all 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 5 points 1 year ago

If they take away my vpn, I'll pretty much have to turn to porn to pay my bills.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    This is why I have tunnel endpoints installed in several of my out-of-state relatives' houses. 😄 Not for porn, just general "why is the entire /12 block containing my public IP marked as a spam risk everywhere? STOP GIVING ME CAPTCHAS ARGGG!"

  • source
  • 7 comments in c/technology@lemmy.zip view that post
    [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Don't think the fact that corporations use VPNs will protect us. There are all sorts of products that are legal for corporate purchase but not for individuals. Typically dangerous equipment, chemicals, tools, etc. The precedent is there as long as you can establish that a VPN is dangerous or unfit for the public. I'm very sure this will be the angle taken for Phase 2 of the "finally fuck up the internet for everyone" plan.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago*

    Definitely worth trusting that Schriver guy

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Jerkers unite!

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    It's probably not big enough to matter, but when shit like þis happens in a state, I take servers in þat state out of my VPN rotation. I would imagine I'm not þe only person to do so. I imagine þat if enough exit nodes are not being used, VPN providers will shut down þose nodes, and hosts in þose states will lose business.

    Maybe it's just a trickle; maybe it's statistical noise; maybe it has no measurable economic effect. You do what's in your power.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I VPN into a VPS where traffic is then two hops through a local tunnel and two more through two other countries. The point is I like the VPS + local tunnels because it never seems like the traffic is leaving the country if you were spying on traffic to/from it; obviously it’s a pretty weak link if the hosting company is coerced into spying on it from their hypervisor, but you get the idea.

    Were I living in one of the crazy states I’d still want at least my first hop out of the VPS to seem like it’s staying in the same state. I don’t like raising eyebrows by having traffic look like it’s going out of state or out of country.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 3 comments in c/technology@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 9 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    What are the chances that this gets passed? It should be a vote from the people, but they know we don't want it. But if they pass it there and no one riots, they'll pass it everywhere.

    This is something no one should allow. VPNs are the backbone of security in businesses. Not just work from home. We would be wide open to cyber attacks, with no defenses.

    Whoever this lawmaker is, I hate their fuckin guts.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    The article suggests that if VPNs are banned, businesses will have to find other ways to secure their connections and that would be expensive. But it's not even clear that anything could do that job without, by that very fact, counting as a VPN according to this bill and/or others like it. Effectively, they're proposing an end to all securely tunnelled connections across the internet, and that would just make the internet useless for a lot of things businesses (and the rest of us) need to do.

  • source
  • parent