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

721–730 of 735 posts

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

#721

Post by AlexeyBelov »

SanjayMehta wrote: post #702
scott_w wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You claimed that politicians are covering up child sex trafficking. Big claims require big evidence. If this were true, it would be the biggest scandal in British political history and everyone would know about it. Instead, you talk of the Rotherham scandal, which is not “politicians covering up/shielding from prosecution.” The fact you’re telling me “do your own research,” tells me you’re lying through your teeth be…

Do your own research.

I never liked that phrase. It's often used by crooks or people who believe putting onions under their pillow at night cures $ailment.

Also, one comment is often read by hundreds of people, so if you've already done the research and provide it to the community, countless hours are saved and duplicate work doesn't need to be performed.

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

#722

Post by Popeyes »

ehhthing wrote: post #472
Popeyes wrote: post #451

Lots of the top comments talking about how Imgur can stay out of the UK more easily and not about how Imgur can comply with the law and protect children's data. Why is it always that regulation is the problem, not the company being irresponsible with data.

> Why is it always that regulation is the problem, not the company being irresponsible with data. Can you be irresponsible with childrens' data if you don't know whether your users are children?

Have a look at the update for a look at what they are talking about.

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re...

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

#723

Post by AnthonyMouse »

squidbeak wrote: post #706
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're mistaken, the proposed system isn't centralized. The IDs only exist in the wallet. That's a password manager or authenticator app. You don't need a government to do anything to have that. > Some of these signed proofs can be disclosed using Zero Knowledge Proofs (a cryptographic means of demonstrating something without demonstrating anything else) which would actually make it harder to 'correlate' you in the…

> That's a password manager or authenticator app. You don't need a government to do anything to have that. Too reductive. Password managers and authenticators don't give you any means of passing your official data in an authoritative way. > The only way to actually prevent this is to make the data the user presents to the second service indistinguishable for all users meeting the qualification Where ZKPs are used (eg…

> Password managers and authenticators don't give you any means of passing your official data in an authoritative way.

The desire to pass "official data" from someone outside of the entity you're directly interacting with is the design flaw. Stop having that.

> Where ZKPs are used (eg for proof of age over 18) you're describing exactly what the proposal seems to expect.

I suspect that it isn't, because the only systems that actually work in terms of privacy correspondingly can't provide you with any way to identify someone if they're anonymously providing proof of age to anyone who asks, and then it would only take one person to set up a service to do that for everyone. Whereas if you can catch someone who does that you've just proven that the privacy protections aren't real.

> The system provides for an auditing service to ensure this doesn't happen without user consent.

You're suggesting that someone is going to audit something that happens inside of every private company. That's either going to be a box-checking exercise with zero effectiveness or a massively expensive ordeal that only compounds the problem by expanding access to include a set of government auditors -- or both.

The only way three people can keep a secret is if two of them are dead. If you don't want corporations to have your private information, you can't give it to them and then try to stuff the cat back into the bag. You have to prevent them from having it to begin with.

Laws requiring them to collect it are the opposite of that.

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

#724

Post by VagabundoP »

Urahandystar wrote: post #708
pyuser583 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Labour thought it was a good idea to follow Corbyn. I don’t mean that an insult or a gotcha. But it was not a well thought out plan. The part about only listening to their own think tanks is weird. Academia leans left. American conservatives are suspicious of advice not from their think-tanks, but that’s because it’s hostile territory. The Democrats treat the university/expert/consultant class as free labor. I don’t…

Its interesting that you mention Corbyn when if you look into the data Starmer got much lower voters than he did but the UK system works in strange ways. I should mention I was one of those that refused to vote for Corbyn on the allegations of anti-semitism but those later turned out to be untrue. One thing I have to ask about the democrats and a fear of Corbynism is shutting down primaries really and effective way t…

Yeah I believe there was a smear campaign - some of it based on some definite instances - Corbyn could have survived but I don't think he had the political chops. I think he probably had too much integrity to do what really needed to do to stay in power and become PM.

