> 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 the law is supposed to protect.
I expect that the overlap between "honestly care for childrens' quality of life" and "understands the ramifictions of this bill to any significant extent" is near zero. (Though there are doubtless many people who have inaccurately convinced themselves they are members of both classes.)
"For the children" is how they sell removal of freedoms and justification for putting the general population under surveillance. The managers know what's best for all of us!
"Think of the children", except the population increasingly doesn't have any. It's nice then to imagine that approach would stop working at some point in the future, but probably not.
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.
This is genuinely terrible for people living in the UK who care about their privacy and freedom on the internet.
I do wonder whether this bill was caused by sincere misunderstanding of how tech works on the part of the legislators or, more cynically, a government agenda to crush privacy on the internet. Either way, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
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!".
Now this is a headline I didn't want to see pass. I wonder if Apple will do what they said and pull iMessage and FaceTime. Same with Meta and WhatsApp.
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?
I wonder how it would play with the CanadianBroadcastCorp. Where assisted suicide is legal. Would accessing CBC require drivers license verification?
Also what form of government ID would be required? I have mates who have really crappy passports from small 2nd/3rd world countries, and that's all they have. Would they be able to visit CBC?
Yes but not in the way you think. You will be prohibited from opposing it. It will be "self-harm" to live and it isn't suicide when the government kills you to save the NHS money.
Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquillity of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke.
But in the spirit of commemoration, whereby those important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, are celebrated with a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the fifth, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. There are, of course, those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way.
Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.
How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly, there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. They were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic, you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, I sought to end that silence.
Last night, I destroyed the Old Bailey to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago, a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words; they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you, then I would suggest that you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me, one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot." - V
- "How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly, there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. They were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense."
Timeless observations. The most powerful force controlling a democracy is, simply, us. And the root cause of all the most damaging policy errors is us, with our banal inadequacies: our stupidities, our fears and angers, our irrationality.
This truth is entirely vanished from modern democratic narratives, because no one wants to hear it, and no one benefits from advancing it. Democracy means you're in power; civics means you're responsible.
Welcome to the goolag, comrades. As sad as it sounds. This stuff is emerging in <s>WEF</s>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".
Facebook, Twitter et al have entire office floors to deal with legal threats.
The UK police love to go after "soft" targets and there's no-one softer than someone who's life can immediately be ruined by arresting them and thus getting them fired due to missing work.
Edit: I now see you mean "host their own personal content" but the point still stands.
Although you do have a point, the freighted language isn't fair.
Big white-collar crime is a different, and much more resource-intensive, set of challenges to investigate and prosecute. As such, it is not a constabulary remit - it needs bodies such as the SFO, which depend on extensive budgets to be effective. Blame the government for not prosecuting the big white-collar fish.
I'm sure it grinds every copper's gears that the bastards get away with it.
Last year some small single dev company got sued and dude lost his house, because he used google fonts, and didn't realise it was against GDPR. This is my worry really.
What I want, is a way to tell my website that the user is sitting in these places. I want to be able to know the user is there, so I can geo-fence them off.
Most ISP won't even let you do it anyway. I know the players in Canada don't and I think Australia too.
So even if you had the inclination to do it, not going to happen in our current world.
Yes, because most people have like 30 contacts in their IM roster. Your phone, your home router, maybe even your smart fridge would be able to tackle this scale.
Something like Twitter cannot be as easily replicated, but it's never been about privacy ad encryption.
Another thing that's hard to replicate is a global namespace. Federated namespaces (see email. mastodon. matrix) work acceptably well though.
Readit News
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 the law is supposed to protect.
Also other noteworthy discussions on HN,
Your compliance obligations under the UK’s Online Safety Bill (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32055756) (July 2022 | 462 comments)
Signal says it'll shut down in UK if Online Safety Bill approved (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34936127) (February 2023 | 302 comments)
The Online Safety Bill: An attack on encryption (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34727082) (February 2023 | 179 comments)
Ask HN: Online activities to be made impossible by the UK Online Safety Bill (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36919175) (July 2023 | 105 comments)
Google's Statement on the UK Online Safety Bill [pdf] (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37443634) (September 2023 | 47 comments)
UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37408196) (September 2023 | 302 comments)
I do wonder whether this bill was caused by sincere misunderstanding of how tech works on the part of the legislators or, more cynically, a government agenda to crush privacy on the internet. Either way, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Instead it will require companies to take action ... as a last resort develop technology to scan encrypted messages...
Tech companies have said scanning messages and end-to-end encryption are fundamentally incompatible."
Any questions? You can't make a bill for what is impossible, and this debate is going on for how many years now? It is agenda.
You know you are screwed when someone repeats apparent lies over and over...
Water? Energy? Everything else?
Man, this is going to be fantastic ...
The UK has an problem with regulation ... amongst everything else in this sh!thole.
I thought they dropped that part of the bill, I may be mistaken though.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/09/today-uk-parliament-un...
* 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?
For harm to others we have the bright(er) line of consent, but for harm to oneself, who is to say?
Also what form of government ID would be required? I have mates who have really crappy passports from small 2nd/3rd world countries, and that's all they have. Would they be able to visit CBC?
Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquillity of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke.
But in the spirit of commemoration, whereby those important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, are celebrated with a nice holiday, I thought we could mark this November the fifth, a day that is sadly no longer remembered, by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat. There are, of course, those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way.
Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission.
How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well, certainly, there are those who are more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable. But again, truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. They were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic, you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night, I sought to end that silence.
Last night, I destroyed the Old Bailey to remind this country of what it has forgotten. More than four hundred years ago, a great citizen wished to embed the fifth of November forever in our memory. His hope was to remind the world that fairness, justice, and freedom are more than words; they are perspectives. So if you've seen nothing, if the crimes of this government remain unknown to you, then I would suggest that you allow the fifth of November to pass unmarked. But if you see what I see, if you feel as I feel, and if you would seek as I seek, then I ask you to stand beside me, one year from tonight, outside the gates of Parliament, and together we shall give them a fifth of November that shall never, ever be forgot." - V
Timeless observations. The most powerful force controlling a democracy is, simply, us. And the root cause of all the most damaging policy errors is us, with our banal inadequacies: our stupidities, our fears and angers, our irrationality.
This truth is entirely vanished from modern democratic narratives, because no one wants to hear it, and no one benefits from advancing it. Democracy means you're in power; civics means you're responsible.
The Jacobins were, exclusively, Catholic landed gentry.
Lopping off Chuckie's head set the stage for Britain's golden age, which goes to show: Tories have always been stupid as well as evil.
So because Facebook, tiktok, YouTube et al start over-censoring, people just think fuck it and start hosting their own content again?
The UK police love to go after "soft" targets and there's no-one softer than someone who's life can immediately be ruined by arresting them and thus getting them fired due to missing work.
Edit: I now see you mean "host their own personal content" but the point still stands.
Big white-collar crime is a different, and much more resource-intensive, set of challenges to investigate and prosecute. As such, it is not a constabulary remit - it needs bodies such as the SFO, which depend on extensive budgets to be effective. Blame the government for not prosecuting the big white-collar fish.
I'm sure it grinds every copper's gears that the bastards get away with it.
Very few people outside a small clique want or care about self-hosting anything.
Something like Twitter cannot be as easily replicated, but it's never been about privacy ad encryption.
Another thing that's hard to replicate is a global namespace. Federated namespaces (see email. mastodon. matrix) work acceptably well though.