Live data from Hacker News

4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

bbc.com

491–500 of 936 posts

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK, like Australia and many of its other offshoots has always had a bit of a totalitarian streak.

[dead]

Oddly that's Zuck doing that. And weirdly, the law would only apply to app stores. I think that's a separate movement from what the UK is doing though. That US law is designed to hamstring Meta's competition not restrict political speech but it can be abused the same way I think.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#492
post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. The cries of a long-since-dead empire slowly fading into geopolitical irrelevance.

Not so slowly. They've gone from a more or less respectable smaller country to more or less politically, culturally, and economically irrelevant in less than 10 years. I even question whether it's rational to allow them to have nukes; they should probably be required to give them up to some country that has a shot at remaining a stable and predictable geopolitical entity over the next century.

"allow"? Under what authority and governance would you remove them?

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#493
post #357
post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK I don't think has arrested anyone for running a website.

The police in the UK have arrested more than 12,000 citizens for online speech. https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-a...

I mean yes and no.

Looking through that article, one of the examples is "The wife of a conservative politician was sentenced to 31 months in prison for what police said was an unacceptable post."

But if you dig into what happened - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo

"The wife of a Conservative councillor has been jailed for 31 months after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set on fire."

This is pretty clear incitement to violence.

The UK has problems, but it's not very useful to throw all of these cases together to make a big number, it really rather undermines the point.

(edit - looking at the video posted in a sibling comment is enlightening. The number actually convicted of anything is around ~400 and this includes a lot of direct incitement to violence, stalking and all sorts. Which are similarly illegal in the US. The US right-wing talking points are as usual a load of crap.

None of which is to say I think the UK has things right, and that number of arrests is clearly a problem in itself, but as usual the "OH MY GOD look at what's happening over there! Muh free speech!" from the US commenters is hypocritical and myopic)

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#494
post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so slowly. They've gone from a more or less respectable smaller country to more or less politically, culturally, and economically irrelevant in less than 10 years. I even question whether it's rational to allow them to have nukes; they should probably be required to give them up to some country that has a shot at remaining a stable and predictable geopolitical entity over the next century.

I mean the US have nukes and they’re hardly stable and predictable. Allow them to have nukes, who are you lol

Given that the nukes that the UK has is Trident, which is a US system that the UK cannot use without US cooperation [0], it seems entirely appropriate that the USA gets to decide if the UK has nukes.

[0] Yes, the UK can fire them without US approval, but the actual hardware is maintained and supported by the USA, and they have to be shipped to the USA regularly for maintenance. If the USA decided that the UK should not have nukes, there's not a lot the UK could do about it, the Trident system would have to be scrapped entirely and replaced with some completely different system. Which the UK doesn't really have the capability to do and it would cost a fortune to acquire that capability.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#495
post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Im not going to risk getting in trouble because I made a post online or discussed immigration or trans people in the wrong way according to them." This is a mis-truth which has been spread by Joe Rogan and his ilk. Political speech is very much protected in UK law. You won't get in "trouble" if you make posts against immigration or trans people. J.K. Rowling and Ricky Gervais certainly haven't been locked up. Yes,…

> Political speech is very much protected in UK law With "protected political speech" being defined as which flavour of the established, incompetent elite you prefer this year. People have been arrested in the UK for holding blank signs within vicinity of Palestine marches. People have been arrested over protesting Charles' coronation. To say nothing of thousands of people arrested every year over tweets. Political s…

> arrested in the UK for holding blank signs within vicinity of Palestine marches.

Got a source on this one?

Supporting Palestine in the UK has never been illegal. Supporting the specific group "Palestine Action" has been as they were for a while a proscribed terrorist organisation due to what was (IMHO) some property crimes committed against defense contractors by some of their members. Totally wrong, and has now been struck down in the courts, but saying "you can't support palestine" is also wrong.

> Thousands of people arrested every year over tweets.

The source I saw on this one had clear examples of violent threats and calls to set buildings full of people on fire, so I'm not sure this is clear either.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#497

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not so slowly. They've gone from a more or less respectable smaller country to more or less politically, culturally, and economically irrelevant in less than 10 years. I even question whether it's rational to allow them to have nukes; they should probably be required to give them up to some country that has a shot at remaining a stable and predictable geopolitical entity over the next century.

This is an entirely delusional twitter-brain take. Despite its problems, the UK is still a sixth largest economy, a cultural powerhouse (how many Hollywood actors are British?), with a lot of soft power, a capable and currently renewed nuclear arsenal (Astraea and Dreadnought are on track), a globe-spanning network of alliances (from AUKUS to Japan deploying to the UK first time in their history to being one of the c…

The UK used to be the 4th largest economy [0] so being 6th is still indicative of decline.

[0] https://www.madisontrust.com/information-center/visualizatio...

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't personally like their government but at this point they certainly have the appearance of long term social and political stability. More than most western countries for the time being.

China has a host of factors that make their current system very fragile. I doubt they make it five more years before turbulence hits.

I'd be interested to read about that if you have any particular pointers to resources to share.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#499

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven’t you considered that the fact you were exposed to these things made you who you are today am able to say that with conviction. If you had been shielded from the reality on human extremism you would not.

Vouched, because this was going to be my counterpoint as someone who had the same circumstances as the grandparent. Despite the enormously heinous stuff I've seen on that site, it has made me a better writer, developed my critical thinking skills, and given me a perspective on the world and its people that wouldn't have existed without. It also introduced me to many different things and developed my taste beyond meas…

Should 4chan or something similarly extreme be recommended reading for children/adolescents to understand the horrors of the world then?

I would bet that some young people will be as reflective and independently minded as you were to integrate the material into their experience and be better off for it. Some (like me, because I was thin-skinned) won't and it will stress them out or traumatize them instead. Does that make them lesser human beings for not being capable of bettering themselves from seeing the unfiltered truth on their own?

For all the benefit of 4chan, and I do say there is some benefit only after having grown into an adult with better critical thinking skills and years of therapy, it self-selects for a certain type of poster capable of lurking enough, following the norms and having a thick skin. Not everyone will clear that bar and it's unreasonable to think that all young people will turn out like yourself having immersed themselves in it. Some could end up wasting a lot of time baited into petty arguments, or worse.

Re: 4Chan mocks £520k fine for UK online safety breaches

#500
post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not offer services to several countries The kind of vague phrasing that makes one immediately suspicious. What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea? > also US customers were 30% of the total which made it a non choice You're literally operating in the US then. It's obvious US laws would apply if you're serving US customers.

> What were these 'several countries'? Iran? Cuba? North Korea? It doesn't matter which those were, we were obliged to respect laws of the European country we were incorporated, not US ones.

It matters because it gives context to the potential reason they were behaving that way.
Post reply on HN