Cable Forum
Page 12 of 15 « First 2891011 12 131415
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   Online Safety Bill Etc (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33711643)

tweetiepooh 10-06-2025 09:17
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197802)
so what's stopping me logging on and handing the PC over to a child
Nothing, but the responsibility is then yours as would any action be. There are tools that can assist parents to police their children's use of technology, which together with other good parenting habits can do a great deal to help protect children from overuse or abuse of on-line media etc.

papa smurf 10-06-2025 10:00
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36197833)
Nothing, but the responsibility is then yours as would any action be. There are tools that can assist parents to police their children's use of technology, which together with other good parenting habits can do a great deal to help protect children from overuse or abuse of on-line media etc.
you mean parental responsibility :shocked: gosh what a terrifying thought setting the rules for your own kids is

RichardCoulter 10-06-2025 10:21
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197835)
you mean parental responsibility :shocked: gosh what a terrifying thought setting the rules for your own kids is
But the whole point of taking steps to protect children is for those parents who don't take appropriate action to protect their children from online harm, and these children need protecting too.

tweetiepooh 10-06-2025 10:47
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197836)
But the whole point of taking steps to protect children is for those parents who don't take appropriate action to protect their children from online harm, and these children need protecting too.
But how far do you erode the freedoms of others to protect children whose parents (care givers) are neglecting their duty? Do you ban cars because children whose parents haven't taught them not to play on/near the road could be killed? (This is beyond the duty of drivers to be aware of the conditions.)
If parents don't properly and fully train their children because they can't be bothered, isn't that a form of neglect? As always we need to differentiate between those who can't and those who won't.
Children do not need a smart phone, or even a phone at all. Do not give them one and if you must make it a member of a family group where you lock it down and limit it to suit your rules. Do they need their own computer? We gave our refurbished Lenovo laptops with Linux, they could do all they needed to up to the end of school (then my daughter needed Windows for 6th form to run Adobe) and they couldn't install stuff likely to break it.

RichardCoulter 10-06-2025 11:13
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36197837)
But how far do you erode the freedoms of others to protect children whose parents (care givers) are neglecting their duty? Do you ban cars because children whose parents haven't taught them not to play on/near the road could be killed? (This is beyond the duty of drivers to be aware of the conditions.)
If parents don't properly and fully train their children because they can't be bothered, isn't that a form of neglect? As always we need to differentiate between those who can't and those who won't.
Children do not need a smart phone, or even a phone at all. Do not give them one and if you must make it a member of a family group where you lock it down and limit it to suit your rules. Do they need their own computer? We gave our refurbished Lenovo laptops with Linux, they could do all they needed to up to the end of school (then my daughter needed Windows for 6th form to run Adobe) and they couldn't install stuff likely to break it.
You raise some very pertinent points. As for your questions, I guess we must delegate the answers to the people we have elected to represent us in Parliament.

papa smurf 10-06-2025 11:19
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197836)
But the whole point of taking steps to protect children is for those parents who don't take appropriate action to protect their children from online harm, and these children need protecting too.
how many children do you have

Pierre 10-06-2025 13:31
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197819)
Anyone thinking about ending their own life who is searching out content of this nature should not be able to find DIY guides on the internet.

The algorithm would also note that they are interested in this subject and serve up even more content.
anyone can put anything on a server.

Quote:
People should not be allowed to encourage people to commit suicide in forums, chatrooms etc without consequences.
Agreed, but what about nuance?

What about a scenario where two young teenage lovers break up, and she says "if you break up with me, I'll kill myself" and he responds "do it then, I don't care"

Should he be prosecuted?

Quote:
Responsible parents would ensure that their child is at school and in bed at a reasonable hour, so restricting the hours when these activities should be taking place wouldn't affect them. It's the children of parents who, for various reasons, don't bring up their children responsibly that this legislation aims to protect (if it is actually introduced).
The state trying to take the role of the parent.......what could go wrong?

Sirius 10-06-2025 16:25
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197839)
You raise some very pertinent points. As for your questions, I guess we must delegate the answers to the people we have elected to represent us in Parliament.
Nice non answer

Itshim 10-06-2025 17:38
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tweetiepooh (Post 36197837)
But how far do you erode the freedoms of others to protect children whose parents (care givers) are neglecting their duty? Do you ban cars because children whose parents haven't taught them not to play on/near the road could be killed? (This is beyond the duty of drivers to be aware of the conditions.)
If parents don't properly and fully train their children because they can't be bothered, isn't that a form of neglect? As always we need to differentiate between those who can't and those who won't.
Children do not need a smart phone, or even a phone at all. Do not give them one and if you must make it a member of a family group where you lock it down and limit it to suit your rules. Do they need their own computer? We gave our refurbished Lenovo laptops with Linux, they could do all they needed to up to the end of school (then my daughter needed Windows for 6th form to run Adobe) and they couldn't install stuff likely to break it.
Commonsense, what's gone wrong on this forum :D

RichardCoulter 10-06-2025 19:01
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197855)
Nice non answer
Because we lack the experience or knowledge to answer & resolve many issues or simply can't be bothered to deal with them, we elect MP's to do so on our behalf.

Ultimately, it will be these people who will decide what needs addressing and how to do it.

We are able to try and influence them in various ways if we wish and, of course, some MP's are better than others.

Stephen 10-06-2025 20:31
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197865)
Because we lack the experience or knowledge to answer & resolve many issues or simply can't be bothered to deal with them, we elect MP's to do so on our behalf.

Ultimately, it will be these people who will decide what needs addressing and how to do it.

We are able to try and influence them in various ways if we wish and, of course, some MP's are better than others.
Sorry, but how are those MPs anymore experienced or knowledgeable than us? Those privileged many with there expense accounts and people to do things for them. Many without kids too.

jem 10-06-2025 20:55
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197865)
Because we lack the experience or knowledge to answer & resolve many issues or simply can't be bothered to deal with them, we elect MP's to do so on our behalf.

Ultimately, it will be these people who will decide what needs addressing and how to do it.

We are able to try and influence them in various ways if we wish and, of course, some MP's are better than others.
Tell me, do you honestly think that the MPs we elect have any more experience or knowledge than the ‘my mate down the pub who thinks...’? Of course not, they will vote for whatever ‘seems’ popular at the time. And this is irrespective for the practicalities of doing it or doing further harms that the legislation probably will cause.

Let me give you an example;

Do you believe that child sexual abuse is wrong? Yes or No?

