SUMM

The creator expresses deep concern that the UK’s Online Safety Act threatens internet freedom and urges immediate action to prevent its damaging effects.
References past involvement in activism against similar legislation targeting the open web.

Draws parallels to the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOAPA), which nearly implemented broad and harsh restrictions and content bans, notably threatening free expression.
Highlights the community’s successful fight against SOAPA through widespread online protests and the pivotal role of groups like the EFF.
Emphasizes the importance of net neutrality and the dangers posed by monopolistic ISPs restricting or prioritizing web traffic.

The Act places a duty of care on online platforms, mandating age checks for millions of websites accessible in the UK.
Non-compliance means massive fines (up to 10% of worldwide revenue) or service blocks.
Defines “harmful content” broadly, including not only pornography and self-harm but abuse, hate speech, violence, and even risky stunts or substance use.
Requires platforms to actively make judgments on harmful content, robustly verify user ages (often through third-party services), and moderate algorithms/content.
ID verification methods proposed include uploading government IDs, face scans, or providing access to banking information—raising security and privacy concerns.

Notable platforms (e.g., Reddit, Discord, Spotify) have already started implementing age checks, often involving third-party identity services.
Ofcom has sent enforcement letters to US-based companies, threatening severe penalties for failure to comply.
Companies may face daily penalties or large fines if they don’t provide records or follow new rules.
The legislation impacts not only UK-based services but any site accessible from the UK, adding legal complexity and compliance burdens worldwide.

EFF and the creator argue the Act doesn’t genuinely improve child safety online and introduces serious privacy, free speech, and discrimination risks.
Millions lacking ID (e.g., migrants, unhoused, marginalized groups) may be excluded from online access.
VPN usage skyrocketed in the UK after age checks went live, demonstrating widespread public resistance.
Only clear winners are VPN and identity check companies, with higher exposure to identity theft and phishing due to normalization of ID requests online.

The US and Australia are considering or implementing similar age verification laws for social media or restricted content.
Each jurisdiction’s unique requirements make compliance nearly impossible for global platforms, increasing legal risk and administrative complexity.
Legislation risks causing more harm than it prevents, both operationally for platforms and to users’ privacy and access.

The responsibility for protecting kids shifts from parents to governments, then to platforms, then to third-party identity providers.
When parents, government, or platforms fail, the level and scope of damage escalates from individual children to the potential destruction of the open web and mass identity/data leaks.
Outsourcing to third parties increases the attack surface for identity theft and exposes users to higher risks.
Creates a culture where users get accustomed to sharing sensitive data, making phishing and scams easier.

Advocates for education and tools that help parents control and monitor their kids' online activities, rather than sweeping legislation.
Suggests device-level restrictions and improved parental controls as preferable policy approaches.
Opposes reliance on VPNs and third-party identity services, citing previous privacy abuses and risks.

The Digital Services Act discusses the tension between privacy and age checks but risks establishing general mandates for intrusive age verification.
Age checks often require forms of government ID many do not have, or depend on sensitive biometric/behavioral data collection.
These mandates create supply chains with little user transparency and can promote discrimination and privacy violations.
The approach incentivizes platforms to focus on compliance over genuine safety, neglecting proper content moderation and data protections.
Age restrictions can be easily circumvented by motivated youth, providing little practical protection.

Legislation like the Online Safety Act risks degrading the internet's openness without meaningfully addressing child safety.
Current approaches lead to more harm, increased exclusion, greater attack surfaces for identity theft, widespread surveillance, and an unhealthy reliance on VPNs and third parties.
Real solutions must focus on empowering and educating parents.
Viewers in affected regions are urged to contact government representatives and advocate for the repeal of these laws to preserve a free and open internet.

How the "Online Safety Act" might destroy the web