Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 419 posts

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#191

Post by mod50ack »

sandbags wrote: post #139
CGamesPlay wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Evers’s veto is part of a dubious Wisconsin tradition. In 1975, Gov. Patrick Lucey struck the word “not” from the phrase “not less than,” reversing its meaning. In the 1980s, Govs. Tony Earl and Tommy Thompson crossed out individual letters to create entirely new words. And in 2005, Gov. Jim Doyle reappropriated over $400 million from its intended use by striking all but 20 words from a 752-word passage, creating a…

I'm not in the US so I've no dog in this race only curiousity. I can understand allowing a governor to change the text of a bill. But I cannot understand allowing them to sign those changes into law. It seems like that would mean they could creatively reverse the meaning of any bill. It seems like a governor should be able to approve the text as written, or change it and send it back. What am I missing?

The original intention was to allow for what is called a "line-item veto." Let's say you had a bill (and this is not uncommon) with a lot of basically unrelated provisions. It creates programs A, B and C. This would allow the governor to approve A and C but not B, and would prevent the sort of "horse-trading" that legislators like to do ("I'll support your pet idea if you support mine").

That was the idea. But Wisconsin has twisted into something else entirely. Arguably, the idea was not a good one to begin with, anyway.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#192

Post by JustExAWS »

txrx0000 wrote: post #32

A device-side IP filter locked behind a password that parents can configure in the device's settings would be much more effective and easier to implement than censoring the Internet. This should be the default solution, yet it's never brought up for whatever reason. Not to mention these online content censorship laws for kids are wrong in principle because parents are supposed to be in control of how they raise each…

This has existed for well over a decade for iOS. I don’t use Android so I can’t speak to it.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#193

Post by elzbardico »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #116
kbrkbr wrote: post #95

After Wisconsin finds out how to reliably filter vpn, they can then teach Netflix and Akamai how to do it. Last time I checked modestly reliable geoblocking existed, and completely unreliable vpn blocking. A friend told me that when he comes across a site for which Nordvpn is blocked, he just changes IP. Latest the third one always works, even on YouTube (he is all about privacy).

You misunderstand. When they "ban VPNs", it's not that the VPN police will be patrolling your neighborhood trying to catch you using Mulvad or whatever. Instead, the AG will send a letter to the VPN provider, threatening to prosecute them for selling an illegal service. And they will comply and shut down. Once the commercial services are gone, it won't matter that you could hide your own VPN usage in a practical sens…

The law is stupid and dangerous. But this is not what it says.

It says that a site that distributes harmful content for minor, like, let's say, xvideos, will have to block vpn users from wiscosin.

Yes. that will mean, that if xvideos will wish to be compliant with Wiscosin laws, they would have to figure out a way to block all vpn users.

Bad. Really bad.

But no, it's not like Wiscosin citizens will be prevented to work remotely using a VPN to connect to their corporate network.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#194

Post by elzbardico »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #186

Sadly (at least for me, I am a US citizen) we are seeing the slow burn collapse of western ‘democracies’ and the slow steady rise of the global south. Western leaders are in panic mode. I am not very political but when I look at the last Biden administration and the current Trump administration I see two men in panic mode - very weak. A partial solution to western civilization collapse is to make ourselves as individ…

You're one of the few that correctly sees this goes beyond partisanship boundaries.

The polarization keeps us divided. Meanwhile, the billionaire become more and more rich and powerful, no matter which sides currently has the power. Baillouts, tax cuts, regulation or de-regulation. Doesn't matter, there is a group who always win.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#195

Post by JustExAWS »

merizian wrote: post #146
duxup wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think putting parents in control is the right path, but will reveal a sad fact. Many parents aren't taking time to be in control, and no amount of legislation will fix that.

I disagree that legislation can't help. Fundamentally there's an education disconnect and unnecessary friction in setting up parental controls. Governments can better educate parents about the risks, and give them better tools to filter/monitor content their children watch (eg at the device level). Being a parent is hard and it's possible to make this part easier imo. eg consider child-proof packaging and labeling la…

Well the law could be simple - “every computer sold must have a prominently displayed ‘parental choice’ screen on first boot that lets the owner specify whether this device will be used by a child and give the parents and option to block adult content”

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#196

Post by elzbardico »

tim333 wrote: post #114
stavros wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can, though. That's what laws are.

HN is US based. You'll have fun getting a law like that through in the US, or even the UK or EU. They do have a law like that in China I think.

Give it a bit more time.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#197

Post by JustExAWS »

subscribed wrote: post #152
txrx0000 wrote: post #32

A device-side IP filter locked behind a password that parents can configure in the device's settings would be much more effective and easier to implement than censoring the Internet. This should be the default solution, yet it's never brought up for whatever reason. Not to mention these online content censorship laws for kids are wrong in principle because parents are supposed to be in control of how they raise each…

IP filter? So what you do when you block the entire cloudflare, CloudFront, Amazon and Google cloud ip ranges? What's left? There are better solution than blocking IPs.

I have worked in cloud consulting for a little over five years. A lot of companies specifically ask that we blocked traffic from cloud providers. It’s a built in feature of AWS WAF.

Ironically enough, that meant when I was working at AWS, I sometimes couldn’t access a site that I was working on for a client when I went into the office for a business trip (I worked remotely).

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#198

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #116
kbrkbr wrote: post #95

After Wisconsin finds out how to reliably filter vpn, they can then teach Netflix and Akamai how to do it. Last time I checked modestly reliable geoblocking existed, and completely unreliable vpn blocking. A friend told me that when he comes across a site for which Nordvpn is blocked, he just changes IP. Latest the third one always works, even on YouTube (he is all about privacy).

You misunderstand. When they "ban VPNs", it's not that the VPN police will be patrolling your neighborhood trying to catch you using Mulvad or whatever. Instead, the AG will send a letter to the VPN provider, threatening to prosecute them for selling an illegal service. And they will comply and shut down. Once the commercial services are gone, it won't matter that you could hide your own VPN usage in a practical sens…

Florida requires age verification today to go on porn sites. Guess how many of the mainstream porn sites not based in the US completely ignore it?

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#199

Post by raw_anon_1111 »

nijave wrote: post #48
ManuelKiessling wrote: post #22

Well, let’s be honest — users of VPNs regularly don’t know what they are doing, too. Can’t count how often I‘ve heard otherwise technologically literate people saying how they use a VPN (NordVPN e.a.) because „something something security“.

Irony being trusting random VPN providers and arbitrary foreign (exit) countries potentially makes security _worse_ than without the VPN

I would trust a foreign country with my data much more than I would trust the US. A foreign country can’t do me nearly as much harm as the US can as a US citizen.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#200

Post by martin-t »

pona-a wrote: post #26

As someone born in a post‑Soviet country with rather many odd digital laws--including one requiring that any use of encryption be registered with the department of commerce and the secret service (meaning no TLS unless you get a permit)--I can clearly see the endgame of similar proposals. These laws aren’t meant to be followed. Their text is deliberately vague, and their demands are impossible by design. They aren't…

> These laws aren’t meant to be followed

Selective enforcement should be illegal - people practicing it should be put in prison, the law should be auto-repealed, any past sentences cancelled and the people sentenced should be compensated.

This should be written into every constitution, just like free speech and the right to kill when killing is right ("right to bear arms").

Post reply on HN