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

231–240 of 298 posts

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

#231

Post by khalic »

extraisland wrote: post #223
khalic wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh yeah these services seem totally legitimate… you know what, keep believing what you want buddy, have a good day

Right. Let me get this right: 1) You asked for evidence of a rent-a-crowd / rent-a-mob service. Something which you could have looked up yourself. 2) I gave you links to companies that offer these services. I understand that these websites aren't the best, I literally listed the first 4 that were spat out by when searching. I suspect they probably don't get most of their business through the website. They look like w…

I find it insulting that you would send such clearly fake websites, that’s why I’m stopping the conversation. Have a good day

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

#232

Post by crinkly »

hopelite wrote: post #205
crinkly wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it was a police state, JD Vance wouldn’t be getting it on his holiday here from protesters and video vans driving around and being refused service in a pub. It could end up that way but we’re not there yet. If we do get there we tend to make the French look like amateur protestors (look up poll tax riots). I’m less worried about a police state than a corporate dystopia. The attendee list at Trump’s inauguration wo…

That is a very simple perspective. Nothing about the current British government would preclude being underhanded and manipulative, i.e., making sure that not only the current US government, but the next system’s candidate is made to feel discomfort and displeasure in order to manipulate. People do this kind of underhanded passive aggressive thing all the time, why would it not be the case for the British government t…

I think you're overcomplicating it. Having actually worked for UK gov directly with politicians, they are mostly either trying not to look bad but way out of their depth in stuff and being propped up by civil service.

In that circumstance they'd stay out of it and blame it on the citizens while trying to get favour with Vance some other way.

Spend a few months in Azerbaijan if you want to experience a police state. I have :)

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

#233

Post by khalic »

desas wrote: post #193
khalic wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok I don’t know enough about this political system to contribute on that, there are some political systems built like that, like the US.

The same thing applies in the US doesn't it? There has essentially only been two political parties (three if you squint hard enough) for nearly the entire existence of the country?

Yeah that’s why I was making the parallel

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

#234

Post by extraisland »

khalic wrote: post #231
extraisland wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Let me get this right: 1) You asked for evidence of a rent-a-crowd / rent-a-mob service. Something which you could have looked up yourself. 2) I gave you links to companies that offer these services. I understand that these websites aren't the best, I literally listed the first 4 that were spat out by when searching. I suspect they probably don't get most of their business through the website. They look like w…

I find it insulting that you would send such clearly fake websites, that’s why I’m stopping the conversation. Have a good day

What is fake about them?

I can find two of the agencies on Companies House:

- Dreams Agency - https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...

- Envisage Promotions- https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/c...

The other one might be a trading name and I can't find anything that matches directly.

Can I have an apology please?

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

#235

Post by darrenf »

xienze wrote: post #144
darrenf wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arrests are up, but sentences are down — i.e. fewer convictions/criminal records https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/select-communications-off... > there are several reasons why an arrest may not result in a sentence, such as out-of-court resolutions, but said the “most common is “evidential difficulties””, specifically that the victim does not support taking further action. As mentioned at the top of the above docume…

> Arrests are up, but sentences are down — i.e. fewer convictions/criminal records Well that’s certainly a relief! People are only being _arrested_ for """offensive""" speech, not convicted!

I mean … is it not a relief that “””offensive””” speech isn’t actually a crime?

There’s widespread recognition right up to the Lords that this is a shitty situation, dangerous/chilling, and a waste of police time. We all think it's nonsense, and it’s being called out for being nonsense in parliament. Literally no-one, AFAICT, thinks it’s a good thing that arrest numbers are rising for non-criminal speech.

TBH I would hope when the dust settles that more people will get in shit for wasting police time — either reporting non-crimes to the police, or not actually wanting any (further) action taken. Feels like in many cases the “victims” are just playing the system as it (rapidly) develops, to take an online beef offline, rather than totalitarianism. If it were totalitarianism they’d be locking folk up, or at least convicting them of something, but that’s where we came in — those numbers are falling.

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

#236

Post by hopelite »

nrawe wrote: post #134
Xelbair wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

What people like you seem to miss or maybe simply lack the sophistication (if I may say so) for, is understanding the nature of the ruling system and how far it will go to achieve its aims, which are also hidden from you. The ruling class are obviously a rather small group, so they inherently and by necessity rely on extreme manipulation, gaslighting, lying, deception, etc. to keep everyone off balance and not looking at them for causes or even accountability, let alone doing anything about them. It is why those who are extremely adept at manipulation and abuse are the ones who keep the ruling class in power in all places in the West, where the ruling class defers to them for that skill of manipulation and abuse.

