←back to thread

361 points gloxkiqcza | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.226s | source
Show context
Apreche ◴[] No.45006225[source]
If they do it, I never want to hear any criticism of the great firewall of China from them ever again.
replies(11): >>45006407 #>>45006591 #>>45008003 #>>45008064 #>>45008720 #>>45009326 #>>45009628 #>>45009653 #>>45010097 #>>45010338 #>>45010502 #
est ◴[] No.45009326[source]
I read on twitter, can't find the exact link, a chinese content site operating in .sg for many years, survived multiple "internet purges" by China, got banned by UK authorities last month.
replies(1): >>45009336 #
msgodel ◴[] No.45009336[source]
I remember reading posts a decade or two ago on either Linode's forums or some other place like LinuxQuestions in broken English about tunneling through firewalls with ssh from I assume Chinese people.

I've started seeing posts like that from British people now. Absolutely wild. So much for the birthplace of common law.

replies(4): >>45009460 #>>45009973 #>>45010518 #>>45010852 #
phatfish ◴[] No.45010852[source]
A slim chance of getting outed for watching porn is more important to UK males than enforcing an age gate to stop kids having unlimited access. This is all that shows.
replies(4): >>45011687 #>>45011876 #>>45011900 #>>45012089 #
1. aDyslecticCrow ◴[] No.45011900[source]
You're on hacker-news, so this is simple to explain;

Create a new flag in the http header that indicates under-age, and put heavy restrictions (and fines) on what content is allowed to be served as a response. Get this through to google, Mozilla, Microsoft, and apple as a device-wide parent-control feature. Universally enforced and legally backed parent control.

1. Simple to enforce

2. No major security issues

3. No risk of abuse as a surveillance or control mechanism.

4. No issue of "did not know user wasn't child" loophole if anyone is found in violation. If a child is still found on a adult website; it is entirely blamable on parent not running the parent control feature, or the website not respecting the flag.

This type of solution is proposed by the Russian state using special sim-cards for children under 14. Odd how the UK is the extreme one all of a sudden.

Instead we get;

1. Difficult to enforce effectively and easy to circumvent with rudimentary methods for those it actually affects.

2. Security nightmare to do correctly. (recent tea leak)

3. Easy excuse to ban any content the government disapproves of. (wikipedia is now a adult site)

4. A normalization to hand out personal ID and photos to random websites.

5. A perfect excuse for authoritarian governments to implement something similar since "free and democratic nation did the same".

This is not about children. It is never about children. Banning encryption, collect all personal digital communication for review, and personally identify all people online. These three things are non-negotiable, regardless of motive. "protect the children" is easy to say, easy to make everyone agree with, easy to straw-man opponents into monsters. But whenever its used, we better make darn sure that's the real motive.

I would gladly back the first solution above. We need to protect children better, but this law is not about that.