I absolutely loath it when people say "the criminals will get them anyways" UNLESS someone makes a real argument for why. This is the best argument I have heard for why NOT to implement this bill.
I absolutely loath it when people say "the criminals will get them anyways" UNLESS someone makes a real argument for why. This is the best argument I have heard for why NOT to implement this bill.
There's a number of ways it could be handled. probably the hardest/most lawman-resistant would just be to have a field on the VPN client to enter the proxy's ip address, and whenever it changes just disseminate the new address via social media. How much easier it gets than that depends on how forceful the blacklist is.. IE, if it disrupts DNS resolution or not.
The thing is, even if they shut down the proxy, someone else could just set up another one and then the game begins again. Servers are relatively cheap... at least when compared to the price of sending cops somewhere to unplug it.
That'll never happen... many companies host their own websites on servers they own, on site. Many of them huge businesses that are trying to control their own assets. Even if it WAS made illegal, those servers aren't just going disappear.
That'll never happen... many companies host their own websites on servers they own, on site. Many of them huge businesses that are trying to control their own assets. Even if it WAS made illegal, those servers aren't just going disappear.[/QUOTE]
That'll never happen... many companies host their own websites on servers they own, on site. Many of them huge businesses that are trying to control their own assets. Even if it WAS made illegal, those servers aren't just going disappear.[/QUOTE]
Ho ho hooooo boy. Decentralized DNS? I know I'm a Libertarian kook and all that, but even THAT sounds a little too close to potential ANARCHY. Ha ha... but it may be what is necessary. I just don't envy the DcDNS hax0rwarz over who gets www.sex.com.
