this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)

United Kingdom

5350 readers
300 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, 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.

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.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] stsquad@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I don't know why we couldn't have what we already have on mobile. My kids phones have isp enforced restrictions that prevent them stumbling onto most adult sites. At home I've got their devices fairly locked down but I'm fairly technical so know how it works. I don't know why households couldn't just have a setting with their ISP that allows them to opt in/out of blocking non-OSA compliment sites rather than doing a blanket censorship.

I get the reasoning behind the OSA - a lot of parents don't know how to protect their kids online and defer to the government to sort it out. However the implementation has been a giant flustercuck.

[–] eldebryn@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago

Because it's not about the kids.

The UK, or any government, could instead use the money for OSA to create a protocol/mandate that phone and net providers need to adhere to, which enables parents to restrict to adult content. Heck, phone-only sims and adult traffic control administered via "parent accounts" would deal with almost the entire problem seeing how most young people use phones for internet access anyways instead of laptops and desktops.

But it's not about the kids. It's about control and having an excuse to abolish privacy.

[–] mannycalavera@feddit.uk 8 points 1 week ago

Sir, I will refer you to my previous reply.

LOL wut you expect me to actually parent My children? LOL gtfo. All I care about is sourdough and designer dogs. Let the government do it!

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

You can still Google image search "tits". The OSA doesn't stop that.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 week ago

I don't know why households couldn't just have a setting with their ISP that allows them to opt in/out of blocking non-OSA compliment sites rather than doing a blanket censorship.

Yes. I would rather have feds and corpos control what my kids can and can't access.

We really are headed into two tier society... People who take digital sovereignty seriously and the useful idiot slaves

[–] shellington@lemmings.world 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Feels like we are shifting into a seriously locked down future of the internet. Where everything will require ID to do anything from seeing memes to eventually reading news sites. I cannot believe how quickly all this is happening and how co-ordinated it seems to be.

VPN's work for now but what about when the EU and USA pass their restriction and censorship acts too, eventually there will be nowhere to VPN too. Does anyone have any advice other than hoarding what ever data and sites we can now while they are still available?

[–] Krill@feddit.uk 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Hoarding is the best plan for maintaining access to information, but not for interaction. Get used to being asocial.

In relation to 4chan, I can't think of an easier scapegoat/opponent to use to justify blocking via ISP. And from a fines perspective...uh, that will be entertaining to watch, considering GDPR fines scenarios (not directly comparable but from a conceptual space)

[–] _cryptagion@anarchist.nexus 4 points 1 week ago

you're being way too pessimistic about this. governments have been trying to block access to information online for decades, and it's never been successful. even if a future like you imagine comes to pass, VPNs don't need to be commercial, and they can also be peer-to-peer. if it gets anywhere as bad you think it will, we'll see a wider adoption of tech like I2P and local mesh networks, or people running their own shadow VPNs with their friends. it's one thing for them to go after mullvad or proton or whatever big VPN you like, but it's another thing entirely to squash private VPNs that people can already put up with very little effort. especially since they would have no idea they even exist.

you should absolutely fight censorship like this, but don't ever think that them passing legislation is the end of the fight. it's only the beginning, and there are millions more of us than there are of them.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago