10 ms·

As somebody from the UK, I think this is a great form of protest against the government.

by bArray 1y ago

noir_lord 1y ago
Same - frankly google/alphabet should just HTTP 451 the UK (and I say that as a brit/someone in the UK). It'd be interesting to see how fast the policy would get reversed then. This was always a stupid policy and so protesting it by pulling services is one way to draw attention to that.
- KaiserPro 1y ago
  I do worry that the ability of people to understand that there is more than one law that affects internet services. the first clue is that its the ICO that is running this. the ICO has nothing to do with the online safety act. Secondly asking a commercial company to conform to basic data protection isn't that onerous. Honestly its almost like HN has tumbler level reading comprehension.
  - trinsic2 1y ago
    Yeah this is where i am getting mixed up because the article isn't saying what the cause was. I thought it was related to the digital id thing that every site need to make sure they check for minors..
- adventured 1y ago
  If big tech wants a reaction, pull all investment out of the UK. Microsoft + Google + Amazon + Nvidia + Meta + Apple = $630 billion in annual operating income. They'll react to a change in capital investment faster than anything else.
  - Winblows11 1y ago
    > pull all investment out of the UK. Wow I didn't know big tech invested so much in the UK!
    - Root_Denied 1y ago
      "Investment" here seems to be operations and personnel, resulting in taxes going to the UK government. They aren't making $630 billion per year in money off of those companies, but the operating income means they're getting taxes on that $630 billion (income tax from company and employees, VAT for purchases, etc.) and the personnel working in the UK are probably spending most of that money in the UK (velocity of money theory comes into play here). The resulting economic benefit for the UK government is enough that they'd notice the drop if all that started to transition away.
      - smashah 1y ago
        The UK government is currently gas lighting the public into ignoring 60k+ in quarterly job losses and is historically unpopular. Despite that it is railroading orwellian attacks against rights and freedoms of the citizenry, all of which without a mandate. This is a kamikaze government of austerity-obsessed foreign agent traitors. The only thing they would be upset about in your scenario is about the inconvenience it would cause those trillion dollar American companies.
  - widerworldweb 1y ago
    I'm sure the UK would cope. They did ok without them less than 30 years ago. Damage to stock value would be the bigger blocker (from both sides of the pond). Might kickstart some actual competition though, as that happening would create a large hole to fill.
    - glitchcrab 1y ago
      The world was a very different place 30 years ago.
  - dwedge 1y ago
    The end game of these rules seems to be that it's impossible for small forums to cope, so content gets centralised on big tech. I would be surprised if they don't support this.
- bapak 1y ago
  > should just HTTP 451 the UK Didn't something like that happen about 15 years ago maybe due to net neutrality? Or maybe it was wikipedia's black outs over SOPA.
ksec 1y ago
How about officially starting one on HN? If we could gather a list of sites to join.
KaiserPro 1y ago
Wait you're against GDPR?
- jobs_throwaway 1y ago
  Of course, I have a brain
  - bapak 1y ago
    I think GDPR absolutely makes sense. It's my data and you must delete it if I ask.
    - DecoySalamander 1y ago
      In most cases it's not your data, really, you didn't produce any of it. But it's data about you.
      - munchlax 1y ago
        The only real information about me is data I produced myself. Anything else is just an observation and isn't neccesarily true at all.
        KaiserPro 1y ago
        GDPR is about protecting information that can be used to identify people. > The only real information about me is data I produced myself. Thats copyright law, which is whole 'nother kettle of fish. Its also one I don't know that well
    - grayhatter 1y ago
      The GPDR is far more complicated than just that superficial example. But I'm curious about how far you feel that assertion goes. Ignoring what the GPDR says exactly, how do you feel about the various examples? I have http request logs from requests that you've made. Do I have to delete them when you ask? You sent me an email, do I have to delete my copy? I host an email service for me and a friend exclusively, you request that I delete your data, do I have to delete emails you sent to him as well? You answered a long thread about an esoteric computing question, hypothetically under the name denvercoder9, do I have to delete that comment? What about the replies to it which quote you? I have evidence that you committed a crime of some sort, do I have to delete that? Someone else posted true information about you to my site intended to categorize comments to HN posts. It's someone else data about you, do I have to delete that when you ask? What if the information is actually false? Where should the line be drawn, and why?

