this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
226 points (96.3% liked)

World News

39364 readers
2278 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Corngood@lemmy.ml 154 points 10 months ago (10 children)

I hope this encourages children to learn an important life skill that will help them in numerous ways: Piracy.

[–] portside@monyet.cc 1 points 10 months ago

It is life changing really. I don't recall ever paying for digital content. I still go to the theatres for an exceptional movie but that's it. It has made me learn more about computers, be a bit savvy in tech. I can't count how many times that has helped me get through my job. It really is an important life skill

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 90 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Headlines next year: "VPN subscriptions in the UK up 42069% for some reason"

[–] Risk@feddit.uk 43 points 10 months ago (2 children)

As a quote in the article states, porn is the canary in the coal mine - with some MPs apparently advocating for blocking VPNs to prevent work arounds.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 19 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Tell me the MPs don't understand VPN technology without telling me the MPs don't understand VPN technology.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 8 points 10 months ago

Why listen to experts who can explain all this technology when I get it from Facebook!

[–] _xDEADBEEF@lemm.ee 13 points 10 months ago

probably also haters of wfh.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 26 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Followed by headline: "Torries Criminalize VPN Use, Require Use of Torrie-Owned VPN"

[–] EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee -1 points 10 months ago (4 children)
[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

An authoritarian wanker

[–] Darthjaffacake@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

Conserva-tory

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

The plural of Tory with an extra R.

[–] AnxiousOtter@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

British Conservatives.

[–] ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one 2 points 10 months ago

I truly appreciate the number you used. Chef's kiss

[–] beaxingu@kbin.run 55 points 10 months ago (1 children)

its always nice that they want your official id associated with your porn. i just want to see what happens when that database gets hacked.

[–] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] beaxingu@kbin.run -1 points 10 months ago

you got me.

[–] Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 10 months ago

This might be a big nitpick, but "Child Protection Groups", vs "Privacy Warriors", sounds sleazy.

As positive connotations as possible on one side, vaguely negative on the other.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

In case anybody needs a reminder, the UK Government's response to the Snowden Revelations that showed even more widespread surveillance of civil society in the UK than in the US was, unlike in the latter country, to pass laws that retroactivelly made the whole thing legal.

[–] Kumabear@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Pretty positive this is going to end up being a DNS level block that will be as simple as setting a dns server outside of the UK to bypass.

Because anything else would create an unbelievable amount of administrative overhead.

Also imagine the spike in identity theft this is going to cause.

[–] milkjug@lemmy.wildfyre.dev 15 points 10 months ago

China: “Hold my Tsing Tao

[–] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 31 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm an advocate of VPN but this is not the situation to recommend them but to chastise regulators and lawmakers for even allowing this. This is eroding our freedom of speech. I can see politicians expanding this and censoring terrorist speech and speech of certain political ideologies. It is the erosion our civil liberties we need to worry about.

[–] Donut@leminal.space -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I agree that it's a slippery slope, but what does this have to do with freedom of speech?

[–] yildolw@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Smut is speech. Frankly, smut is the highest form of speech. You should not need to show your papers to speak or to listen

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 29 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Porn perusers will soon have to prove their age by uploading an identity document like a passport, registering a credit card, [...]

Ah, mandatory account creation with linked credit card being the most widely available and likely easiest option?

No wonder the porn sites aren't fighting this too hard!

(...or are they?)

[–] Flumpkin@slrpnk.net 8 points 10 months ago

My guess is that some companies will greatly benefit from this regulation because they can somewhat monopolize the market. I also wouldn't be surprised if those were the ones who lobbied for this.

[–] dylanTheDeveloper@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

Oi yer got ye wankn loicense

[–] Muscle_Meteor@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 10 months ago

Discounting VPNs for a moment..

What if one person made an account with ID and then the entirety of the country just happened to know the login?

Usr: admin Pass: admin

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 16 points 10 months ago

Ofcom wants porn consumers to "think of the children".

[–] andthenthreemore@startrek.website 12 points 10 months ago

Not this shit again

[–] randon31415@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

So the latest the UK can call an election and get Labor in charge is January 2025, the same month this goes into effect. Wonder if they will rush a repeal or get blamed for it starting?

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Easy. Everything bad that happens before January 2025 is Gordon Brown's fault, and everything after it's Kier Starmer's. You know it's true because it says so in the Daily Mail.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Whilst I appreciate the satire of the Tories' one and only politican strategy, as the Snowden Revelations showed back then, New Labour wasn't any better in their "keeping a watchful eye on the plebes" ways.

Looking down on the rest as riff-raff that needs to be kept in place is a feature of both Tories and New Labour.

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The Snooper's Charter (which made all the things Snowden revealed actually legal) and the thing where it became illegal to film facesitting in the UK both happened under the Cameron administration after being pushed for when Theresa May was home secretary. New Labour didn't pass anything comparable.

It might well be the case that GCHQ started their mass surveillance of UK citizens under orders from Blair, but given that five independent inquiries have found that the security services lied to the cabinet about WMDs in Iraq, it's pretty plausible that they did it of their own volition despite it being illegal.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

I think the theory that New Labour knew perfectly well what was going on and are no different from the Tories in this makes a lot more sense, especially since the veritable explosion in the use of surveillance cameras dates back to their time as do cases of abusive police surveillance such as the Met infiltration of Ecologist groups (know because at least one of the women in one such group ended up pregnant from one such undercover cop).

Or are you saying that the New Labour leadership were such complete total incompetent numpties that they could not see any of this for their whole decade in power?!

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Porn perusers will soon have to prove their age by uploading an identity document like a passport, registering a credit card, presenting their face to AI-powered scanning technology, or using a handful of other methods outlined in draft guidance from the regime’s regulator, Ofcom.

Although initially missing from the U.K.’s next attempt at internet regulation, pressure from children’s charities, age verification providers and vocal parliamentarians persuaded the government to revamp the defunct regime through the Online Safety Act.

Many videos depict graphic and degrading abuse of women, sickening acts of rape and incest, and many underage participants,” Tory MP Miriam Cates, a strong advocate for the legislation, told the House of Commons in September.

Research indicates younger kids who stumble across porn accidentally can find it shocking and disturbing — although the majority of young people surveyed in a 2020 British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) report said this didn’t impact them in the long term.

But the issue is complicated: the BBFC report found that older teens said they watched porn for educational purposes, due to a lack of information about sex in schools, or for gratification, while half of the LGBTQ+ respondents said it had helped them understand and explore their sexual identity.

“The squeamishness associated with pornography has made it nearly impossible to have a mature discussion about the technical feasibility, trade-offs, and effectiveness of age verification mandates,” says Matthew Lesh, director of public policy and communications at the free-market think tank.


The original article contains 2,313 words, the summary contains 245 words. Saved 89%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Sludgehammer@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Although initially missing from the U.K.’s next attempt at internet regulation, pressure from children’s charities, age verification providers and vocal parliamentarians persuaded the government to revamp the defunct regime through the Online Safety Act.

Ah, good ol' "think of the children," once again doing the heavy lifting for the morality police and state surveillance.

[–] Corngood@lemmy.ml 10 points 10 months ago

pressure from [...] age verification providers

I think this is the tell that it's much stupider than any of that. It's just another corrupt Tory handout to their mates.

[–] kholby@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

I'm in the US so I've always needed a passport to watch porn (or anything else) in Britain.

load more comments
view more: next ›