Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday January 20 2023, @04:09PM   Printer-friendly

UK lawmakers vote to jail tech execs who fail to protect kids online:

The United Kingdom wants to become the safest place for children to grow up online. Many UK lawmakers have argued that the only way to guarantee that future is to criminalize tech leaders whose platforms knowingly fail to protect children. Today, the UK House of Commons reached a deal to appease those lawmakers, Reuters reports, with Prime Minister Rishi Sunak's government agreeing to modify the Online Safety Bill to ensure its passage. It now appears that tech company executives found to be "deliberately" exposing children to harmful content could soon risk steep fines and jail time of up to two years.

The agreement was reached during the safety bill's remaining stages before a vote in the House of Commons. Next, it will move on to review by the House of Lords, where the BBC reports it will "face a lengthy journey." Sunak says he will revise the bill to include new terms before it reaches the House of Lords, where lawmakers will have additional opportunities to revise the wording.

Reports say that tech executives responsible for platforms hosting user-generated content would only be liable if they fail to take "proportionate measures" to prevent exposing children to harmful content, such as materials featuring child sexual abuse, child abuse, eating disorders, and self-harm. Some measures that tech companies can take to avoid jail time and fines of up to 10 percent of a company's global revenue include adding age verification, providing parental controls, and policing content.

If passed, the Online Safety Bill would make managers liable for holding tech companies to their own community guidelines, including content and age restrictions. If a breach of online safety duties is discovered, UK media regulator Ofcom would be responsible for prosecuting tech leaders who fail to respond to enforcement notices. Anyone found to be acting in good faith to police content and protect kids reportedly won't be prosecuted.

[...] "The onus for keeping young people safe online will sit squarely on the tech companies' shoulders," Donelan wrote. "You or your child will not have to change any settings or apply any filters to shield them from harmful content. Social media companies and their executives in Silicon Valley will have to build these protections into their platforms—and if they fail in their responsibilities, they will face severe legal consequences."


Original Submission

This discussion was created by janrinok (52) for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
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.
(1)
  • (Score: 2, Offtopic) by crafoo on Friday January 20 2023, @06:39PM (46 children)

    by crafoo (6639) on Friday January 20 2023, @06:39PM (#1287759)

    do what the progressive political police tell you or you go to jail. LMAO UK you aren't a real country.

    • (Score: 0, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2023, @06:51PM (45 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2023, @06:51PM (#1287762)

      Fascism achieved... When you see anyone under 18, look away before somebody accuses you, neat way to get "disappeared"...

      • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Saturday January 21 2023, @08:30AM (44 children)

        by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 21 2023, @08:30AM (#1287862) Journal

        I find both this and the GP surprising. There are numerous examples in our past discussions where people have said that nothing will change until individuals face some jail time. Fines get paid by the company and those responsible are not penalised in any way, so where is the motivation for them to change how they behave? Those companies being fined simply hand-wave it away as the cost of doing business and often pass those costs on to their customers.

        The UK has decided that jail time can be justified in some cases - and now that is wrong because, well because, well just because!!! You cannot have it both ways. If somebody is breaking the law then they should be held accountable - not the just company that employs them, but the people who knowingly are simply ignoring what the law say is acceptable and what is not.

        Do you live in countries that have no laws whatsoever? Why are those laws that you accept as being reasonable in some way different from any others?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 21 2023, @07:34PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 21 2023, @07:34PM (#1287946)

          The UK has decided that jail time can be justified in some cases - and now that is wrong because, well because, well just because!!!

          Slippery slope (mission creep) is real, babe... And the state really has no right to regulate content on the internet

        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 21 2023, @07:34PM (42 children)

          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 21 2023, @07:34PM (#1287947) Journal

          The UK has decided that jail time can be justified in some cases - and now that is wrong because, well because, well just because!!!

          We'll, are any UK government or legislative leaders going to jail for this law? Because otherwise this doesn't solve an actual problem that harms kids.

