17 ms·
UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
- richwater 10mo agoEU countries seem to be obsessed with infringing upon their citizens privacy
- jonathanstrange 10mo agoThe UK is not an EU country.
- burningChrome 10mo agoBut would you agree going into people's houses and arresting them for mean tweets would be infringing on their civil liberties just a little bit?
- jonathanstrange 10mo agoOf course, I agree. The UK has nothing to do with the EU, though.
- TheOtherHobbes 10mo agoMean tweets - yes. Very obvious incitement to violence - no.
- complianceowl 10mo ago[flagged]
- hsbauauvhabzb 10mo agoBy that same logic you could describe hitler as just a man concerned about the economy of his country.
- complianceowl 10mo agoThe fact that you're linking my logic to Hitler is representative of how lewd your thinking has become.
- hsbauauvhabzb 10mo agoNo it’s pointing out that your argument sounds like it’s intentionally missing critical information in a way that makes your audience think or feel a certain way.
- complianceowl 10mo ago[flagged]
- immibis 10mo ago[flagged]
- immibis 10mo agoHitler's crimes were all speech crimes. If your opinion is that speech can never be a crime, then in your opinion what were Hitler's actual crimes?
- complianceowl 10mo ago[flagged]
- burningChrome 10mo agoSo you would categorize these as "incitements to violence"? The recent arrest at London’s Heathrow airport of a noted Irish comedian, Graham Linehan, for the “crime” of three politically incorrect tweets A few months ago, police arrested a couple for messages shared in a WhatsApp chat group as six officers searched their home. Authorities arrested a grandmother for silently holding a sign outside an abortion clinic that said “Coercion is a crime, here to talk, if you want.” The wife of a conservative politician was sentenced to 31 months in prison for what police said was an unacceptable post. In contrast, a child molester was sentenced to 21 months in the slammer. And yet, something worse is happening that is being swept under the rug: A glaring example of this “wokeness” was exposed earlier this year by Elon Musk when he put the spotlight on how British authorities have for years turned a blind eye to notorious rape gangs made up primarily of Pakistani Muslim men who prey on vulnerable young girls. Musk was pilloried by the woke crowd for making this an issue. If not for his prominence, he most certainly would have been prosecuted. Thanks to Musk’s pressure, however, the British prime minister finally reversed course and ordered a probe. An extensive investigation has already found the scandal to be uglier and more widespread than previously supposed. https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-are-being-thrown-in-uk-prisons-over-what-theyve-said-online-can-free-speech-be-saved/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-a...
- pmyteh 10mo agoThe 31 months was for literally inciting a mob to burn down a building with asylum seekers inside, in the middle of a riot. Yes, from the Internet rather than in person, and she's now very vigorous in claiming she didn't intend anyone to actually do it. But yeah. Likely criminal even in the US under the "imminent lawless action" exception. Musk had bugger all to do with the rape gangs scandal, which broke literally years ago, and has been brought up with regularity by the newspapers here since. (For what it's worth there have also been plenty of non-Pakistani groups doing similar things and getting away with it. The main problem seems to be that no one in authority misses, or listens to, dropout teenage girls who have fallen off the radar - which makes them easy pickings for nonces.) I don't know about the others. The sign holder was likely within the 150m buffer zone put around abortion clinics last year, though. Given the content of the sign (which just steps over the letter of the statutory prohibition not to influence patients' decisions while being entirely morally unobjectionable) I suspect it was a deliberate setup for arrest for outrage, just like the Palestine Action people. But I could be wrong. It's perhaps also worth noting that Britain's traditions of free speech have never been as absolutist as the US (the last successful prosecution for blasphemous libel was as recent as the 70s and it's still technically a crime to advocate for a republic) but that raucous objections to government have very rarely been the target in recent centuries. The major difference in practice is that being grossly offensive isn't constitutionally protected. You're still not likely to get done for it, though.
- pavel_lishin 10mo agoI don't think this is limited to the EU.
- Tor3 10mo agoEU? Brexit, remember? When that's said, there are forces in the EU as well which try stunts like this, kind of, but in the EU there are at least lots of countries and lots of opposing voices. In the UK the situation is different.
- g947o 10mo agoGood news, potentially coming to US soon as well: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/lawmakers-want-ban-vpns-and-they-have-no-idea-what-theyre-doing https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/lawmakers-want-ban-vpn...
- stronglikedan 10mo agoAs soon as one country gets away with it, most will follow suit.
- blitzar 10mo agoThe UK left because the EU was not "thinking of the children"
- wkat4242 10mo agoNo they left because the old people didn't like all the brown faces in their street.
- 984635026859846 10mo ago[flagged]
- drnick1 10mo agoVery true, just see what happened to the Graphene project recently. They were approached by the French government for a backdoor, threatened when they refused, and left the country in fear.
