This all or nothing mentality is so disconnected from the real world. Of course some people started using VPNs, of course some children even started doing it. No law can prevent all occurrences of what it tries to prevent. But it can make it more difficult, and heighten the barrier of entry for children that are introduced to the internet.
> At the next election some portion of Labour voters will remember missteps like this and will vote for someone else because of it.
Personally, I think their prosecution of peaceful protestors (Palestine supporters) whilst giving a free pass to right wing violent protestors will alienate their traditional left-wing base.
I don't think the traditional left wing base is too enthused about their intifada brothers to be honest. And a specific subset of those probably would want to ban porn too.
As far as I can tell, the purpose of the law is to push children to use either free VPNs and proxies (which will likely make them less safe using the internet) or to visit less famous porn sites that are too niche to be targetted. So, we're pushing children towards the most dodgy porn sites possible and encouraging people to upload identifying information to the less dodgy porn sites.
This law is not fit for the declared purpose at all.
They exist because they are either proxying networks that resell residential IPs (aka your internet connection) ...or because they are harvesting credentials.
The former will now make less sense as a business model, since UK isn't a good location to proxy traffic through anymore.
Yes. That’s exactly what we believe.
Do you believe that 77% of UK Pornhub users suddenly stopped wanking?
Seems pretty implausible to me.