3 ms·

Why do courts do stupid things like this. It's easy to distribute a HOSTS file with the same information. Are they going to forbid that too? The only people

Why do courts do stupid things like this. It's easy to distribute a HOSTS file with the same information. Are they going to forbid that too? The only people inconvenienced by this will be those who were only casually interested anyway.

ranger_danger 2y ago
Wouldn't that be the majority of people? In their eyes, that's good enough and considered mission accomplished... kinda hard to argue with that IMO.
- AnthonyMouse 2y ago
  Nobody is going to use a hosts file. They'll use a different public DNS that supports DoH (so the local ISP can't see/modify the traffic) but that has no physical presence in France and isn't subject to its laws, or a VPN to the same effect. That requires no greater effort than it is to use OpenDNS to begin with. All they're doing is requiring people who are subject to their jurisdiction to do this, which is entirely pointless when others aren't. "The internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." The real problem is that the people not willing to accept that will then be offended when this invariably fails to be effective, and lobby for ever-increasing levels of oppression in an attempt to make it work, when the only way to actually make it work is a totalitarian security state incompatible with a free society. We can't allow ourselves to be dragged into that dystopia inch by inch.
  - tsimionescu 2y ago
    Any service which is open to EU citizens, such as a DoH server, falls under the claimed jurisdiction of the EU. Whether they could successfully follow that claim depends entirely on geopolitical conaiderations which are hard to predict. But as long as your services are opened to EU citizens, you are, in principle, liable for violating EU laws.
    - rvnx 2y ago
      From the perspective of the French law, if your service is reachable in France, then you are liable. In practice, Google has an operating branch in France, so they are weak. Even if they didn't have the branch, in theory, extraterritoriality can still be applied between relatively friendly countries; though taking lot of time and bureaucracy. Even with enemies: Russian company is totally safe from US law, and vice-versa, but they could get under sanctions for "promoting terrorism" (in some way, this could also be argued for these DNS servers as well if we push it a little bit).
  - gorgoiler 2y ago
    The saying about routing around damage is an excellent countercultural rallying cry. What’s weird is that this same “censorship ain’t cool” thing we call The Internet also requires you to psuedonymously identify yourself in plain text on every single packet you send. I wish the long haired folks in the 70s had thought of that angle too. We have onion routing but it’s hardly the same thing when using it puts involves putting oneself in a minority with some questionable company.
Narkov 2y ago
Don't let perfection get in the way of done.
- rvnx 2y ago
  A solution working in 90% of the cases is not bad. Especially if this is reasonably easy. Then progressively you can figure it out for the remaining % as the technological solutions progressively get more difficult to implement.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

ranger_danger 2y ago

Wouldn't that be the majority of people? In their eyes, that's good enough and considered mission accomplished... kinda hard to argue with that IMO.

AnthonyMouse 2y ago
Nobody is going to use a hosts file. They'll use a different public DNS that supports DoH (so the local ISP can't see/modify the traffic) but that has no physical presence in France and isn't subject to its laws, or a VPN to the same effect. That requires no greater effort than it is to use OpenDNS to begin with. All they're doing is requiring people who are subject to their jurisdiction to do this, which is entirely pointless when others aren't. "The internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." The real problem is that the people not willing to accept that will then be offended when this invariably fails to be effective, and lobby for ever-increasing levels of oppression in an attempt to make it work, when the only way to actually make it work is a totalitarian security state incompatible with a free society. We can't allow ourselves to be dragged into that dystopia inch by inch.
- tsimionescu 2y ago
  Any service which is open to EU citizens, such as a DoH server, falls under the claimed jurisdiction of the EU. Whether they could successfully follow that claim depends entirely on geopolitical conaiderations which are hard to predict. But as long as your services are opened to EU citizens, you are, in principle, liable for violating EU laws.
  - rvnx 2y ago
    From the perspective of the French law, if your service is reachable in France, then you are liable. In practice, Google has an operating branch in France, so they are weak. Even if they didn't have the branch, in theory, extraterritoriality can still be applied between relatively friendly countries; though taking lot of time and bureaucracy. Even with enemies: Russian company is totally safe from US law, and vice-versa, but they could get under sanctions for "promoting terrorism" (in some way, this could also be argued for these DNS servers as well if we push it a little bit).
- gorgoiler 2y ago
  The saying about routing around damage is an excellent countercultural rallying cry. What’s weird is that this same “censorship ain’t cool” thing we call The Internet also requires you to psuedonymously identify yourself in plain text on every single packet you send. I wish the long haired folks in the 70s had thought of that angle too. We have onion routing but it’s hardly the same thing when using it puts involves putting oneself in a minority with some questionable company.

Narkov 2y ago

Don't let perfection get in the way of done.

rvnx 2y ago
A solution working in 90% of the cases is not bad. Especially if this is reasonably easy. Then progressively you can figure it out for the remaining % as the technological solutions progressively get more difficult to implement.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]