4 ms·
>and can even be outright blocked. That's my biggest fear. Yesterday I woke up to find out that Three (a big telco provider in the UK) had blocked Mullvad's AP
by richjdsmith 8y ago
>and can even be outright blocked.
That's my biggest fear. Yesterday I woke up to find out that Three (a big telco provider in the UK) had blocked Mullvad's API path as 'adult content'. I had to physically go to a store and verify that I was an adult to be able to use my VPN - the very same VPN I use because I have so little trust in the UK Gov (I'm not from here and am not staying long term, but hate that the society reminds me of 1984 regularly),
- mindslight 8y agoI was referring to blocking by websites, as there is actually some competition between them. For example, a few major ecommerce sites frustrate or outright block traffic from my VPS, so I've simply stopping visiting them rather than poking holes. A similar dynamic is present for ISPs wherein if most people expect "Internet access" to mean something that works with VPNs, then ISPs can't block it [0]. But that's a harder state to reach as there's much less competition between ISPs. A commerce site wouldn't want to forgo 10% of their business, but a government/quasi-government has no problem demonizing 10% of their subjects. Which is why we ultimately do need non-real-time protocols and namespaces for the bulk of communication. [0] Nagging systems like the UK would still exist, but they couldn't progress further to outright banning it.