11 ms·
Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient": >
by EmbarrassedHelp 7mo ago
Ofcom is currently threatening a Canadian forum that exists to help people with depression. Ofcom claims that geoblocking blocking the UK is "insufficient":
> I've also gone back to Ofcom explicitly telling them the UK was now geoblocked (twice now) and I received a response that this was insufficient.
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_run_a_selfhelp_forum_for_people_with_depression/ https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdviceUK/comments/1rk690v/i_ru...
Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally.
- swarnie 7mo agoAfter bending over backwards for US media companies in the 2000s they thought it went both ways, turns out it doesn't. Oh well, the uncensored web from my NL VPN still looks the same.
- NullPrefix 7mo agoNL VPNs will bend the knee to EU regulation
- swarnie 7mo agoOne click its Algeria, or Singapore, or Canada. We can move much faster then they can legislate.
- hdgvhicv 7mo agoFirst they came for the websites but I used vpns Then they came for vpn clients but I used free software Then they came for the payment methods but I used bitcoin Then they blocked UDP at the isp but I used satelites doe linked elsewhere Then they just came for me but nobody cared as nobody else was affected
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- BobbyJo 7mo agoI mean, IP meant a lot more in 2006 than in it does now in 2026. The IP economy has basically died, so of course IP/Data based trade deals no longer make sense.
- Spivak 7mo agoWell they technically do, parliamentary sovereignty means that the UK can, "legislate to ban smoking on the streets of Paris." There are no limits to what laws they can write, even ones that are out of their jurisdiction, absurd, or unenforceable.
- markdown 7mo agoThe U.S. asserts the right to prosecute anyone, anywhere, who provides material support to any group they label as a terrorist organization. Not only is this enforceable, it has been enforced, and people have been assassinated without charge for this crime.
- 15155 7mo agoIt helps when you spend trillions annually on your military. Might makes right.
- XorNot 7mo agoRussia spends a lot less and routinely assassinates foreign critics. India has targeted overseas critics as well. The size of ones military expenditure does not determine whether a foreign government can kill you, specifically.
- badc0ffee 7mo agoThe US isn't spending trillions/year on the military, at least not yet. It might crack 1 trillion in the near future.
- diego_sandoval 7mo agoI think anyone running a website should avoid visiting the UK from now on.
- throwawaytea 7mo agoA gf asked to go on a trip to England/Ireland and I told her I will go to Brazil or Colombia before I go to the UK. Im not going to risk getting in trouble because I made a post online or discussed immigration or trans people in the wrong way according to them.
- edwcross 7mo agoIn those countries, you'll probably have more to fear for your physical security from non-governmental threats than the other way around. But given the increasingly dystopian state of many countries worldwide, you may also encounter difficulties related to administrative burden and systems with not enough human oversight and override for exceptional situations.
- specproc 7mo agoNo chance I'd go to America, as they definitely check that sort of thing at the border now. Not sure how often that happens coming to the UK, yet.
- throwawaytea 7mo agoIt happens to citizens of the UK everyday, so I'm not really into finding out how tourists are treated.
- 2postsperday 7mo ago[flagged]
- marcus_holmes 7mo agoYou are the victim of misinformation and need to check your sources.
- varispeed 7mo agoThese departments are full of delusional maniacs, that at home are doormats and nobodies, but once they cross the floor of the department, they think they own the world. They sit by the desk and think who's day they can ruin today. Meanwhile the UK is gnawed by corruption, scams and whatnot, yet there is no one able to do anything about. But harassing some Canadian forum? First to serve!
