Alex, thank you...Another wonderful in depth analysis. I have one comment which seems to have been over looked in all the noise over Digital ID Facial Recognition, etc. And it kind of relates to the issue of fraud.
As far as I am aware, I own my personal information/data and biometrics. They are all my property as part of my identity and state being.
In the same way an 'author' can claim copyright and ownership over their original work, I am wondering if it is possible to do the same with my identity information.
Now I understand the Government leverage will be you can't have access to Government services unless you provide the information we demand to prove who you are.
At the same time does this give the government the FREE right to demand and use this information and distribute where it chooses, without permission, or indeed payment. Are they also going to indemnify me for any losses as a result of any cyber-fraud or security breakdowns. After all I own my information not them! I am who I am, because I exist. I have not intention of suffering any losses of any kind given their incompetence or the operators of the One Login oar whoever they have in mind.
It seems to me that one source of non co-operation might be around copyright ownership and potential copyright infringement/security. Given their overbearing attitude and reported security issues already, I imagine they've just dismissed all this, together with the question of ownership? Thoughts?
Hi Stuart, these are great points but I didn't have the space in this broad look at non-compliance to go into specific courses of action.
YES, we have ownership of our data. Part of the sleight of hand being pulled off depends on us not realising that we do. It is perfectly possible to refuse or even withdraw consent - I know of one recent example where a woman withdrew consent for her bank to use voice recognition. The staff did not seem to be aware that she had the right to do so, but she insisted and prevailed. Many people are unaware of the right to opt out from NHS Digital who are increasingly sharing data for commercial purposes.
These cases illustrate the importance of saying No and that non-compliance always takes us onto new territory, exploring new things that could work. For example: Clare Wills Harrison suggests Data Subject Access Requests could be used to remind public bodies of their obligations:
It is worth adding that government is passing/considering legislation to dilute our data privacy rights - something the Tony Blair Institute is recommending - under the guise of public service efficiency etc. Again, they are counting on lack of awareness to get this through. This is why we need a public conversation about digital rights involving legislators - take a look at the Bill of Digital Rights drawn up by Together under Resources. We probably don't need to use copyright, which has a different conceptual basis, since the principles are already laid down in data privacy and protection. I'm going to add another useful resource I've just remembered below.
And yes, no one is taking responsibility for losses incurred when there are security leaks - a strong reason why people should not be thoughtlessly handing over their data, nor should organisations be demanding it. This Andrew Orlowski's main argument - check out his work. We would all do well to remember that digital technology hasn't been around very long and we haven't yet learnt how to use it for the good of humanity. If I had to put an age on it, I'd say we were like 12 year olds playing with a new toy!
In Section 6, the part about Decision Making says:
“13A Decision-making
(1) This section applies to any decision of a CCA.
(2) A decision of a non-mayoral CCA is to be made by a simple majority of the voting members present and voting on that question at a meeting of the CCA.
(3) A decision of a mayoral CCA is to be made by a simple majority the voting members present and voting on that question at a meeting of the CCA; and such a majority must include the mayor, or the deputy mayor acting in place of the mayor.
I see this as effectively making it difficult to hold the mayor to account - if not an actual dictatorship, not far off.
In section 6, the part about Validity of proceedings:
13B Validity of proceedings
(1) The proceedings of a CCA are not invalidated—
(a) by any vacancy—
(i) among its members or substitute members, or
(ii) (in the case of a mayoral CCA) in the office of deputy mayor, or
(b) by any defect in the appointment or qualifications of—
(i) any member or substitute member, or
(ii) (in the case of a mayoral CCA) of the deputy mayor.
(2) In this section “substitute member” means a person appointed to act as a member in the absence of another member”
I see this as potentially making the election of any representative meaningless because they could be substituted for anyone whatsoever.
This Bill will not improve the potential for democracy at a local level in anyway - it certainly will not empower the local people and small businesses.
If you can interpret this section in a different way to show how democracy is improved, I will be very interested to hear it.
By the way, if you look at the white paper that preceded the publication of the Bill, you will find further embedding of the digital infrastructure in Section 2; towards the end there is a subsection called Fixing the basics - this type of phrase was used a lot in the Election Campaign, I wondered then what was meant by it.