It seems impossible to you that a government and its actors would e.g., not only allow, but even facilitate something like terrorist attacks specifically for the very purpose of making incremental, ratcheting moves towards an authoritarian system more palatable… for your safety of course.

It’s really not any different than how all abusers will incrementally test and press with various cycles of pressure and relief on their target of subjugation and abuse.

All the signs of manipulation, subjugation, and abuse are there in basically all western countries. Have you ever heard of Biderman’s chart of coercion[1]?

[1] https://www.strath.ac.uk/media/1newwebsite/departmentsubject...

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

#237

Post by 1234letshaveatw »

omnicognate wrote: post #203
1234letshaveatw wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know right? Just look at all the wrongthink in the US being bandied about

I see no greater diversity of viewpoints in the US than the UK. I do see a country that's falling apart, sadly.

I see the opposite, happily

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

#238

Post by dgroshev »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #199
dgroshev wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government in power has little to do with the Act, it was passed two years ago by a different party that is now refusing to own the mess that they created. Sure, one can say that the government could be more diligent at repealing bad laws, but the Parliament had quite a few things on its plate already, so it's not surprising that this Act coming into power during the summer recess wasn't high on the agenda.

This is entirely not true, and the government is entirely free to withdraw this stupid, harmful legislation. Do not make excuses, because this is how the Labour Party get away with this sort of stupid action.

The government can't "withdraw" an Act of Parliament, only the Parliament can, by passing a new bill.

It's not a Labour Party's action, the deadline was written into the act two years ago.

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

#239

Post by nrawe »

vidarh wrote: post #216
nrawe wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, here's the thing, the BBC has a whole section of its news site dedicated to the conflict, including documentation of alleged atrocities committed by Israel and Hamas. Its produced documentaries detailing the settlers movement. The BBC is paid for by the taxpayers. LBC regularly has pro-Israel and pro-Palestine people on. GBNews, Sky and the Murdock-verse have their views mostly from a pro-Israel POV, more left-le…

> I could walk to my local town centre with a placard for either saying: "Stop Genocide in Palestine" or "Down with Hamas" this weekend and not be arrested. You might "just" get threatened with arrest: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/17/armed-police-t... Or you might get arrested: https://www.petertatchellfoundation.org/peter-tatchell-arres... There are many similar ones, but they are now much harder to fi…

Right, supporting PA is illegal, opposing what's happening in Gaza is not. That's why I specifically didn't say having a placard with a message supporting PA, but "Stop Genocide in Palestine". That is the detail that matters.

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

#240

Post by vidarh »

hopelite wrote: post #224
vidarh wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who does live in the UK, and has for 25 years, while I too see the distortion you talk about, things have taken a distinct turn towards authoritarianism to the point that I watch what I write under my own name.

The funnest part about that is you better make sure no matter what you write is also future proof against any and all whims of any other regime that may rule at any point in the future. But that is ultimately the point of any abusive and toxic system created by psychopathic, megalomaniac, malignant and grandiose narcissistic people and groups; they want to broken and shattered, never sure what may set the abuse off,…

That is true anywhere, and one reason why I think UK constitutional law is fundamentally broken in that, as some will tell you, the UK does have a constitution; but also, that constitution includes the principle of "parliamentary sovereignty" which means that parliament can at any point strip away all rights and privileges - the most important element of a functioning constitution, and a functioning democracy, is how it protects against government over-reach - even when supported by the majority (perhaps especially then), but as you allude to, not just now but also in the future.

And this is also a key argument when people try to justify oppressive laws by appealing to their own good nature: Protecting speech and protecting agaisnt the government isn't always - or even usually - against protecting against the present, but protecting against every future potential government, and especially protecting against those who might be attracted by tools of oppression created in the present to seek power.

I'm quite free-spoken most places, and usually feel more constrained by not wanting to be too controversial for potential employers etc. when writing under my own name.

But the shift in the UK recently has been particularly troubling to a degree I haven't experienced first-hand before, and while it makes me more cautious about how it will be interpreted now, you're right:

It's scarier to consider how these tools will be abused in the future.

Post reply on HN