If ‘no’ then do you believe that everything should be done to minimise it? Yes or No?

Statistics suggests that the vast majority of child sexual abuse happens in their own home. Do you agree with this? Yes or No?

So would monitoring of activity inside everyone's home, reduce the incidence of CSA? Yes or No?

Logically you have to say ‘yes’ so we must install cameras in every room in every house in the country, watched 24/7 by, oh maybe we get the unemployed* to do this for a small fee and they ‘report’ anything they don’t like! Do you agree with this? Yes or No?

If ’no’ then you obviously don’t agree that ‘everything should be done....’; you are no better than a child molester yourself! You see how this works?

After all, who cares who is watching what you do, after all, if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear; no? I assume you have no curtains up at your windows?

Look Richard, I have absolutely no doubt that you are a good person, you generally want to protect vulnerable people, but sometime, well often really, the obvious ’sounds like a good idea’ solution isn’t well thought through and causes more issues than it solves.


* absolutely no disrespect to anyone who is unemployed, just struck me as a possible source of people who could be paid a little extra to spend a couple of hours each day watching what others are doing in their own home. What could possibly go wrong?

mrmistoffelees 10-06-2025 21:08
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
So Richard in another thread you posted the following statement

‘ Some people are born disabled, but it's possible that they chose this in order to understand what the life of a disabled person is like eg they previously scoffed or discriminated against disabled people, realised that this was wrong and decided to go on a 'training course'. This is a very controversial view as, essentially, it's saying that abused/neglected/disabled people chose the situation that they are in or experienced.’

Taking your logic could it not be the children at risk chose to be born that way ?

You can either admit your statement is gibberish or, you can accept its applicable in any scenario.

Choose one as you can’t have it both ways

jem 10-06-2025 21:19
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36197877)
So Richard in another thread you posted the following statement

‘ Some people are born disabled, but it's possible that they chose this in order to understand what the life of a disabled person is like eg they previously scoffed or discriminated against disabled people, realised that this was wrong and decided to go on a 'training course'. This is a very controversial view as, essentially, it's saying that abused/neglected/disabled people chose the situation that they are in or experienced.’

Taking your logic could it not be the children at risk chose to be born that way ?

You can either admit your statement is gibberish or, you can accept its applicable in any scenario.

Choose one as you can’t have it both ways
Good point, so Richard believes any child/person who is abused actually ‘chose this’ and wanted it to happen. So how dare we intervene with laws preventing this?

Or we just assume it’s all gibberish and move on!

RichardCoulter 10-06-2025 22:52
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen (Post 36197869)
Sorry, but how are those MPs anymore experienced or knowledgeable than us? Those privileged many with there expense accounts and people to do things for them. Many without kids too.
In theory it's down to us to ensure that we vote for the best people for the job, but I accept that it's not always that simple.

---------- Post added at 22:48 ---------- Previous post was at 22:46 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jem (Post 36197873)
Tell me, do you honestly think that the MPs we elect have any more experience or knowledge than the ‘my mate down the pub who thinks...’? Of course not, they will vote for whatever ‘seems’ popular at the time. And this is irrespective for the practicalities of doing it or doing further harms that the legislation probably will cause.

Let me give you an example;

Do you believe that child sexual abuse is wrong? Yes or No?

If ‘no’ then do you believe that everything should be done to minimise it? Yes or No?

Statistics suggests that the vast majority of child sexual abuse happens in their own home. Do you agree with this? Yes or No?

So would monitoring of activity inside everyone's home, reduce the incidence of CSA? Yes or No?

Logically you have to say ‘yes’ so we must install cameras in every room in every house in the country, watched 24/7 by, oh maybe we get the unemployed* to do this for a small fee and they ‘report’ anything they don’t like! Do you agree with this? Yes or No?

If ’no’ then you obviously don’t agree that ‘everything should be done....’; you are no better than a child molester yourself! You see how this works?

After all, who cares who is watching what you do, after all, if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to fear; no? I assume you have no curtains up at your windows?

Look Richard, I have absolutely no doubt that you are a good person, you generally want to protect vulnerable people, but sometime, well often really, the obvious ’sounds like a good idea’ solution isn’t well thought through and causes more issues than it solves.


* absolutely no disrespect to anyone who is unemployed, just struck me as a possible source of people who could be paid a little extra to spend a couple of hours each day watching what others are doing in their own home. What could possibly go wrong?
This is why legislation should be thought through very carefully due to the 'law of unintended consequences'.

---------- Post added at 22:49 ---------- Previous post was at 22:48 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jem (Post 36197880)
Good point, so Richard believes any child/person who is abused actually ‘chose this’ and wanted it to happen. So how dare we intervene with laws preventing this?

Or we just assume it’s all gibberish and move on!
I didn't say what you claim.

---------- Post added at 22:52 ---------- Previous post was at 22:49 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36197877)
So Richard in another thread you posted the following statement

‘ Some people are born disabled, but it's possible that they chose this in order to understand what the life of a disabled person is like eg they previously scoffed or discriminated against disabled people, realised that this was wrong and decided to go on a 'training course'. This is a very controversial view as, essentially, it's saying that abused/neglected/disabled people chose the situation that they are in or experienced.’

Taking your logic could it not be the children at risk chose to be born that way ?

You can either admit your statement is gibberish or, you can accept its applicable in any scenario.

Choose one as you can’t have it both ways
This theory could be applicable to any scenario.

As the late Queen Elizabeth II said "We are here to observe, to grow, to learn and to love. Then we go home".

Sirius 11-06-2025 06:21
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197865)
Because we lack the experience or knowledge to answer & resolve many issues or simply can't be bothered to deal with them, we elect MP's to do so on our behalf.

Ultimately, it will be these people who will decide what needs addressing and how to do it.

We are able to try and influence them in various ways if we wish and, of course, some MP's are better than others.
You do know that MP's vote based on the instructions of the party whip dont you.

Pierre 11-06-2025 10:51
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197883)
This is why legislation should be thought through very carefully due to the 'law of unintended consequences'.
My irony meter just exploded.

RichardCoulter 11-06-2025 13:35
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197895)
You do know that MP's vote based on the instructions of the party whip dont you.
Not all of them have a party whip. Those that do are not obliged to follow their party whip if their conscience doesn't allow them to.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:22 ----------

WhatsApp has today announced that it will support Apple in it's ongoing row with the UK Government over privacy. They believe that the requirements of the Online Safety Act and a secret order that Apple received last February* could set a dangerous precedent and is another example of foreign powers trying to regulate it's own tech businesses.

