4 ms·

The list's probably going to get a lot longer. I wonder how it's going to compare to the list of sites who block Europeans due to GDPR concerns. I've only ever

The list's probably going to get a lot longer. I wonder how it's going to compare to the list of sites who block Europeans due to GDPR concerns. I've only ever noticed two sites that did that, even though the amount of noise from Americans was not insubstantial. The OSA is a lot more invasive than the GDPR though.

ta1243 1y ago
The main category of site which GDPR blocks are local news sites in the US Sites block for GDPR because they want to abuse visitor data and privacy Sites block for OSA because they don't want to abuse visitor data and privacy
- Oras 1y ago
  How about when it’s a local site, they don’t really care about EU traffic? It’s too much “pointless” effort to comply such as having EU servers to process user data, extra code to show the ugly cookie consent, and privacy policy and terms of service that would comply with GDPR.
  - trinix912 1y ago
    Or perhaps just don't use sketchy 3rd party advertising and analytics? You can always offer companies to send you PNG's of ads and serve them to the user without any of this. You can always analyze server logs to see which pages are the most popular, without deanonymizing the users. It's how some news agencies in the EU already do.
    - ben_w 1y ago
      I wish I knew what's going through the minds of the people who approve all these analytics partners. I've not been able to effectively argue even against the use of "consent or pay" in EU apps and websites, despite "the European Data Protection Board released a non-binding opinion stating that in most cases, consent-or-pay models do not constitute valid consent within the meaning of the GDPR." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_or_pay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_or_pay
      - ta1243 1y ago
        There are so many large sites which use consent-or-pay with no enforcement action taken though.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    Why would you bother at all? If you are a local site by a local company on the other side of the world you don't need to block anyone, you just ignore foreign laws. In the case of those news sites, though I suspect that most are owned by large multinational companies whose lawyers advised that blocking EU visitors is the only 100% sure way to avoid hypothetical retaliations by EU authorities.
  - ta1243 1y ago
    If it's a local site then it's not subject to the GDPR. The GDPR applies to sites aimed at europeans. However the privacy attacking malware they embed on there to mine data from their users would apply, and that's why they block it - because America allows abuse of their citizens data, but Europe doesn't. Of course there is no enforcement for an entity attacking European citizens in this way so they could do it anyway, but like with cookie banners the point isn't to comply with a law, the point is to get citizens to blame the law rather than the abusers.
michaelt 1y ago
Also the EU's population is 450 million, while the UK's is 69 million. So losing the users stings 85% less.
- mna_ 1y ago
  Just looking at raw population isn't good enough because some countries are more "online" than others and the UK is one of those countries.
  - Telaneo 1y ago
    Are any countries in the EU a lot less online than the rest, to the point that this matters more than a few percentage points? Even grandmas in Eastern Europe have smartphones now, and I don't think the EU has expanded to Sub-Saharan Africa quite yet (unless you want to count Réunion).
- visualphoenix 1y ago
  It’s not just the UK implementing age verification actively. 5 EU member states [0] are actively participating: Denmark, Greece, Spain, France [1], and Italy. Canada and Australia are jumping in [2] [3]. [0]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_1820 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_... [1]: https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/france/la-loi-sren-securisation-et-regulation-de-l-espace-numerique-en-france https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/france/la-loi-sren... [2]:https://facia.ai/news/canada-proposes-age-checks-for-online-adult-content-access/ https://facia.ai/news/canada-proposes-age-checks-for-online-... [3]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-sear...
  - devnullbrain 1y ago
    It puts a UK user in a weird situation. On one hand, the more countries that join in (and I've heard of US states too), the more likely it is that age verification becomes well supported and I continue having access to the wider world's internet. On the other hand, we've reached a very thick part of the wedge already: this is terrible for competition and I do not trust any state with this power. The best path is one of calamitous implementation that scares off other countries and embarrasses this one into a u-turn. But it's increasingly unlikely.
crashprone 1y ago
Would you mind elaborating on your statement? How is the GDPR invasive? Invasive from the content providers' POV?
- Telaneo 1y ago
  Invasive from the content providers' POV, yes. Mostly in good ways in my experience being on the other side of that, but its obviously not completely non-invasive, given that a few things happened after the GDPR came into effect. If it was completely non-invasive, then nothing would have happened, and there wouldn't have been any point in passing it. No point in passing a law you don't want to actually affect anything.

