• BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      3 days ago

      I think the idea is that any VPN that doesn’t comply gets IP blocked. But that’s obviously a cat and mouse game since VPN services are a dime a dozen and you can always rent a VPS and tunnel to a respectable VPN through it.

      • P1nkman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s more like mouse and bazooka: you might hit the mouse, but you’ll destroy your whole house at the same time.

      • potatopotato@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        3 days ago

        Also all of this assumes we’re in a purely ipv4 paradigm. IPv6 has essentially infinite direct addresses that can be used.

      • bonenode@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        That is probably true but the average person won’t be able to get past the stage finding a non-IP-blocked VPN.

        • BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Not necessarily, sure the average person will have a much harder time, but inevitably, word of mouth networks form and people quickly share which VPN isn’t currently caught by the blocks. That’s how it is in mainland China, and they have very strict DPI going on so the word of mouth workarounds are like “use this shadowsocks provider” etc