New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
AFAIK all the minor parties also want this too. There's no meaningful way to register an opposition to it. Even if it got voted on at https://petition.parliament.uk/ the government would just say it wasn't in public interest or some bollocks and ignore it anyway.
BTW - an example: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903#debate-threshold
Despite requiring a debate above 100k signatures, AFAIK it didn't actually get debated on, despite what it says here. They issued a statement saying they don't intend to change anything instead.
Yeah, easy, link it to your passport or digital ID. The government will want to make this a revenue stream one way or another. Enforced Internet licence by way of charging for a passport seems the logical solution. Then the other countries just have to check your passport on entry to see if you're a ne'er-do-well.
Honestly, I have thought about politics and I love multi party system but even that's not enough.
I personally really really love how switzerland operates where the amount of decentralization is so much that they don't even know the name of their president (in a good way!)
Because all the laws would/are usually made at a local level with people who you might vote and where each vote matters and the whole system would be incentivized to work for the average citizen and the layers of bureacracies between a "lord" and a citizen would be none. The whole idea of lord is bs imo.
I want real accountability and I feel like swiss is a perfect example of such decentralization and I feel like these facts are as such also linked to how swiss is almost / de-facto the gold standard of privacy.
Wishing more countries get decentralized so that nothing like this happens & we don't have ideas of parties as such in the first place for some aspects imo.
Just my 2 cents but I know that this might not be implemented but I just want decentralization and accountability for the democracies to actually do what it should with some true forms of checks and balance.
No they wouldn't, people just don't care. Same in Sweden, noone is opposing Chat Control, and there is parliamentary support for it. Denmark is driving chat control in the EU!
So if you don't have any kids, they are taking away the privacy of your simple VPN, just because some parents are not willing to take care of their kids. This is enough to make a donkey laugh.
Also the kids will just use some cheap vps and then they will again say think of children and then vps's themselves will get blocked too or might be forced to have ID Verification or VPS's will simply shut out from UK. I am really worried what it might mean for lowend/vps space
Not that I am UK citizen tho but if I was a UK citizen from lowendtalk or someone privacy oriented from UK, as I have said, I would be scared.
Oh, China!
Would rather they make it illegal for 16 year olds to run UK based businesses, but whatever. Teenager rug-pullers, deadpoolers, and scammers have probably done more harm than any random teen speaking their mind on reddit or bullshitting online with their friends.
Yes. Because parents these days are so lazy, they don't even bother checking out what their kids browse on the internet. Or at least thought basic knowledge when surfing the internet.
Nowadays, I doubt average parents are capable of punishing their child, let alone berating them because they browse something inappropriate, like porn or gore while being underage.
The real problem is that the Online Safety Act, age-limiting VPNs or anything aren't the real solution to the actual problems.
Children looking for porn will find it, whatever barriers are in their way.
Children looking to talk about sui***e will find people to talk to about it, even if all the big forums are locked away and age-gated, they'll find that obscure board in whatever country that doesn't give a shit about the UK's rules and is too small for the UK to have noticed them.
Children being exploited will still happen, but those doing it will cover their tracks better.
People who want to use the internet to facilitate illegal activities will still find a way, regardless of if there's a VPN or not.
All this is doing is criminalising normal people doing normal things in the name of making "surveillance of the bad guys" easier. It won't, it'll push the bad guys further underground and make it harder still to figure out what they're doing, and only serve to make it easier to surveil the normal citizen, with the inevitable data breaches thrown in for good measure. And making it a PITA just to look at normal imgur pictures.
But all the political parties want this. I'm not sure if they're all just power-hungry and hoping they'll be in power and can lord it over us all, or if they're all just too scared politically to admit the truth that none of this will actually make a difference and that the CSAM stuff is just a cover.
Personally, I'm not too bothered as I'm clued in technically, and have no doubt I'll always find a way to circumvent whatever they throw at us, unless they go as far as blocking traffic from the UK to machines abroad, including ones that my company uses to carry out its lawful business. If we ever get to the point of not allowing UK companies to have overseas servers, I'd hope that I'd have already left the country to live somewhere sane years before.
It's a grandstrategy for mass-surveillance within supposedly "free" and "democratic" state.
What's the purpose, when they can't touch someone like Jimmy Savile?
Like mentioned above it isn't actually solving the issues and I think the biggest problem is the government is trusting big tech and all these ID verification companies to regulate and keep their people personal info safe. Look at what happened to Discord, thousands of people's id got exposed on the internet.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8jmzd972leo
It's not that they couldn't touch him, it's that they didn't want to.
The end is nigh... for freedom of speech.
In fact, freedom has already died.
I remember my younger years and compare them with the current legislation. Many of the actions I committed back then can be punishable by criminal penalties ranging from 1 to 10 years. When I committed them, it was just the fruit of my stupid young brain's ideas and nothing more, no harm to other people's lives or anything like that.
There was no Internet then, and we watched and listened mostly to Soviet films and radio, in which negative examples were completely excluded. No drugs. But young minds are curious, and lawmakers can't even imagine what human curiosity can lead to.
I'm afraid that the new legislation will only lead to the appearance of small humanoid robots...
Small humanoid robots is much better than the current situation. Because at least it could be programmed to screw bolts and nuts, drive tractors, pick fruits, etc.
