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

The UK government has blocked IPs

police.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 107 posts

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#21

Post by krapp »

ethbr1 wrote: post #20
benmmurphy wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the wild thing is in the UK private citizens can bring about criminal prosecutions. section 179 is a hornets nest waiting to be poked. in the UK prosecutors are not a bulwark against bad law. the courts would need to thread the needle to protect freedom of speech for elites but allow suppression for plebs. > at the time of sending it, the person intended the message, or the information in it, to cause non-trivial psy…

As an American, watching the UK government wrestle with "free speech, except when we disagree with it" is a fun pastime. It's definitely not a right if it disappears when it's inconvenient.

Speech is regulated in the US as well. Publicly call for the assassination of a President and see what happens.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#22

Post by gerdesj » 

  $ host www.police.uk
  www.police.uk is an alias for fallback.soh.police.uk.
  fallback.soh.police.uk has address 104.18.28.214
  fallback.soh.police.uk has address 104.18.29.214

  $ host police.uk
  police.uk has address 51.104.28.64
Could someone outside the UK use the above and explain what they experience. Then we can get to the bottom of this. Its a bit late here for me to ask remote customers if I can use their gear to diagnose this.

Let's keep it real please!

(EDIT - formatting)

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#23

Post by pyuser583 »

benmmurphy wrote: post #12
kypro wrote: post #4

For those unaware, the UK police are currently promising to go after people posting misinformation and retweeting content (including video of riots) that might incite hate. In response to this the UK police are being trolled on their live chats (largely by Americans I believe). I did originally post a link to these (you can find them on X), but given the content I don't want to risk it. I'm assuming they're now block…

the wild thing is in the UK private citizens can bring about criminal prosecutions. section 179 is a hornets nest waiting to be poked. in the UK prosecutors are not a bulwark against bad law. the courts would need to thread the needle to protect freedom of speech for elites but allow suppression for plebs. > at the time of sending it, the person intended the message, or the information in it, to cause non-trivial psy…

This mechanism exists theoretically in the US.

I live in a state that had a pre-Roe abortion ban on the books. After Roe was repealed. local prosecutors tried to use their prosecutorial veto to prevent enforcement.

It was pointed out that if they straight up said “we won’t enforce the law” Private citizens could enforce it.

Usually, a judge would throw the case out, but if a DA had publicly refused to do their job, judges would find it hard to simply defer to DA.

I suspect private criminal prosecutions are so rare because public prosecutors guard their monopoly.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#24

Post by m11a »

benmmurphy wrote: post #12
kypro wrote: post #4

For those unaware, the UK police are currently promising to go after people posting misinformation and retweeting content (including video of riots) that might incite hate. In response to this the UK police are being trolled on their live chats (largely by Americans I believe). I did originally post a link to these (you can find them on X), but given the content I don't want to risk it. I'm assuming they're now block…

the wild thing is in the UK private citizens can bring about criminal prosecutions. section 179 is a hornets nest waiting to be poked. in the UK prosecutors are not a bulwark against bad law. the courts would need to thread the needle to protect freedom of speech for elites but allow suppression for plebs. > at the time of sending it, the person intended the message, or the information in it, to cause non-trivial psy…

Theoretically yeah. Maybe not for this particular act (the Online Safety Act 2023), see eg section 179(7) and 179(9) which sort of imply only a prosecutor can bring proceedings. Though I think that's largely by oversight rather than design.

It's a really poorly written act though. Compared to acts written by previous governments, this one has a pretty bad structure.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#25

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

kypro wrote: post #4

For those unaware, the UK police are currently promising to go after people posting misinformation and retweeting content (including video of riots) that might incite hate. In response to this the UK police are being trolled on their live chats (largely by Americans I believe). I did originally post a link to these (you can find them on X), but given the content I don't want to risk it. I'm assuming they're now block…

[flagged]

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#26

Post by inopinatus »

OJFord wrote: post #19
inopinatus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't work from Australia either, so apparently the Commonwealth can get fucked. I imagine some middle-ranking civil servants at the FCO will, in a not-too-distant-future, be expressing a measure of dismay to their Home Office counterparts. Before which time, hopefully, the gov.uk folks will figure out how to selectively block access to live reporting channels, not the entire police service, in response to vexatiou…

I'm not saying it makes complete sense, but I'm not sure I understand why it bothers you that much? I'm not sure how many times I've visited police.uk in my (British) life, probably a few , but I'm pretty sure it's zero for police.au or whatever it is.

I've had reason to correspond with British police forces on several occasions. There are many transnational matters of diplomacy, law enforcement, citizenship, sport, tourism, hiring, migration, security, and trade for which police clearance and input may be (sometimes must be) sought, or notification given, and this disrupts all of them: websites are a starting point for interaction, documentation, and communication, and it's a massive burden if you're forced back to calling up folks at your UK offices (or worse, the high commission) just to start a conversation each time, let alone work through a process.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#27

Post by BoredPositron »

kypro wrote: post #4

For those unaware, the UK police are currently promising to go after people posting misinformation and retweeting content (including video of riots) that might incite hate. In response to this the UK police are being trolled on their live chats (largely by Americans I believe). I did originally post a link to these (you can find them on X), but given the content I don't want to risk it. I'm assuming they're now block…

>> I'm currently waiting for a knock at my door along with 65 million of Brits who have posted inaccurate information online from time to time. Legal note: if anything I have said here is inaccurate I was unaware of it at the time of posting.

how fucking funny. Everytime when something like this is getting discussed the only response is sarcasm and hybris. No acknowledgment of the problem, no ideas, just fucking bad one liners. It's a real problem and you can be glad that you haven't had to deal with it. Yeah, ofc what they are doing now is absolute shite but sometimes you could at least acknowledge the law in it's meaning and not the shitty execution of it and no I don't care about your sarcasm "disclaimer" you are not five.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#28

Post by ethbr1 »

krapp wrote: post #21
ethbr1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, watching the UK government wrestle with "free speech, except when we disagree with it" is a fun pastime. It's definitely not a right if it disappears when it's inconvenient.

Speech is regulated in the US as well. Publicly call for the assassination of a President and see what happens.

The exceptions are far more narrow than in the UK. Try and bring a libel charge in each country.

PS: And technically, afaik, it isn't a crime to call for the assassination of the president of the US. It's illegal to attempt it, and to take actions that support those attempting it. But if you just post on Facebook about it... you'll get a call from the Secret Service and a recommendation that you don't do that, but no charge.

Re: The UK government has blocked IPs

#30

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

krapp wrote: post #21
ethbr1 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, watching the UK government wrestle with "free speech, except when we disagree with it" is a fun pastime. It's definitely not a right if it disappears when it's inconvenient.

Speech is regulated in the US as well. Publicly call for the assassination of a President and see what happens.

The restrictions on speech in the US a much narrower and more clearly defined than in the UK or Europe, where there is an ever changing and unprincipled perspective on what speech is allowed. In the US you cannot directly call for violence but you can do a lot of other things and you can see the case law around this in Brandenburg v Ohio and other such cases. Vague restrictions like “hate speech” are meaningless in US law (since obviously such labels can be weaponized arbitrarily) and journalism is protected without restriction. Whereas in the UK, sharing a video of the riot is apparently enough to get yourself arrested by gestapo at the doorstep.

To offer more detail on how far the Brandenburg case went in protecting free speech rights: it ruled that seditious speech – including speech that constitutes an incitement to violence – is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as long as it does not reach a level "where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action”.

Post reply on HN