Are you feeling safer?

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj3l0e4vr0ko

I keep seeing posts on social media about the UK's Online Safety Act, and I am wondering how our UK people feel about it. I know they are not only blocking (trying to, anyway) kids from visiting porn sites, but also using it to keep tabs on people complaining about the UK govt, immigration, two tier justice, etc. I follow a mix of people from the UK, mostly feminist women, but also some of the sort of "anti-woke" types. The women I follow definitely think something should be done to protect kids from pornography, but are opposed to the law being used to punish adults for expressing opinions online. I see "Orwellian" being used to describe the act pretty often. I read something about them wanting to ban VPNs in response to all the people using VPNs to access social media. I honestly don't know what is bullshit, and what is actually happening.

I also wonder what it means for small websites like this one. We already don't allow porn, and we don't encourage suicide or any of the other things, but we do allow people to express opinions on controversial topics. 

The law is a complete mess, though I will say the idea that it is Orwellian is just a tired old trope.  Not sure here Orwell stood on teenagers being able to download 4K porn of women being throttled...I suspect he wouldn't approve. He was concerned with intellectual freedoms, especially to speak out critically about the state, not the basic human right (as some seem to see it) to watch a simulated gang rape.

Personally I think there should be age restrictions on porn, as it's warping people's minds, but I don't know how you do it...not like this.  This legislation is trivial to bypass using a VPN.  Or for sites like Reddit, just show a random old persons face in the screenshot.  So basically a big waste of time.

I also wonder what it means for small websites like this one.

Absolutely nothing.  Aren't you hosted in the US anyway?  Even if anyone cared, what are they going to do exactly?  The big tech companies are also registered the UK so can be taken to court.   If you're just operating out of a foreign state there is fuck all they can do.

Do you think there is any 18+ content on here anyway?

Well, if you read my post again, you will see that I mentioned people are claiming the govt is using the act to "keep tabs on people complaining about the UK govt, immigration, two tier justice, etc".  There are news articles calling it Orwellian, but they're not referring to kids watching porn. Obviously most decent people think kids shouldn't have access to porn.

Also, this part of the OSA isn't about porn:

Priority content that is harmful to children:

Content that is abusive on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;

Content that incites hatred against people on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for serious violence against a person;

Bullying content;
   
Content which depicts serious violence against or graphicly depicts serious injury to a person or animal (whether real or fictional);
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for stunts and challenges that are highly likely to result in serious injury; and
   
Content that encourages the self-administration of harmful substances.


I know that Ofcom has been monitoring Kiwi Farms and has sent threatening emails to them. It's not a porn site, it's a forum. They are mean to people, but they don't post illegal shit. 

I don’t think stuff like complaining about government or immigration is included.  It’s not on your list either.

The things you have under “Priority content that is harmful to children” all looks like stuff that ideally children shouldn’t be accessing.  Although I’m not sure if this act goes about it the right way. 

The possible clamp down on VPNs they are now musing sounds bad to me.  I use the one that comes with my antivirus package for general security and privacy.  Although that doesn’t seem to bypass age restrictions.  Maybe it’s UK based?  Maybe there’s respectable VPNs that have agreed to play by the rules and dodgy ones?  I don’t really know.

I certainly don’t want to start uploading my driving license or passport to sites to look at adult content, so I guess I’m relegated to the kiddies version of the internet.  At least until they’ve worked through the issues.  I’ll be pissed off if that means I can’t do all the useful things though.  See how it goes I guess.

Well, if you read my post again, you will see that I mentioned people are claiming the govt is using the act to "keep tabs on people complaining about the UK govt, immigration, two tier justice, etc".  There are news articles calling it Orwellian, but they're not referring to kids watching porn. Obviously most decent people think kids shouldn't have access to porn.

Also, this part of the OSA isn't about porn:

Priority content that is harmful to children:

Content that is abusive on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;

Content that incites hatred against people on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for serious violence against a person;

Bullying content;
   
Content which depicts serious violence against or graphicly depicts serious injury to a person or animal (whether real or fictional);
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for stunts and challenges that are highly likely to result in serious injury; and
   
Content that encourages the self-administration of harmful substances.


I know that Ofcom has been monitoring Kiwi Farms and has sent threatening emails to them. It's not a porn site, it's a forum. They are mean to people, but they don't post illegal shit.

You forgot about having to show ID to order pizza.


Reminds me of an episode of Chad Vader where the Storm Trooper asked him for a fruit badge to buy bananas.

