Live data from Hacker News

UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

bbc.co.uk

91–100 of 130 posts

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“self-harm” is a broad category as well. A lot of things that people do are harmful to the self in some way. For harm to others we have the bright(er) line of consent, but for harm to oneself, who is to say?

Surely cramming french fries and soft drinks into your piehole all day is self-harm. Will they be banning McDonald's?

It's supposed to get rid of stuff that makes people uncomfortable, like knowing about the existence of people in pain who want to end it. The bright, happy marketing of McDonald's is quite the opposite! Have it your way! Yay!

Look forward to animal welfare issues being hidden in the same way too.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#92
post #43

The bill makes sites prove they are committed to removing content: * promoting or facilitating suicide * promoting self-harm Serious question - how will this affect discussions around euthanasia? Can people just not discuss that online in the UK anymore?

Why make an exception for euthanasia? People should have the right to do anything to their own bodies. The language is interesting, though. At what point does it become "promoting" or "facilitating" suicide? If I tell you I don't plan on suffering a long and painful end, is that promoting suicide? If I tell you that inert gases like nitrogen or carbon monoxide seem like a nice way to go, is that facilitating it?

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#94
post #2

Relevant, ORG warns of threat to privacy and free speech as Online Safety Bill is passed - https://www.openrightsgroup.org/press-releases/org-warns-of-... > Open Rights Group has warned that Online Safety Bill, which has been passed in parliament, will make us less secure by threatening our privacy and undermining our freedom of expression. This includes damaging the privacy and security of children and young people…

It seems that a lot of people idiotically think that what is best for the children is for them to live in a dystopia.

It's such a transparent lie. Most families in the UK with three children are in poverty. The UK punishes the child for existing, by denying it social security.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#95
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems that a lot of people idiotically think that what is best for the children is for them to live in a dystopia.

It's such a transparent lie. Most families in the UK with three children are in poverty. The UK punishes the child for existing, by denying it social security.

Just factually incorrect.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#96

I wonder if this sort of thing would lead to more people self-hosting again since it seems to be targeted at "big tech". So because Facebook, tiktok, YouTube et al start over-censoring, people just think fuck it and start hosting their own content again?

What do you mean again?

Very few people outside a small clique want or care about self-hosting anything.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#97
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because those regulations are written by people who despise regulations. They are meant to fail, so that eventually "the free market" (aka their rich friends) will get free reign, because "regulation clearly failed!".

Eh? That is definitely nor what's going on with this bill.

Indeed. This is not corporate regulation, it's social regulation.

Social authoritarianism is the driving force in English politics, and it's a big vote-winner in the tabloid- and telegraph-reading constituency. It's also the message that's easiest to flog on social media, since all you have to do is trigger outrage and critical thinking goes out of the window.

Liberality is probably more popular, but it's erased by our ghastly electoral system. (Scotland may as well whistle for a say, and I would advise them to secede.)

The tories are generally anti-worker and pro-big-business. There was a blip as the Brexit nutters seized power - brexit being anti-everything - but the tories reverted to type with Liz "Lettuce" Truss and Rishi "literally a billionaire" Sunak.

Upshot? Forget regulation that might impinge on the free market or protect workers, but prepare your anus for a sequence of civil-right-ectomies.

In fact, in my middle age, I cannot recall a home secretary that has not been more illiberal than the last. David Blunkett; John "Dracula" Howard; Theresa "culture of hostility" May; Chris "remove books from prisons" Grayling; now we're up to Suella "ship asylum-seekers to Rwanda" Braverman. These people are FUCKING CUNTS, ffs, when they were dropped at birth they should have been dropped from much higher.

I despise Westminster, the two-party system, the capture of media by capital interests, and the vegetative English electorate. I could get myself an EU passport... but where is better? Fascism is close to the surface, everywhere in the first world I look.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#98
Oh, we had something like that in Russia, they've extended the list after. Also "to protect children" initially. Once you have a convenient framework, it could be useful to remove any info the government does not want. The next step would be declaring some organisations and groups as "harmful" and removing their info.

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#99
post #30

Welcome to the goolag, comrades. As sad as it sounds. This stuff is emerging in WEF different countries almost simultaneously. Do you see the pattern here? I do. Freakin prison under disguise of safety.

Pretty much, it is a copy of the law they had in russia 10 years ago. Good to start censorship. And if some service is not "committed enough", it would have to be blocked by the providers to "protect our children/citizenships".

Re: UK Parliament passes Online Safety Bill

#100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely cramming french fries and soft drinks into your piehole all day is self-harm. Will they be banning McDonald's?

It's supposed to get rid of stuff that makes people uncomfortable, like knowing about the existence of people in pain who want to end it. The bright, happy marketing of McDonald's is quite the opposite! Have it your way! Yay! Look forward to animal welfare issues being hidden in the same way too.

While the bill is appalling, don't downplay the issue. Voluntary euthanasia is a total strawman.

"kys" is widely-understood netspeak nowadays. It means "kill yourself".

Children are cruel. Mostly because they are mentally insufficient - it takes time and mistakes to learn human values. (Although cruelty lingers into adulthood in some.)

The new(ish) problem is that, previously, ideally, bullied teens could come home and have respite from cruelty and experience love. But nowadays the bullying follows the mobile phones. And love is quiet but cruelty is vigorous.

And parents and schools don't have the equipment to deal with it - there is no parental rule or technical solution that can't be bypassed, and, if there were, it would separate teens from their peers. (At some point, children require their peers for their social development, and they need to get out from adult supervision.)

And I'm merely describing online bullying amongst children. I could go into the normalisation of throatfucking and gangbanging, or ideological grooming (which is also a problem amongst soft-headed adults such as boomers and incels).

For clarity - I don't like children, I don't have them, and this is not a problem close to my heart. I'm trying to see the other side's perspective here.

Post reply on HN