Honestly one of my first thoughts about this mess, or when I see countries pulling this shit and people fretting about x y z website; That web-site is either going to make the stupid choice to comply and apply those policies world-wide, or stop acknowleging said country exists by any means possible. Other sites will step-in to take over the surrendered market-share.

If your company and servers are anywhere else, you are under no obligation to comply or even block Brittain. Let Brittish companies and government bear the burden of enforcing their non-sense on their prisoners, sorry, I mean “citizens”.

For people who don’t know this: That is an IRC server whose main purpose is to facilitate communication for developers of open source software.

Governments trying to regulate the Internet in order to make it “safer”, especially “for children”, are literally putting our entire digital infrastructure at legal risk. How did we get to this point? Can we, maybe, try to undo this and go back to a system where governments try to regulate, at most, only the parts of the Internet where the hosting happens within their borders? And we have access to everything that is legal somewhere, even if it is illegal where we live? Pretty please?

John Perry Barlow was right: https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence

Speaking of which, the memo implies that “significance” in this context is interpreted as being relative to the population of the UK, not relative to the user base of the service

It’s such a badly written act that something like that is up for interpretation and there’s not defined percentages. If it’s as a significant percentage of 70 million then it’s basically just going to actually affect the huge, predominantly American, sites