FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > Online safety bill
Online safety bill
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not sure I fancy the government knowing about what I look at or watch. How does everyone else feel? Will Fab be affected and what VPN will you be using?" Which section or clauses are you referring to? The bill is to protect children. Government already have a range of powers they can use, including requiring your ISPs to handover logs of all your online activity. If you want to do illegal activities online, then laws that will help the authorities track you down seem reasonable to me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Most VPN providers will immediately roll over on you as well " It’s kind of hard with irreversible encryption, though not even the USA could crack WhatsApp or ToR. They could possibly require them to switch it off for like telegram, but I can’t see that happening. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm not keen and I don't agree with the idea that if you're a not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. That only applies if the definition of 'wrong' remains constant. " At least one sensible answer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. " Rights come with responsibilities, this is a fundamental concept regarding rights. If you want to do things online and hide them from the authorities, then you have a responsibility to not break the law. I’m still not sure what part of this act people are worried about under RIPA- Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, there has to be a reasonable suspicion you are doing something illegal before ISP’s will handover your data | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm not keen and I don't agree with the idea that if you're a not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. That only applies if the definition of 'wrong' remains constant. " 100% this. Also not sure a porn site is the most secure kind of company to have your details, was having dinner with someone who worked at co-op this week and honestly the future and hacking sounds terrifying | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm not keen and I don't agree with the idea that if you're a not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. That only applies if the definition of 'wrong' remains constant. 100% this. Also not sure a porn site is the most secure kind of company to have your details, was having dinner with someone who worked at co-op this week and honestly the future and hacking sounds terrifying " Always use two factor or multi factor with all your online accounts. That's hows those dickheads at the Co-op got hacked. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably just trying to see if they can introduce a tax wank ! To get more money in! Christ this country will be rich ! 🤣🤔" They’ll spunk it up the wall in some nonsense failed service later don’t worry | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably just trying to see if they can introduce a tax wank ! To get more money in! Christ this country will be rich ! 🤣🤔" It's just about shutting down free speech and any opposition to their policies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Probably just trying to see if they can introduce a tax wank ! To get more money in! Christ this country will be rich ! 🤣🤔 They’ll spunk it up the wall in some nonsense failed service later don’t worry "You are probably right .and I was forgetting, they should get tax more than us as a bunch of wankers ! 😂 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses." Who is recording what I do online? 🤔 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. " Not sure that there's many actual "swinger's" on here. Most seem to be cheating and playing behind a partner's back. Hence why many are worried about privacy. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The authorities will only know if you're doing something you shouldn't." None of us are that naive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just find it a joke the government are worried about what people watch instead of real problems!!!" But they arnt worried, its an restriction to stop minors accesses porn sites. It wont affect you unless your a minor | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just find it a joke the government are worried about what people watch instead of real problems!!!But they arnt worried, its an restriction to stop minors accesses porn sites. It wont affect you unless your a minor" 
Children potentially accessing inappropriate materials is a real problem.
Fab's solution to the law has been one of the best | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses." I totally agree with you the Nativity of some people is very disturbing. This is a perfect tool to manipulate people in which ever political power decides to use it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses. I totally agree with you the Nativity of some people is very disturbing. This is a perfect tool to manipulate people in which ever political power decides to use it." Ok. I'll play along. How can I be manipulated and what benefit would it be to any government to know that I swing and watch porn? 🤔 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have a friend who works at GCHQ due to the official secrets act she can not go into details, But has told me the boffins / spys there can look at any computer / mobile they want to. So if they want to read my shit on here just like Sydney university they are welcome." omg pmsl, wtf. thats got to be the funniest thread on this post | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. " FS is the most judgemental site I've been on. And if you're looking for uderstanding, good luck! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. FS is the most judgemental site I've been on. And if you're looking for uderstanding, good luck!" Are you judging how judgemental people are on this site😂🤣 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’m more concerned about the website gathering your information and can they keep it safe ! Some sites are asking for drivers license or passport information can’t say how reliable theses sites are and if they where would we need this sort of protection? " well dont subscribe to those websites then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I hope it's used on here to stop all the cheating married guys "and married women? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The authorities will only know if you're doing something you shouldn't." Aww that's so cute.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. FS is the most judgemental site I've been on. And if you're looking for uderstanding, good luck!" Oh the irony of judging others who judge people 🤣 Mr F. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses. I totally agree with you the Nativity of some people is very disturbing. This is a perfect tool to manipulate people in which ever political power decides to use it." Firstly what you look at and when is tracked and available and already being used and sold by browser technology amongst other things. They know when women's periods will be and when to offer products as one example. They know who is in your house and what you are doing from electric and water usage. Secondly it's not so much the fact it's presenting unknown entities with opportunities to manipulate... But it's the fact it can't be guaranteed to be held securely and not abused by those we are providing it to and the complete lack of privacy. What are you worried about if you're not being dodgy...? Plenty. The public gets what the public wants. Ultimately the trade off between convenience and privacy and security has been won by convenience. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️" Well one is a choice they make who they share it with and meet. And one is no choice at all and with no idea who they are sharing it with, for how long and with what consequences. Not hard. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️" What a naive and stupid comment to make! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️ What a naive and stupid comment to make! " I mean, 40,000 people can this second access images if your penis, but you're concerned about the government and law enforcement impinging on your privacy? It's just a bit ironic | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If our government put as much effort into securing our borders as they did on this online safety bill I’d give up wanking for a week "You do know this has been going on for years don't you and has cross party support. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If our government put as much effort into securing our borders as they did on this online safety bill I’d give up wanking for a week