*In the event of a national security risk, the Home Office said it needs to be able to access Apple data worldwide. Apple argue that, to enable this, they would have to build in a 'back door', which they have outright refused to do.on the grounds that others may find it.

I can see a legal case happening to judge whether the Home Office has the right to tell Apple what to do.

Neither party has thus far commented on this 'secret' order, presumably because it's supposed to be a secret!

Paul 11-06-2025 14:55
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197921)
I can see a legal case happening to judge whether the Home Office has the right to tell Apple what to do.
Thats easy to answer, so should be a very short case - "No, it doesnt".

The old "National Security" excuse is complete nonsense. If Apple or WhatsApp made backdoors, the "National Security" threats would simply move elsewhere, leaving the rest of us open to attack by criminals who get hold of the "backdoor".

nffc 11-06-2025 15:26
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197929)
Thats easy to answer, so should be a very short case - "No, it doesnt".

The old "National Security" excuse is complete nonsense. If Apple or WhatsApp made backdoors, the "National Security" threats would simply move elsewhere, leaving the rest of us open to attack by criminals who get hold of the "backdoor".
Apple isn't a UK company but has stores here, probably offices, and sells products and services to UK customers.


They can't control what they do compared to if it was a UK company. But they could in theory say that if Apple wanted to continue offering products and services to UK customers, it would need to comply with UK law, and also they could say that if they are not complying with requests from UK bodies that they could no longer sell products and services in the UK.


Doing that for something like this would just mean other people would be able to provide work arounds, or that they would lose a lot of tax from sales etc, so it wouldn't be a decision which would be popular or useful to make.


It would be interesting to see what would ultimately happen when the OSA is in full swing and some random site in the USA or South Africa or something is being interrogated by the UK authorities because some 15 year old saw something they shouldn't have.

Sirius 11-06-2025 17:28
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197921)
Not all of them have a party whip. Those that do are not obliged to follow their party whip if their conscience doesn't allow them to.

---------- Post added at 13:35 ---------- Previous post was at 13:22 ----------

WhatsApp has today announced that it will support Apple in it's ongoing row with the UK Government over privacy. They believe that the requirements of the Online Safety Act and a secret order that Apple received last February* could set a dangerous precedent and is another example of foreign powers trying to regulate it's own tech businesses.

*In the event of a national security risk, the Home Office said it needs to be able to access Apple data worldwide. Apple argue that, to enable this, they would have to build in a 'back door', which they have outright refused to do.on the grounds that others may find it.

I can see a legal case happening to judge whether the Home Office has the right to tell Apple what to do.

Neither party has thus far commented on this 'secret' order, presumably because it's supposed to be a secret!
That is excellent news, fingers crossed that Apple and WhatsApp win there case. It will set a precedent that the Government cannot just demand stuff and get away with it. Plus we then have 2 x secure platforms that the Government cannot snoop on.

RichardCoulter 12-06-2025 13:41
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197936)
That is excellent news, fingers crossed that Apple and WhatsApp win there case. It will set a precedent that the Government cannot just demand stuff and get away with it. Plus we then have 2 x secure platforms that the Government cannot snoop on.
Whichever way it goes it will clarify things one way or the other. Essentially, it would clarify which is more important, personal privacy or the Government being allowed access to deal with terrorism. I said some time ago that I thought it would eventually come to this.

As this affects something as important as privacy of the individual from the state, perhaps we should have a referendum?? I suspect that those who have been affected or are worried about terrorism will vote one way and those that haven't/aren't will vote the other, but it will provide clarification of how the electorate feel.

Stephen 12-06-2025 13:59
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Government reach should only go so far. Search for certain keywords should trigger investigation. However personal privacy is very important so I dont think generally spying and watching what people do is what's needed at all.

papa smurf 12-06-2025 14:12
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
how long will it be before they start steaming our letters open at the sorting office

Sirius 12-06-2025 14:45
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36197971)
Whichever way it goes it will clarify things one way or the other. Essentially, it would clarify which is more important, personal privacy or the Government being allowed access to deal with terrorism. I said some time ago that I thought it would eventually come to this.

As this affects something as important as privacy of the individual from the state, perhaps we should have a referendum?? I suspect that those who have been affected or are worried about terrorism will vote one way and those that haven't/aren't will vote the other, but it will provide clarification of how the electorate feel.
We all know what happens when they allow a referendum 🤣

Paul 12-06-2025 15:24
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197980)
We all know what happens when they allow a referendum 🤣
The losers cry for the next 10 years ?

Chris 12-06-2025 15:38
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197983)
The losers cry for the next 10 years ?
10 years, 9 months and counting in Scotland

Sirius 12-06-2025 16:33
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197983)
The losers cry for the next 10 years ?
And the winners want even more.

papa smurf 12-06-2025 18:26
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197980)
We all know what happens when they allow a referendum 🤣
The prime minister resigns :woot::woot:

Hugh 12-06-2025 20:33
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36197990)
The prime minister resigns :woot::woot:
Then you get four more from the same Party over the next six years…

papa smurf 12-06-2025 20:36
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36197993)
Then you get four more from the same Party over the next six years…
who all get stabbed in the back :)

RichardCoulter 13-07-2025 14:01
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
This morning the head of Ofcom was asked questions as the next stage to protect children from harm starts on the 25th of this month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002fx8k

The main content pertaining to the Act is at the beginning.

papa smurf 13-07-2025 14:16
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199224)
This morning the head of Ofcom was asked questions as the next stage to protect children from harm starts on the 25th of this month:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m002fx8k

The main content pertaining to the Act is at the beginning.
i watched it, seems these company's will police themselves

Itshim 13-07-2025 16:13
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36197895)
You do know that MP's vote based on the instructions of the party whip dont you.
That's working well for the pm :D

RichardCoulter 14-07-2025 09:32
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36199226)
i watched it, seems these company's will police themselves
Yes, in the same way that TV channels are expected to comply with the broadcasting code, Ofcom will only generally become involved if there are breaches of the law relating to the Online Safety Act.

mrmistoffelees 14-07-2025 09:58
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36197983)
The losers cry for the next 10 years ?
Counterpoint The (de)crying seems to be coming from (some of) the ‘winners’ trying to blame the negative impacts that the country has suffered on anything but Brexit despite them being caused by….. drum roll….. Brexit

Itshim 14-07-2025 15:12
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36199235)
Counterpoint The (de)crying seems to be coming from (some of) the ‘winners’ trying to blame the negative impacts that the country has suffered on anything but Brexit despite them being caused by….. drum roll….. Brexit
Really needs to be a trading club , not a pretend political union .