Currently, we're creating very sheltered generation who doesn't know right from wrong because teacher's can't taught the consequences, yet government criminalized every little thing.
I don't remember exactly who was the first, perhaps Plato, who complained about young people who don't respect traditions, don't respect their elders, and can't do anything with their own hands. But I hope that people will show their creativity again and win again in the eternal struggle between the young and the old.
The UK claims all of these new restrictions and prohibitions are about safety, but they don't enforce any laws against the people actually committing crimes.
The UK arrests more people for hurty words online than Russia and China combined at this stage. So ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Hear hear.
And yet, Keir Stalin wants you to be able to vote when you're 16. So no VPN with spicy 4chan memes for you, but please vote for labour kthxbye.
Requiring credit card to buy VPN - won't solve any problems. You can be added as an additional cardholder on your parents' card, you can be using a debit card (most payment processors don't actually care about the difference and you can get one as a giftcard or as a normal bank account).
I reckon OFCOM just doesn't want the kids seeing all the dope Amelia memes and having ideas.
Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to make a cute, purple-haired goth girl the mascot for racism?
Or even just teaching kids critical thinking and basic online safety.
What if the idea is chatgpt generated xD
Or maybe it was a racist! "Yes, the kids will certainly turn away from discrimination if we make the mascot of discrimination... someone everyone will adore! Bwahaha!"
Sorry for replying all of you in a single post. Ancient history indeed shows this is recurring theme. But, I believe there's fundamental change. I don't think there's better explanation than this
https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-030-93429-3
What underlies the classical view of the curriculum is the idea that humanity through scientific inquiry has discovered and developed a body of knowledge about how the world is constituted and how it works that young students need to master, or at least have some basic understanding of, if they are to successfully live in that world. Such knowledge, for example, the rudimentary principles of physics and biology, is held to be objectively true, given the strength of the evidence in its favor that scientists have collected by observation and experimentation and by formulating and testing different hypotheses.24 By virtue of being true, in this sense, that body of knowledge has spread to the point that it has become shared or, in Hirsch’s term, “communal.”25 It is, in other words, taken for granted that everyone has possession of it. Thus, to be ignorant of communal knowledge is to be an outsider unable to comprehend, build on, or challenge what others know. Therefore, schools must, according to the classical view, teach communal knowledge to every student.
Hannah Arendt crystallized this point in her 1954 essay “Crisis in Education” when she stated, “[Education] is where we decide whether we love our children enough not to expel them from our world and leave them to their own devices, nor to strike from their hands their chance of undertaking something new, something unforeseen by us, but to prepare them in advance for the task of renewing a common world.”26
Meanwhile
In contrast to both its milder cousin and the classical view of knowledge, radical social constructivism does not believe that we can come to know how the world is, or most likely is, constituted through rational reasoning and the empirical, evidence-based scientific method. The reason is that radical social constructivism, at the very least, holds that truth claims cannot be measured against an objective reality because such a reality will always be unknowable due to our inherently partial perspectives. As one account of this radical epistemology explains, “The scientific method, in particular, is not seen as a better way of producing and legitimizing knowledge than any other, but as one cultural approach among many, as corrupted by biased reasoning as any other.”43 However, other interpretations suggest that radical social constructivism is even more uncompromising than that, positing that objects and phenomena can, in fact, change depending on the ways in which we think and talk about them and how we choose to determine knowledge and truth.44 The conclusion is nevertheless the same, namely, that there are no real truths.
This reliance on radical social constructivist epistemology is what enables postmodernists to claim, as we have seen, that the quest to establish knowledge is nothing more than an attempt to further the power of dominant groups. It also explains why postmodernists argue that we should interrogate the shared language and concepts of society and subvert traditionally understood boundaries, such as the boundary between the objective and the subjective.45 Moreover, this radically social constructivist epistemological underpinning leads postmodernists to take a very specific view of teaching and education.
Perhaps the most elementary and important principle in this view is that the students themselves—not the teacher—should direct the learning process in the classroom. The reasoning is that because there are no objectively existing facts, there is no knowledge that can be legitimately transferred from teacher to student. Any attempt by a teacher to do so would, in effect, be an act of indoctrination and unwarranted social control,46 as would any effort to correct children’s mistakes or maintain a structured classroom environment conducive to learning in the classical sense.47 Similarly, because there is no way to objectively measure what students know, traditional assessment and grading practices are considered to be inherently judgmental and ideological.48
Instead, the postmodern social constructivist view of teaching holds, students must be free to determine their own knowledge and reality, building on personal life experiences rather than culturally prescribed truths, and find their own ways of studying and monitoring their progress. Students should, in this view, also be encouraged to independently deconstruct dominant discourses in different fields—science, history, art, etc.—through collaborative verbal discussions and the development of critical thinking. In contrast to the classical view, critical thinking is here regarded as a general skill that can be acquired, and indeed exercised, without possessing domain-specific knowledge, for instance, through comparing diverse sources of information, evaluating arguments, and exposing hidden agenda.49
That's why the school teach nothing and doesn't scold them.
It's really bizzare when I was told by people whose kids is in elementary school that their kids, beside the textbook and additional materials from their teacher, had to do some self-study on the subjects, and this wasn't for individual project.
I suspect the UK will start going after payment processors who process payments from UK issued cards to foreign VPNs, and start blocking those payments.
Bruh don't give them new ideas lmao xD