111–120 of 499 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The simple threat of arrest, even if they only happen by the hundreds, is enough to have a chilling effect on free speech.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn’t dismiss this so easily, the Palestine Action stuff is pretty appalling.
You mean folks choosing to protest under the guise of a proscribed organisation? Protesting in favour of Palestine remains legal, doing so under the name of a proscribed organisation is not. Admittedly, the reason for them being proscribed is rather idiotic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> While figures show that the total number of arrests for online posts fell to 9,700 last year, down from a record 13,800 in 2023... https://freespeechunion.org/daily-mail-investigation-exposes...
[flagged]
>Keep in mind the UK already arrests and imprisons vast numbers of people for speech offences
>>I think you’ve been spending too much time on Twitter
Did you miss it or are we moving the goalposts for some reason?
On a related note, they built their digital ID so that third parties could verify attributes (it's NOT just a single-service login across government + a linking ID across government services, which is how it was sold by the BBC). They're pretty close to completely de-anonymising the internet for UK citizens. Say they introduce an Australian-style social media ban for under 16s, then requires all social media to link…
> Keep in mind the UK already arrests and imprisons vast numbers of people for speech offences. Vast? No, they really don't.
What is it about these UK politics posts that draws a particular type of commenter? What the heck media are these folks consuming to have such a warped view of this country?
Probably the media that shows the UK locking up old ladies and people in wheelchairs for speaking out publicly against ongoing UK support for genocide (among other "speech offenses").
It's so organic and grass roots and good for democracy™ that every single Western country suddenly decided that eliminating privacy online in lockstep was the top priority despite none of the ruling parties running on it as a platform or with any meaningful referendums from the voting public. But to what end?
>It's so organic and grass roots It is though. This is one of the few surveillance issues actually driven by grassroots organisations like ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Shout ) in particular when it comes to adult content who have been at this globally for well over a decade. There's no shadowy cabal trying to age-restrict porn or social media, this is more like a modern day Carrie Nation. Puritanism alw…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting to see these kinds of comments more in this thread compared to the one from yesterday. The one from yesterday was discussing how australia is banning social media for anyone under 16. Most comments were supportive because they hate social media. A few comments were discussing how it is just a way to propagate more KYC.
It's way easier to justify banning social media entirely than banning it for under-sixteens. Paradoxically it infringes on freedom less, as it bans a type of business model for being too harmful rather than restricting people's rights to view and share information.
This is a problem with Australia's attempt to ban kids from it, where there's some surprising exemptions from the restrictions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You mean folks choosing to protest under the guise of a proscribed organisation? Protesting in favour of Palestine remains legal, doing so under the name of a proscribed organisation is not. Admittedly, the reason for them being proscribed is rather idiotic.
That's exactly it. The proscription is ridiculous and delegitimises the whole concept of proscribed organization. It collapses into "mere support for Palestine is an arrestable offense". This didn't work against Sinn Fein and it will not work now.
It explicitly doesn’t do that, folks are still very much free to protest in support of Palestine.
On a related note, they built their digital ID so that third parties could verify attributes (it's NOT just a single-service login across government + a linking ID across government services, which is how it was sold by the BBC). They're pretty close to completely de-anonymising the internet for UK citizens. Say they introduce an Australian-style social media ban for under 16s, then requires all social media to link…