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

4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

alecmuffett.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 817 posts

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#131

Post by Symbiote »

xethos wrote: post #66
alias_neo wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but you'd need to apply it to all phones, because what's stopping a kid from buying an adult smartphone There's no need, that's already the case. All phones (the network account attached to the SIM actually, not the phone itself) comes with a content filter enabled by default in the UK, adult or not.

> All phones (the network account attached to the SIM actually, not the phone itself) comes with a content filter enabled by default in the UK, adult or not. Neither resident nor frequent visitor to the UK, so I'm behind the times when I ask: I beg your fucking pardon? Is there further reading on this inane nanny-state horror, ideally via a Wikipedia article on the law or gentleman's agreement amongst the carriers? F…

I think you show identification (like when buying alcohol) when buying the phone/contract, and the block is removed. Or, this can be done later.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#132

Post by miladyincontrol »

BergAndCo wrote: post #113
4ggr0 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the rasion d'etre of 4chan can probably be discussed forever, but i can't imagine donating money to such a vile, hate-filled platform. surely there are better causes fighting for the same things, right? i know, freedom of speech, it's your money and not mine, etc.

why do so many people think 4chan is the same site it was 10 years ago? modern 4chan is just another reddit.

I agree on some notions, theres little original content or discussion, theres little creativity.

Most threads still get plagued by a circlejerk of wannabe neonazis repeating shibboleths and transphobia at each other ad infinitum, or if you're lucky enough you find a crumb of quality discussion, often generals, often around derivative content from other platforms or popular media.

There are the rare productive generals that do have people curating information in meaningful ways, or even rarer actually doing things themselves. Far more often generals are just toxic loosely held together "friend" circles who cant get along anywhere else due to a perpetual veil of irony that can only survive in anonymous spaces, often attacking each other for little more than to stir the pot and keep conversation going. They'll still hold a superiority complex over their use of the site even though every single bad thing they'll say about others can be said for 4chan times 10.

Its not 2006 anymore, 4chan isnt a creator of internet culture, 4chan is a dumpster of the web, where art goes to die.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#133

Post by mikkupikku »

Hamuko wrote: post #125
CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Act expressly anticipates that it will have extra-territorial effect It also continues like this: > This does not mean that the Act extends to all use of in-scope services globally. […] “The duties extend only to the design, operation and use of the service in the UK and, for duties expressed to apply in relation to ‘users’, as it affects the UK users of the service” Wouldn't this mean that the Act only applies…

> Wouldn't this mean that the Act only applies to services explicitly design/targeting UK users/visitors? Clearly not considering that there's nothing in 4chan that would make it explicitly targeted towards the UK. Unless Ofcom is saying something and doing the opposite.

4chan does have very minor explicit support for UK users; on some boards it puts a UK flag on their post (as it does with all other countries and territories.) It could perhaps be argued that this constitutes the site being consciously designed with UK users in mind. Hardly matters though, there's nothing the UK can do about it. They aren't a superpower anymore and it's time for them to realize it.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#134

Post by potato3732842 »

paxiongmap wrote: post #54

"The least bad thing that Ofcom and the Government could do is to quietly let the matter drop whilst focusing on education." This generalises very well for all Government. Shame we're a couple of generations into education being about producing pliant workers over independent, thinking human beings.

>This generalises very well for all Government.

The government shouldn't be dropping things. It should have the power to pick those things up in the first place.

It's like a fishing stop. Even if you get off with a warning the whole interaction just shouldn't have happened.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#135

Post by jabroni_salad »

OvbiousError wrote: post #108

Am I missing something here? 4chan is available in the UK so has to follow UK laws there, where is the problem? Regardless of whatever it is they are enforcing.

I think if the UK wants to operate on such an assumption, they should move to national firewall with a whitelist model rather than a blacklist.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#137

Post by pessimizer »

morkalork wrote: post #119
LordN00b wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is plenty of precedence for this, and I am about to fudge a bunch of details. The basic point is that the United Kingdom can make any law it sees fit to any place or person. Even though it may only exercise punitive issues once they arrival inside the physical jurisdiction. So the example I was taught, the UK can pass a law banning smoking in Paris, but may not arrest/fine until such criminal trespassers get of…

The United States (eg. illegal gambling, hacking), South Korea (smoking cannabis abroad) and many other countries operate the same way.

> South Korea (smoking cannabis abroad)

And gambling, too. Remember in 2013 when all those celebrities got busted for gambling in Macao?

> After getting caught gambling illegally, Shinhwa’s Andy, Boom and Yang Se Hyung received their punishments.

> On November 28, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced Andy, Boom, and Yang Se Hyung to monetary penalties. Andy and Boom must pay 5,000,000 won, while Yang Se Hyung will pay 3,000,000 won.

> The fines were dependent on how much money each person bet. Andy spent 44,000,000 won, Boom 33,000,000 won, and Yang Se Hyung 26,000,000 won.

> The three are all currently pulled out of all schedules and self-reflecting on their actions.

> Meanwhile, Lee Su Geun, Tak Jae Hoon, and Tony An are waiting for their first trial to take place on December 6. They bet more than several hundred million won.

https://web.archive.org/web/20140215040022/http://mwave.inte...

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#138

Post by cft »

jojobas wrote: post #67
tasuki wrote: post #35

> The Act explicitly grants Ofcom the legal authority to regulate online safety for individuals in the United Kingdom, and this expressly includes conducting investigations into, and imposing penalties for, non-compliance by providers of online services with their duties under the Act. […] The Act expressly anticipates that it will have extra-territorial effect I don't see anything wrong here: Sure, Ofcom can have th…

The concern is they decide a site non-compliant, can't do shit about it in absence of British presence, then go after Britons accessing the site. Kiwifarms stopped serving UK IPs, not because of fear of enforcement but rather because they don't anyone British jailed. The UK landing page straight up says 'use Tor'.

Can probably arrest the founder in Heathrow, like Durov's arrest in France.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#139

Post by ibejoeb »

beardyw wrote: post #79
jojobas wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This case is more like UK bans selling cigarettes and tries going after a Parisian tobacconist.

Yes if the Parisian tabaconist sells in the UK. What happens in France is a French concern.

Not exactly. It's like if a brit goes to paris to buy cigarettes, the UK is stating that it's the tabac's job to refuse the transaction.

They can say whatever they want, but the UK can't conduct an extra-territorial police action in france. They can bar subject from traveling to france instead. The onus is on the UK.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#140

Post by dyauspitr »

paxiongmap wrote: post #54

"The least bad thing that Ofcom and the Government could do is to quietly let the matter drop whilst focusing on education." This generalises very well for all Government. Shame we're a couple of generations into education being about producing pliant workers over independent, thinking human beings.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN