How would they know you were using one? Not sure how they could enforce it given the nature of what VPN's are.
GMail will use your data to train AI (ie. read all your private emails)
- Thread starter Chris
- Start date
-
BushMoot: Come along to the amazing Summer Moot 31st July - 5th August (extended Moot : 27th July - 8th August), a festival of bushcrafting and camping in a beautiful woodland PLEASE CLICK HERE for more information.
It's very easy to tell if you're using a VPN as the traffic is encrypted. So ISP sees encryption > report to authorities. But do note that that wasn't the proposal being made, it was actually an age restriction on VPNs that was proposed.
As far as commercial providers go it come down to the payment side, they make your bank liable for ensuring you cannot purchase VPN/Proxy provision without positive ID. What we're looking at effectively, is an internet loicnce. Which will make the 'Mericans laugh.
Your radio picks up broadcasts from June 2025 when we're near the end of February 2026?
The banks are already liable, under the banking rules, and pushing id hard, as they are scared of big fines by the regulator. Also for the same reason, preferring to close accounts that make overseas payments.
Sensible thing would be if we could add verification via anonymous tokens from phones - this is already used in the US for some passports and driving licenses. You verify your age on your phone, then use your digital wallet to create a token which you give to the service asking you to verify your age, which verifies your age without needing to pass on your personal details to the service you are verifying your age with.
This would allow anonymity with VPN providers as they could verify your age, update a marker on your account to say 'verified' and then delete the token you sent them. It would also stop under 18s from accessing the services unless an adult gives them the means to do so, which will always be impossible to prevent.
This would allow anonymity with VPN providers as they could verify your age, update a marker on your account to say 'verified' and then delete the token you sent them. It would also stop under 18s from accessing the services unless an adult gives them the means to do so, which will always be impossible to prevent.
I don't think I understand. I have bought many things over the years which were age restricted, or required a licence, and not once has my bank or indeed any payment system blocked anything awaiting ID confirmation or the like. Can you explain what you mean by your comments e.g. with a worked example?
To date they have largely placed the liability on the supplier, and you are not under 18. It depends upon the internal banking rules, which are largely confidential. e.g. there is a floating transaction value above which banks have to notify the Regulator & also certain types of transactions
At the moment, as far as I am aware, there are no rules in place regarding reporting obtaining specific products or suppliers, but there might be. I would be surprised if there is not something relating to explosives etc.
If an offshore VPN provider cannot or will not play ball with the Govt. then they might be placed on the naughty list.
It turns out that Windows tracks and logs every webpage that you have ever visited even if you're using a VPN. Also Microsoft has been known to share this information with governments too. So if you think your online browsing is anonymous when you use a VPN it's not if you use a Windows device. I can't say that I'm in the least bit surprised by this but it's interesting all that same.
Here's an artificial which explains how the system works.
https://no01.substack.com/p/your-computer-already-told-on-you
Here's an artificial which explains how the system works.
https://no01.substack.com/p/your-computer-already-told-on-you
VPNs and monitoring what people are looking at on their computer is just the tip of a much larger iceberg too. The video below discusses how the thousands of public video cameras and multiple data centers operate together. I thought that I already had a good idea about this sort of thing but it’s actually much further reaching and insidious than I initially realized.
It’s not just number plate and facial recognition video cameras they use now either. They also have signal trace ‘camera’ devices such as those produced by Leonardo. You’ve probably already seen them around but not realised what you’re looking at. Little white square panels attached to buildings and lamp posts. Now many of these panels are just regular antennas for sending and receiving digital information. However some of them are very sensitive highly specialized antennas that are specifically tuned to watch for things like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and other signal bands.
What these signal trace ‘camera’ devices actually do is is monitor each time you walk or drive past one and takes an inventory of every electronic device in your pocket or car as you pass by. Also not only does it know what type of devices you are using but because each one of those electronic signals has an individual ‘signature’ to it like a serial number or fingerprint, it is then able to link each or your individual electronic signals specifically to you and the rest of your data using AI to monitor it all together in the future.
So simple visual video cameras don’t just see what car is traveling where any more. These these signal trace devices also know who is in the car and what electronic devices they are using and use AI to log, monitor and interpret all this data. So for example if ever you share a car with one of your friends or workmates it will see that you likely know this other person and will then use AI to link that person to you and then monitor both of you and your digital devices together as ‘associates’ in the future. As I say - it is much further reaching and insidious than I initially realized.
