1036
UK households could face VPN 'ban' after use skyrockets following Online Safety Bill
(www.birminghammail.co.uk)
this post was submitted on 29 Jul 2025
1036 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
73534 readers
3185 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Show me a ban that didn’t came with 10x problems. People have their needs even the filthy ones. Especially the filthy ones. Hence will find a way to fulfill it. If there’s no legal way to do so the demand will create an alternative market for it to match the demand…more trouble on the way if that’s the lane the UK choose
We all know that prohibition in the US was a rousing success!
And the war on drugs was extremely effective and didn't cause any bad things at all!
let people live life is more than just good for individuals… it’s just safer for everyone
focusing on harm reduction rather than abstinence and bans
I'd tentatively say, casually available heroin, morphine and laudanum/opium.
It obviously caused problems and pushed the market underground but it seems to have worked out.
I'm not aware of any studies in to this though, so it's only conjecture/guesswork.
I'll also clearly state I'm not putting them on the same level as this current dystopian bullshittery.
"Worked out" is people dieing from tainted drugs of a unknown potency? Youre a fucking monster.
Hey now, that's a lot of animosity for a statement that doesn't do much to make a good point.
The original question was
I posited a conjecture based guess with some basic reasoning and as i said , it was opinion more than provable fact.
By "worked out" i meant the overall situation is better after the ban, despite the negative consequences.
It seems that was lost on you, but now you know.
So let's address your reasoning, such as it is.
People died from tainted drugs before the ban, probably a lot from tainted drugs of the type in the ban.
Unless you have any evidence those numbers changed significantly after the ban, I'll chalk that up to your opinion.
Not a very reasonable one to my eyes, but such are angry people on the internet.
I was not aware i needed to provide an example of a ban that resulted in everything being completely fixed after the fact (mainly because that's not how the question was worded) but if that was, in fact, the requirement, my bad.
If I'm a monster (in your opinion) because i think the reduction in access to terribly addictive drugs might have overall brought down fatalities and other negative consequences, then i can live with that.