You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Apologies if there is already a thread - I tried searching but ... well ... you know.
As our evil tyrannical government is now preventing us from accessing things it doesn't like I guess we'll all be needing VPNs soon. My go to would be Proton as they seem to take privacy seriously, but as always I need to check here first. Honestly, I can barely make toast without checking here first.
Any recommendations?
Apologies if there is already a thread - I tried searching but ... well ... you know.
As our evil tyrannical government is now preventing us from accessing things it doesn't like I guess we'll all be needing VPNs soon. My go to would be Proton as they seem to take privacy seriously, but as always I need to check here first. Honestly, I can barely make toast without checking here first.
Any recommendations?
You don't need to pay for a VPN, any decent browser will have it built in, or free extensions you can add.
So when you want to watch some 'gentlemans cinematography' you can just open a private tab set your location to mongolia or something.
It will make buffering your grot take a bit longer, but that's the price you pay for it being free.
Proton seems to work OK for me.
I've used windscribe for years. Was some random deal eons ago so I pay nothing and get 50GB on the free plan!
Looking now you can get 2GB for free and 10GB if you register with an email address.
So watching grot will be a bit like beat the clock or dialup but limited by total GB allowance 🙂
Opera GX also has a built in free VPN. Not sure how it stacks up to Proton as I haven't used either.
I use proton - it is my go to for watching the UCI WS and now it is my go to for everything.
Obviously grot will be everyone’s first priority (beating the clock indeed!), but there are other things I am concerned about
https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/07/28/a-safe-internet-is-an-unfree-internet/
I imagine there will also be a Streisand Effect about these things - most people don’t care until you tell them they CANNOT read something …
edit - I’ve also heard that the kiddies have already found their way around the block, using characters from video games to fool the age verifying software.
edit - I’ve also heard that the kiddies have already found their way around the block, using characters from video games to fool the age verifying software.
Norman Reedus from the game 'Death Strandings' mad interactive photo mode, no less 🤣
You probably know the actor as his character 'daryl dixon' from the 'walking dead' TV series 🤣
The poor guys gonna end up with a really bad reputation for watching grot!!!!!
Isn’t it just a case of proving you’re old enough to send yourself blind … no VPN required?
“Isn’t it just a case of proving you’re old enough to send yourself blind … no VPN required?”
Take a look at the Spike article linked, it has examples of legitimate discussions which have been censored - including a speech by an mp in the House of Commons. The Uk seems to be challenging Australia for the ‘most censorious democracy’ title.
Isn’t it just a case of proving you’re old enough to send yourself blind … no VPN required?
Kind of yes but do you really want to give your personal details to the opticians friends?
apologies for the stupid question but what guarantees does the govt give for all our data if there is a data breach? am guessing they have a clause to exempt them from any blame (the government)?
am guessing they have a clause to exempt them from any blame (the government)?
No clause needed since the government isnt actually involved in the process.
They are just requiring websites to check but havent actually defined any technical standard how or provided a tool to do so. As such they can shrug their shoulders and say "well that website was clearly wrong".
Depending on your brand of tinfoil hat this handing all responsibility to the companies involved might be deliberate precisely for this reason.
Of course if you put the hat on the other way then its a cunning plan by the government since they know someone will screw up at which point they can use it to put in place a government system to do, well, something.
BBC Article - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn72ydj70g5o seems to suggest free or very cheap vpn have their security issues...
"Many of these free VPNs are riddled with issues," said Daniel Card, a cyber-security expert with the Chartered Institute for IT (BCS).
"Some act as traffic brokers for data harvesting firms, others are so poorly built they expose users to attacks."
He may of course be an expert in the 'talking for those wanting to make money from you buying the $$$ options' kind of expert, I don't know, but it gave me pause for thought.
Personally, I'm struggling to know what I do currently (I don't have a grot habit) that would be enhanced by having a VPN but it comes up in conversation often enough I keep thinking I 'should'.
Ignoring vpn’s for a moment, wouldn’t it be easier for established websites like Amazon, eBay, Disney, Netflix, etc to provide a rolling passkey on the user account page that’s updated every 10 mins?
that’s proof that you’re over 18, and eliminates the chance that the code could fall into the wrong hands.
seems simpler than all the other options that were presented by the bbc.
and aren’t the yoof of today moving over to smar****ches?
