[flagged]
UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
51–60 of 130 posts
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#52Does anyone have a link to the full text of the bill? The House of Lords site only seems to list the amendments without context. I’m interested to know if it passed with the (ridiculous) requirement of a third party age verification service
[deleted]
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
different. The US government is designed to be inefficient and requires bipartisan agreement or a majority in both chambers to do stuff. The UK government has significantly more executive powers, far more than the president, and normally has a majority to pass things that can't be done by the excutive. the problem is that brexit and bad party leaders has been exceedingly disruptive and killed both the conservative an…
One might argue that the electoral system (FPTP) is a common denominator in both cases. Under another system, new parties might arise to replace to stale ideas of the old (on both the left and the right). Under FPTP, that's almost impossible to achieve. It's a common refrain that people don't engage with politics because they feel disenfranchised. Which is perhaps unsurprising, because to a large extent they are!
I think FPTP is a factor but not in the same way. The structure of the US system means that a president with a slim majority in one house can't do anything much. the UK has no such real problems.
In the UK you only have to win the commons (lower house) to run a government. the US you need both and the president.
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#54I wonder if this sort of thing would lead to more people self-hosting again since it seems to be targeted at "big tech". So because Facebook, tiktok, YouTube et al start over-censoring, people just think fuck it and start hosting their own content again?
Can self hosting deliver content at the scale we're used to now?
Yes, because most people have like 30 contacts in their IM roster. Your phone, your home router, maybe even your smart fridge would be able to tackle this scale.
Something like Twitter cannot be as easily replicated, but it's never been about privacy ad encryption.
Another thing that's hard to replicate is a global namespace. Federated namespaces (see email. mastodon. matrix) work acceptably well though.
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#55Does anyone have a link to the full text of the bill? The House of Lords site only seems to list the amendments without context. I’m interested to know if it passed with the (ridiculous) requirement of a third party age verification service
I think it's the file dated 19 July 2023, plus the two amendment documents since then?
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
different. The US government is designed to be inefficient and requires bipartisan agreement or a majority in both chambers to do stuff. The UK government has significantly more executive powers, far more than the president, and normally has a majority to pass things that can't be done by the excutive. the problem is that brexit and bad party leaders has been exceedingly disruptive and killed both the conservative an…
Populism is a response to corrupt and incompetent establishments. There's nothing competent to drive out by the time populism rears its head. It was already long gone.
> Populism is a response to corrupt and incompetent establishments
populism is a response to discontent, nothing more, nothing less. Populists need an in. If the country thinks that the government is doing ok, or they are happy enough as they are, then populism can't spread. Populists need a cause and a scapegoat.
boris was brexit. corbyn was "enough shitting on the poor and young"
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#57I don't know why the UK bothers to make new laws. It has no hope of enforcing them. The Police are mired in scandal and cut to the bone. The courts system is taking apart, with criminal barristers forced to strike for pay, courts closed and massive backlogs in both the criminal and civil branches. Prisons are full, and taking apart. A terrorist on remand escaped last week. What are they possibly going to do with yet…
Can confirm as a UK citizen. Laws are seeminly never really enforced from what I've noticed.
Indeed, look at the navel gazing as they try and work out how to ban a dog breed that is a clear hybrid of a breed that is already banned.... and therefore is banned already!
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#58I hope other countries don't copy the UK. With the Internet we have choice of jurisdiction and can happily avoid any cryptography projects operating out of the UK. I don't care if WhatsApp will become wiretapped in the UK. My beloved Matrix operates out of there, that's what concerns me. And I have to use WhatsApp because of its network effect (all my friends and family are on it). I have tried recruiting them on to…
Half don't care about privacy.
Branding a privacy app "as a privacy app" is a mistake. We need the next messenging app to be private by default AND better at making people popular and giving attention and securing relationships for the end user and all the rest of it..
The people who care about privacy are "trying to get away" and going to "get off the map". In the eyes of some average joes.
That's basically anti-marketing.
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I expect that the overlap between "honestly care for childrens' quality of life" and "understands the ramifictions of this bill to any significant extent" is near zero. (Though there are doubtless many people who have inaccurately convinced themselves they are members of both classes.)
yes, but undoubtedly the UK's security services know that the best way to pass something unpopular is to recast it as helping children women the vulnerable much like the content of the 2010 CIA memo that wikileaks released[1] stating that the best way to increase public support for US military actions in Afghanistan is to emphasize the oppression of women [1] https://wikileaks.org/wiki/CIA_report_into_shoring_up_Afgh…
It's annoying being one of the seemingly few people who sees through these techniques. I seldom voice support for a position because it does 'one thing' and WE NEED TO DO THE ONE THING NOW!!! Instead, as best as I can, I try to see the net effect on everything this proposition touches.
Even forget spending hours stewing over facts and data, there is just an instinct inside me that picks up that it is a ruse, a fallacy, a cynical ploy.
While that sounds like tooting my own horn, and I admit I've been taken in by some tricks before, it just isn't easy to stand by and watch. And even if you argue and make the case for online freedom, someone else just needs to come along and go, 'AH!, but what about the children!' and the masses are swayed.
Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill
#60It’s interesting.
This gigantic legislation is misconceived at the same time I think it’s easy to see why it has been deemed electorally popular enough for the government to proceed with.
Tech companies do not provide a carriage service. It’s something more than that. The behaviours they permitted, and even encouraged, on their platforms have incurred large amounts of harm on individuals and society as a whole.
There can be no compromise on the government with encryption but they are able to do this because online companies are yet to figure out how to best protect the vulnerable that use their services.
With that said I think the existence of the unregulated internet was likely anomalous. If ever you wanted privacy, you always have had to ensure the only two beings with access to the information communicated were yourself and the intended recipient. Is it really possible for a society to permit the existence of any large organisation for private communication without eavesdropping?