Well, if you read my post again, you will see that I mentioned people are claiming the govt is using the act to "keep tabs on people complaining about the UK govt, immigration, two tier justice, etc".  There are news articles calling it Orwellian, but they're not referring to kids watching porn.

I really don't think it's for "keeping tabs"  - some of that content was marked NSFW so the age check thing comes up.  It really doesn't happen because people are debating immigration etc.  Sounds like the social media companies are over zealous, which might well not be their fault as the law sounds so vague.    How would this "keeping tabs" even work?  It's the social media companies that run the age checks and collect the data, not the government.

As I say, I think it's a terrible law and I'm not defending it...just I think people get carried away with some of the things they think it does.

Obviously most decent people think kids shouldn't have access to porn.

But they do.  Parents should really monitor all their internet use....doesn't seem to be working out.

I know that Ofcom has been monitoring Kiwi Farms and has sent threatening emails to them. It's not a porn site, it's a forum. They are mean to people, but they don't post illegal shit.

Wait...Kiwi Farms is still available?  They literally got taken off the internet by New Zealand ISPs and even Cloudfare blocked them.  I didn't realise they were back up.  Sounds like they have blocked UK users...those without a VPN anyway.  Which is obviously a great loss to our nation.

But yeah, what was Ofcom going to do exactly?

Everything "they" do is about power and control.
They will not stop until they have chinese conditions with total surveillance and executive powers,
similar to those in a dictatorship.

Oh Kiwi Farms was never down for very long. New Zealand ISPs may have blocked KF, but they can't take a website down for the entire world. After Cloudflare dropped KF, Josh ended up inventing his own Cloudflare. Every time someone tries to take KF down, Josh finds a way to fix it. I think he is even his own ISP, or something. I can't remember.

Here, I copy/paste the email ofcom sent

From: OSS_5 <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, Jul 25, 2025 at 8:34 AM
Subject: Ofcom engagement - Availability of KiwiFarms in UK

Dear representatives of Lolcow LLC,


We (Ofcom, the United Kingdom’s Online Safety regulator), note that as of 23rd July 2025, the full Kiwi Farms website (www.kiwifarms.st), including posts, comments, and images, appears to be accessible to UK users, having previously been made unavailable to UK users following our communication with you, last dated 29th April 2025.


Considering this development, please clarify the following by no later than 17:00 BST on 30th July 2025:

- Whether Lolcow LLC intends to reinstate these restrictions and, if so, the expected timeline for doing so;
- If there is no intention to reinstate the restrictions, the measures Lolcow LLC has taken, or plans to take, to ensure compliance with the Online Safety Act (OSA)


As outlined previously, the purpose of the OSA is to protect UK-based users of internet services from exposure to illegal content and material that may be harmful to children. The OSA requires that providers of services with links to the UK take action to protect users based in the UK – it does not require them to protect users based anywhere else in the world.


To assist with compliance, please refer to the following resources:

- Illegal Content Interactive Tool – designed to help service providers understand what is required under the OSA
- Record-Keeping Template – to support providers in meeting their record-keeping obligations


We will continue to monitor the functionality available to UK users via Kiwi Farms and strongly encourage Lolcow LLC to take all necessary steps to meet its obligations under the OSA.


Should you have any queries about our approach to online safety, we remain open to discussion and are committed to supporting service providers in achieving compliance.


Sincerely,
Online Safety Team
Ofcom

They are treating KF like it is Twitter or Facebook. It's weird! They say they are protecting you (not just children) from exposure to illegal content. I suppose the entire forum is a non crime hate incident, though.

I was reading a previous email ofcom sent to KF, but Null posted images of it instead of text. Anyway, they say that any website that provides user-to-user services has to comply with the act.


Here's a different email ofcom sent in April

Sir / Madam,

Illegal Content Risk Assessment Enforcement Programme
We acknowledge the email of 31 March 2025 from your legal representatives setting out your view
that Kiwi Farms is not subject to the Online Safety Act 2023 (‘the Act’). We also note that you have
since IP blocked people in the United Kingdom (‘UK’) from accessing your service.1

Taking the latter point into account, we have decided not to proceed with issuing an information
notice requesting a copy of the written record of the illegal content risk assessment conducted in
respect of Kiwi Farms at this time.

The purpose of the Act is to protect UK users of internet services from content that is illegal in the
UK or potentially harmful to UK children. The Act requires that providers of services with links to the
UK take action to protect users based in the UK – it does not require them to take action in relation
to users based anywhere else in the world. For further information please see: Protecting people in
the UK from illegal online content – regardless of its origin - Ofcom.

