~~Rather than~~ In addition to this, they should leak all the websites that MPs are visiting.
If it's anything like the United States, we're sure to find some embarrassing search histories (at the very least).
No privacy for me. No privacy for you.
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2025
431 points (99.1% liked)
Technology
74247 readers
4203 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
Well he did it love in the commons not surprised he's going
I'd love to hear some informed commentary on the legality of this, if it's legal, it's surely an oversight in the law.
Edit : just to be clear, I'm talking about creating the ID, rather than using it.
Of course it's not legal. This is called identity theft.
Using the ID, sure. But what about providing the service?
Depends.
You can argue that it's basically art/political speech. You've done it to draw attention to flaws in the approach and to highlight how ineffectual the current system is, and that if you actually wanted to do make fake IDs you'd take a much less high-profile approach. As such, there's no actual criminal intent required.
Don't know if a judge would buy it though.
Civil disobedience is done with full knowledge you are breaking the law.
Especially a UK one.
Yeah, I think the creator of this is playing with fire personally.
I think it would fall under forgery which is definitely illegal and doesn't require you to use the ID.
Given that many online services currently asking for ID have a proven track record of massive data leaks I'd argue that demanding people upload photos of their ID is complicity in identity theft too.
That would be a bit harder to make stick, but I would agree.
On the criminal side, It’s identity fraud, and also an offence under the Misuse of Computers Act, gaining access to a system unauthorisedly. Civilly, it’s almost certainly a violation of the ToS.
“My OpenAI credits got hugged to death, please use a known postcode (like one from Keir Starmer's constituency, WC2B6NH) in the meantime,” the author asks.
While the OSA is dumb, this is also bad design, and why applications are going to use so much power.
Cache the image creation results. Use a random address generator. This would drop the LLM use to the bare minimum.
That’s…exactly what they are doing and telling you to use a known post code so you hit the cache…
They're using ChatGPT for fake address generation if it even needs a cache for that part. There are plenty of libraries to do that locally. They should only need to cache generated images, which is the only thing a model would be useful for here.
Yeah this is not worth the risk. Identity fraud of a politicians can be a serious crime. The pay off for this is a minor inconvenience for some desk worker and a few slop articles written about you.
It can be used by AI age verification tools on a bunch of websites. So yes I guess that is fraud. But these tools claim not to store the data in the verification process. If somebody could prove a made up ID was used then I suspect they're in bigger shit for a GDPR leak.
It's a case of mutually assured destruction: to charge someone with impersonation, they would have to admit that they saved data that was supposed to be only for age verification and then deleted.