For or against?
Not heard of it?
Not heard of it?
Online safety bill.
- Thread starter gant
- Start date
Sponsored Links
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,544
- Reaction score
- 2,173
- Country
Against - goes too far
This was probably always destined to happen to the Internet. It started as a kind of wild west free for all and, over the intervening years, more controls have been introduced. I suspect that direction of travel will continue.
From a personal point of view, given I don't actually know most of the people I interact with e.g. on forums, I've always liked the fact I can remain anonymous. If it ever reached a stage where sites such as this were legally obliged to ask members or prospective members to verify their ID (e.g. through provision of passport and/or bank card details) I doubt I'd remain a member. Whilst I understand lots of businesses with an online presence already have my details (e.g. bank, retailers etc) for some reason providing personal details to what I class as leisure sites doesn't rest easy with me.
I would also question how securely the data is held and so on.
When it comes to things that always crop up in these debates e.g. pornography, I'm conflicted. Anybody of all ages can go on Google, go to the image search, and find all sorts of weird and wonderful stuff, some of it very questionable. I've looked at this purely for research purposes you understand! So whilst I might not fully agree with it, I can see a logic in areas like that being subject to greater controls. Restricting devices is maybe fine for younger kids, but when kids get a bit older, they can invariably find ways around such restrictions e.g. parental controls.
The wild west days were never going to continue. Although they might not come out and say it, I bet governments all over the world love the idea of ever greater control and visibility of what we're all doing online.
Link:
www.gov.uk
From a personal point of view, given I don't actually know most of the people I interact with e.g. on forums, I've always liked the fact I can remain anonymous. If it ever reached a stage where sites such as this were legally obliged to ask members or prospective members to verify their ID (e.g. through provision of passport and/or bank card details) I doubt I'd remain a member. Whilst I understand lots of businesses with an online presence already have my details (e.g. bank, retailers etc) for some reason providing personal details to what I class as leisure sites doesn't rest easy with me.
I would also question how securely the data is held and so on.
When it comes to things that always crop up in these debates e.g. pornography, I'm conflicted. Anybody of all ages can go on Google, go to the image search, and find all sorts of weird and wonderful stuff, some of it very questionable. I've looked at this purely for research purposes you understand! So whilst I might not fully agree with it, I can see a logic in areas like that being subject to greater controls. Restricting devices is maybe fine for younger kids, but when kids get a bit older, they can invariably find ways around such restrictions e.g. parental controls.
The wild west days were never going to continue. Although they might not come out and say it, I bet governments all over the world love the idea of ever greater control and visibility of what we're all doing online.
Link:
Online Safety Bill: supporting documents
Supporting documentation for legislation to establish a new regulatory framework to tackle harmful content online, and make reforms to the criminal law.
Last edited:
Sponsored Links
From the factsheet:
Platforms will also need to address in their terms of service how they will treat named categories of content which are harmful to adults, likely to include disinformation.
Who decides what 'disinformation' is?
Platforms will also need to address in their terms of service how they will treat named categories of content which are harmful to adults, likely to include disinformation.
Who decides what 'disinformation' is?
- Joined
- 22 Dec 2021
- Messages
- 2,417
- Reaction score
- 340
- Country
Mottie & dense13.
I have to agree with diy_fun_uk
And as its a global platform and a lot of the forums i'm a member / moderator are US based - they have no durastriction , and I suspect like the gambling websites - when tried to control - they just moved out of the country , same as a lot of finacial organisations moved headoffice to a european country during brexit - even though the majority of the employees stayed in UK the entity moved - not sure how that was all done - just that it was
I have no idea where a website i look after is actually hosted - is it where the company is located or the website ??? Not read the details of the proposal
as it keeps getting delayed anyway
But like GDPR , loads of things you can nolonger do - that actually can enhance customer experience , I know when i signed up for a service and was on a phone call - they asked me not to OPT out -as that meant they could not send me details of the service i just applied for !!!!!!!! that was the early days
And as its a global platform and a lot of the forums i'm a member / moderator are US based - they have no durastriction , and I suspect like the gambling websites - when tried to control - they just moved out of the country , same as a lot of finacial organisations moved headoffice to a european country during brexit - even though the majority of the employees stayed in UK the entity moved - not sure how that was all done - just that it was
I have no idea where a website i look after is actually hosted - is it where the company is located or the website ??? Not read the details of the proposal
as it keeps getting delayed anyway
But like GDPR , loads of things you can nolonger do - that actually can enhance customer experience , I know when i signed up for a service and was on a phone call - they asked me not to OPT out -as that meant they could not send me details of the service i just applied for !!!!!!!! that was the early days
This sites hosted via Amazon Web Services (AWS)
For me, when it comes to sites I access purely for leisure (like this one) I don't particularly want the site owners to have my full name, address etc.
Perhaps they can join with the Police's hate crime division, who are equally inundated with dealing with important crime on Twitter and FB
You agree that more police are needed?
The growth in hate crime, especially online, suggests a need for a special kind of police, just as a special kind of police is required for other types of crime.
An article in The Atlantic 'Is This the Beginning of the End of the Internet' talks about a recent ruling of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal's in Netchoice vs Paxton - the Court upheld a Texas law stating that online platforms with more than 50m monthly active users in the US no longer have First Amendment rights regarding their editorial decisions. In other words, the law tells Facebook, for instance, that it can't moderate content on its website.
I've had plenty of argument with American friends about their precious right to Free Speech, especially when laws regarding Hate Speech were passed in the UK, but this decision by the Fifth Circuit CoA may well go all the way to the Supreme Court where a decision on this matter would affect the way everyone* uses the internet.
I think we can have no doubts about the state of the internet if everyone's speech became unrestricted.
*except China...
I've had plenty of argument with American friends about their precious right to Free Speech, especially when laws regarding Hate Speech were passed in the UK, but this decision by the Fifth Circuit CoA may well go all the way to the Supreme Court where a decision on this matter would affect the way everyone* uses the internet.
I think we can have no doubts about the state of the internet if everyone's speech became unrestricted.
*except China...
The dangers of removing or reducing regulation can produce some undesirable and unpredictable results.I think we can have no doubts about the state of the internet if everyone's speech became unrestricted.
The bill is jut a reaction really and will have problems doing what it says it will do just down to how the globals work. Simply put some one posts something and it is distributed to various server farms all over the world. Can the companies realistically check every post?
All they could do really is add a report link and even then some one has to make a decision. That leaves the question of who.
I've used the internet for rather a long time. B'ham was the 2nd place to get it in the UK. Let's just say the changes have been interesting but maybe the worst one is commercialisation. The more recent influencing changes also has it's interesting aspects as well.
There seems to be another legal aspect as well. A publisher has to be careful about what they say. Newspapers usually get around it by reporting that they are quoting from some other source's opinion. The internet end of things argue that they are not publishers. I can see that the companies aren't in some ways but the posters are. ISP's do have details of the people they serve.
All they could do really is add a report link and even then some one has to make a decision. That leaves the question of who.
I've used the internet for rather a long time. B'ham was the 2nd place to get it in the UK. Let's just say the changes have been interesting but maybe the worst one is commercialisation. The more recent influencing changes also has it's interesting aspects as well.There seems to be another legal aspect as well. A publisher has to be careful about what they say. Newspapers usually get around it by reporting that they are quoting from some other source's opinion. The internet end of things argue that they are not publishers. I can see that the companies aren't in some ways but the posters are. ISP's do have details of the people they serve.
Sponsored Links
