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
That would require trusting a government such as the British one to implement it well. That's far too big an ask for them, so the current situation is preferable.

>>reorde+JK2
Tbf, the team behind .gov websites has been exceptional and I think that part of the digitization of government services has been done really well. So I think it's definitely possible - the question is will the government do that, or will they pay someone few billion quid for an off the shelf solution from a company owned by someone's uncle/brother/cousin that will be a flaming mess.

>>gambit+MQ2
It’s not the technical expertise that is the concern.

It’s what the UK government has shown time and again when they ask for more data: they use it for previously denied-aims to expand their surveillance state.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_mass_surveillance...