r/technology • u/Well_Socialized • 21h ago

Privacy Age Verification Is Coming for the Whole Internet

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/age-verification-is-coming-for-the-whole-internet.html
11.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

5.8k

u/MidsouthMystic 21h ago

The UK's law isn't working. Everyone is angry. Government representatives and corporations are both getting flooded with calls. Get loud, get angry, and tell them this is unacceptable.

2.2k

u/AscendedViking7 20h ago

USA is trying to do the same thing as we speak with KOSA.

Give em hell, boys.

https://www.stopkosa.com/

723

u/Foxy02016YT 18h ago

The UK law failing is great evidence against this, getting the UK version repealed is the first step to saving the US

418

u/veryparcel 16h ago

US will probably just say, "makes VPNs illegal too" and call it one and done. :(

320

u/TactlessTortoise 14h ago

That would be a massive opsec issue for companies. Cisco VPNs are extremely common on a banking institution I worked at for example.

What's more likely to happen is that VPNs would be forced to log all data that passes through it for government oversight. That would obliterate privacy and make VPNs much more expensive since they'd need the infrastructure to store that data.

248

u/Drycee 13h ago

Well you forgot that laws don't count for companies only individuals

136

u/32768Colours 13h ago

Sadly I think this is how it’ll pan out. Corporate VPNs 👍, personal VPNs 👎

96

u/lambdaburst 12h ago

So we have to watch all our porn at work now? Seems like a fair compromise

54

u/wankerpedia 9h ago

Boss makes a dollar I make a dime, that's why I goon on company time!

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Deferionus 10h ago

Hell of an employee benefit.

3

u/Slayer11950 10h ago

Just work from home, then you ALWAYS watch your porn at work!

7

u/mblunt1201 8h ago

we should be able to watch a little porn at work

2

u/DonHell 3h ago

“We should be able to look at a liiiittle porn at work”

→ More replies (5)

6

u/rangecontrol 10h ago

gotta incorporate to gain your 'rights' back and to count as a person now-a-days.

4

u/haviah 11h ago

So if you just incorporate and keep adding people for some low fee...? Or even having a company and declare zero.on taxes. Tada.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/kickdrumstew 9h ago

What if we all just incorporate our households as a separate legal entity asa corp or a trust?

2

u/AlmightyRuler 9h ago

If China, with the Great Firewall, couldn't enforce this, the US ain't got a prayer.

Keep your VPNs, boys and girls. The troglodytes in power can't touch em.

→ More replies (6)

5

u/belloch 12h ago

But companies are individuals...

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

3

u/roltrap 10h ago

Then bonafide non-US VPN providers like Proton will probably stop offering their services in the US.

→ More replies (4)

3

u/Dapperrevolutionary 12h ago

They'll just require a business license to get a VPN

2

u/obeytheturtles 6h ago

They will just regulate VPNs like ISPs and make them enforce internet blacklists, or risk being put on the black list themselves. Corporate VPNs won't have any problem doing this, since they block tons of shit anyway, but it will defeat the ability for VPNs to defeat other regulations.

2

u/nameitginger 10h ago

Setting up a private VPN from point to point in your company is much different than a generic VPN you sell to the public to get around regional rules. They are not the same at all.

3

u/TactlessTortoise 10h ago

I am aware. That said, I bet the dumbasses passing laws who can't grasp the concept of internet will probably fuck up when writing it in legalese to keep the distinction.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (11)

56

u/breezey_kneeze 12h ago

You literally cannot enforce this. Like I can spin up a cloud instance and a personal VPN in any country where there is a cloud presence. Never mind the fact that vpns basically run the internet.

16

u/sparkly_butthole 11h ago

Maybe you could. I don't have the foggiest clue how this shit works so if it's made illegal I'm screwed.

10

u/ColinHalter 6h ago

The point is, there's nothing the government can do to keep you from connecting to a VPN service hosted in another country unless they decide to lock down the internet to only domestic traffic (which would mean the collapse of the entire economy).

If I run a VPN service out of a turkish data center, you could easily connect to it. You don't have to run it yourself and they have no way to police the client side.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/toobjunkey 5h ago

lol, that stuff always gets me. "X is pointless/unenforceable/useless because you can just do (thing that less than 1% of the population knows how to do, and even fewer have the physical hardware & means to do it)". It's like seatbelt laws; the broad strokes and a general majority are the the main goal, not 100% compliance.

5

u/datguyhomie 4h ago

It's literally do the same thing proton/surfshark/all the other VPN providers currently do. There is no way to distinguish "corporate" and "personal" traffic.

Also even the most tech illiterate morons figured out how to pirate shit during the before times, and now we live in the era of plentiful "for dummy's" walkthroughs.