You do know this has been going on for years don't you and has cross party support."Never fits the narrative though. Twitter is filled with people chanting ‘down with Starmer’ for everything no matter who introduced it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses." we don't need to imagine it, its been written down. Orwell's 1984 was supposed to be a wwarning instead it's being used as a blue print for modern society. The psy-op lie is that all of this is done for your own safety. Anyone believing this is already lost. In fact I bet they are the people who were quite happy to be put under house arrest for two years, wearing face masks and rubber gloves when they were allowed to go exercise. Killed all the natural bacteria on their skin with sanitisers and rushed out to be injected with an experimental, untested gene therapy treatment because they were told it was for their own good by people in authority. Look up Stanley milligrams 'Adherence to authority' psychology experiments and you understand they know exactly what makes people tick and how yo control them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Look up Stanley milligrams 'Adherence to authority' psychology experiments and you understand they know exactly what makes people tick and how yo control them" Loved Stanley Milligram in The Goons but not a big fan of his latest stuff on authority. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. " Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from " modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass." I only said it was a good idea...and the reasons why. The techies are the ones who figure out the dynamics of it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass." You know many people in the tech industry are in their 20's, no? So born this century and likely grew up in the 2010's and 2020's.......🤷♂️ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Agreed, the same people have probably already given up their details for online shopping, ordered food online, used Netflix, have a banking app, bought through Amazon or Temu, etc, but get paranoid about giving their age for a wank. And yes, it's mostly men..." This | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass." Some modern kids. I doubt most of them could come up with a tech system to bypass stuff. Who do you think laid the groundwork for modern tech if it wasn't those of us who grew up in the 60s, 70s and 80s? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Agreed, the same people have probably already given up their details for online shopping, ordered food online, used Netflix, have a banking app, bought through Amazon or Temu, etc, but get paranoid about giving their age for a wank. And yes, it's mostly men..." It’s the fact it’s another step by the authorities that restrict another area of life. It’s not going to stop kids as they are already probably using a vpn which gets round this easy. VPN can be set up so simply with no age verification. It’s not going to stop kids. When I was a lad it was finding dads stash of porn, now it’s just a bit techy. I hate the fact it’s another step towards id cards. Yes we all use other on line systems but that’s our choice, this is not | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Agreed, the same people have probably already given up their details for online shopping, ordered food online, used Netflix, have a banking app, bought through Amazon or Temu, etc, but get paranoid about giving their age for a wank. And yes, it's mostly men..." 👏🏻👏🏻👌🏻 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Agreed, the same people have probably already given up their details for online shopping, ordered food online, used Netflix, have a banking app, bought through Amazon or Temu, etc, but get paranoid about giving their age for a wank. And yes, it's mostly men... It’s the fact it’s another step by the authorities that restrict another area of life. It’s not going to stop kids as they are already probably using a vpn which gets round this easy. VPN can be set up so simply with no age verification. It’s not going to stop kids. When I was a lad it was finding dads stash of porn, now it’s just a bit techy. I hate the fact it’s another step towards id cards. Yes we all use other on line systems but that’s our choice, this is not" It is your choice. You can choose not to look at stuff that needs age verification. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve not read all comments, but as I’ve read the worrying thing is these third party companies set up to do age verifications have not been checked and there is nothing in place in uk to make sure they are keeping your data safe. I see another Ashley-Maddison scandal coming along with another well known site that got hacked. " Given I've had to provide a sum total of zero personal info to access Fab and the hamster.......and therefore there's no data to keep safe......what exactly am I at risk of being leaked? Being on here isnt illegal. Watching porn isn't illegal. The comparisons being made to a leak from a website that's sole purpose was to facilitate cheating on partners are hilarious. I suspect many of those worried about potential data leaks are also now boycotting Coldplay gigs.....🤦♂️🤦♂️😂😂 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️" It’s all about choice, freedom of speech and freedom to live, you share what you want with who you want. It’s all about control. Every bit of our freedom is slowly being eroded. Bit by bit. Stand up against it cus one day you’ll think of shit I can’t do anything. It’s the same with making cash digital. You will be restricted where you can spend and how much. It’s started already you go try and remove a large amount of money from your bank | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve not read all comments, but as I’ve read the worrying thing is these third party companies set up to do age verifications have not been checked and there is nothing in place in uk to make sure they are keeping your data safe. I see another Ashley-Maddison scandal coming along with another well known site that got hacked. Given I've had to provide a sum total of zero personal info to access Fab and the hamster.......and therefore there's no data to keep safe......what exactly am I at risk of being leaked? Being on here isnt illegal. Watching porn isn't illegal. The comparisons being made to a leak from a website that's sole purpose was to facilitate cheating on partners are hilarious. I suspect many of those worried about potential data leaks are also now boycotting Coldplay gigs.....🤦♂️🤦♂️😂😂" 😂😂😂 Exactly this, to access something on reddit classed as adult material (basically it was a bit sweary and stuff) I did a face scan, no personal details nothing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve not read all comments, but as I’ve read the worrying thing is these third party companies set up to do age verifications have not been checked and there is nothing in place in uk to make sure they are keeping your data safe. I see another Ashley-Maddison scandal coming along with another well known site that got hacked. Given I've had to provide a sum total of zero personal info to access Fab and the hamster.......and therefore there's no data to keep safe......what exactly am I at risk of being leaked? Being on here isnt illegal. Watching porn isn't illegal. The comparisons being made to a leak from a website that's sole purpose was to facilitate cheating on partners are hilarious. I suspect many of those worried about potential data leaks are also now boycotting Coldplay gigs.....🤦♂️🤦♂️😂😂" Yep. I literally turned WiFi off (amazingly despite being ancient I knew how to) and accessed the site. It's possible I suppose that phone providers might be required to tell the govt who has adult content enabled on their phone and that information might be used against me at some point. If it comes to that I reckon there will be worse things to worry about | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️ It’s all about choice, freedom of speech and freedom to live, you share what you want with who you want. It’s all about control. Every bit of our freedom is slowly being eroded. Bit by bit. Stand up against it cus one day you’ll think of shit I can’t do anything. It’s the same with making cash digital. You will be restricted where you can spend and how much. It’s started already you go try and remove a large amount of money from your bank " As I said my phone already has adult content enabled, that was enough to age verify me. How much of my freedom was eroded? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve not read all comments, but as I’ve read the worrying thing is these third party companies set up to do age verifications have not been checked and there is nothing in place in uk to make sure they are keeping your data safe. I see another Ashley-Maddison scandal coming along with another well known site that got hacked. Given I've had to provide a sum total of zero personal info to access Fab and the hamster.......and therefore there's no data to keep safe......what exactly am I at risk of being leaked? Being on here isnt illegal. Watching porn isn't illegal. The comparisons being made to a leak from a website that's sole purpose was to facilitate cheating on partners are hilarious. I suspect many of those worried about potential data leaks are also now boycotting Coldplay gigs.....🤦♂️🤦♂️😂😂 Yep. I literally turned WiFi off (amazingly despite being ancient I knew how to) and accessed the site. It's possible I suppose that phone providers might be required to tell the govt who has adult content enabled on their phone and that information might be used against me at some point. If it comes to that I reckon there will be worse things to worry about " But 'adult content' is a broad spectrum. It includes gambling, access to 18+ movies (vanilla, not porn), and many other things. I have to go through age ID verification to order coils and liquid for my vape. There will be thousands of people accessing 'adult content' through phones that don't watch porn or swing. The fact someone has that content unlocked on a phone means nothing. 