I don’t understand how this is a controversial opinion, but maybe parents should actually parent their children instead of expecting the Internet or the government to decide what their kids should see for them? Maybe talk to your kid about safe and ethical sex, the dangers of porn addiction, and not to take anything away from pornographic content instead? Maybe we shouldn’t be giving children smartphones and tablets with unfettered internet access in the first place instead of spending time with them? Wild concepts I know.
because these laws aren’t about protecting children they’re about elimination of access to things the government doesn’t like… like queer spaces
This, right here. It’s like Nixon’s “war on drugs” that went on, and on, and on… The goal was not drugs, per-se, but to use drugs as a pretense to police people of color.
Drugs still won.
And people of color lost.
As is american tradition.
And giving them sweeping ability to track everybody via their identity papers, to see what websites and services they’re using, what all their online identities are, etc.
They claim the info isn’t being saved or passed on to the government to form a big surveillance database to one day use against people - sure, it’s legal to, say, be gay or a socialist or of a particular religion today, but societies and regimes change, and the info they collect on you today may become ammunition against you in 10, 20, 40 years time.
But I don’t for a moment believe their obvious lies.
This is nothing but authoritarian police state monitoring and control. It’s extremely obvious. Yet, who are we to vote for in the next election? Not Labour, thanks to this (and a few other big reasons perhaps), not the Tories because, well, you’ve seen what they’re like.
It’s not impossible for a third party to be elected of course, not as impossible as places like the USA that have a very worryingly solidified two party system, it’s just very unlikely.
Knowing the British people and their seeming apathy and poor judgement at scale these days I wouldn’t be surprised if they elect the racist bigots at Reform - who ironically would be even more authoritarian and evil than what we have now.
As usual, there’s no hope for the future and no possibility of good outcomes.
Humanity is doomed to repeat it’s failures for all of history again and again, and we’re just along for the miserable ride.
The general apathy and disdain for noncomformity (the hatred protestors get is absurd) really does let their government stomp all over them. IIRC BBC goes out of their way to not cover protests in their own back yard, or anything that may be critical of the crown
I’ve been saying this a couple places recently, but why not pass legislation requiring every site to provide a content rating. Then parents can choose if they want to restrict content by ratings or not. Yeah, you could have malicious actors, but it makes it easier and simpler for everyone to work than having ID laws.
But that would actually solve the problem and not enable massive government overreach. We can’t have that.
I imagine it would work about as well as YouTube Kids would.
Which is to say not at all
That requires effort, which most parents are unwilling to do, and newspapers will still want it banned and governments would still want to ban it so they can ban other things too.
Don’t give your children unrestricted acces to a smartphone until they’ve proven they can use it wisely. No smartphone before age twelve. Limited use until age 15. And ffs. Ban smartphones at school.
Teach your kids about the internet. It’s part of sexual education.
And don’t leave it up to private companies to identify me and collect sensitive data on me. Fuck that. If you really want age verification. Deliver the framework.
completely agree, if kids want a phone at school they can get a dumbphone
So of all the fucking things to restrict, why this? Facebook is a hundred times more dangerous than any porn. Ban that shit instead.
Because it’s something where the current government can claim they’re “doing something” or “addressing a real problem” but it also doesn’t threaten the rich and powerful.
Going after Facebook would threaten the rich and powerful, for who it is an important tool for manipulating people, who think they can use it to mold culture to what they want it to be my breaking the minds of children.
The current UK government is desperate to say to the public that they’re governing and fixing problems, but they also really don’t want to piss off the rich and powerful.
This is the second time in my life that Labour have gained power after a long Conservative tenure, only to dive straight into enacting policies that were more right-wing than their predecessors.
The OSA was brought in by the tories. Labour agree with it as well. Both of them are authoritarian bastards.
It’s less of a left - right thing (that’s mainly economics). It paternalism Vs liberty thing. Labour have always had a very strong “we must protect the populace” theme to their policies. Conservatives have it too, but they want to do it in a different way.