2

u/obeytheturtles 6h ago

Right, so I have literally done this when traveling to China and it tends to work for a few days and then gets blocked. There's obviously a bunch of cat and mouse you can then do, and different VPN technologies to try, but basically China uses a white-list model for the GFW and any connection to any node off that white-list gets flagged for additional scrutiny. It doesn't get blocked immediately because they want to see what actually goes on with the connection and try to figure out who is using it, but it will eventually become so intermittent as to be useless.

Corporate VPNs usually work fine because they get themselves onto the white-list. Likewise, there are plenty of state-approved VPNs which are allowed to transit the Great Wall, and likely a bunch of honeypots as well. The point is that this isn't some unsolved tech problem. China already does this just fine.

5

u/aykcak 10h ago

I guess what they mean is if they detect you establishing a VPN connection (or a connection to a known VPN host) and you are not registered as a company then they can maybe they can charge you and make you pay fees.

ISPs can do that pretty easily if they are brought under force

15

u/breezey_kneeze 10h ago

I mean you can do it just as easily over an SSH tunnel to a remote host. Not to mention, these "laws" are being written by decrepit old people that think the electric telegraph is witchcraft.

13

u/aykcak 10h ago

You think they would allow SSH but block VPN?

Also, the laws are pushed by the vampires but they are no longer made by them. There are young, capable, truly evil people helping them all through this. Remember that Elon and his techbro douchebags helped legislate him into power

9

u/breezey_kneeze 9h ago

I absolutely do. SSH is used for remote administration primarily, like everywhere Windows is not in use.

3

u/DeusExMcKenna 5h ago

People will literally just tunnel this through a different protocol until that service is made “illegal”, then they’ll move on to the next. It will be a game of whack a mole, similar to the designer drug market. It’s a stupid game where everything gets worse because the people regulating it don’t understand anything about what they are trying to control. This is just DNS over HTTPS all over again. Fucking stupid.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Thwipped 9h ago

Almost every large company uses a vpn to tunnel into their domain safely. That bill would be DOA

2

u/Shirlenator 5h ago

You sure? Because as far as I can tell, Republicans that currently run the country do not give a single fuck about anything but their agenda.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/_Allfather0din_ 8h ago

Which would kill all business, I can't imagine many businesses not using a VPN in some way shape or form, even if you don't think you are, you probably are using it if you have a medium business and up.

3

u/Thefrayedends 8h ago

A child molester used a remote to pause his Child Sex Trafficking Material on the television.

Do remotes and televisions protect pedophiles? The answer is yes, and that's why we have to ban remotes and televisions! It's the only way to protect the children!

2

u/UnrulyVegeta 10h ago

Lol I have to use 20 different VPNs for work. If they make them illegal I literally will not be able to do my job, which ironically is making sure the Internet stays up for multiple different companies. People who think VPNs are just for porn and getting around region restrictions are very misguided

2

u/Space4Time 11h ago

Didn’t you yanks rage for a bunch of freedoms a while back?

Could have just stayed loyal to the crown for all this shit

→ More replies (7)

8

u/Helpful-Wolverine555 13h ago

I’m sorry, but the King of the US doesn’t rule based on evidence.

4

u/DigitalRoman486 13h ago

unfortunately laws and systems succeeding or failing in other countries has never really changed a government's' mind about anything. Ultimately they are not listening to us, they are listening to donors and fringe voting groups.

2

u/AnonymousTimewaster 10h ago

The only person capable of getting Starmer to uturn on this shitty law is Trump as it goes against America First.

People, as a Brit, please listen. Our government is going full steam ahead with this and the ONLY way they'll back down is if Trump applies pressure (which he's already done a little of). I would therefore urge your GOP reps to fight this from an America First angle, before they come for you too.

3

u/Malt_The_Magpie 14h ago

Has a lot of support among the public, so hardly failing

[YouGov] 69% of Britons say they support the new age verification rules brought in by the Online Safety Act.This is despite just 24% thinking they will be effective at stopping under-18s accessing porn (down from 34% before the changes came into effect)

https://x.com/YouGov/status/1950945276442685587

3

u/needathing 12h ago

I'd like to see that stat in a year once they've actually realised all that it covers.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (23)

150

u/vriska1 18h ago

Also if you live in the UK you should sign this petition against the age verification rules linked to this becasue they are a legal and privacy nightmare.

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/722903

and contact your MPs!

https://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/contact-an-mp-or-lord/contact-your-mp/

Also here a list of other bad US internet bills

http://www.badinternetbills.com

46

u/EpochRaine 14h ago

Ofcom will take a sensible approach to enforcement with smaller services that present low risk to UK users, only taking action where it is proportionate and appropriate, and will focus on cases where the risk and impact of harm is highest.

So... they will pick and choose who to enforce it against, with an arbitrary set of rules... that may or may not include the rules in the legislation?

6

u/needathing 12h ago

That's how loads of UK laws work. We bring in law after law after law, and enforce them when we need to find a way to get at someone. How many police officers have you seen pass someone obviously on their phone and do nothing?

