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

231–240 of 936 posts

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

#231

Post by shellac »

anigbrowl wrote: post #210
DevKoala wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds so gross. Why do British people tolerate that? It’s as if British people belong to their government.

It’s as if British people belong to their government. Legally speaking, British people are subjects, not citizens.

Then somebody needs to let the government know, because the relevant 1981 act is "[a]n Act to make fresh provision about citizenship and nationality". In that 'British subjects' are a quite limited subset of citizens. Most British people are citizens, not subjects.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1981/61/contents

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

#232

Post by ronsor »

mattmanser wrote: post #206
ronsor wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Like random tariffs? Imagine this scenario, a major G7 country declares: All bytes sent to a computer on their soil count as a transaction on their soil. And the end client being on a VPN is not a defence UNLESS the website owner attempts to verify the user's identity. Immediately have to pay local taxes, conform to local laws. Unless you keep all your assets in the US and never fly abroad, our shady website operator…

This is basically a mutually assured destruction scenario.

The US is not going to let all US companies get fined out of retaliation, so there would be more retaliation from the US against the EU, and everyone else. In the end everyone loses, except for China, which as you mentioned is not stupid enough to play these games and decided to simply pick a lane.

China locks down the Internet and blocks foreign players (to varying levels of success). They don't reach overseas to prosecute foreign executives or fine Meta for not removing Party-critical content from Facebook. Of all the parties that could be involved in this censorship drama, China is somehow the most honest.

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

#234

Post by 1317 »

vorpalhex wrote: post #96
chrisjj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 4Chan operates in the US And the UK... each time it delivers there.

4Chan has blocked the entire UK IP range. They do not host any infrastructure there. They are bound by UK law exactly as much as they are bound by Venutian or Mars law.

> 4Chan has blocked the entire UK IP range

this isn't true

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

#235

Post by zer00eyz »

whatever1 wrote: post #79
christkv wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their goal is to create a presedent so they can start applying it to platforms they don't like. Its happening all over Europe not just the UK and the plan is clear. They want to repress discourse that is not officially sanctioned.

The real goal it to start banning US sites like fb,aws etc so that Europe starts building their own

> Europe starts building their own

They have had decades to do this. They have not.

Risk aversion and Regulation are the heart of the issue.

Same things that have flattened the American housing market for the last 30 years.

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

#236

Post by oliwarner »

3rodents wrote: post #146
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.

If we want to base the argument on technical nuance, 4chan are sending their packets to the U.K. just as the cocaine dealer would be sending packets (of cocaine) to their buyers in the U.K.

They're replying to an externally-established connection. The packets they're sending are going to a local router.

If you posted cocaine from your cocaine-legal country to an address where it was illegal, and you followed all the regular customs labelling rules, I'm not sure you should be liable. And you shouldn't be extradited either. Even the UK demands that extradition offences would have been criminal had they been committed in the UK. Now I'm sure in practice, you'd find yourself in trouble immediately but I don't think it's fair.

The ramifications of laws like this is everyone needs to be Geo-IP check every request, adhere to every local law. It's not the Internet we signed up for.

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

#237

Post by strideashort »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #214
3rodents wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we want to base the argument on technical nuance, 4chan are sending their packets to the U.K. just as the cocaine dealer would be sending packets (of cocaine) to their buyers in the U.K.

This isn't a physical product. A better analogy would be a phone call, initiated by someone in the UK to a foreign country.

What if I send http request over snail mail? And they send me back printed http/html response?

Is it “different” then?

Being serious here.

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

#238

Post by phendrenad2 »

RadiozRadioz wrote: post #55
cyberclimb wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the EU imposing GDPR restrictions on non-eu companies?

I think that's different because I have a positive personal opinion of the GDPR and a negative personal opinion about what the UK is doing. Therefore the GDPR is good and this is bad. It's really quite objective.

You can hold a mirror up to HN, but you can't make them look.

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

#239

Post by itintheory »

petcat wrote: post #87
tokyobreakfast wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most Brits already have a VPN to beat off so the effect will be negligible.

And then they'll make VPNs illegal

I suspect they'll be harder (impossible?) to block, but that will probably deter the casual user.

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

#240

Post by strideashort »

tyho wrote: post #161
3rodents wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we want to base the argument on technical nuance, 4chan are sending their packets to the U.K. just as the cocaine dealer would be sending packets (of cocaine) to their buyers in the U.K.

4chan send their packets to their ISP, not the UK.

not at all, 4chan only sends packets to their isp!
Post reply on HN