Good job UK, you will push children to dangerous unmoderated sites instead! All in the name of state surveillance!
post
Hey I heard that theres a Very Pretty Neat trick for Brits to "travel abroad" effortlessly
House of Lords voted for age verification on VPNs. Not for them of course.....
So rent a VPS abroad and run your own VPN from it. Comercial VPNs have a business to maintain so they've got to comply to keep operating and public advertising, but a privately run VPN just for yourself is just another TLS connection in a sea of other traffic.
I'm aware, got options set up. But the vast majority of people? It's not all about me like.
Give it a bit of time and you'll need a license to use a VPN. Without a license, your ISP can snitch in you. Unless you use starlink.
This is the UK. You need a licence for a TV. I almost would guarantee that this is happening
You need a TV licence because that's the funding model for the BBC (and wider broadcasting infrastructure), not because the government want to keep tabs on who has a TV.
You don't think they are using that data to see who doesn't have a licence to go sniffing around for violators?
Besides £174.50/year is ridiculous ($241.06). I've watched the BBC, it ain't worth that much.
Given how you translated the cost into $, am I correct in assuming that you're not British?
Because I am, and honestly, £14.50 a month for what the BBC actually offers is, if anything, not enough. Because it's not just TV.
The income from the licence fee covers TV, radio, broadcasting infrastructure, and R&D into said infrastructure. It also covers a broad range of community initiatives (several orchestras receive much of their funding from the BBC). And let's not forget the iPlayer. It may have since been surpassed in utility by some of the other streaming companies, but it was one of the first to offer that kind of service, and for a long time, pretty much the gold standard.
On top of that is the intangible benefits of having a state broadcaster that is, according to the rules by which it is bound, absolutely not allowed to run advertising for commercial products. Other broadcasters in the UK are held up in comparison to the BBC, which means that they have yet to fall to the diabolical levels that commercial broadcasters in places like the US have. If they did, people would switch off.
BBC News can piss up a rope though. Sometimes stories don't need balance.
The part that is most offensive is the lack of choice if you don't want to fund things that really don't need to be funded by the public at large anymore. The price also really isn't justifiable when a year of amazon prime and monthly Netflix is still cheaper. Even if paying for the infra was the most important thing, it isn't needed anymore with broadband internet access available everywhere now. It's like saying we need the pony express to deliver mail in the age of planes trains and automobiles.
Besides here in the US I don't want the government running a public broadcast/propaganda machine. It isn't getting better over there either. The same government that will arrest you for a social media post for being deemed offensive by an unelected beaurocrat is the same government I don't want running any kind of propaganda arm. Which gets back to choice. If I wanted to watch any alternative, I'd still have to fund the BBC.
people would switch off.
They are. Subs to traditional pay TV here in the states have been dwindling for years. With how broadcast television is dying anyway I wouldn't be surprised if the UK would soon require a license to watch any live streams on the internet even without owning a TV just to make up the lost revenue. Governments are diabolical when it comes to protecting their revenue especially when they have a monopoly on violence.
Even if paying for the infra was the most important thing, it isn't needed anymore with broadband internet access available everywhere now.
Not everyone has fast internet. And in a world where internet access is not a public utility, but people can still receive TV and radio over the air, there is still a need for broadcasting infrastructure. The BBC was founded on the promise to educate, entertain, and inform, and has a mandate to be available to as many people as possible. As such, the maintenance of that infrastructure means that people in the most remote areas of the UK can still receive education, entertainment, and information over the airwaves, regardless of the profit motives of private companies.
I will grant that the BBC is not in the best of health currently, after 15 years of Tory misrule, and the positioning of conservative sympathisers in the highest positions. However, suggesting that private organisations would perform any better denies the existence of Fox News, for example. Private organisations are led by private ideals, and will almost always bend towards the greatest income. Which is understandable. The BBC is still able to speak truth to power. Currently.
The same government that will arrest you for a social media post for being deemed offensive by an unelected beaurocrat
I admit that I don't know the context to this, but I will say that almost every example I can think of of people being arrested for social media posts is because they posted something inflammatory. The one exception off the top of my head was Paul Chambers, who was arrested for posting a joke about blowing up an airport. He was eventually found not guilty, but taken at face value even that could be (and was) considered inflammatory.
I wouldn't be surprised if the UK would soon require a license to watch any live streams on the internet even without owning a TV just to make up the lost revenue.
