Thread

1. SoftTalker · 1790960547 · focus · HN ↗

   > platforms are left with an impossible choice: completely block all VPN traffic nationwide or withdraw access from Utah entirely

   Is it even possible to reliably know that a connection is from a VPN? Anyone can proxy through a random hosting provider.

   1. happyPersonR · 1790967013 · focus · HN ↗

      Requires the vpn provider to snitch and possible tag the ip frames or http frames lol

      Folks would just host their own vpns various places and this would be pointless ….

      1. unglaublich · 1790967265 · focus · HN ↗

         It's all just an effort to control the 90%.

         1. pkilgore · 1790968322 · focus · HN ↗

            It lawfare against porn. They don't want these companies to exist. They want it to be impossible to comply with the law to shut them down.

            1. pimeys · 1790970267 · focus · HN ↗

               Why are people so upset about porn? It's probably still the biggest portion of internet traffic. Kind of like human nature, don't you think?

               1. lokar · 1790972853 · focus · HN ↗

                  Assuming you are really asking, the two largest objections:

                  - religious/cultural. My beliefs forbid this, it makes people bad/worse in some hard-to-define way, so no one should be allowed to do it. Sometimes with an emphasis that the sellers are luring good people into sin/ruin.

                  - it harms women. Many of the participants are trafficked or coerced in some way (and further abused). The profits from the industry encourage more of this. It “warps” the mind of men who use it, leading them to mistreat and abuse women.

                  I see elements of truth in all these, but IMO they are ultimately not compelling, prohibition is unworkable and unduly infringes on willing participants and consumers.

                  1. brookst · 1790987378 · focus · HN ↗

                     Yeah both of those arguments would work fine for banning religion, but oddly that is shocking to proponents.

                     1. Rohansi · 1790989487 · focus · HN ↗

                        I thought the same. People would realistically be thinking "not my religion" but, even if that were true, that is the kind of thinking that leads to conflicts between religions. That can range from racism between individuals, to stuff like this, and even to entire wars. Despite all of this we specifically protect religion, which I'm fine with, but nobody should be forcing their religious beliefs onto others in any way. That has definitely harmed far more people overall.

                        1. germandiago · 1791001493 · focus · HN ↗

                           So in the absence of religion, there is no racism, no interests and no wars?

                           You seem to suggest that banning religion would end up wars or human nature.

                           And yes, noone should force everyone else, but not only om religious stuff. Sometimes there has been non-religious truths to which people are forced and that collides ireemediably with other thinkings.

                           I am not sure why one philosophical thinking should be better than other just bc it does not contain religion.

                           In fact, I consider a big part of most religious a compilation of wise advice about human nature. You can believe it or not, take it or not, that is a choice, but when not taken into fanatism I do not think it is harmful.

                           Again, that is not anreason to force a position to others. But there are a handful of things that are very controversial.

                           1. 306bobby · 1791016254 · focus · HN ↗

                              Saying something is a major catalyst is not saying it's the only catalyst.

                              Neither parent was being this black and white about it so I have no idea why you are

                              1. hinkley · 1791054168 · focus · HN ↗

                                 I’ll take “Things You Learn In Introduction to Logic” for 500, Alex.

                                 In places where supposedly most of the people are in engineering or software, I’m surprised how often 1) people have to point this out, 2) people are willing to loudly pronounce their lack of basic logical skills.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.