Live data from Hacker News

UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

easydns.com

41–50 of 111 posts

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#41
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No because people with enough influence will terminate your hosting, domain name, isp, bank account, or just get your site blocked. See kiwi farms, nigel farage, and the wikipedia-iwf dust-up. Mastodon and the fediverse are close, maybe, but many instances refuse to "speak" to one another because of their users.

[flagged]

It is a very good example though.... It's a horrendous site, but freedom of speech doesn't only apply to people I like or accept. Censorship always starts with the weakest and most hated target, then moves onto the less controversial ones.

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#43
I don't like this at all, especially in a world where we are finding out so many top scientists lied or fabricated data in their research. The PRESIDENT of Stanford just resigned!

It's clear we cannot trust the institutional powers to self-regulate and do the right thing.

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, pity the (faux?) naive child who has been brought up on a diet of McCarthyism. You’re so scared of reds under the bed that you can’t see what the (increasingly far-)right wing are doing to you.

Based on what? Where is extreme right wing you are talking about?

Wake up. Quick.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/suella-braver...

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#46

One question to UK fellas: is it me or the UK is becoming some sort of a surveillance state right in front of us just like china?

Remember 1984, written by Englishman George Orwell? It's worth remembering that in part that was a commentary on British society, through a future lens.

When the UK does things which remind of you that, it isn't a coincidence. To be clear I'm not saying "this is literally 1984" or anything like that, I'm just trying to explain how "surveillance state" and "UK" have a LOT of known history.

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#47
"Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquillity of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, whereby those important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, are celebrated with a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the fifth, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. There are, of course, those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly, there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. They were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic, you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, I sought to end that silence. Last night, I destroyed the Old Bailey to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago, a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words; they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you, then I would suggest that you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me, one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot."

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#49
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, pity the (faux?) naive child who has been brought up on a diet of McCarthyism. You’re so scared of reds under the bed that you can’t see what the (increasingly far-)right wing are doing to you.

A right wing, especially a "far" right wing, government would have mass deportations, stop immigration, promote nationalist ideology, and not allow let alone themselves push things such as pride and other left wing social values. There doesn't exist any single example of this in the Anglo-sphere, nor the UK itself.

You are familiar with the Rwanda Plan, I take it?

And maybe the Madagascar Plan?

Re: UK version of “Online Harms Bill” wants to prefilter content without due process

#50
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we are currently under a right wing government whose media friends smeared their only real opposition as... a dangerous communist who would destroy the country. their main opposition now are copying more and more of their policies. they are not, in fact, communists and are pretty far away from ever being left of centre.

A Right wing government would stop mass immigration and not promote leftist social values as current UK government/establishment does. Far away from right wing, certainly not nationalist in any way.

are you trying to suggest that the tories are "promoting leftist social values"? considering their mediocre at best treatment of minority groups, [citation needed]

also one of their most controversial bills would lead to "illegal" immigrants being sent to Rwanda

skewed American perspectives aside, I genuinely fail to see how anyone would interpret them as anything left of centre-right

Post reply on HN