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

Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

express.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 735 posts

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#571

Post by elAhmo »

matt-p wrote: post #555
avianlyric wrote: post #364

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What about I sell advertising packages to a US company from my US HQ but someone in the UK views and advert on my site and therefore generates me 0.001¢ - debatable. Not entirely sure what is debatable about this situation. You quite unambiguously derived revenue from a UK citizen here, although not much. If you didn’t want that revenue, then don’t display ads in the UK. If that makes serving traffic to the UK unec…

OK, so if I'm a blogger making a few hundred dollars a month from adsense on my blog, I'm actually subject to every single jurisdiction on the planet unless I actively (and completely!!!) block access from there?

This is exactly why I said this is a slippery slope. Some people in other threads argued you are providing a service, but to me this makes no sense. You are not actively doing anything or targeting people from countries that might somehow interpret your content or activities illegal.

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#572

Post by tjpnz »

matt-p wrote: post #214
nadermx wrote: post #144

The UK has been doing this sort of stuff for at least a decade. For example they have the PIPCU which under the guise of copyright threatens 10 years in prison for sites not even in their jurisdiction. https://torrentfreak.com/uk-police-launch-campaign-to-shut-d... And with that, they have at the least gotten registrars not located in their jurisdicrion to transfer domains https://easydns.com/blog/2013/10/08/whatever…

So has alot of Europe to be fair, I think it's a cultural thing honestly.

Europe isn't a cultural monolith. This is an issue of MEP accountability and transparency. Look no further than Chat Control to see how far they're going to ensure that the people in favor of it remain nameless.

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#573

Post by SideburnsOfDoom »

gethly wrote: post #545
SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So I would argue that you are completely wrong. You could argue that, but it would be idiotic. It would be deeply and deliberately ignorant of e.g. Facebook complicity in ethnic massacres in Myanmar. Cambridge Analytica. Youtube as an engine of algorithmic radicalisation. The continued extremism on what was once Twitter. Online anti-vax disinformation. QAnon. All of Truth Social. You posit it as "people vs governme…

Back then facebook did not exist. Hence, good times. Also, government regulations always come because people start complaining they got scammed or damaged in some way(usually due to their own ignorance), so government comes in and makes things worse for everyone. I am not saying there should be no legal framework for internet, but today it is just way too much and it stagnates progress, freedom of speech and overall…

> Back then facebook did not exist. ... so government comes in and makes things worse for everyone.

I really do not agree at all. The power consolidation that Facebook is a good example of is just not a government regulation thing at all. The opposite in fact. Government regulation being hands-off allowed the internet to become "5 giant websites that share screenshots from the other 4". And that they're largely uncountable.

The internet as it is today, with very little governance over the large websites that exist today, is terrible for the people who are online today. I stand by that. Removing regulation won't help, as the bad actors are already pretty much unregulated already.

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#574

Post by EmptyCoffeeCup »

BatteryMountain wrote: post #556
Angostura wrote: post #534

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or, just ban children from the internet, same as gun ownership for 12yo's. Fine/imprison parents. It's an interesting idea. I presume that the there would be similar laws to selling guns. So there would need to be the national ID card and checks when selling any internet-enabled device. TVs, phones, cameras etc. I as, a parent would probably need a phone safe, into which I could place my phone when I wasn't using i…

All solved problems. Phones can have passcodes, fingerprint readers, facial recognition (for parents face) to keep kids off them. Devices can have multiple user accounts, each with different purposes and applications. On my linux laptop, I have two accounts, one for work & one for personal, with distinct applications and configuration. If all else fail, each manufacturer can product a simple device that can only chat…

Lol.

One of my colleagues had Child Services round, as their daughter had told her school he was abusing her, because he confiscated her mobile (that he was paying for).

Good luck "parenting" any child in this day and age, when any seemingly minor things you think you can do as a parent, lead to that sort of outcome.

How'd you keep a kid off the internet, when they're happy to say anything to the authorities get that internet access back?

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#575

Post by bdangubic »

bigbadfeline wrote: post #419
bdangubic wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love this idea of businesses doing and selling whatever the F they want and citizens being punished based on laws in their country. not sure why US businesses even have to obey US laws?!? just punish the consumers/citizens and be done with it of course defining what “US” business is might be quite challenging, is Apple a US company?! They make nothing in the US and pay no taxes in the US … love this idea though!

