[HN Gopher] UK version of "Online Harms Bill" wants to prefilter...
___________________________________________________________________
UK version of "Online Harms Bill" wants to prefilter content
without due process
Author : StuntPope
Score : 149 points
Date : 2023-07-26 17:10 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (easydns.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (easydns.com)
| somecompanyguy wrote:
| [flagged]
| stuckinhell wrote:
| I don't like this at all, especially in a world where we are
| finding out so many top scientists lied or fabricated data in
| their research. The PRESIDENT of Stanford just resigned!
|
| It's clear we cannot trust the institutional powers to self-
| regulate and do the right thing.
| kneebonian wrote:
| [flagged]
| 128bytes wrote:
| "They described the strange feeling of peace that came over
| them when they handled the Book of Science, the pleasure that
| it was to repeat certain statistics out of it, however little
| meaning those statistics conveyed to the outward ear, the
| ecstasy of touching an instrument, however unimportant, or of
| hearing new Scientific revelation, however superflous.
|
| "The Science," they exclaimed, "feeds us and protects us and
| elevates us; with it we speak to one another, with it we
| teach one another, in it is the totality of being. The
| Science is the friend of rationality and the enemy of
| superstition: the Science is omniscient, unquestioned;
| blessed is the Science." And before long this allocution was
| printed on the first page of the Book, and in subsequent
| editions the ritual swelled into a complicated system of
| praise and prayer." - A parody of The Machine Stops
| [deleted]
| monksy wrote:
| That was the politicians who did that. They even
| disincentivized valid research and policies that would help.
| (I.e. testing strategies, masking, quality of masks, programs
| to get masks out, etc)
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| Yep, this will get downvoted, but during covid, A LOT of stuff
| got censored as "misinformation", that later got proved to be
| true by the same authorities and scientists (expert groups,
| etc.), without any apology or even acknowledgement of "the
| past" and "the current truth". And I'm not talking about the 5g
| conspiracy theories, we started all this with "masks don't
| help".
| didibus wrote:
| I've seen people say this, but I've not actually observed
| that at all.
|
| What got censored exactly?
|
| Personally I feel I got to know everything in proper time as
| knowledge was being formed and refined.
|
| I think it might be because I know how to read papers and
| understand nuances? And the average person take policies as
| the same as high confidence proven scientific conclusions, as
| opposed to the best guess of the time by some policymaker
| that needs to make a decision without the full information?
| StuntPope wrote:
| > I've seen people say this, but I've not actually observed
| that at all. > What got censored exactly?
|
| Zerohedge was kicked off Twitter for suggesting that the
| Wuhan Institute of Virology was a likely candidate for the
| origin.
|
| We're seeing that Fauci & Ecohealth co-ordinated the paper
| to "debunk" the lab leak theory and now the lab leak is
| looking to be the most likely culprit (it is not without
| precedent, the 1977 Russian Flu turned out to be a lab leak
| from gain-on-function research).
|
| Ivermectin, was another. Complete with "horse de-wormer"
| smears and deplatforming campaigns all over the place.
|
| If you don't know of any instances where this has happened,
| you either did a masterful job tuning it all out, or still
| believe 99% of the b/s.
| esquivalience wrote:
| Can you please post a source for the ivermectin point? If
| I understand your comment you're suggesting that it is
| effective against covid, but I may be misunderstanding.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/30/world/coronavirus-who-
| mas...
|
| > "There is no specific evidence to suggest that the
| wearing of masks by the mass population has any potential
| benefit. In fact, there's some evidence to suggest the
| opposite in the misuse of wearing a mask properly or
| fitting it properly," Dr. Mike Ryan, executive director of
| the WHO health emergencies program, said at a media
| briefing in Geneva, Switzerland, on Monday.
|
| This was a clear recommendation to not wear masks (unless
| you're caring for sick people), and overnight it turned to
| mandatory masks. This is not some random person somewhere,
| but someone who has to say stuff directly to "average
| people".
| wesleywt wrote:
| You are committing massive hasty generalizations.
| onion2k wrote:
| _A LOT of stuff got censored as "misinformation", that later
| got proved to be true_
|
| What that means is that people were sharing unproven things.
| _Some_ of the things were later proven, and some weren 't.
| Censoring everything until it's actually proven science is
| not a bad strategy when people are willing to _inject
| themselves with bleach_ because they 're so desperate for a
| cure.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| But gravity is not proven either, and a bunch of physics is
| just theories still.
|
| We don't censor those.
