Ofcom fines 4chan £20K and counting for violating UK's Online Safety Act

Post by kibbel » Mon, Oct 13, 2025, 9:39 PM UTC

myne_throwaway wrote: post #124

gnfargbl wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I'd like to actually know the answer to the question you're posing there. Does discussing suicide increase the overall rate, is it neutral -- or does it even decrease it? The Samaritans are usually regarded as a net public benefit, though they tend not to encourage people to go through with it, whereas the Wikipedia link suggests that the users of that forum have some kind of fetish for it. I would also exp…

Having perused the site a number of times, I wouldn't say many people there "have a fetish for it". You're a million times more likely to be told to kill yourself on 4chan than on SS. SS simply says a) suicide should be your choice, b) dehumanizing people for having suicidal thoughts is bad. Sadly these opinions are so far outside the overton window that suicidal people end up having no choice but to discuss their pr…

Post by EarlKing » Mon, Oct 13, 2025, 9:41 PM UTC

doublerabbit wrote: post #145

deejaaymac wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My government doesn't seem to be listening to me, did you have yours professionally trained or something?

> did you have yours professionally trained or something? It's rather simple really; the secret is money. Only then can you tame a politician.

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Oct 13, 2025, 9:59 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #192

fair_enough wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All you did was link to the main page of a wikipedia article and copy and paste the first sentence. Your response is so lazy, it doesn't even deserve a response, but I'm putting this out here for the benefit of the general public: https://www.icrc.org/en/article/grave-breaches-defined-genev... GC 4 Art. 147. "Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if…

> If these laws apply between enemy nations engaged in declared war, they are even more applicable to countries at peace with one another. So far as I can tell, that claim is your own invention. Also, according to your own link's link to the full text: Article 4 - Definition of protected persons Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case…

Post by fair_enough » Mon, Oct 13, 2025, 10:03 PM UTC

ben_w wrote: post #192

fair_enough wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All you did was link to the main page of a wikipedia article and copy and paste the first sentence. Your response is so lazy, it doesn't even deserve a response, but I'm putting this out here for the benefit of the general public: https://www.icrc.org/en/article/grave-breaches-defined-genev... GC 4 Art. 147. "Grave breaches to which the preceding Article relates shall be those involving any of the following acts, if…

> If these laws apply between enemy nations engaged in declared war, they are even more applicable to countries at peace with one another. So far as I can tell, that claim is your own invention. Also, according to your own link's link to the full text: Article 4 - Definition of protected persons Persons protected by the Convention are those who, at a given moment and in any manner whatsoever, find themselves, in case…

Post by kbelder » Mon, Oct 13, 2025, 10:49 PM UTC

klez wrote: post #4

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #3

Good luck in trying to collect it.

They should go looking for the Hacker Known as 4chan and collect from him.