OLD BOY 14-07-2025 15:30
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36199235)
Counterpoint The (de)crying seems to be coming from (some of) the ‘winners’ trying to blame the negative impacts that the country has suffered on anything but Brexit despite them being caused by….. drum roll….. Brexit
Brexit may have happened but it still hasn’t been implemented. We are still stuck with EU rules and we have not done enough to encourage business. While Covid and the Ukraine war were major disrupters to progress, it’s not acceptable that the new trade deals are only just coming through now.

The Conservatives should have done better, and it is revealing that it’s taken a Labour government to start pushing these through. Our biggest money making sector for the UK is services, and this needs to be included in every trade deal we do.

It’s no good blaming Brexit for all our woes. Implementation should have been fast tracked to enable us to reap the benefits. Starmer’s attempts to cosy up to the French will soon show everyone how misguided this fellow is.

RichardCoulter 16-07-2025 19:34
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
User to user websites & sites where pornography is uploaded are now making preparations in order to ensure that they do not fall foul of the forthcoming age verification requirement.

These include verifying users themselves or outsourcing the function, blocking the UK from their service, closing down etc.

Although this is not endorsed by Ofcom (the regulator for these sites), this site does contain some useful information for those affected by this change:

OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk

thenry 16-07-2025 19:42
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Modded APKs exist for anybody that has an android device

Chris 16-07-2025 19:59
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199382)
User to user websites & sites where pornography is uploaded are now making preparations in order to ensure that they do not fall foul of the forthcoming age verification requirement.

These include verifying users themselves or outsourcing the function, blocking the UK from their service, closing down etc.

Although this is not endorsed by Ofcom (the regulator for these sites), this site does contain some useful information for those affected by this change:

OnlineSafetyAct.co.uk
Meanwhile anyone who wants to access these sites once they become geoblocked, will do what every internet user who wants to evade a geoblock already does.

This legislation is a classic case of the government needing to be seen to Do Something, whether what they do addresses the problem or not.

Paul 16-07-2025 22:38
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199382)
User to user websites & sites where pornography is uploaded are now making preparations in order to ensure that they do not fall foul of the forthcoming age verification requirement.

These include verifying users themselves or outsourcing the function, blocking the UK from their service, closing down etc.
So naive, ever heard of VPN's ;)

Itshim 22-07-2025 17:41
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36199385)
Meanwhile anyone who wants to access these sites once they become geoblocked, will do what every internet user who wants to evade a geoblock already does.

This legislation is a classic case of the government needing to be seen to Do Something, whether what they do addresses the problem or not.
Was told that a local school senior pupils are selling vpn connections to younger kids.not sure how that would work. This problem was passed up the food chain , the legal brains says nothing can be done about it. Could be a breach of contract but that's it.

jem 22-07-2025 21:56
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
More likely a case of more knowledgable people ‘selling’ how to set up a VPN to less knowledgable people.

In an odd way, you sort of have to admire them, there is obviously a demand to access porn and so, as often happens someone will step in to fill this need.

Of course it might have been better for the government to approach this from a perspective of ‘this will happen anyway, stop trying to compensate for bad parenting’ with a faulty technological fix.

I’m sure I have said this before but, I have two daughters, now adults, but when they were younger, 13,14,15 and had phones and tablets, I said to both of them, ‘look with the best will in the world, apply all sorts of parental controls, I know (because I do this for a living), they don’t work, and you are, absolutely are going to stumble over something that you don’t like, not sure this is ‘right’.

And when you do you come to me or you Mum and we will explain it to you. Importantly, no, you will not be punished or sanctioned or questioned about it. In fact quite the reverse, good for you for querying what you see and asking about it.'

Girls don’t like or watch porn? Rubbish, they do, it’s perfectly normal, maybe, not as ‘accepted’ as boys doing it, but they do! Alas a lot of porn is made from a male, fantasy perspective. No this actually isn’t how it works (or at least should work) in real life! And maybe parents of boys should also adopt this attitude, yes you are going to want to watch ’stuff’, it's perfectly understandable; but it is fantasy, it is not, absolutely not you should behave with a partner in real life.

Or maybe it’s just me.

Itshim 23-07-2025 17:19
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jem (Post 36199731)
More likely a case of more knowledgable people ‘selling’ how to set up a VPN to less knowledgable people.

In an odd way, you sort of have to admire them, there is obviously a demand to access porn and so, as often happens someone will step in to fill this need.

Of course it might have been better for the government to approach this from a perspective of ‘this will happen anyway, stop trying to compensate for bad parenting’ with a faulty technological fix.

I’m sure I have said this before but, I have two daughters, now adults, but when they were younger, 13,14,15 and had phones and tablets, I said to both of them, ‘look with the best will in the world, apply all sorts of parental controls, I know (because I do this for a living), they don’t work, and you are, absolutely are going to stumble over something that you don’t like, not sure this is ‘right’.

And when you do you come to me or you Mum and we will explain it to you. Importantly, no, you will not be punished or sanctioned or questioned about it. In fact quite the reverse, good for you for querying what you see and asking about it.'

Girls don’t like or watch porn? Rubbish, they do, it’s perfectly normal, maybe, not as ‘accepted’ as boys doing it, but they do! Alas a lot of porn is made from a male, fantasy perspective. No this actually isn’t how it works (or at least should work) in real life! And maybe parents of boys should also adopt this attitude, yes you are going to want to watch ’stuff’, it's perfectly understandable; but it is fantasy, it is not, absolutely not you should behave with a partner in real life.

Or maybe it’s just me.
Told they are " selling" connection.

RichardCoulter 23-07-2025 18:30
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
From another forum user:

Quote:
Civitai, the generative AI resource site, has announced to all UK users they will not be able to access the site after 24th July. Whilst it's not a porn site it does contain a lot of user generated content that can be rather explicit. However I think it does point up that a lot of smaller sites will just cut UK users adrift rather than try to comply with the rather onerous terms of the OSA.

In other words 'The OSA is too complex and the penalties too onerous on both the company and individuals for us to comply, so we'll take the easy way out and simply geoban Brits'.