- immibis 10mo agoThat is not what happened to the Graphene project recently. Basically, there have been a string of anonymous secure phones designed and marketed directly to high-ups in organised crime. Encrochat, Sky ECC, Anom, Phantom Secure, probably more. Their plausible deniability is thin - an undercover government agent goes to the creators and basically says "I'd like to buy 30 of these for my drug-dealing empire" and the creator says "Sure, that'll be $2000 each." Later the agent calls them up and goes "Hey this guy cooking meth was busted by the cops, can you erase his phone?" and the creator goes "Sure." and erases the phone. That's not merely selling secure phones - that's joining organised crime (as the guy who makes the phones). Someone in the French government basically said that if Graphene is another Phantom Secure, they should suffer the same consequences as Phantom Secure. That's what the comment was. It doesn't seem like Graphene is another Phantom Secure, but they're sure acting suspicious by running away from France because of this comment.
- majorchord 10mo agoBy this same logic, would Proton also be acting suspicious if they exited Switzerland?
- drnick1 10mo agoIt looks like French authorities did more than than and the Graphene devs were explicitly asked to decrypt devices and threatened with arrests: https://nordictimes.com/tech/grapheneos-exits-france-after-threats-and-smear-campaign/ https://nordictimes.com/tech/grapheneos-exits-france-after-t...
- immibis 10mo agoChat Control did not pass, because it infringes upon their citizens privacy.
- outside1234 10mo agoIs there actually a massive problem that they are trying to solve with this?
- abroszka33 10mo agoIt's usually the children's safety, porn, piracy or protection from some foreign enemy. But does it really matter?
- postepowanieadm 10mo agoExtremism.
- IshKebab 10mo agoYes, their previous dumb law doesn't work because there are easy free VPNs available (e.g. Proton).
- Kenji 10mo ago[dead]
- Havoc 10mo agoYes. The problem is the pseudo anonymous internet makes it harder to control the population :/
- lunar_rover 10mo agoMaybe yes but the ulterior motive behind these "solutions" is pretty obvious. Rip anonymity from the internet, one step forward towards Telescreens.
- gorgoiler 10mo agoYes: somewhat cynically, they want their democratically elected affiliate party to remain in government (or they just enjoy popular support themselves) and so when the majority of people think protectin the childrun is good, you should demonstrate your purity spiraling by proposing and going along with anything that supports such an aim. You’d want to vote for that, right? I mean, the kids, right?!
- 10mo ago
- 31337Logic 10mo ago"Attempt", being the key word here. :-/
- YurgenJurgensen 10mo agoWe’ve seen how this goes. If it doesn’t pass, they’ll try again and again until some combination of political chicanery lets it slip through. They only have to win once, we have to win every single time.
- Bender 10mo agoConsider instead setting a slightly more realistic goal, like 6 or 7.
- hexasquid 10mo ago(sigh) waggles hands
- ninalanyon 10mo agoI've been waiting for this for some time. It's an obvious loophole in the current rules. So how long will we have to wait before it dawns on them that VPNs are also used to circumvent IP address blocks in the UK, and other countries of course.
- pksebben 10mo ago> So how long will we have to wait before it dawns on them I think the whole idea is that we don't have to wait, and that "it dawned on them" before they even wrote the draft law.
- impure-aqua 10mo agoRequiring me to upload my ID to invoke ssh with the -D flag should certainly be a top legislative priority of the United Kingdom
- Etheryte 10mo agoGotta be of age to get some -D.
- RobRivera 10mo agoHearty kek
- lijok 10mo agoPretty sure you can install kali and have a hundred flags that have been legislated against in most countries, out of the box. Not a great argument.
- jjgreen 10mo ago"ssh-D" would be a good name for a terrorist née protest group opposing this.
- spiffytech 10mo agoIt'll be amusing right up until the UK decides SSH is a threat to children.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- immibis 10mo agoIt's worse than that - it's totally illegal to invoke scp with the argument of naked_kids.jpg. The horror!
- Beestie 10mo agoSo lemme guess - in order to prove one's age, one needs to obtain a digital ID and use said ID to gain access to the internet thereby creating a perfect system to monitor one's internet activity. Gotta hand it to them - "protecting the children" is a pretty good pretext.
- SpaceManNabs 10mo agoInteresting to see these kinds of comments more in this thread compared to the one from yesterday. The one from yesterday was discussing how australia is banning social media for anyone under 16. Most comments were supportive because they hate social media. A few comments were discussing how it is just a way to propagate more KYC.
- iamacyborg 10mo agoPosts about the UK tend to draw quite a lot of weird astroturfing from the ultra free speech crowd.
- ImJamal 10mo agoThere is a difference between a concept (banning social media for kids) and the actual implementation (requiring ID to visit sites or whatever they are going to do).
