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

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

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 936 posts

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

#811

Post by Bender »

wao0uuno wrote: post #258
FridayoLeary wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm moving away from that line of thinking. We can discuss how poorly formulated this law is, and the implications for privacy of internet control bills, and the resulting eroding of our freedom of speech. It's correct to be suspicous of attempts to regulate the internet. But I'm becoming increasingly convinced that "for the sake of the children" such measures are necessary. The reality is that most kids these days h…

4chan is probably one of the least brain damaging sites kids can go to these days. It has porn and stupid memes, true. But so does google if you turn the safe search off. It's the corporate run sites and services with ai powered recommendation engines that are the most problematic. Infinite scroll sites like reddit or tiktok are what really fucks up your brain. I used to frequent 4chan as a kid back in the day when i…

Low quality porn at that. Their size limits and board post limits keep it that way. Only /gif/ and one other board even permit sound. That is hateful against the visually impaired.

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

#812

Post by speefers »

Nursie wrote: post #493
jdkee wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The police in the UK have arrested more than 12,000 citizens for online speech. https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-a...

I mean yes and no. Looking through that article, one of the examples is "The wife of a conservative politician was sentenced to 31 months in prison for what police said was an unacceptable post." But if you dig into what happened - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3wkzgpjxvo "The wife of a Conservative councillor has been jailed for 31 months after calling for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set on fire." This…

[dead]

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

#813

Post by mothballed »

pc86 wrote: post #804
wongarsu wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule of law is worse than might makes right? Or what do you perceive as the opposite of "might makes right?"

What is stopping you from breaking a given law if there is zero chance you'll be jailed or killed for doing so?

Social ostracism, loss of voting rights, loss of licensing, loss of ability to volunteer for some of your children's activities, loss of job opportunities because your name is on a docket or list of sexual offenders, higher insurance rates, loss of rental options, possible difficulty obtaining a passport or getting a visa, potentially being dropped from certain bank activities during due diligence, etc

Being jailed with some books and lots of time to work out sounds nice sometime, especially during times when home life is toddlers or baby screaming at you and waking you 24/7 and all your time is spent tending to others' needs so you have no personal agency anyway, the rest does not.

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

#815

Post by Bender »

FridayoLeary wrote: post #308
ranger_danger wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard disagree. I think the control should stay with the parents where it already is. They can decide whether or not to put protections in place or whether or not to hand them a device at all. We don't put protections on kids walking out the front door, and there's plenty of theoretical dangers there too. Let the parents educate their children.

The evidence shows they don't have sufficient control. Parents these days clearly are unequal to the task, i'm passing no judgement just observing. >We don't put protections on kids walking out the front door My view is that we most certainly ban and/or heavily discourage children from entering certain places and talking to random strangers. There are many safeguards in the real world, there is simply not enough in t…

This may be true but the laws already exist for parents and legal guardians. To me this reeks of focusing on the wrong aspects to obtain tracking of adults. If parents are not doing their job then prosecute them for it. Or fine them if money is the goal.

"~You are a bad parent. Insert $500. Brought to you by Carls Jr."

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

#816

Post by gilrain »

kulahan wrote: post #583
pwdisswordfishy wrote: post #568

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Ofcom could do it too if they had like 25 aircraft carriers and 2 of the 3 largest air forces on the planet, the best intel network, the most advanced tools, the backing of a $25T economy, the…

The cooperation of allies is more powerful than all of that, and the US is woodchipping their allies as fast as possible. Their power will disappear astonishingly quickly.

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

#817

Post by rawTruthHurts »

3rodents wrote: post #174
DevKoala wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds so gross. Why do British people tolerate that? It’s as if British people belong to their government.

The same principles apply around the world. The U.S. recently invaded a sovereign nation and abducted its democratically elected leader because that leader was ostensibly involved in shipping cocaine to the U.S. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_interventio...

Ostensibly involved in made up cocaine shipping.

https://www.salon.com/2026/01/06/department-of-justice-quiet...

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

#818

Post by Bender »

mapotofu wrote: post #30
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have children?

I do. I also grew up on 4chan because I didn’t have an involved parent, and I lived in the suburbs where finding friends to just “go outside and play” wasn’t an option. Consuming that content was genuinely hurtful and probably forever altered my psyche. I have the means and knowledge, in technical skill and life experience, to know how these things work, and protect my kids from that. Most people don’t.

Which threads affected you the most? rekt? or perhaps all threads in /pol/? What changed you and how are you different?

I admit watching and hearing the videos of children being live organ harvested was a bit rough on me. Most try to say those are fake as a coping mechanism but sadly they are very real and it occurs in every state/province of every country 24/7. It's a massive business. There are rescue orgs that try to intervene but they are almost always too late.

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

#819

Post by pc86 »

w4der wrote: post #690
Aurornis wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and they’ve put as much as 2 billion dollars into it. and yes, that’s billion, with a B. The original report that cited the $2 billion number was AI generated slop. The $2 billion number wasn't from Meta, it was from Arabella Advisors. The AI-generated report showed only about $20-30 million in lobbying efforts per year across all lobbying. Even the Show HN post was full of AI slop, claiming things like "months of…

> only about $20-30 million That is still an absurd amount of money

What's absurd is lying by two orders of magnitude and expecting people not to completely ignore everything you have to say because of that.

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

#820

Post by fluoridation »

ilovecake1984 wrote: post #781
fluoridation wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't it ridicule its own agencies to allow them to go after entities that they have no hope of policing? It's such an impotent gesture to do this.

No, because it’s a step in a process. Next steps would be blocking the site uk wide. We will likely see a future where uk puts out interpol notices on the individuals involved. If they enter a country with extradition agreements they will get extradited.

"Likely" based on nothing at all.
Post reply on HN