🤷♂️ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass." I don't think they are smarter at all. They share their person data with anyone and anything. They are able to navigate modern tech more easily but that doesn't make them smarter. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Agreed, the same people have probably already given up their details for online shopping, ordered food online, used Netflix, have a banking app, bought through Amazon or Temu, etc, but get paranoid about giving their age for a wank. And yes, it's mostly men..." What is mostly men? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I’ve not read all comments, but as I’ve read the worrying thing is these third party companies set up to do age verifications have not been checked and there is nothing in place in uk to make sure they are keeping your data safe. I see another Ashley-Maddison scandal coming along with another well known site that got hacked. Given I've had to provide a sum total of zero personal info to access Fab and the hamster.......and therefore there's no data to keep safe......what exactly am I at risk of being leaked? Being on here isnt illegal. Watching porn isn't illegal. The comparisons being made to a leak from a website that's sole purpose was to facilitate cheating on partners are hilarious. I suspect many of those worried about potential data leaks are also now boycotting Coldplay gigs.....🤦♂️🤦♂️😂😂 Yep. I literally turned WiFi off (amazingly despite being ancient I knew how to) and accessed the site. It's possible I suppose that phone providers might be required to tell the govt who has adult content enabled on their phone and that information might be used against me at some point. If it comes to that I reckon there will be worse things to worry about But 'adult content' is a broad spectrum. It includes gambling, access to 18+ movies (vanilla, not porn), and many other things. I have to go through age ID verification to order coils and liquid for my vape. There will be thousands of people accessing 'adult content' through phones that don't watch porn or swing. The fact someone has that content unlocked on a phone means nothing. 🤷♂️" Exactly! I honestly don't understand why people are getting themselves bent out of shape over this On the one hand we have people baying for blood shouting "protect our children" and on the other complaining that their freedoms are being eroded because of a piece of legislation designed to protect children. 🤷♀️. Sometimes I wonder if it's me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I do find it odd some of these comments, from people who possibly have most of their life / personal details on a smart phone. I said when they first came out that this could end up like big brother in a tiny box and it seems it is for a lot of people and yet people are incensed because they have to verify your age so it makes things a little safer for kids. Most odd. Agreed, and it's not just porn, it's any content that children and vulnerable people could be at risk of harm from modern kids are far smarter with technology than the older generations because they have grown up with it. Are you honestly telling me that an adult that grew up in the 70s,80s can come up with a tech system that modern kids won't find a way to bypass. I don't think they are smarter at all. They share their person data with anyone and anything. They are able to navigate modern tech more easily but that doesn't make them smarter. " Also navigating it and designing it or coming up with work arounds are two very different things | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Here's a radical idea why not put restrictions on the content of these sources of media not the people who use them. I'll tell you why it's because a high percentage of them are owned and have been owned throughout history by a certain religious community that you're not allowed to criticise. " Bing pot | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It’s started already you go try and remove a large amount of money from your bank " That has always been like that, I was questioned in the 90's of why I wanted to take a large amount of cash out of my bank. At the time I told them it had nothing to do with them and just to give me my money, but now I would think differently because of all the scams going on and they may be saving me from being duped 
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I can't believe so many people are arguing against a system that will at least stop some under 18s from accessing porn. 🤦. " I don't think they are arguing against the principle...which has long been needed. But it's the way it's being implemented that is a legitimate cause of concern and a disaster waiting to haopen | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again, paranoid much! I can't look at porn without verifying, so it must be a conspiracy..." OK you start with a bunch of grapes. Every day I take one. You might not realise this is happening at first. But eventually you end up with an empty vine.but then it's too late because I have taken all your grapes away. Now replace grapes with civil rights. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Now replace grapes with civil rights. " Worst cheeseboard ever. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's odd that members of a site who knowingly share intimate images of themselves with strangers and then arrange to meet said strangers would be so concerned with the privacy of their online browsing. Might just be me 🤷🏼♂️ It’s all about choice, freedom of speech and freedom to live, you share what you want with who you want. It’s all about control. Every bit of our freedom is slowly being eroded. Bit by bit. Stand up against it cus one day you’ll think of shit I can’t do anything. It’s the same with making cash digital. You will be restricted where you can spend and how much. It’s started already you go try and remove a large amount of money from your bank " 💯 👍 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Again, paranoid much! I can't look at porn without verifying, so it must be a conspiracy... OK you start with a bunch of grapes. Every day I take one. You might not realise this is happening at first. But eventually you end up with an empty vine.but then it's too late because I have taken all your grapes away. Now replace grapes with civil rights. " Is it a civil right to look at porn on line.? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't particularly care if the government knows I look at porn or am on a swinging site, however I am very concerned with the security of the data. How would you feel if a hacker was to publish all your details, telling your family, friends and neighbours what you are doing?" What details? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The number of these threads is getting embarrassing. No government wants to watch you crank one out. They only really care if what you watch is illegal. The bill was written by politicians for christ sake do you really think of all people they want it to be specific? The sites have made it as non invasive as possible, a two step process and there's a legal notice stating the information cannot be used for ANY other purpose. So if it is you're quids in. It's not a surprise! The banners have been up for weeks. The bill is years old. If it's that bad go back to dvds and magazines, you have choices. Honestly it's really starting to sound like a bunch of guys defending their right to type the word teen or schoolgirl into a search bar. 🤦♂️ " so I've been called a conspiracy theorist all my life, a murder during covid, and now a pedo. Funny how the control freaks try to discredit anyone who asks questions about freedom. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It’s started already you go try and remove a large amount of money from your bank That has always been like that, I was questioned in the 90's of why I wanted to take a large amount of cash out of my bank. At the time I told them it had nothing to do with them and just to give me my money, but now I would think differently because of all the scams going on and they may be saving me from being duped
