It's websites that are supposed to be inaccessible by children within Utah that the law would affect. Not sure if the Utah government website has any 18+ pages.
If the premise is to prevent Utah kids from accessing things then good luck enforcing those extraterritorial fines, or if you try and fine sites daft enough to be hosting their site in a place like Utah, it'll take a whole couple minutes to move.
Either way this comes out as theatrics at best, and losing money in top of it with pointless litigation or chasing away tax and service paying businesses
I imagine they will have conservative activists use VPNs to access these websites, and then pass that information onto law enforcement, who will then use that to try and bankrupt said websites and services.
They're not intending to prove anything. The goal is to put the burden of risk on websites, to force them to just block VPNs completely. Even if it's unlikely that a VPN user will get unmasked as being underage, the risk of being liable if it does happen will (in theory) be too great for them to ignore.
Cool, then people will eventually realize they can easily use VPS’s with OpenVPN or Wireguard tunnels, or they can roll their own tailscale network. We’ll stop seeing VPN ads on youtube and start receiving ads for VPS hosting services and vloggers will post instructional videos on how to bypass Utah’s and other state’s draconian laws soon enough.
VPS hosting doesn't allow you to pretend to be in other countries to view their TV or sites that are censored in your country (unless you pay again for a VPS in each country). So it won't replace everything commercial VPNs do.
The Internet really does threaten the people who are in power. They are currently realizing it and doing what they can to stop it. I just hope the Internet ends up winning. I used to be fairly optimistic about this in the mid-2010s when I hadn't been hearing very much from the copyright industry anymore... then, in the late 2010s, attacks on the free and open Internet really started to get serious. I wonder how much they will escalate.
Shouldn't there be some constitutional requirement, maybe under "due process" theory or otherwise, that US state laws cannot apply to anyone who has no way of knowing that they are even doing something (in this case: serving customers) in that state? Has anything similar been litigated before?
17 Comments
ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com · 35 pts · 142d
Cool, so I can spin up a web crawler for the Utah gov site, route it through a VPN and let them fine themselves to oblivion?
chisel@piefed.social · 8 pts · 142d
It's websites that are supposed to be inaccessible by children within Utah that the law would affect. Not sure if the Utah government website has any 18+ pages.
U7826391786239@piefed.zip · 7 pts · 142d
ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com · 1 pts · 142d
If the premise is to prevent Utah kids from accessing things then good luck enforcing those extraterritorial fines, or if you try and fine sites daft enough to be hosting their site in a place like Utah, it'll take a whole couple minutes to move.
Either way this comes out as theatrics at best, and losing money in top of it with pointless litigation or chasing away tax and service paying businesses
U7826391786239@piefed.zip · 30 pts · 142d
limonfiesta@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 142d
I imagine they will have conservative activists use VPNs to access these websites, and then pass that information onto law enforcement, who will then use that to try and bankrupt said websites and services.
U7826391786239@piefed.zip · 6 pts · 142d
JakenVeina@midwest.social · 1 pts · 142d
They're not intending to prove anything. The goal is to put the burden of risk on websites, to force them to just block VPNs completely. Even if it's unlikely that a VPN user will get unmasked as being underage, the risk of being liable if it does happen will (in theory) be too great for them to ignore.
smeg@infosec.pub · 15 pts · 142d
Time to build up the darknet into the full place to be, rather than the dregs of the earth it is now.
Or build more off-net networks
orbituary@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 142d
this has been on my mind a lot. we have the means; it's just used by bottom feeders.
nymnympseudonym@piefed.social · 6 pts · 142d
Came here to say this.
It's so damn easy to put a .onion alongside any website. Everyone should do it. And watch these lawmakers' heads explode.
TheMadCodger@piefed.social · 3 pts · 142d
Actually, how does one put up a .onion?
nymnympseudonym@piefed.social · 4 pts · 142d
https://community.torproject.org/onion-services/setup/
For super extra fun, make a vanity .onion
https://github.com/cathugger/mkp224o
potatoguy@mbin.potato-guy.space · 3 pts · 142d
Fediverse-over-reticulum-over-whatever would be good too, but i didn't look too much at reticulum, but it seems good for this
read_desert@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 142d
Cool, then people will eventually realize they can easily use VPS’s with OpenVPN or Wireguard tunnels, or they can roll their own tailscale network. We’ll stop seeing VPN ads on youtube and start receiving ads for VPS hosting services and vloggers will post instructional videos on how to bypass Utah’s and other state’s draconian laws soon enough.
floofloof@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 142d
VPS hosting doesn't allow you to pretend to be in other countries to view their TV or sites that are censored in your country (unless you pay again for a VPS in each country). So it won't replace everything commercial VPNs do.
read_desert@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 142d
Very true
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de · 3 pts · 142d
The Internet really does threaten the people who are in power. They are currently realizing it and doing what they can to stop it. I just hope the Internet ends up winning. I used to be fairly optimistic about this in the mid-2010s when I hadn't been hearing very much from the copyright industry anymore... then, in the late 2010s, attacks on the free and open Internet really started to get serious. I wonder how much they will escalate.
Shouldn't there be some constitutional requirement, maybe under "due process" theory or otherwise, that US state laws cannot apply to anyone who has no way of knowing that they are even doing something (in this case: serving customers) in that state? Has anything similar been litigated before?
Bluegrass_Addict@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 142d
the internet is gonna be meshtastic..
cheeseburger@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 142d
USA really needs to replace the moron-class as their leaders.