I suspect a lot of smaller user content driven sites will take the same route - even if they explicitly ban dodgy stuff the costs of complying with the new rules will make them unviable. Yet again the internet is favouring the big corporations with deep pockets over the little guys we hoped would thrive on it.
No idea if this is a trend of any significance.

nomadking 23-07-2025 19:00
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Doesn't apply to just porn. It seems to also apply to any form of free discussion.
Even totally innocent websites have problems meeting the compliancy rules and have had to shut down.
Meanwhile the harm spread by the mainstream media goes untouched.

Carth 23-07-2025 19:09
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36199759)
<snip>
Meanwhile the harm spread by the mainstream media goes untouched.
If I ever get the urge to read about sex, horror, death & destruction or anything else that *may* impact my delightfully innocent mind, I just look at the main media/news sites and job done.

nomadking 23-07-2025 19:31
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36199762)
If I ever get the urge to read about sex, horror, death & destruction or anything else that *may* impact my delightfully innocent mind, I just look at the main media/news sites and job done.
Apart from anything else, harm isn't just about those things.
The key thing is that it also applies to sites just like this.

Carth 23-07-2025 20:01
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
To be perfectly honest, I'm starting to think it applies to anywhere that people (or even AI in future) have a difference of opinion :D

Sirius 23-07-2025 20:25
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
If only i had the money to start a VPN service, i would be quid's in. They way the offended are getting there way soon a VPN will be a necessity not a maybe

Paul 23-07-2025 22:04
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Never heard of Civitai, I tried to view it but our work system blocks it as "Adult Content" ...

RichardCoulter 23-07-2025 22:53
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36199766)
Never heard of Civitai, I tried to view it but our work system blocks it as "Adult Content" ...
Apparently, it's a user to user generated content site where users sometimes share explicit content (probably why your work system is blocking access).

It would have to comply with the Online Safety Act from Friday, so have decided to geoblock the UK from Thursday.

Chris 23-07-2025 23:03
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36199763)
Apart from anything else, harm isn't just about those things.
The key thing is that it also applies to sites just like this.
It applies to every website or internet service accessible from the UK. However the bar for what constitutes adult or objectionable content is fairly high, and obviously on this forum in particular we moderate more-or-less to ‘family friendly’ standards when considering what people post, especially with regards to images or links to other sites.

No matter what some have suggested, and notwithstanding what certain other members of this forum might think, we’re not going to get prosecuted simply on the sense of personal offence of someone who reads stuff on here they just don’t like.

Chris 24-07-2025 13:11
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
1 Attachment(s)
BBC explains, in detail, with graphics, why anyone wanting to access pr0n from the UK after tomorrow should use a VPN.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1k81lj8nvpo

It’s the bottom part of the graphic that’s truly jaw dropping. The part that says “Hey kids, here’s how you get around age restrictions”. :erm:

I guess you have to admire their commitment to public service …

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1753359047

Paul 24-07-2025 13:56
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Reading that story, it seems odd that Pornhub say they will comply with the UK rule given that last month there was another story about how they are pulling out of France for the same age check reasons.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5yelvlnzveo

Chris 24-07-2025 14:02
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
The article is slightly vague on detail but it looks like it has something to do with the way verification is mandated in the French law. According to the article, the porn sites don’t want the responsibility of holding personally identifying details about their viewers on their own systems when the devices people use are capable of determining age. I assume the law in the UK allows the operators to offer that as one of the 7 routes to verification they keep talking about.

RichardCoulter 24-07-2025 15:12
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
An Ofcom spokesperson said yesterday that fines would be the first tool used to ensure compliance (along with a referral to the police where necessary) before things like prosecution or geoblocking.

It will be interesting to see what happens with X as people can join from aged 13 and there is plenty of pornography on there. Musk seems to think he can do whatever he pleases, so I can see X being eventually geoblocked. IMO this won't be a bad thing and should be a major incentive to people to switch to Blue Sky.

They advertise themselves as being 'what social media should be', which I assume to mean that it is professionally run with appropriate moderation policies.

peanut 24-07-2025 15:25
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
From that BBC page it states...

'According to Ofcom, platforms must not host, share or permit content encouraging use of VPNs to get around age checks.

The government told the BBC under the Online Safety Act, it will be illegal for platforms to do this.

The regulator said parents should be aware children using a VPN to access the internet "would not be able to benefit from the protections of the Online Safety Act".

Concerned parents, it said, should block or control VPN usage.'

So this new law/ruling is because parents aren't controlling what their children are viewing who now need 'protecting'. Now they're saying the onus is back on the parents to control what and how they're using the internet. :confused:

Chris 24-07-2025 15:42
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199797)
An Ofcom spokesperson said yesterday that fines would be the first tool used to ensure compliance (along with a referral to the police where necessary) before things like prosecution or geoblocking.

It will be interesting to see what happens with X as people can join from aged 13 and there is plenty of pornography on there. Musk seems to think he can do whatever he pleases, so I can see X being eventually geoblocked. IMO this won't be a bad thing and should be a major incentive to people to switch to Blue Sky.

They advertise themselves as being 'what social media should be', which I assume to mean that it is professionally run with appropriate moderation policies.
The same Bluesky that saw a glut of child porn being posted late last year, at the exact-same-time the hand-wringing hard left staged a mass walkout of Twitter?

The Bluesky that has about 100 content moderators against Twitter’s 2,000-plus? (And only has 100 because it had to quadruple the staff to cope with the child porn outbreak).

The Bluesky that is, by design, harder to moderate because it’s decentralised? (unlike Twitter which is still centrally controlled)

You appear to be conflating a personal dislike for the politics of Twitter’s owner with an assumption that Twitter is less wholesome or less moral than the alternatives. Newsflash: humans are awful, and they take the same sh*t with them wherever they go.

You might want to reflect a little before simping for what is, after all, just another social media site.

Paul 24-07-2025 16:45
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36199798)
'According to Ofcom, platforms must not host, share or permit content encouraging use of VPNs to get around age checks.
In other words, you can say they exist, and could be used, just dont say you should use them .. ;)

---------- Post added at 16:45 ---------- Previous post was at 16:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199797)
They advertise themselves as being 'what social media should be', which I assume to mean that it is professionally run with appropriate moderation policies.
No, it just means the have a fancy sounding (but meaningless) advert. What exactly should "social media be" ?