Who's laughing now naysayers. No VPN, no browser history, no awkward selfies. You can't beat the late 90's early 00's Vivid stars.
that’s proof that you’re over 18, and eliminates the chance that the code could fall into the wrong hands.
Whats in it for them and do you want to be sitting next to your partner when Amazon pops up:
- Adverts people have paid to show to people look at this item.
- Adverts people have paid because you recently use Amazon to authenticate your age for "tractors and milkmaids"
- People who brought this item looked at these as well
Now there are ways round this and in some countries banks, for example, do provide verification services but it needs the relevant companies to agree to it and then some rather strong laws around stopping them doing anything with the information which again leads to why exactly they should provide this service.
There are some interesting technical approaches with zero knowledge proofs but they are rather complex (I happily admit I struggle with the ideas) and still require a lot of faith from the average user.
On the toast question.....obviously peanut butter....with marmite a close second.....with the kink that you can mix the two as long as you don't tell the content verification gods
with the kink that you can mix the two as long
Which is a strong argument that everyone should use government provided identifiers on the internet including current location and hellfire equipped drones should be able to reach any part of the UK within 25 minutes.
Is this a thing these days ?
Interweb has always had things like 'virus' pop up scams, to hacking et all. So has anything really changed that they need to do this ? or is intercontinental hacking now so much of a thing that everyone now needs a new level of protection.
Just get the govt to make it compulsory for any website (utilities, banks, bbc iPlayer, supermarkets) that requires age verification to generate a six digit code every ten minutes.
doesn’t need to be blatant…”honey, I’m just updating the iPlayer passwords (cough)”.
is it really that friggin simple?
Actually, making it compulsory for any website that uses your bank details or verifies your dob (chemists, nhs) to generate a six digit passkey, will actually encourage more people to explore online pron.
this is a good thing, whether for a reduction in prostate cancer or just to encourage greater transparency within the pron industry.
some people find pron to be exploitative. That may be because not enough people are watching it and flagging up the dodgier stuff to the govts pron ombudsman.
The scope definition for the Online Safety Act is so broadly worded that it includes any kind of forum, so age verification may be required for STW once Ofcom get their enforcement running...
so age verification may be required for STW once Ofcom get their enforcement running...
Would that mean we could get rid of the swear filter? 🙂
Nord VPN seems to be the big boy according to various pod casts I listen to?
On another note, the bloke who fitted our Virgin Cable said if you use a dodgy stick without a VPN they will throttle your internet speed.
Personally, I'm struggling to know what I do currently (I don't have a grot habit) that would be enhanced by having a VPN but it comes up in conversation often enough I keep thinking I 'should'.
I used a VPN for first time recently so I could watch ITV coverage of TDF whilst in Spain. I purchased z1 month of NordVPN, it was really good, worked reliably and easily. I just selected a UK based router and ITVX was happy. I'll probably buy an annual plan now, going through Rest Is Politics route offers a pretty good extended deal for 24 months with another 4 months for free, I think about £65 for basic plan.
Apologies if there is already a thread - I tried searching but ... well ... you know.
It was a bit of cryptic title but there was one.
Anyway Free VPN on iOS allows you to have a time limited VPN after watching a few adds.
This has made me giggle. Nothing says pander to middle age men (who are sufficiently dullard to sort a vpn) who are currently "inconvenienced" by the recent change than this. Getting between the old, male and stale and their need to view young ladies in a state of undress at your peril!
will actually encourage more people to explore online pron.
this is a good thing, whether for a reduction in prostate cancer
Say what now? As someone on active surveillance due to a PC diagnosis, this is very much news to me! Are you saying more Frankie Vaughan may have prevented it? I'd be very keen to see any sources for that!
I used a VPN for first time recently so I could watch ITV coverage of TDF whilst in Spain.
Surf Shark here. Whichever UK location I set it to, BBC sees through it. It does work for other stuff, I watch some content on S4C (welsh language) which is geo blocked outside UK, it works okay.
will actually encourage more people to explore online pron.
this is a good thing, whether for a reduction in prostate cancer
Say what now? As someone on active surveillance due to a PC diagnosis, this is very much news to me! Are you saying more Frankie Vaughan may have prevented it? I'd be very keen to see any sources for that!
