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

591–600 of 735 posts

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

#591

Post by graemep »

avianlyric wrote: post #360
jobs_throwaway wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notion that a 17 year old cannot consent to user tracking is absurd

That’s because you’re looking at this ass backwards. The law determines an age at which a person is considered capable of making legally binding agreements, like providing consent. In the UK that’s 18, with some exceptions. It would be absurd for the UK to create a special exception to allow underage youths to consent to user tracking at an age lower than the standard age for legal consent in any other context.

its more complex than that. There are many agreements you can make younger than that. Kids can, for example, buy services such as transport (e.g. the monthly bus tickets my daughter bought at 18) that are subject to legally binding agreements. They can buy things in general, on and offline. You can enter into employment contracts in general at 16, and for some limited exceptions even younger.

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

#592

Post by jeroenhd »

ta1243 wrote: post #522
jeroenhd wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Tories wrote the law for the recent changes to internet freedom in the UK. Labour supports it. Support seems to come from all sides across the political spectrum. 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-on…

They could have insisted websites include something like a TXT record saying they are "for over 18s only". Or even come up with a standard saying "this website is suitable for under 18s" under a dns record. Then the bill payer can enable or disable access for three categories * Under 18s * Over 18s * Unknown as they are the bill payer and entering into a credit agreement requires you to be over 18. If you wanted belt…

> include something like a TXT record

The people writing these laws don't know about DNS.

This isn't really relevant because what is considered "suitable for under 18s" varies wildly per country. Some countries ban rainbow flags, others will happily sell alcohol to 16-year-olds. Plus, 99.99% of websites don't care about this and will be blocked by default if you block the "unknown" category. Grandma isn't going to call their ISP and ask to unblock pornography because the American knitting forum she's on doesn't know how to add TXT records.

Technical solutions don't solve political problems.

> The majority of the big ISPs would likely block the "over 18" category by default.

Existing UK legislation already requires them to do that.

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

#593

Post by nickdothutton »

fakedang wrote: post #528
vintermann wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something that I think normal, decent people don't appreciate enough: you can join an organization without believing a word of what it stands for. It's perfectly possible to just pretend. It doesn't take a ton of resources or a big coordinated conspiracy to join and betray an organization, it just takes a bit of self-confidence, or chutzpah. One person I believe knows this, is Keir Starmer. It's very hard to explain…

If Starmer were trying to do this alone, then what are the other ministers doing? The UK is a parliamentary democracy, not a presidential government, so it's not just him, it's the rest of the Labour stooges too.

Power is very concentrated in the PM's office and with the Cabinet Secretary. Even to the point where individual ministers are relatively weak within the system. One of the common lines you can find in almost any political autobiography in the UK (last... say... 30-40 years) goes something like "I entered government eager to grasp the levers of power, but never managed to truly find them".

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

#594

Post by Bender »

ta1243 wrote: post #522
jeroenhd wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Tories wrote the law for the recent changes to internet freedom in the UK. Labour supports it. Support seems to come from all sides across the political spectrum. 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-on…

They could have insisted websites include something like a TXT record saying they are "for over 18s only". Or even come up with a standard saying "this website is suitable for under 18s" under a dns record. Then the bill payer can enable or disable access for three categories * Under 18s * Over 18s * Unknown as they are the bill payer and entering into a credit agreement requires you to be over 18. If you wanted belt…

Rather than DNS consider an existing solution that just lacks laws to require server operators to add it and web clients to look for it. That is RTA headers. [1] Adding a header is trivial and clients looking for it is an afternoon of coding from an intern. As a bonus there is no privacy leaks unlike third party adult verification sites. The onus would be on the parents to enable it. Teens will always get around it given they watch porn and pirated movies together from within G and PG rated video games and that will always be a thing but it could help small children.

[1] - https://www.rtalabel.org/index.php?content=howtofaq#single

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

#595

Post by rightbyte »

iamnothere wrote: post #354
Ray20 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why would I be subject to their laws? For the same reason that a person under British jurisdiction is subject to its laws. I mean, laws, including British ones, exist for a reason. And usually, that reason isn't "because they're British," and this reason makes sense regarding to non-residents as much as it does to residents. > Just because it's accessible globally means I now have to factor in every possible regula…

> Unfortunately, international laws and international cooperation are not yet sufficiently developed, and extradition requests for such reasons are not a common occurrence yet. Unfortunately? You’d prefer that the owner of a UK pro-LGBT site could be extradited to Uganda over some anti-gay law? Should BBC reporters be sent to the gulag for writing an unfavorable article about Russia? The fantasy world you’re imaginin…

> You’d prefer that the owner of a UK pro-LGBT site could be extradited to Uganda over some anti-gay law?

