3 ms·
this to me is nonsense. the article is available on the internet. you can freely access it from almost anywhere. the problem is that the politicians of the da
by kmlx 3y ago
this to me is nonsense.
the article is available on the internet. you can freely access it from almost anywhere.
the problem is that the politicians of the day of some regions (china, australia, european union etc) decided that the freely available internet does not really fit with their worldview. as such they created rules that in effect split their internet from others.
this naturally lead to a mass adoption of things like https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/451# https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/451...
luckily, at least for now, those regions still have access to VPN.
- jwr 3y agoNo, the website specifically refuses to provide the content to a range of IP addresses (anything not in the US, I'm guessing). Don't confuse this with local censorship.
- kmlx 3y ago> No, the website specifically refuses to provide the content to a range of IP addresses yes, just like any other website that blocks certain regions and countries.
- jwr 3y agoOk, in that case I misunderstood your point. I do not understand how "the politicians of the day of some regions (china, australia, european union etc) decided that the freely available internet does not really fit with their worldview. as such they created rules that in effect split their internet from others." As I understand it, the rule (IP-based exclusion) was created by the website owner, not "the politicians of the day of some regions".
- sentientslug 3y agoThe rule is created by the website owner to avoid getting sued into oblivion by not following GDPR (written by politicians), which it shouldn't really have to, because this is a local news affiliate for a city in the United States. I wouldn't exactly call that "local censorship".