Realistically, how can they ban VPNs and succeed?

>cancervatives pass law banning commercial VPNs
>VPN companies shut down
Simple as.

To succeed they would have to dedicate more law enforcement time and resources to tracking down VPN users than China and Russia, which considering their current occupation might be a believable aim for them, but it will only accelerate the toppling of their government. If not by the cuck island natives, then definitely by the sharia-loving muzzies who live there. I'm expecting the UK to be modern Libya in a couple of years.

>>106116925
>cancervatives
Ah yes, the conservative goverment of the UK.

>could
>'ban'
fuck off with your speculatory sensationalist clickbait. there are no plans to ban vpns in the uk.

>>106116867 (OP)
The VPN ban is fudd. It from an article on an MPs suggestion three years ago when the OSA was being drafted.

VPNs before they became a bit of a grift, were, and still are for organisations to access internal resources and systems that aren't Internet facing. You would have businesses raging at the government, the government themselves uses VPNs.

>Can't stop people who don't pay the tv loicence
>Thinks they will be able to ban VPNs

>>106116983
You have businesses raging at the UK gov right now, yet according to their own website they have no intentions of repealing it. They will go to court to defend it. There are even talks in the US about sanctioning visas from gov officials from countries who harm free speech on US platforms and (subsequently) US citizens. They're dying on this hill. What makes you think they won't die on a VPN ban hill in the next few years or even sooner? It doesn't take much to force a law that restricts VPN use to private entities and governments and wipes out all consumer VPNs.
What will happen is that they'll do it but they won't be able to enforce it. Any attempts at cracking down on it will inevitably result in more chaos and time/resources being wasted on actual crimes that matters like the numerous beheadings and rapes that happen in London everyday.
If that's how they want it than fair enough, but I don't think they'll be able to keep it that way for long.

>>106116954
They pretty much are. Makes no difference who's in charge anymore, it's all terrible.

>>106117060
The super, super conservative, traditionalist, government of the UK

clown

>>106117151
Yes.

>>106116999
What form of fucking snark did they want to put into an ad like that? Why do you need a Licence for a TV anyway?

they could force isps to block ipsec traffic, then blackhole any asn owned by vpn companies
tor snowflake would keep working, even china didn't figure out a way to kill it

>>106117185
Because TV is owned by the government. The British broadcasting corporation is owned by the British government.

>>106117269
theyre dumb
they should sell one time loicences with the tv purchases
if one has a loicence then they bring it to the tv shop so they dont pay twice for it

>>106117151
of course, they uphold the muslim traditions :^)

>>106117269
"collective funding to sustain a universal, advertising free public broadcaster and to legally define who must contribute based on viewing of live / BBC iPlayer content"
Can any bongs confirm this? ad-free and of quality equal or better than the charge paid for? Still retarded though

>>106116925
>commercial
So not banning open source vpn code on GitHub?

>>106117363
>I feel completely anonymous hosting my own VPN on a VPS tied to my name
Retard.

>>106117151
I mean they are forcing puritan bullshit laws. The world is full of nuance and I don't believe in party pigeonholing. But they are acting like a stereotype right now.

>>106117457
So what would you say to someone who uses their free use service that they do not charge money for (donations are fine as always though)

>>106116867 (OP)
Block all ports by default but 80 and 443

>>106116925
Currently it’s bipartisan and pushed by feminists

>>106117732
>Block all ports by default but 80 and 443
Do you not realize that just like any other software, you can run a vpn on whatever port you want?
Actually detecting vpn usage would require dpi to identify the actual protocol being used, and even then protos that are wrapped in tls (such as openvpn) would not be detected without additional heuristics

>>106117316
>ad-free
BBC is always advertising for other BBC products so not really
>quality equal or better than the charge paid for
Maybe it was true decades ago. Kenneth Clark's Civilization, Doctor Who before it became dogshit, Fawlty Towers, Monty Python's Flying Circus, Yes Minister, etc. Unfortunately these days, the BBC hasn't made anything worthwhile in years. They are far too busy with their main goal of promoting cultural Marxism and attacking native British people.

