391–400 of 936 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 4Chan operates in the US And the UK... each time it delivers there.
The UK can block whatever they want if they'd like to become an authoritarian firewall state. But they have no legal basis to fine 4chan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have worked for a company that was threatened by the US to not offer services to several countries or face criminal charges in the US. I'm talking about a saas nothing strange. We were too small and bent, also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice.
> not offer services to several countries The kind of vague phrasing that makes one immediately suspicious. What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea? > also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice You're literally operating in the US then. It's obvious US laws would apply if you're serving US customers.
It doesn't matter which those were, we were obliged to respect laws of the European country we were incorporated, not US ones.
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…
>Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Just 2 months ago Italy tried to ban domains globally too https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46555760
Otherwise each company, everywhere in the world, no matter how small, has to follow the arbitrary demands of every nation state? How does that make any sense?
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not so slowly. They've gone from a more or less respectable smaller country to more or less politically, culturally, and economically irrelevant in less than 10 years. I even question whether it's rational to allow them to have nukes; they should probably be required to give them up to some country that has a shot at remaining a stable and predictable geopolitical entity over the next century.
This is an entirely delusional twitter-brain take. Despite its problems, the UK is still a sixth largest economy, a cultural powerhouse (how many Hollywood actors are British?), with a lot of soft power, a capable and currently renewed nuclear arsenal (Astraea and Dreadnought are on track), a globe-spanning network of alliances (from AUKUS to Japan deploying to the UK first time in their history to being one of the c…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> not offer services to several countries The kind of vague phrasing that makes one immediately suspicious. What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea? > also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice You're literally operating in the US then. It's obvious US laws would apply if you're serving US customers.
> What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea? It doesn't matter which those were, we were obliged to respect laws of the European country we were incorporated, not US ones.
Laws are not a buffet. You choose to do business in a market, you've opted to be regulated in that market.
You are absolutely free to sell your services to whoever you want, but the US is equally free to refuse to allow you to operate domestically if you're breaking their laws (and otherwise make your life difficult if you e.g. rely on US banking infrastructure). If you want to do business in Iran, don't expect to do business in the US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But 4chan doesn't geoblock users? So it's clearly operating globally. Country flags are a major feature of the board.
4chan is clearly operating in the US. The UK can easily cut the overseas cables and fix the problem!
If I offer a service in US I still have to respect US law, it doesn't matter that I'm based in Luxembourg or New Zealand.
The same applies in reverse.
E.g. many US news outlets never cared to implement gdpr and geoblocked European users from accessing their websites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep saying this and it a profound misunderstanding of how the world works. Nobody likes USA. Nor is that required. It is irrelevant. International politics do not run on emotions. As long as USA is capable of enforcing its will, USA's view will be the one that matters. You may dislike it, but that is what it is.
Or one can say enough and decide to cut off doing business in or with US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to say it, but instead to choose to say something both interesting and directly responsive to the comment you're replying to.
Okay, here goes. You can tell when someone is acting in bad faith when they talk about a law that has been in force and enforced since the 1960s is something new. Of course, "touch grass" works just as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Just 2 months ago Italy tried to ban domains globally too https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46555760
It’s really kind of unfortunate that people ignore the fact that the ruling powers seem to always follow the same MO, yet everyone falls for it over and over again; first they go after the dregs that they’ve made beyond the pale for pearl clutching polite company, e.g., I think over a year ago, when the German government first went after Gab followed by something like, if not Ofcom itself. I don’t recall the outcome…
Even if you agree that this should be done for the currently stated reasons, the precedent is horrifying.
To quote Snowden, we're building the infrastructure of mass surveillance. (And then hoping nobody's going to come along and use it.)