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

Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 887 posts

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#331

Post by xnyan »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #133
nickslaughter02 wrote: post #10

Wikimedia should block UK access. That will get the attention of media and popularity contest politicians might change their mind. Remember the "Repeal the Online Safety Act" petition? It has gotten over half a million signatures and the response from the government was a loud "no". > The Government has no plans to repeal the Online Safety Act, and is working closely with Ofcom to implement the Act as quickly and eff…

> Wikimedia should block UK access. That will get the attention of media and popularity contest politicians might change their mind. Or they could respect the democratic decisions of the countries they do business in? I'm quite critical of the implementation of this legislation but the idea of an American company throwing their weight around trying to influence policy decisions in the UK gives me the ick. Fair enough…

> Or they could respect the democratic decisions of the countries they do business in?

In what way would blocking access from the UK be not respecting the law?

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#332

Post by throwaway2489 »

extraisland wrote: post #307
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have good reasons to be suspicious of polling organisations such as YouGov You have secret reasons to suspect all polling? If that is the case, and where suspicious means automatically rejecting anything that doesn’t agree with your vibes, then yes, that is a deep and flawed bias and statistical illiteracy.

It isn't about something not agreeing with my vibes. I don't appreciate when people put words in my mouth. I never said all. I obviously meant some. Firstly in my original post I stated why I don't believe YouGov to be accurate. It isn't just me that has an issue with thier polling. Secondly, It is well known that many people are swayed by peer pressure and/or what is perceived to be popular. Therefore if you can man…

Are you against any kind of content restriction whatsoever or just porn?

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#334

Post by arduanika »

Mistletoe wrote: post #50

Could it be that the massive Wikipedia war chest of money can actually be used for something now?

If the incessant banner ads said, "Hello, this is a special plea from Jimmy Wales, get in, we're saving the Brits from themselves", then maybe I'd actually donate.

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#335

Post by kylec »

Perz1val wrote: post #146
ndr wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does WP do this anywhere else? I wonder what happens if they simply don't comply. Will the UK at any point ask ISPs to ban Wikipedia?

I think just getting blocked is no big deal, but they'll probably get fined as well, that is the problem

What mechanism does the UK government have to extract fines from Wikipedia?

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#336

Post by [deleted] »

thomastjeffery wrote: post #80
bbor wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I share your general frustration, but as an unabashed Wikimedia glazer, I have some potential answers: 1. They lost this legal challenge, so perhaps their UK lawyers (barristers?) knew that much broader claim would be even less likely to work and advised them against it. Just because they didn't challenge the overall law in court doesn't mean they wouldn't challenge it in a political sense. 2. The Protests against SO…

> Just because they didn't challenge the overall law in court doesn't mean they wouldn't challenge it in a political sense. That's my point, though. This is the perfect opportunity to do so, and they aren't doing it . Instead, they are picking the smallest possible battle they can. That decision alone makes waves. > Certainly Reddit et al have similar general concerns with having to implement ID systems as they did a…

[deleted]

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#337

Post by codedokode »

In Russia there is a plan to make special SIM cards for children, that would not allow registration in social networks. Isn't it better than UK legislation?

The whole idea that every site or app must do verification is stupid. It would be much easier and better to do verification at the store when buying a laptop, a phone or a SIM card. The verification status can be burned in firmware memory, and the device would allow only using sites and apps from the white list. In this case website operators and app developers wouldn't need to do anything and carry no expenses. This approach is simpler and superior to what UK does. If Apple or Microsoft refuse to implement restricted functionality for non-verified devices, they can be banned and replaced by alternative vendors complying with this proposal. It is much easier to force Apple and Microsoft - two rich companies - to implement children protection measures than thousands of website operators and app developers.

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#338

Post by marcosdumay »

bravesoul2 wrote: post #316
Mogzol wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can return a 451 error with a descriptive page, same as how sites have custom 404 pages

We need new 6xx codes. "Requests that are fine, need no redirection and have no errors but are blocked because of politics, overbearing laws or regime"

That's what 451 means.

It's "user error, you are trying to access the site from some dystopian society that prohibits it".

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#339

Post by lpribis »

karel-3d wrote: post #306
tempestn wrote: post #299

I was just vacationing in the UK last week and ran into this ridiculous thing trying to browse (entirely non-pornographic, fwiw) Reddit threads. Which I opted not to read rather than going through the hassle and privacy breach. Also got to experience the full force of the cookie law, which I hadn't realized I was only seeing a fraction of here in Canada.

The cookie law is not in UK but in EU, no?

Much of it comes from GDPR law which was passed prior to brexit. After brexit, the UK kept most of the regulation under the "UK GDPR", meaning it does apply in the UK as well.

Re: Wikipedia loses challenge against Online Safety Act

#340

Post by lazide »

Lerc wrote: post #327
Ravus wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's sadly an example of terrible leading question bias, to the point where I'm surprised that it even got a 22% oppose rate. The percentages would change dramatically were one to write it as, "From everything you have seen and heard, do you support or oppose the recent rules requiring adults to upload their id or a face photo before accessing any website that allows user to user interaction?" Both questions are fact…

I live in a country where 91.78% of the population voted for a referendum that bought back hard labour in prisons. As one of the few who voted against it I have yet to encounter a single person who voted for it who both supports hard labour and realised that was in the question being asked.

Let me guess - ‘do you support violent prisoners being given work in proportion to their crimes’ or something similar?
Post reply on HN