131–140 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Controlling VPN seems much easier, no? Since you have to pay for a VPN service, and I imagine most kids don't have a credit card to make arbitrary purchases independently, so it would have to bubble up to a parent.
That's assuming the child is smart enough to only use a paid-for VPN. I can foresee a lot of children being suckered into using a dodgy VPN.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Crimes numbers, including rapes, are through the roof in the UK This is far-right propaganda. https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/gbr/uni...
Your source is only for all crime statistics. If you look at the detailed breakdown rape has increased[1]. More worrying is the fact that charge rates have fallen[2], which makes the claim that crime was "down" doubtful. [1] https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250726_EPC... [2] https://www.economist.com/content-assets/images/20250726_BRC...
> “People are scared of what's going on. Both criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate.”
He then edited the comment once I called him out on its veiled racism and once he'd seen the thread following from that (the discussion around ONS statistics where I highlight that crime is generally down, just not sexual offences). He then changed his comment to:
> "They're super scared because a great many people have had enough. Crimes numbers, including rapes, are through the roof in the UK"
I realise that @vidarh replied to the updated text. But there are a couple of points:
1. If you go to the Office for National Statistics Crime in England and Wales report [1], you'll see the following comment:
"Trends in police recorded sexual offences should be interpreted with caution as improvements in recording practices and increased reporting by victims have contributed to increases in recent years. For further information, see Section 19: Data sources and quality."
So, an increase in the numbers doesn't necessarily mean actual an increase. It would also explain why the percentage of solved (sexual) crimes is decreasing.
2. Even if there was an actual increase, that doesn't change the fact that crime is down overall (which counters the original statement by @TacticalCoder)
3. It also doesn't invalidate @vidarh's link which shows crime in the UK is low compared to other nations. So, if some areas have increased, then the overall picture is still relatively good for the UK. It certainly doesn't fit what @TacticalCoder originally wrote: "criminality and religious extremism are rising at a more than alarming rate".
Editing the comment from the one that was called-out to a whole new statement, that maps onto the one crime stat that is actually going in the wrong direction (but might not be due to changes in how its measured), is extremely disingenuous.
[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeand...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> extremism is only really growing due to white supremacy groups. Nonsense.
We literally had riots in the UK last year due to white supremacists. It is writ large all over social media, especially because of Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle. Its hateful rhetoric and actual violence is on show in the UK more than any other form of extremism. What other forms of extremism do you believe is growing? Compared to, say, 2007? Where we had hate preachers at Finsbury Park mos…
It's a portmanteau of ECHELON [0] and Elon Musk. I've never cared for him, and especially not now that he is advancing fascist ideology.
To counter your point, it would depend on how you define extremism. If you want to define extremism as acts of violence then I can understand.
However there are plenty of fundamentalist/extremist views within the UK which exist regardless of what the right wing does.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> surrendering to a foreign government that has no jurisdiction over them is what's new Many countries, including the US, claim jurisdiction if you are providing services to their citizens. Some claim jurisdiction if someone in that country sees your web page (ie you've now "published" it there). You've been blissfully unaware, perhaps, but this has been a thing for a long time. You have probably seen sites having se…
Harmful in which way? Porn addiction is as harmful as gambling, tobacco and alcohol addiction. High school students with phones at school are showing porn to their friends, even younger kids. Some schools have banned phones, but teens aged 12–17 can still access porn sites freely when they get home. In my opinion, gambling sites and porn sites should always verify age, same goes for shops selling tobacco and alcohol.
I've heard this before, but I've never, not even once, gotten an evidence-based approach to if this is true.
I've only ever gotten morality-based arguments, which, IMO, aren't arguments at all and aren't worth mine, or anyone else's, time.
We cannot just act like pornography being harmful is a foregone conclusion. No, we need to prove it. We should not be legislating things, and giving up our privacy and freedom, before even defining a problem.
Intuitively, sure, it makes sense that porn is bad. It depicts sex, and in western puritanical cultures, that's bad. If people are exposed to sex, surely they're at greater risk of teen pregnancy, or STIs, or whatever.
