386
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ad_on_is@lemmy.world to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

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!

I didn't even know that my router was using my ISPs DNS, and that I can just ditch it, even though I'm running AdGuard (selfhosted)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year 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.)

[-] DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.com 6 points 1 year 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.

[-] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year 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.

[-] hardcoreufo@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year 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.

[-] DeltaTangoLima@reddrefuge.com 3 points 1 year 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.

this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
386 points (95.3% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54420 readers
344 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS