• paddington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      248
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s so much worse than that. North Carolina House Bill 8 was created a year ago to add Computer Science to middle school and high school curriculums. Throughout it’s 3 edits over the year, all 10 pages of the bill were about teaching kids computer science. Then, ONE WEEK before the bill was passed, a paragraph on the last page was added including the text requiring age verification for adult websites. https://www.ncleg.gov/BillLookup/2023/H8

      At that point it was too late, and anyone against the bill would be called out for being against teaching kids computer science. The cowards writing these bills know that they would be shot down immediately if they were public about what they were doing, so they tack it on to a children’s education bill and hope no one notices until it’s too late.

        • Dave@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          106
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          It is illegal where I live. I imagine it’s illegal in most developed countries. Bills can only have one purpose, they can’t combine unrelated things.

          • Landless2029@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            64
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            I’ve heard of several cases in the USA where they combine unrelated things to mess with voters. Even this one is kinda related but school education plus internet censorship. Split that shit up and let the people vote for what they want.

            Edit: it’s a rider

      • DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        Fucking Amy Galey. I hate that I have to be I around her and pretend that she’s the best thing since sliced bread. I wish people got to hear more about her talking at length about how great her family treated their slaves and less about her GOP silly season power moves.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Well, why not vote against it and defend yourself when accused of voting against education?

        • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          ·
          2 years ago

          “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.” - Jonathon Swift

          So now you’re investing time and effort to publicize why this bill was broken. Your political opposition successfully got you on the defensive. These strategies play a part of why fascism and authoritarianism are succeeding in the USA.

          • derpgon@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 years ago

            That’s what I wanted to highlight by posting it. It’s a lose/lose situation for America either way.

        • Argurotoxus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 years ago

          Simply put, the attack is shorter and easier to understand than the nuanced defense.

          Politicians can put “you’re against education!” in a 15 second attack ad on the radio/TV/a poster. It takes a short media appearance to explain the nuance. Which isn’t worth the time or money typically, since so few people will see it.

          Especially since a huge section of our population gets 100% of its news from Fox, Newsmax, and other right wing media. That interview will never air there. In fact, those sources will repeat the party line of “you’re against education!”

          • dezmd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            “Why do Republicans think about porn every time they discuss children?”

            Thats how you frame it back at em.

          • skulblaka@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            The situations are clearly different because of the rabid faith of conservative followers, but that being said, it seems relatively easy enough to get on TV/media first and start spreading around “Republicans want to take your porn!” The situation could be explained pretty concisely within a 20 second TikTok or a shareable YouTube video.

            Now don’t get me wrong, if American political debate soils itself any further than it already has and fully becomes two-side mudslinging and nothing else, then I’m going to need to either leave the country or become radicalized. But it’s becoming clear to me more and more these days that if the democrats want to throw their weight around they’re going to need to lower their standards a bit. Instead of half hour appeals to judgment we need more 30-second dunks. Poli Sci students need to hear a detailed and nuanced discussion of a bill, but it’s been readily proven again and again ad nauseum that the average person does not.

            And I’m not advocating that they lie, only to use the framework of a lie in order to spread the message. A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth can put its shoes on, specifically because the instant something might maybe be relevant to something someone thinks exists, somebody is on Fox news spouting 30 second dunks about it. The instant we hear what’s going on with the bill rider somebody should have been on TikTok, YouTube and X posting a 30 second dunk about how Republicans are abusing education bills to steal all porn from everyone, everywhere. Don’t lie, but take strategies from their playbook. I want an account doing blow by blow daily updates on everything the R’s have their grubby mitts in, in the same way that there are accounts doing blow by blow daily updates about exactly how many children they accuse Kamala Harris of having eaten. Except this one will have credible sources.