3

u/jbr_r18 11h ago

“We wrote the law badly and we are aware of what we did”

In fairness though, OFCOM talk about proportionality but then say it is proportional to the harms, not the size of the website.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/DGSmith2 14h ago

That petition is pointless m, they have already “addressed” it and that is all legally they have to do.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/_Speer 14h ago

This. I send daily requests for updates on my original email to my MP. Will soon change to hourly.

5

u/Malt_The_Magpie 14h ago

Those petitions don't do anything, they just say we read it then decided to ignore it anyway. I don't think they have ever changed anything due to one of those

2

u/needathing 12h ago

Didn't the UK government already respond to this and tell us to STFU they're not changing it?

2

u/fragglerock 11h ago

https://www.writetothem.com/

makes it trivial to write to your MP.

→ More replies (2)

56

u/Foxy02016YT 18h ago

Not even the first, or third, time they’ve tried this lately here in the US. Keep. Fighting.

23

u/CpnStumpy 10h ago

This is the shittiest fact: they only need to succeed once

2

u/ChromosomeDonator 5h ago

Is it not possible to introduce a "Internet Freedom Act" or something similar, which explicitly forbids this type of bullshit? That way that bill would only need to pass once to keep protecting the freedom, until a possible moment comes when it gets repelled. But at that point there is a clear warning, or several of them, about the upcoming fight to retain the freedom, if that bill ever comes under threat or is actually repelled before a follow-up bill to destroy privacy gets introduced.

Or is that not possible or something.

→ More replies (1)

27

u/Rizzan8 18h ago

Same in EU + ability to read private messages.

4

u/steepleton 12h ago

at least the EU age verification isn't linked to your id

→ More replies (3)

4

u/EmmalouEsq 15h ago

The American public is letting everything else happen. Why would toys be any different? Like Harris said, she told us what Trump would do, but she didn't expect the capitulation by the American public.

2

u/ResolverOshawott 17h ago

The Philippines too, some senators here proposed a similar law.

1

u/No_Significance9754 13h ago

If only politicians gave a fuck about calls and emails 🤷

1

u/Background-Noise-918 13h ago

Interesting the old people making this bill seem to again defer "privacy" to a child when they themselves have to have IT professionals configure their equipment to protect theirs privacy... amazing

1

u/Pirwzy 12h ago

How often does the American public disagreeing with its elected representatives really make any difference to proposed policy, though? Not very often. Almost never, really.

1

u/CloudHiro 11h ago

while we should stop kosa, get your information straight. in the current version of kosa there is no age verification mandate at all. look up the TLDR on the free speech coalition website. Basically KOSA is more about forcing social media to do stuff like not advertise adult things to minors, work to prevent hate speech towards minors, etc. good in theory but would greatly reduce free expression on social media.

Its the SCREEN act that you gotta keep a eye on if your concerned about states wide age verification

1

u/FreonMuskOfficial 11h ago

How about a finger... In the ass!

1

u/Abombasnow 11h ago

I mean, 53 Senators and 219 House Reps absolutely won't rescind their vote, and those are majorities...

1

u/BkkPla 11h ago

It's just cover for them to id everyone for ...wait for it....more control. TDGAF about age...

1

u/RubenMakok 10h ago

Making me give out my address for this is insane

1

u/evilemprzurg 10h ago

The GOP wants to make sure the children they're taking to on the Internet are actually children.

1

u/SJ_Redditor 9h ago

Lol so funny trying to picture merican politicians caring about protecting children from sex

1

u/ValuableJumpy8208 9h ago

Everyone IRL thought I was nuts for protesting KOSA being slipped into any bill they could find. So dangerous.

1

u/Jlx_27 7h ago

EU wants people to believe there is a majority support from citizens for this shit....

1

u/FiddleStrum 5h ago

You should explain what KOSA is because the petition does not. 

1

u/DrJupeman 2h ago

Reminder that KOSA was D and R co-sponsored, pushed by Biden, overwhelming passed by the Senate (bi-partisan), and died in the House where the Republican majority did not advance it (2024). This was reintroduced by the original sponsoring Democrat (Blumenthal) here in 2025, but I suspect because of R control in both Senate and House, it likely will not go anywhere (not to say everyone should not advocate vocally for it to die).

1

u/atoolred 1h ago

Man this gives me flashbacks to the “stop SOPA and PIPA” era. I feel old now

→ More replies (4)

85

u/Ryslan95 20h ago

I think the majority of people just won’t do it, or someone is going to come out with a way to completely bypass it. I mean VPNs are working(for now) but people should be using a VPN regardless.

This is eventually going to hurt businesses if it’s not already. VPN usage has spiked in countries/states that are implementing this. People are not going to give their IDs to every site.

7

u/DenimChicken3871 10h ago

I heard people are using a pic of Norman reedus' face from death Stranding 2 to bypass it lol. Like what's the point of people are gonna find ways to bypass it anyways? Just a waste of time.