|
| Why should we censor lab leak theories? It was a valid
| theory even then and still is. I mean... to go to extreme,
| why should we censor reptilian 5g zuckerberg-is-a-robot
| theories at all, why censorship?
|
| People were spraying their houses with vinegar before too,
| and we didn't censor that, even if it wasn't proven either.
|
| On the other hand, we had real world data that vaccinated
| people "don't get sick", and we didn't censor that either:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnb
| c...
|
| > And we have -- we can kind of almost see the end. We`re
| vaccinating so very fast, our data from the CDC today
| suggests, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the
| virus, don`t get sick, and that it`s not just in the
| clinical trials but it`s also in real world data.
| mitthrowaway2 wrote:
| That _really_ shook my faith in institutions, and I had a lot
| more faith in institutions than most people do.
|
| Then we saw it again, with "inflation is transitory, we
| aren't even thinking about thinking about hiking interest
| rates...".
| hellojesus wrote:
| The inflation is translatory was a known lie by political
| nonpolitical entities though. They can't say the truth: the
| country is bankrupt and the only way to press the brakes is
| to jack rates to 30-70%, which will thusly destroy the
| economy. The other option is ww3 or debt default, in which
| case the US loses reserve status and all US living quality
| plummets to the dark ages.
| kneebonian wrote:
| "Good evening, London. 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."
| callalex wrote:
| You used quotation marks, but provide no attribution.
| KineticLensman wrote:
| It's from V for Vendetta [0]
|
| [0] https://www.quotes.net/mquote/131160
| ExoticPearTree wrote:
| So the UK finally wants to create the Ministry of Truth?
| LightBug1 wrote:
| Not sure why this is flagged.
| dang wrote:
| Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here.
| ExoticPearTree wrote:
| Maybe unsubstantive, but it's the closest analogy everyone
| can understand.
| dang wrote:
| If everyone can understand something, then repeating it
| won't lead any place new. We're trying to optimize for
| curiosity [1], so we're trying to avoid repetition [2].
|
| That goes double for the repetitive+indignant sort of
| internet comment--those almost always lead to shallow
| conversation.
|
| [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=tru
| e&sor...
|
| [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=fal
| se&so...
| classified wrote:
| The self-anointed saviors of mankind know best, and they can do
| no wrong.
| dang wrote:
| Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments here.
| owlbite wrote:
| UK MPs: "We're very worried about people debunked due to their
| repulsive beliefs". Also UK MPs: "We believe ISPs should be able
| to deinternet people's views based an arbitrary computer models
| of dubious accuracy."
|
| How long before these two views are exposed as contradictory? (Or
| do they just resolve that internally as "we only support
| dewhatevering people we don't like"?)
| vixen99 wrote:
| I think the MP meant 'debanked'.
| hayd wrote:
| Ah ha, but you can't have "repulsive beliefs" if we suppress
| them... like they do in much of Europe!
|
| It seemed like most MPs weren't actually bothered about
| debanking, it's been going on for several years now and
| _surely_ many of those people affected wrote /spoke to their
| local MP. It's required someone like Farage to kick up a fuss
| about it. Hopefully we'll see proper legislation to prevent it
| going forward but I won't hold my breath.
|
| The next government is going to be even more all-in on the
| authoritarian/blasphemy-laws nonsense.
| wesleywt wrote:
| The Great Firewall of China will become the norm of the internet
| not the outlier.
| happytiger wrote:
| Do they not realize that they will kill democracy in the process?
| BrotherBisquick wrote:
| An exhaustive list of leftists who care about democracy:
| RobotToaster wrote:
| I'm sure the oligarchs in charge are fully aware.
| gorwell wrote:
| No doubt they will sell it by saying the opposite.
|
| "Online harms are extremely dangerous to our democracy"
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fzYj11qWb-M
| Rexogamer wrote:
| considering their other actions (including requiring voter ID
| despite very few cases of voter fraud in the last election - a
| move which just so happens to favour older voters (who are more
| likely to vote for the tories) and which harms younger voters
| (who are more likely to go elsewhere)), I think they do
| makingstuffs wrote:
| It's a feature, not a bug - Them, probably
| rosmax_1337 wrote:
| "They" don't believe in democracy anyway, they like to make
| people think they believe in democracy, but really they're like
| any other despots around the world.
| mc32 wrote:
| It seems that "government" the noun, tends toward autocracy and
| that democracy is a curious detour that is fun while it
| perseveres but it looks like many governments are tending less
| democratic. We're not seeing this only in despotic systems or
| right wing or left wing, all of them are becoming more
| authoritarian. France, Canada, the US as well as the usual
| suspects.