- croes 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. They learned from the US
- agilob 7mo ago>Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Just 2 months ago Italy tried to ban domains globally too https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46555760 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46555760
- roysting 7mo agoIt’s really kind of unfortunate that people ignore the fact that the ruling powers seem to always follow the same MO, yet everyone falls for it over and over again; first they go after the dregs that they’ve made beyond the pale for pearl clutching polite company, e.g., I think over a year ago, when the German government first went after Gab followed by something like, if not Ofcom itself. I don’t recall the outcome exact outcome or what has happened since, but I think Gab basically told them off in a similar way, i.e., “ummmm, this is America, silly Europeans” and may have even submitted the foreign demand letters to Congress and for whatever reason may have still geo-blocked the UK and at the same time has blocked VPN IPs because they found it effective at blocking pornography and the bad actors who emanated from a certain country. The effect though is that they’ve effectively barred the UK from participating in free speech in America if that’s still the current state of things. I suspect that is exactly what the tyrannical forces have worked out too, and which is why they’re demanding something other than just geo-blocking. If you agree to VPN blocking, you effectively enforce the geo-block as well as unmasking users for five-eye de facto domestic surveillance. But they only came after those horrible horrible “Nazis” that insist on their rights to free speech, “…and I did not speak out.” The point is, regardless of what one thinks of Gab, the powerful and tyrannical elements clearly go after those the mainstream population hates due to the two minutes of hate, so to say, which people have been conditioned to loathe; where the tyrants refine their tactics and the strategy, and practice and normalize the process for when they are ready to go after the mainstream populace… which seems to be approaching. And then the mainstream people are shocked and surprised because they believe it all came out of nowhere, when they just ignored it all along. This of course is not just limited to the digital realm, the tyrannical forces will always come after scapegoats, and the exposed and low hanging fruit, or and even deliberately cause the “troublemakers” to identify themselves so they can be tracked, monitored, and picked off if need be. This is not new, and people seem to fall for the same tricks over and over and over.
- deleted 7mo ago[deleted]
- 15155 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. The cries of a long-since-dead empire slowly fading into geopolitical irrelevance.
- observationist 7mo agoNot so slowly. They've gone from a more or less respectable smaller country to more or less politically, culturally, and economically irrelevant in less than 10 years. I even question whether it's rational to allow them to have nukes; they should probably be required to give them up to some country that has a shot at remaining a stable and predictable geopolitical entity over the next century.
- bromuk 7mo agoI mean the US have nukes and they’re hardly stable and predictable. Allow them to have nukes, who are you lol
- observationist 7mo ago>who are you lol The US. Who else on the planet would have the effective power to possibly even think about who should and shouldn't have them, while plausibly being able to do anything about it?
- PUSH_AX 7mo agoProbably a country that has done so in the past, like the UK…
- inopinatus 7mo agoGiven how the situations w.r.t Ukraine & Iran escalated, the US is the only country that has specifically and publicly demonstrated it's inability on both counts. We can't give Ukraine their nukes back because they were decommissioned (and they were rotting at the time), but there'd be no nation more deserving. Corollary: no individual nation is able to shoulder such responsibilities.
- behringer 7mo agoIf it's insufficient then there's no risk of removing the geoblocking then.
- 9dev 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Curious time to complain about the UK doing this (*points broadly eastwards*)
- protocolture 7mo ago>Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. Ofcom is probably full of non technical people who have been given a specific set of (stupid) instructions including that if its on the internet, its a product being sold to the UK.
- recursive 7mo ago"Just following orders"
- protocolture 7mo agoPretty much. But the outcome being a bunch of emails and court action instead of like, genocide.
- pcf 7mo agoTotally unrelated to this post. Get a grip.
- raverbashing 7mo agoI mean yeah when you're paing 20-40k£ you're not getting the best
- ksec 6mo agoUK Gov would prefer to have more headcount rather than lower headcount but higher pay.
- wisty 7mo ago“Parliamentary supremacy means that Parliament can legislate for all persons and all places. If it enacts that smoking in the streets of Paris is an offence, then it is an offence.”(Ivor Jennings) It is also accepted that enforcement can be an issue if the law is an absurd overreach (like the UK criminalising smoking in the streets of Paris).
- nobodyandproud 7mo agoSo, does a powerful foreign the UK and put the Parliament out of its misery?
- chrisjj 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally What, Ofcom is trying to restrict viewing outside UK?
- tw04 7mo agoThe US thinks their laws apply globally so why wouldn’t Europe expect the same. We will be dealing with the fallout of Venezuela for generations.
