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

UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

bsky.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 298 posts

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#131

Post by KaiserPro »

nxm wrote: post #61
mcjiggerlog wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There oddly seems to be a concerted effort online to paint the UK as some kind of failing police state recently. This narrative seems to have really taken off with some Americans, who now seem completely convinced that the UK government is some kind of totalitarian oppressor who are snatching people off the streets. Meanwhile, Brits just look on at this narrative wondering what the hell they're talking about. Look, I…

What is happening in Britain is people are being actually arrested for “offensive” speech, which is of course subjective, subject to abuse, and open to totalitarian oppression. This is why the First Amendment in the US constitution is so important

> Britain is people are being actually arrested for “offensive” speech

This isn't actually new though. The difference is that they'd normally be nicked for breaching the peace, which is loosey goosey enough to be used for most things.

ASBOs are far more totalitarian as they can legally stop people from doing legal things. (ie stop a child playing in a park)

But to tackle your main point, Yes people are being arrested for offensive speech, but thats normally only part of the reason for arrest.

I can call my MP a massive , I cannot however cause a race riot, as that's not allowed under freedom of expression.

I also cannot give advice on pensions.

I cannot threaten the lives of people

I also cannot claim to be a policeman

etc.

The thing you must understand is that _most_ people (ie not columnists or former PMs) accept that there is a tradeoff between "free speech" and a pleasant society. Sure we did look at your first amendment and think "ooo thats probably nice" but then we have the human rights act that enforces freedom of expression. (which the same columnists/former ministers are decrying freedom of speech are looking to get rid of "because it protects immigrants")

The Online safety act is a mess, because ofcom have not issued proper guidance, and the draft bill was directed by someone who was borderline insane (nadine dorris)

Age assurance is not actually a problem, what is a problem is asking me to hand over personal details so some fly by night US startup who'll get hacked/sell my data to blackmailers.

forcing websites to have moderation policies is fine, not having a flexible approach for smaller sites is not fine.

The act is flawed, but its not _actually_ that different from how Network TV is moderated in the USA.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#132

Post by abtinf »

esskay wrote: post #82
ap99 wrote: post #18

For the Americans looking at this act, you're maybe putting it in the context of American politics and thinking who cares if the porn sites have my face or id. But in the UK you can be arrested and jailed for saying something online that offends someone else.

> But in the UK you can be arrested and jailed for saying something online that offends someone else. It's hard to take this seriously, especially when if I ask for citations it'll likely be a couple of extremely obscure cases where the details are being conveniently glossed over.

Wikipedia literally has an extended section on this issue. No one is going to give you citations for something trivially googlable.

> In September 2022, a British woman was arrested and charged for holding up an "abolish monarchy" sign at a proclamation ceremony for King Charles III in Edinburgh. Similar arrests throughout the country around this period over anti-monarchy republican sentiment have alarmed human rights groups.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#133

Post by doublerabbit »

khalic wrote: post #114
doublerabbit wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are European, cool. Any successful UK protests? As that is the country we are talking about here.

Are you going to move the goalpost further if I give you one?

I was specifically targeting protests in the UK. As we are talking about the UK.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#134

Post by nrawe »

Xelbair wrote: post #108
mcjiggerlog wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There oddly seems to be a concerted effort online to paint the UK as some kind of failing police state recently. This narrative seems to have really taken off with some Americans, who now seem completely convinced that the UK government is some kind of totalitarian oppressor who are snatching people off the streets. Meanwhile, Brits just look on at this narrative wondering what the hell they're talking about. Look, I…

Look, I've been visiting Britain as a tourist for years(since more than 10 years ago) - mostly to visit my friends who live there. Each time i come there it's worse than previous trip, and your whole infrastructure feels oppressive. Constant reminders to be vigilant because something bad might happen(train and metro jingles come to mind) - implying a terrorist attack. Constant reminders that you're watched by cameras…

As a Brit, I'd agree that it's not ideal.

However, the characterisation of terrorist scare in the 2000's, is somewhat off. Over the course of the last two decades, there have been numerous terrorist attacks, most notably 7/9, which have led to increased vigilance and securitisation.

So while travelling in Hungary, Croatia, or Italy over the last few years I've noted the difference, I also appreciate that each country is dealing with its own internal context that can be difficult to grasp from the outside.

