Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

alecmuffett.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 499 posts

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#101

Post by [deleted] »

piker wrote: post #94
omh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is based on statistics for the Malicious Communications Act. That includes people sending, for example, threatening messages to an ex partner. Not all of them are online posts, in fact probably a minority

That's what would be reasonably expected, but it's not backed up by the information. > The total arrest figures are likely to be far higher because eight forces failed to respond to freedom of information requests or provided inadequate data, including Police Scotland, the second largest force in the UK. Some forces also included arrests for “threatening” messages, though these do not fall under the specified section…

[deleted]

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#102

Post by kubb »

iamacyborg wrote: post #45
baazaa wrote: post #36

On 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…

> 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

Parallel realities. Over here it seems like the US is a dystopia, with how hostile their leadership is to democratic institutions and how greatly it empowers oligarchs.

They think that European countries (or commonly just "Europe") are about to arrest all citizens for criticizing politicians. "Europe" must be saved from their leftist fascist regimes. For now using propaganda. Soon militarily.

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#104

Post by kylecazar »

lucb1e wrote: post #58
kylecazar wrote: post #23

Isn't everyone under the age of 16 using a VPN doing so through their parent's billing?

Only 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

Wow, send cash along with the token they generate (to associate with your account). That's a new one... Interesting!

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#105

Post by iamacyborg »

gmac wrote: post #56
iamacyborg wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

I wouldn’t dismiss this so easily, the Palestine Action stuff is pretty appalling.

You 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.

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#106

Post by stooart »

cj wrote: post #81
piker wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While figures show that the total number of arrests for online posts fell to 9,700 last year, down from a record 13,800 in 2023... https://freespeechunion.org/daily-mail-investigation-exposes...

I thought Daily Mail was close to tabloid status (or a bit above). Aren’t they banned from being a citation on Wikipedia?

The Daily Mail is definitely tabloid, although some might describe it as a comic. There are reasons why Wikipedia doesn't allow it as a source.

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#107

Post by pjc50 »

andyjohnson0 wrote: post #40
tehjoker wrote: post #25

It's crazy that there is a house of unelected lords in an allegedly modern country.

> 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 bishop…

> less party-political

Making it life appointments only makes things much worse. It is not possible to be depoliticized in a polarized environment; look at what happened to the US supreme Court, or the Polish one.

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#108

Post by himinlomax »

cyanydeez wrote: post #65
piker wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> While figures show that the total number of arrests for online posts fell to 9,700 last year, down from a record 13,800 in 2023... https://freespeechunion.org/daily-mail-investigation-exposes...

[flagged]

A distinction without a difference.

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#109

Post by omh »

piker wrote: post #94
omh wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is based on statistics for the Malicious Communications Act. That includes people sending, for example, threatening messages to an ex partner. Not all of them are online posts, in fact probably a minority

That's what would be reasonably expected, but it's not backed up by the information. > The total arrest figures are likely to be far higher because eight forces failed to respond to freedom of information requests or provided inadequate data, including Police Scotland, the second largest force in the UK. Some forces also included arrests for “threatening” messages, though these do not fall under the specified section…

Thanks. That wasn't clear from the Mail article above.

But the Times article also says:

> A spokeswoman for Leicestershire police said crimes under Section 127 and Section 1 include “any form of communication” such as phone calls, letters, emails and hoax calls to emergency services.

So I think the categorisation is a mess, and probably not even consistent across forces

Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16

#110

Post by pjc50 »

iamacyborg wrote: post #105
gmac wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t dismiss this so easily, the Palestine Action stuff is pretty appalling.

You 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.

That'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.
Post reply on HN