this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2025
532 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

36460 readers
1766 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Decentralized social network Mastodon says it can’t comply with Mississippi’s age verification law — the same law that saw rival Bluesky pull out of the state — because it doesn’t have the means to do so.

The social non-profit explains that Mastodon doesn’t track its users, which makes it difficult to enforce such legislation. Nor does it want to use IP address-based blocks, as those would unfairly impact people who were traveling, it says.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 15 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

We need more federation and P2P in everything.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 4 points 1 hour ago

P2P! I have been screaming this into every forum at reddit since last piece of shit president was president. See? This is why!

[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 3 points 49 minutes ago

What's wrong with your own personal 2M band radio network? Or just bring back CB culture. It's in the name: Citizen's Band...

[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 60 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 11 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

Would have been the smart move for business, too. Just don't comply until everyone else caves and then sue the state for favoring some businesses.

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 26 points 4 hours ago

Does the law in Mississippi apply to the geographic region and airspace, or only residents?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 207 points 9 hours ago (5 children)

There's going to come a point at which the Feds/States will lean on the ISPs to handle the censorship for them. We've had people all over the Nat Sec system staring at the "Great Firewall of China" and asking themselves "Can we get something like this over here?"

[–] mitch@piefed.mitch.science 1 points 1 minute ago

All my IT and InfoSec friends have called me alarmist for suggesting even the possibility of a GFW of America, but every day that passes, it looks more and more likely to happen, doesn't it?

Start practicing circumvention techniques now, y'all, while it's still legal and cheap to do so. Learn amateur radio. Learn Meshtastic. Learn all the different censorship-resistant VPN technology out there. Host your own websites or services for friends, family, or your community. It doesn't make it impossible, but it does make it hard, and fascism is nothing if not lazy.

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 26 points 4 hours ago

staring at the “Great Firewall of China” and asking themselves “Can we get something like this over here?”

I've just been assuming that was the goal all along.

Fifteen years ago, I said on Reddit, "The U.S. is trying to become like China before China can become like the U.S." Of course, I got buried.

[–] IllNess@infosec.pub 58 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

If this really about protecting kids, they could've done opt in blocking at the ISP level. Just a few new fields with ISPs and they have products that can take care of this already.

This is really about tracking every little thing you do online.

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 1 points 2 minutes ago

It's never really about the kids.

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 33 points 7 hours ago

Eventually it will be about restricting what we can access on the web.

[–] hisao@ani.social 96 points 9 hours ago (10 children)

This is why it's perfect time to get some tech literacy regarding tor, i2p, yggdrasil, and shadowsocks. It's not perfect solution to use tech to circumvent restrictions that shouldn't be there in the first place, but sometimes it really comes to that point and it's really nice to have all systems ready!

[–] ezyryder@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 43 minutes ago

I'm making a website to aggregate all of this information. Pro net neutrality, anti censorship laymens guide. Still in the works but its called zoracle.life.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I've tried a few times to check out i2p, it seems to take hours of leaving it running to even get to the point where you can very slowly and inconsistently load even the official pages though.

[–] hisao@ani.social 6 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

In my experience, if you have anything but "Network: OK" status (for example, "Network: Firewalled"), it's not working properly. If you're behind a VPN, you need to port-forward and properly configure a port in I2P config/settings. Another sign that it's misconfigured is 0 participating tunnels. This is how properly configured I2P network statistics looks like with high internet bandwidth:

spoiler

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 hours ago

Thanks. Somehow the network actually seems to be working pretty well for me now, not sure why it wasn't before.

[–] peoplebeproblems@midwest.social 61 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Arguably though, at some point they'll just say "if we can't read your traffic, you can't use the Internet."

Which still isn't a problem, as I'm sure we can come up with a means to encrypt traffic to make it look entirely legitimate. But it's going to take a while.

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 56 points 8 hours ago (17 children)

At that point people would probably go to a p2p adhoc wireless meshnet to bypass the ISPs entirely.

