>The report also did not make any moves to ban the use of end-to-end encryption, which has been criticised by some politicians and child safety advocates as enabling criminal activity.
>Instead, it recommends that the use of encryption should be a “risk factor” included in risk assessments the tech companies must complete under the bill.
The article also doesn’t mention if the report deals with anonymity online.
Unless the law is *solely* about children, with a tangible and direct nexus to them, when you see a proposal that props up child welfare as its shield, be very concerned about the motivations behind it.
Criminalization or banning of the “legal but harmful” is an invitation to silencing debate in a nation that has increasingly seen its speech rights curtailed.
> Another major addition is the recommendation that tech firms must appoint a “safety controller” who would be made liable for an offence if there were “repeated and systemic failings”.
Who’s going to apply for a job where you could go to prison if somebody else fucks up?
[deleted]
One step closer to China but never in the good public spending ways, it always seems to be in bad surveillance + limiting political freedoms way.
> An explicit duty for all pornography sites to make sure children cannot access them
They really are bringing back the porn block then. Did the government not learn anything the last time they tried this what, only a couple of years ago?
Smoke mirrors and bullshit. The entire point of the bill is a China CCP style firewall to stop us calling out the Tory thieves and liars.
“Knowingly distributing seriously harmful misinformation” is going to become a criminial offence. Some people on this subreddit are going to be in trouble lol.
The responsibility to stop children viewing porn is on the parents. Do your fucking responsibility and actually raise your child rather than dragging it up hoping others will change around you. Lazy and ignorant parents are a burden on society and detrimental to their children’s future. There is no safe way for online sites to stop children, they can only put large warnings when first access the site. The only way to control it is for parents to do their job and install blocks and monitor their devices while also making sure parents actually talk to their kids to help them understand what porn is and why it can be harmful. The biggest problem with porn is children viewing it without understanding the context, that’s something that absolutely needs parents to explain.
The Online Flashing law doesn’t sound awful but I question how effective it will be in practice. The ability to delete messages could see people trying to trick people so even visual evidence isn’t certain. Plus it isn’t like only British people send unwanted nudes to British people so the protection this will provide will be minimal.
I agree that large companies should see named persons targeted for failures but I believe this should extend further than online and be that any business breaking the law sees top management personally fined or punished. It shouldn’t allow for scapegoats and should always be the absolute top management who actually have the power to change things.
I don’t however trust this government to adequately set up any of these laws.
9 comments
Interesting notes on encryption:
>The report also did not make any moves to ban the use of end-to-end encryption, which has been criticised by some politicians and child safety advocates as enabling criminal activity.
>Instead, it recommends that the use of encryption should be a “risk factor” included in risk assessments the tech companies must complete under the bill.
The article also doesn’t mention if the report deals with anonymity online.
Unless the law is *solely* about children, with a tangible and direct nexus to them, when you see a proposal that props up child welfare as its shield, be very concerned about the motivations behind it.
Criminalization or banning of the “legal but harmful” is an invitation to silencing debate in a nation that has increasingly seen its speech rights curtailed.
> Another major addition is the recommendation that tech firms must appoint a “safety controller” who would be made liable for an offence if there were “repeated and systemic failings”.
Who’s going to apply for a job where you could go to prison if somebody else fucks up?
[deleted]
One step closer to China but never in the good public spending ways, it always seems to be in bad surveillance + limiting political freedoms way.
> An explicit duty for all pornography sites to make sure children cannot access them
They really are bringing back the porn block then. Did the government not learn anything the last time they tried this what, only a couple of years ago?
Smoke mirrors and bullshit. The entire point of the bill is a China CCP style firewall to stop us calling out the Tory thieves and liars.
“Knowingly distributing seriously harmful misinformation” is going to become a criminial offence. Some people on this subreddit are going to be in trouble lol.
The responsibility to stop children viewing porn is on the parents. Do your fucking responsibility and actually raise your child rather than dragging it up hoping others will change around you. Lazy and ignorant parents are a burden on society and detrimental to their children’s future. There is no safe way for online sites to stop children, they can only put large warnings when first access the site. The only way to control it is for parents to do their job and install blocks and monitor their devices while also making sure parents actually talk to their kids to help them understand what porn is and why it can be harmful. The biggest problem with porn is children viewing it without understanding the context, that’s something that absolutely needs parents to explain.
The Online Flashing law doesn’t sound awful but I question how effective it will be in practice. The ability to delete messages could see people trying to trick people so even visual evidence isn’t certain. Plus it isn’t like only British people send unwanted nudes to British people so the protection this will provide will be minimal.
I agree that large companies should see named persons targeted for failures but I believe this should extend further than online and be that any business breaking the law sees top management personally fined or punished. It shouldn’t allow for scapegoats and should always be the absolute top management who actually have the power to change things.
I don’t however trust this government to adequately set up any of these laws.