Barbara Thomas @versoe

This was a very bad week for privacy in Canada.

The utter idiocy of people saying 'HOW will this be policed?' Let's apply it to literally every other situation, ever, where a social norm is codified into law Don't hit your wife - HOW? Don't drive drunk - HOW? Don't shit in shops - HOW? Don't expose yourself to kids - HOW?

#MenAtWork @MenAtWork_MC

7 months ago

@johnmcdonnellMP They’re men, John. Just like me & you. If I know something is for women I don’t attend it. I don’t *think* you would, either. The focus of your exasperation shld be those of our brothers who refuse to recognize women’s boundaries. What kind of socialist ignores material reality?

29 321 4K 66K 31

Once again, the Scottish government has been trounced in court. I do not know why John Swinney is so keen to put male murderers in women's jails but it is now clear that doing so is unlawful.

For Women Scotland @ForWomenScot

2 days ago

📢📢 Judgement Day!📢📢 FWS wins in the Outer House of the Court of Session For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers Judicial Review of the Scottish Prison Service Policy for the Management of Transgender People in Custody Operational Guidance. scotcourts.gov.uk/judgments/#/

432 1K 4K 439K 136

For those interested in the considerable privacy implications of Canadian legislation re age verification of social media usage:

David T.S. Fraser @privacylawyer

4 days ago

If you wanted a "just the facts" overview of Bill C-34, the Safe Social Media Act, it's up on my blog. blog.privacylawyer.ca/2026/06/online…

1 21 30 1K 9

No, a "blanket VPN ban" in the UK is not happening, and the people shouting "ban incoming" don't understand what they'd actually be banning.A consumer VPN and a corporate VPN are the same protocols. WireGuard, IPsec, TLS tunnels. There is no switch that blocks the teenager dodging age checks but spares Barclays' internal network, every company's link to AWS, every remote worker, every hospital trust. Block VPNs at the network level and you nuke half the economy in the same swing. That's not me guessing. Peter Kyle already said a ban is "not on the cards" because VPNs are "essential to data protection for businesses." The government conceded this in public. So no one's building a Great Firewall here. What's actually proposed is regulatory, not technical: age-gate the providers, lean on Apple and Google to pull the apps. What it does nothing to: a self-hosted WireGuard box on a €4 VPS. No app to pull, no website to delist, no company to fine. Just one box among millions. Anyone technical routes around the entire thing in ten minutes, and the people it's aimed at are exactly the ones who'll do that.

They can’t. Make your own vpn: 1. SSH to a host with: ssh user@host -D 8081 2. Point your browser proxy settings to localhost port 8081, and mark it as a SOCKS v5 proxy. 3. You now are proxying your browser traffic to where that host is, like a vpn.

International Cyber Digest @IntCyberDigest

4 days ago

THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs THEY ARE GOING TO BAN VPNs

894 3K 11K 992K 1K

With Minister @gary_srp invoking "you're with us or with the criminals" language as the government seeks to shut down debate on Bill C-22, he would do well to remember how Liberal MPs reacted to that approach years ago on a different lawful access bill. x.com/mgeist/status/…

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Michael Geist @mgeist

4 days ago

In 2012, Liberals condemned Vic Toews for telling lawful access critics they could “stand with us or with the child pornographers." Now @gary_srp, shutting down Bill C-22 debate, tells critics to "choose" between police and victims. Same shameful playbook. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/gary-a…

4 60 151 14K 10

The government has pushed through its motion to end debate on Bill C-22, forcing the committee into a late night hearing going on right now that no one will watch or can follow to pass the bill and send to the House. An absolute democratic embarrassment. parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en/Pow…

Bill C-22 Lawful Access is being jammed through without adequate debate. Watch this shameful process unfold: parlvu.parl.gc.ca/Harmony/en/Pow…

@SVPhillimore @JRLevinsLaw If you watch the WESC grilling of Mary-Ann Stephenson, there’s a bit where Alex Sobel starts bipping on about article 8 rights. She tells him “but women have article 8 rights too” There’s a flash of confusion Then anger Like it’s literally never dawned on him before

