UK Politics General Discussion

[Matt N]

The much-hyped Online Safety Bill, a hang-over from the Tory government that is possibly one of the most far-reaching pieces of internet legislation ever, came into force on Friday: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0epennv98lo

I don't want to sound right-wing, but I'll admit that I'm not sure if I agree with this legislation.

I completely get the sentiment behind it. Very few people would disagree that current legislation makes the internet too unrestricted for children and teenagers; some of the statistics (for example, 50% of 13-year-olds have seen "hardcore, misogynistic pornography") are quite sobering. Something definitely needs to change.

However, I'm not sure that this legislation is the answer, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, I have my concerns about the rather blunt way in which the legislation seemingly forces any site with "user-generated content" to abide by the very draconian requirements. Yes, the likes of Facebook and X come to mind, but sites like Wikipedia are also getting pulled into this and are threatening to restrict their service in the UK, and smaller sites like TS are also covered by the legislation. I fear that the blunt way in which this legislation has been implemented could potentially make many discussion boards shut up shop or pair back their services. Forums like TS have been an absolutely brilliant thing for me, and I wouldn't want other enthusiasts of anything to miss out on such a brilliant thing because of some ham-fisted legislation that reached too far.

Secondly, I also have my concerns about the idea of mandatory age verification on adult sites. It's a sound idea on paper; it's adult content, so people should be verified like they are to buy beer. But I don't think it's quite that simple in practice. Age verification on a website is much more complex and introduces many more minefields than age verification in a shop, nightclub or similar in-person environment. In the in-person environment, you flash your driving licence, passport or whatever at the shop assistant, and they likely forget your information almost as soon as you've made your purchase or obtained entry to your business. But the online world does not forget that easily. Any age verification process on a website would store the information given for verification in some capacity, likely in some kind of database. Now some will say "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"... but I'm not sure I agree. Data breaches are a legitimate threat for any database, and while pornography is legal and many adults consume it, I'm quite sure that most, if not all, users of adult sites would not want their usage information from these sites to be paired to personally identifiable information and leaked in a data breach. A database of age verification information that would almost definitely be identifiable paired with usage information from adult sites sounds like it's asking for a ransomware or sextortion attack... budding cyber criminals will absolutely love that! And frankly, I think there are also questions to be asked about privacy; there's a definite argument that this would strongly impede many people's privacy even before you take the data breach potential into account.

So for the reasons given, I'm definitely unsure on whether I agree with this legislation. I don't deny that the intention is noble, and I agree with the sentiment, but I think it's too far-reaching and has privacy implications, and I'm not sure it's the answer to this issue. I wonder if the answer should lie in legislation more specific to children and teenagers and/or larger social media sites, perhaps with regard to parental controls.

What does anybody else think?

 

[Benzin]

People always find a way to get smut. And it doesn't surprise me that people don't want to give these websites identifying personal information (particularly credit cards for example) that will make them a real target for hackers. Plus of course relies on the 3rd party companies bought in for the "age confirmation" software to not be selling that data on anyway.

The other effect is that it drives people onto more dangerous areas of the Internet.

The Act has also had some unfortunate not thought about side effects on a few forums as well.

However seems like VPNs will be next since they became VERY popular since this came into fruition. Which of course would affect many Working From Home because what do you use to connect to the central work system?

 

[Alsty]

How the government can pass a law that over-reaches into the privacy of its citizens... just claim it's "protecting children". You wouldn't be against that would you?

 

[Smiley]

It's a stupid piece of legislation, and only a matter of time before age verification services get hacked. It's as stupid as suggesting putting backdoors in encryption, or even as some politicians have suggested "banning encryption".

 

[Matt N]

It's as stupid as suggesting putting backdoors in encryption, or even as some politicians have suggested "banning encryption".

You see, it’s stuff like this that makes me have doubts about the level of technological literacy of those who created the legislation. They should really have domain experts with some level of technological literacy involved in creating technology legislation, but the execution of this bill gives me doubts about whether any domain experts were actually consulted.

I saw the reference to putting back doors in encryption… they somehow thought that this would be some kind of magical back door that would only allow government officials through and wouldn’t let cyber criminals through. That isn’t how encryption works, unfortunately! You can’t let people in without undermining the entire principle! The head of the NCSC (rightly) accused the government of “magical thinking” on this.

I’m slightly reassured by the fact that others on here seem to be concerned by the bill. I myself have my concerns about it and am not sure I support it; I think it’s noble in intention, but poorly executed and perhaps overly authoritarian for my liking. But I was slightly afraid to say that on a site that tends to lean left-wing politically, seeing as the only party that appears to openly oppose the bill is Reform UK. The left wingers are seemingly all for it!

I don’t agree with Nigel Farage on very much, but I think I can see his point on this subject…

 

[DiogoJ42]

You only have to look at what happened this week with that "Tea" app, to realise why only an idiot would upload their ID, or even a face scan, to any site.

 

[Matt N]

You only have to look at what happened this week with that "Tea" app, to realise why only an idiot would upload their ID, or even a face scan, to any site.

What happened, exactly?

 

[DiogoJ42]

It's an app that lets women "rate" men. They all had to upload ID and face scans to prove they were "women".
Turns out the server didn't even have a basic password on it. Technically it wasn't even a "hack", it was "walking through an open door". Now every single member has been doxxed.

