Live data from Hacker News

UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

ofcom.org.uk

111–120 of 394 posts

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#111

Better alternative to first-party propaganda: https://www.eff.org/pages/uk-online-safety-bill-massive-thre...

Well, that links to EFF's own "propaganda" - perpetuating privacy at all costs. Inevitably the place law and regulation should is somewhere in between, balancing risk and striving for an acceptable position all things considered within a democratic framework.

Why is it inevitable that we should continually erode one's right to privacy?

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not particularly egregious because it's not a national vote for a party, is it? It's a series of (balanced) regional votes for elected representatives from equal-sized constituencies who are supposed to be responsive to that region. Suddenly this is a massive problem for tories because it's red-faced angry right-wingers on the losing side. Whenever it contributed significantly to a tory win, it has not been a pr…

> It's not particularly egregious because it's not a national vote for a party, is it? You're talking with someone who thinks that it is egregious that a party that gets the minority of the vote runs the government, and the grandfather of your own comment points out that in 2024 it was with the lowest percentage vote in 30 years, which is particular. The electorate lurched from the Conservatives farther right, and th…

The party that has got a plurality of the vote runs the government, in fact. Same as in the USA this time, eh?

But again, in case it is not clangingly obvious yet: we don't vote for parties to control government. We don't vote for party leaders. We vote for constituency MPs, and if there are enough of them who can agree to form a government, that is what they do. Political parties are not, particularly, even essential to the process. They just speed it up.

A big chunk of why we have a Labour government this time round is Tory constituencies deciding to tactically vote Lib Dem because a Labour candidate would be less likely to gain a majority, after all. One has to assume that the people who did that meant to do it.

> The electorate lurched from the Conservatives farther right, and the result of that was a centrist government.

I dispute this concept; it's a convenient hopeful fiction being sold by hucksters and grifters. You only have to look, for example, at polls saying a majority of Leave voters would now support closer ties with Europe to resolve problems caused by Brexit. What happened is simple: people chose to have a functional government, which neither the Tories of 2024 or Reform could possibly offer. Reform is probably a generation or more away from being able to do that, and who knows if the Tories can reassemble around something mainstream before then.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which kills any sort of online anonymity as all social media posts will be directly linked to your ID. This will make it much easier to go after anyone that is a dissident in the UK. Many these awful laws such as one being discussed are sold to us under the guise of protecting the children. The last time I checked 7 people a day were being prosecuted for speech related crimes in the UK (and I checked a while ago). Pa…

I think laws and regulations can be put in place that, while imperfect, would highly discourage the use of social media by minors. I wouldn't want every user to validate their age with government ID. But we can say schools should ban kids from using phones. We can say that large social media platforms need to whitelist content/creators that children are allowed to access. We can insist that social media companies thr…

> I wouldn't want every user to validate their age with government ID.

Well that is what will be required or a credit card.

> But we can say schools should ban kids from using phones. We can say that large social media platforms need to whitelist content/creators that children are allowed to access. We can insist that social media companies throttle the ability for minors to scroll through videos at a dopamine addiction pace.

Every argument around regulation around social media to protect children ignores that fact that parents are the ones closest to their children and their children is their responsibility. Some parents inability to control their children shouldn't infringe my rights as an adult.

> More generally and more applicable to the discussion, I think regulations for social media need to be applied proportional to the userbase and centralization of a platform, and target viral algorithms.

If I don't like how particular algorithms act on social media, I can simply opt out of using it. As an adult I have agency. I found that I was spending a disproportionate of my time using Twitter/X and as a result I deleted my account. I had problem with alcohol years ago, I stopped drinking after I accepted I had a problem. I have my own agency.

> It may be time to research simpleX chat and Briar if we will maintain the ability to communicate without government filtering.

The issue is that the vast majority of people I wish to talk to aren't tech savvy and are unwilling to use anything other than mainstream platforms. So you end up essentially walling yourself from everyone else. That isn't ideal.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#116

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.

Which kills any sort of online anonymity as all social media posts will be directly linked to your ID. This will make it much easier to go after anyone that is a dissident in the UK. Many these awful laws such as one being discussed are sold to us under the guise of protecting the children. The last time I checked 7 people a day were being prosecuted for speech related crimes in the UK (and I checked a while ago). Pa…

It's not that hard to create privacy friendly age verification. Have a system like Sign in with Apple vouch that you're over 18. Go to Apple store to flash your ID and they just set a flag on your account. Apple doesn't give the site any personal info when you use Sign in with Apple. Apple isn't giving the government any of your details without a warrant. No Apple store nearby? It doesn't have to be Apple, licence it out to a few companies.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#117
Related. Others?

Hash matching proposals for the Online Safety Act's implementation are dangerous - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38217439 - Nov 2023 (17 comments)

The UK's Controversial Online Safety Act Is Now Law - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38048811 - Oct 2023 (159 comments)

King Charles III signs off on Online Safety Act with unenforceable spying clause - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38044973 - Oct 2023 (72 comments)

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#118
post #56

As a software engineer in the UK (and former schoolteacher) I'm supportive of the Online Safety Act. People prefer to interact with people who are similar to them, so they end up with a belief that most people are like them, but as a teacher, I had to grapple with the full distribution of human intelligence. It's wider than I'm comfortable with. Most people struggle to deal with the complexity of everyday life in the…

I am a software engineer in the UK. One of the reasons I want to move from the UK is because so many of our populace has attitudes such as yours. The online safety act won't solve the problems you think it will and will create a whole new host of issues. What is amusing is that you even admit that you solved the problem of online scammers with your grandparents through education (I've seen the videos you mentioned as…

> (doesn't get reported on btw).

I wonder how it is that you know about it then?

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#119
post #23

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

Given that such porridges are only “unhealthy” to the extent that they increase risk factors for various diseases, perhaps eating them should be considered a form of gambling. Then government could tax it too.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which kills any sort of online anonymity as all social media posts will be directly linked to your ID. This will make it much easier to go after anyone that is a dissident in the UK. Many these awful laws such as one being discussed are sold to us under the guise of protecting the children. The last time I checked 7 people a day were being prosecuted for speech related crimes in the UK (and I checked a while ago). Pa…

>Parents should be the ones that should be controlling their children's social media usage. I guess we should stop checking age when buying alcohol in pubs (_Parents should be the ones that should be controlling their children's alcohol purchases_) And stop checking age when buying cigarettes (_Parents should be the ones that should be controlling their children's tobacco purchases_) etc. It's illuminating that your…

But when I go and buy booze, I just show my ID and that's it, it isn't stored in a database with what I bought and then leaked on the internet.
Post reply on HN