Canadian Government Docs Suggest Website Blocking, Targeting VPN Usage

michaelgeist.ca

40 points·gjke4hgawe90r··7 comments

After the UK, Australia and Canada all have this implemented, I'm sure we'll see it in the USA because "the rest of the civilized world" is doing it and they'll probably just conveniently reinterpret or otherwise dodge the First Amendment.

After all, it doesn't really say anything about website blocking. And people are still technically free to "speak" ... even if the government ensures that nobody can actually listen to them. And perhaps we can simply rope the major ISPs into it as a liability dodge. You know, we're not saying that you really have to block these sites, just that we won't guarantee that you won't get in trouble if you don't.

Or any of the many other ways one could claim to uphold the First Amendment in some technical sense while eroding it in a real sense.

> I'm sure we'll see it in the USA because "the rest of the civilized world" is doing it and they'll probably just conveniently reinterpret or otherwise dodge the First Amendment.

Interesting POV, I was convinced Europe copies this kind of law from US and Canada.

Well, don't get me wrong. The USA probably does export this sort of thing, at least with respect to copyright laws, via treaty (and then brazenly uses it as an excuse to get what they want here).

But as far as actually implementing it, it'll be harder here because it can be shot down by the Supreme Court on First Amendment grounds, which is why I suspect they'll have to find some manner of dodge first.

FYI you don't have to VPN to use US Netflix, you can use a smart proxy, which is cheaper.

I just use my EC2 and forward traffic using SSH...

TigerVPN for 30$ for lifetime is more expensive?

So, should I tell them that the Internet is post-Nation State? Or do you want to?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com