PublicThe more I think about it, the more convinced I am of this -- not least because of the massively larger "attack surface" of personal data there will now be. And some of that will be facial data. As is sometimes said: "If your password is compromised, then you should change it. If your face is compromised... good luck." I think the OSA is a perfect example of how a blind, superficial repetition of "protect our kids!" without thinking
beyond headlines can actually make people, children included,
less safe overall. Given what we already know about the extent of cyberattacks (the M&S and the Co-op hacks are only the tip of the iceberg) introducing a law like the OSA without
from day one having seriously strong transparency, privacy and data protection is... well, "foolhardy" is a very polite way to put it.
I suspect that when the OSA was first announced by the Tories, most people imagined that it would be primarily used to keep children off porn sites. Lots of support for that, as you'd imagine, and fair enough. But just a few days after implementation, we're already seeing that it causes issues far, far more widely than that. On BlueSky now, you can't even send DMs without age verification. Wikipedia's parent organisation is in court as I write, pointing out that if it's required to implement the OSA fully it will likely become impossible to keep Wikipedia itself accessible to a general UK audience. These won't be the last examples. To those of us with long online memories, there's an unhappy parallel with how early filtering software in places like public libraries in the late 1990s prevented access to stuff like LGBT resouirces.
And our politicians of almost all parties have just blindly gone along with this through a combination of stupidity, electoral calculation and craven cowardice. The Tories and Labour are most at fault as the governments who saw the law through to implementation in this terrible state. But most of the others are complicit as well. That doesn't only go for politicians, it goes for other authorities, sadly including charities. The OSA in its present form
does not make the UK a safer place for children to be online. Because of the poor privacy safeguards, the lack of rigour in considering its reach and the almost certain massive data breaches that will come along at some point, matched with politicians' proven inability and/or refusal to understand how IT
works ("backdoors for good guys only", anyone?) I'm afraid I think everyone, including children, is actually
less safe now.
I doubt anything much will be done about it until there's a disaster, though -- just as specialists had been screaming about the risks of a major pandemic for years, but most politicians didn't really want to listen until Covid came along. We may yet get serious, meaningful balance between a workable internet and protecting children from harm -- but the OSA in its current form is not it. Amazingly, the UK isn't even the worst: Australia is planning to require minors to use age verification, as it's setting a minimum age of 16 for much social media. Shame on the politicians and media who used the Yes, Minister approach of "Something must be done. This is something. Therefore this must be done." You, personally you, will bear some of the responsibility when (and no, I don't think it's "if") there is a catastrophic data breach.