The introduction of this paper, quickly dispels any notion that this process is connected with people power and choice.
As I see it from the incomplete research that I have managed to do on this subject, I think this is one of the biggest nails in the coffin for freedom and democracy in this country, and it is sailing through without a whimper.
Have a look at what your current local authorities are planning. All should have submitted their Re-Organisation plans to the government on 28th November.
If you find they have submitted plans for a strategic mayoral authority, ask the current councillors how the mayor can be held to account under their plans.
Most have not read the Bill and many haven’t read their own documents, especially if they’ve paid consultants to produce them. This is how a lot of this authoritarian stuff gets through.
As Alex says, we can all do a little bit to help bring awareness and take action to stop the march to authoritarianism. There are lots of ways, so we can each find something, and there are lots more of us than Them 😀
We already have a 'combined mayoral authority' - WECA. I watch in despair as people who get nowhere petitioning Bristol City Council turn to WECA thinking they will save them, praising them for the much nicer way they are treated than at council meetings. We had one mayor who was arrested for child abuse, rape and abduction earlier this year, replaced by a woman who works for PwC - which has a list of malfeasance as long as the M5. There are a lot of weird bad cop good cop deception attempts going on round these parts!
Nothing more has been heard about his case since. Labour gave him the boot but he is still a sitting independent MP - in Jacob Rees Mogg's old seat (an easy win at the last election). It's rotten to the core.
I'm doing what I can - attending council and WECA meetings, writing articles on the blog I've linked. Alex has encouraged me in both. And helping locals upset about Bristol's transport policy to understand the wider agendas. The latter can be a painful and slow process. People do not want to accept that the system is broken, and believe it's just a case of finding the right arguments.
I am aware of this but just don't have the time/capacity to cover everything. As you may know, Sandi Adams, now working for UK Column, has done quite a bit on this subject.
A comment from a campaigning perspective: people tend to find governance issues quite difficult to engage with. But there is a growing awareness of the role of mayors - something I did write about some time ago - and how their connections and funding are being used to implement the climate agenda at local level. When the Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin flew to Brazil for COP30 she got a lot of stick.
I appreciate what you have to say about time to look at everything. There are so many things happening in so many ways, that all need our attention. That is obviously the strategy.
I have written to UKC, but they do not seem to be looking at this legislation. Very few are.
People are more attracted by the National and International aspects of what is happening.
My interpretation of this Bill, is that only decisions of the Mayor can be passed and that members and their substitutes do not have to meet the eligibility criteria.
So bad as things seem now with getting representatives to actually represent people, as opposed to stakeholders, it will only get much worse, with even less recourse.
Often, Go Local is a suggested solution to beat the Supermarket corporations and Amazon. I think that strategy is being used against the people with respect to removing democratic governance.
Brillaint breakdown of how strategic withdrawal actually works in practice. The Portugal vaccine passport example shows something most people miss tho: non-compliance isn't just refusin one big thing, it's building capacity throgh smaller acts first. I tried something similar with facial recognition at an event last year, and that first "no" felt way harder than I expected. The piece about historical nonconformists creating parallel systems is spot-on because thats exactly what makes resistance sustainable longterm, not just symbolic.
To your last point, making resistance sustainable through building parallel systems is something we all need to do.
I owned a London coffee shop during Covid and switched it to being a grocery shop. It was an eye opener owning a food business during what was essentially a global robbery. I closed it post covid as I escaped London.
3 years ago, an awake friend of mine (our daughters are school friends) opened another grocery shop (as a side hustle) purely as an insurance policy for when they pull the trigger again.
The network’s one can build by having their own neighbourhood business both with customers and suppliers is invaluable.
Thanks Alex, it’s an excellent article. I’ve just shared it with a working group I’m in. I’m feeling quietly confident that we can non-conform our way out of this shit-fest given that we’re already seeing it working in places like Bulgaria, Nepal and in patches around the UK. Or we all just move to Cornwall!
Once the British get uncomfortable enough, I think we’ll start seeing greater numbers. Especially when they look at their friends and family members and wonder why they’re getting by operating in parallel networks that they’ve had a head start in forming.
