UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT.
Uncategorized
86
Posts
39
Posters
2
Views
-
@Fonant @david_chisnall Sure you're not planning on doing anything. That doesn't mean it won't happen to you. Remember, "if you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear" was a favourite saying of Lavrenti Beria.
@cstross @david_chisnall The likelihood of the police taking my computer for forensic examination is zero.
I have plenty of things that I must keep private. So does everyone.
-
@Fonant @oschonrock @PeterSommerlad The people proposing this amendment in the House of Lords are technical illiterates, that's what makes this so dangerous. So it will be interpreted over-broadly and damagingly with inevitable, unpredictable, side-effects.
@cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad
100% agreed...
The entire bill is totally technically illiterate with all sorts of backfiring fishhooks... embarrasing really.
No idea why Labour feels the need to do this sort of thing.
Worldproof the child, not childproof the world. And parents' responsibility.
-
@Fonant @PeterSommerlad @cstross
I doubt that... Or actually... they prob haven't thought about that sort of useful detail.
But just like when your porn account has been age/verified once, you then just "log in" (or carry some kind jwt in a permanent cookie) for subsequent usage.
And yes, if your kid can get access to your computer and log in as you, then all bets are off.
VPNs will likely be similar?
@oschonrock @PeterSommerlad @cstross Yes. They can legislate as much as they want to age-verify all VPN users. Mathematics and logic makes this impossible to enforce in any meaningful way, though.
-
@Uilebheist @cstross "I'm an aging router, and I assume responsibility for any outbound packets these young devices connecting to me may send "
-
@cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad
100% agreed...
The entire bill is totally technically illiterate with all sorts of backfiring fishhooks... embarrasing really.
No idea why Labour feels the need to do this sort of thing.
Worldproof the child, not childproof the world. And parents' responsibility.
@oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)
-
@oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)
@cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad
Complex subject.
For example, I would be quite pro a complete twitter ban in EU/UK.
Is that "nanny state", or is that recognising that X is deliberately manipulated to be a malignant anti-democratic cancer?
Porn for kids.... TBH, I get less excited about that, and selective blocking is hard/impractical.
-
@cstross @david_chisnall I'm not planning to do anything that would result in the government seizing my computer 🙂
There is no way the government can know whether or not I use a VPN or not, nor whether I use TOR.
Unless the law allows the police to randomly inspect people's computers, and they do this to a significant proportion of the population, I can use any VPN I like without fear. We don't live in a police state yet...
@Fonant @cstross @david_chisnall emphasis on yet. When you go through the U.K. border they can seize for inspection all devices you are carrying, no matter your citizenship.
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
@cstross There's no way they can possibly enforce this for existing VPN users.
-
@Fonant @cstross @david_chisnall emphasis on yet. When you go through the U.K. border they can seize for inspection all devices you are carrying, no matter your citizenship.
@Nicovel0 @cstross @david_chisnall Yeah, but I'm not going to be carrying my desktop computer on foreign trips.
-
@cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad
Complex subject.
For example, I would be quite pro a complete twitter ban in EU/UK.
Is that "nanny state", or is that recognising that X is deliberately manipulated to be a malignant anti-democratic cancer?
Porn for kids.... TBH, I get less excited about that, and selective blocking is hard/impractical.
@oschonrock @cstross @PeterSommerlad A ban on Twitter in the EU would also be impossible to enforce.
-
@capriciousday Like banks and other financial institutions who require their employees to use them when working out of the office, or over wifi *within* the office.
@cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...
-
@cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...
@HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday They'll argue that lawyers are over 18 "and why would be a problem to prove that?".
Remember it's the "Labour" party we are talking about. -
@oschonrock @cstross @PeterSommerlad A ban on Twitter in the EU would also be impossible to enforce.
@Fonant @cstross @PeterSommerlad
Yes, I agree that geoblocking would have many holes (vpns, tor, etc), but that is acceptable in this case, IMOBecause the threat that ban would be trying protect against, is serious damage to Europe's democracies. Democracy is a numbers game by definition. So to eliminate a major source of malignant misinformation for say 90% people who can't be bothered to circumvent the geoblock, would destroy the network effect that is so core to any social network's power.