"As someone who used to work in the industry cash withdrawal restrictions are there for three reasons alone. Fraud prevention, money laundering regulations and the simple fact that banks don't actually hold large sums of cash at any given time. 90% is in the ATM's for small sum withdrawal and for day to day cash requirements for local small businesses. Personal safety. It's to stop vulnerable people being scammed and/or forced to withdraw funds by others, often including family. Staff safety and security. Having shit loads of money sat around just in case someone walked in and asked for it increases risks. Hence you have to pre-notify and it's ordered in specifically for a pre- arranged collection. But of course there's always some that think it's about 'control' and some kind of hidden government agenda. 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I don't particularly care if the government knows I look at porn or am on a swinging site, however I am very concerned with the security of the data. How would you feel if a hacker was to publish all your details, telling your family, friends and neighbours what you are doing?" I wouldn't be happy but that has been happening way before this bill. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the subject of money. Rothchild once said.... " I don't care who makes the laws as long as I control the money" now just think to yourself what he's actually saying in that statement and what ramifications it has." It has zero ramifications. I mean....the BoE has repeatedly stated that cash will never disappear even in the event of potential central bank digital currencies. Yes rich people have money. They always have. And yet we all still get paid, have access to cash, can spend our money on whatever we choose. I have an amazing collection of random ducks and not once has anyone tried to stop me buying another one. I shop where I want, when I want. I had my car washed for the first time I months yesterday and by some small miracle managed to withdraw a crisp tenner from a cash point (no charge) literally minutes after using my card to but a couple of drinks. I then sat in the car whilst it was being washed and logged into Fab without having to prove my identity to anyone, safe in the knowledge that my online activity wouldnt be the topic of conversation in some ministerial meeting in London. I'm always confused when people tell me my freedoms are being eroded and that I'm not able to make my own choices in life. 🤷♂️ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The number of these threads is getting embarrassing. No government wants to watch you crank one out. They only really care if what you watch is illegal. The bill was written by politicians for christ sake do you really think of all people they want it to be specific? The sites have made it as non invasive as possible, a two step process and there's a legal notice stating the information cannot be used for ANY other purpose. So if it is you're quids in. It's not a surprise! The banners have been up for weeks. The bill is years old. If it's that bad go back to dvds and magazines, you have choices. Honestly it's really starting to sound like a bunch of guys defending their right to type the word teen or schoolgirl into a search bar. 🤦♂️ so I've been called a conspiracy theorist all my life, a murder during covid, and now a pedo. Funny how the control freaks try to discredit anyone who asks questions about freedom. " Firstly Punx I would never call you that. You at least are presenting reasoning. I may not agree with all of it but I can respect that your stance is related to freedoms. However I've read enough in the last 24 that comes from a less reasoned place. And it's thread after thread of people wanting to know how to hide their searches. So apologies if you felt targeted that wasn't my intent. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Now replace grapes with civil rights. Worst cheeseboard ever." 🤣🤣🤣 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Crikey, I thoughts swingers site might be a bit more understanding of the need for privacy without jumping to 'doing something illegal' line. FS is the most judgemental site I've been on. And if you're looking for uderstanding, good luck! Are you judging how judgemental people are on this site😂🤣" It's a fact! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The number of these threads is getting embarrassing. No government wants to watch you crank one out. They only really care if what you watch is illegal. The bill was written by politicians for christ sake do you really think of all people they want it to be specific? The sites have made it as non invasive as possible, a two step process and there's a legal notice stating the information cannot be used for ANY other purpose. So if it is you're quids in. It's not a surprise! The banners have been up for weeks. The bill is years old. If it's that bad go back to dvds and magazines, you have choices. Honestly it's really starting to sound like a bunch of guys defending their right to type the word teen or schoolgirl into a search bar. 🤦♂️ so I've been called a conspiracy theorist all my life, a murder during covid, and now a pedo. Funny how the control freaks try to discredit anyone who asks questions about freedom. Firstly Punx I would never call you that. You at least are presenting reasoning. I may not agree with all of it but I can respect that your stance is related to freedoms. However I've read enough in the last 24 that comes from a less reasoned place. And it's thread after thread of people wanting to know how to hide their searches. So apologies if you felt targeted that wasn't my intent. " 👍 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the subject of money. Rothchild once said.... " I don't care who makes the laws as long as I control the money" now just think to yourself what he's actually saying in that statement and what ramifications it has. It has zero ramifications. He's saying politicians will make the rules he wants otherwise they will not be supported financially. I mean....the BoE has repeatedly stated that cash will never disappear even in the event of potential central bank digital currencies. Yes rich people have money. They always have. And yet we all still get paid, have access to cash, can spend our money on whatever we choose. I have an amazing collection of random ducks and not once has anyone tried to stop me buying another one. I shop where I want, when I want. I had my car washed for the first time I months yesterday and by some small miracle managed to withdraw a crisp tenner from a cash point (no charge) literally minutes after using my card to but a couple of drinks. I then sat in the car whilst it was being washed and logged into Fab without having to prove my identity to anyone, safe in the knowledge that my online activity wouldnt be the topic of conversation in some ministerial meeting in London. I'm always confused when people tell me my freedoms are being eroded and that I'm not able to make my own choices in life. 🤷♂️" The concept of "the illusion of freedom" suggests that while individuals may perceive themselves as free to make choices and act independently, this sense of autonomy is often a constructed reality, influenced by various social, economic, and psychological factors. It implies that true freedom, in the sense of unconstrained agency, might be more limited or even illusory than commonly believed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the subject of money. Rothchild once said.... " I don't care who makes the laws as long as I control the money" now just think to yourself what he's actually saying in that statement and what ramifications it has. It has zero ramifications. He's saying politicians will make the rules he wants otherwise they will not be supported financially. I mean....the BoE has repeatedly stated that cash will never disappear even in the event of potential central bank digital currencies. Yes rich people have money. They always have. And yet we all still get paid, have access to cash, can spend our money on whatever we choose. I have an amazing collection of random ducks and not once has anyone tried to stop me buying another one. I shop where I want, when I want. I had my car washed for the first time I months yesterday and by some small miracle managed to withdraw a crisp tenner from a cash point (no charge) literally minutes after using my card to but a couple of drinks. I then sat in the car whilst it was being washed and logged into Fab without having to prove my identity to anyone, safe in the knowledge that my online activity wouldnt be the topic of conversation in some ministerial meeting in London. I'm always confused when people tell me my freedoms are being eroded and that I'm not able to make my own choices in life. 🤷♂️ The concept of "the illusion of freedom" suggests that while individuals may perceive themselves as free to make choices and act independently, this sense of autonomy is often a constructed reality, influenced by various social, economic, and psychological factors. It implies that true freedom, in the sense of unconstrained agency, might be more limited or even illusory than commonly believed. " That's an awful lot of words to try and tell me I have no freedom. But you're right. When I'm skint I can't buy more ducks. 🤷♂️ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the subject of money. Rothchild once said.... " I don't care who makes the laws as long as I control the money" now just think to yourself what he's actually saying in that statement and what ramifications it has. It has zero ramifications. He's saying politicians will make the rules he wants otherwise they will not be supported financially. I mean....the BoE has repeatedly stated that cash will never disappear even in the event of potential central bank digital currencies. Yes rich people have money. They always have. And yet we all still get paid, have access to cash, can spend our money on whatever we choose. I have an amazing collection of random ducks and not once has anyone tried to stop me buying another one. I shop where I want, when I want. I had my car washed for the first time I months yesterday and by some small miracle managed to withdraw a crisp tenner from a cash point (no charge) literally minutes after using my card to but a couple of drinks. I then sat in the car whilst it was being washed and logged into Fab without having to prove my identity to anyone, safe in the knowledge that my online activity wouldnt be the topic of conversation in some ministerial meeting in London. I'm always confused when people tell me my freedoms are being eroded and that I'm not able to make my own choices in life. 