Your experience in Portugal was really interesting. I’d love to see it as an option of escaping from the UK but their national jab-rate is a put off. They seem to be a more compliant country on the whole compared with the UK. Do you agree with that sentiment?
There's a book in me about Portugal but I don't have the strength to write it. Portuguese society is extremely compliant and by the end of my time there I got a sense of why the dictatorship lasted so long. Also, I wouldn't recommend anyone emigrate to an EU country at this point.
Or Cornwall, where AI is being trialled to spy on drivers inside their cars!
And yes, I agree that discomfort is key. The tax thing has woken a few more up and as businesses start closing in 2026 more will realise the government really isn't working in the interests of the people.
On my first trip to Lisbon which was well after Covid, I remember taking a cab and the driver was militant about me wearing a mask. As I listed to the radio that he had blaring throughout the journey, all I could hear was wall to wall Covid-related news. I just thought that no wonder this dude was freaking out about masks when all he listens to is this frantic bs 24-7. It explained a lot when one considers that Portugal is one of the most (if not the most) jabbed countries in the world.
Yes, the Portuguese went mad for masks - almost comically so. A neighbour of mine went to get hers and that she could "safely" give me a kiss through it! At the same time, they didn't really do lockdowns and there wasn't the level of anxiety that prevailed in Britain. For the first six months I had a blast - there were parties and gatherings everywhere.
It sounds as though they’re a country of contradictions. I needed paracetamol for a headache and went into a little corner store. Given that you can legally buy class As, I may as well have been undercover drug squad given the look the shopkeepers gave me when I asked for paracetamol.
I hear you on not escaping to the EU. Out of the frying pan and all that. Although it is within sailing distance.. 🤔
I totally understand your point of view in your overall look at non-compliance.
Also, thank you for the examples you've given, together with the links...
I'm a member of Together and think their Bill of Digital Rights is a great step forward. At the same time, I recall that when it was announced, I felt it dealt with process rather than the foundational fact of ownership. Perhaps it was implicit?
Thank you also for the reference to Andrew Orlowski's work, which I've just discovered through Together, along with all the security issues. Like digital ID work being subcontracted to Romanian laptop owners by UK management consultancies!
I agree with your comment about 12 year olds too.
To close, I'd add that the 'powers that be' appear to be acting more like insecure 3 year olds, throwing a tantrum in an attempt to find power, control and create safety in their environment. Over 3 million people have already told them to get a grip on themselves!
I do some freelance work for Together. I agree with your point about the lack of foundational thinking - something I'm keen on as a person with a PhD in philosophy! The bill is just a draft so there will likely be opportunities for members to add input as we go. Or just email them now with your thoughts.
I think developing a culture of positive digital rights is key to getting through this. The more of us talk about them, claim them, the better.
Good to know a PhD is working with Together ;) I've done my best to contact them with my feedback - at the time and subsequently... I got no response. Given your comments do you have a contact there I can reach directly? Agree with your final point... And, Happy New Year. Here's a better 2026 Alex.
Mmm. The CEO of Substack recently wrote a piece condemning the OSA. Sounds like they're batting for both sides.
As I say, like others I'm prepared to leave Substack if necessary. It IS a shame for Substack as much as us, since it developed its reputation as a safe, freethinking sanctuary post-2020.
On the technology point, it develops fast on both sides! Impossible to keep a good internet down, and I even hear talk of alternative internets ...
Come to think of it, this is a classic illustration of the compliance fallacy! Substack is going along with the new online safety legislation in the belief that it "has" to and that complying will enable to it continue with business as usual. But in reality, as the requirements increase and writers exit, compliance brings its own undoing,
Alex, Per your query on COCO regarding the supposed tax revolt chatter, we colonists are seeing a mass wave of memes and themes surrounding tax revolts via non-payments on this side of the pond. Such is the fervor that I adjudge much of it to be produced by the 'Deep State' itself in order to drive the narrative. Why? Because, as I recollect, it was stated by Mr. T some time back of his intent to do away with the income taxes, tariffs being used to fill instead. Of course, if the course is followed the administration can claim 'the voice of the people' is heard.
