Kojo Nomai

Plastic rōnin warrior (mostly keyboard).

[Konstantin Kisin @KonstantinKisin]

Want to save the West? Start by telling your children the truth.

A society that teaches its children to hate their inheritance shouldn't be surprised when they fail to preserve it.

Teach your children gratitude. Teach them why freedom matters. Teach them what made the West successful.

Because if you don't tell them the truth about their civilisation, someone else will tell them a lie.

[Preston Byrne @prestonjbyrne]

Here’s a letter from Ofcom, the UK’s Internet censor, threatening my American clients with fines and arrest if they refused to censor their site.

Any comment?

[meathead @chrisheatherly]

I’m actually a child online safety expert and was one of the pioneers in this space with Club Penguin and so I feel uniquely positioned to critique this.

The groomer problem is real but it’s also vastly overstated. The far larger issue we saw at Penguin was suicidality or reports of sexual abuse in the home.

There is no solution for lazy/bad parenting. You can implement all the ID laws you want but if parents are going to just hand kids their phones unlocked, those kids will have access to all the same things the parents have unfettered.

What I found is that these draconian safety laws actually make it harder to be an honest operator of kids apps because on one hand it’s so much legal risk and so much user friction that it simply becomes uninvestible as a business.

Parents will just lie to let their kids use the unfettered internet. For example, I have a friend who works in mobile gaming who has two kids, one above and one below the age limit but separated by just 2 yrs, and the two wanted to play and chat together on Roblox - which is reasonable. To do this, he just verified that his younger kid is old enough for the chat feature when he’s not.

This happens all the time and will happen with these laws to. How far do we want to go with this? Scan the face of the user in real-time to make sure it’s not a kid using the device? We could do that but it feels like a massive unwanted intrusion of privacy.

That’s how you know this law isn’t about kids. COPPA and GDPR-K and so forth already make it illegal to allow chat and other grooming vectors to kids.

What’s really being done here is trying to eliminate online anonymity. And this is a far bigger issue that goes to core speech rights because if you cannot criticize the govt anonymously and if wrong speech is a crime then it becomes easy to identify all the detractors of the govt in power, and ban, fine or jail them for speech crimes.

Starmer has already been doing this and he wants to do it at a much bigger scale. Starmer won’t even acknowledge the problem of actual grooming gangs in Britain’s neighborhoods but he’s worried about online grooming?

No he’s not, and this hypocrisy gives away the game. What he wants is to kill online anonymity so he can enforce censorship of his unpopular policies. No politician should have this power.

[Ben Leo @Benleo]

The council staff, social worker, hospital staff and school head teacher should all be up in court on negligent manslaughter charges.

ENOUGH of this managed decline of our country and institutions.

That poor baby was failed by LOW GRADE, INCOMPETENT dolts.

RAPED to death.

[J Stewart @triffic_stuff_]

🚨Tech Secretary Signals Fresh Assault on Privacy: “We’re Coming Back for More” With VPN Bans and Extra Measures 💬 🚫

Starmer’s regime is barreling toward full-blown authoritarian control and they’re not even hiding it anymore.

Just days after rushing out a blanket social media ban for under-16s, the Tech Secretary is already on the airwaves admitting they’ve got no real answers on enforcement… yet proudly announcing “further statements in July” on VPN restrictions, curfews, chatbots, and more crackdowns.

Before the first ban is even rolled out.

This isn’t about protecting kids. It’s a thirst for surveillance and censorship. They want zero privacy. They want to know exactly what you’re doing and saying online at all times. Age verification, facial scans, VPN blocks – the infrastructure of a digital police state.

Starmer is an authoritarian with no real mandate, racing to ram this through before the public boots him out. No detailed plan, no proper scrutiny, just more control.

This country is being f*cked by a government obsessed with power over people.

[J.K. Rowling @jk_rowling]

135 British MPs are fighting guidance that would deny ‘Paula’ the right to enter women’s and girls’ changing rooms.

[Basil the Great @BasilTheGreat]

🚨 BREAKING: It has been revealed that the public consultation data Keir Starmer is using to promote his social media ban did NOT have an ‘against’ option

[Guido Fawkes @GuidoFawkes]

A year ago Guido reported Labour would go after VPNs.

The government's breezy dismissal was written up by the press.

Eleven months later Liz Kendall says she will come back with new restrictions on VPNs as British policy to ban half of the internet falls apart. #carcrash

[Konstantin Kisin @KonstantinKisin]

The ban on social media for children under 16 is an idea that has merits. But the way it is being done is simply a way to force everyone, including adults, to identify themselves online, creating the most powerful surveillance and censorship architecture in human history.

[Bernie @Artemisfornow]

A German state broadcaster falsely claims Elon Musk called for migrants to be “hunted” in Belfast.

He’s suing them now.

Ask yourself how a journalist gets something so wrong.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

"Interdire les VPN", c'est ne rien comprendre à ce qu'est un VPN.

Un VPN, ce n'est pas un produit, c'est un principe. Un tunnel chiffré entre votre machine et un serveur que vous choisissez. Votre trafic ressort avec l'adresse de ce serveur, point final. C'est de la cryptographie et du routage, rien d'autre.

Or ce tunnel chiffré, c'est exactement la même brique technique que le HTTPS de votre banque, le SSH de n'importe quel développeur, le réseau interne de n'importe quelle entreprise. Le chiffrement et le tunneling, ce n'est pas "le truc des hackers", c'est le socle de l'internet moderne.

Donc "interdire les VPN", au sens littéral, ça veut dire interdire les tunnels chiffrés. Et interdire les tunnels chiffrés, c'est casser le e-commerce, la banque en ligne, le télétravail, bref tout ce qui fait qu'internet fonctionne. Vous ne pouvez pas tuer l'un sans tuer l'autre.

Maintenant le concret, celui qui fait que c'est déjà perdu.

Il n'y a pas "un VPN" à bloquer. Vous louez un serveur à 5 euros par mois chez Hetzner, DigitalOcean ou AWS, vous installez WireGuard ou OpenVPN en trois commandes, et vous avez votre propre VPN sur une IP que personne n'a sur sa liste de blocage. Un gamin de 16 ans fait ça pendant la page de pub.

Vous pouvez bloquer les IP des fournisseurs commerciaux connus ? Ça ne change rien à l'auto-hébergé. Pour aller plus loin, il vous faut un pare-feu national avec inspection profonde des paquets et liste blanche de protocoles. Autrement dit la Chine, l'Iran, un appareil de surveillance de masse. Et même ça fuit en permanence (Shadowsocks, V2Ray, protocoles obfusqués qui imitent du trafic HTTPS classique).

Le choix réel est donc binaire. Soit votre interdiction est du théâtre, contournée en 48 heures. Soit vous construisez une Grande Muraille numérique, et même Pékin n'arrive pas à la fermer complètement.

Le fond du problème, c'est que ces gens légifèrent contre l'arithmétique. On ne vote pas une loi contre les mathématiques. Le tunnel chiffré existera tant que le chiffrement existera, et le chiffrement existera tant qu'internet existera.

Des bureaucrates qui n'ont jamais écrit une ligne de code de leur vie décident d'interdire une primitive cryptographique qu'ils ne savent même pas définir. Ils ont déjà perdu. C'est le poulet sans tête : ça continue de courir, mais la décision est déjà tombée.

[X Freeze @XFreeze]

Never forget EU offered an illegal secret deal to Elon to quietly censor speech and do what they tell him to do, promising they would not impose any fines

Elon outright rejected the deal

So then came a $140M fine imposed on 𝕏 to go after Elon

You have no idea how corrupt and bloated the EU bureaucracy is

[The Free Speech Union @SpeechUnion]

The Mayor of London, Sir Sadiq Khan, continues to call for greater intervention and regulation of social media platforms that highlight rising crime in the capital.

Khan has claimed that London has been subjected to a “relentless and unprecedented attack of lies and hatred” on social media. He now argues that online “misinformation” is deterring tourists from visiting the city.

Yet Home Office data show that there were nearly 100,000 thefts or attempted thefts in London last year, compared with around 45,000 in 2019.

Rather than trying to shut down criticism and debate, or blaming social media for London’s problems, the Mayor should focus on tackling rising crime and making the case for his own policies.

More open discussion is not the problem. It is part of the solution.

[Kellie-Jay Keen @ThePosieParker]

Anyone armed with a felt tip faces instant arrest.

[mert @mert]

this is absolutely insane

- the UK now proposes scanning of all PRIVATE content on user devices or *jail* (for the execs) of device companies

^ recall how the french already arrested pavel earlier this year

- this is on a *device level* -- meaning you can not even use the phone freely *unless you literally KYC* -- does not matter which apps you use

- on top of this, they will require *another* KYC submission on the app-level to access certain apps

so this would mandate both device-level and app-level surveillance

this is the most draconian shit I have seen in tech yet

[Bernie @Artemisfornow]

And bloody obviously … ‘Common Law’ can only work when a country has COMMON values, COMMON beliefs andCOMMON ethics. Ours no longer does.

Jury equity should work against injustice, not as a playground for jurors to use their personal politics or cultural beliefs as law.

British society has lost a shared moral framework … thanks Tony Blair 🤡

[Graham Linehan @Glinner]

Stories like this make me think that somewhere along the line, I actually died and went to hell. How did so many of my old colleagues and friends stand for this man against their own daughters? How could they happily see my career destroyed on his behalf?

[Chris Rose @ArchRose90]

Ironic that the BBC is reporting this.

[Benonwine @benonwine]

The Police drove her to hospital. The police saw her injuries. Yet, the police, the Tele/Courier, the council, the politicians, the TV, all said the Bulgarian was innocent. Let that sink in... They made the families life hell, to protect a Bulgarian migrant who is actually well know to both the council and the police.

There was also no mention of the migrant needing to be restrained and a spit hood placed on him, nor him urinating in the back on the police van. Dundee City Council Dundee Evening Telegraph Police Scotland Scottish National Party (SNP) Rupert Lowe The Courier UK Even after the Hospital Admission letter for concussion was posted online, they all stuck to the narrative the wee girls were being racist towards an innocent migrant, and his wife. The innocent migrant asked the wee girls if they wanted a good time. The innocent migrants wife was his sister, who was clearly seen running over and grabbing the 13yo's hair and throwing her to the ground. This case was an open and shut case from the onset.

Yet, they put the family and girls through months of hate and death threats. Even now, people are still calling the family scumbags, saying the verdict means nothing. Instead, focussing on the girl and the weapons, not the beast who tried chatting them up and then assaulted them when they told him he was a "fucking creep, we're 12". 2 young girls, children, were assaulted before any weapons entered the equation.

I genuinely hope the family sue the lot of them. I hope Elon Musk finances her court costs, or the family are crowd funded

[Autism Capital 🧩 @AutismCapital]

Step one was the censorship at the app level. Because people are able to bypass that they are now censoring at the device/OS level (Step two). Step three is censorship at the ISP level. Think China. All sites pre-authorized by a "Ministry of Digital Safety" entity.