Sorry that was meant to say don't know if these are gov ammendments or not, auto correct

If it's any reassurance this was tried months ago and rejected, and I don't know if there gov ammendments or not and if not they may not pass.

After reading that all i can think is how do the GOP keep saying thing's so cartoonishly evil and still get elected?

Does this mean anything practically going forward or is it just talk?

I have realised something, I once came across patreon's impact assessment to ofcom regarding AV and they claimed because there a subscription service that works fine as AV and I can tell you patreon don't AV average users so if ofcon say that's ok maybe the pay for VPN's will be spared (ironically).

Priority 1 content, not block for UK users remove. So site still operating in the UK under AV may be removing a lot of content by A.I soon.

bills.parliament.uk/bills/3938/s... here's the text of the ammendment, the good news (sort of) is it is an ammendment to the extreme porn laws so the content has to look realistic, this may have a knock on effect world wide though because following the logic of the OSA they must remove (cont)

I'm always intrigued how kids are somehow both super intelligent to understand tech better than there parents but also to stupid to understand how to navigate the Internet.

When the OPA was being changed the crown prosecution service made a point of how since they were talking about the OPA they could do anything about specific sex acts covered by other laws like extreme porn or anything including bodily harm.

There's a lot to unpack there, several sex acts were banned in porn due to the obscene publications act of (i think) 1958, hard-core porn was illegal until 2000, in 2019 the interpretation of the OPA was changed from listed banned acts to a series of 3 (I think) tests regarding contest not acts.

Oohhh but meta is full of old people for whom it's ok to be radicalised, think of the children Paul on X. (For anyone who can't tell, that was sarcasm).

And i'm pro a smoking ban because of how it is dangerous to smoke to the point of death so I feel a hypocrite to not oppose chocking in some way (not that I think people who like it are bad).

There's a lot i can say about how I think this will be done and I don't completely like the idea of making possession illegal (because it's so common it's easy to watch by accident) but I also don't think chocking is great www.girlonthenet.com/blog/safer-a...

Tell me why I should feel the need to be represented in tv when I'm represented in every other aspect of everyday life?