This is a clearly terrible idea. It's clear to us, at least, not to them. As is on the public record, there are three proponents behind this amendment. They and their contact details are: LORD NASH [Tory, contactholmember@parliament.uk] BARONESS CASS [Crossbench / 'independent', rivisn@parliament.uk ("staff")] BARONESS BENJAMIN [Liberal Democrat - which particularly disappoints me – benjaminf@parliament.uk] All three…
Oh. Cass. She was given the peerage for constructing the Cass Review, an extremely one sided anti trans "review" of the science around puberty blockers. I suspect she's against VPNs and in favor of total information control of children because of trans panic.
UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
361–370 of 499 posts
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#362Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about when a group of individuals forms an institution that's self serving and harmful to other citizens, and they're able to do a lot of this under the guise of "privacy"?
All operations as a public institution should be transparent. We fund them through taxes, we have a right to know what is going on. I don't know what you are getting at with "self serving and harmful to other citizens"? Like a private institution? a company? Of course private companies are self-serving. All of them could be described as perpetrating some subjective and nebulous "harm". There are already transparency…
Personally I think we're cooked but I can understand why some people are trying to take action and destroy online anonymity. Ideally we'd just live in a world where people can run their own mail server and people would leave it a lone, but we don't.
Maintaining the status quo means western democracy is fucked. There is no anti-dote to propaganda and lies being spread through social media. Maybe getting rid of online anonymity would help but I understand why people don't want a digital ID either.
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#363Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, what's your solution for completely anonymous people to be infiltrating western democracies information space and spreading propaganda lies and falsehoods. I'm 100% not in favor of this level of authoritarianism, i'm just honestly curios what your solution is? Just let it continue? Let your children be subjected to misinformation about the holocaust etc? Let children be exploited and images of them…
The alternative is to refuse to delegate the formation and development of the character of our children and culture to automated systems and regulatory policies. Engage with your children on topics that matter. Discuss the pros and cons of various viewpoints and political platforms with your friends and neighbors, colleagues and fellow bus-riders. We, ourselves, are the psychosocial immune system for society, and if…
"If only we would just self organize into communities to protect childen..." ok.
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#364Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#365Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#366Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're free to voice any opinion What a bold lie. There are plenty of opinions that are literally illegal to voice such as Nazism.
Why do you want to voice or otherwise condone voicing Nazism?
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#367It's so organic and grass roots and good for democracy™ that every single Western country suddenly decided that eliminating privacy online in lockstep was the top priority despite none of the ruling parties running on it as a platform or with any meaningful referendums from the voting public. But to what end?
On the other hand, what's your solution for completely anonymous people to be infiltrating western democracies information space and spreading propaganda lies and falsehoods. I'm 100% not in favor of this level of authoritarianism, i'm just honestly curios what your solution is? Just let it continue? Let your children be subjected to misinformation about the holocaust etc? Let children be exploited and images of them…
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#368Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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
It's not. And any effort to do this at scale would be quickly shut down by physics and economics, not the government. Modern computing technology is a wildly complex supply chain, with extremely specialized manufacturing equipment and facilities. Billion dollar fabs are worth billions of dollars for a reason, and it's not for the real estate or the views. Trying to determine the best "diy chip" sounds like a fun proj…
The entire point of of designing your own chip is so that you know there won't be any surprises. Nothing undocumented.
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#369Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Certainly, calling the UK "ultra-authoritarian" is incorrect. But the point about attempts of completely deanonymizing Internet access is still important. The inability of the government to know everything about its citizens is an important check that prevents it from slipping towards illiberal, even if prosperous, system, like that in mainland China, or Singapore.
- easier access to the services - remember this is supposed to be STRICTLY digital only, so presumably on par with government gateway ID? - control of illegal immigration - with scale of the problem wildly blow out of proportion - presumably by helping control the border? how? And ostensibly by making impossible to work without right - which is a check mandatory already based on the existing digital-only online check -- once again fake non-solution
Certainly after experiencing multiple problems with the existing eVisa (Digital only) and reading multiple horror stories of faults and errors it proves to me the government is NOT taking ANY of the best practices into consideration while unfairly using parallel to the (like Estonian ID)
The only thing it would do is to cut the fraud a bit, but the impact would once again be limited because it would be a physical document (which, I must repeat from the abundance of caution, might bear a certificate or a chip that makes it incredibly hard to make a fake version of it).
I'm sorry but the government made it a fight for the souls of the rightwing voters once again, it didn't show the awesome project. It showed the stick it want to introduce to conduct the same checks it runs already :)
Just VERIFY and examine their claims. It's been discussed so many times, not only on HN.
Re: UK House of Lords attempting to ban use of VPNs by anyone under 16
#370Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Certainly, calling the UK "ultra-authoritarian" is incorrect. It's Russia level. They're prosecuting people for holding up signs protesting a genocide.
> They're prosecuting people for holding up signs Source?
For holding rhe sign.
The famously authoritarian police threatening arrest for an attempt to hold an EMPTY placard.
Or arresting for a shirt with "Plasticine Action".
Or locking in a prison for several years for zoom call in which they planned nonviolent protest (blocking the motorway).
We could do it for months.