Not sure what the PB toast:PC risk relationship is tho
https://www.health.harvard.edu/mens-health/ejaculation_frequency_and_prostate_cancer
OK, thanks. Interesting, I'd not seen that before, though I note there's nothing in it about porn specifically! It seems my ahem "frequency" is within the range attributed to a reduced risk, so not particularly useful in my specific case. I think it's a bit of a leap though, to go from that kind of study to implying as the earlier poster seemed to, that porn in general may reduce cases of prostate cancer.
Nord VPN seems to be the big boy according to various pod casts I listen to?
They're certainly one of the most well advertised.
On another note, the bloke who fitted our Virgin Cable said if you use a dodgy stick without a VPN they will throttle your internet speed.
I'd wager that the bloke who fitted your Virgin Cable was talking out of the top of his head.
There are many reasons why you shouldn't use a 'dodgy stick' without a VPN (or indeed, at all), and many reasons why VM may throttle your connection. But I'd hazard that the Venn diagram here would be two discrete circles.
As the prostate fluids are so rich in nutrients, they can boost metastasis? of any nascent tumours.
doctors recommend ‘draining’ the pc, three times a day if you’re 21 years old. Slightly less if you’re Nigel garages age.
i think the problem with the proposed age verification is that it adds stigma to looking at pron.
Ideally, we would like to make it easier for the rest of the adult population who do not watch pron on a regular basis to dip into these channels now and again to make sure that nobody is being exploited.
maybe the current regulations are designed to allow AI to identify and remove Prince Royale from any compromising footage before the public gets a chance to view it.
As our evil tyrannical government is now preventing us from accessing things it doesn't like I guess we'll all be needing VPNs soon.
Whilst I appreciate that the comment might have been said mostly in jest I think for the sake of clarity that it might be worth pointing out that the current government is not responsible for the legislation behind the Online Safety Act 2023.
In fact I think the date of the age verification was delayed until last week by the previous government due to technical issues or sumfink.
Obviously the current government isn't opposed to the legislation but I'm not convinced that might be a valid criticism.
The problem here is that everyone is focusing on the red herring that is the pr0n aspect and having a good giggle while missing the fact that as someone above pointed out. This covers ANY website or forum which contains material which could now be classed as restricted.
For example there are forums and websites provide help and advice around suicide prevention, trans issues, depression/self harm and a myriad of other areas which people may wish to seek out valid help but are then put in the same bracket as pr0n. This may cause people to either not seek advice where needed or to feel they are vilified for searching for something which is now classed as restricted and needing verification.
This catch all approach is good for the Governments headline of being seen to be doing something but will cause more harm beyond not being able to have a good tug.
but are then put in the same bracket as pr0n.
Surely if it isn't suitable to be viewed by children then restricting its access to children shouldn't be seen as a problem ?
Obviously I appreciate that it creates ease of access issues for adults but protection of minors should be the priority IMHO.
Now if you think the definition of what is unsuitable for children is wrong then that is a completely different issue imo.
For example there are forums and websites provide help and advice around suicide prevention, trans issues, depression/self harm and a myriad of other areas which people may wish to seek out valid help but are then put in the same bracket as pr0n. This may cause people to either not seek advice where needed or to feel they are vilified for searching for something which is now classed as restricted and needing verification.
Are there any current examples of this? Or is this theoretical hand wringing?
The point of the verification is to ensure people are over the age of 18 is it not? Are there any websites out there that specifically would not want to have under 18's accessing the material say on assistance with self harming thoughts? Given a very significant proportion of self harm is carried out by those under 18 most help sites I've visited on the subject (in a professional, pastoral capacity) are geared very much for the under 18 year old age group it seems unlikely. It's practically their reason for existing.
Surely the threshold for if verification is needed is if it is reasonable not to want minors to view it. Clearly there are some dark (in every sense) corners of the internet where there is material that glorifies self harm/suicidal thoughts etc which to be honest no one should be visiting, let alone minors, but genuinely 'healthy', helpful sites on these subjects (like say the Samaritans) put behind a verification on these subjects- I'll believe it when I see it.
i think the problem with the proposed age verification is that it adds stigma to looking at pron.
I don't care about porn. I'm not a particular fan of spectator sports in general, I'd rather be taking part in something.