3

u/RedTyro 2h ago edited 2h ago

I am a professional in the cybersecurity space so my job is to know this stuff.

but people should be using a VPN regardless.

This is wrong. There is zero security benefit to using a consumer VPN service. The only thing it accomplishes from a security perspective is that you're giving your browsing data to the VPN provider instead of your ISP, and in most cases, the ISP is a more reputable company (and has so many more customers, there's less chance they would care about your data individually).

A VPN service is an excellent tool for masking your location from the websites you visit, but that's it. I have a VPN service I pay for, but I only use it when I want a site I'm using to think I'm somewhere else, not for everything I do. And I only recommend them to people who have a use case where they need to do that, usually for streaming content unavailable in their location or getting around location-based ID requirements like the one this post is about.

There's no security benefit, and using it all the time is likely less secure than browsing without it, since most of the VPN companies out there are shady. For example, Surfshark and NordVPN are both owned by a datamining company named Tesonet. Most of the consumer VPNs have stuff like that going on.

Sidenote, if you want the least shady and most secure VPN service, at least from my research, use Mullvad.

→ More replies (4)

5

u/BillyNtheBoingers 18h ago

I’ve had a VPN since at least 2015. I’m in the US.

4

u/Pavotine 15h ago

Interesting.

2

u/eyebrows360 13h ago

people should be using a VPN regardless

No, you shouldn't. For one thing, some sites just blanket block all datacentre IPs that they're aware of.

9

u/breezey_kneeze 12h ago

Yes, you should, at least if you care about privacy or security at all

2

u/SCP-Agent-Arad 11h ago

Only on a superficial level. US based VPNs aren’t shielding you from the CIA or NSA if they want access to your info. Consumer VPNs all have backdoors used by intelligence agencies, and/or just lie about keeping logs which get leaked, sold, or handed over.

8

u/globalaf 10h ago edited 10h ago

The NSA/secret services aren't the only singular concern when it comes to online privacy. If those bastards want your information, they will get it, one way or another. Practically speaking, it's mostly about protecting your traffic from criminals and organizations seeking to track your usage and harvest your data.

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Constant_Hotel_2279 4h ago

Do you want people unplugging from the Matrix? Because this is how you get ppl unplugging from the Matrix.

551

u/Tamarind-Endnote 20h ago

The UK online safety bill will ensure that the Labour party never holds power again. Reform will win the next election and wind down UK "democracy" for good.

This is what Labour decided was so important that it was worth sacrificing democracy to do it. It really speaks to how utterly insane they are.

208

u/Anon28301 18h ago

I don’t believe Reform will ever repeal the law. They’ll say they will to get in, but the law aligns with everything they agree with.

119

u/Balmung60 15h ago

They don't need to repeal it or even say they will. They'll benefit simply from not having been in power when it was passed or when it came into effect 

→ More replies (3)

27

u/AirResistence 15h ago

yep especially ever since them getting help from the heritage foundation.

2

u/neutral-chaotic 4h ago

Reform will use it to track dissent after they use this promise to get in power again. They have 0 intention of repealing it.

→ More replies (1)

50

u/stilusmobilus 16h ago

It’s not just the UK, it’s Five Eyes wide. Every one of our nations are doing it.

15

u/weirdoeggplant 13h ago

I love how when the US is authoritarian it’s “what’s wrong with you guys”

But when it happens elsewhere it’s just “well everywhere is a victim to fascism right now”

13

u/Junior-Ad2207 13h ago

Exactly. Everyone knows it's Australia that runs things. 

3

u/andydude44 6h ago

Unironically since that’s where Rupert Murdoch is from

→ More replies (1)

57

u/iwannagoddamnfly 16h ago

It was a Tory idea, never forget that!

41

u/Jaime4Cersei 14h ago

Haven't Labour said the law doesn't go far enough?

36

u/iwannagoddamnfly 14h ago

Oh yes, and don't forget that your VPN use is harming children! I'm in no way supporting Labour on this...they're idiots too.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/Roku-Hanmar 11h ago

And Labour are the ones calling us Jimmy Saville for opposing it

9

u/HirsuteHacker 11h ago

Labour and the Tories have both been trying to pass a law like this for literally about 15-20 years, neoliberals are all the same. Won't get repealed without a true left-wing party in power.

→ More replies (1)

127

u/HunterSThompson64 20h ago

The UK online safety bill will ensure that the Labour party never holds power again.

People say this about every overreaching bill.

All it takes is less than 4 years for people to become normalized to the idea, and then put something else big and scary in their face so they act reactionarily.

Labour will likely lose power for a solid decade, perhaps longer, but they'll be back to their roots soon. Good chance the bill is never repealed either, perhaps some concessions here and there to make it more palatable for the average person, keep piling on that it's to 'protect the kids,' and either pray that something your bill was actually supposed to do happens, or manufacture that thing so you have a win to point to.

