richsouth

I'm guessing that as an adult I'm going to have to show my passport / drivers licence or something else to go on YouTube now? Stuff that.

Because they're all going to go outside and skip and run and jump and skim stones rather than sitting in a darkened room playing Fortnite.

They have no idea how it can be enforced - I think they think computers can do anything. Will this mean age verification on anything that's even slightly social. Will I (as a 45 year old) need to give my passport, driver's license or any other ID to watch YouTube? If so, they can f off because I'm not doing that.

Don't you mean www.altavista.com ?

Shocker - these agents aren't actually intelligent. They take best guesses and use other peoples' work it deems 'close enough' and cobbles something together with n 'thought' behind it. They're dumb, stupid pieces of code that don't think or reason - The 'I' in 'AI' is very misleading because it has none.

But they don't - either through lack of knowledge or just can't be bothered to enforce it because they don't want to upset their kid. If parents were doing this already, the government wouldn't have to step in.

I think that went into the Google Graveyard years ago

THIS so much! I'm more at risk from the US and my own (UK) government than the Chinese, and in answer to the questions below: - No I don't know anyone from or in China - I'm highly unlikely to go anywhere near China (or fly over it, around it) - I'm poor

So unless my local Chinese takeaway is classed as Chinese soil, I'll more than happily buy my phone from there

Most phones are already made over there anyway so know knows what kind of backdoor, listening devices are coded into the chips they put into 'Western Company's' phones.

What do you mean 'finally' - surely 'redundancy' or 'natural disaster' is reason enough.

Because as we all know, lines of code == quality of code.

So only PAYING customers can make CSAM and distribute it openly. Nice one.

"Developers of apps that use end-to-end encryption to protect private communications could be considered hostile actors in the UK." <-- What about HTTPS, the thing that secures most websites especially banking sites. Old farts making laws about things they know nothing about! FFS

Developers of apps that use end-to-end encryption to protect private communications could be considered hostile actors in the UK. <-- HTTPS does this. What about secure sites like baking sites that encrypt end-to-end? Old farts making laws about things they know nothing about.

I've head the kinds TV show Bluey is especially good for dogs as it's mostly in their visible colour spectrum - I must say, our dog does seem to watch it when we have children over and it's on.

It might be immoral, but if you're trying to make money using their service I can't see there being a legal reason to prevent them doing this. I meant, they (Google) need the money right? Companies like this seem to get to the point where they feel justified in charging for every little thing that wouldn't kill them to give for free.

They do so much stupid stuff in the crossword (REBUS, missing letters, un-ordered phrases) that they can make a mess of anything. I HOPE they'll keep it as it is but just charge for past Wordles. That's the only improvement they could make.

And without it we wouldn't have a space programme because they always launch after 0.