UK's Online Safety Act comes into force • Hacker News Board

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#21

Post by red_admiral » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 9:58 AM UTC

The UK has a thing called non-crime hate incidents (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-crime-hate-in...) where the police records alleged complaints about discrimination, even if they are not a crime (otherwise they would be hate crimes).

This could be used to direct policing resources sensibly ("lots of incidents recorded at such-and-such a place, maybe we should patrol there a bit more") or to build a dystopian database, or to waste police time. There's certainly a push by some of the media to stop the police spending time on this and focus on solving crimes instead.

Similarly, this regulation could be used to prosecute child abusers, or it could be used to suppress free speech, or it could mean that people start using properly secure messaging apps.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#22

Post by amoe_ » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 9:59 AM UTC

postepowanieadm wrote: post #12

collyw wrote: post #6

The steady march towards authoritarianism continues. Is there any way that we can overwhelm them?

Vote.

This legislation was created by the Conservative party, but wasn't opposed by any major political party in the UK.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#23

Post by DrBazza » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 9:59 AM UTC

We love our regulation, especially if the government can't easily tax it.

Yet, we still have gambling adverts on UK TV and on football shirts.

At the same time we've also banned adverts for "certain types" of porridge. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgrwzx8er9o

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#24

Post by EpicQuest_246 » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:00 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #17

1984 was not an instruction manual.

It may not have been but it seems that any dystopian piece of literature will be used as one.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#25

Post by benfrain » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:01 AM UTC

I’d like to see all social media sites require proper age verification, much like any gambling sites in the UK have to. No under 18 needs social media. Feel, especially for children, they are a net negative.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#26

Post by threeseed » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:03 AM UTC

collyw wrote: post #6

The steady march towards authoritarianism continues. Is there any way that we can overwhelm them?

The problem for you is that the majority of the public support this.

Because there is plenty of scientific evidence that social media is bad for children with many parents having first hand experiences with grooming, deep fakes, bullying etc.

And I think almost everyone can agree that companies like Meta, TikTok, X have major problems with their algorithms pushing people into ideological extremes, allowing rogue actors to manipulate at scale and not taking privacy or security seriously enough.

So finding people who want to defend them will be hard.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#27

Post by hyhconito » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:04 AM UTC

[dead]

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#28

Post by iLoveOncall » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:07 AM UTC

postepowanieadm wrote: post #12

collyw wrote: post #6

The steady march towards authoritarianism continues. Is there any way that we can overwhelm them?

Vote.

What a joke. Every single political party that will ever be in power will want this sort of bills to be passed. It benefits them directly.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#29

Post by csmattryder » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:07 AM UTC

> crisis response protocols for emergency events (such as last summer’s riots).

Or maybe the proles organising mass protests at the government. No, surely not.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#30

Post by zo1 » Mon, Dec 16, 2024, 10:08 AM UTC

pjc50 wrote: post #18

briandear wrote: post #13

My problem with all of these sorts of things is the idea of who determines “harmful.” Because that’s a term of such ambiguity that it could literally mean anything. “Covid came from a Chinese lab” — “harmful because it causes ‘racism’” “Pakistani grooming gangs in Rotherham are targeting young British girls” — harmful because it could promote social unrest. “Eating meat can improve metabolic health” — harmful because…

> In the US Wrong thread, you should be posting in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42427132 "US lawmakers tell Apple, Google to be ready to remove TikTok from app stores Jan. 19"

Side note. But if they're banning TikTok, they totally need to ban Youtube and Instagram as both of them have what TikTok has. I.e. The never-ending slot-machine of dopamine known as Shorts and Reels.