Comment by vpShane

Comment by vpShane a day ago

16 replies

Should be interesting to see how the internet blocks those of us who don't want to be fingerprinted, ID'd, or reveal our home IP addresses. YouTube already blocks embeds to login and prove I'm not a bot, funnily it doesn't work and embeds never play. Reddit will block me unless I'm signed in which I don't mind too much, but the daily beast and many others block me which is a shame because I'm a real human being using the internet as intended.

Instead of blocking or limiting features to whitelist users with approved behavioral patterns and limit / block those that don't -- such as loading a page and immediately commenting or doing things that normal humans don't do, they block IP addresses and ASNs.

I just close the browser tab and remind myself not to waste my time caring, there'll be other platforms.

My router is setup for WireGaurd and it'll never be disabled.

Shame on SoundCloud

sigmoid10 a day ago

>block those that don't -- such as loading a page and immediately commenting or doing things that normal humans don't do, they block IP addresses and ASNs.

As someone who has both spent quite a bit of time writing scrapers and later lots of headache on blocking malicious bots from accessing websites, I can tell you this has become futile. Bot makers aren't stupid. If you put in a check for how fast actions are performed, they will put in a sleep timer in their script. If you start blocking residential IPs because many people use it, you are probably just blocking a school or dormitory, while the real bots will quickly move to another IP once they smell something is off. Today with modern multimodal LLMs, you can bypass almost every "human-check" imaginable. And if they can't pass something, most of your users sure as hell won't either. Not because it is too hard, but because it will take too long to solve. The sweet 3-15s actionable human intelligence threshold has been passed by now. The cats and dogs type captchas were already solved more than 12 years ago by simple CV machine learning. The tech has progressed an insane amount since then. In the end I always ended up basically doing what SoundCloud did here if my service was sensitive: Block entire countries, all tor exit nodes and all known VPN ASNs. That will get it down by like 90%. Bear in mind that anyone who wants to put in some effort will still easily bypass this, but at least the low-effort guys from third world countries will take a while before they catch on. So you can go back to doing some actual work in the meantime.

  • [removed] a day ago
    [deleted]
bilekas a day ago

> which is a shame because I'm a real human being using the internet as intended.

This is the main issue here, the web has become actively hostile to normal people in the quest to monetize every second of online activity.

  • IAmBroom 20 hours ago

    "Actively hostile" is another of the common myths. See also: "corporations are evil".

    "Completely indifferent" and "Corporations are completely amoral" are more accurate.

    It's the difference between someone trying to drown you, versus someone trying to fish while you drown just off the bank. Same end, of course.

    • OkayPhysicist 18 hours ago

      What do you think "evil" means? In the real world, there's no one holding up a platonic ideal of moral action and swearing to do the opposite, like some comic book antagonist. Real world evil is acting with complete amorality, because if you don't care about right or wrong in your pursuit of some goal, you inevitably will do some heinous shit.

      That's not to say corporations don't come awfully close to the comic book concept of evil. By definition, a corporation's prime purpose is an uncaring commitment to making money, and if you've gone public, making all the money. That's awfully close to being the opposite of the "good" ideals of generosity and kindness.

    • [removed] 20 hours ago
      [deleted]
    • immibis 3 hours ago

      Evil is boring, evil is indifference, evil is amorality. That's why they called it "the banality of evil"

    • forshaper 20 hours ago

      I don't think they're evil, but to say that consumers aren't the fish seems a stretch.

    • Aeglaecia 8 hours ago

      while i am sure that google was completely indifferent when they made their search engine return worse results in the name of increasing profits , this action did serve to directly increase human suffering

butlike 19 hours ago

In the nicest way possible: who cares? So "they" know my vile pornographic proclivities, my daily commute, and probably what color my poop was this morning. Then what? I get embarassed?

Snowden showed the NSA has taps upstream, so in my book: that's over. I'm fairly convinced if your company reaches a size where it could potentially be a national security threat, the government comes knocking (Facebook, Apple, Twitter, etc.), so that seems like it's over. You have the AI companies scraping god knows what. And, I imagine most countries have corollaries.

