27
top 34 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] PatMustard@feddit.uk 23 points 6 months ago

Should we invest in education for children as to what is and isn't healthy sexual behaviour, or perhaps put the responsibility for patenting children on the parents? No, let's bring in authoritarian laws and undermine online privacy again, and maybe let some of our mates get rich while we're at it!

[-] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 9 points 6 months ago

Problem is, just like pensioners this cohort of active voters (entitled parents) have the ear of political parties. They threaten to vote with their feet. These daft policies don't start in a vacuum. Middle class parents have lobbied for years to get to this stage and the government had obliged rather than do the hard thing and better educate parents on how to keep their children safe online.

Can't wait for Keir to get in and reverse or axe this policy. That's what he'll do, right? Right?

[-] IbnLemmy@feddit.uk 3 points 6 months ago

Kier ain't axing shit. The man is too busy pivoting on all pledges so he can morph into Boris and you think he will make this the seperating line?

[-] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

Unlike the tories, Labour have a costed manifesto, so they have to remove things if the economy gets worse and they'll have less money to work with if they win. It keeps getting worse, so they keep removing things from the manifesto. There's not really another option other than running on a manifesto they know contains things that can't fit in the budget.

[-] SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Wait, really? Ok, I admit that's actually a good reason for removing manifesto promises. I was under the impression they cut the £28B etc etc just because they felt like it/lobbying/appeasing demographics

[-] Emperor@feddit.uk 19 points 6 months ago

Although initially missing from the U.K.’s next attempt at internet regulation, pressure from children’s charities, age verification providers and vocal parliamentarians persuaded the government to revamp the defunct regime through the Online Safety Act.

I think "age verification providers" are a bit biased here. I'd imagine VPN companies are lobbying hard for this too as they will gain from this.

Another argument for physical media - I am pretty sure I have a VHS around here with something smutty on it...

[-] BumbleBeeButt@lemmy.zip 11 points 6 months ago

Hahaha, old dinosaurs can't keep up with technology.

[-] sunbeam60@lemmy.one 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

My daughter is in her mid-teens. She’s into performing arts and dance. Even she knows what a VPN is.

This will make a difference but a much smaller one than they think. It might remove some cases of accidental discovery but it will remove very few cases of intentional access.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 6 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Porn perusers will soon have to prove their age by uploading an identity document like a passport, registering a credit card, presenting their face to AI-powered scanning technology, or using a handful of other methods outlined in draft guidance from the regime’s regulator, Ofcom.

Although initially missing from the U.K.’s next attempt at internet regulation, pressure from children’s charities, age verification providers and vocal parliamentarians persuaded the government to revamp the defunct regime through the Online Safety Act.

Many videos depict graphic and degrading abuse of women, sickening acts of rape and incest, and many underage participants,” Tory MP Miriam Cates, a strong advocate for the legislation, told the House of Commons in September.

Research indicates younger kids who stumble across porn accidentally can find it shocking and disturbing — although the majority of young people surveyed in a 2020 British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) report said this didn’t impact them in the long term.

But the issue is complicated: the BBFC report found that older teens said they watched porn for educational purposes, due to a lack of information about sex in schools, or for gratification, while half of the LGBTQ+ respondents said it had helped them understand and explore their sexual identity.

“The squeamishness associated with pornography has made it nearly impossible to have a mature discussion about the technical feasibility, trade-offs, and effectiveness of age verification mandates,” says Matthew Lesh, director of public policy and communications at the free-market think tank.


The original article contains 2,313 words, the summary contains 245 words. Saved 89%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2024
27 points (93.5% liked)

UK Politics

2966 readers
134 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS