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

Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

webdevlaw.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 480 posts

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#241

Post by __alexs »

throwaway4aday wrote: post #53

Can someone explain why this won't result in a renaissance for peer to peer and e2e encrypted chat/forums/social media etc.? When government or industry makes it nearly impossible for consumer needs to be met we inevitably see a grey and black market spring up to meet those needs. My prediction is that if legislation like this becomes widespread we'll see a freely distributed application rise to prominence among a ga…

Because the bill will never pass. It will be quietly swept away when new Tory leader is elected.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#242

Post by kodah »

Thiez wrote: post #150
kodah wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be nice if those who didn't vote actually affected the power of the parties. Not voting is a valid choice, it says, "All the options you gave me suck. Try again." Otherwise you run into a system where people start trying to calculate the delta between two evils and think we're making progress.

How do you see this work in practice, and wouldn't it just lead to calculating the deltas between three evils, the third being abstention? How would this be better than getting rid of the first-past-the-post system? We saw this is the Netherlands a while ago. There was a referendum about whether there should be closer relations between the Netherlands and Ukraine, and the options were "agree" and "disagree", but many…

Your example isn't quite the same thing.

More or less, I want my lack of voting to be a signal to the Democratic party that, "Your vision is out of whack and does not serve me". Today, when someone doesn't vote the party and constituents try some mental gymnastics to put fault on people who don't vote as if they don't care.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#243

Post by 9dev »

theptip wrote: post #34
9dev wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What else would it be? There's about 67 million people living in the UK, compared to the 447 million in the EU - depends on your definition of "small", but our company will likewise ignore any specific UK regulations. The handful of customers there isn't worth any additional overhead compared to the EU+US.

Of the countries in the world, the UK ranks sixth in GDP.

Most of that money is bound in the financial industry, though. Unless you're in the sector, the GDP rank doesn't matter much for doing business with the UK.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#244

Post by pjc50 »

mellavora wrote: post #16
TillE wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just underlines what should be fairly obvious: that such official meetings are not how things are actually decided in representative democracies. I mean that's even more explicit in a parliamentary system, where members are nearly always expected to vote the party line or face consequences.

> I mean that's even more explicit in a parliamentary system, where members are nearly always expected to vote the party line or face consequences. yes, that is a feature (not a bug) of a parliamentary system. A complementary feature is that parliamentary systems tend to have representational seat distribution. So a party that wins 35% of the vote gets 35% of the seats. And those seats are expected to vote as a block…

> A complementary feature is that parliamentary systems tend to have representational seat distribution. So a party that wins 35% of the vote gets 35% of the seats.

lolnope, this is a FPTP country.

The last election, the Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote and 57% of the seats.

Even more extreme, although overall irrelevant, the SNP got 45% of the popular vote in Scotland, resulting in 48 out of 59 seats won in Scotland.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#245

Post by pjc50 »

causi wrote: post #132

who also has skin in the game about being on the receiving end of the most horrific online abuse Do people just not get educated in online literacy anymore? An adult getting abused online is like getting third degree burns because you laid your hand on a hot burner and refused to take it off. If people saying mean things to you is disturbing your groove so much you're calling it "abuse" maybe you should stop reading…

And yet people keep complaining about "cancel culture".

People saying things about you can affect you even if you don't read them.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#247

Post by stickfigure »

solarkraft wrote: post #231
stickfigure wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely it will result in crippling the domestic UK tech industry while everyone else in the world ignores it. I really don't see most countries extraditing someone for the high crime of "let british users access a website without verifying their age".

This has been said about the EU, but the market has proven to just be too big to ignore. It could also be the reverse (see authoritarian countries), with international players leaving the market and local ones filling the space.

By "ignore it" I mean "ignore the law", not ignore the UK market. At some point the idea that countries can regulate the internet outside their borders falls apart. The US succeeds in enforcing its gambling laws WRT Americans, but that only works because other nations agree to do the enforcement.

I just don't see that happening here. So maybe the UK becomes a no-travel zone for anyone in the worldwide tech industry? That would be sad, but it's a plausible outcome.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#248

Post by lifeplusplus »

hmmm how many countries are there 180+? must be fun to be compliant to all of them. Either rules should apply to only within the country or be handled by international organization. About time we created lawmaking internet committee, there are many for technical standards already.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#249

Post by oxfordmale »

jfk13 wrote: post #97
antonymy wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My immediate thought as well. As this law will apply to ANY service available to UK users the only feasible solution for smaller websites and app developers will be exclusion to avoid liability. So UK users will simply start using VPNs to by pass region blocks.

Ah, the familiar HN bubble, where people instinctively think of "simply start using VPNs" as the solution. No; some tiny minority of UK users may do that, but the overwhelming majority will just use whatever services are "approved" (follow whatever rules they have to, to stay in the market) and remain available by default.

My twelve year old son told me very casually a few months ago that he had installed a VPN to bypass the schools internet filters. It was clearly no big deal to him, it sounds like that is what all his friends are doing. At home they are of course doing this to bypass any parent filters to allow them to look at certain content.

Re: Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill

#250

Post by red_admiral »

causi wrote: post #132

who also has skin in the game about being on the receiving end of the most horrific online abuse Do people just not get educated in online literacy anymore? An adult getting abused online is like getting third degree burns because you laid your hand on a hot burner and refused to take it off. If people saying mean things to you is disturbing your groove so much you're calling it "abuse" maybe you should stop reading…

No, it is not. Examples of online abuse that go well beyond "disturbing your groove" are well documented. Online abuse, like climate change, is proven beyond reasonable doubt and we should probably do something about both.
Post reply on HN