If they're blocking all traffic beyond their borders, then that's a separate matter, but usually such restrictions are more annoying than absolute.
If they're blocking all traffic beyond their borders, then that's a separate matter, but usually such restrictions are more annoying than absolute.
Governments can make evading their censorship very difficult, painful, and risky, if they want to. It can have a huge impact.
All this did was to inject venom into an otherwise civil exchange.
Have you actually been to China? I was there not long ago traveling around a range of cities and never had trouble with either Mullvad or Astrill having used both hotel and residential networks. I have many friends who have similar experiences. In fact, I've never recalled anyone having trouble getting outside of the great firewall.
But from a lawmaker perspective, the topic is not technical.
The question, at the end, is about the enforcement of the punishments that go with circumvention; and in some places there is punishment even when you are "just" trying to circumvent these restrictions.
It's easy to break-in into someone's place. What prevents you from doing it, is the punishment (and potentially ethics), not the physical barrier.
It's illegal to steal a macbook that has been abandoned on the train. Try leaving yours and see if the more important thing is the physical barrier or ethics/punishment/existence of laws.
Using a VPN, or any other technical workaround you can think of, doesn't negate that the law in your state says you must prove your age to access the content.
States require proof of age to purchase alcohol. You can ask someone who is of age to buy it for you, that doesn't make it legal for you to have it.
Not true for California, and probably many other states:
[0] https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/laws/minor-in-possessio...