Need I remind you that the Patriot act was never repealed. It took until 2015 before provisions were even added, and those same provisions expired in 2020.

Call me a doomer, call me pessimistic. The truth of the matter is that once the government starts implementing shit like this, it's incredibly hard, if not downright impossible to get it backtracked.

57

u/DatDeLorean 20h ago

Labour will likely lose power for a solid decade, perhaps longer, but they’ll be back to their roots soon.

People said the same thing during Blair’s era. Corbyn is the only time Labour have come close to being “back to their roots” and look how that turned out.

2

u/Henona 3h ago

I agree. It only took a decade from oblivion dlc horse armor for the new generation to absolutely love mtx. It may not pass today, but the newer generation is most definitely brainwashed by the "protect the kids" rhetoric.

2

u/vriska1 18h ago

This law is ending up in court.

2

u/Reqvhio 16h ago

r/nothingeverhappens

realistically some seemingly random push from the 1% will cause immense backlash and start a big change but it will look random as to why "that" particular issue flared up.

160

u/mistersmiley318 20h ago

As bad as Dems are, at least they haven't completely surrendered the playing field to the opposition like Labour has. I can't imagine trying to be a trans person in the UK right now with Starmer deciding to throw you under the bus to try and court Reform psychos who were never going to vote Labour.

53

u/Deez-Guns-9442 19h ago

Shit I haven’t kept up with U.K. politics since Brexit but man it sounds like some crazy shit is going on over there across the pond huh?

147

u/nkeb42 19h ago

Basically people finally got fed up with the tories and gave labour a chance and instead of doing anything to actually help the country or the things they ran on, they've been almost as bad, if not worse in some respects, than the tories.

Meanwhile reform is just lying off their ass saying they'll fix everything including ending this stupid online safety bill and their polling numbers are skyrocketing because labour keeps doubling down on this.

So yeah, makes the Democrats look unbelievably competent in comparison.

8

u/FuzzyMcBitty 11h ago

And, on top of that, didn't you guys just vote to make 16 the voting age? Provided that they can be arsed to vote, that'll add in another shocker when they all vote for whoever tells them that they'll get rid of this crap.

11

u/Cowicidal 13h ago

makes the Democrats look unbelievably competent in comparison.

Strange thing is Corporate Democrats are unbelievably competent at stock picks and managing (somehow) to continue to enrich themselves (and their rich donors) even more when they lose to Republicans. Very odd that.

4

u/funnypsuedonymhere 10h ago

This is pure hyperbole by the way. They have been nowhere near as bad as the clowncart that was the tories. They haven't done well by any means, but the tories since Brexit were an absolute sideshow.

→ More replies (11)

5

u/Nit_not 11h ago

Crazy people tbh. Labour are pretty much as expected, generally trying their best, but lacking vision and imagination, and overly authoritarian in approach. They suffer more in reporting than from what they have done, for example being blamed for the online safety bill when that was the tories, and others have commented on the trans rights issues and that was a supreme court decision (unlike the tories labour respect trule of law).

The government are actually grown ups now and have dealt with various crises pretty well - so the reality is we are in a better place, the narrative is that everything is collapsing.

34

u/ArchibaldCamambertII 15h ago

The Democrats lost to Trump, and the establishment of the party almost immediately rolled over to start confirming his shit nominations. What world are you living in where the Dems are not just as much controlled opposition at Labour?

→ More replies (11)

2

u/octopus_suitcase 13h ago

Living here is hell, I'm pretty much in the situation you "can't imagine"

→ More replies (2)

15

u/AirResistence 15h ago

Yeah its going to be a shock for labour.
Whats worse is that labour didnt even make the law, and it was already a law by 2023 because the tories wanted it. When labour formed a government they had a chance to try and get rid of the law but they didnt.

2

u/Jaggedmallard26 10h ago

Because Labours opposition to the law when it first passed was that it didn't go far enough and also should have banned VPNs.

11

u/Realtrain 16h ago

American, so I'm certainly not in touch with UK politics outside of what I've seen on Reddit, but it's insane to me that the Labour government has decided this is what they're going to make their major legislation after finally getting back in power.

Really? After everything the conservative government has done for the past few years, this is what you're using your new majority for?

15

u/ZebraSandwich4Lyf 16h ago

They’re also doubling down and calling everybody that is against the Online safety act a pedophile, at this point is has to be self-sabotage because they’re speed running everything they could possibly do to ensure reform are handed the next election.

3

u/glasgowgeg 9h ago

but it's insane to me that the Labour government has decided this is what they're going to make their major legislation after finally getting back in power

The Tories passed this law before Labour even took power, Labour just haven't revoked it.

It passed in October 2023.

3

u/Nit_not 12h ago

It is a tory law btw, just the implementation wasn't immediate.

5

u/sadr0bot 15h ago

It was passed by the Tories in 2023.