If a service restricts access by UK users, that action would need to be effective in order for the
service to fall out of scope of the Act. The relevant test remains whether the service has links to the
UK. A service can have links to the UK if it has a significant number of UK users, or if UK users are a
target market. Duties to protect UK users also apply to providers of services that are capable of
being used by individuals in the UK and which pose a material risk of significant harm to them. As
explained in our note, the targeting of UK users by, for example, promoting ways of evading access
restrictions, could be relevant to whether that service still has links to the UK, depending on the
specific circumstances.

In view of the above, although we are not issuing an information notice at this time, we may revisit
this matter in future, taking account of any relevant evidence (including about whether your service
is in scope).

Yours sincerely,
Ofcom

I have no idea who Kiwi Farms is. 

Honestly I find it find it hard to see being about to read the stupid, insane or hateful shit spewed out from anyone in the world as some kind of inalienable right.  I remember the internet before it was such a cesspool, and I remember life before the internet too.  Somehow we managed to have freedom of speech before any of this even existed.

The internet is very useful but I wouldn’t really miss much of the crap that comes with it.  If they stopped me accessing this place just for it being too ridiculous it wouldn’t be a great loss.

Reddit is awesome for any kind of technical advice though.  From someone carefully explaining how to fix a kick drum pedal to how to beat a boss in a video game.  That I would miss. 

I’m far more concerned with the hard line they are taking on some protestors.  Something that’s happening in the US too.  That’s a real threat to freedom of speech, yet one that the freedom of speech warriors don’t seem to care much about.  They all seem too worried about their right to be racist, sexist and homophobic online.

Kiwi Farms is a gossip forum. They gossip about internet retarts, mostly. Sometimes the retarts get mad and try to frame them for things, like swatting Marjorie Taylor Greene, which they didn't do because they don't touch the poo. There are too many instances of governments, individuals, and companies trying to take them down to mention.

Well, it's okay if you are happy for your govt to tell you what you can say, see, hear, and read. I am not willing to let some officious bozo decide what is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, etc. Especially when the govt is just made up of people who are no better than I am. I mean, would you take it seriously if someone like Trump wanted to police sexist speech? Do you think there are no sexists in your own govt? Or homophobes? Or racists? If you are an adult, shouldn't you be able to decide to read (or not read) these things yourself?

Why wouldn't you be concerned about your govt blocking your access to a site for being too ridiculous? Wouldn't you think that the govt was overstepping its remit? It's not illegal to be ridiculous! It's not about it being a big loss. This reminds me of people saying that if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't worry about the govt spying on you.

Well, in the US we're not worried about our right to be racist, sexist and homophobic online because we have the 1A. Protesting isn't banned here, either. Setting things on fire, blocking traffic, destroying property, and things lke that are illegal whether someone is protesting while they are doing it or not. I am more concerned about ICE swooping in and detaining people who are here legally, which has been happening regularly. BUT, I am also capable of being concerned about more than one thing at a time.

I am not feeling safer about a company and local city boards secretly voting to mass surveil people https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/flock-public-safety-policing-surveillance-scarsdale-new-york

Flock is a $7.5 billion surveillance technology company, operating in over 5,000 communities across 49 states. Flock has a proven playbook to expand through securing local government contracts, often behind closed doors.

Flock’s technology has been used to assist with everything from ICE investigations in Illinois to abortion investigations in Texas. “Local police around the country are performing lookups in Flock’s AI-powered automatic license plate reader (ALPR) system for ‘immigration’” related searches and as part of other ICE investigations, giving federal law enforcement side-door access to a tool that it currently does not have a formal contract for,” 404 Media reported in May. A Johnson county sheriff searched over 83,000 cameras to prosecute a woman traveling over state lines to obtain an abortion, including searches of thousands of cameras in Washington and Illinois where abortion is legal, according to data obtained by 404 Media.

The technology brings into question the presumption of innocence, the legal principle that people are innocent until proven guilty. Charles Siefe, the former NSA employee who spoke at the June 10th meeting in Scarsdale, explained to Drop Site how Flock provides a system of "persistent severance” through interconnected Live View Cameras (LVCs) and License Plate Readers (LPRs). “You can actually go into the database and look for stuff to see if you can tag that person with a crime.” He compares this to traffic stops, saying, “police officers know if you follow someone in a car for a couple of miles, the likelihood is you'll be able to pull them over for something.”

This is insane.