But is this actually the case? In the past 20 years, teen pregnancy has fallen off a cliff. Rates of STIs are lower, too. In areas that teach abstinence-only education, they actually have higher teen pregnancy. Taking a more puritanical approach does not guarantee better outcomes, and based off the real-world statistics, it seems to do the opposite.
In addition, I have zero reason to believe porn addiction is even real. There's a lot of dispute among psychologists, with most not recognizing it as an addiction. The problem here is that an addiction is not a compulsive action. An addiction needs to impair your everyday life. That's the clinical definition of an addiction.
We're not seeing a lot of bad outcomes or impairment from pornography. It is exceedingly rare that someone who is consuming pornography is doing it to a degree where it negatively affects their lives. Sure, it's possible, but for the vast, vast majority of people this just does not appear to be the case.
Now, to get ahead of the curve because I've already had this conversation a hundred times - no, I am not addicted to pornography and I very rarely consume it. I have a happy and healthy sex life. I just reject the idea that it's harmful with no evidence provided, and I reject moral arguments in general.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> extremism is only really growing due to white supremacy groups. Nonsense.
We literally had riots in the UK last year due to white supremacists. It is writ large all over social media, especially because of Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle. Its hateful rhetoric and actual violence is on show in the UK more than any other form of extremism. What other forms of extremism do you believe is growing? Compared to, say, 2007? Where we had hate preachers at Finsbury Park mos…
It's a bit odd to focus on the anti-government protests and call them terrorists, when they were out protesting because the government failed to adequately protect them from an actual terrorist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We literally had riots in the UK last year due to white supremacists. It is writ large all over social media, especially because of Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle. Its hateful rhetoric and actual violence is on show in the UK more than any other form of extremism. What other forms of extremism do you believe is growing? Compared to, say, 2007? Where we had hate preachers at Finsbury Park mos…
> Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle It's a portmanteau of ECHELON [0] and Elon Musk. I've never cared for him, and especially not now that he is advancing fascist ideology. To counter your point, it would depend on how you define extremism. If you want to define extremism as acts of violence then I can understand. However there are plenty of fundamentalist/extremist views within the UK which ex…
I don't need to, the government already has widened the definition to include white supremacists and has a list of proscribed groups. This allows Prevent (the de-radicalisation programme that was originally set-up for Islamist terrorists and potential terrorists) to work on de-radicalising white supremacists too and for MI5 to focus some of its energy on preventing extremism and violence in the UK.
> However there are plenty of fundamentalist/extremist views within the UK which exist regardless of what the right wing does.
I am certainly not saying "right wing bad". I'm saying "far-right white supremacy bad". And probably "far-right bad" in general, just like I'd say "far-left bad". Extremism, in general, requires you to move away from compromise. Whether it's far-left or far-right, in my judgement it will always lead to conflict.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We literally had riots in the UK last year due to white supremacists. It is writ large all over social media, especially because of Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle. Its hateful rhetoric and actual violence is on show in the UK more than any other form of extremism. What other forms of extremism do you believe is growing? Compared to, say, 2007? Where we had hate preachers at Finsbury Park mos…
Are you talking about the Southport mass stabbing that killed three children and wounded 10? The perpetrator was a second-generation African migrant found with an Al-Qaeda training manual and ricin, who had been repeatedly referred to Prevent. The UK government initially refused to release information about the perpetrator, which caused speculation and confusion about the attack. It's a bit odd to focus on the anti-g…
Wouldn't age verification without revealing identity be solved with a service that acts as an identity authority? 1) Site that needs to verify age generates a globally unique id, creates requested data array ["is_over_18"], valid_until property and hmac signature of this message. 2) Client forwards just the id and requested data array to identity authority. Identity authority returns the id, map of data {"is_over_18"…
https://support.apple.com/en-gw/guide/apple-business-connect...
