this post was submitted on 24 Aug 2025
452 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

74545 readers
3682 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 51 points 3 days ago (1 children)

How about parent your children?

What about the crappy late night TV channels with the women waving a cordless house phone like it's 1996?

I'm perfectly able to watch porn because I'm 45, but I refuse to interact with any of this prove your age bollocks because I know full well that "we won't store your details" and "we will share your details with 1284 trusted data partners" are the same picture.

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 17 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Also "Data breach of 500K users IDs discovered on dark web"

Kids watching porn is a much smaller problem than data breaches. Those can fucking ruin people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world 40 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

FYI, with Mullvad VPN set to UK, sites that require age verification:

  • pornhub.com
  • youporn.com
  • redtube.com
  • porn.com
  • bellesa.co
  • tube8.com
  • thisvid.com
  • quorno.com

Sites tha do NOT require age verification:

  • hqporner.com
  • xhamster.com
  • youjizz.com
  • alohatube.com
  • qqqporn.com
  • xnxx.com
  • xcafe.com
  • helloporn.co
  • go.porn
  • cartoonporn.pro

And xvideos.com is a bit special since it shows you the thumbnails of porn videos but won't let you play them.

But we need to stop VPNs! Think of the whole two children that have VPNs! What if instead of just going to the half of the sites that don't verify age, they figure out how to use a VPN?! Oh the humanity!

Yeah, UK wants to de-anonymize VPN users as the next step in their attack on free speech. It is laughable to think this is about anything else.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] greatwhitepapertiger@lemmy.zip 39 points 3 days ago (3 children)

This has nothing to do with porn or protecting children. It's a backdoor way to attach names and faces to VPN usage so movie and music studios can sue specific people for torrenting. They failed in bringing lawsuits previously because they couldn't pin point the piracy to specific individuals. I would bet money that the ministers leading this charge have ties to groups in the movie and music industry. The UK will be the testbed before the full rollout in the EU and then worldwide.

[–] Jason2357@lemmy.ca 21 points 3 days ago

This is a lot bigger than the entertainment industry now. Creeping fascism and the trillion dollar surveillance capitalism industry are hellish bed buddies.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 16 points 2 days ago

Children aren't using VPNs. Also I am going to say this: it doesn't matter that fucking much. I watched porn before I was 18. It didn't really do much to me. It did not give me unrealistic expectations of women. What did affect me were entirely unrelated stuff. Which is why I do need therapy and sexual therapy, but it wasnt the porn. It was people like that fucker.

[–] queueBenSis@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 days ago (2 children)

if the strategy is to tell children to stop circumventing the rules with a workaround, couldn’t the original messaging just have been “talk to your children about not watching porn”

it’s so obvious the identification laws have nothing to do with protecting children from porn and everything to do with Big Brother surveillance

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 26 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Streisand effect: the BBC is telling every last kid that VPN is exactly the way to circumvent the prohibition.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 16 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Because the goal is to outlaw VPNs. To do that they need enough children to use VPNs to make it credible enough.

[–] YiddishMcSquidish@lemmy.today 6 points 2 days ago

As if something being credible has ever stopped a politician from acting.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 20 points 3 days ago

I remember when my step-son was a teenager. I didn't care that he watched porn. I cared that he infected the family PC with viruses and malware trying to watch porn.

[–] isekaihero@ani.social 24 points 3 days ago

This is fascists using "think of the children" to violate everyone's online privacy and spy on everyone worldwide.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 251 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Stop ministers using VPNs to watch child porn.

Told!

[–] toad31@lemmy.cif.su 12 points 3 days ago

Yeah, never forget how the people in power routinely gave Epstein a pass because they were participating in raping kids.

All this "for the children" is performative bullshit to take more power away from the average person.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 93 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Dame Rachel de Souza told BBC Newsnight it was "absolutely a loophole that needs closing" and called for age verification on VPNs.

Saw that coming. Can’t have the populace living their lives without constant, repressive government scrutiny.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] UltraBlack@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (3 children)

Ok one question: Why do we have to protect children from porn if they've already gotten exposed to it?

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 3 days ago (1 children)

To add to it: Why do we need to protect children that arent ours from things their parents are supposed to protect them from?

Weird way to shift job tasks around.

[–] Skullgrid@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It's preying on the tech illiteracy of idiots. There are several pieces of software that can be used to locally censor the internet for minors, and they're very affordable, and I bet free versions (open source?) probably also exist.

When I was a wee lad, there were "internet safety guides" being shown to kids and parents including :

  • Don't post personal information online
  • Do not use your real name on the internet
  • Do not give images of your ID to anyone online

But then, facebook asked for people's fucking IDs and real names, and people just fucking forked it over. GOOD JOB DICKHEADS.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] wabafee@lemmy.world 41 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think the best way to solve this is to not have kids in the first place.

