Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

ofcom.org.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 394 posts

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#121

Post by hgomersall »

iLoveOncall wrote: post #31
collyw wrote: post #6

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

> Is there any way that we can overwhelm them? Yes: leave the UK. I and a lot of high earners are thinking about leaving the UK because it's simply a punishing country where you have high taxes like others in Europe but nothing to show for them. It's also by far the most authoritarian western country, as exemplified by measures like this one. The way to overwhelm them is to sink the UK by having most of the people it…

The country doesn't need high earners per se, it needs people that contribute effectively. There are plenty of "high earners" that are parasites, contributing little and extracting much. It all makes much more sense once you realise that governments spend before they tax and so what really matters is real resources.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#122

Post by EpicQuest_246 »

jimnotgym wrote: post #118
EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

I found out about it via social media which is essentially modern "word of mouth".

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#123

Post by tokioyoyo »

EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #90
cjs_ac wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is very difficult to see what your argument is here. My arguments are: * free speech is not a cornerstone of our national identity (despite John Milton's attempts to make it one); * social media causes genuine harm (but does not do so inherently); * the Act imposes a legal responsibility on social media platforms to limit harm caused by those platforms; and * while members of the HN community may have a personal…

Social media does not cause harm in of itself. People can use social media in a way that can be harmful, but you can say that about absolutely anything. Plenty of people that are not tech people manage to use social media to promote themselves, their business etc. People use it as a place of business. It is a mixed bag, like most things are. You are (like the government) pre-supposing that is the case and basing your…

The best cultural difference analogy I’ve heard — two ends of “Guns don’t kill people, people kill people” argument. One side genuinely believes that statement, the other thinks without guns there would be less death.

Same applies to social media and web as well. Yes, it is people ruining each other’s lives, but using an intermediary tool. Whether you think that way will depend on your preexisting conceptions and beliefs. I don’t think there is a wrong way of thinking of this, and every government will handle it differently depended on their goals and needs.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#124

Post by jimnotgym »

EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #97
frikskit wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

‘No section 230’ might be the reason why there’s no social media tech scene. I’d like to think that HN cares about things other than social media too - maybe Brits could do something that actually adds some value. But in any case, original point also brings up the question: why is the UK allowing foreign companies to violate laws that it would prosecute British businesses for violating? If you allow a foreign domicil…

I don't really understand how many people on here (I've been lurking for a while), essentially pretend everything is backwards. You don't level the playing field by making it more difficult to do business, you make it easier. BTW, I get btw a threat letter from another UK quango (I forget the name), which basically says "if you have any user data you need to pay us £60 a year". Yes you need to pay a levy for a databa…

>I get btw a threat letter from another UK quango (I forget the name), which basically says "if you have any user data you need to pay us £60 a year".

The Information Commissioners Office. Just tell them you are not storing any data and they will go away.

> I did work as a freelancer in the UK (made impossible now because of IR-35 regulation)

Freelancers were never covered by IR35. IR35 covers employees masquerading as contractors. If you work for multiple companies on specific projects that won't cover you

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#125

Post by jimnotgym »

EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #122
jimnotgym wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> (doesn't get reported on btw). I wonder how it is that you know about it then?

I found out about it via social media which is essentially modern "word of mouth".

OK, so you are just spreading rumours then?

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#126

Post by jimnotgym »

cjs_ac wrote: 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 love your post, and not because I agree with all of it. It is the most original thing on this entire thread

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#127

Post by belorn »

pjc50 wrote: post #88
foldr wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have more than two parties then the winning party may have less than 50% of the votes. That's just how the math works out. Somewhat ironically, given your arguments, UK voters decisively rejected a plan to change the voting system to a more proportional one in a 2011 referendum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Kingdom_Alternativ...

Yes, but: the winning party having less than 50% of the votes still feels incredibly undemocratic, as you get a situation where a majority of the voters picked a different choice. Proportional systems give an outcome where a majority of voters voted for at least one of the parties in the winning coalition . Coalitions become explicit rather than internal to parties. The internationalist/isolationist split in the Cons…

Why does it feel undemocratic? I have always felt that party politics are undemocratic since my voting system (Sweden) translate to voting persons into seats in parliament. Political parties and coalitions are just systems added on top of that system that get translated into people in seats. Votes in parliament are counted per person, not per party or block, and people can vote against party line.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#128

Post by jahewson »

cjs_ac wrote: 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…

> Someone else will make a joke about police officers investigating tweets. That practice - which was put to an end a couple of years ago

This claim is 100% false. We’ve seen multiple people jailed for tweets this year alone.

> I have much greater faith in my government to protect my freedom of speech

You don’t have free speech. The U.K. has no such general right. That’s why people are in jail for tweets.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#129

Post by EpicQuest_246 »

herghost wrote: post #108
EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #33

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…

If I choose to buy alcohol or cigarettes and I look over 25 in the UK I do not have to show any ID. If I do need to show ID, it doesn't get tracked by the government. It is only seen by the whoever is serving me at the checkout. I don't honestly believe that you don't understand how this is different.

> It's illuminating that your post is both "tech can't solve it" and so brazenly pro-tech with manifestations of its laziest arguments each way.

I believe that the only way to stop enforcement is to make it impossible to enforce. This would require new software that is easy to use by the majority of people. I don't see this happening in the near term.

> Of course tech can solve the ID problem. It could solve it in a way that doesn't need to give ground to your slippery slope argument too. It just doesn't have the incentive model to do so. Any "control" in this space would reduce the marketable headcount and so it's not in tech's interests to solve - without government intervention.

I am not sure what you are trying to say here. The fact is that some sort of government ID will be required or a credit card and that would be directly linked to any accounts you may have. Simply this is a bad idea for my own security, I don't want to be giving my government ID to some social media company in the first place or a third party that I maybe unfamiliar with. That before we get into any other wider reaching concerns.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#130

Post by EpicQuest_246 »

jimnotgym wrote: post #124
EpicQuest_246 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really understand how many people on here (I've been lurking for a while), essentially pretend everything is backwards. You don't level the playing field by making it more difficult to do business, you make it easier. BTW, I get btw a threat letter from another UK quango (I forget the name), which basically says "if you have any user data you need to pay us £60 a year". Yes you need to pay a levy for a databa…

>I get btw a threat letter from another UK quango (I forget the name), which basically says "if you have any user data you need to pay us £60 a year". The Information Commissioners Office. Just tell them you are not storing any data and they will go away. > I did work as a freelancer in the UK (made impossible now because of IR-35 regulation) Freelancers were never covered by IR35. IR35 covers employees masquerading…

My comment around IR-35 is that it has caused a lot of confusion and thus made contracting a lot more difficult as a result. A lot of freelancers and contractors have been affected by this.
Post reply on HN