> not sure why US businesses even have to obey US laws Because there are laws for US businesses over which the US government has jurisdiction. > just punish the consumers/citizens and be done with it. That happens too, when consumers break the laws that apply to them. In the case of international transactions, the law has to account for the pesky jurisdiction: It's nothing new, when travelers/consumers go through the…

> Because there are laws for US businesses over which the US government has jurisdiction.

but why we have laws at all? if the US business can do whatever the F they want in UK why not in US too?

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#576

Post by etiennebausson »

betaby wrote: post #316
layer8 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s the server’s choice to send or not to send the data. The fact that the server is receiving a request for the data in no way implies that it has to obey it. If someone places an order for a product whose distribution violates a law, the distributor is still responsible for sending it. Someone selling drugs is still responsible even if the buyer requested the drug. Someone distributing unlicensed material is still…

NO, bad analogy. A shop in Amsterdam sells shrums in Amsterdam, which is legal. User from UK buys shrums, transaction happens in Amsterdam, which is legal. User brings shrums to UK, that's illegal and the user is liable, not the shop in Amsterdam.

Except in your image, the shop is shipping his shrooms to his home in the UK.

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#577

Post by FMecha »

elAhmo wrote: post #37

> The ICO also confirmed that companies could not avoid accountability by withdrawing their services in the UK. This is quite a slippery slope. If I host a website in one country, I do not necessarily care where people access my website from. It is not like I actively provide a service to them - they just use internet (decentralised network) to access it. What if I publish a newspaper here, someone takes it where the…

This situation here is what I sort of implied when lfgss shut down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42444354

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#578

Post by m101 »

isodev wrote: post #565
m101 wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, so from the point of view of the user was there evidence of actual harm?

Well yes - so many young people in the UK have been radicalised. Was it the fault of Imgur, I don't know, probably not. Is the Online Safety Act going to solve it? Probably not. But my comment was that, in general, it's not up to Imgur, Google, Meta, Apple, etc. to have an opinion on this or any other country's policy because it's just not fair. 1 corporation should not have more say or sway than 1 citizen vote. And…

Yes, agreed. So force them to leave the market over imposing financial penalties. Financial penalties correlate with correcting poor business behaviour, but also they correlate with poor regulator incentives towards revenue over harm.

My general point is how do we ensure governments are honest wrt to the consumer. Removing financial incentives towards revenue generation for them might actually be a step in that direction.

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#579

Post by Tarsul »

vintermann wrote: post #559
Aromasin wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What one might contribute to malice can normally be attributed to ignorance. I think the political class in the UK is just completely bifurcated from the public (not as much as the Tories were, but more than I though Labour would be), such that every decision senior Labour leaders are making is lauded in progressively smaller circles they keep and they're oblivious to the reality of the situation. They just don't fee…

Malice is a strong word. I think they (because as another commenter points out, he can't do this entirely alone) primarily just don't care, and secondarily, just assume there's going to be a reward. They aren't told by some shadowy cabal there's going to be a reward, they just assume it. It's not an unreasonable assumption either. Nick Clegg did seemingly get rewarded for tanking the lib Dems. The ones lower in the p…

I think to understand Starmer is to understand that he comes from a public prosecutors position and he still thinks like it. Which is why everything that screens "justice" is highest on his agenda, this means that privacy-invading things are justified if law & order can catch more perpetrators. Also explains why he is totally helpless wrt the economy (not his forte).

Re: Imgur pulls out of UK as data watchdog threatens fine

#580

Post by Ntrails »

NL807 wrote: post #373
Aurornis wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US has always claimed jurisdiction on foreign-hosted but US-accessible content. Committing crimes remotely from another country was never a loophole to escape the laws of that country. When a country requests extradition they’re not claiming jurisdiction over another country. They’re saying that a crime was committed in their country by the person and they’re asking the foreign country for cooperation in prosec…

>They’re saying that a crime was committed in their country by the person and they’re asking the foreign country for cooperation in prosecuting that person. Seems like a loophole for arbitrary criminal accusations of a people living abroad who are not affiliated with the country making the accusations. With this kind of logic, adult website operators should be extradited to some middle-eastern country for violating t…

> unless they are conducting business directly in that country

Imgur was showing ads (business) and collecting data (business) and operating a message platform (business) in the UK. They have stopped.

This seems fine?

Post reply on HN