          What gets missed with terrible law like this is that democracies that work are based on separation of power. And one of the biggest is the division between government and business. It's a terrible idea to make one completely subordinate to the other especially over really bad ideas like this.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 21 2023, @08:02PM (41 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 21 2023, @08:02PM (#1287952)

            It's a terrible idea to make one completely subordinate to the other especially over really bad ideas like this.

            Government is always subordinate to business, or the money dries up and the opposition gets all the fundage, and you get a "color revolution"

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @12:10AM (39 children)

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @12:10AM (#1287972) Journal

              Government is always subordinate to business, or the money dries up and the opposition gets all the fundage, and you get a "color revolution"

              Sounds like you're butt hurt that Russia is losing. That incidentally would be a great place for a color revolution to happen.

              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:01AM (38 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:01AM (#1287977)

                You are choking on your own propaganda. "Russia" is your bogeyman, not mine. All governments are subservient to money, even the most rabid commie ones have to make deals, they are pirate capitalists just like yours

                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:32AM (37 children)

                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:32AM (#1287982) Journal

                  You are choking on your own propaganda.

                  You made a point of whining about color revolutions. That's the tell. Only one flavor of idiot does that.

                  For a glaring example of how broken that outlook is, Ukrainians are fighting awfully hard for a CIA rump state created by a "color revolution" while Russia isn't for their country. Something wrong with the narrative.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:50AM (36 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @01:50AM (#1287989)

                    I love how you whip up your own little conspiracy theories out of nothing

                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:05AM (35 children)

                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:05AM (#1287991) Journal
                      Given that you are the one who brought zero to this thread, I think your post is an acknowledgement of the bankruptcy of your position.
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:29AM (33 children)

                        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:29AM (#1287996)

                        Given that you are the one who brought zero to this thread

                        On the contrary, I merely responded to your post about who is subordinate to whom... nothing about "Russia" or anything else. You are merely throwing up smokescreens and strawmen for the sake of distraction

                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:40AM (32 children)

                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:40AM (#1288002) Journal
                          And I already explained the tell: "color revolutions". That's exclusively a Russian bit of propaganda and gives your game away.
                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:47AM (31 children)

                            by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:47AM (#1288003)

                            "color revolutions". That's exclusively a Russian bit of propaganda

                            You really are funny! Just making shit up... so you don't have to admit government subservience? You went totally off topic

                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:06AM (30 children)

                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:06AM (#1288014) Journal

                              "color revolutions". That's exclusively a Russian bit of propaganda

                              You really are funny! Just making shit up... so you don't have to admit government subservience? You went totally off topic

                              You aren't actually saying I'm wrong, I see.

                              As to the government subservience, I don't have to admit what isn't true. There are several cases where government is clearly far stronger than the alleged corporate dominance. The most obvious one is the captive revenue stream. No company has a five trillion dollar revenue stream and monopoly. The US federal government does. No company has the most powerful military in the world. The US federal government does. No company has the espionage capabilities or the real estate. Or the regulatory power.

                              Similarly, Big Oil doesn't have the legal standing to fix prices and output of oil. OPEC does.

                              Second, are the numerous times that the federal government has acted counter to powerful corporate interests without consequence, such as the repeated times that the US intelligence community has screwed over the high tech industry or how US industry has been massively set back by the EPA.

                              Third is the phenomena of the state corporation. If governments were subservient to corporations, then the state corporation would merely be an API: a means to access government hooch or a fig leaf for working around regulatory obstacles and public feels. Instead, state corporations are among the most powerful of corporations: Aramco, State Grid Corporation of China (and several other staggeringly huge state-owned corporations in China), Fannie Mae, Japan Post Bank, and Gazprom.

                              Fourth, is just the obvious. You argument has two flaws: begging the question and not comparing like to like. If we were to think without your ideological blinders of the NSA, for example, as a corporation, it would be clearly a powerful corporation that has no peer. But if we were to assume beforehand that somehow corporations dominate it (despite the utter absence of any such evidence), then after some pretzel logic we could easily come up with the conclusion we assumed was true in the first place. Begging the question is softball logic.

                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:46AM (27 children)

                                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:46AM (#1288015)

                                ... state corporations are among the most powerful of corporations...