Never mind that all taxation is theft. Always has been. A legalized form of slavery or indentured servitude as its always the action of some living off the labor and expense of others from whom it is forcefully taken. Never mind that the unholy alliance of government and corporate interests (both are corporations, granted existence by 'higher' authorities (and a deep rabbit warren that is) the combination of which is the very definition of fascism, 'print' their own company chits at will, irregardless of however much is culled via taxes. It is said by some that the income tax is to pay the debt on what gov't borrows. Borrows from who? And from whence does such wealth derive outside of some clerk typing digits into a computer ledger? No value exchange there, no valid contract. Only the sacrament of the worlds greatest faith based religion; centrally controlled fiat. All the lies of a multi-faceted, hierarchically systematized social order. Your 'Pounds' are worth no more than our 'Dollars' excepting that we all continue to play charades with them, unallowed to use anything of actual value in our exchanges.
The worst offenders aren't really the so-called 'leaders' (who, I argue, are essentially all appointed under cover of controlled elections, and all of any import are pre-vetted and 'compromised' before entering into office. The tie that I contend binds them all is being involved to some degree in human trafficking, and particularly against the youngest. For if a man or woman can be led to commit atrocity against the innocent, following orders to do anything else to anyone else is rather a simple exercise), nor the masses of the powerless, but the enforcer class. Those who are the hired thugs of the regime who receive stolen taxes in return for continuing the enslavement of their fellows. Those who wield the batons, pull the triggers, gavel the judgments, and commit all manner of depredation.
Perhaps I overstay my welcome here, but I shall attempt a more succinct (less parenthesed dribble, Ha!) to address specific points from the essay above in my next intended rant. -W
Alex, thank you...Another wonderful in depth analysis. I have one comment which seems to have been over looked in all the noise over Digital ID Facial Recognition, etc. And it kind of relates to the issue of fraud.
As far as I am aware, I own my personal information/data and biometrics. They are all my property as part of my identity and state being.
In the same way an 'author' can claim copyright and ownership over their original work, I am wondering if it is possible to do the same with my identity information.
Now I understand the Government leverage will be you can't have access to Government services unless you provide the information we demand to prove who you are.
At the same time does this give the government the FREE right to demand and use this information and distribute where it chooses, without permission, or indeed payment. Are they also going to indemnify me for any losses as a result of any cyber-fraud or security breakdowns. After all I own my information not them! I am who I am, because I exist. I have not intention of suffering any losses of any kind given their incompetence or the operators of the One Login oar whoever they have in mind.
It seems to me that one source of non co-operation might be around copyright ownership and potential copyright infringement/security. Given their overbearing attitude and reported security issues already, I imagine they've just dismissed all this, together with the question of ownership? Thoughts?
Hi Stuart, these are great points but I didn't have the space in this broad look at non-compliance to go into specific courses of action.
YES, we have ownership of our data. Part of the sleight of hand being pulled off depends on us not realising that we do. It is perfectly possible to refuse or even withdraw consent - I know of one recent example where a woman withdrew consent for her bank to use voice recognition. The staff did not seem to be aware that she had the right to do so, but she insisted and prevailed. Many people are unaware of the right to opt out from NHS Digital who are increasingly sharing data for commercial purposes.
These cases illustrate the importance of saying No and that non-compliance always takes us onto new territory, exploring new things that could work. For example: Clare Wills Harrison suggests Data Subject Access Requests could be used to remind public bodies of their obligations:
https://clarewillsharrison.substack.com/p/why-mass-dsar-campaigns-could-disrupt
It is worth adding that government is passing/considering legislation to dilute our data privacy rights - something the Tony Blair Institute is recommending - under the guise of public service efficiency etc. Again, they are counting on lack of awareness to get this through. This is why we need a public conversation about digital rights involving legislators - take a look at the Bill of Digital Rights drawn up by Together under Resources. We probably don't need to use copyright, which has a different conceptual basis, since the principles are already laid down in data privacy and protection. I'm going to add another useful resource I've just remembered below.
