They legislated an antifascist org a terrorist org (Palestinian action).
Conservative fascisms tentacles are deeply embedded in the UK, from surveillance state to political corruption. That's why Brexit happened, and they remain among the most susceptible to fascism among the developed world.
Just checked the video and...
Oof! That's pretty much a political awareness video and far from an ad.
There is no way they can risk mass political awareness regarding the new legislations that they are frantically attempting to tunnel through.
100% ban material.
If I were UK govt. I would be internally calling this a "National Security" issue.
Random question: Do you guys leave your VPN on all the time? I’ve only been using it sometimes because I’m worried it will slow down my speeds for normal use.
Any time I use the internet, regardless of what connection, I basically always keep it on. I may swap servers in some most likely ineffective way of keeping myself safer from tracking, but otherwise it normally stays on. Only other exception is when flarpak isn't allowing updates to come through.
I use airvpn 24/7 and get full speeds even when I had gigabit fibre. Was always limited by a single server connection for a service capping out whether on vpn or not
If your vpn uses Wireguard then it should be a minimal difference. You can always split tunnel if you need full speed but wireguard is plenty fast in my experience.
That's probably pointless. You should only use it for piracy, bypassing content filters, regional blocking, and things like that. Otherwise you're just wasting money/hurting your internet speed for zero benefit.
A VPN only offers marginal protection from tracking, since it only hides your IP address. Most tracking happens in the browser, via cookies and fingerprinting techniques. The only reliable way to protect yourself against that is Tor, and you should not use Tor with a VPN.
I like Mullvad and I am a happy customer, but this misleading advertising is kind of a bad look IMO. It's good to raise awareness of this serious issue, but they're clearly trying to profit off of consumers who don't understand the product they're selling.
It wasnt banned. They didnt meet the advertisment requirments. Its false outrage to generate clicks. Its quite disappointing of them thought they knew better.
Aren't advertising requirements that constrain subject matter effectively a mechanism for banning content?
One of the reasons given for rejection was:
Referencing topics such as: Paedophiles, Rapists, Murderers, Enemies of the state, Journalists, Refugees, Controversial opinions, People’s bedrooms, Police officers, Children’s headsets … is inappropriate and irrelevant to the average consumer’s experience with a VPN.
That doesn't seem to me like the sort of criteria that a rule-enforcement agency should be using for determining whether something should air. (For what it's worth, refusing to air this in the US would absolutely be considered a freedom of speech issue.)
Did every one forget that uk was a aristocracy with democracy taked on? Point is they knew the requirments worked outside to get it banned and then generated false outrage.
It isn't the first time that the advertising requirements were used to chill speech. It doesn't matter whether there was a ban; what matters is whether speech was effectively prevented. "There is no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
I think one of the big ones is the actor saying 'pedophiles' in the first 5 seconds. Possibly wasnt within the guidelines. Watch the video its extremely clear why it wasnt fit for broadcast and was never intended to be.
28 Comments
myrmidex@belgae.social · 53 pts · 183d
So while grok is spitting out underage nudes, THIS is what the UK bans? Can they suck Satan's cock harder still?
WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 183d
They legislated an antifascist org a terrorist org (Palestinian action).
Conservative fascisms tentacles are deeply embedded in the UK, from surveillance state to political corruption. That's why Brexit happened, and they remain among the most susceptible to fascism among the developed world.
rogsson@piefed.social · 6 pts · 183d
Nomnomnom satans cock is delicious
ohulancutash@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 182d
Political advertising is banned on TV and radio.
GreenShimada@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 183d
Total Streisand effect.
I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 182d
FYI, when you click the link on mobile, it immediately starts downloading a video file. I can not stress enough how much I do not want that to happen.
Bruhh@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 182d
What client are you using? Plays in Voyager fine.
UntimedDiffusion@piefed.zip · 3 pts · 182d
Happens to me on summit
Martineski@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 182d
Doesn't happen to me on summit. Lol
Eyekaytee@aussie.zone · 1 pts · 177d
plays fine on ecosia on iphone, what are you using?
ulterno@programming.dev · 8 pts · 182d
Just checked the video and...
Oof! That's pretty much a political awareness video and far from an ad.
There is no way they can risk mass political awareness regarding the new legislations that they are frantically attempting to tunnel through.
100% ban material.
If I were UK govt. I would be internally calling this a "National Security" issue.
binarytobis@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 182d
Random question: Do you guys leave your VPN on all the time? I’ve only been using it sometimes because I’m worried it will slow down my speeds for normal use.
AceFuzzLord@lemmy.zip · 6 pts · 182d
Any time I use the internet, regardless of what connection, I basically always keep it on. I may swap servers in some most likely ineffective way of keeping myself safer from tracking, but otherwise it normally stays on. Only other exception is when flarpak isn't allowing updates to come through.
lemonySplit@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 182d
I use airvpn 24/7 and get full speeds even when I had gigabit fibre. Was always limited by a single server connection for a service capping out whether on vpn or not
Bruhh@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 182d
If your vpn uses Wireguard then it should be a minimal difference. You can always split tunnel if you need full speed but wireguard is plenty fast in my experience.
entwine@programming.dev · 2 pts · 182d
That's probably pointless. You should only use it for piracy, bypassing content filters, regional blocking, and things like that. Otherwise you're just wasting money/hurting your internet speed for zero benefit.
A VPN only offers marginal protection from tracking, since it only hides your IP address. Most tracking happens in the browser, via cookies and fingerprinting techniques. The only reliable way to protect yourself against that is Tor, and you should not use Tor with a VPN.
I like Mullvad and I am a happy customer, but this misleading advertising is kind of a bad look IMO. It's good to raise awareness of this serious issue, but they're clearly trying to profit off of consumers who don't understand the product they're selling.
one_old_coder@piefed.social · 1 pts · 182d
Never slow for me with Mullvad.
SillyDude@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 182d
And then and then and then
Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org · -1 pts · 182d
It wasnt banned. They didnt meet the advertisment requirments. Its false outrage to generate clicks. Its quite disappointing of them thought they knew better.
BatmanAoD@programming.dev · 11 pts · 182d
Aren't advertising requirements that constrain subject matter effectively a mechanism for banning content?
One of the reasons given for rejection was:
That doesn't seem to me like the sort of criteria that a rule-enforcement agency should be using for determining whether something should air. (For what it's worth, refusing to air this in the US would absolutely be considered a freedom of speech issue.)
Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org · -2 pts · 182d
Did every one forget that uk was a aristocracy with democracy taked on? Point is they knew the requirments worked outside to get it banned and then generated false outrage.
BatmanAoD@programming.dev · 2 pts · 181d
What does that have to do with anything?
Corbin@programming.dev · 6 pts · 182d
It isn't the first time that the advertising requirements were used to chill speech. It doesn't matter whether there was a ban; what matters is whether speech was effectively prevented. "There is no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life."
Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 182d
Wouldnt surprise me that it was. Its what its likely designed to do. Doesnt mean mullvad werent aware of it and took advantage in a dishonest way
ravenaspiring@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 182d
As someone who isn't familiar with the UK advertising laws, is this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advertising_Standards_Authority_(United_Kingdom) what you mean?
Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org · -1 pts · 182d
I think one of the big ones is the actor saying 'pedophiles' in the first 5 seconds. Possibly wasnt within the guidelines. Watch the video its extremely clear why it wasnt fit for broadcast and was never intended to be.
PokerChips@programming.dev · 2 pts · 181d
Let's just settle in the obvious that there was no way this video was over going to pass and they were going to find any means necessary to sack it.
Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org · 1 pts · 181d
Isnt that what i said?