This is pure speculation. There is no evidence to support this concern. That said, you do technically need a TV licence to watch programs on the iPlayer. But that's all BBC content anyway, so it's functionally no different than watching it via broadcast.
Your ISP could snitch on you for tons of 'illegal' traffic, but they don't because that would require deep packet inspection on an absurd amount of traffic and they gain nothing for it. Instead they pass on notices when they receive them from third parties, and take enforcement actions (like cutting off their service to you) only when they're directed to. They want your money after all.
Torrenting for example; only gets flagged when copyright holders join torrent trackers, then send letters to ISPs that control the IPs found in those groups. That's not the ISP hunting you down, they're just passing on a legal notice they've been given and thus are obligated to pass it to you.
From and ISPs perspective; a VPN connection doesn't look any different than any other TLS connection, ie https. There's nothing for them to snitch because a) they can't tell the difference without significant investment to capture and perform deep analysis on traffic at an absurd scale and b) they have no desire to even look and then snitch on customers, that just costs them paying customers.
The ONLY reason this can be enforced at all, is because comercial VPN companies want to advertise and sell their services to customers; so lawmakers can directly view and monitor those services.
Lawmakers have no way of even knowing about, let alone inspecting an individuals private VPN that's either running from private systems or from a foreign VPS.
All that's not even touching things like SSH tunneling - in a sense, creating a VPN from an SSH connection; one of the most ubiquitous protocols for controlling server infrastructure around the globe. Even if traffic was inspected to find SSH connections, you CAN'T block this or you disrupt IT infrastructure at such an alarming scale there'd be riots.
Time for a VVPN.
Then we just need a hero to route all our traffic through the House of Lords.
Doesn't matter. Chinese people found a way around the firewall, pretty sure there are nerds in UK that will find a way.
A bunch of VPNs are owned by Israel. A bunch of them are also data brokers.
What does age verification mean for VPNs?
Because if I'm using a VPN using a UK server and I get any issues, I can switch to Spain, or Italy, or Zimbabwe or whatever. Is that not the case?
The government can decree that ISPs have to block the IP addresses of known VPN endpoints. That's perfectly possible. They did something similar with piracy sites before (e.g. if you go visit piratebay on virgin media you'll get an error page). It's a game of cat-and-mouse because if it's done with DNS then aliases pop up immediately, and if it's by IP then other proxies pop up, but the fact is they could make is so difficult for average users that people give up.
Not really. They just announced they want to age gate VPNs too.
So I guess no more internships at companies with more than one office.
China doesn't even really allow VPNs at all, yet some people can still go over the firewall.
If it's just "age restriction", I'm sure there will suddenly be a lot of grandpa/grandmas buying VPNs¹
¹When China tried to restrict online video games, kids just used their grandparents IDs for verification lmfao
China's VPN blocking is actually very, very effective, and the vast majority of people don't go around it.
And that's kinda the point - the controls don't have to be 100%, they just have to cover the majority. And for the few that do circumvent - well, that's just one more easy crime for the authorities to charge you with if they ever feel the need.
Yall may wanna step in and nip that kind of authoritarianism in the bud because it doesn't get easier when it's matured.
Sexuality is a human right, and controlling sexuality is an authoritarian tactic to manufacture compliance.
“Age verification” is not just a tool for elimination of Internet privacy, it’s also a tool for sexual control.
Someone has been reading 1984… I’m not disagreeing with you, just saying ‘hi fellow doom reader’.
What would we even call a decentralized porn site?
FaptivityPub
Wouldn’t the ideal be self hosted content made by the people hosting it? Obviously there’s no mechanical means to block people from uploading content that they don’t make, but those kinds of ethical questions and control of access can be handled by federation networks.
Decentralizing these things could lead to a better way for sex workers to work safely (SESTA/FOSTA closed up a lot of safer avenues for sex work in the US) There’s a lot of rules for trust that you can build into these systems, things like basic encryption with private and public keys.
Someone who didn’t want their content online could take it down easily. They could easily gate it - like, think about where most of the profit the actresses and actors videos go to now? If you are watching stuff for free on a website, it’s the website getting ad revenue and maybe the company. Do they get royalties? Workers should own the means of their reproduction.
More importantly, what type of content would be most popular in fediverse?
There calling it NoFap February.
I think it will be interesting to see what happens as a result of cuting a population off from porn.
They will just rely on illegal outlets now lol Can’t wait to see people locked up for porn lol one of the stupidest ways to spend government money lol
Texas did the same shit not long ago. VPN usage went through the roof, as expected.