- selcuka 10mo agoThere is a theoretical difference, but in practice they are the same thing, and we all know it [1]: > Social media platforms have admitted verifying user ages would likely involve surrendering personal IDs, as the Albanese government forges ahead with its under-16 ban. [1] https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/privacy-and-security-risks-social-media-giants-warn-government-id-verification-may-be-needed-for-age-ban/news-story/f5b599d73da05c04e6aec2049bf6bb04 https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/privacy-a...
- idle_zealot 10mo agoIt's way easier to justify banning social media entirely than banning it for under-sixteens. Paradoxically it infringes on freedom less, as it bans a type of business model for being too harmful rather than restricting people's rights to view and share information.
- kylecazar 10mo agoIsn't everyone under the age of 16 using a VPN doing so through their parent's billing?
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- lucb1e 10mo agoOnly for VPNs whose payment methods verify that you're -ge 16 Can't seem to link the section but down this page are some options that don't require that: https://mullvad.net/en/pricing https://mullvad.net/en/pricing
- kylecazar 10mo agoWow, send cash along with the token they generate (to associate with your account). That's a new one... Interesting!
- StanislavPetrov 10mo agoThere are many free VPNs.
- casey2 10mo agoTo protect children we must install malware on their computers! Let's just hope those authorities don't use malware to peep on them through webcams ... Again or look at their personal data or use behavior analytics to target minority groups as "risks" sending law enforcement to harass or kill them. or store all their personal data on a 3rd party companies insecure servers You have to start surveillance young, get them used to it early so they don't realize how bad it is!
- ascorbic 10mo agoThis is one of dozens of amendments proposed by members, so it's more accurate to say "three members of the House of Lords attempting to ban the use of VPNs".
- TSiege 10mo agoI'm not from the UK but I thought the house of lords is largely a vestigial legislative body and has no serious power. Am I wrong there?
- notahacker 10mo agoThey can propose amendments to legislation, and delay some legislation from passing if they don't like it or don't get their amendments approved.
- andyjohnson0 10mo agoBrit here. The HoL's role is to review and scrutinise legislation as part of the parliamentary process of turning bills into acts (laws). Most legislation originates in the (directly elected) House of Commons. But all parliamentary bills pass through the Lords, and they can propose ammendments, but those ammendments have to be approved by the Commons. Those that aren't are sent back to the Lords for reconsideration. In the event of deadlock, the Commons has primacy and can overrule the Lords.
- mjmas 10mo agoAre there any limitations on what can be proposed in one of the houses? For example in Australia our upper house (senate) can't adjust or propose bills to do with money.
- blibble 10mo agono
- TazeTSchnitzel 10mo ago
- xoa 10mo agoBlacklists are an inherently terrible, rights infringing approach to this sort of issue vs whitelists. It would be a lot better if the internet by default was simply considered 18+ (or 16+ or whatever a country wants). Instead, the tld system could be easily used to have age based domains where anyone who wanted one had to meet some set of requirements for content standards, accountability and content vetting, didn't allow user contributed content at all without review or whatever was needed. At that point all the technical components exist to make this an ultra easy UI for parents. Require ISP WiFi routers at least to support VLANs and PPSKs, which ultra cheap gear can do nowadays no problem, and have an easy to GUI to "generate child password, restrict to [age bracket]", heck to even just put in a birthday and by default have it auto-increment access if a parent wants. Add some easy options for time-of-day restrictions etc, done. Now parents are in charge and no adult needs anything ever. Now I highly doubt politicians are all being honest about full motivations here, clearly there are plenty of forces trying to use this issue as a wedge to go after rights in general. But at the same time parental concern is real, and non-technical people find it overwhelming. It'd be good if industries and community could proactively offer a working solution, that'd reduce the political salience a great deal. It's unfortunate the entire narrative has been allowed to go 100% backwards in approach.
- mschuster91 10mo ago> But at the same time parental concern is real ... only to the degree it hasn't been manufactured by tabloid media and Russian propaganda warfare, that is. With every little news about local shootings, robberies, rapes, beatings, thefts, whatever not just making national, but in the worst case international headlines, one might think that Western countries are unsafe hellholes of the likes of actually legitimately failed states - despite criminality rates often being on record lows. Of course parents are going to be afraid for their children, and it's made worse by many Western countries financially only allowing for one, maximum two children. On top of that, a lot of the panic is simply moral outrage. Porn and "trans grooming" it seems to be these days, I 'member growing up with the "Killerspiele" bullshit after some nutjob shot up a school in the early '00s. My parents grew up with the manufactured fear of reading too much as it was supposed to make you myopic. Again, all manufactured fear by organized groups aiming to rip our rights to pieces. Parents should relax and rather teach their children about what can expect them on the Internet, how people might want to take advantage of them, and most importantly, that their children can always come to them when they feel something is going bad, without repercussions. When children think that they cannot show something to their parents, that is where the actual do-bad people have an in.
- tehjoker 10mo agoIt's crazy that there is a house of unelected lords in an allegedly modern country.
- andyjohnson0 10mo ago> It's crazy that there is a house of unelected lords in an allegedly modern country. I certainly agree. But its worth noting that only 92 of the 825 seats in the Lords are reserved for hereditary peers - the remainder are nominated by the (elected) leaders of the main political parties, or are appointed for non-political achievements (science, society, business, arts, etc.) There are also 26 Church of England bishops. Legislation to remove the hereditary peers is currently going through parliament. There's plenty wrong with the HoL, but I think there's at least an argument to be made that the UK benefits from a parliamentary revising chamber that is less party-political than the Commons.
- tehjoker 10mo agoThat description sounds like the U.S. senate before there was a constitutional amendment to implement directly elected senators. The indirect election of senators was used to ensure that senators were selected to be favorable to elite interests. Direct election was intended to make it more responsive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventeenth_Amendment_to_the_U... However, I have many criticisms of the continuing undemocratic nature U.S. Senate (I think it should be dissolved entirely), but that reform was a good step. It's true that the upper house will be less party political, but that is because everyone inside is very comfy with each other and aligned on policy that favors the wealthy.
- kmeisthax 10mo agoIt's also the same problem with the European Commission. If anything, it's worse than hereditary peers. At least the peers are obviously illegitimate.
- pjc50 10mo ago
- int32_64 10mo agoIt's so organic and grass roots and good for democracy™ that every single Western country suddenly decided that eliminating privacy online in lockstep was the top priority despite none of the ruling parties running on it as a platform or with any meaningful referendums from the voting public. But to what end?
- stebalien 10mo ago> democracy house of lords
- blibble 10mo agothey're subordinate to the commons it's really not a problem, they're essentially a reviewing chamber it works quite well
- etothepii 10mo agoThe House of Lords is the most democratic hereditary system in the world. The 90 of the 92 heredities are elected from amongst the available candidates.
- u_sama 10mo agoThe house of lords is a stamping system at this point, and maybe a stopgap to authoritarianism. All power resides in the House of Commons which is elected The true issue lies in the fact that the Westminster style of government is de facto an elective tyranny, with no real checks and balances other than the misused ECHR
- EmptyCoffeeCup 10mo agoIf this were true, the papers wouldn't have run an article yesterday bitching about the lords sending back the workers rights bill again. The commons may _eventually_ overrule them, but it takes time and costs political capital. The majority of our population want more law, more rules, more restrictions : they don't see the value or enjoyment in doing something, so they don't think anyone should be able to do it. Ask the average joe whether or not cars should prevent drivers from being able to "chose" to break the speed limit: You'll get a resounding "yes" 8/10 times - the value of freewill seems to be increasing lost on my country men.
- raverbashing 10mo agoWill probably work as well as their prohibition of knives for underaged people (That is, none at all)
- fidotron 10mo agoReminds me of my favourite UK totalitarian politician fantasy story: https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorris/2019/03/14/yes-a-politician-really-did-suggest-all-knives-should-have-gps-trackers-built-in/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianmorris/2019/03/14/yes-a-poli... The UK went culturally off the deep end a long time ago.
- paradox460 10mo agoOrwell wrote 1984 after working at the BBC
- parliament32 10mo agoI'm relatively confident this was the entire end goal of the Online Safety Act. Get the (relatively) easy law passed, then "oh no platforms are only requiring this for UK-based IPs and there are too many VPNs/proxies, I guess we need to de-anonymize everyone".
- torified 10mo agoWhat a brilliant plan! Nobody could have seen this coming! God I'm sick of the constant attacks against online freedom. God forbid anyone should ever have a private conversation.
- azalemeth 10mo agoThis is a clearly terrible idea. It's clear to us, at least, not to them. As is on the public record, there are three proponents behind this amendment. They and their contact details are: LORD NASH [Tory, contactholmember@parliament.uk] BARONESS CASS [Crossbench / 'independent', rivisn@parliament.uk ("staff")] BARONESS BENJAMIN [Liberal Democrat - which particularly disappoints me – benjaminf@parliament.uk] All three can be contacted by sending an email to contactholmember@parliament.uk using the proper form of address as detailed in https://members.parliament.uk/member/4270/contact https://members.parliament.uk/member/4270/contact If you're reading this website and are either living in the UK or are a British citizen I strongly urge you to write a personalised and above all polite email stating with evidence why they are misguided. The "think of the children" brigade is strong – you may well be able to persuade these individuals why it is a bad idea.
- sph 10mo agoAs if that's gonna change their minds. You'd have a better chance by stuffing a £20 note in the envelope.
