Hacker News

points by Aurornis 5 days ago | 0 comments

Be careful what you wish for: This lawsuit comes from the same state that wants to hold companies liable for letting people connect via VPN to adult websites: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/10/court-agrees-eff-utahs...

Thankfully that part of the law didn't stand under closer inspection. As anyone on this website should know, it's technically impossible to identify all VPN users or geolocate VPN users behind their VPN. Anyone can set up a VPN on a raspberry Pi and leave it at a friends' house in another state. Under the law they tried to pass, adult websites would be liable for this.

[–] tfrancisl 5 days ago

Slippery slope argument. You can have authoritarian, anti-people legislation, and you can have pro-people, anti-corporation legislation. These are very different, and any legislator or ideologue that tells you any different has listened to too many Maggie Thatcher and Ronald Reagan speeches.

[–] Aurornis 5 days ago

> Slippery slope argument.

The legislation in my example wasn't a hypothetical slippery slope. It actually passed. This was part of what they were trying to regulate.

[–] method_capital 5 days ago

The ONLY difference is who's reading and writing the legislation. I never know if I should be alarmed or humored by people so blind to their own political biases.

[–] tfrancisl 5 days ago

I am very much not blind to my viewpoints. I believe the authoritarian pseudo-Christians that run Utah are dangerous people with dangerous "political bias" (adults call this ideology).

[–] jkestner 5 days ago

Sympathetic but that's not relevant. GP is not talking about what kinds of things corporations should be held accountable for, but whether their officers should be held accountable. At the heart of this is whether the punishments for corporations are sufficient if they don't actually deter illegal behavior.