howsentimental

🚨Labour confirms ID requirement at device level - VPNs useless.🚨 By forcing Apple and Google to verify age at the device level during phone setup… Keir Starmer’s government isn’t protecting kids — it’s building a surveillance infrastructure. The OS itself will restrict platforms like TikTok, Instagram and X, making VPNs largely useless because the block happens before any traffic leaves your phone. 🚨Once every device carries a verified age profile, authorities gain an easy route to identify users through legal requests to tech firms. This is digital ID by the back door, sold as child safety. Classic Labour: expand state control first, ask questions later.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ thetimes.com/uk/politics/ar…

We all have to say no to digital ID. Or it’s game over. I already miss the world I knew. I don’t want to live in the world they have planned. Do you?

I can’t wait to see how Labour try to ban VPNs… they are literally used by companies and corporations for security. I can see huge court cases over this if they try… AUTHORITARIAN NUTJOBS

I must apologise for the political tweets of late. I'm a horror gamer, I want to talk about that, but my country is rapidly descending into 1984. I cannot stay silent when people are losing rights to a tyrannical government.

If the UK ever bans VPNs, don’t buy the line that “only criminals need privacy”. That is absolute nonsense. Normal people use VPNs for banking, public Wi-Fi, working from home, travelling abroad, protecting business accounts, journalism, whistleblowing and basic online privacy. A ban would not stop serious criminals. They would just find another way. The people it would hurt are ordinary, law-abiding citizens who simply don’t want every click, search and message tracked. Privacy is not suspicious. Privacy is protection. And once any government starts banning privacy tools, you have to ask: What exactly are they trying to stop us seeing, saying, or protecting?

Censorship always comes with a “protect the children” lie

@Sargon_of_Akkad I used to have so much respect for him. It’s sad.

No, the intention is clearly forcing us all to use digital id to sign into social media. Shocked you can't perceive that, tbh.

BBC reporting that no one believes them anymore

Just want to congratulate @Keir_Starmer for uniting the country. Now both adults and children hate him. What an achievement.

The Under 16's social media ban is just Digital I.D The Government wants to know exactly who is saying what online

@elonmusk @EmmanuelMacron This in a nutshell

@Polymarket As was predicted...

It’s important to know that the social media ban for under 16s is not a ban for under 16s. It is a ban on *selected* social media for EVERYONE. Until you identify yourself.

X already has age verification, so do most other social media and gaming apps. Starmer is lying to you, he is creating a route to Digital ID for everybody.

And there it is. This isn’t about the kids. This is about policing us and pushing digital ID.

@misscarsonn I'd like to hear the explanation of how it is that Labour wants 16 y/o's to vote but don't want them to be online to learn what they are supposed to vote about x.com/misscarsonn/st…

So in the UK, if you’re 16/17 years old. You’ll be able to drive, join the army, get married, Vote in elections but can’t send a Snapchat to your pal at 7pm. Makes sense #SocialMediaBan

When a government calls for censorship it is never actually about protecting its citizens, it’s about protecting the government. Fact.

Bluesky won’t be included in the under-16s social media ban. Twitter/X will be. This is clearly a political decision, nothing to do with child safety.

The Starmer curfew for 16-17 years olds will be impossible to enforce. Warning. This is the beginning of everyone being restricted and one of the many back door digital IDs.