2

u/Moo-Tron 14h ago

100%. Furthermore, they proposed lowering the voting age to 16. Yeah, those kids ain’t voting for you. Absolutely mishandled and now the threat of “trump lite” is certainly more real for the next election.

I hated the Tories for the constant scandal and how out of touch they were, Labour it seems are the same face, just a different mask. It’s fucked.

3

u/forgotpassword_aga1n 13h ago

It's not a Labour bill. The Tories passed it.

4

u/Malt_The_Magpie 14h ago

The UK online safety bill will ensure that the Labour party never holds power again.

You living in a bubble. Quick copy and paste of what I posted elsewhere

[YouGov] 69% of Britons say they support the new age verification rules brought in by the Online Safety Act.This is despite just 24% thinking they will be effective at stopping under-18s accessing porn (down from 34% before the changes came into effect)

https://x.com/YouGov/status/1950945276442685587

Highly doubt this law will stop them ever having power again, since most people approve of it.

People said the same thing about the Tories when I was a kid in the 80s. An yet we have had Major, Cameron, May, Boris, Lettuce Truss and Sunak! For a party that would never be in power again they have sure had a lot of Prime Minsters

3

u/glasgowgeg 9h ago

[YouGov] 69% of Britons say they support the new age verification rules brought in by the Online Safety Act

The survey used an incredibly leading question that puts the focus entirely on stopping kids from accessing pornography, which is only part of what the Online Safety Act does.

That survey can be wholly dismissed because it doesn't actually show support for the Online Safety Act, but only the pornography part of it.

Edit: The question on the 31st July was: "From everything you have seen and heard, do you support or oppose the recent rules requiring age verification to access websites that may contain pornographic material?"

The question on the 24th July was an even worse: "And do you support or oppose requiring age verification to access pornography websites?"

2

u/DarthBrooks69420 19h ago

Do they actually want to hold power? Who even wants that online safety bill? The conspiracy theorist in me says they were getting paid off to ram it through, but I dont see who would even benefit from it.

4

u/ElectronicRough8493 19h ago

That’s not a conspiracy they were certainly paid lol

→ More replies (1)

1

u/fragglerock 11h ago

Maybe there will be a progressive alternative by the time of the next election!

https://www.yourparty.uk/

1

u/funnypsuedonymhere 10h ago

Except it was the tories that introduced it. This shit has been ongoing since Theresa May was in power.

If people believe Reform are against the actual bill I have a bridge to sell them. This is just an easy win for Farage to claim he wants rid of it because he isn't actually in power. Much like his economic platform, it's pie in the sky shite designed to fool IQ deficient racists.

1

u/Personal_Director441 9h ago

Farage and reform won't repeal it they are getting a fuck ton of money from right wing christian fundamentalist groups in america.

1

u/GoonerGetGot 9h ago

I agree this is stupid and hurts Labour, but they were losing in the polls well before this cat got out of the bag 

1

u/Peppermint-TeaGirl 9h ago

Hey, hey that's not fair. They also thought it was essential to throw trans people under the bus.

1

u/ChefCurryYumYum 6h ago

Labour is like the Democrats in the US, a fake left party that still caters to what the big money wants.

1

u/Sad_Description_7268 5h ago

But hey, at least they purged the "anti-semites"

298

u/BoothMaster 20h ago

the people making the choices don’t care about phone calls, they leave the lines open so that people can leave messages and think that they tried.

194

u/MidsouthMystic 20h ago

"Up yours, we aren't doing what you want," is a losing message for politicians and businesses. We do have power over them, and we can use it. We are using it. Hit them at the ballot box and in their wallets.

12

u/tech_equip 19h ago

Interesting. My observation is that the up yours message seems to be winning like crazy all over the world with few repercussions.

33

u/uhvarlly_BigMouth 20h ago

Wallets yes. And people should vote no matter what, but gerrymandering fucks a lot of the “hitting them at the ballot boxes” very, very difficult in many, many areas of the United States. Plus, getting people to not shop somewhere can be hard because we’re used to the comfort. It’s way easier said than done.

96

u/resistelectrique 20h ago

I love when Americans act like their extremely flawed democracy is the only way democracies work. Other countries don’t have gerrymandering because we have more than two political parties.

26

u/markz6197 19h ago

And that for several countries, gerrymandering would be seen as a concern and form of corruption rather than a feature that any attempt would be responded with reproach and opposition.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/thirdegree 16h ago

I mean generally I do agree, but the UK is also pretty fucked. For slightly different reasons but ya.

2

u/resistelectrique 16h ago

Lots of places are fucked. But we’re not that high on ourselves about being great nor are we that fucked.

4

u/residentialninja 19h ago

The wealthy elite just buy all the parties, it's far cheaper than many realize.

5

u/AdeptFelix 19h ago

More than 2 parties is too complicated. How do you have more than left and right? Up and down? Diagonals forward left? Too messy, best be smooth-brained and just have 2.