- fredoralive 10mo ago> Liberal Democrat - which particularly disappoints me don't you remember 2010?
- pjc50 10mo agoOh. Cass. She was given the peerage for constructing the Cass Review, an extremely one sided anti trans "review" of the science around puberty blockers. I suspect she's against VPNs and in favor of total information control of children because of trans panic.
- vincom 10mo ago[flagged]
- baazaa 10mo agoOn a related note, they built their digital ID so that third parties could verify attributes (it's NOT just a single-service login across government + a linking ID across government services, which is how it was sold by the BBC). They're pretty close to completely de-anonymising the internet for UK citizens. Say they introduce an Australian-style social media ban for under 16s, then requires all social media to link their accounts to digital IDs for this verification. Naturally the only remaining loophole is if a UK citizen manages to avoid being flagged as British ever by using a VPN, so I expect they will focus on that going forwards. Keep in mind the UK already arrests and imprisons vast numbers of people for speech offences, there's no slippery-slope argument here because the UK is already at the bottom of the slope as an ultra-authoratitarian anti-speech nation.
- iamacyborg 10mo ago> Keep in mind the UK already arrests and imprisons vast numbers of people for speech offences I think you’ve been spending too much time on Twitter
- gmac 10mo agoI wouldn’t dismiss this so easily, the Palestine Action stuff is pretty appalling.
- iamacyborg 10mo agoYou mean folks choosing to protest under the guise of a proscribed organisation? Protesting in favour of Palestine remains legal, doing so under the name of a proscribed organisation is not. Admittedly, the reason for them being proscribed is rather idiotic.
- pjc50 10mo agoThat's exactly it. The proscription is ridiculous and delegitimises the whole concept of proscribed organization. It collapses into "mere support for Palestine is an arrestable offense". This didn't work against Sinn Fein and it will not work now.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- fidotron 10mo agoThe way this, and various other proposals/actions in other countries, are all popping up at the same time, seemingly independently though obviously not, has to be one of the biggest warning signs of trouble in my lifetime. Not helped by various European states deciding they want national service again all of a sudden. Our governments have turned into the very thing they claimed to be opposing for decades. It's disgraceful.
- iamacyborg 10mo ago> Not helped by various European states deciding they want national service again all of a sudden Their next-door neighbour is threatening war and their longtime ally has turned into an unreliable kook. It’s not all that surprising that countries are looking to bolster their defences.
- burnt-resistor 10mo ago> It’s not all that surprising that countries are looking to bolster their defences. It's not bolstering defenses, it's bolstering expansion of the surveillance state panopticon because "think of the children!"
- azalemeth 10mo agoIt's also worth stating that the worst part of that proposed amendment [1] isn't even necessarily the VPN ban, it's the next clause, on page 20: "The “CSAM requirement” is that any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting (by any means, including livestreaming) and viewing of CSAM using that device." "Regulations under subsection (1) must enable the Secretary of State, by further regulations, to expand the definition of ‘relevant devices’ to include other categories of device which may be used to record, transmit or view CSAM" Apple, what did you start? [1] https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/63901/documents/7465 https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/63901/documents/746...
- matheusmoreira 10mo ago> any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software It's happening. Computer freedom, everything the word "hacker" ever stood for, will be officially destroyed if this passes. We're about to be robbed of control over our computers by force of law. It's just the UK now but eventually it will be every country. This is a very dark day. I've been prophesizing its arrival for a while now. I was secretly hoping I was wrong about everything, that we'd turn this around, that we'd enshrine a right to control our computers into law. The opposite is happening instead. It's so sad...
- GaryBluto 10mo agoI wouldn't give up. When it gets to the level of mandatory government rootkits there are bound to be underground organisations circumventing this and/or trading old hardware. I'd even go as far to say that if things become this authoritarian, certain "direct" acts would be justified in preventing or fighting it.
- ThrowawayTestr 10mo agoDon't worry, they'll make it a crime to open devices that don't have the rootkit.
- iamacyborg 10mo agoWhat is it about these UK politics posts that draws a particular type of commenter? What the heck media are these folks consuming to have such a warped view of this country?
- lordnacho 10mo agoI've had American colleagues ask me about the London crime wave. They seem to have some sort of alternative news source that doesn't tell them murders have halved from the high point around the millennium. https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/london-murder-rate-drops-to-lowest-levels-on-record-399309/ https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/london-murder-rate-dr... Then they say it's about knife crime. Where the UK also does better than the US. https://www.euronews.com/2018/05/05/trump-s-knife-crime-claim-how-do-the-us-and-uk-compare- https://www.euronews.com/2018/05/05/trump-s-knife-crime-clai...
- StanislavPetrov 10mo agoProbably the media that shows the UK locking up old ladies and people in wheelchairs for speaking out publicly against ongoing UK support for genocide (among other "speech offenses").