| treeman79 wrote:
| [flagged]
| Rexogamer wrote:
| we are currently under a right wing government whose media
| friends smeared their only real opposition as... a dangerous
| communist who would destroy the country. their main
| opposition now are copying more and more of their policies.
|
| they are not, in fact, communists and are pretty far away
| from ever being left of centre.
| PKop wrote:
| A Right wing government would stop mass immigration and not
| promote leftist social values as current UK
| government/establishment does. Far away from right wing,
| certainly not nationalist in any way.
| Rexogamer wrote:
| are you trying to suggest that the tories are "promoting
| leftist social values"? considering their mediocre at
| best treatment of minority groups, [citation needed]
|
| also one of their most controversial bills would lead to
| "illegal" immigrants being sent to Rwanda
|
| skewed American perspectives aside, I genuinely fail to
| see how anyone would interpret them as anything left of
| centre-right
| blipvert wrote:
| > skewed American perspectives aside, I genuinely fail to
| see how anyone would interpret them as anything left of
| centre-right
|
| And this is their prestige. At least the one-nation
| Tories can see through it, even though they were expelled
| in the 2019 putsch.
| datadeft wrote:
| I think this is tribal view of the word. Reality is much
| more complex than left vs right. The political elite is
| pushing this false dichotomy too.
| blippitybleep wrote:
| I'm not sure why a conservative government would want to
| implement Marxism or where Marx mentioned censorship of this
| sort.
| blipvert wrote:
| Didn't you know? Marx was a hedge fund banker too!
|
| </s>, obviously...
| blipvert wrote:
| Oh, pity the (faux?) naive child who has been brought up on a
| diet of McCarthyism.
|
| You're so scared of reds under the bed that you can't see
| what the (increasingly far-)right wing are doing to you.
| datadeft wrote:
| Based on what? Where is extreme right wing you are talking
| about?
| blipvert wrote:
| Wake up. Quick.
|
| https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/suella-
| braver...
| cycomanic wrote:
| Pretty much everywhere? The tories are shifting further
| right. In the US the republicans have been on a path
| straight to totalitarism (some of their members are
| calling to forbid Democrats from voting when they move
| states), Israel, many European countries have growing far
| right parties who are typically just a thin layer of
| legitimacy on top of far right ideology (take the AFD in
| Germany or the FN in France who have significant contacts
| with Neonazi activists).
| mc32 wrote:
| Communism and Fascism are solely vehicles to and end. Those
| who govern desire more control no matter what system gets
| them there. "Whatever works!"
| blipvert wrote:
| Precisely. And if you can convince your rabid supporters
| that you aren't "the other lot" they will let you do
| unspeakable things.
| PKop wrote:
| A right wing, especially a "far" right wing, government
| would have mass deportations, stop immigration, promote
| nationalist ideology, and not allow let alone themselves
| push things such as pride and other left wing social
| values.
|
| There doesn't exist any single example of this in the
| Anglo-sphere, nor the UK itself.
| blipvert wrote:
| You are familiar with the Rwanda Plan, I take it?
|
| And maybe the Madagascar Plan?
| PKop wrote:
| Yea a faction tried, but on balance of power were denied,
| and the overall effect was still a net increase of
| immigration.
|
| "net migration to the UK rose to a record high of around
| 504,000 in the year to June 2022, driven by an increase
| in the number of non-European Union nationals.[13] The
| government registered 45,755 people arriving by small
| boats in 2022, 60% higher than in 2021, according to the
| Home Office. That has led to a record backlog of 161,000
| asylum cases."
|
| A right wing government in rule would not allow this. It
| happened and continues to, therefore a right wing
| government is not in power.
|
| >And maybe the Madagascar Plan?
|
| Right now. Obviously they have been in power in the past.
| If net foreign migration is positive by large margin,
| then clearly they are not effectively in power now. If
| the courts overrule any marginal plans to change this
| (which themselves don't affect the overall numbers
| materially) then they are not in power now.
| blipvert wrote:
| The overall net numbers are intentional. If they wanted
| to decrease them they could do so by dealing with the
| backlog of claims and providing safe routes.
|
| But it's the divisive propaganda that they want. Sod the
| humans.
| PKop wrote:
| If you want to define right wing rule as only "talking
| about doing right wing things" then ok. I define it as
| doing them and achieving them, which would amount to
| actually stopping immigration and starting deportations
| to equal net negative immigration. So as to your point
| exactly, the net positive numbers are intentional, or are
| not stoppable for whatever inconsequential right wing
| elements exist as they don't have the power to achieve
| right wing outcomes.
