How can it possibly be, that an ISP, which I’m paying for gets to decid, which sites I’m allowed to have access to, and which not?

All the torrenting sites are restricted. I know, I can use VPN, and such… but I want to do it because of my privacy concerns and not because of some higher-up decided to bend over for the lobbying industry.

While on the other hand, if there’s a data breach of a legit big-corp website (looking at you FB), I’m still able to access it, they get fined with a fraction of their revenue, and I’m still left empty-handed. What a hipocracy!!

What comes next? Are they gonna restrict me from using lemmy too, bc some lobbyist doesn’t like the fact that it’s a decentralized system which they have no control over?

Rant, over!

    • Revanecd
      link
      fedilink
      04 months ago

      Revanced is a popular tool for modifying apps like YouTube, offering ad-blocking, background play, and premium features for free, catering to users seeking enhanced experiences.

  • gordon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    512 years ago

    My state of residence restricts access to certain sites. It’s all bullshit.

    Anyway… The ISP is either a common carrier or a content provider. Pick a fucking lane. You can’t have half and half. Either you are responsible for ALL content provided or NONE.

    If you choose none then you MUST NOT restrict access to any content.

    If you chose ALL then you may restrict content based on what you are willing to take responsibility for. But in that case if someone does something illegal with content you provided you are liable.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        132 years ago

        California. The internet contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        The list is growing: Utah, Florida, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Virginia all have legislation in progress

  • LisPi
    link
    fedilink
    12 years ago

    @ad_on_is The problem you’re hitting is that the #clearnet / #Internet in general weren’t adequately designed to handle malicious #infrastructure operators.

    “The 'net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it” was a comment about #Usenet, a #federated / #P2P system with gossiped (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip_protocol) message exchange which wasn’t particularly picky about its transport layer (indeed you could load a spool on a floppy and mail it), not the internet.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      92 years ago

      I don’t know if you’re choosing to add those hashtags to your comment or if it’s just something that mastodon does automatically, but holy fuckweasels is that shit annoying.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        I wondered why I saw people reply like that as well as tagging the user at the start, that explains it now

  • meseek #2982
    link
    fedilink
    English
    372 years ago

    Yeah this is government level. They tell the ISPs what to block and they do what’s ordered. ISPs want your money. All the legal crap they have to do is part of business.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      62 years ago

      seems like a violation of our first amendment, it’s none of the government business what site or what we can access on the net

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    332 years ago

    Censorship is wrong. Every rational, adult human being should have the fundamental right to their autonomy, without third party intervention, with full awareness of the laws that apply to them.

    If they decide to abuse that freedom and awareness by accessing illegal content (even CSAM), then they are taking the risk of being discovered, prosecuted, and punished accordingly. And, in many cases (like CSAM), I hope they are caught and punished.

    Regardless of the outcome, it still starts with the freedom for that individual to make that decision for themselves.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      132 years ago

      That’s part of the price of freedom. Tor is a browser that makes it hard to be tracked down, so people use it to facilitate illegal activities. Crypto is a currency that makes it hard to be tracked down, so the same occurs. While most of us use and support these services for legal activities, just to be free from corporate and government oppression, there will always be people who use them to be from legal consequences.

      Sadly, making it easier to find people who do things like post CSAM in turn makes it easier to find people who want to watch Porn without supplying a government ID. (Still can’t believe my state of Virginia passed that law.)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        62 years ago

        people who want to watch Porn without supplying a government ID

        Yeah, and this is where the part of my comment that discussed “laws that apply” is nuanced. If the laws that apply are designed to abridge people’s autonomy, and right to privacy, then that’s an unjust law.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22 years ago

          No disagreement here, just unsure if there will ever be a way to grant freedom to the common man without enabling unsavory actors as well.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            32 years ago

            Yeah, sadly there isn’t. I don’t envy lawmakers - there’s a knife edge they have to walk, between enabling them to catch the bad guys, but without infringing on the rights of the innocent.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Unsavory actors will find ways around any restriction put in their way. So these restrictions only serve to remove freedoms from the rest of us not commiting unsavory acts.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    102 years ago

    Switch over to an ISP that doesn’t do that. Leave record with your country’s customer protection service and/or open press / open culture office that’s why you did it. There. Done.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      112 years ago

      Lots of people come have a choice in who their ISP is. I don’t. For my area, there’s one provider. If I want to change that, I have to move.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        A fair point.