            Point being, personally, I’m growing extremely jaded and tired of the way political discussion works in America. On one hand we have the Democrats making an effort to fully explain away and good faith debate (most of) their bills, with a handful of notable and upsetting exceptions. On the other hand we have a pit of screaming pigs that will debate nothing, will source nothing, will sneak last minute riders into bills they had nothing to do with, and will lie at the top of their lungs constantly and without regard to what they are lying about. The pigs in question have proven themselves either unwilling or incapable of rising to a level of proper political discussion expected from an elected official, and it’s becoming clear that if the relevant populace isn’t going to vote out (or in some cases, isn’t going to be allowed to vote out) the representative, the only way to engage with them effectively in a political sense is to sink to their level. At which point we are all well and truly fucked and what gods remain in the world have abandoned us.

        • awesomesauce309@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          Judging from what they said, it took a year to come to fruition and a week to poison the apple. The current kindergarteners are gonna be grown and graduated by the time the red tape lets way for another vote on the matter. Why not just make bills strictly about the thing they are proposing?

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        Well, why not vote against it and defend yourself when accused of voting against education?

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      The legislators passing these laws are interested only in hurting people, getting bribes, and getting reelected so they can continue. Doing something important for society doesn’t even factor into their decision making.

  • Smacks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    143
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Republicans doing a real good job giving a peek into what voting Red will do for them this year

  • burliman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    135
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Once again, a vice is blamed for its own sake, “for the children”, instead of the thing people are running from, or the hole they are filling. It’s the Right’s version of virtue signaling.

    Porn addiction is just an addiction, and removing porn will not remove addiction in people. Thirst can’t be cured by drying up the well. Saying nothing about the constitutionality of this, restricting potentially addictive content through nanny state ID systems is worthless… check history. South Korea plan was dropped, UK plans for the same thing were dropped. It’s not only ineffective, as kids will always find a way through the cracks, but it also extremely difficult to implement and erodes the bedrock of privacy. We’re not solving addiction, we’re just building a surveillance state under the guise of protection. Solutions are in addressing the root causes of addiction and fostering resilience, not in this game of whack-a-mole that sacrifices our privacy.

    • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      74
      ·
      2 years ago

      I get wanting to keep porn away from children, but on the flipside I don’t trust governments with a history of criminalizing homosexuality with my porn history. Looking up, it seems that these states even kept laws against sodomy in their books.

      • Bakachu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        2 years ago

        I had to look this up, and this is so nuts, but there are currently 12 states that stilll have sodomy laws as of late 2023: Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas.

        I think a lot of people might not realize that sodomy is often legally defined as anything that is not PIV intercourse. So most foreplay and obviously any sex practiced by homosexual couples. I absolutely don’t get why there isn’t a stronger push to get rid of this and other dumb laws against offenses that are widely committed and/or are hard to enforce.

        Well I guess this one kind of makes sense in this current state of political turmoil.

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 years ago

          Because they’re all federally illegal (until they aren’t) by Lawrence v. Texas. And of those 12, 2 definitely would overturn if Thomas has his way (Lawrence was one of the decisions he said he wants reviewed) and 2 are iffy. Texas would gladly enforce anti sodomy laws today if they could.

        • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          I just looked it up to confirm because I’ve only known it to mean butt sex, but the Wikipedia article on it agrees with you.

          I don’t think any of those states actually enforce those laws though, most likely because it would be difficult to get evidence of such acts. Just because the law exists in the books doesn’t mean it’s still upheld, tons of states have “dumb laws” that aren’t enforced (you can’t keep an alligator in a bath tub, you can’t beat your wife with a stick thicker than your thumb, you can’t drive on Sundays, etc…) but we’re never removed because the process is too arduous.

      • ohlaph@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        We were all kids once, we found a way. I did, other kids will. Sure we can make it harder to access, but blocking it isn’t the solution that republicans think it is.

        • jtk@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s not a solution to the problem they say they’re looking to solve. It’s more government control, it’s big brother, it’s everything they say they don’t want, so it’s obviously exactly what they wanted.

          • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yeah, the moral scandal of shouting that kids are being exposed to sex is just too effective at enabling all kinds of overreach.