Sadly it’s a really difficult thing to stand against. Who wants to be labelled the person enabling paedophiles, when all you want is the right to private communication.
To be honest I don’t think much of this is about catching or preventing paedos, and is just straight up authoritarianism.
You’re right. It’s not, but that’s what you’re labelled when you stand against it.
Part of that is allowing labels to be so powerful. Someone doesn’t have to watch kiddie porn or molest children to be branded a pedophile, but when you have that label for someone, it’s implied that’s what they did. We saw this same shit during the Bush years with the “terrorism” label. We’re actually seeing it again with Luigi Mangione and people protesting at Tesla dealerships. People don’t care about reality if there’s simple branding that wipes critical thinking away.
Paternalism vs liberty. Tell me more. I haven’t heard of this comparison before.
The full spectrum is really more like “authoritarian vs libertarian”. Political policy should really be split into two different spectrums. On one spectrum, you have financial policy. On the other, you have social policy. The two normally get lumped together because politicians campaign on both simultaneously. But in reality, they’re two separate policies. So the political spectrum should look less like a single left/right line, and more like an X/Y graph with individual points for each person’s ideology. Something more like this:
On this graph, as you go farther left, the government has more ownership and provides more, (and individuals own less because the government provides more for their needs). As you go farther up the chart, social policy gets more authoritarian. So for example, something on the far right bottom corner would be the Cyberpunk 2077/The Outer Worlds end-stage capitalist where megacorps inevitably own everything and have their own private laws.
Once you separate the two policies into a graph (instead of just a left/right line) it becomes clear why “small government” doesn’t necessarily correspond to “fewer laws” when dealing with politicians.
That’s a political compass, and it’s still missing several political axes.
I guess one potential axis would be ‘stagnation’, in the sense that social mobility between classes stops changing. That could be anything like straight up caste systems, or informal stratification from wealth getting locked up by the 1%. I hypothesize, that such an axis would be a measurement of how ‘elderly’ a society is becoming. When politics become too locked in due to unchanging political critters, the ability for a society to recognize and properly act in a situation becomes compromised.
My parent, they lost mental acuity and flexibility with the years, alongside their bodily agency, and have become quarrelsome. IMO, such dementia is what we are seeing in a aging America and the UK.
Realistically one can come up with any number of axes and still be wrong, because the domain of politics isn’t a metric space.
if i had a nickel for everytime a labour government came into power after a prolonged tory government and immediately started governing further right id have two nickels which isn’t a lot but it’s weird it happened twice in a row
Part of me wants every website to do this. The UK just gets blocked from majority of the internet then people in the UK can get angry and rebel.
The great firewall of starmer
It’s yet another step in seeing the Internet becoming owned by big corporations. Only big corporations can implement these things.
Art, creativity, people doing internet things as a hobby, that is dying more and more everyday.
I miss the 90s internet :(
There was a site I found in highschool around 1998 - the paradigm of pessimism.
Full of dark humor and anti-jokes, in glorious web 1.0 - that site had a huge impact on my humor. I’ve never been able to find it again. Just a random site someone hosted somewhere on the Internet - no scams, no paywalls, just a bunch of weird humor.
Nowadays, if there’s something you like online, remember to plug it into archive.org so it gets added to the wayback machine. You’ll still need to remember the URL to access it, but at least it will be archived somewhere
We also desperately need a non-US archive.
Fuck off with your device based verification system. That’s just the same service, but as a more invasive app installed on your phone.
Instead of scanning a face or ID and uploading it to a service, we’re expected to run unverified closed source code on the device we carry everywhere in our pockets?!