- iamacyborg 10mo agoYou might be missing some important context, namely that they’re doing so under the guise of a proscribed organisation.
- Supermancho 10mo ago> proscribed orgnanization That doesn't change the context. A different justification doesn't change the practical effect. The curtailing of speech is discussed as problematic by many of the residents openly. I certainly have had an earful touring across the entirety of the isles.
- danparsonson 10mo agoFor anyone like me who is not up to date with this news: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/07/uk-palestine-action-ban-disturbing-misuse-uk-counter-terrorism-legislation https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/07/uk-palestine... > “The decision appears disproportionate and unnecessary. It limits the rights of many people involved with and supportive of Palestine Action who have not themselves engaged in any underlying criminal activity but rather exercised their rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association,” the High Commissioner said. “As such, it appears to constitute an impermissible restriction on those rights that is at odds with the UK’s obligations under international human rights law.” > > Since the UK Government’s ban came into effect on 5 July, at least 200 people have been arrested under the UK Terrorism Act 2000, many of them while attending peaceful protests. So it seems you're also missing important context when you wave the whole thing away because "it's a proscribed organisation" - that proscription is in fact another example of government overreach.
- ravenical 10mo agoI, for one, am just /shocked/ that Baroness Cass (of the Cass Report) is trying to limit people's personal freedoms.
- dave1010uk 10mo agoI know what you're thinking: these restrictions are easy to work around. But don't worry, we can just layer more restrictions on top. Eventually the children will be safe! The government just needs to... - require proof of age (ID) to install apps from unofficial sources on your phone or PC. Probably best to block this at both the OS and also popular VPN downloading sites like github.com and debian.org. - require proof of age (ID) to unblock DNS provider IP addresses like 8.8.8.8 and 1.1.1.1 at your ISP. - make sure children aren't using any other "privacy" tools that might be a slippery slope to installing a VPN. This makes it so much easier for the parents too! The internet will be so safe that they won't even need to talk to their children about internet safety.
- stephen_g 10mo agoYou joke, but as I understand it, all internet in the UK has Government mandated 'adult content' filtering by default and you have to go through a process to prove you're over 18 to have it removed... So they are much more than halfway there already...
- maest 10mo agoYou understand it incorrectly
- stephen_g 10mo ago“ In July 2013, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) agreed to voluntarily offer “default-on” adult content internet filters on all new and existing home network customers” [1] OK, so the entire industry does opt everyone in to content filtering by default, just every single provider, without exception, does it “voluntarily”. 1. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN07031/SN07031.pdf https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN07...
- maest 10mo agoYes, that is the correct statement.
- nisten 10mo agoAs someone fully supportive of the social media ban for Australian kids, I think As someone fully supportive of the social media ban for Australian kids, I think we need to teach UK kids to vibecode their own VPNs with OSS models at this point so they can save what's left of their future civil liberties. We all know where this is going, they're going to ban the one mathematical tool we have that gives us control over machines, encryption.
- bilekas 10mo agoOn what possible grounds can they enforce this? Please someone tell me when the line is crossed.
- a2fz 10mo agoMeanwhile, British Transport Police are about to start rolling out Live Facial Recognition at London railway stations: https://www.btp.police.uk/news/btp/news/england/british-transport-police-to-trial-use-of-live-facial-recognition-technology/ https://www.btp.police.uk/news/btp/news/england/british-tran...
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoSocial credit scores and real-time total surveillance are that much closer. The British people are rolling over and okay with this.
- teeray 10mo agoWhy does it seem like all this age-restriction and the consequential VPN bans are happening across the west all at once?
- torified 10mo agoGuaranteed this is the next move they'll try in Australia too.
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoPolitical/issue opportunism. One so-called "democracy" implementing one civilian-harmful garbage policy makes it that much easier for another to emulate it.
- tick_tock_tick 10mo agoBritain, Australia, and Canada love massive government overreach for some reason. America seems to have escaped it by having a culture of just hating government in general. I will say the EUs love affair with it is somewhat new (last 10-15 years or so).
- okokwhatever 10mo agoUKistan doing UKinstan things
- patrakov 10mo agoI guess we will see a jump in the number of foreign eSIMs sold to UK minors.
- YurgenJurgensen 10mo agoTime to open a business in Roblox selling eSIMs delivered in-game through QR codes? (Assuming Roblox hasn’t been banned before we can get the MVNOs on board.)
- greatgib 10mo agoRemember how the morons, at the early stage, were saying "come on, don't be excessive, it's not China here", and now we are reaching a similar or worse civil rights point in most western countries...
- burnt-resistor 10mo agoBecause the ruling class in most countries envy China's control and the people are too divided, disorganized, and ignorant to understand what they're losing. The ruling class saw an opportunity to gather more power and took it. They cede nothing voluntarily.
