3 ms·
I saw the BBC article on this [0] that basically takes credit for the policy change. The whole article was pretty smug to me, as if they are proud to have basic
by version_five 5y ago
I saw the BBC article on this [0] that basically takes credit for the policy change. The whole article was pretty smug to me, as if they are proud to have basically shut down a bunch of people's businesses. There are other factors I understand, but it remains that there are a lot of legit, if not everyone's cup of tea, interests that will be affected by this. Claiming credit for this and acting like all these people are our moral inferiors that deserve what they get is not something to be proud of.
The examples of illegal or objectionable content the BBC talks about could not doubt be found on the internet also. Is that a reason to want and shut it down?
[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58255865 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-58255865
- nextaccountic 5y ago> The examples of illegal or objectionable content the BBC talks about could not doubt be found on the internet also. Is that a reason to want and shut it down? The difference is that, as per the OP, > A “compliance manual” suggests Onlyfans intentionally tolerated illegal content And only took proper measures to fight CSAM in July 2021. That's pretty damning.