Re: Surprised?
I think politicians like to think the UK has more influence than it actually does.
86 publicly visible posts • joined 23 Jun 2021
I doubt many people will feel any sympathy with Facebook & will think they got off lightly, but this does feel like state governments have found a way to circumvent the First Amendment & Section 230. I'm not so sure this is a victory for parents or teenagers.
It looks like the government want Google & Apple to do an age check when you set up a new phone. Plus there are possible restrictions on VPNs being mentioned in the Guardian & the Times. It might be time we all have to admit that we have effectively lost the internet & it's never coming back like it was.
That's one motivation. But these policies (e.g. the Online Safety Act) survived a change of prime ministers & governments, so I don't think it matters who is in charge. Who is going to give up their mobile phones though? They've become so indispensable to modern life. Only literally everyone in the UK binning theirs will lead to any kind of change.
I think it's New York with the 3D printer filters (though California might have a similar proposal). It doesn't just cover 3D printers; apparently any kind of device using CAD is covered. Plus they want people buying 3D printers to undergo the same background checks people buying guns go through. Unfortunately it seems like the people govern us aren't even useful idiots.
The UK is not the shining beacon of free speech that is often claimed. Historically British governments have had many methods to censor information: licensing printers, seditious libel, knowledge taxes (requiring newspapers to be stamped), wartime censorship, D notices, etc. A lot of stuff about the royal family has been covered up & records destroyed or redacted. I also think the US Constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on. American governments have found so many loopholes around, for example, the Fourth Amendment (e.g. buying data from brokers).
Thing is it isn't just the UK. Seemingly banning under 16s from social media & requiring age/ID verification to go online seems to become a serious issue requiring immediate legislative action in many different countries around the world. This, is of course, in no way co-ordinated.
I'd guess they might have exceptions for government, business & education. Just ordinary members of the public would have to prove their age or ID. At this point I don't think we can rule anything out anymore, e.g. a ban on talking about circumvention tools online; forcing VPNs to keep logs, etc.
We seem to have politicians these days who have no understanding of what is & isn't possible with technology legislation. They seem indifferent to the inconvenience they are causing everyone. Maybe they should abolish Section 230 & crash the American economy as well before people stop voting for them.
There is also a huge risk if American politicians pull the plug on Section 230 & don't replace it, that the ripple effects hit the rest of the world. While cloud services could go dark to avoid liability is probably small, the fact is it is still possibly. I think all the political uncertainty will encourage more moves to digital sovereignty.
There's a negative campaign being run in the French press claiming GrapheneOS is the criminal's choice of phone. While there have apparently been no official demands for a backdoor, GrapheneOS have decided that discretion is the betted part of valour & have therefore left France. Unfortunately (as other commentators have pointed out) the current political atmosphere is one where governments are taking more active measures against encryption & age verification looks like it will become the default method of accessing the internet. So these battles are going to be replayed in lots of countries around the world.
Even if Reform win the next election, I think it will be very difficult for them to repeal the Online Safety Act. There would be opposition from all the groups that got it passed & lots of negative headlines about children being put at risk.
It depends. News organisations naturally have an exemption. (Newspapers were one of the main promoters of the legislation). However, it depends how Ofcom defines a media site. The Register may not qualify. Even if it does, I believe there is some uncertainty if comments under articles are exempt or not.
Problem is western governments are extremely keen on age verification as a means to protect minors from unsafe internet content. This happening even in the US at the state level where things like the First Amendment & Section 230 don't seem to deter state legislatures from passing internet safety laws. Age verification will be everywhere online in the next decade.