🤷♂️ The concept of "the illusion of freedom" suggests that while individuals may perceive themselves as free to make choices and act independently, this sense of autonomy is often a constructed reality, influenced by various social, economic, and psychological factors. It implies that true freedom, in the sense of unconstrained agency, might be more limited or even illusory than commonly believed. " Was there a time in history (not prehistory )where actual freedom and perceived freedom were the same thing? Does actual freedom also mean freedom from consequences? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing" It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"On the subject of money. Rothchild once said.... " I don't care who makes the laws as long as I control the money" now just think to yourself what he's actually saying in that statement and what ramifications it has. It has zero ramifications. He's saying politicians will make the rules he wants otherwise they will not be supported financially. I mean....the BoE has repeatedly stated that cash will never disappear even in the event of potential central bank digital currencies. Yes rich people have money. They always have. And yet we all still get paid, have access to cash, can spend our money on whatever we choose. I have an amazing collection of random ducks and not once has anyone tried to stop me buying another one. I shop where I want, when I want. I had my car washed for the first time I months yesterday and by some small miracle managed to withdraw a crisp tenner from a cash point (no charge) literally minutes after using my card to but a couple of drinks. I then sat in the car whilst it was being washed and logged into Fab without having to prove my identity to anyone, safe in the knowledge that my online activity wouldnt be the topic of conversation in some ministerial meeting in London. I'm always confused when people tell me my freedoms are being eroded and that I'm not able to make my own choices in life. 🤷♂️ The concept of "the illusion of freedom" suggests that while individuals may perceive themselves as free to make choices and act independently, this sense of autonomy is often a constructed reality, influenced by various social, economic, and psychological factors. It implies that true freedom, in the sense of unconstrained agency, might be more limited or even illusory than commonly believed. Was there a time in history (not prehistory )where actual freedom and perceived freedom were the same thing? Does actual freedom also mean freedom from consequences? " I don't think there have ever been freedom from consequences.. Not even in the good old days before t'internet | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content." It will though. Some may go looking for it elsewhere but not all. No one said it will be perfect though but if nothing is done to try and help stop the real harmful things that kids can see on the net then we are failing our kids. I don't get why people would object to trying to keep kids safe. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"There's some really paranoid people on here who have clearly been influenced by online nut jobs. " I don’t know what you mean 
**adjusts tinfoil cap** | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To be honest.. the most surprising thing for me is that this site wasn’t caught up in it….." It is Fabio but you must have been assessed and passed, as over 18. .
I see the conspiracy bandwagon has jumped from Covid to this though | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To be honest.. the most surprising thing for me is that this site wasn’t caught up in it….. It is Fabio but you must have been assessed and passed, as over 18. .
I see the conspiracy bandwagon has jumped from Covid to this though "I wonder what the next conspiracy theory will be after this | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To be honest.. the most surprising thing for me is that this site wasn’t caught up in it….." See here Fabio https://www.fabswingers.com/forum/feedback/1719123 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have a friend who works at GCHQ due to the official secrets act she can not go into details, But has told me the boffins / spys there can look at any computer / mobile they want to. So if they want to read my shit on here just like Sydney university they are welcome." I was many years ago cleared to work at two government sites. My clearance due to both sites , where working took over 12 weeks from third interview and informed yes job offer subject to security clearance. Nearly five months . Yes got another job . Then about 25 years on . Company then working for had big contract for a government site. I was due to prior jobs . Plus yes got security check done quick . Was the liaison at site between . Company , site and any contractors that were required to be there. I had a meeting with the head of security . As person said . Showed part of my clearance . Due to what was being involved . I saw five pages . There were nine . Persons wording to me was . I did not have relevant clearance to see those pages . As above . I have known for years. Any phone call , text message , email is recorded . Pick up by GCHQ ? Perhaps other agencies in UK . But not actually read . Unless something ‘flagged ‘ by system. A bit like Fab and certain words ? The amount of data held by companies etc about people is astounding . Just do an online free credit check . ? It will show more than people realise ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I have a friend who works at GCHQ due to the official secrets act she can not go into details, But has told me the boffins / spys there can look at any computer / mobile they want to. So if they want to read my shit on here just like Sydney university they are welcome. I was many years ago cleared to work at two government sites. My clearance due to both sites , where working took over 12 weeks from third interview and informed yes job offer subject to security clearance. Nearly five months . Yes got another job . Then about 25 years on . Company then working for had big contract for a government site. I was due to prior jobs . Plus yes got security check done quick . Was the liaison at site between . Company , site and any contractors that were required to be there. I had a meeting with the head of security . As person said . Showed part of my clearance . Due to what was being involved . I saw five pages . There were nine . Persons wording to me was . I did not have relevant clearance to see those pages . As above . I have known for years. Any phone call , text message , email is recorded . Pick up by GCHQ ? Perhaps other agencies in UK . But not actually read . Unless something ‘flagged ‘ by system. A bit like Fab and certain words ? The amount of data held by companies etc about people is astounding . Just do an online free credit check . ? It will show more than people realise ? " Is this written in code? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content. It will though. Some may go looking for it elsewhere but not all. No one said it will be perfect though but if nothing is done to try and help stop the real harmful things that kids can see on the net then we are failing our kids. I don't get why people would object to trying to keep kids safe." I don't believe I objected to keeping kids safe but I do object to you implying that I did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content. It will though. Some may go looking for it elsewhere but not all. No one said it will be perfect though but if nothing is done to try and help stop the real harmful things that kids can see on the net then we are failing our kids. I don't get why people would object to trying to keep kids safe. I don't believe I objected to keeping kids safe but I do object to you implying that I did. " Then you've misunderstood my intention or I have worded it badly. I have seen a lot of people objecting on the grounds that it isn't 100% effective. I'm sorry that I made it seem I included you in that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content. It will though. Some may go looking for it elsewhere but not all. No one said it will be perfect though but if nothing is done to try and help stop the real harmful things that kids can see on the net then we are failing our kids. I don't get why people would object to trying to keep kids safe. I don't believe I objected to keeping kids safe but I do object to you implying that I did. " It was a general comment to the people who object to the bill, there is a lot of it on this thread. You didn't object to the bill and had put a reasoned argument to what kids may still get up to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To be honest.. the most surprising thing for me is that this site wasn’t caught up in it….. It is Fabio but you must have been assessed and passed, as over 18. .