In the last 24 hours, government has announced plans to eviscerate the Privacy Commissioner’s office, cut off debate on a lawful access bill that includes metadata retention, and reversed age verification privacy safeguards 5 days after introducing them. x.com/mgeist/status/…

keyboard_arrow_left Previous keyboard_arrow_right Next

Michael Geist @mgeist

6 days ago

Privacy involves more than just AI and social media. How banks, retailers, airlines, etc. deal with our information matters too. To conceive of it as just an adjunct of the AI and digital file, explains a lot about how this government doesn’t get privacy. michaelgeist.ca/2026/06/canada…

15 82 182 33K 22

Very moving and perceptive piece by @Will___lloyd "Makerfield days: There is a white rage in the air and no by-election is going to change that" newstatesman.com/politics/2026/…

That expert would be me. To see a Liberal cabinet minister adopt the Vic Toews’ “you’re with us or with the criminals” style language on lawful access should be the signal that the government has lost its way on Bill C-22.

Globalnews.ca @globalnews

5 days ago

A privacy expert told Global News the Liberals' push to fast-track the bill and limit debate was "staggering" and "astonishing." globalnews.ca/news/11908249/…

265 376 1K 97K 84

This is absolutely appalling. Shameful. "Government prematurely ends debate on Bill C-22 without dealing with dangerous surveillance powers | OpenMedia" openmedia.org/press/item/gov…

Scene, Downing Street: ‘How can we make ourselves even more unpopular?’ ‘Well, prime minister, we could allow Natural England to proceed with their plan to shoot 90% of the ponies on Dartmoor’ ‘Yes, that might do it.’

Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford

6 days ago

Exclusive from @oliver_wright Dartmoor ponies could be subject to mass culling to reduce the impact on biodiversity after a controversial ruling by the government’s environmental quango Natural England has demanded that all livestock grazing on the moor is reduced by about 75

393 746 4K 2.5M 634

'The motion won’t change the law. The supreme court judgment will stand, unless there is legislative action.' 🎯 If MP's want to dismantle sex discrimination legislation from 1975, join another party. Reform? @UKLabour supports the 2010 Equality Act. theguardian.com/society/2026/j…

- Give 16 & 17 year olds the vote - Impose a YouTube/social media curfew for 16 and 17 year olds and ban under 16s, thus making loads of new or soon-to-be voters hate you - Kill the ponies You know, I'm not entirely sure that politics is really Keir Starmer's thing

Steven Swinford @Steven_Swinford

6 days ago

Exclusive from @oliver_wright Dartmoor ponies could be subject to mass culling to reduce the impact on biodiversity after a controversial ruling by the government’s environmental quango Natural England has demanded that all livestock grazing on the moor is reduced by about 75

393 746 4K 2.5M 634

Roy Hattersley’s origin story should be a Netflix series.

It is literally insane simultaneously to think that 16 and 17 year olds are mature enough to vote but not mature enough to look at Instagram at 8:30pm. This is comically absurd.

Politics UK @PolitlcsUK

a week ago

🚨 NEW: Keir Starmer will introduce nightly social media curfews for 16 and 17-year-olds as part of the Government's social media ban [@thetimes]

2K 669 7K 14.3M 1K

Dear Lush (cc Chelmsford City Council), As a woman who had half a breast removed last year due to cancer, I am writing to raise my concerns about your “Proud of My Stripes” window display. I am also, on behalf of other women who have experienced breast cancer, respectfully requesting its removal. Because mastectomies are not a fashion statement, an identity marker or something to be celebrated. They are something women undergo because they are ill, because they are frightened, because they are trying to stay alive. Around 59,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK every year. Many will undergo surgery - a mastectomy, lumpectomy or other procedure. Others choose preventive mastectomies because they carry a high-risk BRCA gene mutation. If a woman chooses to have her breasts removed to affirm a gender identity, that is her personal choice. I honestly don’t know the number of women who have elective mastectomies for this reason. What I do know is that it is a tiny number compared with those for whom breast surgery is medically necessary and not something to be celebrated. I think I speak for many women who have experienced breast cancer - and for their families - when I say this: Breast removal surgery is not something I regard as cute, playful or empowering. Nor is it something I believe retailers should be celebrating. For that reason, I am requesting that the display be removed and that @ChelmsCouncil apologise for promoting it on social media. Yours sincerely, Janet Murray