I do care that sex is stigmatised. If people hadn't been sticking things in other things since time immemorial then we wouldn't be here today to be lectured about it or be judged by it. There shouldn't be any shame in having sexual proclivities so long as it involves consenting adults, so if say you want a threesome or a 68 or to go dogging then more power to your elbow (you'll likely need it). Some people believe that sex should be reserved exclusively for procreation, others believe that the party hasn't even got started without six metres of sisal, a can of alphabetti spaghetti and a riding crop. Most fall somewhere in between (and some fall outside). It shouldn't matter. There's all manner of tastes and kinks out there. Foot fetishists are wildly common for instance - I don't see the attraction myself but that's kind of the point, I don't have to, what business is it of mine?
I care a great deal about grown adults being treated like children. I don't want Internet filters enforced on me, not because I want to view illicit content but because I haven't spent half a century on this planet to have what I can look at be dictated to me unless I hand over biometric data to a private company in the US. We're stumbling from 1984 to Fahrenheit 451. No-one should be required to verify their age before being allowed to buy a stick of butter just on the off-chance that they might be tempted to shove it up their arse.
Obviously I appreciate that it creates ease of access issues for adults but protection of minors should be the priority IMHO.
It took me less than 1 minute to get around it. Installed Opera, switched on VPN and went to site that requires UK Age verification but as I appear to be in Sweden it didn't trigger it. If it takes me 60 seconds to do that then it will take a 14 year old 30 seconds.
So it basically will protect minors who have the computer skills of my mother which won't be many.
Surely if it isn't suitable to be viewed by children then restricting its access to children shouldn't be seen as a problem ?
Obviously I appreciate that it creates ease of access issues for adults but protection of minors should be the priority IMHO.
Who decides what is suitable? Would you consider a suicide prevention help page to be something minors should be protected from seeing?
That's a rhetorical question, the point is that it's Not That Simple. Eg, the post ten minutes before yours (you probably missed it whilst typing) mentioned subjects such as trans issues. There are many who would say that's an adults-only topic; there are more still who would like to pretend that it doesn't exist.
Who watches the watchers?
Nord VPN seems to be the big boy according to various pod casts I listen to?
They're certainly one of the most well advertised.
On another note, the bloke who fitted our Virgin Cable said if you use a dodgy stick without a VPN they will throttle your internet speed.
I'd wager that the bloke who fitted your Virgin Cable was talking out of the top of his head.
There are many reasons why you shouldn't use a 'dodgy stick' without a VPN (or indeed, at all), and many reasons why VM may throttle your connection. But I'd hazard that the Venn diagram here would be two discrete circles.
You may well be right but he worked for Virgin and had no reason to either offer me the information or lie about it. The discussion was around the fact I didn’t have a dodgy stick because I’d got a good deal. He said even with employee discount he still did and said he used a vpn.
It took me less than 1 minute to get around it. Installed Opera, switched on VPN
Which is precisely why there are discussions about banning VPNs
It doesn't undermine the moral argument behind restriction of access with regards to minors
doctors recommend ‘draining’ the pc, three times a day if you’re 21 years old.
Sorry, back to this - 3 times a DAY?!
Surely if it isn't suitable to be viewed by children then restricting its access to children shouldn't be seen as a problem ?
The issue is that Wikipedia is currently in this bracket. The last government (or senior leaders within it)'s obsession with what people get up to in the privacy of their own home is fairly infamous - Theresa May fought for years as home secretary to get some sort of censorship in place for the internet, presumably because running around in fields is as frisky as she could ever understand one wanting to be. What's disappointing, as with a number of things right now, is the extent to which the current government, supposedly the 'good guys' in our 2-party democracy, is just continuing on with the previous lot's legislation without even pausing to apply any sort of common sense or common good measure to it.
Who decides what is suitable? Would you consider a suicide prevention help page to be something minors should be protected from seeing?
Well certainly not me, I'm not a child psychologist nor do have any professional qualifications concerning suicide, self harm, etc.
Why would you even consider asking me?
Surely if it isn't suitable to be viewed by children then restricting its access to children shouldn't be seen as a problem ?
The issue is that Wikipedia is currently in this bracket.
I refer to my previous comment.....
Now if you think the definition of what is unsuitable for children is wrong then that is a completely different issue.
No-one should be required to verify their age before being allowed to buy a stick of butter just on the off-chance that they might be tempted to shove it up their arse.
Why would you even consider asking me?
I didn't. Did you miss the following sentence?