>>106116937
No, they wouldn't. All you literally need to do is buy a month of time on the most common VPNs and then list all the IPs of endpoints. For less than 500 Bucks and like 12 minutes of shell scripting you could cover basically all VPN users.

>>106117047
> I don't think they'll be able to keep it that way for long.

They can and will

>>106116867 (OP)
Piss off any of the Elected government official, and banning and seizing will commence. Money can only make someone free or libertarian for so long until the government starts checking on you in your own property.

>>106117766
That was the expected answer. I swear the only good media that came from that island was Fawlty Towers, Top Gear (The good ones)... and that's about it. I wouldn't be caught eating from the propaganda trough by watching whatever slop comes through on any of the public frequencies in my neck o' the woods anyway

>>106117656
Back in the 90s I never thought we’d defeat the religious conservatives only for feminists to be the one to defeat us

>>106117776
>all VPN users
Which happens to be a lot of people. Who's going to be doing the arresting? An underfunded police force? A system which can't even enforce TV licenses?

>>106117830
What are you talking about. The conversation is about banning VPNs, not arresting people using VPNs. The whole point is if you block the endpoints, the VPN can't be used. And if the VPN can't be used, you can't be arrested for using it.

>>106117763
Do you retards seriously not understand that the point is to control large swathes of the population and not literally every last communication?
The overwhelming majority will be too cowed, too scared, or too lazy to bother. They’ll throw up roadblock after roadblock after roadblock and not give two shits about any negative outcomes or inefficiencies so long as you can’t get a critical mass of people to go against their narratives.

>>106117851
Plenty of consumer VPNs use encrypted endpoints, that is why the UK is trying to ban encryption.
It's also easy to just make your own VPN with a VPS, if you ban those endpoints you end up alienating foreign companies.

>>106117953
An endpoint is just an IP address. If you ban the IP address, then the outgoing server is not reachable.

>>106117965
VPNs use rotating endpoints, there will never be only a handful of IPs that a VPN provider has. They're always accumulating more, which makes this ineffective in the long term.

>>106118002
What you're saying is generally not true. I'm not going to argue any further since you just keep shifting the goal posts.

>>106118006
Cool. You're a tech illiterate and so is your limey government.

>>106116925
*koshervatives

My speculation: The government in britbongistan is too incompetent to do anything other than force consumer commercial vpn companies to stop operating and providing services to citizens in their jurisdiction. even then, some of those companies will still be allowed to operate since the services they offer are not traditional VPN providers. i.e, Tailscale. Further restrictions beyond this seem unrealistic.

Diddling don rapes little kids
Jews rape kids

>>106117047
>There are even talks in the US about sanctioning visas from gov officials from countries who harm free speech on US platforms and (subsequently) US citizens.
except if you say a bad thing about the jews

>>106118046
The UK is recognizing Pallywood as a state. This makes the USA their enemy, just as it did with Canada. Sanctioning them is not unrealistic now.

>>106117763
>Actually detecting vpn usage would require dpi to identify the actual protocol being used
wireguard data glows in the dark

>>106116867 (OP)
Why the fuck are VPN services called VPNs if they're more like proxies?? I've told a guy recently that I VPN into my home network to access my services, he didn't understand what the fuck was I talking about

>>106117699
Show me those legions of commercial-quality free VPNs.

>>106118242
Demand isn't there, that's in the air right now. If it's not needed, so be it. If non-laws are enforced, then they will be in the market, that's how that works.

>>106118258
There’s always demand for “free”

>>106118140
Because VPN sounds cooler

>>106118417
You already hyperbole'd with "legions", and you don't know what the word "donation" means

>>106118458
Actually proxy sounds cooler

>>106118002
how come 4chan can block all VPNs then

>>106119014
>how come 4chan can block all VPNs then
They don't.
IYKYK

>>106116867 (OP)
>they can't ban it.
>it's unenforcable.
>out of touch retarded boomers with no technological understanding pass retard law for retards.
they can suck a fat cock.

>>106116983
buddy they hate you and want you to die banning vpn's is something they will do

>>106118479
NTA

>>106116867 (OP)
Why do they want to ban adults from buying vpns if their goal is to keep underage people away from porn?

