Okay, I'm generally a fan of the EFF, but what they say in this article is untrue? > Their solution? Entirely ban the use of VPNs. > Yes, really. Which is th

Okay, I'm generally a fan of the EFF, but what they say in this article is untrue? > Their solution? Entirely ban the use of VPNs. > Yes, really. Which is then followed by the actual explanation: > an age verification bill that requires all websites distributing [...] “sexual content” to both implement an age verification system and also to block the access of users connected via VPN. This doesn't ban VPNs - it requires age-verified sites to block VPN users. Which makes 3 of the 4 categories they describe basically unaffected by the change to the law. Business users, students, journalists protecting sources - all can turn off their VPN to access porn when they want to, and enjoy the use of their VPN at any other time. (The fourth category is "people who want privacy," who are in fact negatively affected by the law.) Don't get me wrong, I think this is a bad bill, but it's also a bad article that is basically lying.