Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371

RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
104 Indlæg 52 Posters 0 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • uilebheist@polyglot.cityU uilebheist@polyglot.city

    @mbpaz @cstross My router is over 18 years old, and I'm not replacing it. And I can prove its age.

    mbpaz@mas.toM This user is from outside of this forum
    mbpaz@mas.toM This user is from outside of this forum
    mbpaz@mas.to
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #59

    @Uilebheist @cstross "I'm an aging router, and I assume responsibility for any outbound packets these young devices connecting to me may send "

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • oschonrock@mastodon.socialO oschonrock@mastodon.social

      @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad

      100% agreed...

      The entire bill is totally technically illiterate with all sorts of backfiring fishhooks... embarrasing really.

      No idea why Labour feels the need to do this sort of thing.

      Worldproof the child, not childproof the world. And parents' responsibility.

      cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
      cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
      cstross@wandering.shop
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #60

      @oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)

      oschonrock@mastodon.socialO fonant@social.vivaldi.netF ulrich_the_elder@thecanadian.socialU 3 Replies Last reply
      0
      • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

        @oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)

        oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
        oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
        oschonrock@mastodon.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #61

        @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad

        Complex subject.

        For example, I would be quite pro a complete twitter ban in EU/UK.

        Is that "nanny state", or is that recognising that X is deliberately manipulated to be a malignant anti-democratic cancer?

        Porn for kids.... TBH, I get less excited about that, and selective blocking is hard/impractical.

        fonant@social.vivaldi.netF ahltorp@mastodon.nuA 2 Replies Last reply
        0
        • fonant@social.vivaldi.netF fonant@social.vivaldi.net

          @cstross @david_chisnall I'm not planning to do anything that would result in the government seizing my computer 🙂

          There is no way the government can know whether or not I use a VPN or not, nor whether I use TOR.

          Unless the law allows the police to randomly inspect people's computers, and they do this to a significant proportion of the population, I can use any VPN I like without fear. We don't live in a police state yet...

          nicovel0@mastodon.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          nicovel0@mastodon.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          nicovel0@mastodon.social
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #62

          @Fonant @cstross @david_chisnall emphasis on yet. When you go through the U.K. border they can seize for inspection all devices you are carrying, no matter your citizenship.

          fonant@social.vivaldi.netF 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

            RE: https://social.vivaldi.net/@LonM/115966748145817371

            UK PEOPLE: this is REALLY IMPORTANT. If the government bans under-16s from using VPNs, then logically they must intend to REQUIRE AGE VERIFICATION FOR ALL VPN USE. Which will affect adults too!

            *Your* privacy and right to anonymous web browsing is at risk!

            syhr@social.coopS This user is from outside of this forum
            syhr@social.coopS This user is from outside of this forum
            syhr@social.coop
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #63

            @cstross There's no way they can possibly enforce this for existing VPN users.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • nicovel0@mastodon.socialN nicovel0@mastodon.social

              @Fonant @cstross @david_chisnall emphasis on yet. When you go through the U.K. border they can seize for inspection all devices you are carrying, no matter your citizenship.

              fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
              fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
              fonant@social.vivaldi.net
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #64

              @Nicovel0 @cstross @david_chisnall Yeah, but I'm not going to be carrying my desktop computer on foreign trips.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • oschonrock@mastodon.socialO oschonrock@mastodon.social

                @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad

                Complex subject.

                For example, I would be quite pro a complete twitter ban in EU/UK.

                Is that "nanny state", or is that recognising that X is deliberately manipulated to be a malignant anti-democratic cancer?

