this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
1027 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

84413 readers
3915 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 391 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (10 children)

Web services and websites should block all Utah IP addresses and redirect to page explaining that because they cannot tell who's using a VPN, their only option is to block all of Utah.

Yes, I understand how dumb that is, but sometimes you have to fight stupid with stupider.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 161 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Porn sites have been doing that for years now.

And that's exactly what they want.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 90 points 3 days ago (2 children)

They don't want every website to do it though.

[–] EpeeGnome@feddit.online 54 points 3 days ago (6 children)

I like the thought, but it won't work. The big websites won't be willing to lose money they don't have to, and like ID laws that give them reasons to extract more data from users anyway.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 days ago

Indeed. ID laws are a wet dream of Meta and the like. Both because it gives them the unique ID the always wanted and because it is easier for them to comply than small upstarts.

[–] EvergreenGuru@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They actually want to avoid the liability of storing someone’s id.

The government wants to make these things illegal, but they also want to track every person on the internet through their government ID, so they create the problem (age restriction and id checks) because they have the planned solution: digital id for every computer!

Do you have your computer license? Do you? You think the internet is a psy-op and Big Brother’s watching you? Just wait until a government admin message pops up on your screen because you visited the wrong website.

You’re getting fined for spreading misinformation or receiving a letter for libel due to some offhand tweet about some famous person. Don’t worry about receiving a notice in the mail, if you have a printer they’ll make it print your ticket for you immediately.

[–] anomnom@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

You don’t thing an extra 10,000 words in the EULA won’t absolve them of liability for ID theft?

Actually, the existing EULAs probably already do.

[–] jobbies@lemmy.zip 12 points 3 days ago

Its easier to implement and less crazy than blocking VPNs. It also pushes back on other jurisdictions doing the same. I'd be amazed if this isn't what happens.

[–] Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Big websites will only have to do it for a little while though, a month perhaps. If suddenly Utah can't reach youtube or Netflix... Constituents will complain, the citizens simply won't have it, and then the legislators have a problem.

[–] stickyprimer@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

I might not underestimate how much big tech companies hate this too. They are pretty famous about despising all regulation of their space. I wouldn’t put it past them to block a backwater like Utah.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Your right, but I can imagine what it would be like, and that's something.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 5 points 3 days ago

They don’t want every website to do it

Are you sure?

[–] OwOarchist@pawb.social 45 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Web services and websites should block all Utah IP addresses and redirect to page explaining that because they cannot tell who’s using a VPN, their only option is to block all of Utah.

But VPN users using a VPN outside of Utah will still get through.

What Utah (and likely other dumb states soon) are trying to do is to force age verification worldwide through a state law, forcing websites to verify the age of every user from anywhere, because any user who accesses the site from anywhere in the world might possibly be someone in Utah using a VPN.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I understand.

Which is why I'm suggesting they preemptively block everyone in Utah. Protesting needs to inconvenience people and good protests redirect that anger towards those in power.

"Utah's new law us makes us legally liable for providing our services to residence in Utah using a VPN. As that is not technically possible, we have no choice but to cease operating in Utah, or allowing Utah residents to use our services."

But whether or not that particular strategy would be an effective from a protest, is a moot point, as big tech is behind these types of age verification and use identification laws, and those are the only websites and services with a large enough user base to make a difference here.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago

Which is why I’m suggesting they preemptively block everyone in Utah.

Pornhub and other porn sites already do this.

They would still be liable for transmitting content to a Utah resident using a VPN to appear as though they were in neighboring Arizona.

[–] wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 16 points 3 days ago

That just means that people in Utah would need to use a VPN to access those sites.

Which is hilarious, and a predictable result when your legislature is mostly filled with people who could've retired decades ago...

[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Even worse, that would not necessarily help. If someone's accessing your website through a VPN that's not located in that state, you would not block it… then become liable.

Better block everything at this point -_-

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 7 points 3 days ago

The great firewall of Utah, all your pron must be inspected by government officials prior to delivery...

[–] blazeknave@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

So you're saying we should blockade the blockade? /s

With a button saying "Actually, I'm using a VPN so it looks like I'm in Utah but I'm actually not." that gives you access

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Web services and websites should block all Utah IP addresses

That won't work on a VPN, though. The VPN will say the user is coming from outside the state. That's the whole point of the VPN.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

right, meaning everybody will need to get a VPN, defeating the purpose of the law

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's actually quite trivial to detect most VPN providers. There's publicly available IP lists

https://ipinfo.io/tools/vpn-providers-detected

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Many VPN providers regularly rotate their IP ranges.

Regardless, that wouldn't reveal to a website where the traffic was originating from.

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

wouldn't reveal to a website where the traffic is coming from

that's... exactly the point here. If you're connecting thru a VPN then the web site is supposed to ID you because you might be circumventing their local ID laws.

[–] limonfiesta@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I was replying specifically to your comment...

"It's actually quite trivial to detect most VPN providers. There's publicly available IP lists..."

None of that has anything with what I'm suggesting, or why I suggested it.

I've explained the rationale in other comments, but this is an action of protest, not a technical response or workaround to the law.

If Utah passed the stupid law, you have to inconvenience Utah voters, and to do that, websites should block all Utah IP addresses. Making clear to their users that due to the new regulatory framework, they're no longer doing business in Utah.

If that upsets people in Utah, they can reach out to their representatives to ask why they voted to ruin the internet in Utah.

[–] baronvonj@piefed.social 3 points 3 days ago

you originally said

they cannot tell who's using a VPN

I was replying to that specific statement only. Lists of IP ranges are updated regularly and publicly available. Web sites hosted in Utah will have to make use of them to ID check visitors to comply.

I agree with you that web sites hosted outside of Utah should just block Utah IP addresses with a "contact your representative" message."

[–] ferrule@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 days ago

No, the better solution is for sites that age verification is pointless to block Utah. If you make a mobil app check the GPS or IP and disabl the app if they are in Utah. People should go on sites like Yelp in mass and put down votes on every establishment in Utah so that ths site becomes useless for anyone in Utah. Pretty much just destroy all tech and internet for all things Utah.