zlacker

>>ANewbu+(OP)
There's an opportunity for a service like CloudFlare here give people a simple toggle that manages geoblocks on legal liability factors. It's way too much for every organisation to individually track every country's laws day by day in case just by being accessible there you incur a liability. And it sounds like the UK would have just self-selected out of the list of "safe" countries.

If something like this was in widespread use it would have much more impact since countries would see whole swathes of the internet immediately go dark when they make stupid laws.

>>zmmmmm+TI1
I wish Wikipedia would take one for the team, and go dark in the UK. (And I'm in the UK).

Wouldn't work with somewhere like China, but the UK might still be capable of being shamed.

>>flir+rQ1
At this point, the UK government is beyond shaming. On the contrary, it shame and record-breaking unpopularity seems to empower them.

I wouldn't put it passed them to require the digital ID to access the internet passed curfew.

>>smasha+7k2
Tbf, well implemented digital ID would be much preferable to the idiotic situation that we're in now. The emphasis on well implemented.

>>gambit+DH2
I still don't understand how someone is supposed to benefit from such a thing. If I want to use some service, I'll sign up for an account with it. The only thing a centralized ID is going to do is let the service correlate me with a different account on a different service, which is exactly the thing that I don't want.

How is someone supposed to benefit from a thing whose only function is to reduce the friction against forcing them to correlate their otherwise-independent activity against their will?

>>Anthon+sN2
A well implemented system would somehow allow you to use your ID to prove you have the attributes a service needs (being over 18, able to drive, no criminal records, not a communist or whatever it is they need) without providing any further information that would allow multiple services to correlate ID's against eachother.