- ghm2199 10mo agoSerious question: What's the gold standard in blocking certain content for an age group, without tracking ones identity? My initial thought would it would be just making it super easy for their guardians to distribute and control device content. But let the control end at that echelon of power; Not even the local councils or schools should be given the power to regulate social media for kids to this extent IMO, let alone the govt
- rossriley 10mo agoI'd have thought an OAuth flow to a government run ID system, to create an account you first must verify your age by redirecting to the ID provider logging in via FaceID/Fingerprint to verify it's you and then you are redirected back to the original site with a verification code. Admittedly on paper that means the Gov system would know which sites you were approved for, not logging that would require legislation to not store these logs.
- ElectroBuffoon 10mo agoRTALabel https://www.rtalabel.org/page.php https://www.rtalabel.org/page.php is over 3 decades old. Restricted to Adults, pretty easy to remember. For some history and related standards, see Wikipedia: PICS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_for_Internet_Content_Selection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platform_for_Internet_Content_... POWDER https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_for_Web_Description_Resources https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_for_Web_Description_R... ASACP/RTA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Sites_Advocating_Child_Protection https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Sites_Advocatin... The more "digi-ID so we are sure you are old enough, bitte" keeps been pushed, the clearer it's about tracking and not about children. No matter how much they love to frame it the other way around. Unless they want to admit they are total inepts.
- w_for_wumbo 10mo agoIf we as humans take full responsibility for the world we inhabit. It's really clear that we live inside of systems that we both control and feel that we don't. Exploitation of children is (as strange as it sounds) a design issue. We've designed systems that encourage and rationalize the exploitation of children as a feature of fear. The encouraging part is that we are in control and it's easier to navigate with a system than to resist it, so the question becomes. - How do we modify the incentives that are already in place to not result in the exploitation of children? Because people generally make decisions for their best interest, we're in a dangerous situation where the incentives are for child exploitation. An example would be: I need to feed my family I need to work to live I need to appease my boss to continue to work The boss has goals to meet We need to perform these actions to meet the goals There isn't time or space to consider the full consequences of this action When the impact to children is not considered by a change to a system, they inevitably reap the consequences of living in a system that never considered their welfare. The children that grew up feeling out of control, and in a system not designed for them then seek to control the very system that formed them - not knowing that they're replicating the same harm that got them there. This is a design cycle as I see it, if we don't look at it and understand it - then we will continue feeling powerless - while holding the reigns of our future in our hands. I believe so much in the power of humanity - so I share this not with the idea that I have the answers, but that I am part of the collective that does.
- arminiusreturns 10mo agoUK House of Lords are a buncha of Jimmy Savile pal types, if you get my drift. The same blackmail and bribery networks that exist in the US largely were learned from the Brits, who of course gave Palestine to the zionists on behalf of dragging America into a war they mostly engineered via Edward the 7ths diplomatic intrigues and the pre-war formation of the entangling alliances. So for a long time, I traced most roads in the US back to London... (for example Star Chamber origins)... After a while though, as I dug into the real history of banking, I realized when William of Orange was installed it was shortly after that the Bank of England was established to take them over the same way they later influenced us (Jekyll Island) to establish the Fed, the main trojan horse for a country being monetary countrol. So I now understand just like the masons, or intel dudes, etc, many of them are just so compartmentalized they don't know what they are a part of. I now view the UK the same way. So lets keep following the strings up the chain... "You win battles by knowing the enemy's timing, and using a timing which the enemy does not expect." - Miyamoto Musashi
- crest 10mo agoBetter hope your summer jobs don't require a work VPN kids :-P.
- alliao 10mo agoi've long held a view that what CCP is doing is cancer to all citizens in previously free countries, our democratic leaders are quick to show disgust and disdain, but the actual owners of the country, actual powers that be are enamored and mesmerised by what they're doing to the Chinese populace especially when it comes to messaging/propaganda. block and track everyone then just tiktok your way high heavens. it's not even what aldous huxley meant by the pleasure essay anymore it's deeper and more manipulative
- stevefan1999 10mo agoI'm tired, man, and I'm not sure if donating to EFF would stop those PoS from ruining the internet
- nephihaha 10mo agoI may be posting on an electronic device here but people need to start reading physical books and meeting in person.
- Hizonner 10mo agoDoes anybody have a sense of whether this is best seen as "a proposal by the UK House of Lords", or "a proposal by three fringe whackjobs in the UK House of Lords"? I honestly don't have any idea. How influential are the proposers? Who else has made noise about such things? The amendment from the same three people about requiring all phones to "have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting (by any means, including livestreaming) and viewing of CSAM using that device" strikes me as in the fringe whackjob range.
- ghxst 10mo agoMaybe a stupid question would TOR be classified as a VPN in this context?