[–] Rooty@lemmy.world 21 points 3 days ago

And deprive capital of all that cheap labor? Have you no heart sir/madam?

[–] sunbeam60@lemmy.ml 57 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (13 children)

Do the government ministers understand that setting up your own VPN is literally a 5 minute operation.

Hire a droplet VM, pre-installed with a server OS. Log in with provided credentials. sudo apt install docker Copy/paste a docker compose file that sets up a wg-easy container. Create a peer. Take a picture of the provided QR code. Connect to the server via a wireguard app. Done.

Are they going to ban VMs?

[–] toad31@lemmy.cif.su 22 points 3 days ago (14 children)

What a VM? What's a server OS? How do I log in? What the fuck does sudo apt mean? What is docker? Now I'm editing files? A peer? What's wireguard?

So many of you are disconnected from regular people because you're chronically online.

[–] LiamMayfair@lemmy.sdf.org 17 points 3 days ago

If kids have learned to run their own Minecraft private servers, hosting a VPN should be child's play... Pun maybe intended.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (12 replies)
[–] Photuris@lemmy.ml 101 points 4 days ago

We didn’t see this one coming a mile away.

Palantir execs and shareholders are buzzing with anticipation.

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago

Next up is "Stop children using custom linux distros and unique radio setups to connect to access points outside the nation"

[–] Lembot_0004@discuss.online 102 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Stop ministers making laws to... why the fuck they even do this bullshit? They are a government, they know everything about everyone even without such primitive control methods.

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 89 points 4 days ago

The people pulling the strings have obviously decided that internet freedom is a threat to them and they're taking (global) action to ensure their supremacy.

[–] Gerudo@lemmy.zip 78 points 4 days ago (2 children)

You ban something, and people will always find a way around it. Always.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 54 points 4 days ago (6 children)

Yup, and that's how the US got the Mafia. We banned alcohol, but people wanted to drink, so the Mafia made that happen.

All a ban does is hurt law abiding citizens and businesses.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz 55 points 4 days ago (20 children)

If they were really after kids watching porn (or even porn in general) it would be technically somewhat simple to force ISPs to provide filters on their end as a subscription service. I'm pretty sure I've even heard that kind of services in the past. Make it even opt-out if you really want to.

That way ISPs would just ban everything from pornhub and others unless you spesifically want it allowed or even provide a portal where you could block reddit, twitter, tumblr or whatever you wish on your account. That kind of technology already exists and it's used on many corporate setups.

There's obviously ways around that, but there's no technical way to block every possible way to move bits between computers. Even if they would shut down the whole internet there's still ways to build mesh-networks or even buy USB-drives from a shady alley.

But as we all know, it's not about porn and not about children.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] vane@lemmy.world 32 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Stop fucking but make children.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Baggie@lemmy.zip 54 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Why are the kids technologically illiterate and undersexed until it comes to matters of government control? I'm not usually into tin foil hats, but this doesn't feel like the kids are the primary concern here.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 45 points 4 days ago (3 children)

How much you wanna bet the ministers use VPN to watch porn as well?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Greyghoster@aussie.zone 74 points 4 days ago (8 children)

It’s a bit like “my kids will only eat chocolate” and the therapist’s response “where are they getting the chocolate from?”. If the kids are using VPNs then where are they getting the money for the VPN from? Is this parental consent?

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] subarctictundra@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Hmmmmm, let me play devils advocate and say that kids should have access to porn.

[–] dyc3@lemmy.world 12 points 3 days ago (3 children)

If you want to actually play devil's advocate, you gotta give an argument. Otherwise, you're just being contrarian.

[–] bier@feddit.nl 16 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Let me give you one, kids try to explore topics out of curiosity. They are probably not going to look up someone torturing animals, because they don't want to see that. Kids usually look up and explore things they are ready for. Also "kids" is a pretty diverse group, a 5 year old and a 15 year old kid are very different.

For real young kids parents should monitor online behavior anyway. For teens, how is life this different than looking at a playboy or a porn tape. Teens have been doing that forever, the people creating these laws probably did that when they where kids.

It's probably a lot better to let kids (teens) explore nudity and sex in a safe environment, instead of letting them go unsupervised in places that ignore the law.

It's basically the same argument with drugs, offering legal options vs. going to a dealer and possibly getting much more dangerous drugs mixed in.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] fluxion@lemmy.world 52 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Clearly it's a parental problem to determine if the VPN they are buying for their kids is being used to wank off, but apparently this party of 'liberty' has an unhealthy obsession with monitoring our children's genitalia these days.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] terminhell@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

Ministers, stop watching them watch porn....

load more comments
view more: next ›