Switch the butter for a bottle of white lightening. You ok for that to be sold to all and sundry so you don't have to 'be treated like a child'? Would the 19yr old Cougar have felt like he was being treated like a child if he'd been asked for ID so he could have a session down the park?
19-year old Cougar would have been quite surprised as he'd already been doing exactly that of an occasional weekend for several years.
As analogies go that's probably better than you think but not for the reason you intended. We found a way around licensing legislation in minutes via word of mouth, the fine Asian gentleman running the off licence on Nuttall Street was more than happy to sell 1.5L bottles of Forester's cider to 15-year olds.
In fact, is not passing an age verification test the exact opposite of being treated like a child? Failing an age verification test would be like being treated like a child.
Isn't this a bit like the "if you have nothing to hide..." argument?
Which is precisely why there are discussions about banning VPNs
So another 10 years and by then another way around it. Moral argument is one thing but if there is a need to enforce anything then more savvy people need to be involved in it...
to go from that kind of study to implying as the earlier poster seemed to, that porn in general may reduce cases of prostate cancer.
I guess it depends how you read the earlier comment. Whatever it is that you're doing to increase your frequency the better it is for your prostate is how i read it.
The thing is VPNs can't be banned, they are heavily used by business for transactions and secure access to remote servers in data centers etc.
It's basically critical infrastructure.
It would cause problems on a scale I can't really imagine.
Businesses will have thier own VPN they manage internally, compared to a home user routing their data through nordVPN or whatever, but it's the same thing.
Isn't this a bit like the "if you have nothing to hide..." argument?
I don't think so. My car has to pass an MOT. I don't feel it's demeaned because it's only 3yrs old and 'clearly' roadworthy. I show my passport to get back into the UK - I don't feel moral outrage that I have to when I'm 'so obviously British' (words chosen to suggest the obvious Reform UK 'British test' snobbery) . In neither case am I feeling judged on stuff I might have hidden, just assessed that it/I am what I appear on first inspection.
I think it's just a change of mindset that's needed. You are I are in our 2nd half century and for the vast majority of our adult lives the internet has existed and been a go-anywhere landscape that we've basically grown up and old alongside. To think a bit of that might change, and not for our personal gain but the protection of others, might take a bit getting our heads around.
As analogies go that's probably better than you think but not for the reason you intended
To 'touche' your analogy rebuttal......you chatted to many 15-16yr old recently? Way, way less dodgy shops that will sell you underage booze than there were back in our day. To the extent that in many areas kids have basically given up trying. I was blatantly buying rounds in pubs at 16 without a seconds thought as I suspect were most STW old codgers. It's almost like the age verification in that sector has matured and started to work.....
What's disappointing, as with a number of things right now, is the extent to which the current government, supposedly the 'good guys' in our 2-party democracy, is just continuing on with the previous lot's legislation without even pausing to apply any sort of common sense or common good measure to it.
Yeah, problem is they care what the papers say rightly or wrongly. Had they shelved it the front of the Daily Wail would have had something along the lines of "Stamer soft on immigrant pedophiles and loves pron".
If they think teenagers won't be downloading free VPNs (with their inherent risks) or Opera (with it's own less risky VPN), sending each other links to online file repositories like MEGA, torrents, telling their mates about the dodgy sites based in Russia that they have found or even the dark web, they are daft.
But I'm not sure we have ever had a government that truly understands the internet or even technology. This lot on one hand seems to think AI will solve all our problems whilst on the other they're probably eyeing up banning VPNs (I'm ignoring the click bait article from earlier today but you wouldn't put it past them) and social media for under 16s.
I have two sons, one 15 and one 17. They were well aware the Death Stranding selfie workaround and Opera when I spoke to them earlier. We talk about online stuff because it's the nature of parenting.
One of the knock on effect of all this VPN traffic is that the security services are going to have to work harder to keep us actually safe.
:sigh:
The point is, this sort of thing is Hard.
It's been wrapped up in a big old cloak of "won't somebody think of the children" pearl-clutching so if you dare challenge it you're obviously either a deviant or a nonce, but it's half-assed legislation drawn up by a group of people who haven't got the faintest idea what they're talking about and implemented under the misapprehension that the rest of the world gives the slightest of ****s about the laws of a rainy island at the end of a European cul-de-sac. All of this has come as a surprise to absolutely no-one with an ounce of technical knowledge and indeed was widely predicted at least ten ago (prior to the "Snooper's Charter" Investigatory Powers Act).
