Live data from Hacker News

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

easydns.com

101–110 of 111 posts

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

#101
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> freedom of speech doesn't only apply to people I like or accept That is not the case in large parts of the world. WikiLeaks might be a better example.

"That is not the case in large parts of the world" that doesn't mean giving up and accepting it. "Are you defending X?"-type attacks are horrendous and just contribute to polarisation. Everyone deserves free speech, not just people I like.

In large parts of the world people might not agree that everyone deserves free speech. Sorry for the early Godwin, but for example Nazi apology is not protected in Germany and I suspect most Germans agree that it shouldn't.

Personally I am not sure why users and admins of Kiwifarms are not considered to be complicit in harassment and stalking (and also how in the world SWATting can basically go unpunished), which are crimes and not even protected by the first amendment. In contrast whistleblowing is protected.

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

#102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That is not the case in large parts of the world" that doesn't mean giving up and accepting it. "Are you defending X?"-type attacks are horrendous and just contribute to polarisation. Everyone deserves free speech, not just people I like.

In large parts of the world people might not agree that everyone deserves free speech. Sorry for the early Godwin, but for example Nazi apology is not protected in Germany and I suspect most Germans agree that it shouldn't. Personally I am not sure why users and admins of Kiwifarms are not considered to be complicit in harassment and stalking (and also how in the world SWATting can basically go unpunished), which are…

I mean..... if it's a crime, okay, that's a law enforcement matter. If the kiwifarms site operators get convicted for harassment and stalking, that's fine by me. What is not fine by me is saying they don't deserve free speech even if they haven't committed a crime.

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

#103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In large parts of the world people might not agree that everyone deserves free speech. Sorry for the early Godwin, but for example Nazi apology is not protected in Germany and I suspect most Germans agree that it shouldn't. Personally I am not sure why users and admins of Kiwifarms are not considered to be complicit in harassment and stalking (and also how in the world SWATting can basically go unpunished), which are…

I mean..... if it's a crime, okay, that's a law enforcement matter. If the kiwifarms site operators get convicted for harassment and stalking, that's fine by me. What is not fine by me is saying they don't deserve free speech even if they haven't committed a crime.

And again, this is anything but a universal value. Hate speech is not protected everywhere even in the absence of crimes, and many people over the world agree that it shouldn't.

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

#104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean..... if it's a crime, okay, that's a law enforcement matter. If the kiwifarms site operators get convicted for harassment and stalking, that's fine by me. What is not fine by me is saying they don't deserve free speech even if they haven't committed a crime.

And again, this is anything but a universal value. Hate speech is not protected everywhere even in the absence of crimes, and many people over the world agree that it shouldn't.

Exactly, and that's the problem. If people don't agree that it should be protected, then they don't really support free speech. Which is fine but then they shouldn't be surprised when the next person to be censored will be them.

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

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you please post a source for the ivermectin point? If I understand your comment you're suggesting that it is effective against covid, but I may be misunderstanding.

Are you asking for a source on "ivermectin is not a horse de-wormer" Other than that it has been an FDA approved drug for over thirty years? Or are you asking for a source on somebody getting deplatformed for saying that, and Dr. Peter McCullough comes to mind there. The Great Barrington Declaration was also de-indexed from Google for disputing lockdowns.

For the point I mentioned when I asked about it

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

#106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And again, this is anything but a universal value. Hate speech is not protected everywhere even in the absence of crimes, and many people over the world agree that it shouldn't.

Exactly, and that's the problem. If people don't agree that it should be protected, then they don't really support free speech. Which is fine but then they shouldn't be surprised when the next person to be censored will be them.

Well those people just think the paradox of tolerance makes a sad but good point.

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

#107
post #71

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?

is it me or the UK is becoming some sort of a surveillance state right in front of us just like china Yes and no. The UK is a highly surveilled country. We have more CCTV cameras than any other country. We have Automatic Number Plate Recognition tracking cars literally everywhere. We're a part of Echelon and Five Eyes and probably a whole bunch of other things. Pretty much everything we do is tracked. But... That dat…

Yes and no?

> The UK is a highly surveilled country. We have more CCTV cameras than any other country.

https://aithority.com/news/top-10-countries-and-cities-by-nu...

China has 200 million CCTV cameras

US has 50 million

Germany 5.2 million

UK has 5 million

> The United States has 15.28 CCTV cameras every 100 individuals, followed by China with 14.36 and the United Kingdom with 7.5.

You'll need to provide better citations than just saying that the UK has more CCTV cameras than anyone else, when we have less than the US or Germany, and less per capita too.

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

#108
post #24

Do they not realize that they will kill democracy in the process?

No doubt they will sell it by saying the opposite. "Online harms are extremely dangerous to our democracy" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzYj11qWb-M

Your username was made for this comment.

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

#109

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.

DO NOT DENIGRATE THE SCIENCE! The Science is settled and the science is holy, it came down to us from the anointed scientists and anyone who disagrees with or questions the science is a dangerous heretic, wishing to spread misinformation and promote hate. You aren't qualified to ask questions, the science is settled the science has spoken, you are a lowly non-government non-scientist and you are not to get out of lin…

This is quite clearly a sarcastic response.
Post reply on HN