There is much wrong with the UK’s “freedoms” that is mostly down to monopolies in the media pushing the independents out of the picture in favour of conglomerates with agendas, and our governments following the trends set there to stifle protest in the name of public order.
The BBC is under constant pressure from these forces and has as a result watered down its investigative arms.

The online safety act is a knee-jerk reaction to a problem that will be easily sidestepped by VPN’s, the tech companies blocking legitimate content is probably their way of saying fuck you.

As for the vaunted freedoms of America, it’s another myth you choose to believe.
Reporters without borders ranks us 20th for press freedom, not exactly an endorsement, the US is 57th and sliding downwards.

If your proof of liberty is the ability to insult minorities with impunity, I might suggest you research what liberty is.

Oh Kiwi Farms was never down for very long. New Zealand ISPs may have blocked KF, but they can't take a website down for the entire world. After Cloudflare dropped KF, Josh ended up inventing his own Cloudflare. Every time someone tries to take KF down, Josh finds a way to fix it. I think he is even his own ISP, or something. I can't remember.

I don't know about this obscure shit.  First and last time I heard of Kiwi Farms was years ago, when I read they'd been blocked.  No idea who this Josh person is.

Here, I copy/paste the email ofcom sent

Well, they seem to ask them to please restrict the content for UK users.  Otherwise they will....well, that's it, they don't say fuck all, as there is nothing they can do.  Ofcom have zero authority in New Zealand. 

I know that ofcom doesn't have authority in New Zealand. I don't know why you think I said that they do. You said you thought New Zealand took them off the internet, so I briefly explained what happened with KF and New Zealand. Josh is the owner of KF. If he didn't think ofcom could do anything about KF, he wouldn't have blocked the UK. He is famous for telling authorities to fuck off.

Jura, the myth of freedom in America that you think I choose to believe in, is one that Americans have to constantly fight to maintain. There are always people who want to control what we can and can't say. Yes, the ability to insult minorities without govt censorship or punishment is part of liberty. I suggest you are the one who should research liberty.

I looked a reporters without borders and their methodology. They would like to place the blame on Trump, but the reason our press sucks is because it is all corporate owned, and profit driven. Clicks are way more important than good journalism. Even our public media, like PBS News Hour is dependent on the people donate huge amounts of money to them, and there are topics they don't cover honestly for fear of losing those donations. Very similar to what has happened to your media, and the BBC.  - I know there has been a lot of coverage about defunding public broadcasting, but they get most of their money from foundations, trusts, individual wealthy people, and small donations from regular people.

I call it a myth because it patently is, quite apart from it being part of a constitution that continued with slavery for the next 89 years after writing it, it will always be freedom protected and constrained by the law, otherwise it becomes whatever the loudest and strongest decide it is.

Reporters without borders are not unreasonable in pointing a finger of blame at an administration that closes down NPR, VOA (to the delight of Chinese state media), blackballed the AP for not using the right language  and called in the national guard to “police” the unrest in LA caused by those opposed to the grabbing of immigrants, there were 27 incidents of violence against journalists covering the riots, 24 of which were perpetrated by law enforcement, many were specifically targeted.

But hey, as long as you are free to call those who disagree with you a pedo, there is nothing to see here.

Kiwi Farms is a gossip forum. They gossip about internet retarts, mostly. Sometimes the retarts get mad and try to frame them for things, like swatting Marjorie Taylor Greene, which they didn't do because they don't touch the poo. There are too many instances of governments, individuals, and companies trying to take them down to mention.

Well, it's okay if you are happy for your govt to tell you what you can say, see, hear, and read. I am not willing to let some officious bozo decide what is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, etc. Especially when the govt is just made up of people who are no better than I am. I mean, would you take it seriously if someone like Trump wanted to police sexist speech? Do you think there are no sexists in your own govt? Or homophobes? Or racists? If you are an adult, shouldn't you be able to decide to read (or not read) these things yourself?

Why wouldn't you be concerned about your govt blocking your access to a site for being too ridiculous? Wouldn't you think that the govt was overstepping its remit? It's not illegal to be ridiculous! It's not about it being a big loss. This reminds me of people saying that if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't worry about the govt spying on you.

Well, in the US we're not worried about our right to be racist, sexist and homophobic online because we have the 1A. Protesting isn't banned here, either. Setting things on fire, blocking traffic, destroying property, and things lke that are illegal whether someone is protesting while they are doing it or not. I am more concerned about ICE swooping in and detaining people who are here legally, which has been happening regularly. BUT, I am also capable of being concerned about more than one thing at a time.

The part about this place was hyperbole.   That’s not going to happen.

