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

House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

ispreview.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 143 posts

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#111

Post by yunnpp »

c0m47053 wrote: post #67
AlexandrB wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you're going on about. I don't think children should be watching any genocide videos. Is that something you watched a lot of as a child?

The thing is, it's not really children who lose access to this sort of content, it's the user who doesn't want to give Reddit or Twitter or whoever else a copy of their driving licence. Without age verification, they don't see the truth of something like Gaza, because it's ages restricted. They can however view the other, sanitised version of the story.

Precisely this. OP could have been more effective in their message by avoiding the sarcasm. The end game is censorship, not protecting children or whatever.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#112

Post by Hizonner »

donmcronald wrote: post #86
Deukhoofd wrote: post #12

> may make provision for the provider of a relevant VPN service to apply to any person seeking to access its service in or from the UK age assurance which is highly effective at correctly determining whether or not that person is a child "The law we made is like super duper good!!" > Children may also turn to VPNs, which would then undermine the child safety gains of the Online Safety Act "The law we made is easily c…

> may make provision for the provider of a relevant VPN service to apply to any person seeking to access its service in or from the UK age assurance which is highly effective at correctly determining whether or not that person is a child I think you're reading it wrong. Regulations may have a provision that allows providers to apply age assurance [systems ?] if the age assurance is highly effective at determining age…

> I'm always surprised how ambiguous the writing is for this kind of stuff.

That's because--

(a) The actual legislators vaguely realize that they're too lazy and stupid to get anything right in detail, so they delegate to the regulatory apparatus.

(b) Neither the legislators nor the regulators are ever quite sure what they can politically get away with actually demanding, or how fast they can politically get away with moving, so they want both the ability to grab anything that looks like they can hold it, and the ability to deny that they ever meant to ask for anything that's blowing back too hard on them.

(c) Both the legislators and the regulators want to be able to threaten various actors with draconian actions that are at least possibly authorized under that kind of vague language, in order to get concessions that they are not authorized to demand (and that would be too hot politically to give them authorization to demand).

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#113

Post by yunnpp »

causalscience wrote: post #42

I'm in the UK and I've been involved in advocating for this. I find it utterly frustrating to read the "think of the children" mockery here on HN. I argue that this is good. There's many reasons why children having unfettered access to the internet and different campaigners care about different aspects, so I'm going to talk about the one I care about: addiction, destroyed ability to focus, and dopamine desensitizatio…

You're advocating for the wrong thing. Advocate to ban targeted advertising or demand that social media feeds be transparent. Don't advocate for banning VPNs from anyone who does not want to submit an ID to a company that will be breached less than a year later, or any kind of client-side measure; that's ineffective towards the goal you are trying to accomplish, and has so many other negative side effects that the whole thing is just stupid.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#114

Post by CrossVR »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #22
armada651 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this becomes law, then yes. But then people will turn to VPS providers instead and set up their own VPNs, which will then prompt a law to demand age verification before renting any server. I wonder how far they're willing to go down this rabbit hole.

Not necessarily - how is a kid paying for a VPS server? A personal debit card (which requires ID verification anyway, and likely has their parents able to see activity)? A personal credit card (which definitely requires ID + 18+)? Stealing their parents' card (works for like 5 days)? Does the VPS company block VPN ports without verification, similar to how most companies handle email? Do you think VPS services have a…

> Not necessarily - how is a kid paying for a VPS server?

The same way the kid is somehow paying for a VPN apparently.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#115

Post by Hizonner »

SapporoChris wrote: post #92
4fterd4rk wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stella Liebeck was seriously injured by that McDonald's coffee and it's a myth perpetuated by the McDonald's PR team that it was a frivolous lawsuit. She was in the hospital for eight days and required skin grafts. Do some research.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald's_Restaura... "Liebeck's attorneys argued that, at 180–190 °F (82–88 °C), McDonald's coffee was defective, and more likely to cause serious injury than coffee served at any other establishment" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee#Preparing_the_beverage "Optimal coffee extraction occurs between 91 and 96 °C (196 and 205 °F).Ideal holding temperatures range from 85 to…

Normal people do not serve coffee anywhere close to that hot. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#116

Post by triceratops »

technion wrote: post #110
sublinear wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused by what you mean (I'm an American though). I don't think I'm unique for putting miscellaneous stuff like this on a credit card, and not even necessarily the one my bank offers. Not to hide the transaction, but because charging to debit/checking would make tracking my monthly expenses less straightforward. Payments online are also safer on credit in case a chargeback is required. Also, are you sure you do…

All the properties ive rented over the last decade required an application with "full financial transaction history" for three months. I know ive submitted a statement before where a lot of expenses were "paying off credit card" and they complained the credit card expenses werent shown. I would have to imagine a rental agent looking at months worth of pornhub spending is going to count it against you. Ive never been…

Wtf they ask for bank and credit card statements to rent an apartment in Australia? You don't have credit bureaus and pay stubs?

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#117

Post by gnarlouse »

rustyhancock wrote: post #74
gnarlouse wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Age verification to wake up in the morning, age verification to breathe air, age verification to use the restroom, age verification t...

You got a Loicense for that?

..o ask for a license, age ve...

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#118

Post by deaux »

CrossVR wrote: post #114
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily - how is a kid paying for a VPS server? A personal debit card (which requires ID verification anyway, and likely has their parents able to see activity)? A personal credit card (which definitely requires ID + 18+)? Stealing their parents' card (works for like 5 days)? Does the VPS company block VPN ports without verification, similar to how most companies handle email? Do you think VPS services have a…

> Not necessarily - how is a kid paying for a VPS server? The same way the kid is somehow paying for a VPN apparently.

The kid could easily be using a "free" VPN that harvests all your data in return for its services. No payment required. Not the case with VPS. Even free tiers require credit cards.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#119

Post by deaux »

pibaker wrote: post #68
javascriptfan69 wrote: post #64

We will try everything except regulating the algorithmic content feeds themselves.

If algorithmic feed is so bad then why are you on hacker news, a website with an algorithmic feed that is notoriously non-transparent and often accused of being manipulated by bad actors?

Because obviously "algorithmic" is an oversimplification. Even a chronological feed is "algorithmic".

What needs banning is the combination of "behavioral personalization + infinite content/scroll". HN's feed has neither of these elements.

Re: House of Lords Votes to Ban UK Children from Using Internet VPNs

#120

Post by bdavbdav »

4fterd4rk wrote: post #25

UK nanny state makes it an nonviable place to live. It's pervasive from the moment you step off the plane at Heathrow and see the inane safety stickers covering every surface "WARNING: DOOR" "WARNING: WATER FROM HOT TAP IS HOT" as well as the CCTV cameras.

Not sure if you’re from the US, but they certainly need to remove the log from their own eye…
Post reply on HN