[–] mitch@piefed.mitch.science 1 points 48 seconds ago

Meshtastic, baby!!

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

All they have to do is send a few crews with log dipoles or yagis. Take a few operators down and charge them with terrorism or something and a critical mass will stop using it.

We have the tech for drones sweeping everything everywhere with sensors. Cameras, radios, microphones, IR...

[–] Revan343@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago

At some point you're just going to need to start shooting the fascists

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 25 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

Sneakernets, my friend. Never underestimate the bandwidth of a pocket full of microsd cards traveling on the subway.

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 7 points 2 hours ago

Flash drives of banned foreign films are the one method of accessing foreign media that north Koreans realistically have. It's extremely hard to prevent people plugging a flash drive into their computer in their home to view some media

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Latency is horrific though.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 36 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

You mean "at which point, people will just say 'oh, ok'". (Assuming they even notice)

[–] sexy_peach@feddit.org 33 points 8 hours ago (4 children)

"People" will just comply. Tech savvy people like us are the only ones that could circumvent it

[–] cyborganism@piefed.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

Except we'll have to keep using it because the rest of our families and friends are going to still be on there or pester us about why we aren't there with them to share photos of your sister-in-law's baby photos and videos and your aunt Tammy's vacation photos.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Except if the topic is wifi meshnets, no amount of tech savvyness will get you around an absence of other nodes nearby. General apathy is actually a huge problem here.

[–] Sl00k@programming.dev 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I used to think about this via mesh networks as simply routers, but now with nostr, IPFS, atProto and that new BT messaging stuff Jack Dorsey is on. Technically you could utilize your phone as an access point to the mesh network as you move around the city and load all the comms in the background. The latency would be high, but it could work. Also with 5g tech nowadays long range mesh networks are much more feasible albeit probably expensive for a hobbyist.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Are there now legal means to do longer range communications? I thought the main limitation was you need to be licensed to do anything more than short range home wifi

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 3 points 2 hours ago

I mean it's all licensed by the frequency and antenna transmit power, so long distance is possible with the right choice of protocol, antenna and frequency you can get a surprisingly long distance with unlicensed spectrum. Ubiquity makes some directional antenna for wirelessly connecting 2 sites that operate in the 2.4 and 5ghz ranges that can connect over distances of multiple kilometers

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FailBetter@crust.piefed.social 6 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

The situation does seem quite desperate. I'd like to heed your call. Please advise on most critical systems I should have ready right now today please. I know have a lot of work to do and must stay efficient

[–] hisao@ani.social 12 points 5 hours ago
  • If the internet were fully controlled, you’d need mesh networks - DIY, decentralized networks using radios, local connections, or other alternative infrastructures. I don’t know all the details, but Yggdrasil is a promising modern project that functions as an alternative “internet” for mesh networks, while also working over the regular internet.

  • Within the normal internet, the most resilient solution against heavy censorship is probably Shadowsocks. It’s widely used in mainland China because it can bypass full-scale DPI (deep packet inspection) by making traffic look like normal HTTPS. There are ways for authorities to detect it, and there are counter-methods, but it remains one of the most reliable tools for evading state-level traffic filtering.

  • Next in line are Tor and I2P. Both are very resilient, and blocking them completely is difficult. It’s a continuous cat-and-mouse game: governments block some bridges or entry nodes, but new ones appear, allowing users to reconnect.

  • Finally, regular VPNs are useful but generally less resilient. They’re the first target for legal restrictions and DPI filtering because their traffic patterns are easier to detect.


Overall, for deep censorship resistance, it’s a hierarchy: mesh networks > Shadowsocks > Tor/I2P > standard VPNs. You can ask chatbots about any of these and usually get accurate, practical advice because the technical principles are public knowledge.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] limer@lemmy.ml 129 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (20 children)

I agree with mastodon, even though eventually Texas will enact similar legislation forcing me to use a vpn to read it

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›