- culopatin 7mo agoSo because a window is broken in the neighborhood you go out and smash your own?
- notahacker 7mo agoNah, in context it's more like if your neighbourhood police have been sanctioning counterfeiters across our borders for years, we're not going to take lectures on how inappropriate it is for our neighbourhood police to pick on your pimps too seriously.
- miki123211 7mo agoI think it's good that the UK is trying this right now. It's bound to set a precedent, and the UK isn't powerful enough for that precedent to be in favor of the idea that you have to follow other countries' laws if you're on the internet. Doubly so with Trump II making freedom of speech and overbearing European regulations a political issue. If America introduced a law like this, especially the strong, late-aughts, pre-Trump America, I bet most countries would just cave in, just like most caved in when copyright and AML/KYC laws were concerned. Hell, Swicerland basically abolished anonymous bank accounts, something which the country was famous for, just because the US wanted them to. I don't think we'll see a similar resolution here.
- raxxorraxor 7mo agoLeaving the topic of freedom of speech to conservatives was one of the largest intellectual errors of modern progressive forces. Perhaps you believe Trump or his advisers are idiots, but if so, what are you then... And no, you don't do it because of some holy quest to protect minorities. Minorities never suffered from too much of freedom of speech. The opposite however... It may dawn some people at some point that if you demand a certain behaviour from others, you might be neither liberal nor progressive. Trump can easily point the finger at the EU because it lets him do that. I think the EU cannot take responsibility for itself or other if it doesn't correct course.
- itake 7mo agoNot saying this is the same, but there are depression forums where the admin / mods promotes and sells “permanent solution” kits. People really should turn to medical professionals and not internet strangers for help. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/ofcom-provisionally-finds-suicide-forum-in-breach-of-online-safety-act https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-c... https://youtu.be/lUsO8ny_Dhg?si=FOPqCS2NKOZBQKg8 https://youtu.be/lUsO8ny_Dhg?si=FOPqCS2NKOZBQKg8
- heavyset_go 7mo ago> People really should turn to medical professionals and not internet strangers for help. For your own safety, you are to only discuss your health with NHS certified healthcare providers and no one else. Doing so with others can lead to unprovoked, unsanctioned and dangerous anecdotes, advice and memes. Worse, you might find community and make friends with people who have similar life experiences, which can distract from your state sanctioned treatment plan. This extends to your friends and spouse, they might mean well, but they are not medical professionals. Your health is your private matter, let's keep it that way!
- kunley 7mo agoYour sarcasm sounds like we'd be living in some extreme 1984-like dystopia, while the reality is: there is more bullshit one can read online than a bullshit one can get from a poor doctor/therapist. From my experience, the best one can do is to get a good and affordable therapist by a word of mouth.. and sometimes one can get lucky as such person is doing also service for a state, for free. Main point is to actively start searching
- lukan 7mo agoMain point with depressed people is, they often do lack initiative and enthusiasm to go find that unicorn therapists. When you are struggeling already in general and then you have to struggle even more to maybe find help (and then you don't know whether you can afford it) .. no wonder people turn to online help and LLM'S. So yes, you are right in that activly start searching is the better way. But that insight is often lost on the target audience.
- bilekas 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. And enforceable. Let them fail but they have money behind them,
- pwdisswordfishy 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. How silly of them. Obviously, only the US jurisdiction can do that.
- kulahan 7mo agoOfcom could do it too if they had like 25 aircraft carriers and 2 of the 3 largest air forces on the planet, the best intel network, the most advanced tools, the backing of a $25T economy, the…
- nehal3m 7mo agoMight makes right I guess.
- hdgvhicv 7mo agoUS is losing a war on washing, hardly fear inducing https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2026/03/18/blocked-toilers-fire-damage-and-injured-sailors-us-aircraft-carrier-to-set-sail-for-repairs-in-crete/ https://www.irishtimes.com/world/middle-east/2026/03/18/bloc...