As your closest neighbor I think about how things could have been.

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

#725

Post by anticensor »

DarkmSparks wrote: post #304

Pretty soon the only websites accessible from the UK will be phishing sites asking for all your personal info to access the "real internet". Real smart guys making the laws there these days.

And OnlyFans which is headquartered in the UK.

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

#726

Post by teamonkey »

varispeed wrote: post #538
teamonkey wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can, it’s not blocked.

It is blocked by many ISPs because it contains adult content. https://www.privateinternetaccess.com/blog/internet-archive-...

These are optional adult filters that you can unblock. I have phones on O2 and EE and am able to access archive.org. I believe that you do need to have proven to the ISP that you are over 18. Paying by credit card counts.

The government requires that ISPs provide some opt-out adult filtering, but archive.org being blocked seems like an over-zealous third party moderation list, not government censorship.

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

#727

Post by account42 »

weavie wrote: post #531
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't understand how someone is supposed to benefit from such a thing. If I want to use some service, I'll sign up for an account with it. The only thing a centralized ID is going to do is let the service correlate me with a different account on a different service, which is exactly the thing that I don't want. How is someone supposed to benefit from a thing whose only function is to reduce the friction again…

A well implemented system would somehow allow you to use your ID to prove you have the attributes a service needs (being over 18, able to drive, no criminal records, not a communist or whatever it is they need) without providing any further information that would allow multiple services to correlate ID's against eachother.

Making confirmations of those attributes easily available will only result in more services requiring them. It's not worth the convenience for the vanishingly few cases where such a verification is actually beneficial.

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

#728

Post by account42 »

landl0rd wrote: post #667
FMecha wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ironic thing is that in the UK/imgur case: >The ICO also confirmed that companies could not avoid accountability by withdrawing their services in the UK. Wonder if it could also apply to American news sites (and Japan's 5ch/2channel, I was told they engage in this as well).

No, they claim they can't "avoid accountability" by withdrawing services in the UK. What Imgur cares about is where its staff live and work and pay taxes, which is America. The odds that America will cooperate in going after Imgur if they just block the UK go from slim to none.

More importantly, the US might let the UK go after US companies for the business they do in the UK but they sure as hell won't let the UK go after US companies that explicitly don't do business in the UK.

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

#729

Post by account42 »

riffraff wrote: post #422
bigbadfeline wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But if you're trying to make money through your website... well sorry you're doing business in those countries. Say, I'm the provider... well sorry, you (the customer) are doing business with a foreign country (mine) and you should do it in accordance with YOUR laws about YOUR country's foreign trade. That's the only way to properly conform to jurisdiction, amirite? In other words, UK has no jurisdiction over US bu…

> That's the only way to properly conform to jurisdiction, amirite? No, you're not? It's pretty obvious that if you try to, say, sell illegal drugs to my citizens, I as a country will come after you even if it's legal on your side. The internet blurred the lines because you don't "show up" in the buyer's country but there's nothing new here: both seller and buyer need to respect the law.

The only thing the internet did is allow politicians to ignore the reality: Any business over the internet involving your country still includes people under the jurisdiction of that country, whether that's delivery services, financial services, advertisers or ISPs. That's where a country can enforce its laws.

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

#730

Post by account42 »

BatteryMountain wrote: post #469
zmmmmm wrote: post #267

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…

Or, just ban children from the internet, same as gun ownership for 12yo's. Fine/imprison parents. This is a parenting problem, not a technical/business problem. Remove the supply of children and things will get better. A business cannot make laws or override laws with ToS and invent their own moral compasses - rather it is the sole responsibility of the parent on what their child gets exposed to (whether politics, po…

I don't think we need to ban kids from the Internet or punish parents that let them use it. It's enough if we make it clear that parents are responsible for what their kids do on the internet, both for harm that comes to the child and for any liabilities the child may incur there.
Post reply on HN