Live data from Hacker News

Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

wikimediafoundation.org

191–192 of 192 posts

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#191
post #72
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those controls all still exist. You just get a pass if you’re using “standard crypto”. Or if your implementation is open source.

Export controls still exist, but we're at least a far cry from the days of "This version of Mozilla is illegal to download if you are outside the USA. Please don't do it." (and before that PGP!)

Japan was worried about running afoul of these same laws and banned sales of the PS2 in certain countries, I think the same countries we weren't allowed to share advanced crypto with.

https://www.pcmag.com/news/20-years-later-how-concerns-about... | https://web.archive.org/web/20250619030114/https://www.pcmag...

> All that power caught the eye of Japan’s Trade Ministry. In April 2000, they issued an edict[0]: if Sony wanted to ship the PS2 abroad, they would need to request a special permit. The law as written required any exporter who wished to ship hardware with potential military applications worth more than $472 outside the country to obtain permission from the government or face up to five years in prison.

> With a sticker price of $376, that meant any kind of bulk PS2 shipments would run afoul of the law. If the company couldn’t convince their government otherwise, American gamers wouldn’t have a chance to play Ridge Racer V or TimeSplitters on launch day.

> Sony applied for a special export permit to get its new console to the rest of the world, but a few countries were blacklisted. Libya, Iran, Iraq, and North Korea were considered potentially likely to use the console for nefarious purposes. Here in the United States, we got the hardware on October 26, as planned.

[0] http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/716237.stm | https://web.archive.org/web/20241212131304/http://news.bbc.c...

Re: Wikimedia Foundation Challenges UK Online Safety Act Regulations

#192
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clause for a government review into the impact of VPNs on the bill after 6 months thats government speak for deciding to do something about the VPN problem. because there is no way a commission will not find a good reason to ban VPNs when you reach that point, because you could argue they help avoid UK restrictions.

That's paranoia speak. You can express that anxiety without falsely stating it as fact.

thats not paranoia when you have seen it happening before your very eyes 100 times before.
Post reply on HN