And yes, no one is taking responsibility for losses incurred when there are security leaks - a strong reason why people should not be thoughtlessly handing over their data, nor should organisations be demanding it. This Andrew Orlowski's main argument - check out his work. We would all do well to remember that digital technology hasn't been around very long and we haven't yet learnt how to use it for the good of humanity. If I had to put an age on it, I'd say we were like 12 year olds playing with a new toy!
Thank you for this informative article.
One area that I think is being overlooked by everyone is the Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill.
To me this is a way of bringing in all of the stuff you are concerned about through the back door at the local level.
Any pretence that this will empower local people is dispelled by looking at section 6 which talks about decision making and validity of meetings:
This is the version of the Bill presented to the Lords: https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/63703/documents/7396
In Section 6, the part about Decision Making says:
“13A Decision-making
(1) This section applies to any decision of a CCA.
(2) A decision of a non-mayoral CCA is to be made by a simple majority of the voting members present and voting on that question at a meeting of the CCA.
(3) A decision of a mayoral CCA is to be made by a simple majority the voting members present and voting on that question at a meeting of the CCA; and such a majority must include the mayor, or the deputy mayor acting in place of the mayor.
I see this as effectively making it difficult to hold the mayor to account - if not an actual dictatorship, not far off.
In section 6, the part about Validity of proceedings:
13B Validity of proceedings
(1) The proceedings of a CCA are not invalidated—
(a) by any vacancy—
(i) among its members or substitute members, or
(ii) (in the case of a mayoral CCA) in the office of deputy mayor, or
(b) by any defect in the appointment or qualifications of—
(i) any member or substitute member, or
(ii) (in the case of a mayoral CCA) of the deputy mayor.
(2) In this section “substitute member” means a person appointed to act as a member in the absence of another member”
I see this as potentially making the election of any representative meaningless because they could be substituted for anyone whatsoever.
This Bill will not improve the potential for democracy at a local level in anyway - it certainly will not empower the local people and small businesses.
If you can interpret this section in a different way to show how democracy is improved, I will be very interested to hear it.
By the way, if you look at the white paper that preceded the publication of the Bill, you will find further embedding of the digital infrastructure in Section 2; towards the end there is a subsection called Fixing the basics - this type of phrase was used a lot in the Election Campaign, I wondered then what was meant by it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/english-devolution-white-paper-power-and-partnership-foundations-for-growth/english-devolution-white-paper
The introduction of this paper, quickly dispels any notion that this process is connected with people power and choice.
As I see it from the incomplete research that I have managed to do on this subject, I think this is one of the biggest nails in the coffin for freedom and democracy in this country, and it is sailing through without a whimper.
Thanks so much for your research. It's all deeply worrying.
Have a look at what your current local authorities are planning. All should have submitted their Re-Organisation plans to the government on 28th November.
If you find they have submitted plans for a strategic mayoral authority, ask the current councillors how the mayor can be held to account under their plans.
Most have not read the Bill and many haven’t read their own documents, especially if they’ve paid consultants to produce them. This is how a lot of this authoritarian stuff gets through.
As Alex says, we can all do a little bit to help bring awareness and take action to stop the march to authoritarianism. There are lots of ways, so we can each find something, and there are lots more of us than Them 😀
We already have a 'combined mayoral authority' - WECA. I watch in despair as people who get nowhere petitioning Bristol City Council turn to WECA thinking they will save them, praising them for the much nicer way they are treated than at council meetings. We had one mayor who was arrested for child abuse, rape and abduction earlier this year, replaced by a woman who works for PwC - which has a list of malfeasance as long as the M5. There are a lot of weird bad cop good cop deception attempts going on round these parts!
Here's what I wrote about the first mayor: https://keepbristolmoving.substack.com/p/the-arrest-of-dan-norris
Nothing more has been heard about his case since. Labour gave him the boot but he is still a sitting independent MP - in Jacob Rees Mogg's old seat (an easy win at the last election). It's rotten to the core.
I'm doing what I can - attending council and WECA meetings, writing articles on the blog I've linked. Alex has encouraged me in both. And helping locals upset about Bristol's transport policy to understand the wider agendas. The latter can be a painful and slow process. People do not want to accept that the system is broken, and believe it's just a case of finding the right arguments.
I am aware of this but just don't have the time/capacity to cover everything. As you may know, Sandi Adams, now working for UK Column, has done quite a bit on this subject.
