Most people with that little money aren’t going to go out of their way and assume the risk of investing in new ventures. They’re going to put it in some managed or unmanaged fund recommended by someone else, and that money is going to be invested in something safe and presumably profitable on an infinite time scale, like a megacorp (or 500).

It would amazing if the everyday worker’s savings went towards aiding the local community in starting new businesses, but I wouldn’t count on that being the default.

Legal, probably. Whichever corporations push that hypothetical bill are going to write it very specifically to ensure that it excludes their use cases.

Here’s an example of how they could do it:

S.A.V.E.K.I.D.S:
Support Age Verification Environments Keeping Internet Detectable Signals

Blah blah pretext and background information…

Blah blah surface-level purported reason for the bill is to prevent kids from bypassing age verification checks by using a VPN to pretend they’re a resident of another country…

No entity operating in or doing business within <jurisdiction> may provide services or make available technology that irreversibly redirects, masks, or otherwise obscures internet-destined traffic to appear as originating from any source other than the internet-connected network in which it was generated.

Site–to-site VPN? Fine, it’s destined for the intranet.
NAT? Also fine, it is the originating internet-connected network.
HTTP reverse proxies? Still fine, they pass the origin IP along.

VPN that routes all traffic through it? You’re getting locked up and they’re throwing away the key.

“New legislation mandates that we no longer offer the VPN connections necessary for our remote workers to access the company intranet off premises. Starting immediately, all employees are to return to office 7 days a week. If this does not work for you, please reach out to HR and they will accept that as your resignation in lieu of a written document.”

— Meta (the corp pushing the age verification laws), probably.

I was being sarcastic by the way.

Anyone with a shred of humility and critical thinking skills should realize that cutting corners to chase short term profit is being “penny wise, pound foolish”.

For the well-connected, that doesn’t seem to be necessary to fail upwards into leadership positions, unfortunately. Even ignoring the glaring orange example, there are people like John Riccitiello who managed to skull-fuck the reputations of both EA and Unity and still walk away with a new job lined up.

Right, but you’re not thinking like a MBA.

It hasn’t happened yet, historical trends suggest it won’t happen, and more importantly, that’s perfectly good profit going out the window. The shareholders will be pleased to know that we reduced operating costs by 10% this quarter, and I’ll reach the target for my bonus.

If you thought Flock cameras were a bad situation, imagine not being able to query, read, write, or probably even speak about topics that they decide are “unpatriotic” or “satanic”.

The only difference between right now and then is that right now they aren’t doing anything about it. They already have the data about people’s opinions and leanings as a side effect of the massive network of tracking built for targeted advertising.

It will obviously be worse when we’re stuck renting computers, but what you’re describing is a today problem just as much as it’s a future problem. The only reason it hasn’t turned full 1984 is because they haven’t gone full mask off yet.

No, it won’t. It will cause more of the supply to be reallocated away from consumers into enterprise, and that is exactly what the big tech companies want to see happen.

Having access to a computer and phone is as much of a necessity to survive in modern society as internet is. When personal computing is unaffordable to the point where subscription computing is a good enough “deal” for consumers to jump on, the ball will start rolling towards the inevitable price squeeze that we have no choice but to accept.