 

[Matt N]

It's an app that lets women "rate" men. They all had to upload ID and face scans to prove they were "women".
Turns out the server didn't even have a basic password on it. Technically it wasn't even a "hack", it was "walking through an open door". Now every single member has been doxxed.

You see, this is exactly why I think the age verification aspect of the bill is a large scale cyber attack waiting to happen!

What cyber criminal wouldn’t love a database filled with ID and/or face scans linked with pornography usage information that most people will want to be kept private? A ransomware or sextortion attack practically creates itself!

You’d like to think that the databases would be protected against cyber attack, but seeing as even big, reputable sites have fallen victim to data breaches because of very preventable gaps in their cyber security, do you really trust some of the dodgier porn sites and/or age verification providers to secure their databases adequately?

I will not be at all surprised if we hear about some sort of big data breach soon revolving around one of these age verification features.

 

[Benzin]

You know its an idiotic idea when Farage is being the voice of reason.

Broken clocks and all that.

 

[DistortAMG]

It comes to something when you need ID to have a ****. But you do not need ID to enter the UK.

The country is very broken.

Was great seeing Starmer as Trumps petting dog the other day however. You could see the panic on Starmers face.

 

[Matt N]

How the government can pass a law that over-reaches into the privacy of its citizens... just claim it's "protecting children". You wouldn't be against that would you?

This has already begun, it would seem… Technology Secretary Peter Kyle has accused Nigel Farage of being on the side of “people like Jimmy Savile” due to his disagreement with the bill: https://www.theguardian.com/politic...rage-extreme-pornographers-online-safety-bill

I’m no Reform supporter, but I do think this is a dreadful thing to say. There are very valid concerns about this legislation, in my view, and raising them does not automatically mean you are a pedophile sympathiser or that you don’t think there are problems to be solved.

 

[DiogoJ42]

Ah yes, the classic "the only people who would want freedom are those who would abuse it" argument.

 

[East Coast Mariner]

I’m slightly reassured by the fact that others on here seem to be concerned by the bill. I myself have my concerns about it and am not sure I support it; I think it’s noble in intention, but poorly executed and perhaps overly authoritarian for my liking. But I was slightly afraid to say that on a site that tends to lean left-wing politically, seeing as the only party that appears to openly oppose the bill is Reform UK. The left wingers are seemingly all for it!

I don’t agree with Nigel Farage on very much, but I think I can see his point on this subject…

Is this the relevant vote, Matt? Seems to be mostly a Labour thing (although I'm sure the Tories would have done the same if they had been in power). It's no surprise Nigel Farage is popular, as he is often the only party leader making a big deal of important issues.

 

[Matt N]

Is this the relevant vote, Matt? Seems to be mostly a Labour thing (although I'm sure the Tories would have done the same if they had been in power). It's no surprise Nigel Farage is popular, as he is often the only party leader making a big deal of important issues.

Yes, this is the one.

It was actually originally proposed by the Tories, but Labour just kept it.

 

[Smiley]

It is unfortunate that so few industry experts seem to have been consulted; or it could just be that they all said it was a terrible idea IMHO the UK Govt should have created a digital verification platform first, which I believe is part of the Data (Use and Access) Act - although this has been in various guises for many, many years already.

 

[Alsty]

This and previous governments have always been technically illiterate for as long as I can remember.

Every now and then the topic of putting backdoors into encryption comes up, and when technical experts say it can't be done without completely undermining the whole purpose of it, the government normally reply along the lines of "you're not thinking hard enough".

Reminds of those awful middle managers you get who tell you "I don't want to hear problems, I want to hear solutions".

 

[Matt N]

This and previous governments have always been technically illiterate for as long as I can remember.

Every now and then the topic of putting backdoors into encryption comes up, and when technical experts say it can't be done without completely undermining the whole purpose of it, the government normally reply along the lines of "you're not thinking hard enough".

Reminds of those awful middle managers you get who tell you "I don't want to hear problems, I want to hear solutions".

The rhetoric around technology from the government, particularly with regard to this recent debate around backdoors in encryption, often makes me think that the levels of technical literacy among lawmakers are around on par with those shown by most of the people in this famous clip from The IT Crowd:


I know not everyone is a technological expert, and that’s fine, but I do think there should be greater technological expertise involved in making technology legislation. You really need legislation to have contribution from experts in the field if you want it to be successful.

 

[Benzin]

You really need legislation to have contribution from experts in the field if you want it to be successful.

But we've been sick of experts since 2016 apparently.

Just get Tim from down the local to draw up the plans to stop the boats. And Derrick to redesign HS2 for a far cheaper rate.

 

[BarryZola]

HS2 could have been made much cheaper if they didn't insist on it going quite so fast. If it was a little bit slower it could have been more curvy to skirt around spans of water, bat populations, hills etc instead of having to build tunnels and bridges and whatnot. But they insisted on the extra bit of speed as it was always a vanity project and a white elephant. The extra bit of speed gives you hardly any benefit as the distance travelled in this country is so small relative to the likes of China and France. Even Derrick could have looked at both of those options and decided on the slower trains.

As for the boat people. Kier's not exactly smashing the gangs is he? 25,000 people have entered by boat so far this year making it a record (approx the population of somewhere like Harrogate). The truth is, they want the immigration. He's done nothing of any substance to stop it. All his initiatives are total rubbish that won't make a dent in the numbers. Whether you like it or not, it's a big issue for voters and if he doesn't sort it you'll end up with a Reform like party eventually.