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

Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 110 posts

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#81

Post by janoc »

cjs_ac wrote: post #47
generalizations wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Individuals running Minecraft and Mastodon servers for their friends needn't worry. Because they're too insignificant to matter, or because they won't be covered by the law? It sounds like the former, but you seem to imply the latter.

It's a bit of both. The law states that Ofcom has to ask you for your risk assessments, and they can't ask you for those if they don't know you exist.

You do realize that you "don't exist" only until one pissed off neighbor complains to OFCOM about you after your cat has pooped on their lawn one too many times?

This is a rather incredible mindset to have, IMO. Even for me who doesn't quite subscribe to the constant Big Brother panic.

This law gives the government a huge loaded gun that they can use to blast pretty much anyone they please with. But no worries, they aren't going to use it on you because you are too unimportant?

And that still completely ignores the various collateral damages - such as if encryption is effectively outlawed because the regulatory hurdles associated with it are simply too high to bother with (just look at how many US websites rather block access from the EU instead of having to deal with GDPR compliance), then even if you aren't a target for the enforcement of this law your life could be very badly affected when your service provider gets hacked or your data get intercepted and some account of yours gets hijacked.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#82

Post by janoc »

cjs_ac wrote: post #38
LocalH wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd like to offer a different analogy. Encryption in communication is, to me, akin to the locks on the doors of your residence, on safes or other secure containers. It protects your privacy from prying eyes who want to snoop on what others are doing. The activists are claiming that the government wishes to require that all locks be unlockable by one of a range of secret "master" keys, so that they can ensure you're n…

What the government actually wants is for service providers (as in, social media companies, not ISPs) to monitor everything happening on their service to make sure that no one is coming to any serious harm. How providers do that is up to them. The government doesn't care about the technology; it's all about corporate processes, and they're going to regulate it one corporation at a time. If you're not important to be…

> How providers do that is up to them.

Sure. You are either demanding the impossible - or effectively banning encryption use because there is no other way how to comply with what the law demands, despite it ostensibly not banning anything.

So that's rather disingenuous argument, IMO. The problem is that the governments not only don't care about technology, they don't understand it either. And tend to imagine and demand things that are about as realistic as a square circle - but it is a law, we don't care how you do it, it is your problem!

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#83

Post by b800h »

intunderflow wrote: post #78
b800h wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It matters if you're in the UK and you're a tech hobbyist.

In my opinion the UK has always been against that group and others who stick out, and that's not going to change in the future. Unfortunately if you're a tech hobbyist in the UK your best option is to leave, especially if you're any good with technology. There are plenty of other countries that will treat you far better than the UK ever would.

Absolutely not true historically. We were brilliant in the early 80s, largely thanks to Mrs. Thatcher.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#84

Post by throw16180339 »

cjs_ac wrote: post #36
rovr138 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My experience with online activists' predictions of imminent dystopia is that they generally turn out to be extremely overblown. The questions in my opinion then become, Is it the law preventing these? Is it some people not yet seeing why they should do it? Are they purposefully not doing it initially to calm people? If they don’t want to be able to do it, it could be rephrased.

If you operate an online service, you don't have any actual obligations under the Online Safety Bill until Ofcom taps you on the shoulder. Considering that Ofcom is also responsible for regulating ISPs, all broadcast media, the EM spectrum, the telephone network and the Royal Mail, I don't think they'll have the resources to go after anyone but the social media giants.

Unless there's a political advantage in enforcing the rules against opposing party news sources, online forums, critics, etc. Tell me with a straight face that Boris Johnson's government wouldn't have done this given the opportunity.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#85

Post by timsneath »

b800h wrote: post #83
intunderflow wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion the UK has always been against that group and others who stick out, and that's not going to change in the future. Unfortunately if you're a tech hobbyist in the UK your best option is to leave, especially if you're any good with technology. There are plenty of other countries that will treat you far better than the UK ever would.

Absolutely not true historically. We were brilliant in the early 80s, largely thanks to Mrs. Thatcher.

Agree. She was a polarizing figure in the UK, but the newly-installed Conservative government of the early 80s certainly moved fast to respond to both the threat and the opportunity of the coming information revolution. In partnership with the BBC, they instituted the Computer Literacy Project which comprised education, television programs, subsidized computers for schools, and of course the BBC Microcomputer.

For those who want to read more, there's a great archive site here: https://clp.bbcrewind.co.uk/history and an interesting book from MIT Press (https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262034036/now-the-chips-are-dow...) which covers this period.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#86

Post by cjs_ac »

collaborative wrote: post #70
cjs_ac wrote: post #35

While I'm not a supporter of the Online Safety Bill, I do find that the opprobrium that it has inspired is consistently hyperbolic. The Online Safety Bill bans nothing . What it does do is create a regulatory framework for the Office for Communications (aka Ofcom, HM Government's regulator for the communications industry) to operate and enforce. The regulatory framework is based around risk assessments, and sets out…

You seem to know more than me. I host a fringe e2ee messaging system in the UK that I run under under an LTD. Am I affected?