ta1243 1y ago

The main category of site which GDPR blocks are local news sites in the US Sites block for GDPR because they want to abuse visitor data and privacy Sites block for OSA because they don't want to abuse visitor data and privacy

Oras 1y ago
How about when it’s a local site, they don’t really care about EU traffic? It’s too much “pointless” effort to comply such as having EU servers to process user data, extra code to show the ugly cookie consent, and privacy policy and terms of service that would comply with GDPR.
- trinix912 1y ago
  Or perhaps just don't use sketchy 3rd party advertising and analytics? You can always offer companies to send you PNG's of ads and serve them to the user without any of this. You can always analyze server logs to see which pages are the most popular, without deanonymizing the users. It's how some news agencies in the EU already do.
  - ben_w 1y ago
    I wish I knew what's going through the minds of the people who approve all these analytics partners. I've not been able to effectively argue even against the use of "consent or pay" in EU apps and websites, despite "the European Data Protection Board released a non-binding opinion stating that in most cases, consent-or-pay models do not constitute valid consent within the meaning of the GDPR." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_or_pay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_or_pay
    - ta1243 1y ago
      There are so many large sites which use consent-or-pay with no enforcement action taken though.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  Why would you bother at all? If you are a local site by a local company on the other side of the world you don't need to block anyone, you just ignore foreign laws. In the case of those news sites, though I suspect that most are owned by large multinational companies whose lawyers advised that blocking EU visitors is the only 100% sure way to avoid hypothetical retaliations by EU authorities.
- ta1243 1y ago
  If it's a local site then it's not subject to the GDPR. The GDPR applies to sites aimed at europeans. However the privacy attacking malware they embed on there to mine data from their users would apply, and that's why they block it - because America allows abuse of their citizens data, but Europe doesn't. Of course there is no enforcement for an entity attacking European citizens in this way so they could do it anyway, but like with cookie banners the point isn't to comply with a law, the point is to get citizens to blame the law rather than the abusers.

michaelt 1y ago

Also the EU's population is 450 million, while the UK's is 69 million. So losing the users stings 85% less.

mna_ 1y ago
Just looking at raw population isn't good enough because some countries are more "online" than others and the UK is one of those countries.
- Telaneo 1y ago
  Are any countries in the EU a lot less online than the rest, to the point that this matters more than a few percentage points? Even grandmas in Eastern Europe have smartphones now, and I don't think the EU has expanded to Sub-Saharan Africa quite yet (unless you want to count Réunion).
visualphoenix 1y ago
It’s not just the UK implementing age verification actively. 5 EU member states [0] are actively participating: Denmark, Greece, Spain, France [1], and Italy. Canada and Australia are jumping in [2] [3]. [0]: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_1820 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_... [1]: https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/france/la-loi-sren-securisation-et-regulation-de-l-espace-numerique-en-france https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2024/france/la-loi-sren... [2]:https://facia.ai/news/canada-proposes-age-checks-for-online-adult-content-access/ https://facia.ai/news/canada-proposes-age-checks-for-online-... [3]: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-search-engines/105516256 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-sear...
- devnullbrain 1y ago
  It puts a UK user in a weird situation. On one hand, the more countries that join in (and I've heard of US states too), the more likely it is that age verification becomes well supported and I continue having access to the wider world's internet. On the other hand, we've reached a very thick part of the wedge already: this is terrible for competition and I do not trust any state with this power. The best path is one of calamitous implementation that scares off other countries and embarrasses this one into a u-turn. But it's increasingly unlikely.

crashprone 1y ago

Would you mind elaborating on your statement? How is the GDPR invasive? Invasive from the content providers' POV?

Telaneo 1y ago
Invasive from the content providers' POV, yes. Mostly in good ways in my experience being on the other side of that, but its obviously not completely non-invasive, given that a few things happened after the GDPR came into effect. If it was completely non-invasive, then nothing would have happened, and there wouldn't have been any point in passing it. No point in passing a law you don't want to actually affect anything.