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

371–380 of 499 posts

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

#371

Post by Taurenking »

HWR_14 wrote: post #357
admash wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Engage with your children on topics that matter. And what do we do for the children who have parents who fail them. How do we even detect it in time to help those children?

[dead]

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

#372

Post by classified »

azalemeth wrote: post #54

It's also worth stating that the worst part of that proposed amendment [1] isn't even necessarily the VPN ban, it's the next clause, on page 20: "The “CSAM requirement” is that any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting (by any means, including livestreaming) and viewing of CSAM using that device."…

Law never had anything to do with reason, but this is one more law that mandates an unreachable goal. This will trigger an untold amount of brain-rotten despotism.

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

#373

Post by pixxel »

Duwensatzaj wrote: post #350
matheusmoreira wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Computers are too powerful, too subversive for us citizens to have access to. Give citizens computers and they can copy at will, making a mockery out of things like copyright, they'd wipe out entire sectors of the economy if left unchecked. Give citizens computers and they will have cryptography which can defeat police, judges, governments, spies, militaries. They cannot tolerate it. They will eventually lock everyth…

You already gave up your arms. Why are you surprised they’re coming for anything else they want?

The US was tested for tyranny during Covid, election interference, and BLM burning down cities. You sat at home, utterly impotent. You're gonna stop VPN bans? Please.

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

#374

Post by theshrike79 »

azalemeth wrote: post #54

It's also worth stating that the worst part of that proposed amendment [1] isn't even necessarily the VPN ban, it's the next clause, on page 20: "The “CSAM requirement” is that any relevant device supplied for use in the UK must have installed tamper-proof system software which is highly effective at preventing the recording, transmitting (by any means, including livestreaming) and viewing of CSAM using that device."…

> Apple, what did you start?

Apple tried to do it in a way where nobody would see your personal data until they had multiple confirmed matches against known CSAM - and even then a human would check the results before involving any law enforcement.

But the internet had one of their Misunderstanding Olympics and now we're here again - with an even shittier solution, being formed into actual law.

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

#376

Post by sofixa »

istjohn wrote: post #312
fao_ wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on those descriptions... it sounds like he was pretty clearly racist? From the article: > Sentencing Thompson, Judge Temperley had said of the zero tolerance approach being taken by courts: > “This offence, I’m afraid, has to be viewed in the context of the current civil unrest up and down this country. And I’ve no doubt at all that your post is connected to that wider picture. > “I don’t accept that your comme…

Yes. It's a horrible sentiment, and he should be able to air it. Free and open discourse requires me to allow you to say things I dislike in exchange for you tolerating my saying things you dislike. It isn't free speech if you're only allowed to say popular things.

We know this doesn't work, and it's insane Americans still pretend it does. Goebbels himself said it while they were abusing the Weimar German freedoms and protections of democracy to take power with violence. They were very happy to use the tools of democracy to destroy it. We owe it to our societies and democracy not to let this kind of speech in particular to prosper.

And for a more recent example, you have a presidential couple that (among a million other things) lied publicly, and admitted to it. And they're now in power because their hatred-filled lies were not checked. And the country is sliding fast towards fascism, ignoring courts to concentration camps with no records to suing media to bully them into favourable reporting to pick any other example you want. Guess the country!

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

#377

Post by sofixa »

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #280
idle_zealot wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's way easier to justify banning social media entirely than banning it for under-sixteens. Paradoxically it infringes on freedom less, as it bans a type of business model for being too harmful rather than restricting people's rights to view and share information.

I would personally simply heavily tax ad revenue rather than banning social media, as while a blanket ban is ironically less of an infringement on free speech than banning it for children, it’s still something of an infringement. There’s a bunch of benefits to an ad-tax too, beyond revenue generation: Users won’t be encouraged to use VPNs (and most VPN users probably also use ad blockers anyway). It’s difficult to ev…

The problem with just taxing them more is that they'll make the algorithms doing all the personal and societal damage even more agressive to compensate.

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

#378

Post by Gud »

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…

When did the UK use to be free?

Seems to me this is a cultural issue that runs deep. You are his majesty’s loyal subject, like it or not, and more importantly, you are a subject of his bureaucracy. The US works in a similar fashion, except the deep state has slightly different excuses to exist.

I work extensively in the UK(past 5 years, I’ve worked there maybe two years in total). Nothing gets done without endless approval from people with cushy office jobs in the bureaucracy.

It’s in the bureaucracy’s interest to extend its power, and who is going to stop them?

CSAM is an excellent excuse to control the digital world. I wonder what took them this long.

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

#379

Post by rich_sasha »

I get regularly downvoted for this, but oh well. I don't post for votes:

I think the research consensus is that the internet is a dangerous place for kids. And pragmatic life experience shows that as a parent, you can't control well what your kids have access to. While I think many of these laws are poorly implemented and unnecessarily endanger the free Internet, I think they are coming from a good place.

I think arguing that there should be no restrictions whatsoever is completely ignoring the negative societal impact of modern technology and is actually unpragmatic and counterproductive, because that impact is very real and people want to control it. They won't care about arguments about freedom that seem far fetched to them.

To me a much more fruitful discussion would be on how to control these things and how to ensure it doesn't become a creeping censorship mechanism. Simply saying "no" will mean people who care about free internet will be left on the side.

Because actually there is a lot one could do to reconcile these two standpoints:

- ensure privacy-preserving mechanisms are used for age verification

- ensure laws proactively proscribe freedom of internet outside of selected (age restricted) areas

- provide transparency laws that enable citizens to see all data collected on them, GDPR-style.

- pathways for citizens to appeal or request compensation for violations of privacy

- and crucially, prevent other terrible things in this area, like the demand I saw on a related thread that all mobile devices have an unremovable black-box software that censors all internet access.

Would I mind a provably privacy-preserving age check? Not really. And it's actually achievable, as opposed to simply attempting to veto this whole wave. Hackers like us no longer own the web, it has become a common good.

As a postscriptum, there's a ton of cynicism about "think of the children" and CSAM. I can well believe it's BS when politicians say it. Equally I don't take it as a given. I feel uncomfortable when my freedom to browse innocuous stuff shelters predators and gives 12 year olds access to SM porn. You're free to disagree, but it seems the world is moving on. You can shout at the clouds or try to find a compromise.

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

#380

Post by u_sama »

stebalien wrote: post #32
int32_64 wrote: post #26

It'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?

> democracy house of lords

The house of lords is a stamping system at this point, and maybe a stopgap to authoritarianism. All power resides in the House of Commons which is elected

The true issue lies in the fact that the Westminster style of government is de facto an elective tyranny, with no real checks and balances other than the misused ECHR

Post reply on HN