3 ms·

All this is of course bullshit. The only response that would have a chance of succeeding would have been if most websites collectively just blocked everyone fro

All this is of course bullshit. The only response that would have a chance of succeeding would have been if most websites collectively just blocked everyone from the UK. Imagine if 60-70% of the internet just stopped working for UK People. The law would be toppled tomorrow. Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such.

lukan 1y ago
"Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such." What would be the punishment for that?
- IlikeKitties 1y ago
  > What would be the punishment for that? On a legal level? None. On a personal level? Don't give them money or your business. Avoid them completely or ensure you use ad blockers on their sites and throw away accounts if necessary. Do not contribute to their content. In short: you take whatever they give you, and you give nothing in return.
  - blitzar 1y ago
    Vote with your feet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_voting
Swinx43 1y ago
I live in the UK. Please for the love of all that is sweet and holy DO THIS! The only way our politicians will learn is if the public outcry is so fierce it makes them fear for their jobs. A UK internet blockade might just get this going.
- IlikeKitties 1y ago
  The issue here is that the internet is dominated by large companies that have a huge incentive to use this as a way to ensure regulatory capture of the free internet.
  - drcongo 1y ago
    I'm not following the logic, how would this work?
    - IlikeKitties 1y ago
      Take Reddit as an example: Reddit became big after Digg fucked up their mainpage and has replaced most hobby forums and discussions on the internet. A competitor to it would have to implement a lot of compliance stuff like age verification and that would be very expensive, making it harder for a competitor to be bootstrapped. That's why Reddit has an incentive to support such regulation, even if it costs them a lot. Once implemented, competition becomes harder and harder.
      - drcongo 1y ago
        Aaah, got you, thanks. I'd incorrectly assumed "this" in your original post meant Wikimedia's challenge, rather than the OSA itself.
    - VikingMiner 1y ago
      The large tech companies benefited immensely from relative few regulations in the 2000-2010s. Once they are established, they are happy to comply with regulations which will make it more difficult for competitor to even exist since complying with regulations is often prohibitively expensive for new player. It is known colloquially as "Pulling up the ladder behind you". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_alright,_Jack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_alright,_Jack
blitzar 1y ago
The UK is the perfect target - globally relevant enough to make the news, small enough that its a financial rounding error. Take action, carry through with the threat and if your product actually matters - attitudes can change globally. While the law would not be toppled tomorrow, the companies of the internet need to stop being so desperate for small scraps of money and eyeballs. The internet might be free if companies instead of trying to skirt laws and regulations just operated where they are welcome. Good for the internet but bad for the VCs so it wont happen.
graemep 1y ago
Most websites, for most people, are big tech. Big tech loves this regulation because imposing compliance costs reduces competition.
- ajsnigrutin 1y ago
  The problem is, that both pornhub and facebook also love underage (well, too young) users, because those users will stay there. Cutting off UK for a few weeks won't cause that much damage but might help them in the long run.
  - wizzwizz4 1y ago
    These laws don't cause any problems for PornHub or Facebook. People are moving from independent forums to Facebook.
xnorswap 1y ago
This law could be brought down overnight by Meta if they introduced age-control for WhatsApp and suddenly people couldn't message their own children. But of course Meta carved out their own exception in the law, so this law benefits Meta at the cost of alternatives.
- captainbland 1y ago
  I think that's kind of the joke as well, because WhatsApp (being totally unmoderated and opaque) is probably the exact place you'd want to enact age controls, especially in groups. It's like the government thought long and hard about how to make the restrictions the most inconvenient and with the largest number of gaps in the approach.
hermitcrab 1y ago
>Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such. Companies can be fined £18 million pounds or 10% of revenue, whichever is greater. If you feel like being the first test case, be my guest.
- IlikeKitties 1y ago
  All companies could easily just block UK Users instead.
  - hermitcrab 1y ago
    They could. But it is the world's 6th largest economy.

lukan 1y ago

"Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such." What would be the punishment for that?

IlikeKitties 1y ago
> What would be the punishment for that? On a legal level? None. On a personal level? Don't give them money or your business. Avoid them completely or ensure you use ad blockers on their sites and throw away accounts if necessary. Do not contribute to their content. In short: you take whatever they give you, and you give nothing in return.
- blitzar 1y ago
  Vote with your feet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_voting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foot_voting

Swinx43 1y ago

I live in the UK. Please for the love of all that is sweet and holy DO THIS! The only way our politicians will learn is if the public outcry is so fierce it makes them fear for their jobs. A UK internet blockade might just get this going.

IlikeKitties 1y ago
The issue here is that the internet is dominated by large companies that have a huge incentive to use this as a way to ensure regulatory capture of the free internet.
- drcongo 1y ago
  I'm not following the logic, how would this work?
  - IlikeKitties 1y ago
    Take Reddit as an example: Reddit became big after Digg fucked up their mainpage and has replaced most hobby forums and discussions on the internet. A competitor to it would have to implement a lot of compliance stuff like age verification and that would be very expensive, making it harder for a competitor to be bootstrapped. That's why Reddit has an incentive to support such regulation, even if it costs them a lot. Once implemented, competition becomes harder and harder.
    - drcongo 1y ago
      Aaah, got you, thanks. I'd incorrectly assumed "this" in your original post meant Wikimedia's challenge, rather than the OSA itself.
  - VikingMiner 1y ago
    The large tech companies benefited immensely from relative few regulations in the 2000-2010s. Once they are established, they are happy to comply with regulations which will make it more difficult for competitor to even exist since complying with regulations is often prohibitively expensive for new player. It is known colloquially as "Pulling up the ladder behind you". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_alright,_Jack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_alright,_Jack

blitzar 1y ago

The UK is the perfect target - globally relevant enough to make the news, small enough that its a financial rounding error. Take action, carry through with the threat and if your product actually matters - attitudes can change globally. While the law would not be toppled tomorrow, the companies of the internet need to stop being so desperate for small scraps of money and eyeballs. The internet might be free if companies instead of trying to skirt laws and regulations just operated where they are welcome. Good for the internet but bad for the VCs so it wont happen.

graemep 1y ago

Most websites, for most people, are big tech. Big tech loves this regulation because imposing compliance costs reduces competition.

ajsnigrutin 1y ago
The problem is, that both pornhub and facebook also love underage (well, too young) users, because those users will stay there. Cutting off UK for a few weeks won't cause that much damage but might help them in the long run.
- wizzwizz4 1y ago
  These laws don't cause any problems for PornHub or Facebook. People are moving from independent forums to Facebook.

xnorswap 1y ago

This law could be brought down overnight by Meta if they introduced age-control for WhatsApp and suddenly people couldn't message their own children. But of course Meta carved out their own exception in the law, so this law benefits Meta at the cost of alternatives.

captainbland 1y ago
I think that's kind of the joke as well, because WhatsApp (being totally unmoderated and opaque) is probably the exact place you'd want to enact age controls, especially in groups. It's like the government thought long and hard about how to make the restrictions the most inconvenient and with the largest number of gaps in the approach.

hermitcrab 1y ago

>Every Company that implemented any compliance is a traitor to the free internet and should be treated as such. Companies can be fined £18 million pounds or 10% of revenue, whichever is greater. If you feel like being the first test case, be my guest.

IlikeKitties 1y ago
All companies could easily just block UK Users instead.
- hermitcrab 1y ago
  They could. But it is the world's 6th largest economy.