As somebody from the UK, I think this is a great form of protest against the government.

by bArray 1y ago

As somebody from the UK, I think this is a great form of protest against the government.

Same - frankly google/alphabet should just HTTP 451 the UK (and I say that as a brit/someone in the UK). It'd be interesting to see how fast the policy would get reversed then. This was always a stupid policy and so protesting it by pulling services is one way to draw attention to that.

KaiserPro 1y ago
I do worry that the ability of people to understand that there is more than one law that affects internet services. the first clue is that its the ICO that is running this. the ICO has nothing to do with the online safety act. Secondly asking a commercial company to conform to basic data protection isn't that onerous. Honestly its almost like HN has tumbler level reading comprehension.
- trinsic2 1y ago
  Yeah this is where i am getting mixed up because the article isn't saying what the cause was. I thought it was related to the digital id thing that every site need to make sure they check for minors..
adventured 1y ago
If big tech wants a reaction, pull all investment out of the UK. Microsoft + Google + Amazon + Nvidia + Meta + Apple = $630 billion in annual operating income. They'll react to a change in capital investment faster than anything else.
- Winblows11 1y ago
  > pull all investment out of the UK. Wow I didn't know big tech invested so much in the UK!
  - Root_Denied 1y ago
    "Investment" here seems to be operations and personnel, resulting in taxes going to the UK government. They aren't making $630 billion per year in money off of those companies, but the operating income means they're getting taxes on that $630 billion (income tax from company and employees, VAT for purchases, etc.) and the personnel working in the UK are probably spending most of that money in the UK (velocity of money theory comes into play here). The resulting economic benefit for the UK government is enough that they'd notice the drop if all that started to transition away.
    - smashah 1y ago
      The UK government is currently gas lighting the public into ignoring 60k+ in quarterly job losses and is historically unpopular. Despite that it is railroading orwellian attacks against rights and freedoms of the citizenry, all of which without a mandate. This is a kamikaze government of austerity-obsessed foreign agent traitors. The only thing they would be upset about in your scenario is about the inconvenience it would cause those trillion dollar American companies.
- widerworldweb 1y ago
  I'm sure the UK would cope. They did ok without them less than 30 years ago. Damage to stock value would be the bigger blocker (from both sides of the pond). Might kickstart some actual competition though, as that happening would create a large hole to fill.
  - glitchcrab 1y ago
    The world was a very different place 30 years ago.
- dwedge 1y ago
  The end game of these rules seems to be that it's impossible for small forums to cope, so content gets centralised on big tech. I would be surprised if they don't support this.
bapak 1y ago
> should just HTTP 451 the UK Didn't something like that happen about 15 years ago maybe due to net neutrality? Or maybe it was wikipedia's black outs over SOPA.

ksec 1y ago

How about officially starting one on HN? If we could gather a list of sites to join.

KaiserPro 1y ago

Wait you're against GDPR?

jobs_throwaway 1y ago
Of course, I have a brain
- bapak 1y ago
  I think GDPR absolutely makes sense. It's my data and you must delete it if I ask.
  - DecoySalamander 1y ago
    In most cases it's not your data, really, you didn't produce any of it. But it's data about you.
    - munchlax 1y ago
      The only real information about me is data I produced myself. Anything else is just an observation and isn't neccesarily true at all.
      - KaiserPro 1y ago
        GDPR is about protecting information that can be used to identify people. > The only real information about me is data I produced myself. Thats copyright law, which is whole 'nother kettle of fish. Its also one I don't know that well
  - grayhatter 1y ago
    The GPDR is far more complicated than just that superficial example. But I'm curious about how far you feel that assertion goes. Ignoring what the GPDR says exactly, how do you feel about the various examples? I have http request logs from requests that you've made. Do I have to delete them when you ask? You sent me an email, do I have to delete my copy? I host an email service for me and a friend exclusively, you request that I delete your data, do I have to delete emails you sent to him as well? You answered a long thread about an esoteric computing question, hypothetically under the name denvercoder9, do I have to delete that comment? What about the replies to it which quote you? I have evidence that you committed a crime of some sort, do I have to delete that? Someone else posted true information about you to my site intended to categorize comments to HN posts. It's someone else data about you, do I have to delete that when you ask? What if the information is actually false? Where should the line be drawn, and why?