How about Gemini? https://geminiprotocol.net/

Gemini is a group of technologies similar to the ones that lie behind your familiar web browser. Using Gemini, you can explore an online collection of written documents which can link to other written documents. The main difference is that Gemini approaches this task with a strong philosophy of "keep it simple" and "less is enough". This allows Gemini to simply sidestep, rather than try and probably fail to solve, many of the problems plaguing the modern web, which just seem to get worse and worse no matter how many browser add-ons or well meaning regulations get thrown at them.

How it applies to geolocation and server hosting in light of the OSA I really have no clue. But it's an interesting underground hacker/tinker type alternative.

If it exists, there is porn of it.

Don't forget to write to your MP - being polite but angry helps. Explain the issues, shortcomings and why you feel this should be repealed and a better user-friendly and privacy respecting alternative needs to be found BEFORE implementing stupid asinine knee-jerk legislation like this.

My poor MP is getting it in the jugular because they boasted about working in data security and I'm exploiting the hell out of that statement so they can't easily weasel their way out of it.

Need the munchies for after puffing whatever they put in their vapes.

I know what rule 34 is, I'm asking where this image came from

My sweet, sweet summer child.

Rule #34: There is porn of it. No exceptions.

See also:

Rule #35: If there is no porn of it, it will be made.

I admit, my information on what teens use for barter is even more out-of-date than yours (by about a decade, based on when MySpace was popular).

Don't get me wrong, but why are matters of governmental surveillance and control inherently "right-wing" rather than a totalitarian policy not otherwise directly connected to wing politics? Extremists on both sides have a history of creating totalitarian, Big Brother states (which the UK is certainly headed towards).

Haha all good, I wasn’t criticizing, snacks just made me laugh. Teens have probably been bartering weed and alcohol in high school since the 70s.

Right, how does this image relate to that?

All's well until other countries try to implement this and you will very quickly see how nearly none of them agree with each other on which age limit goes where. In my opinion, the best way to ensure that children don't go to certain places on the internet is to either not give them access to the internet at all or to only let them use whitelisted websites that you review yourself before adding.

I agree with the message but making the argument that it's safe for kids to watch because it's cartoons is wrong. Kids can be fucked up by 2D furry porn, I've seen it happen. Still agree that age verification is a security nightmare, just think it's a weird argument.

It's the same schtick you hear from pedophiles in defense of their child sex dolls and it's unsurprising to see it coming from rule34 in particular considering they serve up a lot of that content in cartoon form.

I don't think it says anywhere that it's safe for kids to watch.

Paternalism vs liberty. Tell me more. I haven’t heard of this comparison before.

When is DeviantArt going to demand my ID, I wonder, it is chock full of all manner of fetish material.

how nearly none of them agree with each other on which age limit goes where.

that's the task of the website to figure out, the device does not have to be aware of the laws. but I think is still much easier to manage than id verification.

I habe an other idea. don't make the websites send agelimit http headers, because as you said that can easily vary by country. instead send http headers that tell what kind of content is available there. only the categories that could be questionable. that way the device (actually the browser) would decide if with the kid account's age that kind of content is accessible.
that way the browsers need to know the age limits, and maybe it's easier to handle it this way.

In my opinion, the best way to ensure that children don't go to certain places on the internet is to either not give them access to the internet at all or to only let them use whitelisted websites that you review yourself before adding.

ok, and I agree, but only very few parents will do that unfortunately. especially considering that their kids could be discriminated against by their limited clasates who don't have their access so broadly limited.

and then, you still need such a whitelisting capability, which I think does not really exist today in firefox and such browsers. addons cant solve this because they can be removed.

Forget tax havens, eventually some countries will probably become content havens and sell server space hosted there. Probably some carribean island

Exactly, I'd argue kids are the most likely to go to lengths to circumvent the rules