                Porn for kids.... TBH, I get less excited about that, and selective blocking is hard/impractical.

                fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                fonant@social.vivaldi.net
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #65

                @oschonrock @cstross @PeterSommerlad A ban on Twitter in the EU would also be impossible to enforce.

                oschonrock@mastodon.socialO 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                  @capriciousday Like banks and other financial institutions who require their employees to use them when working out of the office, or over wifi *within* the office.

                  highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                  highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                  highlandlawyer@mastodon.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #66

                  @cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...

                  uilebheist@polyglot.cityU bencurthoys@mastodon.socialB 2 Replies Last reply
                  0
                  • highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH highlandlawyer@mastodon.social

                    @cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...

                    uilebheist@polyglot.cityU This user is from outside of this forum
                    uilebheist@polyglot.cityU This user is from outside of this forum
                    uilebheist@polyglot.city
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #67

                    @HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday They'll argue that lawyers are over 18 "and why would be a problem to prove that?".
                    Remember it's the "Labour" party we are talking about.

                    highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • fonant@social.vivaldi.netF fonant@social.vivaldi.net

                      @oschonrock @cstross @PeterSommerlad A ban on Twitter in the EU would also be impossible to enforce.

                      oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                      oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                      oschonrock@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #68

                      @Fonant @cstross @PeterSommerlad
                      Yes, I agree that geoblocking would have many holes (vpns, tor, etc), but that is acceptable in this case, IMO

                      Because the threat that ban would be trying protect against, is serious damage to Europe's democracies. Democracy is a numbers game by definition. So to eliminate a major source of malignant misinformation for say 90% people who can't be bothered to circumvent the geoblock, would destroy the network effect that is so core to any social network's power.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                        @oschonrock @Fonant @PeterSommerlad Labour has a nasty paternalist/nanny state tradition going back over a century. It's baked in at this point: Labour knows what's best for you, peasant. (So do the Tories, but they approach it differently.)

                        fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fonant@social.vivaldi.net
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #69

                        @cstross @oschonrock @PeterSommerlad We can happily discuss whether age restrictions on "VPN users" is a Good or Bad idea for a law.

                        My point is that it's impossible to enforce such a law.

                        It would be as pointless as the Online Safety Act. Well-intentioned, no doubt, but embarrassing when ignored. The 4chan bulletin board has been fined £20,000 and more for breaching the Online Safety Act. Their response has been "we don't care, we're not complying with a UK law, we're not going to pay any fines". The only thing Ofcom can do is to ask UK ISPs to block access to 4chan. They haven't yet, but if they do it'll be easily bypassed by a VPN or TOR.

                        oschonrock@mastodon.socialO 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • fonant@social.vivaldi.netF fonant@social.vivaldi.net

                          @cstross @oschonrock @PeterSommerlad We can happily discuss whether age restrictions on "VPN users" is a Good or Bad idea for a law.

                          My point is that it's impossible to enforce such a law.

                          It would be as pointless as the Online Safety Act. Well-intentioned, no doubt, but embarrassing when ignored. The 4chan bulletin board has been fined £20,000 and more for breaching the Online Safety Act. Their response has been "we don't care, we're not complying with a UK law, we're not going to pay any fines". The only thing Ofcom can do is to ask UK ISPs to block access to 4chan. They haven't yet, but if they do it'll be easily bypassed by a VPN or TOR.

                          oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                          oschonrock@mastodon.socialO This user is from outside of this forum
                          oschonrock@mastodon.social
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #70

                          @Fonant @cstross @PeterSommerlad

                          I agree that enforcement will be very leaky at best.

                          Whether that is "enough" depends on the case. In the case of X/twitter (see elsewhere) it might be, because the power of a network is proportional to N^2.

                          What makes the OSA very very stupid is that it subjects the 90% of the adult public who are using these services (ie porn etc) legally to a massive invasion of privacy with signficant risk of damaging data leaks by dodgy third parties.

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • fonant@social.vivaldi.netF fonant@social.vivaldi.net

                            @david_chisnall @cstross The government has to discover that there is an illegal VPN being used in the first place.

                            It is quite possible for millions of VPNs to be made available to UK children, hosted all over the world. Perhaps hosted by children, sharing the small monthly server costs. Quite secret, extremely difficult to find.

                            The proposed law could only ever hope to apply to a few big VPN companies. Which just moves the VPN usage by children underground, where other dangers lurk.

                            highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                            highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                            highlandlawyer@mastodon.social
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #71

                            @Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
                            "We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
                            History has proven both are always true until they aren't.

