Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.com

621–630 of 936 posts

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

#621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As shown in that same article, they also responded: >>> "Companies – wherever they're based – are not allowed to sell unsafe toys to children in the UK. And society has long protected youngsters from things like alcohol, smoking and gambling. The digital world should be no different," she said. "The UK is setting new standards for online safety. Age checks and risk assessments are cornerstones of our laws, and we'll…

> even if their citizenry can access it; it's on them to block that access if they don't like it Not even China and North Korea whine about or send fake “fines” to offshore entities. They just block their sites and move on with life.

> Not even China and North Korea whine about or send fake “fines” to offshore entities. They just block their sites and move on with life.

On the contrary, both of those are very active in going after people who operate websites they don't like from overseas, and/or their family members (who are often easier to get at). They just don't publish legal notices around it.

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

#622
post #248

Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient": > I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru... Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply gl…

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

I think its an attempt at resurgence

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

#623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter where 4Chan is incorporated if it offers a service available to other countries. If I offer a service in US I still have to respect US law, it doesn't matter that I'm based in Luxembourg or New Zealand. The same applies in reverse. E.g. many US news outlets never cared to implement gdpr and geoblocked European users from accessing their websites.

I run a site in the US and have zero intention of implementing GDPR or geoblocking anyone. If the feckless EU bureaucrats don’t want me serving Europeans, they can either block me or convince their citizens to stop requesting things from my servers. Beyond that, they can fuck off.

This is of course fine, if you intend to never travel internationally. Not defending any one, Ofcom is terrible just like 4chan.

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

#624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are the "duties" Ofcom is demanding of site owners and operators: - to conduct a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment; - to use proportionate measures to prevent individuals encountering priority illegal content; - to use proportionate systems and processes to minimise the length of time priority illegal content is present; - to swiftly take down illegal content when it becomes aware of it; -…

Guess how one gets "a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment"? You need to buy it from compliance companies which lobbied for the law in the UK, run by ex regulators. https://x.com/moo9000/status/1950866445186818209?s=20

It means you have to do your paperwork so you can’t then pretend you “didn’t know” csam can exist on your website when repeatedly pointed out.

As far as regulation goes this is pretty light and allowing. It’s more annoying than not having any laws at all sure, but zero regulation regime failed (from the point of view of powers that be).

Next on the escalation ladder is govt writing the rules for you that you either take or leave

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

#625
Whether the data is arriving on a wire, a physical hard drive, DVD, or book, doesn’t really change anything.

It is the role of customs to inspect the physical goods (i.e. physical light) that crosses the border. These are fiber connections the UK themselves chose to install. No one forced these data imports on them.

North korea and China for example have extensive infrastructure to inspect and reject imported data.

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

#626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As Venezuelan nothing angers me more than someone naming Maduro as our president, and that in some way I should feel bad about it. The guy and his government were pure evil.

Yes Maduro and his cronies are pure evil. But it's not another country business to intervene, kidnap or assassinate leaders.

It should be UNSC acting on the arrest warrant from Den Haag sending the president snatchers, but that version of world police didn’t live up to expectations, so back to big shaitan ut goes

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

#628

Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient": > I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru... Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply gl…

> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. How silly of them. Obviously, only the US jurisdiction can do that.

Speaking as a New Zealander, this is correct. Having the FBI raid Dotcom was quite the show.

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

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is easier than that: in Germany for example swastikas are forbidden. But they don't prosecute or fine web pages served in other countries. Or books for that matter. In some countries communist symbology is prohibited, yet they don't fine US web pages for having them. And don't forget the Great Firewall: China blocks pages, and get along with some webs to tune what they serve. But you can publish Tiananmen massacre…

This isn't strictly true, major magazines like Der Spiegel can use it for 'satire' or some such nonsense, it's basically at the whim of those in power as CJ Hopkins learned, his satirical use resulted in him being perversely punished, but state aligned magazines get a pass. EU doesn't believe in human rights or freedoms.

The USA doesn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to human rights.

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

#630

Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient": > I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient. Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru... Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply gl…

> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. How silly of them. Obviously, only the US jurisdiction can do that.

Good news/bad news, our current leaders are far too incompetent to successfully plan and execute a regime change operation. Bad news is they're stupid enough to try anyway and have a lot of weapons.
Post reply on HN