▲ 109 ▼ VPN usage at risk in Michigan under new proposed adult content law (www.techradar.com) submitted 1 year ago by Blaze@piefed.zip to c/privacy@programming.dev 28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 7 points 1 year ago (4 children) Corporate VPNs would be allowed presumably. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago (2 children) Eh you made me read it now. It's not super clearly written but it does sound to me like it is only services that are designed to circumvent the moralising that are prohibited. It's a little ambiguous though. The more interesting thing I learned from reading it is that it isn't just about banning porn. It's also about banning the depiction of trans people - even descriptions! Insane. Come on America. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago "designed to" is in the text of the law. But it's not clearly written. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago (2 children) Eh you made me read it now. It's not super clearly written but it does sound to me like it is only services that are designed to circumvent the moralising that are prohibited. It's a little ambiguous though. The more interesting thing I learned from reading it is that it isn't just about banning porn. It's also about banning the depiction of trans people - even descriptions! Insane. Come on America. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago "designed to" is in the text of the law. But it's not clearly written. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago (2 children) Eh you made me read it now. It's not super clearly written but it does sound to me like it is only services that are designed to circumvent the moralising that are prohibited. It's a little ambiguous though. The more interesting thing I learned from reading it is that it isn't just about banning porn. It's also about banning the depiction of trans people - even descriptions! Insane. Come on America. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago "designed to" is in the text of the law. But it's not clearly written. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] individual@toast.ooo 1 point 1 year ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago "designed to" is in the text of the law. But it's not clearly written. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] FizzyOrange@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago "designed to" is in the text of the law. But it's not clearly written. permalink fedilink source parent