- jalapenos 7mo agoLike most matters concerning the UK: unless your feet are touching their territory, the correct response to their actions, inactions, or very existence, is: "fuck off"
- alexfoo 7mo agoI think the correct response in terms of the British legal system is to simply say: "Dear Sirs, In regards to your recent request, can I refer you to the reply given in Arkell and Pressdram (1971). Yours etc,"
- heavyset_go 7mo agoThese are the "duties" Ofcom is demanding of site owners and operators: - to conduct a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment; - to use proportionate measures to prevent individuals encountering priority illegal content; - to use proportionate systems and processes to minimise the length of time priority illegal content is present; - to swiftly take down illegal content when it becomes aware of it; - to specify in its terms of service how individuals are to be protected from illegal content; and relating to content reporting and complaints procedures in relation to illegal content. Reads to me like they're legally prescribing that all web content is to be automatically fed into AI models in order to assess the content's appropriateness and "risk", and then "swiftly" censor the content if it's deemed too risky or illegal. That's the only method that will scale, can be done "swiftly" and won't have the government kicking down your door if someone posts something illegal on your platform while you're sleeping or on vacation.
- miohtama 7mo agoGuess how one gets "a suitable and sufficient illegal content risk assessment"? You need to buy it from compliance companies which lobbied for the law in the UK, run by ex regulators. https://x.com/moo9000/status/1950866445186818209?s=20 https://x.com/moo9000/status/1950866445186818209?s=20
- Muromec 7mo agoIt means you have to do your paperwork so you can’t then pretend you “didn’t know” csam can exist on your website when repeatedly pointed out. As far as regulation goes this is pretty light and allowing. It’s more annoying than not having any laws at all sure, but zero regulation regime failed (from the point of view of powers that be). Next on the escalation ladder is govt writing the rules for you that you either take or leave
- raxxorraxor 7mo agoThis won't solve anything and "being annoying" to everyone on the planet isn't a trivial overstep. I don't see any sense in your statement that "no regulation" failed.
- Rebuff5007 7mo agoThe UK government is trying to regulate a service used by UK citizens / residents. What part of this seems unreasonable?
- CodesInChaos 7mo agoThat they don't consider it sufficient for the website to block all UK IP addresses.
- veunes 7mo agoThe tricky part is that geoblocking is inherently porous
- raxxorraxor 7mo ago> Ofcom really thinks that their laws apply globally. It really paints this authority in a special light if they believe they can force their rules on everyone on the planet. To be honest, I think this needs immediate psychological evaluation because you have to have a very distorted view on reality. Even if you give a lot of leverage to authorities being detached. But certainly the authority is very overwhelmed with itself and the world. But while we are at it I demand that Ofcom removes it presence from my internet too. Perhaps flood some DNS server, so ofcom.uk to point to 4chan...
- Neil44 7mo agoThat's just how the law works apparently, if there's a UK law passed that makes smoking illegal in Paris then smoking is illegal in Paris. The practicalities of this are to be worked out later.
- bmacho 7mo agoSmoking in Paris is harmful to the health of UK citizens residing in Paris. I'm not sure why UK hasn't banned that yet. When OSA was announced I really expected the US to state clearly that they wouldn't let UK to threaten US citizens with millions of fines if they practice their rights to Free Speech. Because this is what's happening, the UK is making open threats against US citizens when they practice their rights to Free Speech. See e.g. Lobsters' take on it: they just wanted to have a webforum in the US but they couldn't because a foreign country threatened them with huge fines. No protection from the US. "Just geoblock UK" seemed like a good enough in practice solution, although it is more action needed than I'd prefer.
- __s 7mo agogeoblocking should be on ofcom. they should be able to order UK ISPs to block non-compliant sites. everyone gets their own great firewall
- bmacho 7mo agoI don't know how I missed this. Yes, geoblocking should be on ofcom. If they don't like my forum, then instead of sending me a ridiculously big check, putting me on interpol, capturing me at the airport etc, just tell their ISPs to block my forum.
- dash2 7mo ago"help people with depression" is not quite a full description of that website, is it? I thought it had advice on how to kill yourself.