I worry about how the internet has turned out, not least social media.  I worry that many of the next generation are growing up on a diet of the most exteme abusive porn, incel chatrooms, manosphere influencers, religious extemists, racist conspiracy theories, etc.  Hate, bullying, death threats, incitement, are not what the internet was supposed to be about.  Social media was supposed to be a way to share things with friends and perhaps make new ones.  Now look at it.

Other media is far more regulated.  Films and games have age restrictions just for swears, tits or fake gore.  Including really good ones.  I can’t think of any that incite hatred.  Newspapers and TV stations have at least some standards to abide by.  You can’t buy Mein Kampf in a normal bookshop.

Why should the piss poorly regulated (mainly US) big tech companies be free to do whatever they want?  To provide space for the worst elements of humanity to promote their shit?  They’ve already fattened themselves on harvesting and selling our data.  Now they are all working on AI systems to make us all redundant.  Governments are the only thing we have with the power to tell them no.

Of course you don’t have to worry that your current government won’t let you see all the sexist, racist and homophobic abuse you want.  That’s the way they like it.  Your first amendment is being eroded in different ways.  Peaceful protests are being shut down, both by deporting people who are there quite legally and from the government pressure on universities to tow the line.  Museums face a clampdown for exhibitions on black history.  Evidence on climate change is being erased from the public record.  And of course there’s Trump’s repeated threats against news organisations that don’t say nice things about him.  Coming from a man who has praised Putin for the iron grip he has over the media, that should be a little worrying.

The OSA might well be flawed, it might even backfire, but the basic idea that my nephew, his friends, my friend’s kids, etc should be protected from the worst of the internet is not inherently a bad thing. I don’t want to see any of them turning into fucking monsters.

(this is a reply to Jura, unconvinced replied before I hit post)

That's very postmodern of you! No wonder we so often disagree. Everything is a myth if you believe it is a myth. Words create reality.

The Constitution lays out the dream of perfection. The US has always been a work in progress. Every country with laws has freedom protected and/or constrained by the law. I will never understand why so many people in the UK just roll over every time the weirdos in power decide that you can't say things that might hurt someone's feelings. Sometimes I think you guys hate the US Constitution because you're still mad we won the Revolutionary War. lol

Reporters Without Borders should be more honest about what caused the decline in journalism. People no longer trust the legacy media because they spent the last 10 years lying, or lying by omission. They lied about Trump colluding with Russia, they lied about COVID, they lied about Biden's health, they lied about pediatric sex change procedures, they lied about Hunter Biden's laptop, etc (there are too many things for me to remember all at once). 

The AP isn't "blackballed" they just weren't issued White House press credentials. Was it a dickish thing to do? Yes, but also there are many hundreds of media organizations that do not have White House press credentials. This doesn't infringe on their freedom. I don't know if you've listened to NPR, hardly anyone does, but they're just a joke now. They're not breaking important news stories, unless you think it's racist to use the yellow thumbs up emoji. Anyway, Trump didn't close down NPR, he just cut govt funding. Their audience has been declining for years. Not every govt funded program should go on in perpetuity. There's nothing stopping some wealthy trusts and foundations from funding NPR, but I suspect they want to wait it out in the hopes that people will become outraged.

We probably agree about how terribly he's handled immigration. ICE has been abusing people here in Florida, too.

"But hey" is such a weird way to start a sentence. But hey, if I call someone a pedo for disagreeing with me, at least I don't have to worry about the police coming to arrest me.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on August 02, 2025, 03:11:38 PM

Kiwi Farms is a gossip forum. They gossip about internet retarts, mostly. Sometimes the retarts get mad and try to frame them for things, like swatting Marjorie Taylor Greene, which they didn't do because they don't touch the poo. There are too many instances of governments, individuals, and companies trying to take them down to mention.

Well, it's okay if you are happy for your govt to tell you what you can say, see, hear, and read. I am not willing to let some officious bozo decide what is racist, sexist, homophobic, etc, etc. Especially when the govt is just made up of people who are no better than I am. I mean, would you take it seriously if someone like Trump wanted to police sexist speech? Do you think there are no sexists in your own govt? Or homophobes? Or racists? If you are an adult, shouldn't you be able to decide to read (or not read) these things yourself?

Why wouldn't you be concerned about your govt blocking your access to a site for being too ridiculous? Wouldn't you think that the govt was overstepping its remit? It's not illegal to be ridiculous! It's not about it being a big loss. This reminds me of people saying that if you have nothing to hide, then you shouldn't worry about the govt spying on you.

