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
Something that I think normal, decent people don't appreciate enough: you can join an organization without believing a word of what it stands for. It's perfectly possible to just pretend. It doesn't take a ton of resources or a big coordinated conspiracy to join and betray an organization, it just takes a bit of self-confidence, or chutzpah.

One person I believe knows this, is Keir Starmer. It's very hard to explain why things happen in UK politics without assuming he is trying to tank Labour.

>>vinter+NL2
If Starmer were trying to do this alone, then what are the other ministers doing? The UK is a parliamentary democracy, not a presidential government, so it's not just him, it's the rest of the Labour stooges too.

>>fakeda+qT2
The central party has frequently removed left wing candidates elected by local constituency members and imposes right wing blairite candidates by diktat.