9 ms·

> People in the UK will be better protected from illegal harms online What are these 'illegal harms'? I'm online 10+ hours a day for 10 years straight and neve

• intended 2y ago
  > he 15 different kinds of illegal harms set out in Ofcom’s draft risk assessment guidance are: Terrorism offences; Child Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (CSEA), including Grooming and Child Sexual Abuse Material (CSAM); Encouraging or assisting suicide (or attempted suicide) or serious Self Harm; Hate offences; Harassment, stalking, threats and abuse; Controlling or coercive behaviour (CCB); Drugs and psychoactive substances offences; Firearms and other weapons offences; Unlawful immigration and human trafficking; Sexual exploitation of adults; Extreme pornography offence; Intimate Image Abuse; Proceeds of crime offences; Fraud and financial services offences; and the Foreign interference offence (FIO). ——- Online harms are always going to be impossible. Same as crime. Parts of the internet are already being destroyed, and will continue to be destroyed.
• ksec 2y ago
  >How would a site admin determine what is acceptable and what is not? I remember there were stories about GDPR at the time that some site simply decide to block all IPs from EUR, and some sadly because they believe they dont comply, simply shut down the site. In a world ( well US at least ) where the trend is moving to deregulate things. UK decided to quite literally regulate everything. This is sad.
  • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    The trend is to talk about deregulating things. I have doubts about any actual deregulation.
  • libertine 2y ago
    > In a world ( well US at least ) where the trend is moving to deregulate things. UK decided to quite literally regulate everything. This is sad. This is being pushed by banks and tech billionaires, including the world's richest man. Why is that considered a good trend for regular people?
    • ksec 2y ago
      I dont think Banks and Finance should get less regulations ( May be in certain areas ). But there are certainly industry and sectors that needs less regulation. To put it in a software development terms, a lot of laws and regulations need a major refactor.
      • libertine 2y ago
        For example?
• blackhaz 2y ago
  Facebook openly advertising porn sites is one example.
• woodpanel 2y ago
  let me guess: criticizing this law constitutes “harm” already. better not enter this jurisdiction for the foreseeable future
  • libertine 2y ago
    Do you feel better off in a jurisdiction where, for example, anti-vaxxing is promoted?
    • jamiecurle 2y ago
      Yes.
      • mavhc 2y ago
        Are you more likely to die because the people around you aren't vaccinated, or because you can't access a pro suicide website?
      • libertine 2y ago
        Why do you feel like allowing deliberate misinformation of people is a better standard for the jurisdiction in which you want to live?
        • bilvar 2y ago
          Who determines what is misinformation? And after we have established this, who determines whether it was deliberate?
          • libertine 2y ago
            > Who determines what is misinformation? Who determines laws? > And after we have established this, who determines whether it was deliberate? Democracies have institutions with the tools and power to investigate. It's like a regulator is a new concept.
• michaelt 2y ago
  > What are these 'illegal harms'? I'm online 10+ hours a day for 10 years straight and never seen one. (not assuming they don't exist, but their prevalence/impact might be inflated). As I understand things, MPs who are on Twitter regularly get anonymous threats of rape, murder etc https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63330885 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-63330885 - credible threats, with two MPs murdered in the last decade. You and I have the luxury that we can just not be on Twitter - but when you're an MP, unless you're in a very safe seat you've got to meet voters where they are, not where you'd like them to be. So from an MP's perspective? In one hand they've got a report about revenge porn, cyber-bullying, 4chan /pol/ and pro-anorexia facebook groups. In the other hand they've got their phone where someone's just told them to kill themselves. They believe in these "illegal harms" because they've got a front row seat, and experience them on a daily basis.
  • kybernetyk 2y ago
    Poor MPs. Being power hungry must really suck in the age of social media :(
    • benj111 2y ago
      Really? You can disagree with the position, whilst accepting that MPs have been murdered, and MPs do get threatened online. What specific level of power hunger makes a threat to life acceptable? Further, I wasn't in favour of these proposals, but if you have people on HN of all places thinking its acceptable to threaten people, maybe we do need this law.
      • bilvar 2y ago
        Threatening people online was already illegal.
        • benj111 2y ago
          Ok, lets replace this with murder. MPs are getting murdered, so they introduce a new law to prevent murder. Is the parents comment acceptable?
• PeterStuer 2y ago
  "What content promotes eating disorders?" When I watch UK streaming services (ITVx) I get bombarded with adds for junkfood takaway services. The obesity promotions are just staggering. (Outside that I mostly watch YouTube with a premium sub, so maybe I'm just unaware as to how this compares to non UK media services)
• Angostura 2y ago
  You may me familiar with Instagram Fears over Instagram eating disorder posts https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47637377 https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47637377
• scott_w 2y ago
  News over the weekend: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/dec/13/steven-bartlett-accused-of-amplifying-dangerous-health-claims-on-his-podcast https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/dec/13/steven-bartlet... Further in the past, we can look to the “Adpocalyse” on YouTube caused by a glut of terrorist content on social media and it being monetised by ads from major brands. To your last question: that’s why they’re submitting their plans to Ofcom, so they can get into compliance. The link even highlights that regulation is based on risk. Have a larger platform or want to operate in a greyer area? You need to show how you’ll comply in more detail.