It’s not just number plate and facial recognition video cameras they use now either. They also have signal trace ‘camera’ devices such as those produced by Leonardo. You’ve probably already seen them around but not realised what you’re looking at. Little white square panels attached to buildings and lamp posts. Now many of these panels are just regular antennas for sending and receiving digital information. However some of them are very sensitive highly specialized antennas that are specifically tuned to watch for things like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and other signal bands.
What these signal trace ‘camera’ devices actually do is is monitor each time you walk or drive past one and takes an inventory of every electronic device in your pocket or car as you pass by. Also not only does it know what type of devices you are using but because each one of those electronic signals has an individual ‘signature’ to it like a serial number or fingerprint, it is then able to link each or your individual electronic signals specifically to you and the rest of your data using AI to monitor it all together in the future.
So simple visual video cameras don’t just see what car is traveling where any more. These these signal trace devices also know who is in the car and what electronic devices they are using and use AI to log, monitor and interpret all this data. So for example if ever you share a car with one of your friends or workmates it will see that you likely know this other person and will then use AI to link that person to you and then monitor both of you and your digital devices together as ‘associates’ in the future. As I say - it is much further reaching and insidious than I initially realized.
Last edited:
Without knowing all the techie bits, I did already understand Windows reported back webpages etc. It actually said so, or I correctly read the inference, when reading some of their web privacy/security pages. Allegedly to find errors and solve problems, improve service etc etc.
Claimed I had a choice whether to restrict it or not, but I didn't believe that for a moment, "They" are just too greedy to let that go.
Some of the comments to the article are interesting. I go with Pattree's dictum, the only safety is within the sheer volume of reported data and not standing out.
I'd also say, and "not doing anything illegal", but that depends upon the rules, which can change on the whim of politicians, big business and the media.
Claimed I had a choice whether to restrict it or not, but I didn't believe that for a moment, "They" are just too greedy to let that go.
Some of the comments to the article are interesting. I go with Pattree's dictum, the only safety is within the sheer volume of reported data and not standing out.
I'd also say, and "not doing anything illegal", but that depends upon the rules, which can change on the whim of politicians, big business and the media.
From my reading of those two articles, I'd say that both Microsoft and Apple are in flagrant contravention of the GDPR by sending a lot of usage data along with unique identifiers that are linked to users' names, email addresses, sometimes postal addresses and telephone numbers (in the case of iPhone users, telephone numbers are almost certainly included).
I don't think they, or any business in the US, like or care about EU/UK laws at all. "Sue us if you dare" approach to business.
When Google got caught breaking mobile GDPR in Germany, their spokesman tried to deflect by repeatedly asking "Where's the harm?" i.e. ignoring the offence and trying to distract by challenging to provide a justification/irrelevance.
Last edited by a moderator:
The European Commission needs to take a leaf from the Merkins' vocabulary and "grow a pair": by which I mean really apply the penalties laid out in law for breaching the GDPR.
Apple and Microsoft continuing with practices that are clearly against the law yet being let off any penalties would be like allowing Taco Bell to continue to use contaminated lettuce in its salads without penalties.
OK, so leaking data is not the same as infecting people with intestinal parasites, but knowing what the rules are and consciously deciding to not follow them is exactly the same.
To be fair the EC, has done so on several cases and fined them huge amounts. Which they then don't pay but try to kick into the distance with obscure appeals. They have also semi-complied and made some changes and changed (allegedly) some anti-trade practices to muddy the waters.
In essence, as taught at Ivy League colleges, it's called Business Risk: If something goes wrong or is discovered, how long can a business delay and defer and put off the evil day of paying damages vs, how much you can earn on that money in the meantime.
I used to have the explanatory text and a worked example, don't know now where it is.
When considering and costing a new business venture or product, Business Risk is one line in the budget, usually expressed and added as a % of the total budget.
In essence, as taught at Ivy League colleges, it's called Business Risk: If something goes wrong or is discovered, how long can a business delay and defer and put off the evil day of paying damages vs, how much you can earn on that money in the meantime.
I used to have the explanatory text and a worked example, don't know now where it is.
When considering and costing a new business venture or product, Business Risk is one line in the budget, usually expressed and added as a % of the total budget.
Similar threads
