511–520 of 735 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are we talking about the EU in this thread? I don't see how draconian UK laws relate to a proposed chat control law in the EU that hasn't even been drafted and would likely not survive a judicial challenge if it were to be approved.
Well, it relates in that the UK also hates encryption and is extremely likely to get their own Chat Control anytime this decade.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any stats on this? I'd be surprised if the number of Brits putting £10-100/mo into Wikipedia greatly exceeds 10.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2023-24_Report Best I can find $ 132,466.01 Africa $ 4,902,373.13 Asia $ 49,423,340.29 Europe $106,546,895.77 N.America $ 2,509,299.46 Other $ 6,082,217.76 Oceania $ 944,844.22 S.America
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any stats on this? I'd be surprised if the number of Brits putting £10-100/mo into Wikipedia greatly exceeds 10.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising/2023-24_Report Best I can find $ 132,466.01 Africa $ 4,902,373.13 Asia $ 49,423,340.29 Europe $106,546,895.77 N.America $ 2,509,299.46 Other $ 6,082,217.76 Oceania $ 944,844.22 S.America
Convert that to GBP and you get about £7.5 million.
Figure that the UK accounts for about 15% of the European economy and assume it contributes to Wikipedia at about an equal share.
That's about £1.125 million in estimated annual recurring contributions from the UK.
You said 10-100/mo, so let's assume £55/mo or £660/year as the mean.
That would be about 1,700 Brits, a surprising number.
There's an opportunity for a service like CloudFlare here give people a simple toggle that manages geoblocks on legal liability factors. It's way too much for every organisation to individually track every country's laws day by day in case just by being accessible there you incur a liability. And it sounds like the UK would have just self-selected out of the list of "safe" countries. If something like this was in wid…
I don't even know what laws apply to the Middle East, Africa, or South America, but I'm sure there are enough of them to make most sites culpable in some way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The parents have been getting a free pass all this time I totally agree but the UK government – particular Labour – doesn't want people to take responsibility really, because that would take from their own 'power'. There's nothing the UK loves more than a stupid population hooked on benefits and devoid of education, critical thinking and financial freedom.
Not the UK, Labour.
I think the Greens are opposed to it, and maybe Reform in one of their populist speeches, but the majority of UK representatives seem to support this law.
Based on this poll, most Britons also support the OSA: https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/britons-back-online-safety-acts-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Welcome to Schufa in Germany, the “social credit score” without which is almost impossible to rent or buy in most German cities, if the report (which most folks hardly know how it gets calculated) doesn't have the right numbers on it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schufa
That's just a basic financial credit score, and you can easily rent without one (even though some financial accountability is probably reasonable to balance the strong renter protection laws here). What's so nefarious about it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tbf, well implemented digital ID would be much preferable to the idiotic situation that we're in now. The emphasis on well implemented.
That would require trusting a government such as the British one to implement it well. That's far too big an ask for them, so the current situation is preferable.
There's an opportunity for a service like CloudFlare here give people a simple toggle that manages geoblocks on legal liability factors. It's way too much for every organisation to individually track every country's laws day by day in case just by being accessible there you incur a liability. And it sounds like the UK would have just self-selected out of the list of "safe" countries. If something like this was in wid…
So a service like CloudFlare is the Great firewall of the world and CloudFlare can shut you down if you go against their interests as a supranational gatekeeper. Smart thinking Batman.
Cloudflare just offers a button with fewer false positives than naive GeoIP databases. They're not so much gatekeepers as they are the security guards hired by the stores themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish Wikipedia would take one for the team, and go dark in the UK. (And I'm in the UK). Wouldn't work with somewhere like China, but the UK might still be capable of being shamed.
Wikipedia gets a lot of donations from the uk. I’m not sure how many Brits would continue putting £10-100/mo into a charity that explicitly doesn't operate in their borders.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fundraising_statisti...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you follow the DMCA I don't see why not.
Because the DMCA’s safe-harbor provisions only apply to sites that adhere to its requirements. Sites whose primary purpose is to host torrent files or infohashes arguably don’t qualify. If the DMCA allowed US operators to host torrent catalogs openly, there’d be a plethora of them.
Also its hard and extremely expensive to defend yourself to prove it in a niche specifically where people are looking not to pay making it harder to montize to defend properly.