For the last couple of years, we’ve watched the same predictable cycle play out across the globe: a state (or country) passes a clunky age-verification mandate, and, without fail, Virtual Private Network (VPN) usage surges as residents scramble to maintain their privacy and anonymity. We've seen...

For the last couple of years, we’ve watched the same predictable cycle play out across the globe: a state (or country) passes a clunky age-verification mandate, and, without fail, Virtual Private Network (VPN) usage surges as residents scramble to maintain their privacy and anonymity. We’ve seen…

  • jackal@infosec.pub
    18·
    15 hours ago

    Oh look, Gilead is back in the news. What a shithole. Beautiful state but the people are awful.

  • hash@slrpnk.netEnglish
    4·
    12 hours ago

    As a Utahn I’d missed this. But reading what applies… how would a company realize I’m in Utah and be forced to age verify me? My guess is this is actually mostly targeted at sports betting. I don’t know a lot about how people are using VPNs there but I’d be surprised if they’re running them on their phone constantly.

    Not saying I’m okay with it, but the headline made me think I was in for issues using my VPN. What seems to really be coming is a liability rats nest for websites that makes no sense.

    • ConsciousDissonance@lemmy.world
      1·
      3 hours ago

      This effectively pushes risk averse platforms to universally apply age gating to everyone. The technical impossibility is a feature in this case. As it increases the legal risk of selectively age gating. The path of least resistance then becomes universal age gating, as the alternative is increased costs and liability from selective enforcement. Selective compliance may be acceptable depending on the company, if revenue loss is greater than the maintenance cost. But it is a blow for privacy and win for censorship that these questions even need be asked.