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
something I think that needs to be taken into account here is that for 14 years the Tories made decisions far more harmful, far more disconnected, and--in isolation--far less popular with the public than anything Labour has even considered doing, and yet for most of that time actually gained in popularity. why? because most voters in this country read and read news sources in favour of right-wing politics, and even the news sources that are more "left-wing"--The Mirror and The Guardian--aren't as sycophantic anyway. if Labour had the sycophantic media support that the Tories or even Reform do, none of you in this thread would be saying any of this. you may ask "who even reads newspapers these days", but this is not really a useful point, as many people may not read them directly, but they still broadly set the narrative, the tone and the cycle, even if you're hearing it second or third hand via social media

this isn't to say that Keir Starmer is doing an amazing job. he's not. he's far too comfortable with authoritarianism and far too establishmentarian, and I would much rather someone like Andy Burnham in charge--even if you can trust his policy positions just as much as Starmer's from when he won the leadership--just because he has some energy and charisma about him, and you feel like he might be able to counteract Farage somewhat, but, at the same time, the level of scrutiny of Labour is incredibly unfair and before you criticise them yourself, you have to try and remember that you're viewing it all through that filter