Now Parliament is seemingly reeling in shock that VPNs have existed for like 30 years and why did no-one say anything? Oh, I know, we'll ban those too. Yeah, good luck with that. You can then kiss goodbye to remote working, secure online shopping, online banking, the rest of the world wanting anything to do with our incompetent approach to security... and it'll all be for nowt anyway because we'll have bypassed it again whilst the ink is still wet. Hey, why not just take bolt crops to the intercontinental cables, that worked really well for China.(*) Then we can have a fine upstanding British Internet for British people because after all we invented it(**) and Johnny Foreigner can bally well get their own.
In the meantime, before the censorship algorithms kick in, here's a gratuitous photo of a pair of boobies:
(* - it didn't)
(* - we didn't)
Sorry, back to this - 3 times a DAY?!
😂
I recall seeing some 'advice' that the medically interesting/normal range was the same as pooing, it wasn't considered a problem unless it was more than 3 times a day or less than once every 3 days.
I think it's just a change of mindset that's needed. You are I are in our 2nd half century and for the vast majority of our adult lives the internet has existed and been a go-anywhere landscape that we've basically grown up and old alongside. To think a bit of that might change, and not for our personal gain but the protection of others, might take a bit getting our heads around.
I'd be more inclined to agree if I had any faith in the competence of those exacting change. I now need to pass an age verification test (which has already been defeated by a video game in, how many days? whilst we're stretching analogies, it's currently akin to allowing me to drive because I can prove I'm Sonic the Hedgehog) and hand over my details to a US company in order to have unfiltered access to that well-known bastion of hardcore grumble, BlueSky.
Is KWS trustworthy? Are they holding my biometrics securely? Their data buckets are absolutely a prime target for state-sponsored ne'er-do-wells, that much is certain. And that's just one company, who do I have to verify myself to next?
As an aside, I note with some amusement that despite all this new online "protection" the dark web is still readily accessible. And if you think that what most people see is the Wild West then I have some very bad news for you.
you chatted to many 15-16yr old recently? Way, way less dodgy shops that will sell you underage booze than there were back in our day.
I can't say as I have. But if not drink, how many are doing other things instead? Weed, vaping... If you're going to tell me that 15-16 year olds have given up on minor acts of rebellion I'm going to struggle to believe you.
All this age verification censorship for videos, but you can go incognito in Chrome and watch pr0n GIFs to your heart's content without a verification prompt.
I distinctly remember a government minister at the time when copyright infringement was in the spotlight... The pirate bay, etc.
That's apparently banned (ho ho ho!) but even more amusing, they referred (in an official document) to IP as Intellectual property, but in the context of IP as internet protocol, as in IP address.
This is the level of understanding we are dealing with here.
It would be like me trying to create legislation or best practice frameworks for offshore oil drilling despite never having set foot on an oil rig in my life.
If you're going to tell me that 15-16 year olds have given up on minor acts of rebellion I'm going to struggle to believe you.
Going a bit OT but they kind of have - it's very odd. Obviously not totally and they'll always be skagheads and rebel groms in the making, but your 'average' kid has become unhealthy healthy! As in, young boys have become so body conscious and the gym has become the new church of the yoof and Tait and his ilk the preachers. Fear of being an incel is driving too many kids to not do the nefarious stuff we all did and spend their time honing their gym bods. The cool kids are now all about how they look so even the uncool kids who have not drunk the Tait coolaid are being dragged that way too. It's a weird world.
Have you made that small so we don't have to verify our age to see it?
Or is it just that I've been getting carried away with the 3x a day habit?!
I got snagged by this during the week trying to access a fairly boring swedish mail order site.
Also Reddit and a couple of others.
Yeah, no. Not giving my info away to access reddit. All good now though.
and implemented under the misapprehension that the rest of the world gives the slightest of ****s about the laws of a rainy island at the end of a European cul-de-sac
The US has some very similar online safety laws, though. So surprising (well, not really) that Republican politicians are raising the UK laws as a free speech issue. In Florida, for example, no access to porn for under 18s and it's proposed that under 16s have restricted access to social media.
On the point that kids just get VPNs, don't parental controls stop that? They can't install apps or change the config of the device.
