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

Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

irishtimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 102 posts

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#91

Post by extraduder_ire »

piltdownman wrote: post #38
hiprob wrote: post #33

Ireland is just a copy of the UK, except it's a tax haven and a trojan horse of the EU. They have the same age requirement regulation online as the UK.

Nonsense. • There is ongoing discussion in the Irish parliament and policy circles about setting a digital age of consent or minimum age (e.g. 16) for social media access. This debate is driven by concern over youth wellbeing, although no formal law has yet been enacted. https://avpassociation.com/ireland/

There is an age verification law in Ireland they might be referring to, but it only applies to companies which operate from here and not ones which simply allow Irish residents to access them.

Notably including "X international unlimited company". Not Reddit though, they technically operate from the Netherlands despite having a presence in Dublin.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#92

Post by vaadu »

idiotsecant wrote: post #36
0ckpuppet wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

who decides what is harmful? That's going to be like letting a Bible thumping Moral Majority zealot decide what's Art and what's pornography.

The courts. Just like if you sue someone for anything else. Demonstrating harm is part of the process.

The law's definition of harm is massively subjective. It will have judges who think words are violence or make the process the punishment.

This is a law that will be used to censor.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#93

Post by UncleMeat »

uyzstvqs wrote: post #8

This is a good way to regulate this. Criminalize people who abuse AI tools to cause harm. Don't try to impose censorship or mass-surveillance on AI tools. I oppose all pornography, but censoring nudity from a model both compromises the model's quality (example: SD3) and stops legitimate artistic value. Though the framing on Grok is highly duplicitous. It is against the ToS, and it's about a few abusers among millions…

And yet, the total number of abusive images created by grok dwarfs these alternative services.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#94

Post by autoexec »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #73
pjc50 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is only going to change if prosecution is brought against Meta itself, which it looks like the "recklessly" clause is intended to imply. I look forward to Meta facing criminal charges for profiting from fraud. What's the Irish equivalent of Hansard, by the way? Can we look up the debate?

What makes you think Meta will do a better job of policing this than the actual police? Granted, they might be able to crack down harder in some respects since unlike the police they don't have to worry about due process, but is that really "doing a better job" on balance?

Because it'd give companies like Meta has a strong incentive to stop profiting from it or else people start getting fined/jailed.

It also addresses the problem at (what is often) the source. Police in Ireland don't have the ability to march into Facebook's server rooms and start removing posts, so requests have to be made to Meta anyway which takes additional time. Making Facebook clean up their own mess directly would mean cutting out the middle man and all the red tape and hoops police have jump though to get them to take action.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#95

Post by hexbin010 »

ozlikethewizard wrote: post #24

The UK is considering an injunction to have Grok and potentially X banned until this issue is resolved. I'm no huge fan of state intervention, particularly my state which is notoriously over zealous, prudish, and subtly authoritarian. The sweeping changes were seeing in the UK are somewhat reminiscent of the old "First they came for the trade unionists" poem, and there certainly has been many of us speaking out again…

If the UK actually had an issue with X, the PM would delete his account

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#96

Post by roryirvine »

pessimizer wrote: post #56
allturtles wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAICT this is the actual bill: https://data.oireachtas.ie/ie/oireachtas/bill/2025/11/eng/in... Your selective quoting is extremely misleading. The first section about publishing a name/photograph only applies in the context of "for purposes of advertising products, events, political activities, merchandise, goods, or services or for purposes of fundraising, solicitation of donations, purchases of products, merchandi…

But the second paragraph doesn't have any of those specifics. It's just any algorithm ( an actual ban on forbidden math ), software, tool, technology, service, or device.

...when the primary purpose of that algorithm, software, tool, technology, service, or device is to produce an individual’s photograph, voice, or likeness i) without the individual’s prior consent [...] ii) with intent to cause harm [...]

you need to read it together with the two sub-clauses, which make it much more selective (and a lot more reasonable!)

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#97

Post by Ajedi32 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #82
Ajedi32 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are public posts we're talking about, right? Or are we saying Meta should be cracking down on content in private communication too? (And if so, isn't that the same concern I just mentioned about due process, but for privacy instead?)

If we're talking about profiting from fraud, then we're talking ads. Which are semi-public, you only see them if you fall within the targeting bucket, which definitely wouldn't include "law enforcement officer".

They profit from regular posts too, since those usually have ads next to them. But fair point.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#98

Post by idiotsecant »

vaadu wrote: post #92
idiotsecant wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The courts. Just like if you sue someone for anything else. Demonstrating harm is part of the process.

The law's definition of harm is massively subjective. It will have judges who think words are violence or make the process the punishment. This is a law that will be used to censor.

OK? Law is subjective to a degree because it has to be. We write tests and rules and then a judge figures out the specific outcome. That's how law works.

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#99

Post by ozlikethewizard »

hexbin010 wrote: post #95
ozlikethewizard wrote: post #24

The UK is considering an injunction to have Grok and potentially X banned until this issue is resolved. I'm no huge fan of state intervention, particularly my state which is notoriously over zealous, prudish, and subtly authoritarian. The sweeping changes were seeing in the UK are somewhat reminiscent of the old "First they came for the trade unionists" poem, and there certainly has been many of us speaking out again…

If the UK actually had an issue with X, the PM would delete his account

I mean the PM doesnt run his X account, but besides ofcom are investigating and supposedly X are complying

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ceqz7pyd303o

Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse

#100

Post by ozlikethewizard »

cmxch wrote: post #85
ozlikethewizard wrote: post #24

The UK is considering an injunction to have Grok and potentially X banned until this issue is resolved. I'm no huge fan of state intervention, particularly my state which is notoriously over zealous, prudish, and subtly authoritarian. The sweeping changes were seeing in the UK are somewhat reminiscent of the old "First they came for the trade unionists" poem, and there certainly has been many of us speaking out again…

Except that the UK is just laundering authoritarianism through a clause that selectively harms one organization and not all of those that have platforms with the same problem. Given the UK’s already high authoritarian tendencies towards speech codes, it would be better to have the US sanction Kier Starmer, OFCOM, and other associated parties in the Commonwealth, narrowly specified.

Pot calling kettle black. While our government blows an awful lot of hot air its incredibly easy to live a life free from state intervention here, and i live in a major city not some remote village. We dont have armed federal troops gunning people down in the streets, yet I guess.
Post reply on HN