• tal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Honestly, it might be a good thing long-run to have a higher percentage of users on VPNs. They aren’t a magic cure-all, but they do help make it safer to use untrusted networks and discourage some things on the service side, like geolocating and data-mining users based on IP.

    “This might address some security problems” is somewhat abstract to appeal to most users, I think. “VPN or no tits” is something that I think is more generally-relatable.

      • Strayce@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        5 days ago

        Not that they won’t try, but it’s very difficult to blanket ban VPNs. There are very legitimate business reasons to use them and it isn’t necessarily easy for ISPs to distinguish between a “recreational” VPN connection and an employee VPN’ing into say, a work datacenter. Industry will kick up a massive fuss about it.

        • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          5 days ago

          Hell, I VPN into my home network all the time to access my self hosted work applications, it’s 10x more secure than leaving ports open to the wider internet.

      • tal
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        I think that it’s kind of globally-applicable.

        And I’ve wondered in the past whether the long-run for the Internet was always going to be people generally winding up with VPNs for similar reasons. I’m far from the first:

        The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

        John Gilmore