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

251–260 of 394 posts

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#251

Post by jimnotgym »

alexandercannon wrote: post #98
iLoveOncall wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I left the UK earlier this year and went to the USA for exactly this reason. Sick of giving half my paycheque to not receive anything in return except more boot on my neck. Mother freedom etc etc

Nothing in return?

If you had caught cancer, lost your job, had a baby then you would have got help.

You drove to work on roads didn't you? Or perhaps it was subsidised public transport. Your wealth, and the wealth of the company you worked for was protected from a mob with pitch forks. Were you protected from foreign armies invading?

What about education? Or education for your children?

I run a large payroll, I don't see anyone that pays half of their pay in tax?

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#252

Post by throw646577 »

HPsquared wrote: post #164
throw646577 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 essentia…

What happens in practice is, parties do control the government. There are these things called "whips". Also, voters watch national media and mostly vote based on the leadership, stated manifesto etc of each party at the national level.

> What happens in practice is, parties do control the government. There are these things called "whips". Also, voters watch national media and mostly vote based on the leadership, stated manifesto etc of each party at the national level.

Don't patronise me. I'm fully aware of all of these things.

But it doesn't actually change who we vote for. If you want Reform to have more MPs, they have to have locally electable MPs. Because we vote for MPs.

If you change the system in any way that means people get candidates that parties choose on some proportional basis, you break this crucial link with the local area. We vote, locally, and we choose a person who is best for us. Time and time again this has proved to be valuable and to have generally selected quite good candidates and very good parliamentarians.

As soon as you have any other system than, locally, "I choose this person to be my representative", important things break, IMO.

But, again, this only upsets right-wingers now because they are on the losing side of it. Hasn't bothered them in the slightest before.

The idea that parliament has shifted "hard to the left", as you said earlier, is absolutely delusional, given the Centrist Dad government we now have.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#253

Post by youngtaff »

HPsquared wrote: post #68
pas wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how is it not popular support? or your point is that plurality is not enough? or that in a different voting system (alternate voting, ranked choice, etc..) the winner would be completely different?

Conservatives + Reform got more votes than Labour. More people voted against Labour than for them. In any other system they wouldn't have won, and at the very least wouldn't have a majority. The other thing to consider is that the electorate basically moved to the right in 2024 (Tory voters moved to Reform), but parliament shifted hard to the left.

Not sure what your point is bit Labour, LibDems, Greens, SNP, Plaid combined got way more votes than Tories + Reform

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#254

Post by jonathanstrange »

tpxl wrote: post #249
jonathanstrange wrote: post #247

I have a question about that. I'm currently developing a platform with strong end-to-end encryption. My servers only store the public keys of individual accounts, the platform doesn't allow me to see what content people post or transmit without actively eavesdropping, and there are no means for me to moderate the content. However, there will be means for paying end-consumers to moderate the content of people they hav…

Any decent payment provider and bank will include the country code with the payment. Have a ToS preventing them from buying, warn UK users (geoip?) and then reject any payments from the UK.

Yeah that's what I was thinking. I'm using Fastspring so that wouldn't be a problem. However, a paying subscriber will still be able to invite someone from the UK and I don't have any mechanism to prevent that.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#255

Post by youngtaff »

pessimizer wrote: post #109
throw646577 wrote: post #101

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

The electorate didn’t lurch further right… some went right others went left

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#256

Post by guilhas »

thih9 wrote: post #38
DrBazza wrote: 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

About banning ads for “certain types of porridge”: > …the majority of porridge, muesli and granola products will not be affected by the advertising restrictions but some less healthy versions (with added sugar, chocolate, syrup) could be affected. > Sometimes products may be marketed as, or perceived by consumers to be, healthy but in fact contain surprisingly high levels of saturated fat, salt or sugar. Source: http…

I was in Tesco, buying a orange juce

The standard version was 100% orange pressed

The "healthy" low cal version was 50% orange 50% water and sweetener addictives Same brand/price

The British Heart Foundation also recommends cola zero as healthier than 100% juice

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#258

Post by DarkmSparks »

Brought to you by the people who read Orwells 1984 and thought it was a handbook rather than a warning.

I really have zero respect for this law. Watch the BBC interview with Elon Musk over twitter to see how moronic the people behind it are.

When you mix in all the war mongering they do vv Russia and the massive crack downs they have been engaging in to cover up how fast living standards have been falling, and the whole thing is a sad joke.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#259

Post by nvarsj »

Plugging the draft guidance into chatgpt:

  Age Assurance Methods:

  Effective methods: Open banking, photo-ID matching, facial age estimation, credit card checks, and digital identity wallets.

  Ineffective methods: Self-declaration, general disclaimers, or payment methods without age restrictions.
So basically, ID verification will be required for any platform that may have adult/harmful materials.

Re: UK's Online Safety Act comes into force

#260

Post by nvarsj »

guilhas wrote: post #256
thih9 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

About banning ads for “certain types of porridge”: > …the majority of porridge, muesli and granola products will not be affected by the advertising restrictions but some less healthy versions (with added sugar, chocolate, syrup) could be affected. > Sometimes products may be marketed as, or perceived by consumers to be, healthy but in fact contain surprisingly high levels of saturated fat, salt or sugar. Source: http…

I was in Tesco, buying a orange juce The standard version was 100% orange pressed The "healthy" low cal version was 50% orange 50% water and sweetener addictives Same brand/price The British Heart Foundation also recommends cola zero as healthier than 100% juice

Pure fruit juice is not good for you. It has a super high concentration of sugar. The benefits of fruit are primarily the fiber contents, which is completely missing in juice.
Post reply on HN