RichardCoulter 24-07-2025 18:08
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36199800)
The same Bluesky that saw a glut of child porn being posted late last year, at the exact-same-time the hand-wringing hard left staged a mass walkout of Twitter?

The Bluesky that has about 100 content moderators against Twitter’s 2,000-plus? (And only has 100 because it had to quadruple the staff to cope with the child porn outbreak).

The Bluesky that is, by design, harder to moderate because it’s decentralised? (unlike Twitter which is still centrally controlled)

You appear to be conflating a personal dislike for the politics of Twitter’s owner with an assumption that Twitter is less wholesome or less moral than the alternatives. Newsflash: humans are awful, and they take the same sh*t with them wherever they go.

You might want to reflect a little before simping for what is, after all, just another social media site.
It's not so much Musks politics that bother me, it's the dreadful way that he's abused his wealth to buy and ruin Twitter.

There are reports that Blue Sky are now asking for user details in order to comply with the Act, but that X is not.

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 01:43
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Update: Surprisingly, X/Twitter are now implementing an age verification system, so it appears that Musk is playing ball. I had suspected that he would be the one to be awkward.

Because of some of the material on that site, I wonder if under 18's will now have their accounts closed and what will happen to their policy that people can join from 13 upwards?

Perhaps people who post material inappropriate for those aged 13 to 17 will have to flag it as such and it will be blocked from those under 18??

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 03:45
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
I'm surprised that so many websites have chosen to geoblock the UK and lose business rather than introduce age verification checks.

I'm wondering if it's these sites that failed to do the assessment required by last March and are now panicking because they fear Ofcom enforcement??

Carth 25-07-2025 08:53
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
I highly doubt there are any large (or small) website 'businesses' that have any fear of "Ofcom enforcement" :D

Chris 25-07-2025 09:11
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199840)
I'm surprised that so many websites have chosen to geoblock the UK and lose business rather than introduce age verification checks.

I'm wondering if it's these sites that failed to do the assessment required by last March and are now panicking because they fear Ofcom enforcement??
More likely the cost of compliance is higher than the revenue from being visible here. :shrug:

Paul 25-07-2025 15:30
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199840)
I'm surprised that so many websites have chosen to geoblock the UK and lose business rather than introduce age verification checks.
I'm not. They have successfully turned the UK into a place to avoid, made us into an internet paraiah.

Except of course for those with the knowledge to use a VPN (and of course the younger generation, the ones they pretend they are protecting, are the ones most capable of doing this). Many will already be using VPNs anyway.

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 16:35
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36199841)
I highly doubt there are any large (or small) website 'businesses' that have any fear of "Ofcom enforcement" :D
You don't think that the possibility of having their site shut down, huge fines or even imprisonment had any bearing on the decision of websites to either comply with the legislation or voluntarily withdraw from the UK?

---------- Post added at 16:31 ---------- Previous post was at 16:28 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36199842)
More likely the cost of compliance is higher than the revenue from being visible here. :shrug:
Yes, maybe age verification software is expensive??

Re: X/Twitter. There is no prescribed way to verify that someone is over 18 and the way that X have chosen to do this is to check when the account was opened (fair enough) or check the messages sent/received by users. Ofcom say that they are monitoring how well this works very closely.

---------- Post added at 16:35 ---------- Previous post was at 16:31 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36199846)
I'm not. They have successfully turned the UK into a place to avoid, made us into an internet paraiah.

Except of course for those with the knowledge to use a VPN (and of course the younger generation, the ones they pretend they are protecting, are the ones most capable of doing this). Many will already be using VPNs anyway.
When this possibility was put to Ofcom they said that this legislation wasn't a "silver bullet" and that some children will inevitably get round these changes, but that it is a better situation to where people were just required to click 'yes' when asked if they were over 18.

They have advised parents to check & try to stop children from using a VPN and made it unlawful for platforms to promote/encourage the use of VPN's in order to circumvent the new restrictions.

It's a good idea from the parents POV too, as the VPN set up by their child (likely to be a free one) may well abuse the data that they gain access to from all users of the connection.

Sirius 25-07-2025 16:40
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
I did a quick for educational purposes only check and a VPN will circumnavigate the Online Safety nonsense completely and it was a totally free VPN as well. :LOL:

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 16:44
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36199853)
I did a quick for educational purposes only check and a VPN will circumnavigate the Online Safety nonsense completely and it was a totally free VPN as well. :LOL:
There was/is no doubt that this would be/is possible. I'm surprised you find it amusing that some children will use this to circumvent the measures and access all types of pornography and other inappropriate material.

Hugh 25-07-2025 16:54
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36199853)
I did a quick for educational purposes only check and a VPN will circumnavigate the Online Safety nonsense completely and it was a totally free VPN as well. :LOL:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199854)
There was/is no doubt that this would be/is possible. I'm surprised you find it amusing that some children will use this to circumvent the measures and access all types of pornography and other inappropriate material.
Please show me where, in Sirius’s post, he states that he finds it

Quote:
amusing that some children will use this to circumvent the measures and access all types of pornography and other inappropriate material.
If Sirius was the litigious sort, you could find yourself in trouble making statements like that…

Stephen 25-07-2025 17:02
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Personally I think its just a total waste of time. People will easily learn how to by pass these checks and its not like they could suddenly outlaw VPNs as business use them legitimately.

Sirius 25-07-2025 17:09
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199854)
There was/is no doubt that this would be/is possible. I'm surprised you find it amusing that some children will use this to circumvent the measures and access all types of pornography and other inappropriate material.
No matter what is put in their way Kids will find a way around it. Take disposable vapes, now kids have moved to nicotine pouches which are far worse and far more addictive.

---------- Post added at 17:09 ---------- Previous post was at 17:07 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36199855)
Please show me where, in Sirius’s post, he states that he finds it



If Sirius was the litigious sort, you could find yourself in trouble making statements like that…
Indeed it an offensive slur on my character: :mad:

I found it incedulas that a free vpn made the implementation of age checks a total was of time and money.

Paul 25-07-2025 18:03
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199850)
You don't think that the possibility of having their site shut down, huge fines or even imprisonment had any bearing on the decision of websites to either comply with the legislation or voluntarily withdraw from the UK?
What makes you think the UK has any jurisdiction to do such things to anyone in other countries ?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199850)
They have advised parents to check & try to stop children from using a VPN and made it unlawful for platforms to promote/encourage the use of VPN's in order to circumvent the new restrictions.
Since its not the only use for VPNs (by a long way) parents are unlikely to do any such thing.
Platforms dont need to promote/encourage the use of VPN's, people already know about them anyway.