            But if you say that sex education, teaching about consent and risks and how to seek help, is far more effective at protecting children than any sort of censorship, they’ll act doubly scandalized. And parents who don’t want to talk about sensitive matters with their precious little angels fall for it every time.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        Exactly, additionally I don’t trust governments that consistently fail to understand artistic merit in sexually graphic art and sought to ban it to maintain free expression.

    • GraniteM@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 years ago

      If you believe that laws forbidding gambling, sale of liquor, sale of contraceptives, requiring definite closing hours, enforcing the Sabbath, or any such, are necessary to the welfare of your community, that is your right and I do not ask you to surrender your beliefs or give up your efforts to put over such laws. But remember that such laws are, at most, a preliminary step in doing away with the evils they indict. Moral evils can never be solved by anything as easy as passing laws alone. If you aid in passing such laws without bothering to follow through by digging in to the involved questions of sociology, economics, and psychology which underlie the causes of the evils you are gunning for, you will not only fail to correct the evils you sought to prohibit but will create a dozen new evils as well.

      –Robert A. Heinlein, Take Back Your Government

    • dual_sport_dork 🐧🗡️@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      We’re not solving addiction, we’re just building a surveillance state under the guise of protection.

      That’s a feature of all of these types of schemes, not a bug.

    • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      This isn’t even about porn addiction, it’s definitely a “think of the children!” scenario by the right-wing pearl clutchers. Meanwhile, there’s tons of horrible shit on the Internet freely available that they don’t seem to care about, along with nudity in movies. Also I love how that article claims that “residents will have to go to the deep dark corners of the internet to get their porn once pornhub is blocked” as if hundreds of other porn sites not owned by that company don’t exist 🤣 The Internet and tech improvements are literally driven by porn consumption. IDK what the number is now, but like 5-10 years ago it was “40% of all internet traffic is porn related”.

    • itsprobablyfine@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      Hey I agree with you but might want to use a different metaphor in the future. Drying the well won’t stop thirst, but neither will anything else, except well, death I guess.

  • betterdeadthanreddit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    125
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 years ago

    Classic big government nanny state move. That political party which claims to be against this sort of overreach must be upset over it, right?

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      2 years ago

      Do they even claim that anymore? I can’t remember the last time I’ve heard a conservative talk about small government in any way that even comes close to amounting to an actual philosophy.

    • IDriveWhileTired@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      2 years ago

      Was about to say, did politicians now invest in VPN providers?

      Plus, the hypocrisy of it all, since most scandals involving infidelity, abuse and other stuff comes from their side of the aisle (not that the other side is composed of saints, but still).

        • IDriveWhileTired@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I never voted for a politician I liked. I have voted for a lot of politicians that were less bad than the alternative. But never once I said “yeah, that IS a good person”.

      • IphtashuFitz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        41
        ·
        2 years ago

        No they won’t. Virtually every tech company in the world uses them. If any legislation was proposed then companies from the likes of Google and Microsoft down to hundreds of companies with fewer than 100 employees would all fight it.

        • extant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          You make it sound like our lawmakers are wise and would make an informed decision and not just write an exception for companies that lobby for exemption.

          • IDriveWhileTired@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            You make it sound like our lawmakers are wise and would make an informed decision and not just write an exception for companies that -lobby- pay their greedy asses for said exemption.

            There, FTFY.

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 years ago

          Virtually every tech company in the world uses them

          Virtually every company (tech or not) and every government uses a VPN…

          • cation@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            Can’t say anything about China, but why do you think vpn’s are illegal in Russia? Sure, the big vpn companies inside the country might be influenced by the government to limit your access to some banned websites. However, you can freely use a vpn if you wish.

            Again, I remind you that you could always set up your own vpn server for personal use.

        • oatscoop@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I took their comment to mean “companies offering VPN services as a subscription for the purpose of privacy”.

          It wouldn’t be hard to target those companies specifically while leaving every other “legitimate” (in their view) use cases for VPNs alone.