A comment from a campaigning perspective: people tend to find governance issues quite difficult to engage with. But there is a growing awareness of the role of mayors - something I did write about some time ago - and how their connections and funding are being used to implement the climate agenda at local level. When the Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin flew to Brazil for COP30 she got a lot of stick.
I appreciate what you have to say about time to look at everything. There are so many things happening in so many ways, that all need our attention. That is obviously the strategy.
I have written to UKC, but they do not seem to be looking at this legislation. Very few are.
People are more attracted by the National and International aspects of what is happening.
My interpretation of this Bill, is that only decisions of the Mayor can be passed and that members and their substitutes do not have to meet the eligibility criteria.
So bad as things seem now with getting representatives to actually represent people, as opposed to stakeholders, it will only get much worse, with even less recourse.
Often, Go Local is a suggested solution to beat the Supermarket corporations and Amazon. I think that strategy is being used against the people with respect to removing democratic governance.
Brillaint breakdown of how strategic withdrawal actually works in practice. The Portugal vaccine passport example shows something most people miss tho: non-compliance isn't just refusin one big thing, it's building capacity throgh smaller acts first. I tried something similar with facial recognition at an event last year, and that first "no" felt way harder than I expected. The piece about historical nonconformists creating parallel systems is spot-on because thats exactly what makes resistance sustainable longterm, not just symbolic.
To your last point, making resistance sustainable through building parallel systems is something we all need to do.
I owned a London coffee shop during Covid and switched it to being a grocery shop. It was an eye opener owning a food business during what was essentially a global robbery. I closed it post covid as I escaped London.
3 years ago, an awake friend of mine (our daughters are school friends) opened another grocery shop (as a side hustle) purely as an insurance policy for when they pull the trigger again.
The network’s one can build by having their own neighbourhood business both with customers and suppliers is invaluable.
Thanks Alex, it’s an excellent article. I’ve just shared it with a working group I’m in. I’m feeling quietly confident that we can non-conform our way out of this shit-fest given that we’re already seeing it working in places like Bulgaria, Nepal and in patches around the UK. Or we all just move to Cornwall!
Once the British get uncomfortable enough, I think we’ll start seeing greater numbers. Especially when they look at their friends and family members and wonder why they’re getting by operating in parallel networks that they’ve had a head start in forming.
Your experience in Portugal was really interesting. I’d love to see it as an option of escaping from the UK but their national jab-rate is a put off. They seem to be a more compliant country on the whole compared with the UK. Do you agree with that sentiment?
There's a book in me about Portugal but I don't have the strength to write it. Portuguese society is extremely compliant and by the end of my time there I got a sense of why the dictatorship lasted so long. Also, I wouldn't recommend anyone emigrate to an EU country at this point.
Or Cornwall, where AI is being trialled to spy on drivers inside their cars!
And yes, I agree that discomfort is key. The tax thing has woken a few more up and as businesses start closing in 2026 more will realise the government really isn't working in the interests of the people.
On my first trip to Lisbon which was well after Covid, I remember taking a cab and the driver was militant about me wearing a mask. As I listed to the radio that he had blaring throughout the journey, all I could hear was wall to wall Covid-related news. I just thought that no wonder this dude was freaking out about masks when all he listens to is this frantic bs 24-7. It explained a lot when one considers that Portugal is one of the most (if not the most) jabbed countries in the world.
Yes, the Portuguese went mad for masks - almost comically so. A neighbour of mine went to get hers and that she could "safely" give me a kiss through it! At the same time, they didn't really do lockdowns and there wasn't the level of anxiety that prevailed in Britain. For the first six months I had a blast - there were parties and gatherings everywhere.
It sounds as though they’re a country of contradictions. I needed paracetamol for a headache and went into a little corner store. Given that you can legally buy class As, I may as well have been undercover drug squad given the look the shopkeepers gave me when I asked for paracetamol.
I hear you on not escaping to the EU. Out of the frying pan and all that. Although it is within sailing distance.. 🤔
Hi Alex and thank you for responding.
I totally understand your point of view in your overall look at non-compliance.
Also, thank you for the examples you've given, together with the links...