>>106118479
There's always demand for "free."

>>106120099
Look you just gotta get the vaccine so I can get protection for the vaccine ok????

>>106120099
comrade stop with the conspiracy talk or gulag

>>106116937
I actually agree with you beyond the technical. It's starting to look like the UK is going to implode, explode or collapse.

>>106117151
>The super, super conservative, traditionalist, government of the UK
Yes, by UK standards. The party opposite will be the most far-right Britain has ever been. Tony Blair fucked this country forever.

>>106117287
The license isn't for the TV, you can own and use one without a license, the license is just for watching live TV/online BBC content which isn't worth watching anyway so barely anyone under 40 has a TV License anymore. It's literally just an old people scam nowadays

>>106116925
>VPN companies shut down
Suppose they don't... Let's say I'm NordVPN. I shut down my UK offices and remove UK servers as options for customers, but continue to offer VPN service to UK customers through crypto payments. I now have no assets physically located in the UK, which could be seized by a court order. The UK does not have the ability to arrest any of my employees, which are located in other countries. The UK is now no more able to do anything about us than China is.

Just because your product is illegal in a country doesn't mean that country can do anything about you selling that product from a different country over the Internet.

>>106120811
They can make your isp block things. They did with thepiratebay in some countries

>>106116954
>>106117151
they are trying to conserve their power. this makes them conservatives. Even if you would elect... if elections worked... a turbo commie, even the turbo commie will conserve power thus a conservative. Not that anything would change even if you elected Stalin or Hitler, or Jesus.... the uk will always be shit

>>106117776
>block AWS
>internet stops
kek

>>106116999

>>106116867 (OP)
vpns are already half banned. can't read shit on reddit. they'll become pretty much useless soon

>>106120855
They can make the UK users' ISPs block things. Which can be circumvented. They cannot make the non-UK ISPs block anything.

>>106116867 (OP)
they're slowly being cucked
https://youtu.be/_s3pWt3cXoQ

>>106118479
>you don't know what the word "donation" means

No one EVER donates. No one.

>>106121866
I sometimes let the cashier keep the change. that counts as donation in my book

>>106121218
dedicated ip vpn

>>106116867 (OP)
>Realistically, how can they ban VPN
They can't.

>>106122049
they don't have to ban them outright just for the normies

>>106116999
That message makes me not want to pay me teevee liocence desu

Captcha and posting is slow as fuck right now, anyone else with this problem? are the glowies studying my posts?

>>106116925
>UK shuts down all VPN companies
>no relevant VPNs are UK based anyway
>they shut down UK servers I guess, and stop taking payments from UK banks
>noooo you can't just send £5 of crypto to mullvad in Sweden, because... you just can't, ok?

>>106116983
>The VPN ban is fudd. It from an article on an MPs suggestion three years ago when the OSA was being drafted.
They are talking about it again. No legislation in the works for it yet.

there's upsides to digital ID, can be used for voting online. if the EU wants digital ID then it should be used for voting in the EU. why not? things would move faster this way and people can vote on real shit since we have a secure digital ID shit.

>>106116867 (OP)
Make it illegal to purchase for private individuals and ban advertising VPN in the UK. This will not stop it, but thie idea is to make it increasingly hard to get so reduce numbers.
New laws forcing websites to detect and block VPN use. An example try going to https://www.guitar.co.uk/ using a VPN, 9 times out of 10 you will be blocked.
Go full 1984 and do what China is doing. Which is exploring cutom protocols that allow the state very granular control over everything.

These are all retarded of couse, but we have a retarded govermemnt.
At some point we hay have to start using dpi fiddling and vless. Which is just more technical barriers for normies.

>>106116925
Oh no vpn companies shut down. Meanwhile you can spin up a VPS anywhere in the world, install wireguard in 2 seconds, and you are now in wherever you want to be.

>>106122220
It's one of the times where I think they will be told from within that banning VPNs is a terrible idea. There's a lot of tech that relies on VPN usage and IT guys within the government are going to be saying "you really shouldn't do that".

>>106121845
the british are subhuman