- Razengan 10mo agoYo, why the fuck are their people letting this happen
- semiquaver 10mo ago“If Parliament enacts that smoking in the streets of Paris is an offence, then it is an offence” This is not an enforceable law. It seems predicated on the notion that VPNs can only exist as a commercial product, but all you need is two computers connected to the internet.
- morshu9001 10mo agoNot totally enforceable, but there are not a whole lot of people with connections in other countries willing to host VPNs for them. Most people don't even know what a VPN really is.
- reenorap 10mo agoThe UK has turned into the worst parts of 1984. The politicians are absolutely stark raving mad at this point, what a horrible country to be living in.
- wackget 10mo agoI'm not at all a fan of mass surveillance, but is it possible - just possible - that your statement might contain just a smidge of hyperbole?
- reenorap 10mo ago10,000+ arrests a year for posting offensive tweets? The fact there is no freedom of speech in UK and the politicians will willfully arrest people for wrongthink is disgusting. It means that any rational person will keep their mouths shut for fear of getting arrested.
- left-struck 10mo agoHave you read 1984? This sounds like something leading up to the situation in the book, certainly not the worst parts.
- t00 10mo agoOrwell was a licenced critic even if anti-imperialist at heart he sold his soul to fight communism putting imperialist issues aside.
- tjpnz 10mo agoFunnily enough a VPN is the only way to robustly keep your kids off porn sites, social media and other rubbish.
- Razengan 10mo agoThis crap of making laws affecting people who have no say in the law... "They're too stupid to have a say" Same shit used against women in some countries.
- theshrike79 10mo agoSo if my whole home network is behind a VPN, kids under 16 can't use it? I really don't get their reasoning here.
- rich_sasha 10mo agoI get regularly downvoted for this, but oh well. I don't post for votes: I think the research consensus is that the internet is a dangerous place for kids. And pragmatic life experience shows that as a parent, you can't control well what your kids have access to. While I think many of these laws are poorly implemented and unnecessarily endanger the free Internet, I think they are coming from a good place. I think arguing that there should be no restrictions whatsoever is completely ignoring the negative societal impact of modern technology and is actually unpragmatic and counterproductive, because that impact is very real and people want to control it. They won't care about arguments about freedom that seem far fetched to them. To me a much more fruitful discussion would be on how to control these things and how to ensure it doesn't become a creeping censorship mechanism. Simply saying "no" will mean people who care about free internet will be left on the side. Because actually there is a lot one could do to reconcile these two standpoints: - ensure privacy-preserving mechanisms are used for age verification - ensure laws proactively proscribe freedom of internet outside of selected (age restricted) areas - provide transparency laws that enable citizens to see all data collected on them, GDPR-style. - pathways for citizens to appeal or request compensation for violations of privacy - and crucially, prevent other terrible things in this area, like the demand I saw on a related thread that all mobile devices have an unremovable black-box software that censors all internet access. Would I mind a provably privacy-preserving age check? Not really. And it's actually achievable, as opposed to simply attempting to veto this whole wave. Hackers like us no longer own the web, it has become a common good. As a postscriptum, there's a ton of cynicism about "think of the children" and CSAM. I can well believe it's BS when politicians say it. Equally I don't take it as a given. I feel uncomfortable when my freedom to browse innocuous stuff shelters predators and gives 12 year olds access to SM porn. You're free to disagree, but it seems the world is moving on. You can shout at the clouds or try to find a compromise.
- chrismatheson 10mo agoJust wait till someone explains TOR to the MP's. That will be funny
- random9749832 10mo agoIt is worse than you think. The country is on its knees. I go outside and no one looks happy and no one is shopping or eating out unless it is McDonalds or Lidl. No one is working, children are calling sick for school and everyone is wondering how the hell so many random people suddenly got in. The next few decades will be a story of decline. Economy: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyp7v7r28yo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyp7v7r28yo Youth unemployment: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/12/11/britains-youth-unemployment-rising-at-fastest-pace-in-g7/ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/12/11/britains-you... Health care: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/11/nhs-bracing-for-worst-ever-winter-crisis-in-next-fortnight-amid-rising-flu-cases https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/11/nhs-bracing-... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crrkervnxvqo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crrkervnxvqo
- cynicalsecurity 10mo agoWorse than China. They are absolutely obsessed, fanatics. But it's not just bigotry, unfortunately. They are trying to ban free usage of computers for the general public. They want to establish authoritarianism, at least some form of it.
- insane_dreamer 10mo agoI'm much more worried about my teenage sons being on their phones scrolling social media all the time than I am them using a VPN to watch porn.
- bobse 10mo ago[dead]
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- niggertopia 10mo ago[dead]
- kneel25 10mo agoI support the safety act, but this on top will be so disappointing. The most harmed are already being kept safe without this.