Well, in the US we're not worried about our right to be racist, sexist and homophobic online because we have the 1A. Protesting isn't banned here, either. Setting things on fire, blocking traffic, destroying property, and things lke that are illegal whether someone is protesting while they are doing it or not. I am more concerned about ICE swooping in and detaining people who are here legally, which has been happening regularly. BUT, I am also capable of being concerned about more than one thing at a time.

The part about this place was hyperbole.   That’s not going to happen.

I worry about how the internet has turned out, not least social media.  I worry that many of the next generation are growing up on a diet of the most exteme abusive porn, incel chatrooms, manosphere influencers, religious extemists, racist conspiracy theories, etc.  Hate, bullying, death threats, incitement, are not what the internet was supposed to be about.  Social media was supposed to be a way to share things with friends and perhaps make new ones.  Now look at it.

Other media is far more regulated.  Films and games have age restrictions just for swears, tits or fake gore.  Including really good ones.  I can’t think of any that incite hatred.  Newspapers and TV stations have at least some standards to abide by.  You can’t buy Mein Kampf in a normal bookshop.

Why should the piss poorly regulated (mainly US) big tech companies be free to do whatever they want?  To provide space for the worst elements of humanity to promote their shit?  They’ve already fattened themselves on harvesting and selling our data.  Now they are all working on AI systems to make us all redundant.  Governments are the only thing we have with the power to tell them no.

Of course you don’t have to worry that your current government won’t let you see all the sexist, racist and homophobic abuse you want.  That’s the way they like it.  Your first amendment is being eroded in different ways.  Peaceful protests are being shut down, both by deporting people who are there quite legally and from the government pressure on universities to tow the line.  Museums face a clampdown for exhibitions on black history.  Evidence on climate change is being erased from the public record.  And of course there’s Trump’s repeated threats against news organisations that don’t say nice things about him.  Coming from a man who has praised Putin for the iron grip he has over the media, that should be a little worrying.

The OSA might well be flawed, it might even backfire, but the basic idea that my nephew, his friends, my friend’s kids, etc should be protected from the worst of the internet is not inherently a bad thing. I don’t want to see any of them turning into fucking monsters.

I mostly agree with you, except saying something won't happen, because it could happen! You should stay vigilant to govt shenanigans, IMO. Never let them take the silly things from you.

Is it illegal to buy Mein Kampf in a normal bookstore, or do normal bookstores refuse to carry it? I think you can buy and sell it in the US, but some stores may choose not to carry it. Which is their right, either way. I think you can still buy it on Amazon. Anyway, I am against govt banning books outright. At the very least, it has historical significance and if someone wants to study Hitler they should have access to his autobiography. Which will also mean that people who revere him, will also want to read it, but we can't police every creepy thing.

I don't think big tech companies should be allowed to do whatever they want. I do not think they should be allowed to manipulate us with sneaky algorithms. I do not think they should be allowed to target children in any way. If you are fine with giving big tech your ID so that it will protect children from porn and other inappropriate things, then I think you should do it. If they already have all your data, then showing them your ID is like nothing. Personally, I do not have a Facebook account, and no big tech company has my real name. Not even Amazon. I believe that being anonymous on the internet is a good thing, but that is a different subject.

The best thing people can do to protect kids from the horrible shit on the internet is to not give them a cellphone or any other smart device. If they have to have a phone, get them a fucking flip phone. To be a good parent, sometimes you have to be the big meany. My best friend is going through this right now. Her daughter is 11, and wants a phone, but she is not letting her have one.

Not sure Mien Kampf was a good example, it's not banned in the UK or USA.  I had a copy when I was 18 and studying that period - bookshops wouldn't have it on the shelf, you had to ask them to order you a copy.  Same with the library, but it wasn't an issue. Not sure anyone really cared that much, largely because it's a load of drivel.

Lots of other stuff has been banned, usually bomb makers handbooks and the like.  It's worth reading up about the Spycatcher fiasco, where the government got it banned in the UK, but everyone else published it and the Guardian starting just running chunks of it on their newspapers.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney-General_v_Observer_Ltd[/quote]

Totally pointless banning a book now, just read it online.

Anyway, the online safety act is a pile of shite.  One thing it has done is bring left and right together, both Nigel Farage and Owen Jones have both called for it's repeal.  Which is nice, I suppose.

There used to be Owen Jones slash fanfic online somewhere.

Australia is banning machetes! How will people chop through vines and shit? Maybe they should all get ninja swords.