                            fonant@social.vivaldi.netF petealexharris@mastodon.scotP raven667@hachyderm.ioR 3 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH highlandlawyer@mastodon.social

                              @cstross @capriciousday Lawyers likewise. Working at home or in a court building, using confidential & legally privileged data on the office server...

                              bencurthoys@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bencurthoys@mastodon.socialB This user is from outside of this forum
                              bencurthoys@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #72

                              @HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday I don't see anything in the amendment that would apply to a business using e.g. Wireguard to access resources in an internal network. The definition of "relevant VPN service" "means a service of providing, in the course of a business, to a consumer, a virtual private network for accessing the internet". So B2C things only, not corporate VPNs.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • uilebheist@polyglot.cityU uilebheist@polyglot.city

                                @HighlandLawyer @cstross @capriciousday They'll argue that lawyers are over 18 "and why would be a problem to prove that?".
                                Remember it's the "Labour" party we are talking about.

                                highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                                highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH This user is from outside of this forum
                                highlandlawyer@mastodon.social
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #73

                                @Uilebheist @cstross @capriciousday So clerical staff will be required to use a separate computer system to the fee earners, since some of them may be 16 or 17?

                                And yes, it is IngSoc we're talking about.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH highlandlawyer@mastodon.social

                                  @Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
                                  "We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
                                  History has proven both are always true until they aren't.

                                  fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  fonant@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  fonant@social.vivaldi.net
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #74

                                  Defining a "VPN" will be extremely difficult, but that's not my point.

                                  My point is that it is impossible to block access to VPNs, and equally impossible to ban them.

                                  This is a mathematical certainty. We can't un-learn how to have securely encrypted communications.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • nicovel0@mastodon.socialN nicovel0@mastodon.social

                                    @dan @jaawerth @cstross the judge will know when they take a look at it.

                                    jaawerth@functional.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    jaawerth@functional.cafeJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                    jaawerth@functional.cafe
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #75

                                    @Nicovel0 @dan @cstross

                                    "Did you pass the underage VPN ban?"
                                    "Sure did, boss! Required federated identity on every *nix host accessible from the UK, real impossible just like you asked!"

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • oschonrock@mastodon.socialO oschonrock@mastodon.social

                                      @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad

                                      Complex subject.

                                      For example, I would be quite pro a complete twitter ban in EU/UK.

                                      Is that "nanny state", or is that recognising that X is deliberately manipulated to be a malignant anti-democratic cancer?

                                      Porn for kids.... TBH, I get less excited about that, and selective blocking is hard/impractical.

                                      ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                                      ahltorp@mastodon.nu
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #76

                                      @oschonrock @cstross @Fonant @PeterSommerlad One reason for a Twitter ban is that it would then be much more difficult for people to excuse their presence there. And for people not wanting to be there but feel pressured to, to get an excuse to leave.

                                      oschonrock@mastodon.socialO 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • highlandlawyer@mastodon.socialH highlandlawyer@mastodon.social

                                        @Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross
                                        "We don't need to worry, because the govt will not be able to enforce it" is the counterpart to legislators who say "we don't need to put in detailed definitions & restrictions, because we trust police & prosecutors to use the powers responsibly".
                                        History has proven both are always true until they aren't.

                                        petealexharris@mastodon.scotP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        petealexharris@mastodon.scotP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        petealexharris@mastodon.scot
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #77

                                        @HighlandLawyer @Fonant @david_chisnall @cstross

                                        Exactly this.

                                        A bad law isn't one that states its own intention to be abused, it's one that doesn't include specific concrete measures to prevent abuse, because the intent to abuse will surely come along soon enough, like it always has.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • fonant@social.vivaldi.netF fonant@social.vivaldi.net

                                          @cstross @david_chisnall The likelihood of the police taking my computer for forensic examination is zero.

                                          I have plenty of things that I must keep private. So does everyone.

                                          ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ahltorp@mastodon.nuA This user is from outside of this forum
                                          ahltorp@mastodon.nu
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #78

                                          @Fonant @cstross @david_chisnall One should design a society so that there is as little as possible for the people in power to grab on to once it becomes a police state. A legislation process that only considers fair weather is really bad, and the weather already seems kind of cloudy.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper