this post was submitted on 19 May 2026
467 points (99.8% liked)

Technology

84796 readers
4427 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Mozilla, the non-profit tech giant behind the Firefox browser and has warned regulators that age-restricting VPNs "would undermine the privacy and security of all users".

In a formal submission to the UK's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, Mozilla pushed back against a recent consultation that considers age-gating the best VPN services to stop minors from bypassing age checks mandated by the Online Safety Act.

top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old

oi m8 u got a loicence fuh that' VEE PEE ENN?

[–] OldQWERTYbastard@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Such a pathetic nanny state. The Brits deserve better.

[–] D_C@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 hour ago

Brit here. Nope, we don't.
Until we stop sucking americas cock AND also kick out foreign owned media and corrupt politicians, etc, then we deserve everything we get.

[–] darklamer@feddit.org 40 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

"would undermine the privacy and security of all users,"

But that's the entire point of doing it in the first place, isn't it?

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 8 points 8 hours ago

It's nice of Firefox to confirm that the mission has been accomplished.

[–] desra@lemmy.vg 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

those last two words. all users. it's not just about surveilling adults. it's the epstein class lobbying this ish. it's a menu for monsters.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 1 points 48 minutes ago

They've been stung by adults pretending to be children one too many times.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 70 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

They already know all that.

[–] MehBlah@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago

What they don't know is really the whole of human knowledge.

[–] kobra@lemmy.zip 22 points 13 hours ago (5 children)

I'm sick of this. If it's that big of a deal, we just need to ban kids from the internet. Full stop. No intermediary measure will be good enough.

[–] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 17 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

Sounds like a good idea. Now we just need a way to determine which users are kids and which are adults. I've got it! We can use age verification for that, and we'll probably also need to ban vpns to stop kids from getting around it.

[–] kobra@lemmy.zip 11 points 6 hours ago

Kids can't actually get access to the internet on their own. You have to purchase an internet connection of some sort via a provider and kids can't do that. Public access, like libraries, would have to use ID/age verification in person, sure. But not the general internet. That responsibility falls to the parents of the children and you can create whatever punitive laws you want to punish and hold parents accountable for preventing their kids from accessing the internet.

It's literally the same thing we do with prescription drugs and alcohol. Some people have to lock them up, but mostly those bottles are unlocked and accessible to kids all over the world and we expect the parents to do the gatekeeping and then punish/hold the parents accountable when they don't.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 10 points 11 hours ago

No no no. Just take the American approach. Shoot the kids in the schools! What? Is that a bad idea?

Oh, it is?

Well so is age verification.

[–] Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it 5 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

We just need parents that can do the parents, it's not the government resposability to watch out for people childrens on internet to that extend...

[–] bananabread@lemmy.zip 4 points 2 hours ago

It was never about the children

[–] tabular@lemmy.world 7 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

How do you propose to enforce such an idea? Some sort of.. birthday testimony? Some sort of.. oneness corroboration?

[–] kobra@lemmy.zip 5 points 6 hours ago

The parents have the responsibility of enforcing it and that's it, that's enough.

If you want to add laws to say that parents that fail to keep their kids off the internet can lose their kids, fine idgaf. Create whatever you want to hold parents accountable but as parents, this is THEIR problem.

[–] lastlybutfirstly@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

How do we enforce such an idea? I don't know, maybe, we can create some kind of "parental control" software, and if parents don't use it, then we can pass something called "child neglect" laws and punish them with that?

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 3 points 11 hours ago

I was gonna go with banning all UK regulators.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 12 hours ago

I actually like this approach. Better than the wackamole approach of pRoTeCtInG tHe KiDs

[–] mabeledo@lemmy.world 11 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

They know. They just don’t care.

[–] Zorque@lemmy.world 8 points 10 hours ago

They care, but the other way.