denise: Image: Me, facing away from camera, on top of the Castel Sant'Angelo in Rome (Default)
Denise ([staff profile] denise) wrote in [site community profile] dw_news2025-08-26 12:24 am

Mississippi legal challenge: beginning 1 September, we will need to geoblock Mississippi IPs

I'll start with the tl;dr summary to make sure everyone sees it and then explain further: As of September 1, we will temporarily be forced to block access to Dreamwidth from all IP addresses that geolocate to Mississippi for legal reasons. This block will need to continue until we either win the legal case entirely, or the district court issues another injunction preventing Mississippi from enforcing their social media age verification and parental consent law against us.

Mississippi residents, we are so, so sorry. We really don't want to do this, but the legal fight we and Netchoice have been fighting for you had a temporary setback last week. We genuinely and honestly believe that we're going to win it in the end, but the Fifth Circuit appellate court said that the district judge was wrong to issue the preliminary injunction back in June that would have maintained the status quo and prevented the state from enforcing the law requiring any social media website (which is very broadly defined, and which we definitely qualify as) to deanonymize and age-verify all users and obtain parental permission from the parent of anyone under 18 who wants to open an account.

Netchoice took that appellate ruling up to the Supreme Court, who declined to overrule the Fifth Circuit with no explanation -- except for Justice Kavanaugh agreeing that we are likely to win the fight in the end, but saying that it's no big deal to let the state enforce the law in the meantime.

Needless to say, it's a big deal to let the state enforce the law in the meantime. The Mississippi law is a breathtaking state overreach: it forces us to verify the identity and age of every person who accesses Dreamwidth from the state of Mississippi and determine who's under the age of 18 by collecting identity documents, to save that highly personal and sensitive information, and then to obtain a permission slip from those users' parents to allow them to finish creating an account. It also forces us to change our moderation policies and stop anyone under 18 from accessing a wide variety of legal and beneficial speech because the state of Mississippi doesn't like it -- which, given the way Dreamwidth works, would mean blocking people from talking about those things at all. (And if you think you know exactly what kind of content the state of Mississippi doesn't like, you're absolutely right.)

Needless to say, we don't want to do that, either. Even if we wanted to, though, we can't: the resources it would take for us to build the systems that would let us do it are well beyond our capacity. You can read the sworn declaration I provided to the court for some examples of how unworkable these requirements are in practice. (That isn't even everything! The lawyers gave me a page limit!)

Unfortunately, the penalties for failing to comply with the Mississippi law are incredibly steep: fines of $10,000 per user from Mississippi who we don't have identity documents verifying age for, per incident -- which means every time someone from Mississippi loaded Dreamwidth, we'd potentially owe Mississippi $10,000. Even a single $10,000 fine would be rough for us, but the per-user, per-incident nature of the actual fine structure is an existential threat. And because we're part of the organization suing Mississippi over it, and were explicitly named in the now-overturned preliminary injunction, we think the risk of the state deciding to engage in retaliatory prosecution while the full legal challenge continues to work its way through the courts is a lot higher than we're comfortable with. Mississippi has been itching to issue those fines for a while, and while normally we wouldn't worry much because we're a small and obscure site, the fact that we've been yelling at them in court about the law being unconstitutional means the chance of them lumping us in with the big social media giants and trying to fine us is just too high for us to want to risk it. (The excellent lawyers we've been working with are Netchoice's lawyers, not ours!)

All of this means we've made the extremely painful decision that our only possible option for the time being is to block Mississippi IP addresses from accessing Dreamwidth, until we win the case. (And I repeat: I am absolutely incredibly confident we'll win the case. And apparently Justice Kavanaugh agrees!) I repeat: I am so, so sorry. This is the last thing we wanted to do, and I've been fighting my ass off for the last three years to prevent it. But, as everyone who follows the legal system knows, the Fifth Circuit is gonna do what it's gonna do, whether or not what they want to do has any relationship to the actual law.

We don't collect geolocation information ourselves, and we have no idea which of our users are residents of Mississippi. (We also don't want to know that, unless you choose to tell us.) Because of that, and because access to highly accurate geolocation databases is extremely expensive, our only option is to use our network provider's geolocation-based blocking to prevent connections from IP addresses they identify as being from Mississippi from even reaching Dreamwidth in the first place. I have no idea how accurate their geolocation is, and it's possible that some people not in Mississippi might also be affected by this block. (The inaccuracy of geolocation is only, like, the 27th most important reason on the list of "why this law is practically impossible for any site to comply with, much less a tiny site like us".)

If your IP address is identified as coming from Mississippi, beginning on September 1, you'll see a shorter, simpler version of this message and be unable to proceed to the site itself. If you would otherwise be affected, but you have a VPN or proxy service that masks your IP address and changes where your connection appears to come from, you won't get the block message, and you can keep using Dreamwidth the way you usually would.

On a completely unrelated note while I have you all here, have I mentioned lately that I really like ProtonVPN's service, privacy practices, and pricing? They also have a free tier available that, although limited to one device, has no ads or data caps and doesn't log your activity, unlike most of the free VPN services out there. VPNs are an excellent privacy and security tool that every user of the internet should be familiar with! We aren't affiliated with Proton and we don't get any kickbacks if you sign up with them, but I'm a satisfied customer and I wanted to take this chance to let you know that.