|
| The sum-total of political power when you mix all
| factions together, and judge things by results of what is
| happening, not only what is said, then constant positive
| net foreign migration and an overall consensus of this
| continuing doesn't support right wing government rule.
|
| >do so by dealing with the backlog, providing safe
| routes.
|
| If you mean safe route back to their country of origin,
| that is certainly a possible option that a right wing
| government might pursue. Since that isn't happening,
| there isn't a true right wing government in power and
| hasn't been for some time (have to include the courts
| here too).
|
| There are factions that maybe talk a good game, and don't
| move the needle on policy or even consensus rhetoric.
| That's not a point in favor of right wing politics being
| in power.
| ketralnis wrote:
| Communism, Marxism, Fascism, and other "everything I don't
| like is ____" names aren't the same thing as totalitarianism.
|
| You can tell because this is a right-wing government trying
| to do this while Communism and Marxism are left-wing
| ideologies.
| christoph wrote:
| I think they absolutely do. The more serious question is, do
| the general public realise?
| akomtu wrote:
| It's "Online Harms (to the UK royalty) Bill". The lords and dukes
| are very worried.
| toyg wrote:
| Lords and dukes don't give a monkey - in fact, the House of
| Lords has largely been a progressive organ over the last 20
| years. Turns out that, once they're given a sinecure, political
| hacks and flunkeys often rediscover their ethics and morals.
|
| This is more the "Online Harm To Tory Propaganda And Election
| Chances Bill".
| varispeed wrote:
| > This is more the "Online Harm To Tory Propaganda And
| Election Chances Bill".
|
| Hey, let's not forget that Labour also supports this bill.
| toyg wrote:
| Yeah but one of those parties can drop it, and they won't.
| Jigsy wrote:
| Sadly, to paraphrase a now deceased UK judge: "Due process is
| whatever the government of the day says it is."
| mikece wrote:
| Aside from "the dark web," are there any efforts to create an
| impossible-to-censor parallel version or subset of the internet?
| Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
| No because people with enough influence will terminate your
| hosting, domain name, isp, bank account, or just get your site
| blocked. See kiwi farms, nigel farage, and the wikipedia-iwf
| dust-up.
|
| Mastodon and the fediverse are close, maybe, but many instances
| refuse to "speak" to one another because of their users.
| mc32 wrote:
| Exactly. Last election cycle we saw all sorts of excuses to
| deplatform certain communities and viewpoints, some very
| disagreeable but some just had a different point of view on
| some health related topics.
| bonzini wrote:
| Perhaps you should find better examples than kiwifarms to get
| your point across?
| Pannoniae wrote:
| It is a very good example though.... It's a horrendous
| site, but freedom of speech doesn't only apply to people I
| like or accept. Censorship always starts with the weakest
| and most hated target, then moves onto the less
| controversial ones.
| Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote:
| Wikileaks perhaps. They got cut off by mastercard but I
| don't recall hearing them lose their hosting or domain
| name. Although I wonder if you'd be one to consider them
| "russian disinformation" and therefore deserving of being
| shut down. The pirate bay? Lost many domain names at
| various times and probably hosting too. Are they also
| deserving of it due the the scale of the copyright
| infringement they help? Personally I think piracy is a
| moral imperative these days.
|
| Non-controversial sites do not get shut down.
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| You can rarely solve a social problem by technical means alone.
| Get involved.
|
| The reason the government is full of decrepit dotards,
| blustering fanatics, and greedy criminals is because nobody
| else seems to want to participate anymore.
| varispeed wrote:
| Who wants to hide whatever, can already assume the current
| methods of communications are compromised.
|
| I think it will be a cat and mouse game, where people will be
| finding more and more creative ways of exchanging keys and
| disguising encrypted messages in seemingly normal conversations
| or images.
|
| It will be again something that won't affect serious criminals,
| but will give government an insight into who is committing
| wrong think of the given year (as these things change over
| time).
|
| I can also imagine, given the wages in the UK are pretty bad,
| especially for engineers, many of those working on the
| necessary infrastructure would be tempted by the ideas of
| insider trading, leaking company and private secrets to the
| highest bidder and so on.
|
| It feels like this government just doesn't give a flying toss
| and they just want take a dip into people private lives and see
| what they can get out of it.
|
| What is even more worrying is that the opposition also supports
| this bill.
| StuntPope wrote:
| Nostr and SimpleX look promising.
| IshKebab wrote:
| There's Freenet but these sorts of projects generally have
| issues because the biggest segments of society that want
| impossible-to-censor are also the worst.
| kypro wrote:
| Wasn't this somewhat true of VPNs say 10 years ago?
|
| My perception back then was that people who used VPNs were
| generally dodgy people who wanted to illegally download
| things online or mask their identity while doing various
| other illegal things.
|
| But in recent years geo-restrictions, ISP blacklists, and
| data collection have forced more and more users to use VPNs
| to the point where their use today is fairly common.
|
| Obviously I'm not in favour of this legislation, but I would
| hope that the more the governments seek to censor content and
| attack encryption online the more people will use services
| that are un-censorable and encrypted.
|
| Short of requiring spy-ware on all of our devices there's
| fundamentally very little governments can actually do to
| prevent this. In fact, the harder they fight the more they'll
| push people out of their reach.
| pessimizer wrote:
| > because the biggest segments of society that want
| impossible-to-censor are also the worst.
|
| This is not true, this is slander. Child pornographers use
| whatever is available to them. Censors, however, spend all of
| their time trying to associate people who wish to speak,
| listen, and associate freely with child pornographers.
| monksy wrote:
| Don't forget politicians will also say the same thing.
|
| Politicians being censors?! no way in a
| democracy(rollseyes)
| LightBug1 wrote:
| [flagged]
| stainablesteel wrote:
| my serious prediction of this country is 20 years does not look
| good
| HtmlProgrammer wrote:
| Make your money and get out my friend. As off the grid as
| possible in the country is where it's at
| elforce002 wrote:
| One question to UK fellas: is it me or the UK is becoming some
| sort of a surveillance state right in front of us just like
| china?
| suid wrote:
| "Becoming"? It's been happening for 20 years now.
| EA-3167 wrote:
| Remember 1984, written by Englishman George Orwell? It's worth
| remembering that in part that was a commentary on British
| society, through a future lens.
|
| When the UK does things which remind of you that, it isn't a
| coincidence. To be clear I'm not saying "this is literally
| 1984" or anything like that, I'm just trying to explain how
| "surveillance state" and "UK" have a LOT of known history.
| godelski wrote:
| 1984 also wasn't about being watched at all times, it was
| about how the government had _the potential to_ watch its
| citizens at any time. And how the citizens changed their
| behaviors due to this. I mean the government doesn't watch
| you in the bathrooms, but they are scraping all internet
| info, have a lot of cameras, and are even flying planes in
| the sky to record data. People may not be watching those
| things, but they do exist. I think the big difference is that
| most citizens aren't aware of this level of invasion into
| their lives and they haven't really changed their behaviors
| because of it. That's probably the biggest difference between
| 1984.
| EA-3167 wrote:
| That's very well stated, and I think it's best encapsulated
| in how popular the semi-joking phrase, "Well now I'm on a
| list" came about.
| kroltan wrote:
| The West is not against surveillance, apparently, everyone
| wants to do it! It's been a market for a good while now. UK is
| just wsocialising it.
| ajsnigrutin wrote:
| To me (i live in the mainland EU) it looks like a testing
| ground, to see what passes and what doesn't, so that then our
| unelected EU officials can try to implement it here too. Be it
| ACTA, many many attepmts to outlaw encryption (or at least add
| some key escrow system, or centralized encryption system
| instead of e2e), etc.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Whenever the west does something, it's somehow China's fault.
| onion2k wrote:
| _is it me or the UK is becoming some sort of a surveillance
| state right in front of us just like china_
|
| Yes and no.
|
| The UK is a highly surveilled country. We have more CCTV
| cameras than any other country. We have Automatic Number Plate
| Recognition tracking cars literally everywhere. We're a part of
| Echelon and Five Eyes and probably a whole bunch of other
| things. Pretty much everything we do is tracked.
|
| But...
|
| That data isn't used for very much. The police actually need to
| request access, and generally they do without abusing it. The
| government doesn't (seem to) abuse the data available in
| nefarious ways. People can and do publish things that are very
| critical of the government. People protest (although those
| rights have been horribly eroded in the past couple of
| decades). The media isn't _entirely_ on the side of the state.
| We don 't have _social_ surveillance with people reporting
| their neighbours.
|
| So, yeah, it could be a lot better. It's not like China though
| (yet?).
| elforce002 wrote:
| Thanks. That's crazy.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-26 23:02 UTC)