Ye I wish people did this more often. Looking at the consequences from an external view and also how things can be missused.

The usual response is some handwaiving "obviously it doesn't apply to the outgroup only to the ingroup as I define it don't be silly".

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

#596

Post by graemep »

sjw987 wrote: post #554
cs02rm0 wrote: post #408

I don't think these laws are being made with the will of the people. There's been no groundswell of opinion, no technically minded authority pushing expert opinion. The same people lobbying for the online safety act were pushing age verification tools. The government is exceptionally unpopular, even by the standards of already deeply unpopular governments in recent years. I despair of the situation in the UK. How hav…

The population has allowed this to happen. The British people always take any new limitations with the classic stiff upper lip. We could very easily become Russia (without the military and natural resources), because the population has the same say nothing, do nothing mentality. There's also always been a bit of authoritarianism in the British populace. Just look at how enthusiastic people are about banning things th…

I think we have a lack of choice.

The two main parties policies have converged, so have the older smaller parties.

The only choices we have that are any different are Reform and The Green Party, and possibly Corbyn's new party that seems busy imploding right now. Of those, Reform has some nasty people in it, and is rapidly attracting the worst of the Conservative party (look at the defecting MPs), The Greens and Your Party have some fairly nuts people and ideas too (in different ways).

I think ordinary British people are pretty decent.

> We could very easily become Russia (without the military and natural resources)

We have a much bigger economy than Russia.

> any people here care more about ripping everybody down than building them up. They live completely mediocre lives and are perfectly fine with the government nannying them.

I agree with the last bit.

People are also negative about their follow citizens. A lot of people believe the country is full of untrustowrthy "gammon". and back the government/establishment against the latter.

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

#597

Post by RobotToaster »

fakedang wrote: post #528
vintermann wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something that I think normal, decent people don't appreciate enough: you can join an organization without believing a word of what it stands for. It's perfectly possible to just pretend. It doesn't take a ton of resources or a big coordinated conspiracy to join and betray an organization, it just takes a bit of self-confidence, or chutzpah. One person I believe knows this, is Keir Starmer. It's very hard to explain…

If Starmer were trying to do this alone, then what are the other ministers doing? The UK is a parliamentary democracy, not a presidential government, so it's not just him, it's the rest of the Labour stooges too.

The central party has frequently removed left wing candidates elected by local constituency members and imposes right wing blairite candidates by diktat.

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

#598

Post by asimpleusecase »

scott_w wrote: post #535
asimpleusecase wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2025-04-28/debates/2E7... Rather than jump into the raging press coverage or as some see it raging press coverup - here is a link to debate in UK Parliament that indicates there is an issue.

[flagged]

I was providing evidence that there was an issue.

Not trying to take a side.

You can retract your f**.

Yes there is a debate now and it is very open, and there are many reports that it was not so open and people were hurt for a long time. Was that political cover up? Each can decide - but I think the debate shows there was a real issue.

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

#599

Post by tim333 »

noirscape wrote: post #42
dreamlayers wrote: post #11

How is one country able to fine businesses in other countries? What legal authority or ability do they have to do anything?

Placing the fines is pretty easy; they just go through their legal system, finish up the case and get their judgement. Russia has a giant outstanding fine against Google for example since Google is not censoring things the Kremlin doesn't like, even though Google has no corporate presence in Russia and the fine is iirc now larger than the entire world economy. (So it's an unrealistic amount designed to deter Google m…

Arresting executives is pretty extreme and not normally done. Generally countries will only go after assets and revenues in the country.

Even for local companies. I had a UK ltd company and it got some fines for not filling in the correct forms but you can just close it down still owing money, which I did, and there's no liability for the director(s).

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

#600

Post by kakacik »

invalidusernam3 wrote: post #557
dr_dshiv wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assumed Britain would not be Europe but “other”

Why would you think that? Leaving the EU was not a geographical event

Just imagined on the day of brexit whole set of islands just started drifting few hundred kms towards west (or south-west given how canary islands often feels like british overseas territory?) to underscore the leaving part.
Post reply on HN