Today DCMS announced they will legislate to get rid of European cookie pop-ups, ahead of their legislating to require you to implement British identity verification pop-ups.
So here it is, then, the topic that is apparently too dangerous to discuss: the future of the web profession itself.
The draft Code is a recipe for creating a generation of children who will grow up sheltered, shattered, and shamed, as their outlooks and formative experiences are defined by safety warnings, age gates, and privatised surveillance.
Day one, first principles, for the reproductive health care and privacy emergency which America just voted to unleash.
An amendment to the Online Safety Bill uses its age verification requirements to censor subjective legal content determined by government policy. Just like we warned you years ago.
These unanswered questions need to be cleared out of the way before the Bill can progress, regardless of who takes over that work next month.
No, I didn't destroy the Online Safety Bill with this blog. I did something even better.
An anecdote from the road about the somewhat muddled thinking that has gone into defining the Bill's sweeping compliance requirements.
Last month's post about the UK's upcoming age-gating system covered only one aspect of your compliance obligations under the upcoming Online Safety Bill. In this post, I'm going to tell you about the rest.
My friend Morten Rand-Hendriksen and I chatted about legislative threats to freedom of expression, and their potential impacts on open source software communities and projects.
Links to media quotes, articles, and talks I've given in the past year, mostly in a professional capacity for my previous employer, on the Online Safety Bill as well as on various post-Brexit UK privacy issues.
If you are a full time privacy professional in law or academia, you need to understand that one of your fundamental beliefs about online privacy is completely wrong.