Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.

UK Government Plans New Legislation to Tame Internet's 'Wild West'

posted by chromas on Friday May 25 2018, @04:44AM   Printer-friendly
from the consequences-will-never-be-the-same dept.

MrPlow writes:

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

New laws will be introduced to tackle the internet's "wild west" that will make Britain the "safest place in the world" to be online, the culture secretary has said.

Social media companies have already taken some positive steps to protect users, but the performance of the industry overall has been mixed, according to Matt Hancock.

The government outlined proposals last year to impose an industry-wide levy on social media firms like Facebook and Twitter to fund measures to tackle online harm. It is understood the move will be subject to a further round of consultation with the sector and charities before any decision is made on pushing ahead.

A new code of practice to tackle bullying, intimidating or humiliating online content and a regular internet safety transparency report to keep tabs on online abuse could be included in new legislation.

Right, show of hands, who thinks we should move our servers to the UK and stop saying mean things to each other?

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/19/uk-government-plans-new-laws-tackle-internet-wild-west

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
UK Government Plans New Legislation to Tame Internet's 'Wild West' | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 52 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by unauthorized on Friday May 25 2018, @08:27AM (3 children)

    by unauthorized (3776) on Friday May 25 2018, @08:27AM (#683928)

    As such, if the majority of voters agree with "you pay us, otherwise we don't want to hear from you online", what grounds you have to object their decision?

    So, if the majority agree you should be executed with an oversized spiked dildo, what grounds you have to object their decision?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday May 25 2018, @08:38AM (2 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Friday May 25 2018, @08:38AM (#683931) Journal

    So, if the majority agree you should be executed with an oversized spiked dildo, what grounds you have to object their decision?

    The already existing laws of the place.
    To allow my execution with an oversized spiked dildo, they'll need to pass a law allowing this to happen. If this is initiated until all the due process is carried on (including the phase in which all the other citizens are informed), you can bet I'll take the necessary precautions.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 26 2018, @07:10AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 26 2018, @07:10AM (#684399)

      Nice cop-out. If you argue that we should respect the wishes of the majority simply because they are the wishes of the majority, then that logic should apply to any conceivable scenario, no matter how horrible.

      • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday May 26 2018, @10:26AM

        by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Saturday May 26 2018, @10:26AM (#684436) Journal

        I'm going to stay with the people which's choices, even if I don't agree, can respect. When I cannot, I'm not going to poop in their wishes, I have my life to live so I'll leave.

        --
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford