Migrant

NOT IN LONDON, don't have me arrested please I only post pictures of food and random buildings

[Nym @nym]

Russia banned VPNs. Usage doubled. The UK is next in line to learn this lesson.

The most effective VPN advertisement is a government ban.

[Steven Barrett @SBarrettBar]

We must dissent.

[f4mi ‼️ @f4micom]

this is literally how north korean phones are said to work according to defectors lol what the fuck

[BladeoftheSun @BladeoftheS]

I promise you Digital ID will cause you far more trouble than it will solve, between having your identity easily stolen by hackers and being unable to access things you used to use with no hassle without it.

You will curse it, no one wants or needs this trash.

[Berrrnado @bernard_parah]

The UK is insane.

[princess diana is in all of us 🚩👑🏳️‍🌈 @joinaunionpls]

Mass phone spying. Online Safety Act. Digital ID. Facial Recognition Tech. Predictive policing. Central bank digital currency. Insane anti-protest powers. Police using drones.

It's a cage. Starmer and previous governments have basically created a constantly shrinking cage.

[Friederike Ernst 🦉 @tw_tter]

Closing the bathroom door: not suspicious.
Sealing an envelope: not suspicious.
Wanting your phone unscanned: not suspicious.

Privacy is the default setting of a free society.

[Mullvad.net @mullvadnet]

This is what the UK spyware proposal means.

There must be government spyware on every mobile device. It shall watch everything that happens, including always watching the screen, looking for things the government disapproves of.

When anything is flagged by the software as something the government doesn't like, the software must block it from being sent or displayed (in realtime).

The user of the device must not be able to shut this watching and blocking off. The only way to shut it off would be to ask the government or its proxies to do so for you, at their discretion.

Therefore the whole device must be locked down. Administrator rights and the decision of what software or operating system to run or not to run must be taken from the owner/user and handed to the government and its proxies.

Apple and Google are themselves working hard to lock down the devices they are involved in to shut out competition and establish a duopoly.

The UK government says it is "working closely" with Apple and Google and currently they synchronise and coordinate their communication on this subject.

The UK government is now proposing to mandate what would otherwise be illegal anti-competitive practices.

@GrapheneOS on the Apple and Google duopoly:
https://t.co/rbRmcUDTRu

Statement from @signalapp
https://t.co/vJILcSrs4s

@ReclaimTheNetHQ on the state spyware:
https://t.co/3FCi06bP77

The government announcement:
https://t.co/ynYjR3DIRo

[Labour Digital Rights Network @LabDRN]

We agree with every word of this statement by @signalapp ⤵️

[Wide Awake Media @wideawake_media]

Make no mistake: Under-16 social media bans and "online safety" laws are a Trojan horse for the rollout of digital ID infrastructure for everyone.

No government can prevent children under sixteen from accessing a website, an app, a feature or a device unless a digital checkpoint is erected for everybody. The only way to establish who is a child is to first establish who is not.

That means identity checks for children and adults alike. The system cannot reliably determine whether a user is over sixteen without demanding proof. A passport scan. A driving licence. A digital ID.

Dress it up in benevolent-sounding euphemisms like "age assurance", "online safety" or "child protection" all you want. The operational requirement is the same—users must identify themselves in order to be allowed through the gate.

Which is why the language around these laws is so carefully chosen. Politicians rarely admit outright that they are building an identity checkpoint for the internet. Instead, they claim to be protecting children from pornography, self-harm content, addictive design, harmful algorithms, or whatever else is useful to drive the legislation through.

The child is the sympathetic case used to win public consent. The adult is the one being conditioned to produce credentials to access the digital public square. The objective is not really to protect children from adult material, but to make identity-gated internet access feel routine, responsible and inevitable.

And once that precedent has been established, the category of content requiring verification can expand without any serious redesign of the system.

Pornography becomes social media. Social media becomes video sharing. Video sharing becomes search. Search becomes messaging. Messaging becomes payments. Payments become banking. Banking becomes public services. Public services become the minutiae of everyday life.

At each increment, the expansion is sold as limited, proportionate and necessary. At each stage, opposition is framed as harmful to children, society, public health, or national security. The justification shifts according to the emergency of the day. The digital identity infrastructure embeds itself into every category of daily activity.

Once digital ID becomes the price of entry for social participation, it does not stay confined to the original pretext that introduced it. It becomes a general-purpose control system. A way to decide who may access which service, under what conditions, with what level of monitoring, and with what consequences for falling out of good standing.

At that point, digital ID is no longer a tool for keeping children away from harmful content. It is the operating system for a controlled society. And the question is no longer whether you are old enough to access a website. It is whether the system deems you eligible to participate in society at all.

[Reclaim The Net @ReclaimTheNetHQ]

Mainstream British journalists have shown zero outrage as Starmer pushes government-mandated on-device scanning of phones.

This is the same government that secretly demanded encryption backdoors from Apple.

No fury, no scrutiny, no defense of press freedom. Even as spyware heads into every pocket, including their own and their sources’.

[Signal @signalapp]

Our statement on the UK government’s demand that all content on all devices sold or used in the country be scanned, on the presumption of nudity, using a dystopian combination of age verification and content scanning. This proposal will not safeguard children. It endangers us all.

https://t.co/VdWe9uhi8p

[Peter Hague @peterrhague]

I need the government to lock up criminals, defend the nation, build infrastructure, collect the bins, and a few other services - basic research etc. I’m not an anarchist or anything.

What I don’t need from the government is moral instruction. I don’t need them to tell me how to raise my kids. I don’t need them to nudge me into better dietary choices. I certainly don’t need them hamfistedly backdooring my devices to check I’m not doing anything they don’t like.

GTFO of my life, thank you. You’re not smarter than me, you aren’t qualified to manage me, please leave me alone.

[Migrant @remigrado]

@quintanapaz Cuando Pérez-Reverte tuiteó su historia de España por capítulos y llegó a la época donde siempre elogia al protestantismo, me dijo que mencionaría a Salamanca. Pero al final nada, se quedó en iglesia = oscurantismo y atraso.

https://t.co/ewiGpLG4Sh

[Arturo Pérez-Reverte @perezreverte]

@remigrado Todavía estamos en los siglos X y XI. Tenga paciencia, que todo llega en la vida. Un saludo.

[Migrant @remigrado]

Reform will not scrap this system if they get in power BTW. Reform are part of the system.

[Keir Starmer @Keir_Starmer]

This government will not stand by while children are put at risk online.

Today I am calling on the tech companies to introduce device-level controls to prevent children from taking, sharing or viewing nude images.

And if they don’t act, we will.

[Dr Helen Ingram @drhingram]

Online. That’s the key word. He doesn’t give a damn what happens to children offline. This is all about control of online speech, not concern for our children.

[Andrew Sabisky @AndrewSabisky]

we really are gonna have to get phones shipped over from Shenzhen to avoid our phones getting loaded with government spyware. Never forget that GCHQ is also very eager to read all your group chats!

[Franklin @FranklinVH2]

If Starmer and co were actually worried about CSAM and underage nudes, they would target Snapchat. But they only talk about X, because it’s obviously about being able to attribute X posts to ID’d citizens

[Douglas Carswell🇬🇧🇺🇸 @DouglasCarswell]

The aim of this is to end online anonymity for adults

[Andrew Bridgen @ABridgen]

Say No to Digital ID