                                "Big Oil" is OPEC. Gov intelligence (and Madison Ave) is the high tech industry, nobody up there is being "screwed". Investors are safe

                                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @06:03AM (26 children)

                                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @06:03AM (#1288022) Journal

                                  "Big Oil" is OPEC.

                                  Glossing over that it's a government organization not a private corporation organization.

                                  Gov intelligence (and Madison Ave) is the high tech industry, nobody up there is being "screwed".

                                  Of course, you're just going to deny reality.

                                  Investors are safe

                                  They won't get screwed enough to lose their investment completely. That's what "safe" means here.

                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 23 2023, @01:00AM (25 children)

                                    by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 23 2023, @01:00AM (#1288114)

                                    Glossing over that it's a government organization not a private corporation organization.

                                    Because there's no difference. You are delusional if you think there is

                                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 23 2023, @01:36AM (24 children)

                                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 23 2023, @01:36AM (#1288117) Journal

                                      Because there's no difference.

                                      I have no such trouble distinguishing. I also notice that you've never learned that OPEC started as a very successful reaction to Big Oil trying to control the Middle East oil industry.

                                      You are delusional if you think there is

                                      Your inability to see things as they are indicates to me that the delusion lies elsewhere.

                                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 23 2023, @03:48AM (23 children)

                                        by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 23 2023, @03:48AM (#1288135)

                                        So funny.. OPEC was formed by "Big Oil" to set a standard currency of trade, the petrodollar. Your politics are a silly distraction.

                                        The world is run by business in its various forms. The flag is just a logo.

                                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 23 2023, @05:30AM (22 children)

                                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 23 2023, @05:30AM (#1288140) Journal

                                          So funny.. OPEC was formed by "Big Oil" to set a standard currency of trade, the petrodollar. Your politics are a silly distraction.

                                          And you are an idiot. Big Oil lost big after OPEC was formed since they lost control of those assets, pricing power over oil, and a good portion of the supply chain.

                                          The world is run by business in its various forms.

                                          I already gave examples where that is patently false. Now you're just making up shit.

                                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 24 2023, @01:11AM (21 children)

                                            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 24 2023, @01:11AM (#1288282)

                                            I already gave examples where that is patently false.

                                            That is patently false, a lie, or do you really pretend to believe your nonsense? You did nothing of the kind. The only difference amongst them all is how they dress themselves up. It's strictly business

                                            Big Oil lost big after OPEC was formed...

                                            More bad comedy... They are the same, they "lost" nothing. The ticker tapes all confirm you are just plain wrong like always

                                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 24 2023, @05:03AM (20 children)

                                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 24 2023, @05:03AM (#1288312) Journal

                                              That is patently false, a lie, or do you really pretend to believe your nonsense?

                                              I believe my observations of reality, dimwit. Your level of rationalizing after the fact is way too common. But the rest of us don't have to believe, for example, that it's part of IBM or Microsoft's master plan to have their software products and profits undermined by the NSA. Nor that the various Big Oil firms schemed to lose their valuable assets in the Middle East in exchange for having oil priced in dollars - which it was anyway and which isn't very valuable to business when you actually think about it (currency exchange is trivial). More on that last point below.

                                              Big Oil lost big after OPEC was formed...

                                              More bad comedy... They are the same, they "lost" nothing. The ticker tapes all confirm you are just plain wrong like always

                                              They lost assets in the Middle East like exclusive, cheap access to oil fields, pipelines and refineries, and such. And what I think is particularly bone-headed about your argument is that you think that petrodollars are somehow a really big deal for business. The vast majority of businesses, even banks, don't give a flip if you value oil in petrodollars or giant stone wheels. What they care about is whether it's stable and predictable.

                                              The US Government is the enormous party that cares. Pricing oil in dollars generates a great deal of soft power for the US. It's not business cooties driving this.

                                              I find it remarkable that you made this huge case for me and still just don't get it. Sure, business has a lot of power. But the US government is what benefits from the petrodollar. There's a lot of examples like that where things happen because governments want it. But of course, you have to be paying attention in order to see them.

                                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 24 2023, @07:40PM (19 children)

                                                by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 24 2023, @07:40PM (#1288410)

                                                It's not business cooties driving this.

