I'm more talking about the developer of the site rather than the users. And the developer could potentially be found out if they posted it on a popular hacking website and used a known alias and registered the domain in the UK.

But, if they're comfortable, all the more power to them. As I said, I do really like the spirit of the site.

Most MPs' home addresses are actually quite easy to find. Mine's was printed below his name on the ballot paper last election – a nice reminder of how we used to have a high-trust society. I doubt this practice will be continued for much longer.

However, I doubt that's a strong legal argument.

Most are on Wikipedia, no?

Civil servants aren't there to say whether a policy is good, sensible, or a vote-winner. The CS policy profeasion is there, in part, to advise on risks. Ministers decide whether to accept those risks.

There were plenty of people (like me) who would have pointed out the various risks and problems. Some of which caused policy to change, and some were accepted.

I don't think I've ever seen in recent years the CS be blamed for something like this.

Do you think porn sites are more interested in a) correctly preventing unauthorized people from accessing their site, or b) selling as many subscriptions as they can while nominally complying with the law?

I’m not from the UK, so I’m not familiar with what their IDs are supposed to look like.

I was suspicious, though—the hands holding the ID cards looked kind of “crispy.” But at the same time, I thought, “woah, where did the website owner even get these photos?” It wasn’t until I read the Hacker News post that I realized they were all AI-generated (and now cached).

And here’s the thing: I’m an engineer at Apple with decades of experience in the tech industry—I’m not exactly new to this stuff. If I got fooled even for a couple of seconds, imagine how easy it would be to trick someone who isn’t technical.

No, you don't need ID verification to use search engine or read news in China.

However, sites that depend on user-generated content (like forums) would ask for at least your phone number.

Source: https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2016-11/07/content_5129723.htm

> Cybersecurity Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 24: When network operators provide users with network access, domain name registration services, fixed-line and mobile phone network access procedures, or provide users with information publishing, instant messaging and other services, they shall require users to provide real identity information when signing an agreement with the user or confirming the provision of services. If the user does not provide real identity information, the network operator shall not provide the relevant services to the user.

The big asterisk: there's no anonymous internet service in China, you have to ID yourself to get access to the internet (article 24), and the service provider are required to keep record of you (IP and everything) (article 21), and they are also required to cooperate with the authority (no surprise here) (article 28). And using VPN or Tor is likely illegal (article 27).

It's obvious that they care (to some extent) that they're getting valid emails, so why not use a basic regex on the FE and an OTP which gets sent to the provided address?

Neither did a lot of conservatives and labour, interestingly.

Greens and Lib Dems voted no, which raises my opinion of them.

Agreed its a mess.

Crap like Communications Act 2003 and Ofcom has been Labour policy for decades.

Just as a slight correction – the only "Reform MP" that voted for it is James McMurdock, but he's no longer a Reform MP and I'm not sure why he is still listed as one here.