4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

Post by james_in_the_uk » Sat, Oct 18, 2025, 4:27 AM UTC

inkyoto wrote: post #484

james_in_the_uk wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relevant here is that 4Chan appears to explicitly target the UK users for commercial purposes, and potentially (via subcontract to Cloudflare) serves to UK customers from equipment located on UK soil. Whether one agrees with the policy aims of the OSA or not, there are some complex jurisdictional and enforceability issues at play here. Unfortunately it’s not as simple as you make out.

> […] and potentially (via subcontract to Cloudflare) serves to UK customers from equipment located on UK soil. Still, not quite. Servers in the UK ≠ targeting the UK – courts on both sides of the pond will ask whether the operator directed activity at the forum. Merely serving content from UK edge nodes because a CDN optimises latency is usually incidental and does not, by itself, show a «manifest intent» to engage…

Post by Razengan » Sat, Oct 18, 2025, 4:32 AM UTC

econ wrote: post #376

Razengan wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please. Vote-based social networks are way too vulnerable to burying the truth and boosting lies. It just takes the first 3-4 viewers to downvote you to prevent the next 10000 people from seeing what you said. There's no downside to downvoting just because you don't like what someone says, even if it's true. And usually no amount of corrections can outshout a lie/mistake with 100+ votes.

There has to be a better formula to design this game. It seems valuable enough to explore. It will be hard to design a formula that can only be gamed by making quality contributions. A quality discussion requires parties who disagree, exchange of ideas and facts and ideally some kind of eventual agreement. The hardest part is to make it enjoyable to use.

Post by hexbin010 » Sat, Oct 18, 2025, 4:34 AM UTC

cosmicgadget wrote: post #235

From the attorney's post: > The infinite character of that power was most famously summed up by English lawyer Sir Ivor Jennings, who once said that “if Parliament enacts that smoking in the streets of Paris is an offence, then it is an offence”. This line is taught to every first-year English law student. Initially this seems like disrespect for another country's sovereignty. But really the crucial thing is: > We ex…

Post by Razengan » Sat, Oct 18, 2025, 4:37 AM UTC

lurk2 wrote: post #439

Razengan wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh please. Vote-based social networks are way too vulnerable to burying the truth and boosting lies. It just takes the first 3-4 viewers to downvote you to prevent the next 10000 people from seeing what you said. There's no downside to downvoting just because you don't like what someone says, even if it's true. And usually no amount of corrections can outshout a lie/mistake with 100+ votes.

Vote manipulation is a non-issue here because users require a minimum of 500 karma to vote, and because the site is so much smaller than Reddit it can take months to reach that threshold. Downvoting is also capped so that you're very unlikely to get pushed back below the 500 karma threshold unless you are consistently making comments that the community doesn't like. I post things I know won't be well-received here al…

Post by 6r17 » Sat, Oct 18, 2025, 4:44 AM UTC

hax0ron3 wrote: post #351

James_K wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US businesses can get bent. Half my country is rotten and hollowed out, all the shops replaced by Amazon. Screw them. Uber wants to come over here and put our local cabbies out of work, then bring them all back on lower wages with higher fees. Screw off. Air B&B destroys affordable housing all across Europe and turns cities into tourist hell. Oracle comes over here and they're trying their damnedest to get their hand…

If your countrymen want to use Uber, Air B&B, Oracle, and Facebook, should you try to stop them from doing it, even if you personally dislike those companies? You are making the same argument that Trump is making with the tariffs. Personally, while I can see some good arguments for protectionism, I'd rather have the choice to decide whether or not I want to buy Chinese products, rather than the government making the…