      • cation@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 years ago

        You can literally host your own vpn, nothing illegal about that. And, as someone else mentioned, work would be impossible for many companies, as almost any company that works with sensitive data uses vpn to some extent.

        • extant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          And you think lawmakers would make a wise informed decision? You think that they wouldn’t make a decision that would strip away your capability to use a VPN while protecting themselves and big tech that lobby for exemptions?

          Their Profit or Your Privacy, what do you think they’ll pick?

          • frezik@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 years ago

            I don’t have to assume they’re wise. The uproar would be enough to kill the bill before it gets out of committee.

                • extant@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 years ago

                  You know I cannot quantify damages from a program that forces compliance without transparency through gag orders. I can point out that preventing the use of a VPN does not halt an entire company, you can still connect and work exactly the same as with a VPN it’s just not in a secure and private manner but what are you trying to hide? /s

                  No matter what you and I believe it’s irrelevant, if privacy goes on the chopping block than a VPN access would need to go with it and the technology is currently irreplaceable as-is but that doesn’t negate the possibility that it can become regulated. Privacy should be a human right but you and I both know that equality isn’t always equal and there’s a large portion of government over numerous groups that all have their own agendas and understand the advantages of knowledge and the power it can bestow. You’re trying to fight greed and greed only cares about getting more.

                  Thank you for coming to my Ted talk and best of luck to you frezik, I hope you’re right but I’m not going to hold my breath.

          • cation@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            I don’t think it’s even possible to for anyone to stop someone from using a VPN. Sure, in theory, they could affect VPN providers’ businesses, but you’re always going to be able to connect to a VPN if you want to. They’d have to block or heavily limit internet access in order to stop users from connecting to some remote server.

            Also yes, I do think lawmakers are aware that vpn’s are not a threat to anything, thus there is absolutely no reason to ban them.

            Edit: Someone else mentioned a good point. Even if we consider them blocking vpn as a possibility “The uproar would be enough to kill the bill before it gets out of committee.”

        • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 years ago

          And, as someone else mentioned, work would be impossible for many companies,

          Especially those who have moved to a work from home model.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Encryption is a constitutionally protected right. The only debate is whether it falls under the first or second amendment.

      • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Wait, what the heck. Why does that graph look so much like an ECG?

        • grayman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          The spike is first thing in the morning, before work. The gradual increase is home after work. The later it gets, the higher the consumption.

          I did some data analysis a few years ago on porn consumption for a project at work. People are insanely addicted.

          • DrRatso@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            Im just shocked because this can really pass for some crappy smart watch ECG tracing. I see what resembles P waves, then the QRST is spot on, really.

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Maybe it’s in the morning, when 3rd shift gets off (ayyyy) and then rises as the majority of people don’t work 3rd shift?

    • vvvvan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      2 years ago

      I think most people, by far, don’t know how to use (or want to pay for) a VPN. What they’ll do is use one of the other porn sites. There are probably dozens! And it will push sites to operate outside of US and ignore our dumb state laws.

      • NicoCharrua@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        At this point vpns are popular enough and have enough ads about them that most people will be able to look up ‘free vpn’ on the app store and download the first one that comes up. They’re not difficult to use at all

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      FTFY: The land of the formerly free.

      Today, guns have more freedoms than people, it seems.

  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    2 years ago

    In Virginia, they are required to gather personal information and that’s weird. So its just not available here. But when you think of it, porn hub went to great lengths to minimize the problems with the industry. And these sort of regulations are doing the same thing that prohibition did. Push normal citizens into interacting with seedy elements, dangerous situations, and exploitation.

      • Clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Seconded. He was moderate-LOOKING enough to fool some in our purple state, but he only wants the governorship as a path to president I think.

        • GrundlButter@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 years ago

          There was nothing moderate about his campaign. His primary focus during his campaign was to jump on the culture war bandwagon of restricting the liberties of trans kids, and inputting the “will of the parents” into the schools. Not all parents of course, just the ones that align with him politically.