I see the conspiracy bandwagon has jumped from Covid to this though "Just as well it’s not done on mental age…. Most men never graduate from being 12 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To be honest.. the most surprising thing for me is that this site wasn’t caught up in it….. It is Fabio but you must have been assessed and passed, as over 18. .
I see the conspiracy bandwagon has jumped from Covid to this though
I wonder what the next conspiracy theory will be after this "you do know that the term conspiracy theory was originally coined by the cia after the Kennedy assassination to discredit anyone questioning the official narrative don't you? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It is to keep kids safe from crap they shouldn't see , I don't see that as a bad thing It wont though. It will just push kids to sites that dont have any rules or requirments about whats uploaded and will expose them to more harmful content." 💯👍 yeah because prohibition stopped people from making and consuming alcohol didn't it as well all know | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the wording 'the message conveys information that the person *knows* to be false'" Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. " We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? " I suspect he's worried people will find out he's not a duke and he may not be able to give pleasure. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The issue with this Bill for all of us as UK subjects is not the tiny bit of it that protects children, which everyone but the most deplorable people of our society, automatically agrees with but moreover Section 179. Section 179, if anyone is not aware of the details (I suspect on here that is many) needs your urgent attention. In a nutshell it makes it a criminal act to send or post any communication with any inaccuracy. Now it doesn't take a genius to work out how and/or whom will actually define whether someting is deemed "inaccurate". So every single thing you now send or post you MAY be committing a criminal offence. If thus deemed. I'm sure you can see the path this Bill is intended to take. And this explains why there is so much kick back against it currently. But, hey, its only for the good of the kids. Right? - Charles https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2023/50/section/179 " 👍 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? I suspect he's worried people will find out he's not a duke and he may not be able to give pleasure." You mean people might discover we're not actually a nice couple 😱 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? I suspect he's worried people will find out he's not a duke and he may not be able to give pleasure." Oh I have NO worries there. I'm definitely not a duke. But I have never had any complaints about ability to give pleasure. Have had a VERY lot of moans though 
Charles | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? " Sadly so many people both on here and out in the big wide world are missing the point, especially the one the Duke of Pleasure makes about Section 179. Imagine we had a situation such as something like (I choose this only as an allegorical example) the Post Office installing faulty software. And this meant employees were falsely convicted of fraud. And the software people and senior management knew about it but, to try and save their own arses, kept schtum and let innocent employees take the rap. Now. Some Post Office employee in Wales realises this and whistle blows exposing the whole debacle. Now there many who would have liked to silence this whistleblower and his awkward facts as the repercussions are still ongoing. If say the Government or some other thing like it with friends in high places (yes that does exist) faces a similar situation it would be rather jolly handy to have a law such as the Online Safety Bill, you know just lurking there hidden behind a thumbnail that its all supposedly about protecting children, just on the off chance it is needed to charge and convict said would-be whistle-blower with "knowingly" sending "false" information. Cos you see, officially there is nothing wrong with the Post Office's systems and those employees were guilty of fraud, or so the court is told. And the whistle blower, despite them knowing the absolute facts, is deemed a liar. And is convicted as such. And this is the concern. We already have defamation laws to handle lies and falsehoods being told. They've been around for years. Why suddenly the urge to criminalise it all? If they've nothing to hide then no need going to all this trouble? Surely? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the wording 'the message conveys information that the person *knows* to be false' Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all." Or people could just not post fake news, total BS and lies in a deliberate attempt to cause trouble. 🤷♂️ There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident. The former has been widely used, especially during elections, political campaigning and whenever there's a big story in the news. Anything that has a positive effect in reducing misinformation is fine with me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the wording 'the message conveys information that the person *knows* to be false' Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. Or people could just not post fake news, total BS and lies in a deliberate attempt to cause trouble. 🤷♂️ There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident. The former has been widely used, especially during elections, political campaigning and whenever there's a big story in the news. Anything that has a positive effect in reducing misinformation is fine with me. " In principle I fully agree with you. I am sure most people would. And in a perfect world what you say would most welcome. Especially deliberately causing trouble. My question again though is: Who determines what is "fake" though? Who decrees what that person saying is "total BS"? You say "There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident" which, yes, most of the time is correct. But who is the actual judge of that? Who ensures that only truth gets through and similarly the truth doesn't get stopped? I admit I certainly don't have the answer to that. But it concerns me. As it should us all. Charles | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? Sadly so many people both on here and out in the big wide world are missing the point, especially the one the Duke of Pleasure makes about Section 179. Imagine we had a situation such as something like (I choose this only as an allegorical example) the Post Office installing faulty software. And this meant employees were falsely convicted of fraud. And the software people and senior management knew about it but, to try and save their own arses, kept schtum and let innocent employees take the rap. Now. Some Post Office employee in Wales realises this and whistle blows exposing the whole debacle. Now there many who would have liked to silence this whistleblower and his awkward facts as the repercussions are still ongoing. If say the Government or some other thing like it with friends in high places (yes that does exist) faces a similar situation it would be rather jolly handy to have a law such as the Online Safety Bill, you know just lurking there hidden behind a thumbnail that its all supposedly about protecting children, just on the off chance it is needed to charge and convict said would-be whistle-blower with "knowingly" sending "false" information. Cos you see, officially there is nothing wrong with the Post Office's systems and those employees were guilty of fraud, or so the court is told. And the whistle blower, despite them knowing the absolute facts, is deemed a liar. And is convicted as such. And this is the concern. We already have defamation laws to handle lies and falsehoods being told. They've been around for years. Why suddenly the urge to criminalise it all? If they've nothing to hide then no need going to all this trouble? Surely? " if it's already criminalized in the firm of defamation laws then the situation you describe could happen anyway. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? Sadly so many people both on here and out in the big wide world are missing the point, especially the one the Duke of Pleasure makes about Section 179. Imagine we had a situation such as something like (I choose this only as an allegorical example) the Post Office installing faulty software. And this meant employees were falsely convicted of fraud. And the software people and senior management knew about it but, to try and save their own arses, kept schtum and let innocent employees take the rap. Now. Some Post Office employee in Wales realises this and whistle blows exposing the whole debacle. Now there many who would have liked to silence this whistleblower and his awkward facts as the repercussions are still ongoing. If say the Government or some other thing like it with friends in high places (yes that does exist) faces a similar situation it would be rather jolly handy to have a law such as the Online Safety Bill, you know just lurking there hidden behind a thumbnail that its all supposedly about protecting children, just on the off chance it is needed to charge and convict said would-be whistle-blower with "knowingly" sending "false" information. Cos you see, officially there is nothing wrong with the Post Office's systems and those employees were guilty of fraud, or so the court is told. And the whistle blower, despite them knowing the absolute facts, is deemed a liar. And is convicted as such. And this is the concern. We already have defamation laws to handle lies and falsehoods being told. They've been around for years. Why suddenly the urge to criminalise it all? If they've nothing to hide then no need going to all this trouble? Surely? if it's already criminalized in the firm of defamation laws then the situation you describe could happen anyway. " This is the point. It never was a criminal offence. Defamation case are a civil matter between two parties. In the main libel laws covering written or published work and slander for spoken word. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? I suspect he's worried people will find out he's not a duke and he may not be able to give pleasure. Oh I have NO worries there. I'm definitely not a duke. But I have never had any complaints about ability to give pleasure. Have had a VERY lot of moans though
Charles "🙂 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the wording 'the message conveys information that the person *knows* to be false' Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. Or people could just not post fake news, total BS and lies in a deliberate attempt to cause trouble. 🤷♂️ There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident. The former has been widely used, especially during elections, political campaigning and whenever there's a big story in the news. Anything that has a positive effect in reducing misinformation is fine with me. In principle I fully agree with you. I am sure most people would. And in a perfect world what you say would most welcome. Especially deliberately causing trouble. My question again though is: Who determines what is "fake" though? Who decrees what that person saying is "total BS"? You say "There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident" which, yes, most of the time is correct. But who is the actual judge of that? Who ensures that only truth gets through and similarly the truth doesn't get stopped? I admit I certainly don't have the answer to that. But it concerns me. As it should us all. Charles " Some things arent really up for debate. Remember this BS that was circulated to millions in the run up to Brexit? Devoid of any fact and was written to drive a specific agenda. Had the law been in place then I doubt it would have had the visibility it did. 🤷♂️ "WHY IS NOBODY TALKING ABOUT THE LISBON TREATY, THE TREATY THAT COMES INTO FORCE 2020, ITS WORSE THAN THE SO CALLE DEAL, IF 99% OF THE BRITISH THINK THIS THE DEAL IS BAD JUST LOOK AT THE LISBON TREATY. PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW, LEAVERS AND REMAIMERS..“What will actually happen if we stay in the EU” is a question no remainer will ever answer but here it is warts and all. Check it out if you wish —— 1: The UK along with all existing members of the EU lose their abstention veto in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon Treaty when the system changes to that of majority acceptance with no abstentions or veto’s being allowed. 2: All member nations will become states of the new federal nation of the EU by 2022 as clearly laid out in the Lisbon treaty with no exceptions or veto’s. 3: All member states must adopt the Euro by 2022 and any new member state must do so within 2 years of joining the EU as laid down in the Lisbon treaty. 4: The London stock exchange will move to Frankfurt in 2020 and be integrated into the EU stock exchange resulting in a loss of 200,000 plus jobs in the UK because of the relocation. (This has already been pre-agreed and is only on a holding pattern due to the Brexit negotiations, which if Brexit does happen, the move is fully cancelled - but if not and the UK remains a member it’s full steam ahead for the move.) 5: The EU Parliament and ECJ become supreme over all legislative bodies of the UK. 6: The UK will adopt 100% of whatever the EU Parliament and ECJ lays down without any means of abstention or veto, negating the need for the UK to have the Lords or even the Commons as we know it today. 7: The UK will NOT be able to make its own trade deals. 8: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade tariffs. 9 The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade quotas. 10: The UK loses control of its fishing rights 11: The UK loses control of its oil and gas rights 12: The UK loses control of its borders and enters the Schengen region by 2022 - as clearly laid down in the Lisbon treaty 13: The UK loses control of its planning legislation 14: The UK loses control of its armed forces including its nuclear deterrent 15: The UK loses full control of its taxation policy 16: The UK loses the ability to create its own laws and to implement them 17: The UK loses its standing in the Commonwealths 18: The UK loses control of any provinces or affiliated nations e.g.: Falklands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar etc 19: The UK loses control of its judicial system 20: The UK loses control of its international policy 21: The UK loses full control of its national policy 22: The UK loses its right to call itself a nation in its own right. 23: The UK loses control of its space exploration program 24: The UK loses control of its Aviation and Sea lane jurisdiction 25: The UK loses its rebate in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon treaty 26: The UK’s contribution to the EU is set to increase by an average of 1.2bn pa and by 2.3bn pa by 2020 This is the future that the youths of today think we stole from them? They should be on their knees thanking us for saving them from being turned into Orwellian automatons!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"This is the wording 'the message conveys information that the person *knows* to be false' Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. Or people could just not post fake news, total BS and lies in a deliberate attempt to cause trouble. 🤷♂️ There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident. The former has been widely used, especially during elections, political campaigning and whenever there's a big story in the news. Anything that has a positive effect in reducing misinformation is fine with me. In principle I fully agree with you. I am sure most people would. And in a perfect world what you say would most welcome. Especially deliberately causing trouble. My question again though is: Who determines what is "fake" though? Who decrees what that person saying is "total BS"? You say "There's a huge difference between posting something in the full knowledge that it's incorrect or false information deliberately, and posting something in error or by accident" which, yes, most of the time is correct. But who is the actual judge of that? Who ensures that only truth gets through and similarly the truth doesn't get stopped? I admit I certainly don't have the answer to that. But it concerns me. As it should us all. Charles Some things arent really up for debate. Remember this BS that was circulated to millions in the run up to Brexit? Devoid of any fact and was written to drive a specific agenda. Had the law been in place then I doubt it would have had the visibility it did. 