-
@oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)
@cstross @oschonrock @PeterSommerlad We can happily discuss whether age restrictions on "VPN users" is a Good or Bad idea for a law.
My point is that it's impossible to enforce such a law.
It would be as pointless as the Online Safety Act. Well-intentioned, no doubt, but embarrassing when ignored. The 4chan bulletin board has been fined £20,000 and more for breaching the Online Safety Act. Their response has been "we don't care, we're not complying with a UK law, we're not going to pay any fines". The only thing Ofcom can do is to ask UK ISPs to block access to 4chan. They haven't yet, but if they do it'll be easily bypassed by a VPN or TOR.
-
@cstross @oschonrock @PeterSommerlad We can happily discuss whether age restrictions on "VPN users" is a Good or Bad idea for a law.
My point is that it's impossible to enforce such a law.
It would be as pointless as the Online Safety Act. Well-intentioned, no doubt, but embarrassing when ignored. The 4chan bulletin board has been fined £20,000 and more for breaching the Online Safety Act. Their response has been "we don't care, we're not complying with a UK law, we're not going to pay any fines". The only thing Ofcom can do is to ask UK ISPs to block access to 4chan. They haven't yet, but if they do it'll be easily bypassed by a VPN or TOR.
@Fonant @cstross @PeterSommerlad
I agree that enforcement will be very leaky at best.
Whether that is "enough" depends on the case. In the case of X/twitter (see elsewhere) it might be, because the power of a network is proportional to N^2.
What makes the OSA very very stupid is that it subjects the 90% of the adult public who are using these services (ie porn etc) legally to a massive invasion of privacy with signficant risk of damaging data leaks by dodgy third parties.
-
@david_chisnall @cstross The government has to discover that there is an illegal VPN being used in the first place.
It is quite possible for millions of VPNs to be made available to UK children, hosted all over the world. Perhaps hosted by children, sharing the small monthly server costs. Quite secret, extremely difficult to find.
The proposed law could only ever hope to apply to a few big VPN companies. Which just moves the VPN usage by children underground, where other dangers lurk.
@Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
"We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
History has proven both are always true until they aren't. -
@cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...
@HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday I don't see anything in the amendment that would apply to a business using e.g. Wireguard to access resources in an internal network. The definition of "relevant VPN service" "means a service of providing, in the course of a business, to a consumer, a virtual private network for accessing the internet". So B2C things only, not corporate VPNs.
-
@HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday They'll argue that lawyers are over 18 "and why would be a problem to prove that?".
Remember it's the "Labour" party we are talking about.@Uilebheist @cstross @capriciousday So clerical staff will be required to use a separate computer system to the fee earners, since some of them may be 16 or 17?
And yes, it is IngSoc we're talking about.
-
@Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
"We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
History has proven both are always true until they aren't.Defining a "VPN" will be extremely difficult, but that's not my point.
My point is that it is impossible to block access to VPNs, and equally impossible to ban them.
This is a mathematical certainty. We can't un-learn how to have securely encrypted communications.
-
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
@DavidPuente ha fatto un fact-checking a Barbero nell'ambito di un programma di #Meta. Al di là delle polemiche che ha scatenato l'episodio in questione, mi chiedo senza benaltrismo e con sincera curiosità sul contesto come mai nessuno si chiede (a prescindere da David Puente, al quale riconosco buone intenzioni) di che credibilità gode una campagna di promozione della verità da parte di un'azienda che nei rapporti ONU è descritta come strumento del genocidio in Birmania.
-
@womble Too true 💯
-
•
So solo che la vita
Jovanotti
https://youtu.be/0UWbe7Lwr5M
-
"Put a cute panda on it because there's nothing evil about getting people to use your crappy product by guilt tripping them with a cute mascot."
-
@filippodb @sicurezza ciao potresti aggiungermi grazie @Lanfra:Matrix.org
-
@heliokor difficile stabilire criteri oggettivi, Ma è chiaro che quella di Rapetto è una provocazione
-
I've just unsubscribed from the Mozilla newsletter. That 2025/26 AI Future trash website and it's messaging is disgusting and patronising to all the people that have supported them over the years and do not wish to have anything to do with gen AI.
-
Ma voi avete mai trovato un lavoro con Linkedin?
