411–420 of 936 posts
There's always people that say it's the parents responsibility to monitor their kids. But as a parent, you either give your kids full access to the internet or nothing. The fault lies with the OS companies Google, Microsoft, Apple. They do a terrible job with parental controls. They make it very hard to setup, they're confusing and hard to use plus they barely work. I think they just do it as a checkbox for marketing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Long dead? Within living memory. Britain still has colonies with millions of people in them.
>Britain still has colonies with millions of people in them. Britain does not have colonies. You might be thinking of the British overseas territory but the total population of those islands is less than 400,000
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're serving US customers. You are doing business in the US, and therefore you are subject to US law. What about when a customer requests a refund, do you just pretend US consumer protection laws don't apply to that customer? Or to turn your logic around, can American corporations do business in Europe while just completely ignoring the GDPR and all other European laws? Laws are not a buffet. You choose to do busin…
Except that the hint was for criminal charges, not lack of business :)
You choose to do business in a jurisdiction, you bind yourself to their laws. That means all laws, not just ones you like, or think that are relevant to your business. Laws are not a buffet.
Don't do business in jurisdictions where you feel like you cannot comply with domestic law. No one is requiring you to do business in the US. People choose to do business in the US so they can profit from US customers, and that's totally fine, but doesn't come with some magical immunity to US law.
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. Ofcom is probably full of non technical people who have been given a specific set of (stupid) instructions including that if its on the internet, its a product being sold to the UK.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Living here the decline is tangible. And this is West Oxfordshire; not one of the poorer parts of the country. An example in microcosm: a local village suffered road flooding due to failed maintenance of water pipes. Our rent-seeking privatized water company effected the minimum repair required by regulation. The next section of old pipe burst almost immediately, flooding the road further for most of January, utterly…
We need to recognise the difference between the GP rant and what you're describing. The austerity is undeniably still reverberating through the country. It will take years for this ship to turn around, although it is being turned around. For example, in just about a month we're getting European-style rents with the Renter's Rights Act, which is transformational. We can and should do better, and everyone can contribut…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that the hint was for criminal charges, not lack of business :)
Zero difference. If someone is selling children's toys, and 30% of her customers are in the US, and then it turns out her toys are made entirely of lead and asbestos, should she not face US criminal penalties? You choose to do business in a jurisdiction, you bind yourself to their laws. That means all laws, not just ones you like, or think that are relevant to your business. Laws are not a buffet. Don't do business i…
1. This isn't about business but charges. There's no way in hell US can e.g. prosecute non us citizens from trading with Cuba e.g. the embargo applies to US individuals and companies. The rest of the world, e.g. European countries, have normal relations with Cuba and nobody gives two damns about the embargo.
2. The same thing happens in reverse and applies to US companies doing business overseas.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, you've just described one method the US authorities use to block websites. They also force ISPs to block IPs [0]. I feel trying to say that's not "blocking websites" is playing games with words, and the results are functionally the same to the "average" user. The fact that the US effectively claim juristiction over the root DNS system is a more a geopolitical power thing rather than a legal restriction. [0] http…
A court issued that ruling. Not an administrative agency. Pretty big difference.
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. The cries of a long-since-dead empire slowly fading into geopolitical irrelevance.
So it really wouldn't be hard for the same legal framework that restricts age to happen in the US. It just takes compliance on our part. The UK is just one tentacle of the legal bureaucracy. It wouldn't surprise me if a bill appears called the Online Child Safey Act or something like that soon and it happens to coincide with a bunch of issues Ofcom raises in this lawsuit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This whole episode is a charade to do exactly that while claiming they are morally superior to China because the UK does it “for the children” while China does it because they are just evil authoritarians. For Tiananmen Square substitute Rape Gangs.
I don't know why this is being downvoted. It's depressingly true; it seems the UK really heading quickly towards a Great Firewall, they've been looking to control VPN use [1] and the top most read article on BBC News right now is yet another public sector cover up of children being sexually abused. [2] [1] https://www.techradar.com/vpn/vpn-privacy-security/uk-govern... [2] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyzy0y2…
> top most read article on BBC News right now is yet another public sector cover up
Do you not see a tiny little bit of contradiction here (regardless of your mis-characterisation of the second link)