Hacker News Reader

Comment by everdrive | Hacker News Reader

This outcome was always obvious. The internet is too big. You can degrade the sites that are legitimate enough to follow the law, but that's just a drop in the bucket in the sea of porn.

View on HN

Hence why the UK govt wants to ban VPNs and have our own lil internet firewall

They gave up on banning VPNs. They did a consultation and found that the overwhelming majority of children aren't using VPNs to bypass age checks, they're just going to websites that don't implement them.

Not true, we had change or PM.

What they said is true. The outcome of the consultation [1] states, "We will not ban or age-gate VPNs." It also states, "... children typically circumvent age assurance with less sophisticated methods rather than with VPNs, using VPNs more for security and privacy."

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/growing-up-in-th...

I think the point is that porn is decentralized enough rather than the internet too big. Regulating just a handful of sites would deal with like 95% of social media, but you could regulate hundreds of porn sites and have basically 0 effect.

The logical endpoint of this is that nations campaign on "internet sovereignty" and begin whitelisting the internet with strict restrictions and licensure of who can open up new sites. This is reportedly occurring to a limited extent in russia: https://www.intellinews.com/russia-s-mobile-internet-whiteli...

They're going to build an internet where every device must be attested and logged in with your personal state identification.

They're not just stopping filthy, sinful porn. They're making sure wrongthink will be traced to the source and jailed. You can't be allowed to have a job or be banked if you're saying harmful things.

You exist to work and die and be a good little ward of the state. No stepping out of line. You do not get to live as the elites live.

Books and romsets are the future. Get ready for it early.

In the words of Tom Lehrer

"I've got a hobby

Re-reading Lady Chatterley"

Reply on news.ycombinator.com