Anyway, thank you for visiting our fair shores :)

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#135

Post by nickslaughter02 »

khalic wrote: post #63
nickslaughter02 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU wants to scan every private message you send. Are there protests in the streets? "The EU could be scanning your chats by October 2025 – here's everything we know" ( https://www.techradar.com/computing/cyber-security/the-eu-co... ) "Chat Control is back & we've got two months to stop the EU CSAM scanning plans" ( https://tuta.com/blog/chat-control-criticism )

Chat control is being actively campaigned against, and is not yet law. Civil disobedience, demonstrations and other more disruptive forms of protest come after the democratic options have been exhausted. Is this really news to you?

> Chat control is being actively campaigned against

By a few tech communities with a very limited reach. I refuse to believe at this point that the complete silence on the topic from mainstream media across EU is a coincidence.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#136

Post by omnicognate »

jbjbjbjb wrote: post #124
khalic wrote: post #9

What’s with england and its complete lack of response to this kind of power grabs?

All the main parties are behind it, some say it doesn’t go far enough. The vast majority of the British public absolutely love to ban things. If you listen to talk radio or daytime tv most of the time they’ll be having a discussion on banning something. We have a nanny state and the public like it that way. Personally I use an allow list for my kids internet access and don’t rely on the state to parent them. I guess…

> allow list for my kids

I do the same but let's not pretend that's within the technical ability of the average parent. Of course, it should be and that would be a far better place for the government to direct its efforts.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#137

Post by skeezyboy »

foldr wrote: post #88
gambiting wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lived in the UK for 15 years now and the complete political apathy is probably what bothers me the most about this country. Few years back when they made it so that every ISP had to log your entire browsing history and keep it for a year and 17 different government agencies(including DEFRA, the agriculture ministry!) can access it without a warrant, barely anyone cared. Wasn't really mentioned in public media, o…

>Few years back when they made it so that every ISP had to log your entire browsing history and keep it for a year This is a significant exaggeration in two respects. First, SSL ensures that ISPs cannot log your literal browser history. They can log which domains you visit, how often you visit them, how much data was transferred, etc. etc. Second, the law requires ISPs to be able to retain this data on a specific ind…

> First, SSL ensures that ISPs cannot log your literal browser history.

unless im speaking to a 90 year old, nobody thinks browser history means offline copies of the page

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#138

Post by 1234letshaveatw »

te_chris wrote: post #94
nxm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is happening in Britain is people are being actually arrested for “offensive” speech, which is of course subjective, subject to abuse, and open to totalitarian oppression. This is why the First Amendment in the US constitution is so important

Definitely not happening in the us too! Certainly no academic visas being cancelled.

Yes, yes! This is all well and good, but whatabout America bad?!

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#139

Post by foldr »

skeezyboy wrote: post #137
foldr wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Few years back when they made it so that every ISP had to log your entire browsing history and keep it for a year This is a significant exaggeration in two respects. First, SSL ensures that ISPs cannot log your literal browser history. They can log which domains you visit, how often you visit them, how much data was transferred, etc. etc. Second, the law requires ISPs to be able to retain this data on a specific ind…

> First, SSL ensures that ISPs cannot log your literal browser history. unless im speaking to a 90 year old, nobody thinks browser history means offline copies of the page

The point is that they don’t see the URLs you visit, only the domains.

Re: UK government states that 'safety' act is about influence over public discourse

#140

Post by pama »

perihelions wrote: post #71

In the Oxford philosophy-exam thread from yesterday, I was distracted by question #3: "Should anonymous posting online be forbidden?" [0] Never mind the quality of essay you (or your machine surrogate) could write about that. The striking thing is this is now within firmly within the Overton Window in British academia—this is what they seemingly teach their cultural elites in their elite schools. In place of Enlighte…

What was that thread? Oxford philosophy exams never suggest a particular stance on a question so you are free to argue on either direction of this argument and bring about your strongest points based on the current philosophical thinking on the subject. It is not normalizing lack of anonymity (nor horror movies, or the pursuit of happiness), but helps make people hone their argument skills. (And as another user mentioned, the discussion of the british nanny state is not new; it was old when Orwell wrote 1984.)
Post reply on HN