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

201–210 of 499 posts

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

#201

Post by cortic »

iamacyborg wrote: post #191
cortic wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> 12,000 arrests per year Arrested is not the same thing as being charged. The latter is what would lead to a trial. > So they are currently trying to get rid of juries, which they will do Huh > a leader that has styled himself as a more extreme Nigel Farage I’m sorry, what? > The UK is actually a scary place right now It is?

>Huh

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn5lxg2l0lqo

>I’m sorry, what?

Take the online protection act for an example, Nigel Farage though it went too far, Keir Starmer wanted to include a ban on VPNs...

>it is?

If you have been paying attention, yes.

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

#202

Post by tormeh »

Amezarak wrote: post #174
tormeh wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's illegal to insult anyone in Germany, and has been for a long time. Libel, slander, and insults are all criminal (not civil) offences. I know what you're thinking: "That sounds crazy" - Yeah, it kinda is. In practice this is rarely enforced, as the offended party must file a formal complaint and most people have better things to do.

German prosecutors actually did a bizarre and out-of-touch (for an American audience) interview with 60 Minutes recently where they proudly declare they're going to bring order to the Internet and how things like calling politicians "dicks"[1] is rightfully VERBOTEN. > But it was a 2021 case involving a local politician named Andy Grote that captured the country's attention. Grote complained about a tweet, that calle…

Germany does not protect free speech the way the US does. You're free to voice any opinion, but the exact wordings in which you are allowed to do it are restricted. You are allowed to say "I hate Merz" but not "Merz is a piece of garbage".

I'm not saying this is good, but it's not recent and it does not prevent free communication of ideas.

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

#204

Post by ghm2199 »

Serious 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

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

#205

Post by nine_k »

avianlyric wrote: post #172
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…

> On a related note, they built their digital ID so that third parties could verify attributes Isn’t that the entire point of government ID of any variety? The only reason anyone ever asks to see ID is so they can use it verify attributes of your identity, such as name and age. Otherwise what’s the point of an Identity Document , if it’s not to document something? Digital ID has always been sold as something approxim…

A digital ID can be better than a passport / driver license, because it can verify only specific attributes of the bearer to a third party. E.g. only the fact that you're older than 21 in a liquor store or a car rental, but not other details readily visible in a passport.

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

#206

Post by pjscott »

tehjoker wrote: post #25

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

They have very limited power these days. They advise the House of Commons, as more or less a hereditary think tank. They can delay the passage of bills, though this has been limited to a maximum delay of one year since 1949 (less for some types of bills) and there are some checks on this ability. They have a few other things they can do that are (IMO) too boring to warrant much thought unless you're a member of parliament.

The idea of a House of Lords does strike me as a bit odd, but it's not really the big deal it used to be.

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

#207

Post by stephen_g »

outside1234 wrote: post #3

Is there actually a massive problem that they are trying to solve with this?

If it's anything like Australia, then yes - here the conservative major party hates the interent because it has taken so much away from their massive donor and supporters' businesses (mostly legacy media - Murdoch's News Ltd, Nine Entertainment, etc.), and the more "progressive" major party (left of the Overton window but objectively fairly centre-right) hates it because actual progressives there shoot down all their hypocrisy and they can't control the narrative at all.

They both want to go back to the days of billionare-controlled media setting and driving the narrative, because they know how to influence that (or in Labor's case, think they know but they always fail to, despite sucking up to the media). So they dispose the Internet and social media.

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

#208

Post by anthem2025 »

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…

[dead]

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

#209

Post by autoexec »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #155
GaryBluto wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 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.

An illegitimate underground scene running on life support, using old unlocked computers which are a finite resource they will eventually run out of. Utterly depressing... We used to be free... If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages. Billion dollar fabs are single points of failure and they will be exploited, subverted, reg…

> If this passes, the only strategic move available is to somehow develop the ability to make our own computer processors in our garages.

How feasible is this really? I'd feel a lot better if it were possible to produce chips free from backdoors even if the resulting CPUs weren't even as fast as an old Pentium III, but my guess is that any effort to do this at scale will be quickly shutdown by the government

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

#210

Post by vhcr »

iamacyborg wrote: post #173
oytis wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People do get imprisoned for "terrorist speech" to my best knowledge. Up to 15 years prison time if I understand the law correctly

You do realise what terrorist speech entails though, right?

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/07/uk-palestine...
Post reply on HN