Submitted 10 months ago by tonytins@pawb.social to technology@lemmy.world
low key hope this happens.
it’s gonna be fuckin funny to watch all IT in the US grind to a halt because everyone who WFH can’t work because their internet was cut off.
then a week into mandatory office returns someone will get the whole datacenter cut off because they’re running torrents from their laptop.
dumb fucks are going after the worst people to fuck with.
don’t fuck with IT. they know what filthy shit you watch from home.
And they don’t care what filthy shit you watch from home so long as they don’t have to see it
thank god i go to ireland to do all my torrenting.
i prefer to do mine in the czech republic, personally
What about legitimate torrented content? Are they going to outlaw the technology outright? Don’t plenty of legitimate downloads use torrents to speed up software updates and such?
Hell, windows itself does it.
Yes. I share like 100+ Linux distros via torrents.
We are going to end up with a super private and encrypted Internet because of it.
Good.
The unproven claims is the key part here. Also the point of “terminating an account would punish every user in a household” is important as well.
You can fine someone for piracy if you want. As long as they have the standard legal protections. But cutting access is excessive.
This is actually why I usually install a VPS in whichever country I’m physically in—my end devices always appear to be connecting to something innocent in-country (like a corporate VPN). That VPS then does the double-hop out of the country so that the VPS also appears to be innocent.
I don’t think it’s actually more secure though since the VPS is in my name and it’s technically decrypting everything. But I’m a bit less paranoid about that. (I’m not doing tons of illegal shit anyway.)
Look at it this way. Who would you rather risk pissing off, your ISP or a VSP Hosting company?
put the qbittorrent-wireguard container on the vps.
It’s like trading cards, gotta trade em all!
I’m not a judge, but isn’t internet essentially a utility these days? Cutting someone off because of piracy seems like cutting off electricity or water because they did something illegal with it.
accused piracy, too. Not proven. Not convicted. Just “pirate go bye bye.”
They will cut off electricity if you do something illegal with it…
I’m some places in the States they will cut off your electricity or water for sharing with a neighbor that has had theirs shut off. I have seen both happen personally, and not in some back water state. They both happened in upstate NY.
Cut off for sharing, or cut off for running illegal/unsafe/unlicensed wiring and plumbing connections?
more importantly because of accused. Just accused.
Inb4 palantir cuts off your electric and water because you had 15% eye distraction during the mandatory 3hr nightly fox news viewing.
bottle water companies would love this, as would the oil giants
Not even piracy. Accusations thereof.
I’m not a United Statesian so I have no clue anymore how it works there, but other places have been making the case that the Internet is an essential service and that access to it is a basic right. So to leapfrog off your question, is that like a poor person stealing a loaf of bread being cut off from food because they didn’t food responsibly enough?
didn’t many European countries remove People’s hand for theft a few centuries ago?
Unfortunately the country I was born in, the USA, is also one that voted against the international resolution to define food as a human right. 😕
I’m pretty sure this supreme court would rule that people don’t have a right to electricity, or even water. They’ll probably be totally ok with people losing internet access as punishment for crossing media owners.
or even water
We never stopped the “lol treaties with Native American tribes don’t count” bullshit.
Pragmatically, yes. Legally, no. Progressives have been fighting for years to get internet classified as a utility in the US, and regressives and (ironically) internet companies have been fighting against that effort at every turn in the name of profit.
And now look how well that’s turned out. Gee, if only some people had warned them that deregulation was a monkey’s paw…
This would be the case had net neutrality not been killed off nearly a decade ago
Net neutrality is why your online jokes were censored under Biden
– John McRacist, Republican congressman, former CFO of Evil Inc., former lawyer of Vile Ltd., member of Christofascism Society and Roman Salutes to Jesus
Here i am again doing my duty mullvad.net/en/why-privacy-matters
Protip for anyone unfamiliar: Mullvad really is the gold standard for a private VPN. If you just want to pirate shit and not get angry letters from your ISP, Nord or PIA will accomplish that. But if you REALLY want privacy, Mullvad is it.
But if you need to pay for a „Media Flatrate“ anyway, and you have those 5€ a month, why not spend it for a good cause?
(Also PIA and nord cost 12€ a month unless you sign their predatory 2 year contracts, so mullvad is just way better in that regard too)
Idk why but the simplicity of it has me convinced and so far it works well.
⬆️
Based on that logic, ammunition and arms manufacturers should be held liable for damages as well.
More like, if you steal something you are banned from using roads and sidewalks and doors.
Gonna be a lot of issues that come from this. Legally speaking. It’s already on the books that an IP address doesn’t represent a single person… so I’m not terribly clear on how they plan to enforce this even if it were to pass.
Yeah, sure but to “steal something” is to imply that you’re depriving the original owner use of the thing you stole. This is more like making an exact copy depriving nobody of use of the original thing.
The US has a law to limit the liability of gun manufacturers.
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a U.S law, passed in 2005, that protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. Both arms manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible. However, they may be held liable for negligent entrustment if it is found that they had reason to believe a firearm was intended for use in a crime.
Because of fucking course there is
Were talking about Jesusland after all
Yes, but that would mean that logic has any bearing on what the Supreme Court decides to do
I nominate we test with out with the Zuck and his networks.
Brotha_Jaufrey@lemmy.world 10 months ago
This still won’t make me pay for Netflix
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 10 months ago
But it will make me pay for VPNs!