With one of these new sim contracts ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvg3lgdv3r7o) and proper control over your own wifi at home you 'should' be able to have a good bit of control over what kids get to see.
As ever - with capable and aware parents, children are more likely to be supported/protected. But the majority of kids don't come from homes like that and I guess that's one of the reasons we are where we are with the new regulations.
Pretty sure every SIM I've got recently has a block on adult content for its mobile data. Only the account holder can unlock it.
The problem with parental controls on your own WiFi is that it all goes out of the window as soon as they are at their mate's house, where their parents don't bother.
So I think I do support some base protections that the platforms have to adhere to.
the majority of kids don't come from homes like that and I guess that's one of the reasons we are where we are with the new regulations
‘The majority’? I find that hard to believe.
we are where we are with regulation because legislation looks like action from government. It acts as a handy distraction from real concerns that, sadly, government seems unable to [edit] affect improve [/edit]. Like, say, poverty, education, wage stagnation …
I note with some amusement that despite all this new online "protection" the dark web is still readily accessible.
It's going to be somewhat perverse (sic) if this new "online protection" regulation results in more kids using TOR. I've not looked on there for many years, but it certainly wasn't the sort of space you'd want anybody to go to unless they knew how to protect themselves, both from the threats on there and the risk of accidentally seeing something they couldn't unsee.
‘The majority’? I find that hard to believe.
Really? The British public have crushingly rudimentary abilities to manage anything 'tech'. Scratch that, the British public have a level of naivety regarding online security and potential dangers for their kids that thier incapability to actually do anything about resolving issues is hardly a problem because it's rarely tested. Through work I attend the odd webinar/parent information evening to help parents with this kind of stuff, and it's always a suprise at their level of naivety and 'trust' in their kids based basically on ignorance. Almost like they weren't ever kids themselves and remembered what conniving little whatsits they are or in fact read the job description before putting their hand up to take on the role of looking after a fresh batch.
On the point that kids just get VPNs, don't parental controls stop that? They can't install apps or change the config of the device.
1) Many browsers come with VPN functionality already in place.
2) Most parents probably don't know any better than to have one admin login to the computer. The notion that parents are in any way equipped to outsmart their children with regards to technology is hilarious, the solution to any tech problem has been "get your kid to do it" since before VCRs were all flashing 12:00.
3) Other devices, and other networks, are available.
If you / the government is seeking a technical solution then you / they will fail as sure as night follows day. Because the kids are better at it than you are.
Not sure that's true. Aren't the parents increasingly the kids from 25 years ago who were running rings around their own parents with their tech knowledge? Doesn't the non-tech-aware cohort get smaller over time?
From what I see of my siblings and how they are managing this with their kids, they seem pretty clued up.
I disagree with the suggestion that all kids run rings around their parents. We have got parental controls running through our kids devices, their phone contract and through the wi-fi network. We are pretty liberal but, when we choose too, have complete control over what apps they download, content (mostly), screen time (absolutely). I'm no tech expert, but I do know how to use the decent tools that Apple provide and, givn the amount of whinging from my kids about it, they haven't managed to crack the system yet.
That's exactly what they want you to think
the amount of whinging
I think you have proven my point. You know why they are whining? Because their mates can do stuff they can't (i.e. Thier parents aren't as on it as you). It's my experience that when a whole cohort can't do something, they pipe down pretty quickly. It's when some can't and some can it kicks off. I've been amazed how smooth a transition many schools have had to no phone policies and on reflection it's because from a child's eyeline it's 'fair'. Kid phycology takes a bit of getting your head around - even when something is blatantly unfair, as long as it's similarly unfair to everyone in their circle they seem to be far more at peace with it. If something is manifestly a reasonable request but others get to get away with it, the sky falls in. They will happily be the boiling frog as long as all their mates are boiling too!
Reports of needing to prove your age for Spotify, now.
Utter clusterfudge.
Reports of needing to prove your age for Spotify, now.
Utter clusterfudge.
It's true.
https://support.spotify.com/uk/article/age-restricted-content-age-check/
If lacking VPN or copy of “Death Stranding”, one can always offer up one’s M.P.’s driving licence as verification - enter a postcode here: https://use-their-id.com and screen grab the output. A slightly different way of getting your elected representative to work for you.
☝️ A great way for amateur gynecologists to access their favourite websites !