this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
275 points (97.3% liked)

Technology

74361 readers
3117 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vane@lemmy.world 1 points 31 minutes ago

Stop fucking but make children.

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 27 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Dame Rachel de Souza told BBC Newsnight it was "absolutely a loophole that needs closing" and called for age verification on VPNs.

Saw that coming. Can’t have the populace living their lives without constant, repressive government scrutiny.

[–] SoloCritical@lemmy.world 1 points 17 minutes ago

But it’s for the kids what kind of psychopath could be against that!!!!???

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.ml 21 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

Do the government ministers understand that setting up your own VPN is literally a 5 minute operation.

Hire a droplet VM, pre-installed with a server OS. Log in with provided credentials. sudo apt install docker Copy/paste a docker compose file that sets up a wg-easy container. Create a peer. Take a picture of the provided QR code. Connect to the server via a wireguard app. Done.

Are they going to ban VMs?

[–] laz@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 4 hours ago

Moronic bit is atlast asking parents to be responsible

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 27 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

How much you wanna bet the ministers use VPN to watch porn as well?

[–] zipzoopaboop@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Who needs to watch it when you can live it

[–] RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

You joke but people who live porn still watch porn.

[–] absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 hour ago

Market research?

[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 32 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

If they were really after kids watching porn (or even porn in general) it would be technically somewhat simple to force ISPs to provide filters on their end as a subscription service. I'm pretty sure I've even heard that kind of services in the past. Make it even opt-out if you really want to.

That way ISPs would just ban everything from pornhub and others unless you spesifically want it allowed or even provide a portal where you could block reddit, twitter, tumblr or whatever you wish on your account. That kind of technology already exists and it's used on many corporate setups.

There's obviously ways around that, but there's no technical way to block every possible way to move bits between computers. Even if they would shut down the whole internet there's still ways to build mesh-networks or even buy USB-drives from a shady alley.

But as we all know, it's not about porn and not about children.

[–] x00z@lemmy.world 19 points 7 hours ago (5 children)

You can't block porn completely without blocking VPNs. If you connect to a VPN that's all they can see. They can not see what you use the VPN for.

[–] jim3692@discuss.online 11 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

You can't block VPNs without blocking the entire internet. You can block known VPN services, but you can't prevent people from hosting their own.

Some known VPN protocols could be blocked, using introspection tools. However, this would just render corporate VPNs useless. VPN traffic is just bytes, and so is WebSockets. Good luck figuring out whether my HTTPS traffic is legitimate internet traffic, or masked VPN traffic.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Good news, we closed that pesky loophole by banning encryption without backdoors.

If they can't decode it, you better be ready to explain exactly what those bytes were!

[–] jjlinux@lemmy.zip 0 points 43 minutes ago

Depends on the VPN

[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 15 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

VPN, Tor (and similar, like I2P), every imaginable P2P network, proxies, all non-http protocols (smtp, ftp, nntp, xmpp and other instant messengers and so on) can all transfer any kind of data, porn included. And a ton of other things. Heck, I'm quite sure there's a minecraft mod where you can assemble JPG-images out of the blocks and view them that way. And then you can use stuff like uuencode where you can use anything that can move plain text to transfer binary data.

There's no way to block all of that unless you shut the whole internet down. And even then you can still trade good old playboy-magazines with your friends. VPN in itself has very little to do with the actual problem, beyond that someone apparently noticed that their current "save-the-children" iteration had pretty large holes in it.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 points 40 minutes ago

Ban paper.

Kids could draw boobies on it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 39 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Why are the kids technologically illiterate and undersexed until it comes to matters of government control? I'm not usually into tin foil hats, but this doesn't feel like the kids are the primary concern here.

[–] Pure_Psykosis@lemmy.ca 24 points 8 hours ago

They aren't.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 11 points 7 hours ago

Almost like you didn't think this fucker through.

[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 40 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Clearly it's a parental problem to determine if the VPN they are buying for their kids is being used to wank off, but apparently this party of 'liberty' has an unhealthy obsession with monitoring our children's genitalia these days.

[–] AlpacaChariot@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago

Unfortunately, neither Labour nor Conservatives are parties of liberty, although there are some individuals within both that see the importance.

[–] Gerudo@lemmy.zip 59 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

You ban something, and people will always find a way around it. Always.

[–] piecat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

Dead drop USBs for file sharing?

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 38 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Yup, and that's how the US got the Mafia. We banned alcohol, but people wanted to drink, so the Mafia made that happen.

All a ban does is hurt law abiding citizens and businesses.

[–] Mynameisallen@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 hours ago

This is a fairly revisionist history version of the mafia, they were here for decades before prohibition. One might say that they profited greatly from prohibition, but to suggest they began with it is incredibly incorrect. I hate to be the actually guy but I find organized crime fascinating and I can’t let this one go

[–] NGC2346@sh.itjust.works 13 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

When they effectively make the internet a dangerous place, Usenet will rise from the darkness. P2P will also always exist and these politicians dont understand computer math, so a lot of what they're trying to accomplish is bound to fail.

[–] Inkstainthebat@pawb.social 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

As someone who just read the Wikipedia article on Usenet and doesn't know anything else about it: Would this be pretty much the equivalent of the internet before search engines? Because if so I'm really intrigued

[–] phar@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 hour ago

Never mind search engines, Usenet was being used before people were using web browsers.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 199 points 14 hours ago

Stop ministers using VPNs to watch child porn.

Told!

[–] Photuris@lemmy.ml 82 points 13 hours ago

We didn’t see this one coming a mile away.

Palantir execs and shareholders are buzzing with anticipation.

[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 61 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

It’s a bit like “my kids will only eat chocolate” and the therapist’s response “where are they getting the chocolate from?”. If the kids are using VPNs then where are they getting the money for the VPN from? Is this parental consent?

[–] crunchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Most likely they're using "free" VPNs.

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Which is an anticipated problem too. Because those free VPNs are harvesting all of your traffic to sell; If you’re not the customer, you’re the product being sold. Almost as if opponents of the ban said this would happen, and would only work to push kids towards sketchy sites…

[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 88 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Stop ministers making laws to... why the fuck they even do this bullshit? They are a government, they know everything about everyone even without such primitive control methods.

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 69 points 14 hours ago

The people pulling the strings have obviously decided that internet freedom is a threat to them and they're taking (global) action to ensure their supremacy.

[–] xc2215x@lemmy.world 14 points 11 hours ago

Banning Pornhub makes them use the VPNs in the first place.

[–] FUCKING_CUNO@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Dame Rachel told BBC Newsnight: "Of course, we need age verification on VPNs - it's absolutely a loophole that needs closing and that's one of my major recommendations."

If this fucker had any idea what VPN even stood for they'd realize how fuckin stupid this statement is...

[–] MyDogLovesMe@lemmy.world 47 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Ya! Let them watch all that violence on Netflix instead!

[–] Quazatron@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago

I've always been fascinated by the lengths puritans will go to prevent kids from seeing mammary glands, while simultaneously being ok with them watching blood and violence.

[–] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 12 points 11 hours ago

Seriously though. We'll legislate anything to keep them from seeing stuff they might reasonably expect to see and do one day and glorify things nobody should ever see or experience in person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ArgumentativeMonotheist@lemmy.world 39 points 14 hours ago (5 children)

Yeah, it's just all these children with their bank accounts paying for their VPN subscriptions doing it all... Do they think we're that stupid? Don't answer that. 😔

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›