As anybody in the UK would happily point out, the standard of political representation has deteriorated in direct correlation to the amount of money permitted in “donations” to that party.
This should be capped and fully transparent to stop them being bought or constructed by the powerful to further their own gains, as in countries where it isn’t, only the rich are represented. We’ll come back to this.

In respect to your second post, you mention again the Orwellian aspect and quote,

“Priority content that is harmful to children:

Content that is abusive on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;

Content that incites hatred against people on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment;
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for serious violence against a person;

Bullying content;
   
Content which depicts serious violence against or graphicly depicts serious injury to a person or animal (whether real or fictional);
   
Content that encourages, promotes or provides instructions for stunts and challenges that are highly likely to result in serious injury; and
   
Content that encourages the self-administration of harmful substances.”

Now there are cases where the police have taken parts of this and done so in the letter rather than spirit of the law, because the police are liable to authoritarianism more than almost any other public body, and I see where the thin of the wedge argument here is relevant, but I am happy with the sentiments expressed above.

I do not understand any regime where the ability to promote “content that is harmful to children”, “incite hatred against people on the basis of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, disability or gender reassignment”, or any of the above is considered an unalienable right.

When Musk and that kohl eyed idiot Vance butt in on European and UK politics accusing us of being Orwellian and anti free speech, alarm bells ring, and I reiterate, there are aspects of the policing of hate speech that I disagree with but going back to my first point.
Why would representatives of a government that over all others in the west is picked by and runs for oligarchs, turn its sights on Europe as a lesson for the fall of democracy? Especially as at the time they were courting Putin and various ultra-right figures and organisations on this continent.

Perhaps a bloc of countries where basic human rights like universal health care, the right to keep your job if you are ill, guaranteed decent holidays, extensive maternity leave, safer schools and streets, poses a different threat to the one you are being fed.

Campaign financing has been a grievance of mine for years, but people only seem to care about it when the other party wins. I guess by people, I mean the news media, which is where we are urged to be outraged about various things. When I try to talk to regular people about these things, there is a, shoot I don't know the word for the attitude. Is it fatalism? Like there's nothing they can do to change the way it all works. None of the people in power want to pull all that money out of the election process, even though you can see the decline in the quality of candidates, and the general decline of democracy when politicians spend more than half their term in office stumping for the next election. Somehow, campaign finance has been entwined with "freedom of speech" and I don't understand why people fell for it. The entire Western world is electing clowns, now.

I do not think it is Orwellian to protect children from the gross shit on the internet.  I don't think children should be using the internet at all. I have posted more than once, that these laws are being applied to adults. In other topics I've talked about people (adult people) being arrested for saying mean things on the internet. Even if the mean thing is true! What I wonder about, is will this law give your police even more power to arrest people (adult people) for speech. Not speech about making bombs, or drugs, or sending a pitchfork wielding mob after people, but just plain old insulting language that everyone engages in from time to time. You should be able to get in a argument on the internet, insult each other, and say nasty things without police involvement. We all have the power to disengage from the content we don't want to read. Every major social media platform gives you the option to create your own feed, to block people. I don't understand why more people do not take advantage of that. I have noticed that social media addicted people do not want to block people by themselves, they need block lists that they can convince as many people as possible to subscribe to. It is weird.

IDK how this law is going to play out. I don't know how adults in the UK will react to it. I don't know how many adults in the UK will just hand over their ID to big tech, but I suspect people who have already given them all their data will see it as just one more thing. 

It is difficult for me to answer vis-à-vis what happens on social media as I don’t do it, but there will and has been kick back when the police go too far.

But the polarisation mongers use this to divide us into smaller and easier to manage groups, drip fed just enough outrage material to keep us seething, and I see this Orwellian trope as part of that.

Did you get my final point about why these oligarchs might want to conflate European freedoms with Orwell?
Because that is the crux of things to me, it might be spread by a myriad of small interest groups, but this comes from the top, just look at how it drove a wedge between you and Boydster and then extrapolate what that has done to the internet.

The oligarchs didn't drive a wedge between me and boydster! I just don't feel free to be myself over there. I like feisty arguments, but it annoys me when true things are considered "MAGA". It also annoys me when smart people think that opposing Trump means promoting harmful medical procedures, and endangering women and children. It also kinda made me sad that he would accuse me of "carrying water for MAGA" because I know and believe that girls and women should have some single sex spaces, services, and sports for safety and privacy. I have held these opinions on this topic for many years (long before MAGA paid any attention to the issue), and boydster used to hold the same opinion. I know this because we have discussed it off the forums a few times. I also secretly hoped that since he took that position, he would insert some sanity into the proceedings, I had no idea he'd flipped his opinions on the subject.

I haven't checked in to see what's being said over there, but I still love boydster. You can tell him I said that, if you want. I will always think of him as a friend, even when i think he is being retarted.

Oh, and no, I do not get your point about oligarchs conflating European freedoms with Orwell. It is mostly ordinary people. I know you are fixated on Vance, but I tend to talk with regular people. I have talked to some of the women who have been arrested for tweets. I have watched them (on video) be harassed on the streets. I have watched as they've been harassed by employment tribunals (and cheered when they finally won). I am watching as Sandy Peggie is being smeared as a racist because she dared to refuse to undress in front of a man.

Just from my own observations, and they could be biased and flawed, but it seems to me the oligarchs try really hard to make us think something is bogus when that thing serves them. Like, they don't want us to compare all this censorship, this safetyism, etc, to Orwell. They want us to think it is stupid and right wingnut to do so.

Not sure Mien Kampf was a good example, it's not banned in the UK or USA.  I had a copy when I was 18 and studying that period - bookshops wouldn't have it on the shelf, you had to ask them to order you a copy.  Same with the library, but it wasn't an issue. Not sure anyone really cared that much, largely because it's a load of drivel.

Lots of other stuff has been banned, usually bomb makers handbooks and the like.  It's worth reading up about the Spycatcher fiasco, where the government got it banned in the UK, but everyone else published it and the Guardian starting just running chunks of it on their newspapers.

[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney-General_v_Observer_Ltd

Totally pointless banning a book now, just read it online.

Anyway, the online safety act is a pile of shite.  One thing it has done is bring left and right together, both Nigel Farage and Owen Jones have both called for it's repeal.  Which is nice, I suppose.

Fair point, both you and SCG.

I may have butchered my argument with the Mein Kampf thing.  I think most of the rest makes sense though?

Nigel Farage and Owen Jones both absolutely despise the Labour government.  I read Jones’ article in the Guardian, and rarely see even a hint of balance or consideration for the challenges they really face.  Everything they do is bad and wrong.

I strongly suspect that if the OSA were implemented by Corbyn as PM, he’d be its biggest defender.

Nigel Farage and Owen Jones both absolutely despise the Labour government.  I read Jones’ article in the Guardian, and rarely see even a hint of balance or consideration for the challenges they really face.  Everything they do is bad and wrong.

I strongly suspect that if the OSA were implemented by Corbyn as PM, he’d be its biggest defender.

I can't stand Jones or Farage.  I only used to flick to the comments on Jones's articles, as even he even winds up most Guardian readers as well - unfortunately they turned them off, so I just avoid the little prick now.

I suspect you're right about if it was Corbyn introducing it.  Lets see what policy his new party (Your Party?) comes up with for this.  Probably nationalise the internet or some nonsense.  Or nothing and just go on about Gaza instead.

Mein Kampf aside, I do think you're broadly right. 
 

No one ever cared about porn until people started saying things the government didn't like online.

Now it's "won't someone please think of the children."

Disgusting.

Make porn illegal to produce and distribute, if you want to watch it then you can get it the same way I got 5tb of Movies, animation and TV shows and retro games for free. I don't even do it for myself, I just give them to people without access to them otherwise. I don't watch a lot of media, I'm like the Robin Hood of pirates, I steal from the rich and give to the needy.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl on August 01, 2025, 03:31:12 PM

Well, if you read my post again, you will see that I mentioned people are claiming the govt is using the act to "keep tabs on people complaining about the UK govt, immigration, two tier justice, etc".  There are news articles calling it Orwellian, but they're not referring to kids watching porn.

I really don't think it's for "keeping tabs"  -

Would you feel more comfortable talking about Palantir or will you also make excuses for it?

The oligarchs didn't drive a wedge between me and boydster!

I still love Boydster too.

It's just he became so partisan he won't talk to you unless he thinks you pass his political purity test.

If there was a wedge, it wasn't SCGs doing, it was boydster cutting off his friends because of minor political differences. I think abortion is probably the most evil thing that happens on our society, SCG disagrees but it doesn't mean we can't still talk and find common ground. It wasn't SCG that changed, but Boydster.

From where I'm standing it's you that's trying to divide people into opposing groups, Jura.

Did you watch Ana Kasparians interview with Tucker Carlson? Of course you didn't, she became dead to you after she could no longer pass your political purity test.