Link: https://www.openrightsgroup.org/press-releases/mps-give-ministers-powers-to-restrict-entire-internet/

MPs have rejected a Lords amendment to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill that would allow a social media ban for under 16s. Instead, they have voted to give ministers much broader powers which could be used to restrict Internet access to under 18s.

This will give ministers huge powers to restrict the Internet without having to pass new legislation. The powers could be used to restrict access to websites, social media platforms, apps and games of their choosing. Ministers will not have to demonstrate harm to children, effectively ripping up work carried out by Ofcom to assess services according to the risks and harms they pose.

This mean that the current or future governments could restrict content they are ideologically opposed to. For example, a Reform government could force ID checks to access LGBQT content as part of their manifesto commitment “to end trans ideology” in schools.

Ministers would also have the powers to impose digital curfews and to limit the time spent on certain platforms – for example preventing under 18s from playing games such as Minecraft, Fifa and Fortnite after a certain time.

MPs also rejected a Lords amendment to restrict access to VPNs, but gave Ministers the power to introduce such a measure.

@flamingos@feddit.uk could this perhaps be a pinned post? This fundamentally alters everybody's relationship with the internet and should be known to all.

Definitely agreed, this is a change that has massive societal impact.

Good. Far too many morons are having their voices and opinions amplified.

At least yours isn't.

Great retort oh braino.

You think this will just be used to silence the people you dislike?

How cute.

Where did I say that?

Because handing power like that to politicians has never bitten anyone hard in the arse before, right?

Muppet.

Yes let's live in fear of what could happen

Quite right, I assumed naïvety when I should have seen edginess.

How cute.

I think they should just have parental controls enabled on ISP provided routers and mobile contracts by default, and have either a "disable per device" option based on the MAC or a "disable entirely" option, both carrying disclaimers that the network admin/bill payer bear 100% of the responsibility for any children's actions online if they have any.

Dear me. Comparing you to a pair of short planks wouldn't be doing the wood justice.

History, both recent and ancient, repeatedly demonstrates the fact if you give a politician power, they'll use it to attempt to gain more power, or at least to prevent loss of power, perceived or otherwise.

Are you stupid? Have a look around mate. We have the least amount of freedom we have ever had. You can go to prison for a Facebook post. What you're terrified of has already happened. Pull your head out your arse and wake up.

You have no argument, so you just try to belittle me.

That's the norm for mobiles already I believe.

Actually the argument is blindingly obvious, and I've alluded to it. But to spell it out:

A government granting themselves, and all future ministers, the ability to control and log who uses what websites opens the door to all sorts of possible future abuses, while practically solving very little.

Also, your opening "argument" was that this is good because too many people are morons. It's an interesting one from someone who claims to want substance over belittlement.

Yet, you're cheering on this shit show? You're either seriously damaged, or a troll. Which is it?

Can't it be both?

This is what you're failing to understand. I'm not bothered if any government wants to log every website that everyone visits. This is because I understand how networking and network security works. Anyone with half a brain can bypass anything they can come up with. If you hadn't realised, everything in life is a game of cat and mouse.

You know what I just had a look through your post history. You win. You are clearly a very angry person who needs to touch grass. Peace out homie. One love. Xxxx

Yep, I don't have kids but my yearly isp change comes with the added joy of disabling the parental controls.

It definitely seems different from how it was reported. It was presented as a win, not an expansion of powers. It wouldn't be so bad if all the ID verification platforms weren't security dumpster fires!!

Ah you see. You are making the classic mistake.

Of talking like someone who has a basic idea how the internet works.

Unfortunately your target audience (MPs). Dispite being the generation that invented it. Still think of it as a fancy telephone exchange from the 1980s. So assume it's just telling a few mega corps to do as they are told.

Add a bunch of money grabbing business leade rs into the mix. And suddenly the stupid laws make sense.

No, I understand that. My point is that it's a bad thing for society, despite the fact that you personally might be fine.

A wild Accelarationist has appeared.

Phones and tablet, and increasingly everything, has randomized MAC addresses. So it will need to an allow list, not deny list. I mean, if you have roaming WiFi, you want to disable MAC randomization off anyway.... But how many normal people know how? You'd have to make that easier.

Which amendment was which? Trying to look up my MPs coding history for it.

This was proposed through an amendment 'in lieu'. I'm not an expert on how Parliament works, but these are amendments sent back to the Lords after rejecting their amendments (so aren't actually law yet?). The relevant votes here are:

• Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 37
• Motion to disagree with Lords Amendment 38