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

4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

alecmuffett.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 817 posts

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#761

Post by cdfsdsadsa »

skeezyjefferson wrote: post #117
cdfsdsadsa wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you read the paper you linked? It indicates at best a slightly positive outcome on average, with many caveats (video is worse, the younger the kid the worse the effect, removing educational content results in a negative correlation, etc). It also links to another metastudy that covers a larger age range, and indicates a negative correlation. >theyre a poor metric when regarding vocabulary size. I'm talking about…

>It indicates at best a slightly positive outcome on average Follow the science bud. The science is telling you to give them screentime >I'm talking about school reports, among other things. well yeah, you are now. > It's something I struggle with daily, this actually explains a lot

>Follow the science bud. The science is telling you to give them screentime

If I see some science that says this, I'll think about it.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#762

Post by 4ggr0 »

trallnag wrote: post #228
krapp wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no such thing as a "containment board." Nothing actually gets contained.

You want to me share all the IP addresses I've got banned on for posting stuff on /g/, /sp/, and /int/? There's definitely some level of containment going on. Be it pornography, politics, or gore.

luckily IP addresses are mapped to a specific person for life, the fash-trolls will never get around IP-blocks!

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#763

Post by 4ggr0 »

JokerDan wrote: post #220
whimsicalism wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

weird how all the despicable awful platforms are simply the ones with the least amount of editorial oversight from on high

Not sure on this one, Reddit is arguably the worst place on the internet and has a lot of oversight, is heavily curated. Part of the reason it is so bad in fact. The pendulum just swings the other way compared to X and 4chan.

> Reddit is arguably the worst place on the internet

as someone who left reddit so long ago that they don't remember it and really does not care about it, please tell me what's worse on reddit than the constant xenophobic, transphobic and general *phobic stuff on 4chan.

phobic does not even do it justice, as it just straight up advocates for whole races or genders to kill themselves (b-b-b-but, i-i-it's just a joke, kawaii).

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#764

Post by NicuCalcea »

grayhatter wrote: post #750
NicuCalcea wrote: post #747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> under the assumption that they are aware of every possible law in existence That's why Ofcom started the correspondence, to inform 4chan of laws it may not have been aware of. > Someone in the [US] can't expect to have reasonable influence over the laws in the [UK] that they're now required to follow UK companies comply with US laws all the time if they want to continue serving US audiences. I wish this wasn't the…

> Sure they do. When I go to boards.4chan.org, the server recognises my request, including where it's coming from, and returns some content. Similarly, when I buy lemonade from a company, they see my shipping address and ships the lemonade. Seems to me like it maps pretty well. How do you suspect a given IP address maps to a geographical location? Does ofcom supply a list of IP addresses based in the UK? What if it's…

Like I said, Ofcom is satisfied with IP-based geolocation implemented by other services, so those what ifs are not relevant.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#765

Post by NicuCalcea »

grayhatter wrote: post #663
NicuCalcea wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I run a lemonade stand, and a UK citizen walks up a pays a dollar for a glass of lemonade, then that doesn't give the UK jurisdiction over the lemonade stand. You are allowed to sell lemonade to British tourists. But if you're shipping lemonade to the UK, you are subject to UK lemonade regulations. That doesn't mean that the UK has jurisdiction over your business and can shut it down or anything like that, but i…

> But if you're shipping lemonade to the UK, you are subject to UK lemonade regulations. I was with you up until here. Shipping to a physical address, where if you don't specify the country name, it won't arrive. Is very different than shipping to an Internet address, which has no "reasonable" connection to a physical location. > Your choice are: follow UK regulations [give up the core gimmick of your entire site]; s…

> But I don't think it's reasonable to defend them as if these actions aren't egregious

I'm not defending the Online Safety Act, I think it's a horrible and stupid law. On the other hand, I will defend GDPR, which uses a similar legal framework of enforcement. My argument is that the UK is within its rights to implement and enforce laws as they see fit, not that the laws are good.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#766

Post by account42 »

riffraff wrote: post #644
ghusto wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are stating that companies operating in the UK They are not operating in the UK. ISPs in the UK have chosen to make content from the USA available in the uk (or more accurately, do nothing to prevent it being available)

but ISPs do not have the power to decide if something is infringing a rule or not. Thus Ofcom goes through the motions of telling 4Chan "hey I think you're not compliant" and if 4Chan says "lol, I'm not serving UK people" _then_ the UK authority will tell the ISPs to block it (and the will be on the hook if they don't).

If I open a service to pick up stuff from whatever US shop a UK customer wants and then ship it to him would I not be on the hook for the contents? I don't think customs would be impressed with the argument that I don't have the power to inspect sealed packages handed over to me.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#767

Post by account42 »

fsckboy wrote: post #716
PaulRobinson wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite. Ofcom in their reply make their point clear: "The [Online Safety] Act explicitly grants Ofcom the legal authority to regulate online safety for individuals in the United Kingdom [...]" They are stating that companies operating in the UK and providing services to UK individuals, are required to conform with UK regulations in relation to those services, under UK law. As an American business, you can choose t…

> They are stating that companies operating in the UK and providing services to UK individuals did you mean to say "companies operating in the UK and(including) companies providing services to the UK"? because the way you wrote it, it would not apply to 4chan and what is not being mentioned by most commenters is, if the law is unenforceable on a US corp, what is the chance that an individual associated with 4chan Inc…

I would expect the US not to ignore such an arrest so its really a question if going after 4chan this way is worth causing a diplomatic incident.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#768

Post by account42 »

miohtama wrote: post #485
bluGill wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Technically yes, but arresting US citizens will have implications and you can expect the us will protest via diplomatic channels. It is very unlikely UK is interested in that. Not that countries don't prosicute laws for crimes outsiden of their border, but the bar for what they will is higher.

The bar for British is arresting old ladies saying nasty things online, so practically their bar is already gone.

But they are not arresting american old ladies unless they have done something wrong while in the UK. That's the line that you can expect to cause a diplomatic shitstorm.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#769

Post by account42 »

iamacyborg wrote: post #725
immibis wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://freespeechunion.org/french-philosopher-to-challenge-...

So your counter is to show that we won’t let a blatant racist in? I think a lot of folks in the UK would consider that a good thing. Just out of genuine curiosity, what media are you consuming to have this view of the country?

Not wanting to have your people and culture erased is not racist.

Re: 4Chan Lawyer publishes Ofcom correspondence

#770

Post by account42 »

grafmax wrote: post #635
rbanffy wrote: post #631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UK government’s overwrought free speech repression and its utilization of corporate bullying to that end. If the citizens of the UK wish to express discontent, they are free to vote for a different parliament so they enact different laws. We who live outside the UK have no say on their laws.

The UK is much like the US in that democratic processes are co-opted and undermined by special interests to the point that governments engage in suppression of free speech and mass surveillance against their populations. (What’s unique to the UK is that it’s government is largely subservient to the US in the international dragnet.) We are all human and share the same human rights regardless of our nationality.

This is true but it is still ultimately up to the British people to fix. 4Chan cannot change the free speech situation in the UK but they can refuse to help the government censors because they are not under their jurisdiction.
Post reply on HN