← Back to context

Comment by rubyAce

8 days ago

It his law combined with all the other iffy laws in the UK which make this nefarious. This is the issue about discussing anything about how draconian the UK is. If you compare any single law in isolation, it isn't that different. However if you take how the British authorities and how they operate it, and all the other laws you start to see a more draconian picture.

That is what many people, especially those that do live in the UK don't appreciate.

I lived in the U.K. for decades and I have lived in many other countries. I’ll criticise the U.K. government and society endlessly but to describe these changes as notable or remarkable relative to most other countries is nonsense.

From a U.S. internet libertarian freedom-at-all-costs perspective, sure, it’s a draconian nightmare, but for normal people from the U.K. or any other country, it’s barely a blip on their radar.

The U.K. is a flawed place going to hell in a hand basket that many U.K. citizens have strong opinions on but outside of us, the freedom loving nerds on the internet, this identity verification law is not a part of the conversation. “Draconian” and “authoritarian” aren’t in the vocabulary of most U.K. citizens. They’re far more concerned about immigration and the economy.

The long-standing “the U.K. has the most cctv cameras per person” meme is further evidence of this. A well-loved fact carted out by freedom-loving anti-surveillance types… that the mainstream of the U.K. could not care less about.

  • > but for normal people from the U.K. or any other country, it’s barely a blip on their radar.

    This isn’t true at all. Age verification to use services like Discord in the U.K. is very unusual.

    The U.K.’s approach to online speech and freedoms is not shared by many countries.

    I don’t understand why you’re trying to reduce this to a normal outcome when it’s not normal at all

  • It's a "blip in your radar" until you want to say something that is forbidden by the government. Or when someone thinks that you said it, such as with "non-crime hate incidents" where anyone can report "hate speech" to the police, which will be added to your public file.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-crime_hate_incident

    • There’s no such thing as a public police file in the UK. What I assume you’re referring to is that these records are accesible for the purposes of certain kinds of police background checks (which, as in many other countries, are required for certain jobs).

  • > I lived in the U.K. for decades and I have lived in many other countries. I’ll criticise the U.K. government and society endlessly but to describe these changes as notable or remarkable relative to most other countries is nonsense.

    I am English. I was born in England, my parents are English, my Grandparents were English, My Great Grandparents were English etc. etc.

    I have lived my majority of my life here. So I am English.

    You obviously didn't read what I said. I understand that it is nothing special in isolation. However I am not talking about it in isolation. I was talking about the entirety of how the current laws are constructed as well as how the UK state operates.

    Also just because other countries have rubbish laws, doesn't mean we should have adopted similar ones.

    > From a U.S. internet libertarian freedom-at-all-costs perspective, sure, it’s a draconian nightmare, but for normal people from the U.K. or any other country, it’s barely a blip on their radar.

    Many people do not like this and are actively seeking work-arounds. These aren't uber nerds like myself BTW.

    > The U.K. is a flawed place going to hell in a hand basket that many U.K. citizens have strong opinions on but outside of us, the freedom loving nerds on the internet, this identity verification law is not a part of the conversation.

    So you admit there is a problem. But you then pretend that this can't possibly be part of the entire picture because you say so.

    Sorry it very much well is part of the problem. You stating it isn't doesn't make it so.

    • Share some examples, then? I just took a look across all major U.K. mainstream news publications and I cannot find any outrage about these changes.

      10 replies →

  • Not from US. It’s not a blip in my radar. It’s terrifying and you seem to be dismissing it as “it’s just some Americans”.

  • > From a U.S. internet libertarian freedom-at-all-costs perspective, sure, it’s a draconian nightmare, but for normal people from the U.K. or any other country, it’s barely a blip on their radar.

    You're commenting on a story about VPN use surging in the country after the law came into effect. Clearly folks noticed.

  • >to describe these changes as notable or remarkable relative to most other countries is nonsense. From a U.S. internet libertarian freedom-at-all-costs perspective, sure, it’s a draconian nightmare, but for normal people from the U.K. or any other country, it’s barely a blip on their radar.

    This is a very dangerous measure of how worryingly authoritarian or not a particular place is becoming. People's perceptions are notoriously subject to all kinds of blindness and unknowns. The perceptions of most average Germans living in the first years of the Nazi state were also of minimal concern for authoritarianism, and little more than a series of modest blimps on the radar, and where did that take them?

    This is not to compare the underlying savagery of something like the Nazi state with the soft bureaucratic smarminess of the modern UK, but the underlying risks of any creeping authoritarianism are the same: a steady normalization of deviance.