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

4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 936 posts

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#181

Post by mrtksn »

LaurensBER wrote: post #155
mrtksn wrote: post #148

Europeans are following the wrong path on regulating the internet. Instead of calling it internet safety and annoy people, they should just make those services and the people running them liable for the damages. The same goes for the freedom of speech. Europeans should make it legal guarantee instead of trying to build walls around speech. So when X or 4Chan etc deletes a post, it may lead to freedom of speech fines…

I agree but you have to understand that a lot of European (leaders) still have WW2 in the back of their head. For them there're far worse things than giving up some freedoms. One can agree or disagree with this but Europe's actions are far more understandable if you see where they're coming from. From what it's worth, the younger generation doesn't seem to see this the same way so whatever censure Europe introduces t…

It's very weird, all these online laws and regulations seems like its an attempt to reduce the cost of policing by making the platforms a police force and I don't like that. If nazis gather on a platform, go get them or keep eye on them. It's even better than pretending that there are no nazis because you were able to silence them. Known cunts are much easier to deal with than cunts undercover, seriously why push people undercover? Let them speak, if that speech increases their numbers then you must work on your speech.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#182

Post by pwillia7 »

Aloisius wrote: post #142
rconti wrote: post #4

> "Companies – wherever they're based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the UK. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different," she said. So the UK plans to fine Parisian bars that serve alcohol to British under-18s in France on holiday?

I'm not sure one needs to stretch the analogy this far. If someone from the UK calls me on the phone and I start reading them posts on 4chan, is the UK going to fine me too?

you got yer loiscence?

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#183

Post by RiverCrochet »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #103
vasco wrote: post #11

People used to tell kids to not go to a shady part of town while they spent their afternoons outside unsupervised. Can parents not tell kids to not go to certain websites? We still went to the shady part of town and the kids will still go to 4chan but at least we don't need to give away freedoms. Such erosion of freedom for the common person because parents can't have an awkward conversation is irritating.

I'm moving away from that line of thinking. We can discuss how poorly formulated this law is, and the implications for privacy of internet control bills, and the resulting eroding of our freedom of speech. It's correct to be suspicous of attempts to regulate the internet. But I'm becoming increasingly convinced that "for the sake of the children" such measures are necessary. The reality is that most kids these days h…

Recently in the U.S. news a parent was convicted of murder because they facilitated making weapons to their child who then committed a school shooting. They didn't give their child weapons and tell them to go do it, they just didn't keep them away. This is a good trend that I hope continues and will actually help prevent school shootings. Parents are responsible for their children. If children are frying their brains due to Internet exposure, similarly it's the parents fault, and they should be held liable for child abuse in the same manner as if they committed other negligence.

Someone at school has parents who aren't watching their children and allowing them unrestricted Internet access? This is where the bounty-hunter private-right-of-action morality-police laws that seem to be gaining traction can be put to some actual good use instead of, for example, hunting down trans people in Kansas. If someone's child is showing other children inappropriate material because their parents are negligent, the other parents should be able to take those parents to court and recover damages if they can collect evidence. Once parents are fined for letting their children roam with an unrestricted Internet connection it'll stop pretty quick.

> they need help from the wider society they live in.

Help that is not material support (e.g. paying hospital bills, babysitting, etc.) is usually interference.

> I think it's pretty self evident to everyone here how bad internet can be for the mental health even of adults

Agreed, but I can handle myself on the internet (my parents did their job and I am also not a dog and know the difference between a screen and a real object), and shouldn't be tracked with verification nonsense because someone else can't.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#184

Post by EmbarrassedHelp »

Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient":

> I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru...

Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#186

Post by LAC-Tech »

chrisjj wrote: post #63
chuckadams wrote: post #49

Amateurs. Russia has fined Google more than the GDP of the entire planet. Odds of collecting are about the same.

Odds of collecting some 4chan execs travelling abroad are a lot higher, though

I do not think 4chan has executives.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#187

Post by ronsor »

mattmanser wrote: post #180
oliwarner wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if a Brit comes to your country and buys cocaine from you, in person, you wouldn't expect to be convicted as a dealer in the UK. Ofcom has a bad handle on web requests . Clients connect out. 4chan et al aren't pushing their services in anyone in the UK.

Not so clear cut though is it. For example, does 4chan use a CDN? And is that CDN on UK/EU soil, serving this content? Therefore they're actually transacting that business on UK/EU soil. Didn't the US use this argument to prosecute and extradite the Mega founder? I wonder if the UK/EU will reverse uno the US's stance and start extraditions on US CEOs.

The US would likely not process those extraditions, and it would make trade and international relations worse for no real benefit.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#189

Post by swarnie »

EmbarrassedHelp wrote: post #184

Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient": > I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru... Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply gl…

After bending over backwards for US media companies in the 2000s they thought it went both ways, turns out it doesn't.

Oh well, the uncensored web from my NL VPN still looks the same.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#190

Post by pixl97 »

soco wrote: post #154
kimixa wrote: post #134

People here seem to be thinking this a UK/Europe-specific phenomenon, but there's plenty of examples of the US "seizing" sites that were never hosted in the USA either, and even put pressure on countries to extradite people involved even if they never broke any laws in the country they're living in. One I remember was a site hosting streams of the 2022 football world cup. Or a number of Iranian-affiliated news sites…

I think people here are also more fond of 4chan than the average citizen, and also in general rather fond of technological freedom of anything. Makes sense, being players basically in the team about to get a red card. Like it or not, the global internet became a convenient way to skirt local laws and I don't see any reason why exempting something in one place only because it originated in some other place. Is now enf…

Yes it should, there is no global law, and hell forbid there ever should be.

It's fucking stupid that an American site that is afforded free speech protection in its own country has to deal with the UK acting like a tyrant.

Post reply on HN