                                                Yes it is. The US is a business, and the business of the US is business, it's like any other enterprise. It's fun to watch you drown yourself in false nonsensical details trying to separate corp from gov't, but you will never do it, because it's impossible, they are mere facets of the worldwide conglomerate

                                                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 25 2023, @01:35AM (18 children)

                                                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 25 2023, @01:35AM (#1288468) Journal
                                                  We recently just ran across another bit of business road kill - ITAR. Some idiots decided foreign powers were scary dangerous and passed regulations that bans speech about certain technologies within earshot of foreigners. Consequences were predictable [soylentnews.org].

                                                  During those 15 years, several government agencies and industry associations analyzed and reported on the negative impact of ITAR regulations. One of the most notable of these reports was published in 2007 and led by the Air Force Research Laboratory with support from the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security. The focus of the assessment was on global marketplace competitiveness, the health of the United States space industry, and the United States export control process. Data from the report was based on a survey of 274 space companies and 202 respondents. The study concluded that ITAR was having a significant impact on United States competitiveness as companies reported that $2.35 billion of foreign sales, which equaled around 1 percent of total U.S. space revenue and 17 percent of U.S. foreign sales at the time, had been lost between 2003 to 2006 due to ITAR license processing problems such as license rejections or restrictions.10 The conclusion of the report stated, “ITAR has either directly or indirectly precipitated the global competition and is a significant impediment to the United States space industry’s ability to market to foreign buyers.”

                                                  So some government idiots burned a bunch of corporate profit. The narrative fits you well.

                                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2023, @03:13AM (17 children)

                                                    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 25 2023, @03:13AM (#1288478)

                                                    Yes, very funny, and so very superficial and shallow, and your source of information is ironic... What is happening is just the tidal ebb and flow of accounting units, there are no "losses". ITAR, like any other prohibition, is beneficial to somebody

                                                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 25 2023, @04:39AM (16 children)

                                                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 25 2023, @04:39AM (#1288490) Journal

                                                      Yes, very funny, and so very superficial and shallow

                                                      Billions of dollars in costs (over a few year period!) just because some politicians wanted to look tough on foreign spying. You keep whistling pass that graveyard.

                                                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2023, @02:58AM (15 children)

                                                        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2023, @02:58AM (#1288642)

                                                        Billions of dollars in costs

                                                        Billions more in receivables, kickbacks, subsidies, bailouts.. balance is maintained. You are proffering fairy tales

                                                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 26 2023, @03:32AM (14 children)

                                                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 26 2023, @03:32AM (#1288647) Journal

                                                          Billions more in receivables, kickbacks, subsidies, bailouts.. balance is maintained.

                                                          Once again you ignore who benefits and who controls the benefits. Government created the problems - billions of dollars in costs and lost sales for 15 years just because someone wanted to virtue signal. Now, according to you they get to dole the solutions out too. You just told me where the power really is - in government, and yet you still don't understand what you keep acknowledging post after post. They created the costs and they created the schemes to get around the costs.

                                                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2023, @08:24PM (13 children)

                                                            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 26 2023, @08:24PM (#1288782)

                                                            billions of dollars in costs...

                                                            ... for some, immense profits for others. Find where the profits go, and you will find the government's master.

                                                            You just told me where the power really is - in government...

                                                            All in service to the corps that finance them. Money drives all decisions. Money is what creates and destroy governments

                                                            You still fail to separate corp from gov't

                                                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday January 26 2023, @11:35PM (12 children)

                                                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday January 26 2023, @11:35PM (#1288820) Journal

                                                              ... for some, immense profits for others.

                                                              You're blowing smoke. Some if not all of that immense profits goes to government sources. They get reelected. They get empire building.

                                                              You just told me where the power really is - in government...

                                                              All in service to the corps that finance them. Money drives all decisions. Money is what creates and destroy governments

                                                              Right. Even your arguments betrayed you. And if we look at what really happened, the corps "that finance them" got screwed. And government got to magnanimously provide the solution to the problem they created. There's no immense profits for unnamed corporations here.

