201–210 of 213 posts
[0]: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/jan/25/ai-generate...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's what got us in to the current public health emergency. It is a luxury we cannot afford if we are to stand a chance to get out. https://www.bmj.com/content/392/bmj.s125
> It is a luxury we cannot afford Privacy is a luxury we cannot afford? When it was a luxury we couldn't afford because of "terrorism" I was doubtful. Now that it's a luxury we cannot afford because of the "public health" effects of teenagers using TikTok, I am starting to struggle to identify a good-faith argument.
I wonder if any of the law makers are investors in those companies.
Is there yet a low friction way to verify age of UK users that doesn't rely on third party services with questionable privacy implications and exorbitant pricing? I wonder if any of the law makers are investors in those companies.
Surely three-letter agencies, "unknown creators" of chatcontrol proposals in the EU and other state psychopaths care very much about the children!
No, they don't.
Mass surveillance and the leverage coming from that is the goal itself.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The whole point of Obscura is you aren't trusting any single company. First, Mullvad's infrastructure has been independently audited. Mullvad integrity has also tested as proven by a legal case where they were subject to a search warrant when someone was trying to claim copyright infringement. As far as I can tell, Obscura has not had anywhere near the same scrutiny. Second, obscura is the first hop is it not ? The…
Hence why Mullvad is being used as the exit point. You have full e2ee between yourself and Mullvad but crucially Mullvad don't know who your IP. Five eyes are already doing SIGINT on behalf of both the US and the UK government before my connection even reaches Obscura so I lose nothing but potentially gain privacy. How is it you think a single company (Mullvad) having access to my IP and what I am browsing is less se…
Where is Obscura's independent audit ? When has Obscura been tested to the same extent that Mullvad was during its court batttle ?
Answer it wasn't.
Therefore Mulvad Multi-Hop mode. Or Mullvad + Tor, if you insist. Is the safer choice.
And the US juristiction of Obscura is not something you can brush under the carpet like it somehow doesn't matter.
With Obscura you are just throwing your first-hop traffic against an unknown. And an unknown that is under US jurisdiction, and hence PATRIOT Act etc.
Same article also says the bill includes a ban on social media for users under 16, like Australia. Pretty dramatic change. Meanwhile the government and official accounts continue to use X even as they're trying to ban it. Mixed messaging. Lead proponent of the VPN ban: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Nash,_Baron_Nash ; he's https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_for_Policy_Studies again, the dead hand of Thatcherism…
I never thought I'd say this, but I now fully approve of social media bans for children, screw under 16s, let's go further no children on the internet full stop. No mobile data plans for under 18s, arrest parents if they are found allowing their children to use a computer with an internet connection at home. Remove the internet from schools. Then we can get rid of the online safety act, no need to dox adults if we ju…
Schools, yes 100%. Likewise mobile data plans.
Home internet? Could work, but I don't know how much time would be needed to transition any "do this on your computer" homework tasks. (Are there any?)
As one extra twist, the UK age-gates a lot of stuff at 16 rather than 18 in a way that is relevant here: back when I was at school myself, an era when writing letters to the editor of a newspaper was the closest most people had to a comments section, I noted the oddity that I was allowed to perform sexual acts at age 16 but wasn't allowed to photograph myself doing those things and couldn't buy videos of those things.
And between 16 and 18, the education choices in the UK are either A-levels, apprenticeships, or volunteering; I think mobile internet could reasonably be considered mandatory by that point in life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_England#Post-16_e...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The definition section of the amendment defines a "relevant VPN service": >“relevant VPN service” means a service of providing, in the course of a business, to a consumer, a virtual private network for accessing the internet; I think it would be a significant stretch to say that a provider that provisions a VPS instance is a "business providing a virtual private network". Just because you could run a VPN, it's not th…
I think it will successfully strech that far (especially after VPN provders move into VPS to avoid) not least because no-one but the provider could be held responsible.
I can't see how they could apply it to VPS providers without meaning AWS, GCP, Digital Ocean, etc would all start having to do age verification checks. Can't imagine here would not be a massive push back against that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it will successfully strech that far (especially after VPN provders move into VPS to avoid) not least because no-one but the provider could be held responsible.
I don't understand what "VPN providers move onto VPS to avoid" means? Can you clarify? I can't see how they could apply it to VPS providers without meaning AWS, GCP, Digital Ocean, etc would all start having to do age verification checks. Can't imagine here would not be a massive push back against that.
I think they would include AWS and the pushback would be ineffective. Many AWS users could be immediately age-verified by existing payment card info.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course Rusform UK promise to repeal it - they want Russian trolls to have as much unfettered access to the British public as possible
Makes me giggle as Russian citizen since very similar rhetoric was used when establishing internet censorship in RU - let's protect our citizens from evil foreign entities from the internet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand what "VPN providers move onto VPS to avoid" means? Can you clarify? I can't see how they could apply it to VPS providers without meaning AWS, GCP, Digital Ocean, etc would all start having to do age verification checks. Can't imagine here would not be a massive push back against that.
I meant VPN providers offer VPS as a substitute. I think they would include AWS and the pushback would be ineffective. Many AWS users could be immediately age-verified by existing payment card info.
Paying by card isn't enough to verify age. They'd have to specifically verify via passport or other ID.