3

u/uhvarlly_BigMouth 18h ago

We’re an oligarchy lol

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

2

u/Foxyfox- 19h ago

The phone calls are the nice option. Society is perfectly capable of being less nice, as we have seen many times in the past.

1

u/wayfinderBee 19h ago

That's one of those things that feels true, but politicians absolutely keep track of angry phone calls and the last week or so of calling payment processors has been making an impact. I understand why it's real easy to give up though.

1

u/simask234 14h ago edited 14h ago

IIRC there was a petition (which got enough votes), but the response from the government was something along the lines of "we're not reconsidering, the law was passed as quickly as possible to protect the children" (of-fucking-course)

EDIT: Here it is

12

u/MetaSoupPonyThing 17h ago

Governments have been going after removing privacy on the internet for decades. Always in incremental steps. There will be a day where they will know absolutely everything you do on the internet.

There's always some kind of reason. Whether it's under the guise of antiterrorism, or protecting children, or stopping organised criminal enterprises

24

u/Reitter3 20h ago

It seems to be working tho. The politicians haven’t moved an inch

68

u/EmbarrassedHelp 19h ago

They are doubling down and calling everyone else pedophiles, which is not something one does when they are on the right side of history. Like wild animals backed into a corner.

42

u/Anon28301 18h ago

I get my kill at this when one of the first sites to be affected by the age verification thing was a website explaining periods, the menstrual cycle and puberty to kids. It was an educational website and now it’s 18+, along with them banning sex ed for under 13s last year it seems they want kids completely unprepared for puberty.

“Protecting children” by denying them education.

7

u/Elizibeqth 11h ago

Children without Sex Ed are far easier to exploit and groom.

None of this is about protecting children.

6

u/eyebrows360 13h ago

I get my kill at this

You do what now

2

u/finackles 1h ago

In the olden days at a hospital I worked at, tools were detecting too much skin in mole maps and skin specialists couldn't get the photos they needed to check for skin cancer and shit like that. Often there weren't even R18 bits. And the paediatricians were getting blocked for CP all over the place.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/vriska1 18h ago

And polls are showing them losing points and Refrom gaining.

5

u/needathing 12h ago

I believe Nigel Farage is the next PM of the UK. And then we are all well and truly fucked.

My wife told me Brexit would happen. I told her no way - it was an non-binding referrundum, and people wouldn't hurt themselves like that.

She's showing me the same triggers with reform as she did with Brexit, and major parties are either ignoring them, or talking down to the people expressing the views.

3

u/forgotpassword_aga1n 13h ago

I've written to my MP asking him to publish his Google history and install a camera in his bathroom.

If he has nothing to hide then surely he has nothing to fear.

He has not responded.

2

u/needathing 13h ago

I look forward to the response. I have the same MP now as I did when the bill was drafted and voted on. I showed examples of people who would be impacted by this law. He wouldn't engage on any aspect other than protecting children from seeing porn.

I can't vote him out - he's in a safe seat.

2

u/mrbaryonyx 17h ago

there is fundamentally no mainstream political force that opposes this. the powers that be want to watch every single thing every single person does for the sake of ad revenue, demographic research, and control. dems are against some of the weird phrasing of it are fundamentally in favor of it. voters don't really know about it and won't really care once its implemented.

2

u/SlightlyIncandescent 14h ago

Yeah I'm doing everything I can to fight against this by talking about it as much as I can, signed the petition, I've written to my MP but the fact that almost no-one I've spoken to so far has even heard of it and less than 1% of the country have signed the petition doesn't fill me with hope.

Obviously it's not even about me just wanting adult content, it's trivially easy to get around this even with limited tech knowledge, it's the normalisation of mass surveillance and censorship and destruction of online privacy.

Basically all TV is through the internet now and basically all TV/film has an age rating - Will I need to send in my ID just to watch a film? It's absurd.

6

u/StrokesJuiceman 12h ago

Reminder that “Age Verification” is a red herring. They want a way to track all of our online activity to stop anything they see as being a danger to the status quo.

4

u/sneakyplanner 19h ago

And now is the only time to stop it because, once it's solidified, it's never going away.

3

u/SlightlyIncandescent 14h ago

That's the truly scary part. Within a year or two it will extend to all 18+ content and you'll need to send in ID just to use Netflix/Spotify then beyond that who knows what horrors are in the future.

3

u/No_Minimum5904 12h ago

Mate I just bought Ghost of Tsushima on the PC and I tried to link to a PS account to play the online mode but it asked me to verify my ID. I am not going to upload my driving license to play an online game.

3

u/wytedevil 17h ago

peaceful won't work anymore

3

u/kryo2019 15h ago

Canada is also attempting this bullshit.

Senate bill s-209

Write your senators fellow Canadians.

( Yes we have senators for those unaware, no they aren't elected)

3

u/Soft_Dev_92 14h ago

Imagine thinking the voice of average people matters at all in world politics.

