UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT.
-
-
@dan @only_ohm @cstross @Nicovel0 the language is inexact so they can make it mean what they think it should, yeah. or more accurate they hope they'll figure it out later when stuff comes up. Like "provided to a significant number of persons" could mean literally anything, even if we could theorycraft what it probably means
As for TOR, well, my guess is it qualifies but enforcing it is another question. Possible, but seems like it'd just be wack-a-mole
-
@Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
"We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
History has proven both are always true until they aren't.@HighlandLawyer im not sure there is any other way, you always have to trust people to use their best judgement, and use systems of accountability to bring people into alignment with standards, _after_ the fact. I think thats true at several scales
-
@cstross vpns have their place in corporate networks.
There they provide secure access to internal resources for remote workers.
They are all but useless for personal privacy / anonymity.
So while I agree with the principle of your objection to govts gating services - it is actually a faux battle based on misinformation by the VPN industry.
@oschonrock @cstross Curious that the government would bother banning them, then.
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
When did we get a right to anonymous web browsing exactly?
-
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
@cstross I don't doubt for a moment that the big age verification shops have smelled blood in the water and have geared up their lobbying everywhere and told our technologically challenged governments that it's frictionless and completely secure.
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
Makes you wonder how all these remote workers will manage without a VPN connection to their employers IT infrastructure
-
@only_ohm @dan @jaawerth @cstross @Nicovel0 That was my first thought, given that the whole idea of distributed working across a company’s office locations and working from home relies on virtual private networking. VPNs are not just for concealing your current location. Modern business life relies on them. Otherwise we’re back to leased lines.
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
boost with CW: ukpol, OSA
-
@cstross vpns have their place in corporate networks.
There they provide secure access to internal resources for remote workers.
They are all but useless for personal privacy / anonymity.
So while I agree with the principle of your objection to govts gating services - it is actually a faux battle based on misinformation by the VPN industry.
@oschonrock @cstross but how do you prevent ip tracking by advertisers without a vpn? Vpns are necessary to close off that last bit of data.
-
@oschonrock @cstross but how do you prevent ip tracking by advertisers without a vpn? Vpns are necessary to close off that last bit of data.
ip tracking is not "the last bit of data"..it's the first. Advertisers are much smarter than that. This is one of the myths perpetuated by VPN vendors.
If you care, TOR browser will help with many more of their tricks. (Still Not all... If you need proper anonymity use "tails" and proper op-sec)
-
@only_ohm @dan @jaawerth @cstross @Nicovel0 That was my first thought, given that the whole idea of distributed working across a company’s office locations and working from home relies on virtual private networking. VPNs are not just for concealing your current location. Modern business life relies on them. Otherwise we’re back to leased lines.
@christineburns @dan @jaawerth @cstross @Nicovel0
Employers are (unfortunately, IMO) required to collect employees' official identity documents for immigration control purposes anyway, so presumably even if the legislation had applied to workplace VPNs, age verification there would have been easy.
-
@dan @only_ohm @cstross @Nicovel0 the language is inexact so they can make it mean what they think it should, yeah. or more accurate they hope they'll figure it out later when stuff comes up. Like "provided to a significant number of persons" could mean literally anything, even if we could theorycraft what it probably means
As for TOR, well, my guess is it qualifies but enforcing it is another question. Possible, but seems like it'd just be wack-a-mole
-
Good luck to the government making every company register every adhoc vpn between sites, or even my home Tailscale to my parents...
-
@Ulrich_the_elder @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad TBF... Blair was better..
He communicated better. So he managed to achieve more things that a labour govt should..
Notably in education for him..
But yeah he fucked it up by being a religious nutcase going on crusades in the middle east...(Very Tory) Among other things
@oschonrock @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Blair being slightly less horrible is not a reason to have a fucking tory lead the labour party. The labour party when led by a tory is the tory party.
-
@oschonrock @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Blair being slightly less horrible is not a reason to have a fucking tory lead the labour party. The labour party when led by a tory is the tory party.
@Ulrich_the_elder @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad
I don't necessarily disagree, but you sound like one of those boring people who see everything in black and white.
So I am not engaging with that.
-
RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371
UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!
*Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!
@cstross Only if I want to access content that's not appropriate for under-16s. If I did, I'd watch TV. I think I heard a Labour minister celebrating that compulsory age-checks on pr0n sites had greatly reduced consumption. There goes another successful UK industry. I wonder what the punters did with their sexual frustration instead? MPs can have that question free, to ask at PMQs.
-
@cstross Only if I want to access content that's not appropriate for under-16s. If I did, I'd watch TV. I think I heard a Labour minister celebrating that compulsory age-checks on pr0n sites had greatly reduced consumption. There goes another successful UK industry. I wonder what the punters did with their sexual frustration instead? MPs can have that question free, to ask at PMQs.
@woo Weirdly, VPN users rose by *almost exactly* the same number as the fall in age-verified porn users. Fancy that!
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