Itshim 25-07-2025 18:36
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Did I hear correctly that Jimmy Wales is concerned that Wikipedia may have to withdraw from the UK , due to this bill. . It was on radio 4 yesterday. Around lunch time . Just caught the end when I got in the car

Sirius 25-07-2025 18:44
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36199864)
Did I hear correctly that Jimmy Wales is concerned that Wikipedia may have to withdraw from the UK , due to this bill. . It was on radio 4 yesterday. Around lunch time . Just caught the end when I got in the car
The fallout from this will be massive and let's face it the more the offended get there way the more they will demand.

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 19:30
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36199857)
No matter what is put in their way Kids will find a way around it. Take disposable vapes, now kids have moved to nicotine pouches which are far worse and far more addictive.

---------- Post added at 17:09 ---------- Previous post was at 17:07 ----------



Indeed it an offensive slur on my character: :mad:

I found it incedulas that a free vpn made the implementation of age checks a total was of time and money.
LOL stands for 'Laughs out loud', does it not?

idi banashapan 25-07-2025 19:34
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
The very existence of the Online Safety Bill is a response to something many shy away from saying plainly... too many parents are failing to protect their children online. Internet providers already offer free safety filtering, and both desktop and mobile operating systems include built in parental controls and screen time management tools.

So why the need for legislation? It's not a stretch to suggest that many parents either aren’t bothering to configure these protections, or worse, are deliberately disabling them Perhaps for convenience or out of misplaced trust. The bill steps in where personal responsibility has too often been left at the login screen. And once these new steps are seen to be so easily circumvented with things like the aforesaid free VNPs for example, no doubt the response will be to increase the measures and reductions of personal freedoms even further.

The problem isn't so much children accessing porn, it's the parents not preventing them in the first place. Probably the same who complain about the 'nanny state'.

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 19:41
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36199862)
What makes you think the UK has any jurisdiction to do such things to anyone in other countries ?


Since its not the only use for VPNs (by a long way) parents are unlikely to do any such thing.
Platforms dont need to promote/encourage the use of VPN's, people already know about them anyway.
The UK has jurisdiction over sites based in other countries that are available in the UK because Parliament passed a law saying so.

Those that don't comply with the law face sanctions that may make it difficult/impossible to carry on. This and persuading foreign governments aside*, I don't think that the UK could close down a site based abroad and they would be geoblocked to those in the UK.

* Other countries are bringing in similar laws, so there may be reciprocal agreements.

Interestingly, Pornhub made themselves unavailable to some American states that introduced similar laws, but have accepted age verification in the UK.

---------- Post added at 19:41 ---------- Previous post was at 19:38 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by idi banashapan (Post 36199869)
The very existence of the Online Safety Bill is a response to something many shy away from saying plainly... too many parents are failing to protect their children online. Internet providers already offer free safety filtering, and both desktop and mobile operating systems include built in parental controls and screen time management tools.

So why the need for legislation? It's not a stretch to suggest that many parents either aren’t bothering to configure these protections, or worse, are deliberately disabling them Perhaps for convenience or out of misplaced trust. The bill steps in where personal responsibility has too often been left at the login screen. And once these new steps are seen to be so easily circumvented with things like the aforesaid free VNPs for example, no doubt the response will be to increase the measures and reductions of personal freedoms even further.

The problem isn't so much children accessing porn, it's the parents not preventing them in the first place. Probably the same who complain about the 'nanny state'.
Sadly, I think you make a good point. The statistics for the ages of children accessing porn is shocking.

Sirius 25-07-2025 20:27
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199868)
LOL stands for 'Laughs out loud', does it not?
It does and i was laughing at the fact that the so called experts that are involved in this never took into account the fact that a simple VPN would circumnavigate the block. As for your slur that i find the effects that porn has on children as a joke i don't find it funny at all. I have grandkids and i ensure they are kept away from it. Therefor i would like you to take it back and ask for the offensive post to be removed or i will ask the forum owner to get involved myself.

Paul 25-07-2025 21:27
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199870)
The UK has jurisdiction over sites based in other countries that are available in the UK because Parliament passed a law saying so.
LOL. I dont think the world quite works like that, they dont have jurisdiction just because they say so.

They have no power to compel sites in other countries to do anything. The worst they can do (as noted) is try and block them.

After all, that policy has has worked out really well with torrent sites over the last 15 years (many of which have porn sections btw) ;)

RichardCoulter 25-07-2025 23:18
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul (Post 36199875)
LOL. I dont think the world quite works like that, they dont have jurisdiction just because they say so.

They have no power to compel sites in other countries to do anything. The worst they can do (as noted) is try and block them.

After all, that policy has has worked out really well with torrent sites over the last 15 years (many of which have porn sections btw) ;)
Apparently, they will try to stop advertisers, hosting providers etc from doing business with the said sites by banning them from doing business in the UK. If this doesn't work and any negotiations with foreign governments don't succeed, you're right, they can only block the offending sites within the UK.

It's worth noting that this isn't just about porn. A site dedicated to WWII may have pictures of wounded/dead soldiers or Holocaust survivors that would be inappropriate for children.

Paul 26-07-2025 03:05
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36199880)
It's worth noting that this isn't just about porn. A site dedicated to WWII may have pictures of wounded/dead soldiers or Holocaust survivors that would be inappropriate for children.
Not true, these new rules are specifically about porn, and in fact more specifically, image/video based porn, text porn is exempt.

It defines porn as "content of such a nature that it is reasonable to assume that it was produced solely or principally for the purpose of sexual arousal".

Further to this, it only applies if the service meets all of the following tests:
* regulated provider pornographic content is published or displayed on the service
* the service is not exempt, and
* the service has links with the United Kingdom.

The final one is quite interesting (and vague) the definition seems to be ;
* the service has a significant number of United Kingdom users, or
* United Kingdom users form one of the target markets for the service (or the only target market).

If the site is not aimed at the UK, and/or has few UK users, and doesnt have a uk domain, then its quite likely not covered.

Its all here if you get bored and want to read it.
https://onlinesafetyact.co.uk/part_5...aphic_content/

mrmistoffelees 26-07-2025 06:47
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
We did some playing around with this at work Using freely available tools on the internet that older children/teenagers will use for other purposes. we were able to create three methods of false identity in about five minutes that were able to convince five age verification services that it was a legitimate identification source and permit access.