I'm a member of Together and think their Bill of Digital Rights is a great step forward. At the same time, I recall that when it was announced, I felt it dealt with process rather than the foundational fact of ownership. Perhaps it was implicit?
Thank you also for the reference to Andrew Orlowski's work, which I've just discovered through Together, along with all the security issues. Like digital ID work being subcontracted to Romanian laptop owners by UK management consultancies!
I agree with your comment about 12 year olds too.
To close, I'd add that the 'powers that be' appear to be acting more like insecure 3 year olds, throwing a tantrum in an attempt to find power, control and create safety in their environment. Over 3 million people have already told them to get a grip on themselves!
I do some freelance work for Together. I agree with your point about the lack of foundational thinking - something I'm keen on as a person with a PhD in philosophy! The bill is just a draft so there will likely be opportunities for members to add input as we go. Or just email them now with your thoughts.
I think developing a culture of positive digital rights is key to getting through this. The more of us talk about them, claim them, the better.
Good to know a PhD is working with Together ;) I've done my best to contact them with my feedback - at the time and subsequently... I got no response. Given your comments do you have a contact there I can reach directly? Agree with your final point... And, Happy New Year. Here's a better 2026 Alex.
Happy new year to you and yours and a guten Rutsch!
Have you seen this, Alex? I suspect a VPN won't help for much longer. https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/urgent-please-read-and-share-this
Mmm. The CEO of Substack recently wrote a piece condemning the OSA. Sounds like they're batting for both sides.
As I say, like others I'm prepared to leave Substack if necessary. It IS a shame for Substack as much as us, since it developed its reputation as a safe, freethinking sanctuary post-2020.
On the technology point, it develops fast on both sides! Impossible to keep a good internet down, and I even hear talk of alternative internets ...
Come to think of it, this is a classic illustration of the compliance fallacy! Substack is going along with the new online safety legislation in the belief that it "has" to and that complying will enable to it continue with business as usual. But in reality, as the requirements increase and writers exit, compliance brings its own undoing,
Alex, Per your query on COCO regarding the supposed tax revolt chatter, we colonists are seeing a mass wave of memes and themes surrounding tax revolts via non-payments on this side of the pond. Such is the fervor that I adjudge much of it to be produced by the 'Deep State' itself in order to drive the narrative. Why? Because, as I recollect, it was stated by Mr. T some time back of his intent to do away with the income taxes, tariffs being used to fill instead. Of course, if the course is followed the administration can claim 'the voice of the people' is heard.
Never mind that all taxation is theft. Always has been. A legalized form of slavery or indentured servitude as its always the action of some living off the labor and expense of others from whom it is forcefully taken. Never mind that the unholy alliance of government and corporate interests (both are corporations, granted existence by 'higher' authorities (and a deep rabbit warren that is) the combination of which is the very definition of fascism, 'print' their own company chits at will, irregardless of however much is culled via taxes. It is said by some that the income tax is to pay the debt on what gov't borrows. Borrows from who? And from whence does such wealth derive outside of some clerk typing digits into a computer ledger? No value exchange there, no valid contract. Only the sacrament of the worlds greatest faith based religion; centrally controlled fiat. All the lies of a multi-faceted, hierarchically systematized social order. Your 'Pounds' are worth no more than our 'Dollars' excepting that we all continue to play charades with them, unallowed to use anything of actual value in our exchanges.
The worst offenders aren't really the so-called 'leaders' (who, I argue, are essentially all appointed under cover of controlled elections, and all of any import are pre-vetted and 'compromised' before entering into office. The tie that I contend binds them all is being involved to some degree in human trafficking, and particularly against the youngest. For if a man or woman can be led to commit atrocity against the innocent, following orders to do anything else to anyone else is rather a simple exercise), nor the masses of the powerless, but the enforcer class. Those who are the hired thugs of the regime who receive stolen taxes in return for continuing the enslavement of their fellows. Those who wield the batons, pull the triggers, gavel the judgments, and commit all manner of depredation.
Perhaps I overstay my welcome here, but I shall attempt a more succinct (less parenthesed dribble, Ha!) to address specific points from the essay above in my next intended rant. -W