Best Of

The ban, if it actually happens given the likely change of government, will not work.

Kids are remarkably good at finding loopholes, workarounds.

The inconsistency of approach is just bad law making.

16 year olds can vote but not view a YouTube video is just ludicrous thinking

And why is Bluesky excluded from the list considering it is a Twitter dupe.

This is just Starmer trying to use his last days in office to make a splash.

The evidence from elsewhere is that it will not work. It will cut kids off from valuable resources.

It is just a headline not a properly developed policy

Burnham is likely to scrap or heavily modify it once he takes office.

16 year olds shouldn’t be able to vote

Have you been to Scotland where they can not only vote but can actually get married/civil partnerships. Shocking.

I have, and just because the Scottish government chose to do something stupid because they thought it would secure extra votes for the SNP doesn’t mean we should copy them

This.

1000x this.



Julia Hartley-Brewer
@JuliaHB1
I say this as a parent who is genuinely in two minds on a social media ban because the risks to our kids are clear but the solutions aren't.

Starmer's announcement is clearly a knee jerk attempt to do something popular as his authority crumbles. That's a dangerous background for making new laws.

https://x.com/JuliaHB1/status/2066420103818653774

Indeed.

He is not doing this because he thinks it is the right thing to do, he is doing something, anything quick and easy he can do that he can point to as a "legacy".

Whether its a good idea, thought through, principled or anything else is very much a tertiary concern.

Maybe? This hasn’t all come out of nowhere. It is an issue the government has been looking at for a while. Maybe Starmer has rushed it a bit because he wants some good news coverage, but we’ve been talking here about the UK possibly following the Australian model for months.

Norway and Spain have followed Australia with their own bans, and Ireland are talking about using their EU Presidency to make a decision on an EU-wide ban.

So this is definitely an idea that is out there and gaining momentum, independent of the impending defenestration of the British Prime Minister.

I'd rather ban the radicalisation algorithms then impose age restrictions, for multiple reasons previously discussed by many on PB.com, but Starmer is following a tide on this, and likely would have done the same even if his leadership weren't being questioned.

This.

1000x this.



Julia Hartley-Brewer
@JuliaHB1
I say this as a parent who is genuinely in two minds on a social media ban because the risks to our kids are clear but the solutions aren't.

Starmer's announcement is clearly a knee jerk attempt to do something popular as his authority crumbles. That's a dangerous background for making new laws.

https://x.com/JuliaHB1/status/2066420103818653774

Indeed.

He is not doing this because he thinks it is the right thing to do, he is doing something, anything quick and easy he can do that he can point to as a "legacy".

Whether its a good idea, thought through, principled or anything else is very much a tertiary concern.

He won a massive majority to help drive the golden age of Burnham, is that not legacy enough?

Aside from the timing, the social media ban is not about Starmer's legacy. The idea has been kicking around for years – the Conservatives gave us the Online Safety Act and Labour's manifesto said it would build on that. It polls well – the idea is popular but the correct mechanism is not obvious.

ETA I see bondegezou has made a similar point.

Oh really?

I am struggling to find any reference to social media in the King's Speech, only last month. Can you?

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-kings-speech-2026

One frigging month ago this was not on the agenda for the year ahead. Now suddenly its a priority.

Bullshit. This is "legacy" hunting and nothing else.

As I said, it is in the manifesto and the only difference Starmer's likely imminent departure has made is in its timing.

I’m not really that tech savvy so if it’s just down to verifying ID for the device how does each site you connect to know you’ve confirmed ID ?

Very easy to have a secure ID on the device that just recognises that.

However how does that work for shared devices?

We stream on our TVs. If I log into a TV as an adult, then my kids want to use it, what happens?

I just can’t see how it works for YouTube on TV’s. You’re right, it’s a shared device. We watch YouTube on our TV on my sign in.

Given YouTube has been eating into linear TVs viewers for years now and is bigger than most TV channels in terms of viewership I’m not surprised the legacy media is fully behind a move that nobbles competition.

Another way in which layabouts are subsidised by workers:

Water, phone and broadband companies are willing to give millions of people discounted deals on their bills.

Social tariffs - sometimes known as essential, or basic, tariffs - can reduce bills for people on various benefits. Generally, you only need to ask your supplier to get on one.

Importantly, they are not price promotions designed to attract customers, but lower bills for the same service for those who would otherwise struggle to pay.

Most people who have fallen behind on paying their bills are unaware this help is available, a major report has suggested.

These tariffs vary between suppliers and the lower cost of them is often covered by higher bills for everyone else.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gyplpyj00o

Which, again, exposes the fallacy of the "universal credit isn't much, would you like to live on it ?" argument.

Receiving one benefit often acts as a gateway to receiving a multitude of other benefits and subsidies.

The “Gateway” is a massive social problem. Once you’re inside the gateway, you have no incentive to actually work unless it’s for a six-figure salary.

Sorry to say you are wrong. Gateway is as it says. There is no obligation to provide access to the benefit without an Income/Expenditure statement backed by evidence.

The problem is that for those inside the Gateway then providing an Income/Expenditure statement is easier than going to work and earning enough. The poverty trap is real, once receiving all these benefits actually working becomes counterproductive.

Just look at Free School Meals. Many schools have over a quarter of pupils eligible to them. To be fair there's multiple reasons why people can be eligible, but based on income the threshold is not UC, it is an income of less than £7,400 per annum.

How the hell can a quarter of families in many schools have an income of less than £7,400 per annum? That's less than 12 hours a week of work per family to hit that threshold at Minimum Wage.

But if someone is living on that, then actually starting a job and facing a nearly 100% tax rate on UC once past tax thresholds, as well as losing access to FSM and a plethora of other benefits like these becomes utterly unviable.

It is a trap people can't escape. Because the real tax rate becomes well over 100% if you a trapped inside that.

It's post tax and excluding benefits.
https://www.gov.uk/apply-free-school-meals

I'm generally with Bart on a lot of this around poverty traps, though I'd differ on much of detail.

For FSM, for example, I'd be quite inclined to follow the Scandinavians and make them for everyone - incorporating some Japanese style socialisation and learning, treating it as part of the education process.

In Japan some of the children are a team who serve the others, and take away dishes etc.

https://www.japanesefoodguide.com/japanese-school-lunch/

Given the tax-free threshold is above that, then post-tax is moot. There is no tax on the first £7,400 of income (for the employee at least).

So if you work 12 hours per week or more at minimum wage then you are ineligible. At least via that criteria.

The number of working age households, let alone parents individually, doing less than 12 hours of work a week should be pretty close to zero, not a quarter or more in many areas.

Made two points. The first was the the gateway is not a gateway as there is a second check. The other point was wage rates in the UK. The numbers on UC who are actually in work indicates low pay rates - unless these are slackers. The other point is that there are a lot of non-working UC claimants who are ill, waiting for an NHS appointment or caring for others. It's not black and white but if you have the time, why not volunteer at a benefit charity and tell these people that it's all to do with tax rates. You'll find they are both economically rational and numerate.

And why should companies like Amazon and Deliveroo get passess for either not paying a decent wage or avoiding paying tax. Far more important issues than flogging the poor.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/universal-credit-statistics-29-april-2013-to-8-january-2026/universal-credit-statistics-29-april-2013-to-8-january-2026

I don't think Bart wants to flog the poor! (You'll have to check with @Sandpit whether he does.)

The problem with removing the poverty trap is that you either have to reduce benefits for those getting them (who probably need them and aren't going to be happy with them being reduced), or increase benefits for those not getting them (who are less needy and how do you meet the bill) or both.

It is only fairly recently that providers can even compete on speed as previously it was limited by line length for most people.

Even if your speed is identical on FTTP, latency and reliability is much better. I would suggest everyone migrates.

How long before Starlink has a de facto monopoly on the internet, or at least a dominant market position? Why invest billions in undersea cables when you can just point at the sky.

Because the latency on FTTP will always be superior as will the reliability. Also the speeds that can be offered.

Starlink will never be a majority.

You are preaching to the choir. Latency is important for betting. However, most people don't bet and don't care about latency apart from wondering once every four years why their neighbours celebrate a World Cup goal five seconds before it is scored. For most people, latency does not matter and nor does upload speed. Starlink is good enough for 99 per cent of people, including the ones using it to blow up Russian tanks.

First day of Royal Ascot today, an event that sticks in my mind.

I had a small role in the redevelopment two decades ago now, as IT contractor to the caterers. I was the guy who made sure all of those fancy touch screen tills worked properly, and could proces credit cards, something that was very new at the time.

There exists a photo of me, aged 28, with a radio earpiece in one ear, a phone earpiece in the other, and a keyboard under my arm, wearing a morning suit because the staff still have to comply with the dress code in the Royal Enlcosure.

That Champagne bar in the concourse, it turned over £100k a day two decades ago when a bottle was £50 or £60, God only knows what it makes today.

Last job before I moved to Dubai, headhunted by the Ascot guy who’d moved the year before.

I remember trying out touch screens for the first time at a Florida theme park in the 1980s. It was called the World Key Information System IIRC. Worked just as well as modern touch screens.