top 26 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 46 points 10 months ago

Protect the children! Except when the children actually need protecting, then we can't do anything!

  • source
  • [–] 40 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Pfft, sounds fake, next you'll be telling me the Online Safety Act didn't actually have anything to do with online safety

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 77 points 10 months ago (13 children)

    If they do figure it out their conclusion will be something like outlawing VPNs while handing more infrastructure to Peter Thiel.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago (6 children)

    outlawing VPNs

    What would that even look like?

    No two computers can talk to each other without an ISP intermediary?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 10 months ago* (4 children)

    They'll ban it for private individuals and home ISP connections, and allow businesses to pay for a commercial VPN licence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 10 months ago (3 children)

    It's just not that simple, as private individuals do contract work and manage private businesses, large residential and commercial complexes use VPNs to manage high network traffic and guarantee security, and off-site IT support regularly use VPNs for elevated access.

    Retail VPNs don't even strictly evade ISPs. They simply route traffic through their own hubs and then on to the destination. If the UK were to "ban VPNs" that wouldn't really stop me from connecting to a US or French based VPN service. And that's what I'd want anyway, since my goal is to not appear to be a UK resident while trafficking data.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 10 months ago

    If it's anything it'll probably be age verification at point of sale for the VPN for retail VPN providers. Pay with a credit card kinda deal. I know that's not ideal, hell none of it is, but I think it's how steam dealt with it and that worked OK.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 10 months ago (5 children)

    No way they will ban VPNs as it will get in the way of businesses that rely on it / those terminally working from home

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 10 months ago (4 children)

    Obviously they'll have a carve-out for businesses that apply for a VPN licence and have the other end of the VPN remain in the country. Not because they listen to the public saying that VPNs have legitimate uses, but because the megacorp they consult with before drafting the law says it's the only legitimate use-case and has a VPN product they can sell to small businesses that can't afford to wait for their self-hosted VPN to be certified by the one overworked civil servant who has sole responsibility for approving every VPN licence.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    And how are they to determine whats a "vpn"? Just rent a server in another country and ssh tunnel to it, and there you go. Impossible to know your using a 'vpn'.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 10 months ago

    Truth is likely, they want to know who you are when browsing but have no backbone to go after any large tech company.

    I wonder how many people care enough to use VPN just to access Xitter.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 10 months ago

    This is particularly dumb because there’s a plenty long history of courts ordering sites to be blocked for piracy.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 10 months ago

    Labour government confirmed part of the American paedo cabal?

    Oh wait, they already have been!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_of_Peter_Mandelson_and_Jeffrey_Epstein

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 10 months ago (1 child)

    Labor defends pedophiles is all I heard from this.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 10 months ago

    Also, we would greatly enjoy if Mr. Musk would come back and lecture every white person on how critical it is for them to overthrow parliament, or they will all be murdered by immigrants.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 10 months ago (2 children)

    This reminds me of how Obama posted his hugely popular AMA on Reddit within a year of all the news coverage of all the sick and gross subreddits (pics of dead kids, jailbait etc).

    Seems that if a site is big enough shit like this doesn't matter.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago (1 child)

    Seems that if a site is big enough shit like this doesn’t matter.

    which is why we're discussing this on reddit? naw, it does matter, and it builds up into an undeniable train of gross that forces people to other means of communication. Bluesky and Lemmy aren't perfect but they're fantastic compared to the monied shitholes they're replacing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 10 months ago

    I suppose what I mean is that from a Government perspective, evidence points to all kinds of shit being forgivable if the platform is big enough.

    Hell arguably, aside from replacing Digg, being the wild west of forums is what gave Reddit the volume of audience that would guarantee it the likes of Obama.

    I know we're not on Reddit now but the final nail in the coffin that got us all here was API changes to Reddit killing third party clients, not it's history that came before that.

  • source
  • parent