🤷♂️ "WHY IS NOBODY TALKING ABOUT THE LISBON TREATY, THE TREATY THAT COMES INTO FORCE 2020, ITS WORSE THAN THE SO CALLE DEAL, IF 99% OF THE BRITISH THINK THIS THE DEAL IS BAD JUST LOOK AT THE LISBON TREATY. PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW, LEAVERS AND REMAIMERS..“What will actually happen if we stay in the EU” is a question no remainer will ever answer but here it is warts and all. Check it out if you wish —— 1: The UK along with all existing members of the EU lose their abstention veto in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon Treaty when the system changes to that of majority acceptance with no abstentions or veto’s being allowed. 2: All member nations will become states of the new federal nation of the EU by 2022 as clearly laid out in the Lisbon treaty with no exceptions or veto’s. 3: All member states must adopt the Euro by 2022 and any new member state must do so within 2 years of joining the EU as laid down in the Lisbon treaty. 4: The London stock exchange will move to Frankfurt in 2020 and be integrated into the EU stock exchange resulting in a loss of 200,000 plus jobs in the UK because of the relocation. (This has already been pre-agreed and is only on a holding pattern due to the Brexit negotiations, which if Brexit does happen, the move is fully cancelled - but if not and the UK remains a member it’s full steam ahead for the move.) 5: The EU Parliament and ECJ become supreme over all legislative bodies of the UK. 6: The UK will adopt 100% of whatever the EU Parliament and ECJ lays down without any means of abstention or veto, negating the need for the UK to have the Lords or even the Commons as we know it today. 7: The UK will NOT be able to make its own trade deals. 8: The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade tariffs. 9 The UK will NOT be able to set its own trade quotas. 10: The UK loses control of its fishing rights 11: The UK loses control of its oil and gas rights 12: The UK loses control of its borders and enters the Schengen region by 2022 - as clearly laid down in the Lisbon treaty 13: The UK loses control of its planning legislation 14: The UK loses control of its armed forces including its nuclear deterrent 15: The UK loses full control of its taxation policy 16: The UK loses the ability to create its own laws and to implement them 17: The UK loses its standing in the Commonwealths 18: The UK loses control of any provinces or affiliated nations e.g.: Falklands, Cayman Islands, Gibraltar etc 19: The UK loses control of its judicial system 20: The UK loses control of its international policy 21: The UK loses full control of its national policy 22: The UK loses its right to call itself a nation in its own right. 23: The UK loses control of its space exploration program 24: The UK loses control of its Aviation and Sea lane jurisdiction 25: The UK loses its rebate in 2020 as laid down in the Lisbon treaty 26: The UK’s contribution to the EU is set to increase by an average of 1.2bn pa and by 2.3bn pa by 2020 This is the future that the youths of today think we stole from them? They should be on their knees thanking us for saving them from being turned into Orwellian automatons!"" Yeah but we wouldn't need stamps in our passport. Think of all the ink that would save. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Exactly that. That is the wording that should concern us all. We should be concerned about not being able to send messages we know to be untrue? Sadly so many people both on here and out in the big wide world are missing the point, especially the one the Duke of Pleasure makes about Section 179. Imagine we had a situation such as something like (I choose this only as an allegorical example) the Post Office installing faulty software. And this meant employees were falsely convicted of fraud. And the software people and senior management knew about it but, to try and save their own arses, kept schtum and let innocent employees take the rap. Now. Some Post Office employee in Wales realises this and whistle blows exposing the whole debacle. Now there many who would have liked to silence this whistleblower and his awkward facts as the repercussions are still ongoing. If say the Government or some other thing like it with friends in high places (yes that does exist) faces a similar situation it would be rather jolly handy to have a law such as the Online Safety Bill, you know just lurking there hidden behind a thumbnail that its all supposedly about protecting children, just on the off chance it is needed to charge and convict said would-be whistle-blower with "knowingly" sending "false" information. Cos you see, officially there is nothing wrong with the Post Office's systems and those employees were guilty of fraud, or so the court is told. And the whistle blower, despite them knowing the absolute facts, is deemed a liar. And is convicted as such. And this is the concern. We already have defamation laws to handle lies and falsehoods being told. They've been around for years. Why suddenly the urge to criminalise it all? If they've nothing to hide then no need going to all this trouble? Surely? if it's already criminalized in the firm of defamation laws then the situation you describe could happen anyway. This is the point. It never was a criminal offence. Defamation case are a civil matter between two parties. In the main libel laws covering written or published work and slander for spoken word. " Ah yes I see that now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it is a very disturbing trend and I honestly believe that once this has been fully implemented it will be expanded upon to the point where you can't do anything online without it being recorded somewhere, in even more granular detail than it currently is. Imagine a future where we end up with some horrible party in power from the extreme ends of the political spectrum (not hard to do right now) who have access to this information and how they might choose to use it. I don't understand why so many people are fine with it and just spout out the usual "If you are not doing anything wrong etc" or "I doubt they would find me that interesting" excuses. I totally agree with you the Nativity of some people is very disturbing. This is a perfect tool to manipulate people in which ever political power decides to use it. Ok. I'll play along. How can I be manipulated and what benefit would it be to any government to know that I swing and watch porn? 🤔" I did reply but placed a link to a very informative blog from a porn site that explains in detail the issues that this new overarching piece of legislation does. The book: Surveillance Capitalism is worth a read, hope I have not offended or violated any rules for mentioning the book. Otherwise there are plenty of articles in places if one is genuinely interested in the sinister implications of this new law. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's to keep kids safe.... Yeah of course it is, nothing to do with Kim Jon Starmer denying your civil liberties 🤣" Whaaaaat! No way is anyone going to make any money out of this or handover a bunch of their personal data... That's not the intention at all. Won't somebody think of the children.! There's 3 things that cause people to cease all clear thought... Children... Baby animals... And free sex. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Twitter could be fooled on the first day by simply switching your location on your account details. But now it appears that if you wish to go through their age verification process you have to sign up to their premium service at £11 a month. X hamster on the other hand is a simple AI face recognition age determination, no ID required. " Im not premium but can still see the naughty stuff i did before 🤔 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Ladies and gentlemen, Digital ID." Like say a driving licence, yoti and such card and to an extent a passport 🤔 the things we already have? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