> When you integrate with Verify with Wallet on the Web, you disclose the identity information your website requests and for how long. Your website then receives permission to request only the specific data required to address your use case. This prevents users from having to overshare their identity information. Neither the state issuing authority nor Apple can see when and where a user shares their ID.
Google is doing something:
https://developer.chrome.com/blog/digital-credentials-cross-...
> The Digital Credentials (DC) API, allowing Chrome users on Android to present digital credentials from a wallet app on the same device, is already in an origin trial. We are now extending this origin trial to support cross-device digital credentials presentation. With the cross-device capability, users can now scan a QR code displayed on desktop Chrome to establish a connection to securely present credentials from their Android phone.
Web standard for Digital Credentials: https://w3c-fedid.github.io/digital-credentials/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Harmful in which way? Porn addiction is as harmful as gambling, tobacco and alcohol addiction. High school students with phones at school are showing porn to their friends, even younger kids. Some schools have banned phones, but teens aged 12–17 can still access porn sites freely when they get home. In my opinion, gambling sites and porn sites should always verify age, same goes for shops selling tobacco and alcohol.
> Porn addiction is as harmful as gambling, tobacco and alcohol addiction. I've heard this before, but I've never, not even once, gotten an evidence-based approach to if this is true. I've only ever gotten morality-based arguments, which, IMO, aren't arguments at all and aren't worth mine, or anyone else's, time. We cannot just act like pornography being harmful is a foregone conclusion. No, we need to prove it. We s…
What I mean by porn addiction:
In 2025, the average person watches around 6 hours per week of pornography. That's from recent industry and survey data. In 2005, the average was roughly 1.7 hours. So porn is clearly becoming more addictive.
Sex work has exploded online, especially with webcams and platforms like OnlyFans. In 2020 there were over a million sex workers. Now, there are over 4 million. And that doesn't include the many who are pushed into cam work just to survive.
This isn't just about kids spending money to watch their crush undress on a porn site. It's also about the workers, many of whom are exploited because the demand keeps growing.
This industry needs regulation, not to censor it, but to make it safe for everyone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We literally had riots in the UK last year due to white supremacists. It is writ large all over social media, especially because of Elon Musk, who I assume you lionise based on your handle. Its hateful rhetoric and actual violence is on show in the UK more than any other form of extremism. What other forms of extremism do you believe is growing? Compared to, say, 2007? Where we had hate preachers at Finsbury Park mos…
Are you talking about the Southport mass stabbing that killed three children and wounded 10? The perpetrator was a second-generation African migrant found with an Al-Qaeda training manual and ricin, who had been repeatedly referred to Prevent. The UK government initially refused to release information about the perpetrator, which caused speculation and confusion about the attack. It's a bit odd to focus on the anti-g…
He isn't a migrant. He was born in Wales. He's British. 100%. This is exactly the kind of language that starts the wheel of hatred rolling.
Nobody knew anything about him when the riots were fomented by the white supremacist lunatics. They just made it up because it fit their narrative and allowed them to go after brown people. They invented a muslim sounding name and claimed he was an asylum seeker. None of which was true.
> The UK government initially refused to release information about the perpetrator
They didn't "refuse". It's normal practice for the police to not release the details of an alleged perpetrator.
> which caused speculation and confusion about the attack.
Speculation is not a good enough reason to try burning down a hotel with refugees in in. I'm sorry, but there is no defence for the violence and hatred that was stirred and fomented by the white supremacist lunatics (and by Musk et al).
What happened with those children is tragic. Truly. But that doesn't give a free hand to white supremacist lynch mobs.
> It's a bit odd to focus on the anti-government protests and call them terrorists, when they were out protesting because the government failed to adequately protect them from an actual terrorist.
That's a fucked up sentence. He committed a crime, not an act of terrorism. A horrific crime, yes, but what came after was not an "anti-government protest". It was a riot where people were actually trying to murder immigrants based on no information other than what they had made up themselves. I mean, a mosque was attacked the following day and the perpetrator is a Christian (or at least his family is). That's not a protest, that's pure extremist hatred.