Again, we're so incredibly sorry to have to make this announcement, and I personally promise you that I will continue to fight this law, and all of the others like it that various states are passing, with every inch of the New Jersey-bred stubborn fightiness you've come to know and love over the last 16 years. The instant we think it's less legally risky for us to allow connections from Mississippi IP addresses, we'll undo the block and let you know.

anghraine: Uhura and Chapel kiss in the background, ignored by Spock (spock [oblivious])
Anghraine ([personal profile] anghraine) wrote2025-08-23 06:30 pm

TOS fanon is weird but some is a lot weirder than others

I think perhaps the most purely "wait, what" fanon to me (even surpassing Kirk Drift in strangeness, though much less annoying) is this rough scenario that I've probably seen dozens of times at this point:

1. Spock and Kirk are either already together but there's some uncertainty about where they stand with each other, or it's unrequited-but-not-really pining or whatever. Regardless, Spock does something that is pretty understandably upsetting or hurtful in the context of their relationship.

2. Kirk is privately upset and vents to McCoy about [thing].

3. McCoy upbraids him for being insufficiently understanding of where Spock is, or might be, coming from and for being immature enough to sit around being upset instead of handling the communication in his relationship with Spock.

Read more... )
anghraine: uhura confidently sits at the weapons panel while kirk remains tensely in the captain's chair, both bathed in the red lighting of "balance of terror"; text: "you're the only one who can do it" (from "mirror mirror") (kirk and uhura [bridge])
Anghraine ([personal profile] anghraine) wrote2025-08-14 09:13 am

One of my favorite things about TOS: men apologizing

J and I have re-watched three seasons of TNG, and the number of times I've felt that Troi or Crusher is 100% correct and Picard in particular is being an incurious asshole are getting... let's say, numerous. And in general, they seem to get out-shouted by the male senior officers in this "we're just being reasonable while you're being emotional" way that I find intensely annoying. Even when the plot ultimately justifies their perspective, they seem to get these vague acknowledgments in a private setting, not the unqualified public apologies they frankly deserve—because, IMO, the show itself doesn't feel they deserve them.

Meanwhile, when we marathoned TOS, I was pretty surprised by how much I ended up liking Kirk, and then I ended up loving him even more on some re-watches, despite the occasional dire writing ("Elaan of Troyius" can't make me hate him; my most beloathèd writer on TOS just decided that, in addition to writing Elaan as an unholy combination of Katharina from The Taming of the Shrew and just a racist caricature in general, Kirk was going to be Petruchio for a day and also that it'd be hot if France Nuyen roofied and had sex with him, which is, um, rape, but the episode doesn't understand its own plot the way e.g. "Wink of an Eye" or even freaking "Catspaw" understand what's wrong—and it was written by the same guy who wrote the virulently antisemitic "Patterns of Force" that goes out of its way to put Kirk and Spock in Nazi uniforms—just them among the main cast for most of the episode, for some reason, though it's unusual for them to be placed on a mission alone—and the script includes extra antisemitism directed individually at both Nimoy and Shatner on different occasions). There are a lot of reasons that TOS Kirk in particular ended up as my peak ST blorbo, even surpassing Spock's hold on my heart (though I love him deeply), but one of the reasons are scenes like these that TNG has very definitely brought back to mind:
KIRK: At least try cutting him off!
UHURA: Sir, if I could cut him off, don’t you think I—!
RILEY: ♪ I’ll take you home again, Kathleen— ♪
UHURA: Yes, sir, I’ll keep trying.
KIRK [apologetically]: Sorry.

KIRK: Yes, I’m aware of that, Mr. Scott.
CHEKOV: And, sir, the fact Earth took twelve centuries doesn’t mean they had to.
UHURA: We’ve seen different development rates on different planets.
SCOTT: And were the Klingons behind it, why didn’t they give them breechloaders?
CHEKOV: Or machine guns?
UHURA: Or old-style hand lasers?
KIRK [sharply]: I did not invite a debate. [pause] I’m sorry. I’m worried about Spock and concerned about what’s happened.

These apologies are quite simple, not emotional or dramatic or detailed at all, but that's fine. Just the acknowledgment that he was in the wrong and apologizing for it without hesitation or taking it to a face-saving private location or whatever, just saying it right there in front of everyone, is incredibly refreshing. In both of these, also, Uhura is one of the people he's responding to—it's possible that he's readier to apologize in such an open and unambiguous way because Uhura is involved and they're particularly close (their obvious and consistent mutual affection was another of the big TOS surprises!). I don't really think so (McCoy also freely apologizes on the spot multiple times, if less often than his behavior merits), but maybe Kirk's apologies are prompted by Uhura's involvement. However, if so, TOS going out of its way to show a very white-coded male hero publicly and correctly apologizing to the competent and justified Black woman who answers to him in front of his other subordinates doesn't make it any less welcome tbh.

(I'm definitely enjoying parts of TNG, but if several of the TOS movies frustrated me by moving towards 80s space explosions blockbuster when I was invested in the Having Things to Say Even if They're Deeply Flawed approach of TOS along with the visual experimentation, generally unexpected nuances of the characters, and sheer joyous camp of it all, TNG has seemed so painfully complacent 80s and essentially cautious in its fundamental perspective that I miss TOS all the more, its many faults notwithstanding.)