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

Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 301 posts

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#51

Post by mannanj »

mvdwoord wrote: post #16

I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic and can seemingly only lead to brutal restrictions on the internet. What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? With DPI? And a government issued smartcard to use it? It comes across as if this is what some legislators are actually after... they must have some technical advisors who can explain to them tha…

Remember the conspiracy theorists talking about this for decades? I do. This is the goal of a bourgeois class of people who want to save their livelihoods and status in the world though don't want any circumstances they can't control - legislators are out of touch with the majority of people as they are funded by any really serve those bourgeois.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#52

Post by mannanj »

OccamsMirror wrote: post #40
shaftoe wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused where all of this censorship is originating from. What wave of efforts is culminating? I can't really explain this from any movement I can see.

It's all coming from Meta: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/reddit-user-uncovers-beh... Big tech wants regulatory capture.

And Meta is captured by spy agencies. Don't be tricked at any point into thinking this is just a tech thing. And, spy agencies, who captured them?

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#53

Post by uncircle »

OccamsMirror wrote: post #40
shaftoe wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused where all of this censorship is originating from. What wave of efforts is culminating? I can't really explain this from any movement I can see.

It's all coming from Meta: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/reddit-user-uncovers-beh... Big tech wants regulatory capture.

I keep reading this but I don't understand how a company might want to push censorship on users. What is the economic benefit of censorship? Does Meta's bottom line increase if there is no illegal content and every user is age verified on the site? Would Meta care if you use a VPN?

The ones that stand to benefit the most are the governments themselves and their surveillance network.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#55

Post by wilkystyle »

mrbluecoat wrote: post #44
Nifty3929 wrote: post #8

VPNs are on their way toward being banned and/or heavily regulated. I imagine what will happen is a requirement for VPN providers to "know your customer" just as banks do, and for them to be able to tie a particular traffic stream back to a specific human.

How will they ban self-hosted VPNs? https://mrbluecoat.blogspot.com/2025/08/self-hosted-vpn-opti...

"Utah to hold Cloud providers liable for failing to police self-hosted VPNs on their infrastructure"

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#57

Post by rationalist »

butvacuum wrote: post #42
deknos wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? you might laugh/cry, but there was a time in germany, when the telephone at home was owned by the state (the "Post") and you were NOT allowed to tinker with it. personally, i guess, things like sneakernet, lorawan and hamradio will become a lot more popular over time.

Same for the US- until the feds broke up Bell between 1974 and 82. but, there were no technical hurdles. Anybody have a toy whistle?

My understanding is that the phone company owned the phone, not the state.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#58

Post by 2ndorderthought »

mannanj wrote: post #52
OccamsMirror wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all coming from Meta: https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/reddit-user-uncovers-beh... Big tech wants regulatory capture.

And Meta is captured by spy agencies. Don't be tricked at any point into thinking this is just a tech thing. And, spy agencies, who captured them?

I wouldn't say captured. Zuckerberg has been cutting deals with the new administration so often people were seeing him at the Pentagon. It's a partnership

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#60

Post by mvdwoord »

2ndorderthought wrote: post #45
mvdwoord wrote: post #16

I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic and can seemingly only lead to brutal restrictions on the internet. What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? With DPI? And a government issued smartcard to use it? It comes across as if this is what some legislators are actually after... they must have some technical advisors who can explain to them tha…

Utah hosts I think the biggest nsa data center. Honestly, I would like my ISP to block all traffic to and from Utah if this law passes. I can't think of anything I want or need that involves that state.

Without it being good or bad (long term, second order effects), I do think all of these (proposed) laws and where we are heading will balkanize the internet. Alternative tech may sound appealing to the tinkerers, and they may keep certain important channels alive (think radio amateurs... they know this game) but for the masses? I already happily block entire countries or regions to my VPS as there is zero benefit for me to not drop them at the FW level.
Post reply on HN