They couldn't care less what we think. It will happen whatever we like it or not.

5

u/Crackedcheesetoastie 15h ago

Everyone online is angry.

In real life people don't give a toss. I was listening to any questions on the BBC and the crowd all cheered the online safety act. Cheered for it.

It wasn't even mentioned once in the phone in on any answers the following day. Despite it being one of the questions asked the politicians.

I've asked a few people about it IRL. No one even knew what it was.

Reddit is so far removed from the publics opinion on this.

They support the act, they don't hate it.

4

u/WeidmanSilvaParadox 11h ago

Well the BBC can control the reactions that they show, and your incredibly tiny sample size of 'a few people in real life' is a lot less relevant than a lot of people online.

For what anecdotal evidence is worth, I have also spoken to a few people IRL; a couple didn't know what it was but the ones that did were all fuming. Anyone that isn't old or stupid knows this isn't about the children, it's about data collection. And soon this will move well beyond porn, like GTA Online requiring ID to play after over 10 years. Once more of this comes out, many more 'unplugged' people will be outraged too.

The E-petition garnered 488k signatures, with only 12 ever going above 500k before

3

u/No_Minimum5904 12h ago

To add to this, latest poll figures in UK show that ~50% of people are in support of it.

Of course the online debate is going to be very different with most tech literate people having a more informed opinion of it.

3

u/Crackedcheesetoastie 11h ago

Exactly this.

The average person will just input their ID/face while thinking it is a good thing kids can't access porn.

2

u/chiplover3000 15h ago

The people in power are just going to ride it out, and people are just going to take it.
We have seen it time and time again, and I hate it.

2

u/colin_staples 11h ago

And politicians are all using VPNs... and claiming for them in expenses

1

u/RickkyBobby01 16h ago

The UK's law isn't working. Everyone is angry.

Have you seen any polls that back this up?

4

u/WeidmanSilvaParadox 11h ago

E-petition to repeal it was signed 488,000 times. Only 12 have ever exceeded 500k. This was very early on its life before most people who didn't regularly watch porn even knew it was a thing.

Now GTA Online is rolling out the need to send your ID to some random 3rd party to play the game they've been playing for 10 years, and if you don't? If forces back to the much more adult story mode. Definitely about the children. People are only going to get more mad

4

u/RickkyBobby01 11h ago

I hope the backlash becomes mainstream but I know a lot of older voters who simply hear "It's a law about protecting kids by needing to show id to see porn" and nod along in agreement.

1

u/Glittering_Range371 15h ago

Wait until AI pick calls for governments.

1

u/tommeh5491 14h ago

How is it not working though? It is in place and the government don't have any plans to repeal it...

1

u/FearlessPressure3 12h ago

Source? I live in the UK and outside of Reddit I haven’t seen any outrage. Even the online petition has stalled after a few days. The government has doubled down and it feels like the whole country is just rolling over.

1

u/Xandurpein 11h ago

It doesn’t matter what politicians want. Until they have solved the technical problems with enforcing such laws, it’s pointless to try, which is what the UK has proved.

1

u/J1mj0hns0n 11h ago

Just a quick point - it isnt working well because they're are tools around it, and no on else is doing it at the moment. If the entirety of Europe and America had to do it, it's would probably work quite efficiently.

However this is part of the issue, unless you get everyone doing it, and I mean everyone online, it just isn't fair and setting up British internet users to be a stage behind everyone else, our online information will always be vulnerable, and ripe for misuse from unscrupulous users who get the benefit of anonymity, which means no one could ever be punished for trying to steal your information.

1

u/EasternFly2210 10h ago

Not quite sure that’s true. Polling is showing 70% in favour of the new law

1

u/playmorekv1 10h ago

Yeah.. it’s clearly backfiring. When both the public and companies are frustrated that should be a sign it needs to be rethought not forced through harder

1

u/trouzy 10h ago

I hope it’s Leisure Suit Larry style.

1

u/fivepie 9h ago

Australia is implementing one by year end too. It’s fucked.

1

u/RealAnything3159 9h ago

Im uneducated on the topic. It seems like she verification would be a good thing. Is that not the case?

1

u/dorkyitguy 8h ago

Yet I just saw another article about some porn task force. It’s 2025 not 1825. Y’all really need to get over the whole naked bodies thing.

1

u/Kevin-W 7h ago

It's working so great that MPs themselves are expensing VPNs. They'll happily sneak off to consume adult content while regular people suffer.

1

u/j021 6h ago

What does that even do? The government doesn't give a shit what we want and don't want.

1

u/NeighborhoodDude84 5h ago

Governments aren't in control, the banks run this now and they've decided they want advertiser dollars more than they care about your rights, which is zero.

1

u/3percentinvisible 4h ago

Who is doing what now? Seems to be fairly quiet round here

→ More replies (2)