                                                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 28 2023, @05:24AM (11 children)

                                                                by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 28 2023, @05:24AM (#1289043)

                                                                the corps "that finance them" got screwed

                                                                No they didn't. If that were true, they would not be financing them today, we would have an entirely different government. You are just in denial of the symbiosis and the sameness. Money makes the world go 'round

                                                                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Saturday January 28 2023, @06:29AM (10 children)

                                                                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 28 2023, @06:29AM (#1289048) Journal

                                                                  If that were true, they would not be financing them today, we would have an entirely different government.

                                                                  CIRCULAR LOGIC ENGAGE! Those corps are so powerful that if the government really were running over them roughshod, like the US government or OPEC does right now, then those powerful corps would have changed those governments. Since they haven't done so, clearly our lying eyes are wrong here and the corps really are in charge.

                                                                  Well, reality disagreed. That's that.

                                                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 28 2023, @09:06PM (9 children)

                                                                    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 28 2023, @09:06PM (#1289122)

                                                                    Those corps are so powerful that if the government really were running over them roughshod, like the US government or OPEC does right now...

                                                                    No they don't, they have put nobody in the poorhouse, they are in full compliance, the corps have no reason to change anything, business is good, the ticker tapes belie everything you say. You're just rerunning old fairy tales in your head. Government serves and protects business, because it is a business

                                                                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 29 2023, @01:56AM (8 children)

                                                                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 29 2023, @01:56AM (#1289148) Journal

                                                                      No they don't, they have put nobody in the poorhouse, they are in full compliance, the corps have no reason to change anything, business is good, the ticker tapes belie everything you say.

                                                                      US industry is an obvious counterexample. A lot of it went bankrupt over the past half century. Ever hear of the Rust Belt? Steel and textiles went poof! The Big Three are hollow shells of their original selves. Nowadays, coal power is on the run because of green ideology. It's easy to claim corps are winning, when you ignore the many losers.

                                                                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 29 2023, @05:22AM (7 children)

                                                                        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 29 2023, @05:22AM (#1289159)

                                                                        You are delusional. The American people lost plenty. The corps lost nothing, they just moved their operations and accounts offshore.

                                                                        • (Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday January 29 2023, @07:18AM (6 children)

                                                                          by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 29 2023, @07:18AM (#1289164) Journal

                                                                          The American people lost plenty. The corps lost nothing, they just moved their operations and accounts offshore.

                                                                          Except of course, for the numerous examples I already gave which already show the error of your words above. It's not just that you are blatantly wrong, but also the profound primitive immaturity where you just insist on the same small set of statements no matter what. I've seen four year olds come up with better arguments than that and more importantly adapt to challenges and obstacles. I'm not going to give you a lollipop just because you one-note whine.

                                                                          What I think is particularly remarkable about this whole thing is that the rest of us still don't know what you think a corp is. All we know is that you are of the opinion it's something other than those powerful government agencies you refuse to acknowledge exist. A person who can't even express simple concepts or understand their readers' point of views at a basic level, isn't going to have some deep insight into the world's power structure.

                                                                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2023, @01:47AM (5 children)

                                                                            by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2023, @01:47AM (#1289227)

                                                                            You provide nothing to argue. Your "numerous examples" are nothing but superficial claptrap, purely anecdotal to local events. Everything you say has already been debunked by professionals.

                                                                            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 30 2023, @03:07AM (4 children)

                                                                              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Monday January 30 2023, @03:07AM (#1289234) Journal

                                                                              You provide nothing to argue. Your "numerous examples" are nothing but superficial claptrap, purely anecdotal to local events.

                                                                              My numerous examples merely needed to be right. I hit that: most of the largest corporations in the world are state-owned; I gave numerous cases where government acted unilaterally and often frivolously to cost corporations money (you then mumbled that ambiguous someone must be making massive profits somewhere); and you acknowledged that government gives out vast sums to corporations - that's demonstrated control of those purse strings.

                                                                              It's time to give up. You clearly haven't thought about this a bit and you can't provide even the slightest evidence for your claims.