• Spivak 2y ago
  > Is there a single site that authors/proponents of this regulation can point to that literally 'promotes eating disorders' Yes, Tumblr has quite a bit of this content. You're looking for terms like proana, thinspo, meanspo, mia, b/p, various misspellings of anorexic to avoid filters, and ironically "not pro just using tags." If you want to see the content just create a Tumblr account, search proana, click past the eating disorder hotline message, and scroll through. It goes on forever. Fair warning, it's depressing.
• mihaaly 2y ago
  Those wanting to do harm will adapt in seconds. All others with no harmful intent will have their life a bit or much difficult.
• jackvalentine 2y ago
  > What content promotes eating disorders? There are numerous sites and social media pages on all the major platforms that literally promote anorexia. That you’ve never heard of them should perhaps encourage you to take a more curious and less combative approach to this topic.
  • nomilk 2y ago
    > encourage you to take a more curious .. But: > Is there a single site ... ? is asking for a tiny bit of evidence (this is gentle curiousness; the antithesis of combative). Earnestly, are you able to provide one site that 'promotes eating disorders', so I can be educated? If the answer is 'any site with charismatic too-slim people', isn't that extremely difficult to administer, and possibly become horribly discriminatory, for example if a site has a user profile of a beautiful but illegally[1] slender person, doesn't that 'promote eating disorders'? Would a site admin be legally compelled to block that user, or at least censor their profile pic? I literally don't know what's legal vs illegal in this sphere, and suspect 99% of others are the same, and that probably includes the legislators themselves. Those claiming to know precisely what's il/legal in this context are probably overconfident.
    • intended 2y ago
      Search for “pro Ana” websites https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1357034x12440827 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1357034x1244082... https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/2186 https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/4/2186
    • jackvalentine 2y ago
      If you come from an angle of ‘I’ve never seen it therefor it’s just whack a mole’ don’t be surprised if people read it as simple rejection rather than curiosity. Using language like ‘Is there a single site?’ doubles down on it. This article describes social media groups, on the major platforms, that encourage eating disorders https://rollingout.com/2024/10/08/eating-disorder-groups-on-social-media/ https://rollingout.com/2024/10/08/eating-disorder-groups-on-... Young children being treated for eating disorders as inpatients in hospitals almost always have been in contact with some kind of eating disorder glorification.
• xyzzy4747 2y ago
  This forum site for example actively encourages and supports people who want to commit suicide: https://sanctioned-suicide.net/ https://sanctioned-suicide.net/ Many of their members have died after encouraging each other to take the next step. They used to be on Reddit but got banned there a few years ago. Would you want your children or young adults spending time there?
  • nomilk 2y ago
    I hadn't seen this site but will check it out. Thank you for providing some evidence! (really dislike the idea of boogymen! - so seeing a real site is refreshing). > Would you want your children or young adults spending time there? Suicide is a difficult topic. I'd never want anyone (related or otherwise) to be in a position where ending their life is their best option, but then I support euthanasia (a subset of suicide), so I certainly support people obtaining information that could help their situation, even if their situation is difficult, dire and worthy of enormous compassion. Thanks again for sharing.
    • xyzzy4747 2y ago
      The problem is it’s become an entire of subculture of people, almost cult like, who are not only accepting of euthanasia but are actively pro-suicide. I think a lot of people would still be alive if this community didn’t exist. Most of them seem to have mental issues rather than being terminally ill. Also young people are especially vulnerable to being brainwashed by these sorts of things.
  • tdeck 2y ago
    I'm assuming this is the site mentioned in this video? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C3y6SsGAWks https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=C3y6SsGAWks it might be best to remove the actual link so people in a bad mental state don't end up there. Cc @dang
    • nvarsj 2y ago
      It's trivial to find via simply searching suicide on google. It's not like this is a super secret Tor site or something.
• wruza 2y ago
  What content promotes eating disorders?! They’re talking about thinspo. Was pretty popular and survived search bans on many platforms. To save you a search, it’s mostly about getting thing legs that do not touch and overall ~40kg body type.
  • nomilk 2y ago
    How's thinspo different to fat-acceptance communities? (I have nothing against either, I think people ought to be free to pursue information on their body-type)
    • wruza 2y ago
      I guess one is acceptance and another is driving oneself into starvation. If fat communities encourage becoming fat by eating more/worse, they are as delusional. The key idea of thinspo and other look-related movements is to become someone who you biologically aren’t by extreme measures. Some people are naturally thin-built, for them it’s sort of normal. For others it’s basically a destructive body modification which is only temporary. Thinspo is not pursuing information, they are pursuing the body type itself. I liked thinspo type before it had a name, but only when it’s natural and stays within reasonable effort. What’s the point of preferring someone who is constantly on the edge and will snap out of it eventually. This movement should not exist basically, cause it does no good.
      • benj111 2y ago
        That line is blurry though. Anorexics aren't happy with their body. If they go to a site where they find acceptance and understanding, thats good? And on the other hand, it used to be the case that Models were stick thin. If the fat acceptance crowd succeeds, and fat becomes the standard of beauty and people try and emulate that, thats bad. The difference is that Anorexics don't accept themselves, and try to achieve an unhealthy weight. Obese people are trying to gain acceptance for the unhealthy weight they are. The danger is that acceptance is an overloaded term. It isn't just accepting one individual who is already fat. Its shifting culture to the point where it becomes a standard for beauty, which is where people start emulating it.