Really, all the bad actors I'd encounter in my daily travels would be ones who want to steal money from me. That's a simple ideology. I can handle that. My identity gets stolen, my bank account...there's multiple levels of billion dollar companies with vested interest in me not losing faith in "the system," so I'm not worried about it really.

If a company wants to associate my phone number to glean all my purchases forever in order to target tailored ads to me, fine. Again, it's in the spirit of taking my money, which is a simple ideology.

If the neighbors want to snoop on my traffic, hats off to them for having the capacity to live two lives: both theirs, and mine after they figure out my day-to-day dealings. Doubt they have time to do much about it. Hard enough to live one life in 24 hours.

If the government wants to try and keep tabs on everything to see who's making ICBMs and who isn't, or whatever else they want to do, that's their prerogative but it seems like a complex goal that doesn't affect me.

  • vpShane 2 hours ago

    That's one way to look at it, mine is no data goes out or in unencrypted, and for me it's simple. Adtech? "No." - let packet kiddies get my home IP address? "No."

    It's as simple as that: No thanks, then I slide the slider on WireGuard and then I have an encrypted tunnel that all of my devices can communicate with each other, use a DNS through the tunnel with domains blocked and I can control what phones home and what doesn't. I'm not concerned with foreign governments, snoopy neighbors, war driving, or anything.

    I can't solve all the problems but there are no what ifs on my end, *What if" -> No.

    I'm not a number in some algorithm or malicious because I route my data securely, I'm a human being.

  • webstrand 18 hours ago

    This only works so long as you're not interesting to anyone. You never know what past information associated with your identity will be weaponized against you. By the government, corporations, or individuals to justify harming you. Even if you're safe and secure in the belief that your neighbors will never turn on you, others are not so lucky.

    Did you travel to get an abortion? Someone might be interested in charging you with a felony. Did you associate too closely with non-citizens? Maybe you're one too. Did you reserve a hotel room? Probably willing to pay more for flights there. Do you frequent hacker news? Might not be so in favor of the current political establishment.

    • butlike 18 hours ago

      You make a couple of good points. The necessity to commit a felony in the name of healthcare as traveling to get an abortion is shameful. I can't believe it's come to that. Have people been rounded up into camps and exterminated for innate human qualities and beliefs? Yes. And it's disgusting I have to type that as well.

      But beyond that I disagree with your sentiment.

      These things need to be stopped as they come. Withholding data and living a life of fearful "what ifs" cannot preemptively stop atrocity. Of course I'll never know what past information can be used against me in the future; weaponized in ways I cannot fathom. It's a possibility. Hindsight is 20/20, but "you can't predict the future," so how would I know? I have to live my life. I gotta do SOMETHING.

      The crux of all of those "what ifs" is beholden to if the person correlating that data has social agency to act upon it. If that's the case, anyone could be my next predator. Anyone could be the next Hitler waiting to exterminate me based on my non-citizen camaraderie or political leanings.

      Data is just a predictor, it is not the truth. If my life provided a data point for a yet-to-be-born hostile dictator to perjure me, I will deal with that when it comes, but I can't live my life out of fear.

      • 1shooner 10 hours ago

        > I can't live my life out of fear.

        I compare it to ecology. You're saying you will deal with the sea when it has risen to your doorstep rather than reduce emissions, or even build a levy. You've chosen to not worry about the sea, either because you don't think you can stop it, or it is not convenient for the moment to try. People who believe the sea is rising can't help but fear it because they are rational. People building privacy levies are not living in fear, they are reacting rationally to a hazard.

  • teddyh 12 hours ago

    You may believe yourself and your actions to be ignored by the watchers, but you might still want everyone in general to be free of watchers. Both since being constantly watched is detrimental to the human condition, but also since some people may actually dare to improve society if they are not watched.

    For a longer argument, see The Eternal Value of Privacy, by Bruce Schneier in 2006: <https://web.archive.org/web/20241203195026/https://www.wired...>.

  • brianmurphy 11 hours ago

    These vpn believers don't understand how concentrating all of the traffic thru a single chokepoint (the vpn provider network), they're infinitely easier to network monitor.