Fuck off with your device based verification system. That’s just the same service, but as a more invasive app installed on your phone.
not necessarily. you give a phone to your children. you partly lock it down by setting it up as a child account, with its age. you make sure to install a web browser that supports limiting access to age appropriate content according to the age set in the system, maybe taking a parent allowed whitelist. the website is legally obliged to set an appropriate age limit value in a standard HTTP header.
that way, the website does not know your age. the decision is on the web browser.
the web browser checks the configuration in the system, that only the parent can change. it does not send it anywhere, only does a yes/no decision. if the site is not ok, it’ll show a thing like when the connection is not secure or it was put on the safebrowsing list, except that you can’t skip it, only option is to request parent permission.
and finally the age is set in the operating system, without verifying its truthiness, but once again requesting lock screen authentication.
oh and app installs need parent approval for kid accounts, like it should almost always be.this way it’s as private as it can get. the only way a website can find out information about you from this, is to log if your browser loaded the html but not any other resources, because that means you were caught in the age filter. but that’s it.
there’s multiple pieces in this that is not yet implemented, but they should be possible with not too much work.
this is all possible with open source code, if you make sure the kid can’t install anything without parent approval. stores like fdroid could have some badge or something if a browser supports this kind of limitation.Who said the device based service has to be closed source?
Experience, most proposal for “age and identity verification” being badly implemented mostly closed-source solutions that only works on devices they deem trusty, meaning (seemingly) non-rooted phones with specific OSes.
It doesn’t have to be, but the businesses making it claim it needs to be.
The UK is destroying privacy of chaps! The people who want to watch porn, without being tracked! And now they have to fall under the VPN!
I sort of don’t understand why these places which are hosted somewhere else would even bother?
They would still have to comply with the laws of the places the site can operate in, regardless of its physical server location.
Or what?
The website would be blocked at the ISP level, I’m not sure what the UK government can do beyond that.
I feel like if most websites chose not to comply, there’s fuck all the government could do tbh. What are they gonna do? Fine big tech with a slap on the wrist again? Try to shut down every indie hentai site hosted in the Congo or something? Please… it’s all absurd.
They would start up their own Great FireWall of [Blank]
Or have your site taken down by your own country because of its international obligations. You still have to abide by your own country’s interpretation (and political alignment to) of foreign laws.
I doubt that the USA would recognise and take down websites for not following Ofcoms requirements. And Ofcom would 100% be too cowardly to even threaten that. They’d just geoblock.
Perhaps? But you can get extradited from the US to the UK, and there’s all sorts of dumb agreements for international evidence and standing precedent. I don’t expect the current administration to forge new ground here, but navigating the waters of international law is byzantine at the best of times.
I really, really doubt that a website owner based in USA would be extradited to the UK for not complying with UK local law with how they run their website. That’s absurd.
Maybe if they were a UK citizen living in the US, but if it was a US citizen, not a chance.
There’s a lot of rule34 comic sites out there, I just found out. Which one is this? Just for research and background.
I agree with the message but making the argument that it’s safe for kids to watch because it’s cartoons is wrong. Kids can be fucked up by 2D furry porn, I’ve seen it happen. Still agree that age verification is a security nightmare, just think it’s a weird argument.
I don’t think it says anywhere that it’s safe for kids to watch.
fuck the UK
Oh no, what ever will I, resident of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, do.
Boots up Tor.
this will work until every country does this.
Trying to get every country to do something is like trying to herd cats.
basically every country that ‘“matters”’ implements some form of the DMCA
Imagine if people could just choose what country they’re browsing from
Not a long term solution.
Forget tax havens, eventually some countries will probably become content havens and sell server space hosted there. Probably some carribean island
My networking knowledge may be out of date, but can’t you get around region locked sites with VPNs or Tor?
I was in Turkey in July 2019. Wikipedia was blocked. I had to use Tor to access it. On installation I think I had to tick a special box that said something like “use flux capacitor bridge for blablabla countries like China and Turkey”
Though In that case, Wikipedia didn’t give a fuck if you were accessing it from Tor. The government did.
I know some sites block tor/VPN access for various reasons
You can
But most people will not go to those lengths, esp not kids.
Doesn’t proton offer a free vpn with limits?
Also, a vpn is pretty cheap. I wouldn’t say that it’s kids that would be using it, it would be adults who don;t want to upload their picture.
Yes however they are literally move all their infrastructure to the UK so they won’t be an option soon.
Windscribe is a thin too, but since they are Canadian and Canada is making stupid political deals with the US lately, it can’t be relied on either.