          And boy did he deliver on those promises. Laws allowing teachers to discriminate against children, book banning rhetoric, and much more including delaying and halting the already passed legislation on recreational marijuana and fueling the abortion issue.

          He’s as much of a shit bag as Desantis and Trump, he’s just more careful about it.

          • Clay_pidgin@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Absolutely agreed, but my point is more that his offensive stuff was underreported by MSM during the campaign. He was clear enough on his plans when talking to right wing crowds, but in “public” he avoided answering when it would make him look bad. Anyone who was looking out could tell what he was going to do, but if you only watched the evening news you probably wouldn’t have noticed it.

            His opponent didn’t do a good enough job defusing the “muh schools” crap, which FOX had spun out of nothing into a national issue in the preventing months.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Yup. Most regulations of sex workers end up only hurting sex workers. They accomplish little else. That’s arguably the end goal rather than a side effect.

  • trackcharlie@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    It’s ridiculous that elected officials can be so unbelievably fucking stupid.

    What a fucking waste of tax dollars

  • crystalmerchant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lol I was just in Utah and on a home wifi there, pornhub was blocked (100% blocked, like you cannot access the site).

    But if I switched to data, it was not blocked

    Lol – how’s that working out for ya, Utah??

    • Ook the Librarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      ·
      2 years ago

      Lol – how’s that working out for ya, Utah??

      Kinda perfectly. The lawmakers don’t want to block porn; they want their constituents to think they are effective. The people that don’t go to pornhub hear it’s blocked (well that’s nice) and the ones that go, find a work around (some people like it being hard). They hope the work around is innocuous enough to be forgotten by election day.

      I hope they miscalculated. I don’t see how blocking porn and weed is a winning strategy. I don’t understand this country. Life could be fun. We have all the ingredients.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 years ago

        I don’t see how blocking porn and weed is a winning strategy. I don’t understand this country. Life could be fun. We have all the ingredients.

        A not insignificant portion of our fellow citizens are looking at their own misery and deciding that the source of that misery are things you are doing in the privacy of your own home or are or not doing that you “should”. This is much easier that actual self reflection and putting in the work to sort out what portion of that misery is self inflicted (and correctable with personal behavior changes!) or a systemic as a result of public policy which affects all of us to make changes in how our society treats one another.

        • aceshigh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          This is much easier that actual self reflection

          tbh self reflection can be very challenging. very scary. it can trigger an identity crisis and not everyone is mentally able to deal with it.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        We should wave banners describing how actually ineffective they are with instructions to get around this BS!

        • WHYAREWEALLCAPS@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 years ago

          Spoofing mobile is at least an order of magnitude harder than spoofing wifi. It pretty much guarantees that those who spoof mobile are either government agencies or people with enough money your pathetic little bank account is irrelevant to them.

          That’s for now. It is only a matter of time until spoofing mobile is at least as easy and cheap as spoofing wifi is now.

        • RedFox@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          I think everyone is forgetting that there’s TLS on almost every website. You can monitor where people go, but you can’t see the traffic unless you get the person to install a malicious certificate in their device.

          You can however have your traffic redirected to a lookalike site where you give up your account info. So there’s still some actual risk.

  • hex_m_hell@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    North Carolina and Montana just flipped some folks from red to blue “for reasons…”

  • The_Worst@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    In only a couple of years girls aren’t allowed to go to school anymore.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        For many reasons. My daughter is in online school, meaning I don’t personally teach her (although I help) but she does it from home. In her case, it was because she was the very bottom of the pecking order at her middle school and was severely bullied every day (including an online doxxing incident the school did nothing about) until she broke down one day and said she couldn’t handle it anymore.

        Thankfully, online schooling is an option available for girls like her that don’t quite fit in and get treated like shit because of it.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    2 years ago

    I hope those hosts provide a nice greeting page explaining which politicians are guilty of this, and how sneaky their underhand rider was abusing the legal system.