Fully agree with your point on the grey market aspect of things. I'm also curios about the actual implementations that they hope to see not to mention how they

Fully agree with your point on the grey market aspect of things. I'm also curios about the actual implementations that they hope to see not to mention how they would hope to regulate "internal" chats and other internal communications channels which are, as far as I know, not in the scope of this bill. I had some thoughts on some of the many issues this type of thinking result in - https://psyonik.tech/posts/thoughts-on-the-uk-online-safety-bill/ https://psyonik.tech/posts/thoughts-on-the-uk-online-safety-... TL;DR for the article: 1. Any technical solution will be imperfect and can potentially lead to hundreds if not thousands of cases being raised 2. Difficulties in clearing your name in the case of false flags (not to mention how this would actually be implemented) 3. No clear guidance on how such a system would work 4. A death to encryption services since any system that would entail some for of media transfer would be in scope 5. A grey/dark market place for custom software that will still allow encrypted communications run on VPSes/servers that might restrict UK access but could be accessible through VPNs that exit outside of the UK and thus wouldn't fall under the legislation (I think, feel free to correct me on any of these points ofc). 6. A host of other issues from overworked law enforcement trying to deal with the flood to the migration of individuals involved in any illegal activities far far deeper and thus more difficult to detect. This is a clear as day example of what happens when people with no understanding of these topics (and many others, I'm sure economy, education and law enforcement is managed by people with no real world experience in said fields...) are allowed to legislate.