Live data from Hacker News

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

bbc.com

821–830 of 936 posts

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

#821

Hiroshimoot must be sweating bullets

If it comes to it, the CIA will burn projec Hiroshimoot like they have done with many projects once they gain too much negative attention. 4chan has not been run by individuals since moot testified before congress and turned over control to the government to monitor and manipulate the youth.

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

#822

4chan is still a thing? I thought it died long ago. Perhaps I grew up.

4chan is still a thing? I thought it died long ago. Perhaps I grew up.

It is still there. There is a GPT that keeps it looking active and people that reply to it daily. For about 9 days after their most recent big hack it was nice and quiet. It would be a ghost town if not for the GPT using a 4chan pass and seychelles proxies. The /pol/ board is probably the most active with real humans trying to shock and awe people with fake racism and other edge-lord behavior. The real racist are on other sites. I would invite them here to prove what that really looks like but they would be ultra-shadow-banned instantly.

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

#823
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

afaik, prostitution is either legal or partially legal on the majority of Western countries. https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries...

Normally its considered legal to sell but not legal to buy. Prostitution is primarily conducted by women, and this is a way for them to still seek protection and healthcare while still technically criminalising the practice.

In most European countries it is legal to both sell and to buy. What is illegal almost everywhere is being a pimp.

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

#824
post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

You seem to be under the impression that having held an opinion and changing it means the new opinion is better by default, but that's not true.

In my mind it is. I understand both sides of the debate. I'm not switching one set of beliefs for something i believe is inferior, but i'm still open to hearing arguments why i'm wrong. Nobody has responded with anything more persuasive then "it's not my problem, why are you bothering me".

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

#825
post #160

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…

So the solution is effective parental controls. Government mandated age verification isn't parental control, and is unlikely to be very effective. That means making it possible for parents to actively block bad websites, and making that hard to circumvent.

Internet filters exist. I think we should legislate them, making it mandatory for children, or a similar solution.

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

#826

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This US regime isn't any different than the ayatollah, they also want christian sharia laws and to oppress women.

I wish you had traveled the world and would have seen whats really on the ground, instead of staying in your bubble and earlying out with a "everyone is just like me". The us is the most harmless empire that ever was. The most extreme case in the us evangelical bullshit is a daily buisness case.

How it currently is and what the people currently in power wants can be different things right?

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

#827
post #810

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which regime is trying to be changed though? The backlash to starting a war for no credible reason and tanking the world economy along with increased fuel prices could conceivably force a regime change in the USA.

The US regime is changing with the next presidential election regardless of the outcome (or lack thereof) of this war. Short of a nuclear exchange or China invading Taiwan or San Francisco, nothing is changing that.

Trump's private army taking guard outside the white house with the new military-grade defensive ballroom might change matters. Who exactly is going to force him to leave?

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

#828
post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not though. They're lofting sanctions on Russia just to help try to survive this war.

It's not the first time I see comments similar to this and I honestly can't even begin to grasp how anyone can think that the US is in any way shape or form at risk from Iran .

Well, why don't you open Bloomberg or the Financial Times to understand why. The damage being caused is potentially civilization-ending. At the very least, this is already going to be very expensive for everyone for many years.

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

#829
good. There are plenty of laws, especially around technology, that deserve a good public mocking.

At least in the US, you have 70+ year old lawmakers proposing (not even writing) laws they do not understand, passed to them by opaque groups with a obscured, albeit clear, interest.

See the latest age verification bills passed by Meta through a convoluted web of influence. Bring back the technocrats.

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

#830
post #779

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She does if you want to keep doing business there. That's the stick that's available. Either you follow their laws despite not being in their jurisdiction or you can't sell to customers in Libya. I don't like it same as you because it makes doing business on the internet complicated but it's how it works in practice.

> you can't sell to customers in Libya Why though? Libya has no jurisdiction over my business in the EU. I place no restrictions on who can purchase a subscription on my SaaS. I certainly can sell to customers in Libya. All Libya can do is ban my business, but they can only implement that ban within their own sovereign borders.

I suppose inability for you to sell and inability for customers to buy are technically different but the end result ends up being the same. If you need to access that market then they have leverage over you to force compliance with their laws.
Post reply on HN