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, just someone who read the bill a couple of months ago because I was checking to see whether the idea I have in the back of my head for a social media platform was still viable. Heather Burns[0] is an actual lawyer who's a leading authority on this.

The basic principle is that what people do online can have negative consequences in the real world, and the bill basically holds online service operators (such as yourself) at least partially responsible for those negative consequences. Operators need to demonstrate that they're mitigating those consequences risk assessments and policies.

Judging by your profile, you're offering e2ee to family groups, so your intended users are low-risk for sending harmful content. However, your service is freely available to anyone with the app, so it could potentially be used by terrorist organisations, gangs or CSAM sharing groups. e2ee services like this are pretty much the only service that is outright incompatible with the requirements of the bill, so I think you'll be in trouble as soon as Ofcom comes knocking, if they do so. I think the chance of them doing so is small, but that's just my personal opinion, and you will have to make your own decisions.

The family tree and calendar features look like they're low risk, and could be adequately covered by risk assessments, but the file and photo sharing features are also problematic, because (I think) they're encrypted.

You're very unfortunate to be at the intersection of the three factors that could make Ofcom care about you:

* service freely available to the public; * arbitrary user-to-user communication; and * no means of checking for harmful conduct on your service.

The only way forward that I can see for you is to make the backend a selfhost-only affair, which would make your UK-based users responsible under the bill.

[0] https://webdevlaw.uk/about/

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#87

Post by cjs_ac »

janoc wrote: post #82
cjs_ac wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the government actually wants is for service providers (as in, social media companies, not ISPs) to monitor everything happening on their service to make sure that no one is coming to any serious harm. How providers do that is up to them. The government doesn't care about the technology; it's all about corporate processes, and they're going to regulate it one corporation at a time. If you're not important to be…

> How providers do that is up to them. Sure. You are either demanding the impossible - or effectively banning encryption use because there is no other way how to comply with what the law demands, despite it ostensibly not banning anything. So that's rather disingenuous argument, IMO. The problem is that the governments not only don't care about technology, they don't understand it either. And tend to imagine and dema…

There's a subtle but crucial difference. Service providers are free to offer end-to-end encrypted chat, but have to take responsibility for anything that's transmitted through that service. This means that services like Signal and WhatsApp will have to leave the UK, but I'm free to run my own service for just myself, my friends and my family.

I would prefer the bill not to be enacted, but I can live with it.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#88

Post by IshKebab »

osigurdson wrote: post #73

Certainly the online activities that the bill is meant to address will still continue. Criminals don’t care about following the law unfortunately.

While I think this law is bonkers, "then only criminals will have guns" style arguments are terrible counterpoints.

They depend on a 5 year old's view of the world where there are "good guys" and "bad guys" and nobody is a bit in-between. They also use the same oversimplification that economists are famous for - that everyone has perfect information, acts completely rationally, has infinite motivation, etc. etc.

In the real world, criminality is a spectrum and difficulty is a real thing.

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#89

Post by candiodari »

ac2u wrote: post #69
cjs_ac wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am chiding people, not for complaining, but for misunderstanding the surrounding context. Legislation is only as powerful as those enforcing it. > And it seems Apple and others don't believe it either. Yes, Apple, Google, Microsoft, Signal, Meta, and all the other big players else who has turned up to the committee hearings will have their activities curtailed. Individuals running Minecraft and Mastodon servers for…

IMO your analysis has a massive flaw. >Legislation is only as powerful as those enforcing it. While this is generally true, it doesn't necessarily stop the provisions within the bill being used as a political weapon to wield against someone. In other words, just because it's generally not used against small fry, doesn't mean it won't be used as a club against a particular small fry that's a thorn in the side of someo…

You even forget the danger here. Like in France, where they voted in the right to let Macron and the police forces delete someone's French citizenship without judicial oversight. And that's ... kind of OK? I still don't agree with it, but yeah these people have shown that they're not going to abuse it on a large scale.

But with 10% more votes, this power will go into the hands of Le Pen ... and everyone, including Macron, knows what will happen.

(hell, I kind of suspect this is intentional on Macron's part. He wants to get re-elected by making the alternative to electing him catastrophic. It worked last time, sure, but obviously it needs to become more catastrophic if he's to be reelected)

Re: Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill

#90

Post by [deleted] »

cjs_ac wrote: post #86
collaborative wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to know more than me. I host a fringe e2ee messaging system in the UK that I run under under an LTD. Am I affected?

Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, just someone who read the bill a couple of months ago because I was checking to see whether the idea I have in the back of my head for a social media platform was still viable. Heather Burns[0] is an actual lawyer who's a leading authority on this. The basic principle is that what people do online can have negative consequences in the real world, and the bill basically holds online servi…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN