• The guidance posted today is a bit of a shit show


    My fav bit

    "This guidance is distinct and separate from the forthcoming regulatory requirements that will be introduced through the Online Safety Bill."

    ... how many requirements are they really planning on having? It's insane

  • subbed

  • Could you look at age gating it to block U18s?

  • In terms of enforcement, my sense is that the risk is going to be with Big Tech rather than lfgss, but totally get that you don’t want to be in any kind of firing line

  • Could you look at age gating it to block U18s?

    Ugh. Not that age gates work, but the definition of those who need to be protected includes "vulnerable" without a clear definition of that.

    I mean... largely I imagine I'd just exclude vulnerable people. But that isn't a great solution for many reasons.

  • I wonder whether regulation like this is naturally going to force small forums into the anonymous-owner space. Decentralised P2P protocols like Mastodon and whatnot so the community hosts the forum rather than a centralised entity. Of course, then regulating actual unwanted or unpleasant content becomes really difficult.

  • I'm sure it will @Invent. These kinds of bills that force forums to consider going "dark" is the internet equivalent of how the over-use of antibiotics is creating superbugs.

  • Moved to the announcements forum.

    I've not had time to engage with this... and largely have concluded the easiest thing to do is to shift ownership out of the country were push come to shove.

    If it is made more reasonable, then when the more concrete proposal is produced I'll engage with it then.

  • Not a bad shout, signed.

  • shift ownership out of the country were push come to shove

    I thought the draft bill would still apply to ownership outside the UK because of the way they specify "UK-linked"?

  • https://webdevlaw.uk/2022/07/11/your-com­pliance-obligations-under-the-uks-online­-safety-bill/

    What I’ve come to realise since then is it’s not a joke. That’s the intention. Make it too prohibitive, risky, or impossible for public discourse to flow on smaller platforms and services; require the larger ones to become speech police and societal monitors

    Yeah... it seems to still be happening.

  • but there is hope

    1 Attachment

    • Screenshot 2022-07-11 at 17.38.42.png
  • Nadine Dorries say she’s wrong. You may be shocked but a QC then chimed in and said Dorries was the one talking shite.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

UK Online Safety Bill... if it passes, I may have to shutter LFGSS

Posted by Avatar for Velocio @Velocio