If videos from other places with no porn are anything to go off of, they're going to start learning how to drive their cars on two wheels without the distraction of porn.
If you live in the UK or in another country where porn is being restricted:
- Talk with friends and family about getting a VPN (EDIT: Some recommendations I've heard are Air VPN, Private Internet Access, and, despite not having port forwarding, which is essentially one less major feature, Mullvad VPN. A thank-you to @jmf@lemmy.dbzer0.com for suggesting the former two.)
- Learn to use the Tor network (it's really easy to start, and unlike popular belief, Tor isn't only for illegal activities)
- Pressure MPs that didn't vote in favor of the age verification bill by sending emails to them about it so that they fight (or keep fighting) this age verification nonsense.
You don't need to be a porn addict to do these things. In fact, they have started with porn, but they may as well keep going and fight for age verification in other types of content, making access to said content way more difficult. The best thing you can do right now is to learn to fight back.
UK is going to be requiring age verification for VPN access. https://reclaimthenet.org/uk-house-of-lords-votes-to-extend-age-verification-to-vpns
Will this mean all VPNs will comply? Obviously not, but the bigger names will either pull out or comply as we seeing with the bigger porn sites.
The next step after this will be criminalization of using a VPN without age verification.
Wait, WHAT? They already voted? I didn't expect that so soon...
It was planned from the beginningas the real drivers behind the detail of the legislation, the security services, knew people would use VPNs and those have always been the main target.
Its why the legislation was written in the first place. Most people's identity is already tied to their connection via big tech social media. Its the people who use VPNs they can lose track of.
I would expect this to be a live requirement by the end of the year at the latest.
Just be glad the client side scanning keeps getting rejected thats in the same legislation.
Advertising for mullvad harms the peer2peer network. (They blocked port forwarding and won't be bringing it back)
How does it harm p2p? I've been downloading and seeding without issue. Genuine question
P2P requires at least 1 person to have open port forwarding. Ideally, everyone has it open on their VPN. The more people start recommending vpns without it, the more torrents as a whole start to die as everyone I inherently becomes a burden on the system.
I had no idea. According to what I'm reading, if I switch to IPv6, it would effectively solve the problem? I see that mullvad does support it, but will have to look into the individual containers I'm using, as well as docker itself I guess.
Networking is a nightmare to understand
Are there any VPNs that didn't? I couldn't really find any, and tbh it's not a massive issue for torrenting. I still upload a fair bit, but obviously not as much as I would be if I had ports open.
Private Internet Access and Njalla both allow port forwarding.
Mullvad is heavily shilled, and for some reason no online discussion ever ends on a critical note. Be wary and don't assume the group is always correct.
AirVPN allow port forwarding.
I use Mullvad for my day to day devices like my phone and laptop, and AirVPN in my homelab for things like torrenting.
Maybe not massive issue for individuals yet, but I guarantee anti piracy orgs love everyone switching to a VPN that inherently weakens the torrent ecosphere.
Fair point. I just assumed most people reading my message wouldn't care much about torrenting, but in this economy where censorship is pretty much happening, port forwarding would definitely be a plus. Do you have better suggestions?
Airvpn or Private internet access seem to be the good options nowadays, MAYBE protonvpn if you can separate the product from the owner, due to the CEO making inflammatory statements on his socials. That's a call you have to make for yourself and your own threat model.
What VPN(s) would you recommend?
If you live in the UK or in another country where porn is being restricted: Talk with friends and family
Hmmmmm... Maybe not though
" Help me, stepbro. I can't access PornHub anymore 🥹 "
Don’t use tor for porn. Use i2p. You can torrent without breaking shit on i2p.
Here's a free VPN that you can use: https://riseup.net/en/vpn
Try not to assume that there aren't free alternatives to what "the crowd" is constantly herding you to pay for. Do some digging, and you may be surprised by what you come across.
Most of the good stuff is buried underneath mountains of bullshit.
The cost for us to offer RiseupVPN is approximately $60 USD per person per year. If you use the VPN, please consider donating at least this much. Thank you!
That's the same as Mullvad then, or more if you consider that everyone who can afford it should pay for more than their fair share because some can not.
There's always a 🤡 trying to get people to pay for what they can be getting for free.
If no one pays for it then it disappears, dummy.
It's a volunteer service. If you use it and don't donate but could afford to, you're just selfish.
This leaves citizens with a torrent of questions.
You really need a VPN to torrent safely, and the UK Government is in the process of restricting VPNs.
top 92 comments