        Still, in this case you should direct your issue to your country’s consumer protection and culture protection services. Since they are essentially charging you for an incomplete service.

        Of course, there’s other measures that one can take by themself to route around the issue, such as using a VPN. But they don’t deal with the real issue at hand that is what the thread title says: that the ISP is doing something that it shoudn’t.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          102 years ago

          It sounds like you’re not from the US. Our consumer protection services ara a joke. You’re more likely to solve the problem by yelling into a pillow than complaining to US consumer protection.

          • TrenchcoatFullOfBats
            link
            fedilink
            English
            52 years ago

            You’re more likely to solve the problem by yelling into a pillow

            You mean the Casper Original Pillow I’m buying with Klarna for 4 easy payments of $39.95 at 29.99% interest?

            I hear they’re partnering with Amazon on a new version that has a tiny Alexa speaker in it that will whisper ads in your ear while you’re sleeping unless you pay them $15 to turn it off. It’s called the Casper Pillow Talk with Special Offers.

            Yelling: ALEXA! HOW CAN I GET CONSUMER PROTECTION IN THE UNITED STATES?

            Casper Pillow Talk with Special Offers: I’m sorry, I don’t understand. By the way, did you know that Amazon Pharmacy is now selling antidepressants at a discounted price? To order, just say “Add Xanax to my next drone delivery”. To receive the discount, say “I waive my right to sue Amazon via the justice system and agree to private corporate arbitration until the end of time!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    822 years ago

    I don’t know where you’re from and therefore don’t know what laws affect you but unless the ISP is involved in the media game (i.e HBO & AT&T) they don’t care about restricting access. In fact, they’re against it in most scenarios because if a competitor that doesn’t restrict access to piracy related websites exists, that competitor is likely to siphon customers from ISPs who impose restrictions.

    On top of that, most ISPs do the absolute bare minimum to restrict your access so that you can bypass it easily, the most common being the modification of DNS records which you can easily bypass by changing your resolver.

    TL:DR blame your lawmakers not your isp

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      82 years ago

      The DNS modification is slightly off. Some ISPs check UDP packets since they are insecure and will modify query results regardless of the DNS server you are sending to. Mediacom is known to do this for their billing and DMCA systems. They use DNS redirection to assist in MITMing the connection to load their own certificate to your browser. With that done, they can prepend their own Javascript to the response they receive from whatever web server you are trying to contact. That’s how they get their data usage and DMCA popups loaded when you load up whatever site.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          52 years ago

          Even if it is not being done for a malicious reason, it is still a malicious practice. Websites can help prevent this by adopting wildcard Subject Alternate Names in their certificates thereby making the redirection much less likely to succeed, but you shouldn’t have to view your own ISP as a threat actor.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    46
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    No offense but if they can do that you have to blame your government not the ISP… as those are the ones allowing this to happen.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      As if the government wasn’t controlled by probate lobbyists.

      Blame goes to private interests being allowed to influence public decision makers, in my opinion. Infrastructure companies should not be for-profit companies.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        In some cases yes, but I would say that is allowing it too… Idk… I don’t see the need to nitpick but yeah.

      • LoudWaterHombre
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 years ago

        The government is elected by people who care or don’t care about certain topics

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          42 years ago

          The only choice he have here are stupid people and tech illiterate ones. Not a lot we can do except face palm at the ridiculously stupid solutions they come up with.