                                                                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2023, @11:34PM (3 children)

                                                                                by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 30 2023, @11:34PM (#1289395)

                                                                                My numerous examples merely needed to be right.

                                                                                Heh, too bad they aren't, not even close. You're just wagging the dog. Globally everything remains the same, piracy with a trademark and a badge

                                                                                • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 31 2023, @03:15AM (2 children)

                                                                                  by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 31 2023, @03:15AM (#1289422) Journal

                                                                                  Heh, too bad they aren't, not even close.

                                                                                  How did I know you would make yet another zero content post?

                                                                                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31 2023, @05:13AM (1 child)

                                                                                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 31 2023, @05:13AM (#1289434)

                                                                                    Everything you know is wrong

                                                                                    • (Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday January 31 2023, @05:42AM

                                                                                      by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 31 2023, @05:42AM (#1289438) Journal
                                                                                      Cool narrative bro. But there's this relativity of wrong [upenn.edu] thing you don't get. You haven't provided a bit of evidence for anything you've claimed. I have. Rational person will side with the evidence, even if it's not perfectly right.
                              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:49AM (1 child)

                                by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 22 2023, @04:49AM (#1288016)

                                Oh, and:

                                You aren't actually saying I'm wrong, I see.

                                :-) goes without mentioning. By default you are.. except when I say you're not

                      • (Score: 2, Funny) by khallow on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:30AM

                        by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Sunday January 22 2023, @02:30AM (#1287998) Journal
                        And I notice you posted this:

                        "Russia" is your bogeyman, not mine.

                        You're not even trying to deny it. Of course, I wouldn't expect someone who complains about color revolutions (which is a purely Russian obsession - probably because they're one of the few countries that would be susceptible to such) to see Russia as a bogeyman!

            • (Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday January 25 2023, @02:21PM

              by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday January 25 2023, @02:21PM (#1288527) Journal

              Government is always subordinate to business, or the money dries up and the opposition gets all the fundage, and you get a "color revolution"

              It's been four days and numerous posts later, apparently all by the same AC. Not a single sliver of evidence in support of this argument. We just have empty accusations that I'm somehow lying or insinuations that there's something wrong with the sources I used to back my arguments with evidence.

              Nor are we ever given a reason why we should be concerned about "color revolutions" rather than the implication that you've probably been swallowing a huge amount of Russian propaganda to think that phrase is somehow relevant here.

  • (Score: 1) by Runaway1956 on Friday January 20 2023, @07:41PM (2 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Friday January 20 2023, @07:41PM (#1287780) Journal

    I like the concept of making executives criminally liable. But the devil is in the details. Can an overly enthusiastic prosecutor put someone in prison for some minor mistakes? That's no good. Going the other direction, how many loopholes are there for the exec who just doesn't give a damn what the kids see? How easy is it to shift blame to flunkies who are just doing what the exec told them to do?

    "The bill as drafted does have 'teeth' that will ensure compliance," it said, adding that the amendment created "significant legal jeopardy for firms" and would make Britain a less attractive destination for investors.

    The implication being . . . investors WANT minors to see smut and porn?

    • (Score: 2) by sfm on Friday January 20 2023, @09:12PM

      by sfm (675) on Friday January 20 2023, @09:12PM (#1287804)

      " The implication being . . . investors WANT minors to see smut and porn? "

      Probably more along the lines of making the internet more of a pain for both
      programmers and users, thus discouraging investments.

         

    • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Tuesday January 31 2023, @08:04AM

      by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday January 31 2023, @08:04AM (#1289441) Journal

      Can an overly enthusiastic prosecutor put someone in prison for some minor mistakes?

      Perhaps under the US system that is possible. The UK system is different.

  • (Score: 2) by deimios on Saturday January 21 2023, @04:57AM

    by deimios (201) Subscriber Badge on Saturday January 21 2023, @04:57AM (#1287844) Journal

    "holding tech companies to their own community guidelines" - this would be a welcome change. Not that it will happen.
    If they started enforcing all the crap that they write into guidelines they'd be left without users.
    It's no wonder they use broad definitions with many possible interpretations so they cannot be held liable for not enforcing it.

(1)