• LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 minutes ago

    Darrell Issa out of California appears to have proposed this, I assume because he is not seeking re-election.

    Who wants to take a bet he is getting paid for it?

  • DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    104
    ·
    3 hours ago

    This leads to the government deciding which websites you can visit and cant visit down the line. This is a dystopian level of control and with surveillance already getting dystopian… Pick your dystopian technology book and decide which one we’re leading towards. Fascism policies are already on the rise in democratic worlds.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 hour ago

        TIL expressVPN started as

        Crossrider started off by making a SDK for the deployment of browser extensions platforms with support for monetizing extensions. The monetization options were used by major [ad injectors which used man-in-the-browser to change or add advertisements to what users saw.

        JFC.

    • aim4harmony@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      56 minutes ago

      NextDNS is good and I just realised that it’s based in The US. The alternative ones don’t seem to provide the feature of granular filtering.

    • verdigris@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      50 minutes ago

      No, we’re at the point where the people pushing these laws do understand how the Internet works, and they want to control all of it.

    • frongt@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      2 hours ago

      This doesn’t stem from a lack of understanding. It’s about corporations and control.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 hour ago

        We need to stop believing the boomer’s framing that they’re all old and dumb, and start realizing that they’d eat us if we tasted good

  • rafoix@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 hours ago

    If piracy was a problem I can find them multiple international corporations that are well know for using copyrighted content to train their LLM without paying for it or having permission from the owner of that content.

  • ErevanDB@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Well, time to protest, and if need be, use the constitution how it was intended.

      • Burninator05@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I think the intent of the law is that it wouldn’t mater. If the VPN blocks the site, you can’t get to the site.

        • obvs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          48 minutes ago

          I don’t know if you’re familiar with how VPNs work, but it’s basically like a computer in the other country is sharing its internet connection with you.

          So let’s imagine that things are reversed, and you’re a VPN provider in the United States and you’re sharing your internet connection with some computers in another country, like Saudi Arabia, for example.

          And just to be clear, you conduct no business in Saudi Arabia. You’re just sharing your internet connection with people from there. You don’t have any associates in Saudi Arabia, and you have no intention of ever going to Saudi Arabia.

          And let’s say that Saudi Arabia passed a law that said VPN providers had to block some kind of content, like maybe banning all access to content about your favorite band.

          How is this going to affect the VPN service you provide to the other computers?

          • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            43 minutes ago

            It wouldn’t, which is why I roll my eyes every time I see a bill demanding what a VPN must do.

            The only way for them to actually enforce this through VPNs is to block VPNs. Which, presumably, they’ll do at some point, but with an exception list for companies paying the right license fee to use a Government Approved VPN.

            Which, obviously, will be full of security flaws, and likely won’t be HIPPA compliant or other compliances etc, etc.

            • saltesc@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 minutes ago

              So, basically there’s the internet, then there’s the US internet. People will start moving to China for more freedoms.

        • schipelblorp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 hour ago

          You VPN into Canada and then sign onto another VPN from there? Would that work?

          Hell, depending on how the law is written and how clever the lawyers are, the VPN can ship you out to Canada, then connect you back to the network via an authentication token that verifies you are a member of the service without verifying your country of origin.

          • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Well, based on what he said, he’s wrong.

            Unless he’s not from the usa. So before I pointed out the flaw in his plan, I want to make sure I’M not wrong.