The act doesn’t protect it’s a tick box exercise.

What it does do is create massive honeypots of data in various services that will be targeted and in all likelihood will be breached.

Sirius 26-07-2025 07:07
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Sky news is reporting the following.

Quote:
There is also a risk that age verification could push users towards more dangerous corners of the internet in search of pornography.

By 10am on Friday, data suggested an extra 66,000 internet users in the UK had begun using the dark web.

Ms Kubecka fears this number may only increase.
https://news.sky.com/story/hackers-p...conds-13401733

This is exactly what happened with the banning of disposable vapes, Kids just moved to nicotine pouches which are far worse.

In this case if it is kids moving to the dark web then they will be subjected to even more dangerous content.

mrmistoffelees 26-07-2025 07:13
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
From that sky news article

“People should be aware that children and adults who use [certain software] to bypass age checks will not benefit from the wider protections offered by our online safety rules."

Such as…….?

papa smurf 26-07-2025 10:10
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
just been on youtube an advert popped up for cheap VPN's

Sirius 26-07-2025 10:50
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36199897)
just been on youtube an advert popped up for cheap VPN's
i am getting them via email.

peanut 26-07-2025 10:56
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sirius (Post 36199898)
i am getting them via email.
So ‘dodgy” sites aren’t allowed to promote VPNs but any non dodgy site can.

The thing that got me was the bbc stated 6000 porn sites. I know of 2. It seems now all the media is doing is advertising VPNs as a work around and letting people know there’s plenty of porn sites if you look around.

Chris 26-07-2025 10:59
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by peanut (Post 36199899)
So ‘dodgy” sites aren’t allowed to promote VPNs but any non dodgy site can.

The thing that got me was the bbc stated 6000 porn sites. I know of 2. It seems now all the media is doing is advertising VPNs as a work around and letting people know there’s plenty of porn sites if you look around.
Sites that are meant to be conducting age verification are not allowed to publicise ways of evading age verification - which obviously includes VPNs. It’s not a topic ban per se, it’s a ban on evading the law, which is a fairly common principle in UK legislation (e.g. see what happens if you get caught with a speed camera detector in your car).

Carth 26-07-2025 11:23
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36199897)
just been on youtube an advert popped up for cheap VPN's
You still get adverts on Youtube? :shocked:

I had no idea as I don't get any ;) :naughty:

Chris 26-07-2025 11:28
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
DuckDuckGo has been pushing its own browser a lot recently. It has a built-in VPN (for $$$ … though the browser itself is free).

damien c 26-07-2025 12:37
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Don't worry folks, eventually Netflix, Fakebook, X, Insterfake, Prime, YouTube, Twitch, Whatsapp, basically any website that can have information including this very site will be blocked from being accessed in the UK as the Government will say it has "Harmful" content on it.

Welcome to the new North Korea, get ready for daily prayers and pledges to our Supreme Leader Keir Starmer or when another party get in, who ever is in charge of that party.

I have already been asked if I am going to stop uploading music to a channel on YouTube that I run, because the UK Government may find the lyrics in the tracks "Harmful and Dangerous".

I might need to start a business in blankets and rugs, people are going to need them for sitting outside staring at the sky because they certainly won't be watching TV, reading books, listening to music or audio books etc because there will be nothing left that someone has not found to be offensive or harmful.

Sirius 26-07-2025 13:08
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by damien c (Post 36199907)

I might need to start a business in blankets and rugs,
If they are itchy blankets, then they need to be banned :)

Carth 26-07-2025 14:52
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
You won't be able to ban them if they're made from other recycled itchy blankets, we're all going to save the planet by sending everything we don't want back to China, where they will recycle it into even more crap we don't want :D

damien c 26-07-2025 17:25
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Well the censorship is already starting.

A film company who posted their film to YouTube and X (Twitter) has had it blocked on X in the UK unless you have verified your age, only people over the age of 18 can watch it, but people over 16 years of age are going to be allowed to vote without being able to see alternative perspectives than those that our dictatorship believe is acceptable.

The film is called "The Agenda: Their Vision - Your Future"

Description taken from the website for the film(Documentary).

"The Agenda: Their Vision, Your Future examines the digital prison which awaits us if we do not push back right now. How your food, energy, money, travel and even your access to the internet could be limited and controlled; how financial power is strangling democracy and how global institutions like the World Health Organisation are commandeered to champion ideological and fiscal objectives.

The centrepiece is man-made climate change and with it, the race to Net Zero. Both are encapsulated in the United Nations and its Agenda 2030. A force for good? Or “a blank cheque for totalitarian global control”?"



This goes against the agenda and narrative of the UK Government both Tory and Labour, hence it has been labelled "Harmful Content" to anyone under 18.

Even if you are over 18, unless you have verified your age on X, you will not be able to watch it without a VPN on X.

https://x.com/OracleFilmsUK/status/1930356088404357464



Welcome to North Korea people, where according to their state media say they win the Olympics, World cup's etc all the time and the whole world is falling apart whilst North Korea is flourishing.

This country is doomed, to many softies and perpetually offended are making the decisions, instead of using common sense!

Chris 26-07-2025 17:38
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Settings and Privacy > Your Account > Account info.

Set your location to somewhere outside the UK. There are reports of content being geoblocked on the basis of this setting, in which case a VPN won’t help you when using X.

For the purposes of Elon Musk, I am resident in the Falkland Islands. :D

Carth 26-07-2025 17:43
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Page doesn't exist when I used the link.

https://x.com/OracleFilmsUK/status/1930356088404357464

I'm not a twitter X user though, but it shouldn't make a difference as I can (could) see most links to things on there but not any further comments.

Incidentally, I use Discord (for gaming) and I see no changes, and often follow Reddit links for information, which again still allow access to non registered viewers . . . for now.

Firmly in Damiens camp regarding anything the Govt. don't want you to see (or enquire about) will be rendered invisible.

Paul 26-07-2025 18:33
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36199916)
Page doesn't exist when I used the link.
Ditto, looks like someone deleted it.

TBH, it sounds rather like a lunatic fringe film to me.

Carth 26-07-2025 18:44
Re: Online Safety Bill Etc
 
Didn't sound like anything I'd go looking for, but no reason to block it surely :shrug:


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 22:32.
Page 12 of 15 « First 2891011 12 131415
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum