A yank without a yank

  • Zexks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    3 days ago

    It’s already been cut off for a significant portion of the us due to the ‘take a picture of your id’ law

        • silasmariner@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Good luck with banning something that’s an integral part of most large enterprises’ internal security practices

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            2 days ago

            Normally, I’d agree, but these people are trying to fire aircraft controllers in the middle of an aircraft controller shortage.

            • silasmariner@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              I think that’s a different kettle of fish. You try telling AWS (or perhaps more relevantly Palantir) they can’t use a VPN to gate access to internal systems and you’ll have a much bigger fight. And once it’s permissable in some contexts, then it becomes much harder to gatekeep it even in contexts that you do legally forbid, since you can’t just blanket ban it at ISP level. Of course, I suppose you could enforce that ISPs blacklist certain VPN providers, but… Yeah anyway it becomes too tangled once you’re beyond the legislation phase and enforcement becomes a nightmare is what I guess I’m trying to say.

    • Flames5123@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      And it seems that the Louisiana is the only state smart enough to have this kinda law figured out a solution that pornhub is ok with. They use a third party tool to verify access, so the government doesn’t get to know who or what access is given to.