you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 27 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

The bill text of SB-212 seems pretty reasonable. Basically just says the government needs a good reason to create regulations on computation.

It even explicitly mentions good reasons may include things like fraud, deepfakes, and public nuisances of datacenters.

As a Montanan, I'm cool with it. Guess we'll see how it's used.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    I wonder if this would make it illegal to cut off someone's internet if they are accused of piracy. Probably that sort of thing still goes.

    It might provide a protection against anti-circumvention laws and such; laws that make it criminal to mess with hardware DRM on your devices.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    My first thought was about potentially protecting encryption, with all the privacy-invading laws that are popping up here in the US and abroad, but after skimming through the bill it seems like they could still use the "but criminals use encryption" line

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    I don't think it says that a company can't put restrictions on you. It says The government can't restrict how it's used —notably supported by AI groups so they can't regulate that. A company can still prevent you from doing whatever the hell they want if they have the power to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment