I just masturbated to these representatives. Legally that makes them pornography, and they are also required to be banned under this bill's provisions.
this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2025
12 points (92.9% liked)
News
32981 readers
2881 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Taking one for the team.
It was a challenging fap.
but your proudest
"Banning VPNs" has some real " I declare bankruptcy!" vibes.
Why not also ban cash? That can be used to evade detection as well and is notoriously used by criminals.
they kinda did in australia. If you want to withdraw more than $10K you need proof of what you're going to pay with it.
In Canada it is the same. And in Quebec carrying more than $3K Canadian is considered proof that you are up to no good and will get you arrested.
NO VPN!
And the corporate world comes to a screeching halt.
These fuckwads don't even understand anything about what they're trying to legislate.
When shit starts being monitored, I want to see the legislators' traffic public first.
And the corporate world comes to a screeching halt.
In theory, businesses would be required to register their VPNs and... idk, this would limit access to them somehow?
Much like with the Assault Weapons Ban and the assorted online porn bans and strip club bans and dry counties and SEC rules on insider trading, etc, etc, etc a lot of this boils down to "how hard do you want to work in order to enforce this?"
And the short answer is "we only want an excuse to arrest people arbitrarily". So a VPN can quickly because a "everyone with an Internet connection is a criminal suspect". And then you just harass the people you want to harass under cover of "we thought you had kiddie porn" as an excuse
I once worked for a banking transaction company (or something like that, I did their network and telecom support, none of the actual business) and they had offices in Russia. I was told that since VPNs are more restricted there, but required for the business, they had to have a special application with the government to be allowed to have the site to site VPN work.
I imagine they'd try to do the same, as well as grant them another way to be in the pocket of or have some control over businesses. If the government has to approve your necessary security software, you'll want to stay on their good side.
When shit starts being monitored, I want to see the legislators' traffic public first.
Oh my sweet summer child. Of course these laws won't apply to them.
And if they do, they will make up shit to use the dirt you dug up against them against you.
Kind of like how when a cop shoots a black guy they look for whatever parking ticket they got 10 years prior as proof he is a cracking smoking cap busting gangsta who was itching for a bullet. Never being slightly concerned for the cop's violent history or misconduct in various police forces.
load more comments
(2 replies)
"Corruption of public morals" is such a shameless name to put on a bill that simply tries to enforce your own morals.
Corporate media's job is to manufacture consent. Please do not accept their spin uncritically.
This has nothing to do with kids or porn, those are always easy bells for censors to ring. It's about control and tracking. They want to be able to tie anonymous online activity to your real identity.
Politically, we really need to stop accepting their framing that they're trying to protect kids. These bills are only about collecting data.
Considering how many people need to use VPNs to telecommute, this seems like it would be a non-starter. But you can't discount the sheer stupidity and hubris of Republicans these days.
load more comments
(2 replies)
"If you removed all the porn from the internet you would be left with one website, titled "Bring Back the Porn""
Banning VPNs would be an unmitigated disaster and anyone who suggests that it's a good idea has absolutely no idea what they're talking about and should never be allowed to make tech policy again because they are a massive idiot.
Businesses, institutions, and even the government itself all require the use of VPNs to remain secure. VPNs are vital to functioning IT infrastructure everywhere.
Additionally, such a move wouldn't even stop people from accessing porn (which isn't even what VPNs are for), all it would really do is break IT security everywhere.
Yeah but people are really stupid and the economy is going to implode any day now anyways. It has nothing to do with porn and everything to do with criminalizing privacy and making mass surveillance more easy. They do not care how it affects people, they are rich and completely detached from reality. They will go live on Epstein Island or move to Ireland or something when America explodes. They rather be rich and connected then do anything that would actually help anyone, and Americans for the past 30 years have voted consistently for mass surveillance, destroying the constitution and fiat economics. This is what your average American wants by their voting habbits. People are just too stupid and brainwashed by this point.
This is a test balloon. One state is needed to overcome all the technical hurdles like clearing VPNs for work. Once that is done it will be roled out everywhere.
Without ruling out VPNs, all the other internet laws don't make sense. So this step is necessary and almost inevitable.
Bro can we not?
I thought I got lucky to be born into a family that was able to leave China, and I could browse the internet freely in the US. What the fuck y'all? Just let me have my unlimited access to entertainment in peace mmkay?
So... fucking... cooked...
Blatent First Amendment violation.
I mean what even is gonna be the difference between fucking CCP and this BS.
(Canadaaa plssss lemmme innn? 🥺👉👈❓️
Australia? 👀)
The news on this has been underplaying how bad this bill is. It requires ISPs to inspect traffic to ensure its no porn, meaning they would have to be able to decrypt the traffic. This makes a single point were hackers can access credit card data, personal information, and anything else you don't want to share with the world. This assumes the ISPs are willing to front the compute cost of decrypting then re-encrypting and not just banning encrypted traffic because its the easy and cheap way.
Don't forget to ban renting servers, vps and cloud services by individuals.
surely Michigan has no one who works over the internet
The rule of headlines is that if it asks a question in the title, the answer is assumed to be no.
No, it won't.
view more: next ›