4 ms·

The UK is turning in the very definition of a nanny and police state under the usual guise of think of the children. And don't get me wrong I'm just all for ban

The UK is turning in the very definition of a nanny and police state under the usual guise of think of the children. And don't get me wrong I'm just all for banning social media entirely.

pixxel 6mo ago
[dead]
sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
I reckon in 20 years most countries will be doing this - the effects of social media on kids is too strong, and too negative to deny at this point. Also in what way is the UK a police state? The amount of police is falling - we're strapped for cash...
- ReptileMan 6mo ago
  I guess imprecise wording. I suppose they mean unholy crossover of Kafqueske and Owellian state.
- dgxyz 6mo ago
  Everyone likes to say the UK is a police state. It’s a bit of a meme. I mean we are literally going through legal reform at the moment to make it less of one while people with a masked presidential police force scream at us for being a police state.
  - hunterpayne 6mo ago
    Keep in mind that the UK government is currently locking people up for FB posts. Not exactly a police state but close enough that its a distinction without a difference. Oh, and they are debating if to get rid of jury trials so they can just lock up people for FB posts without a trial. If it quacks like a duck...
    - dgxyz 6mo ago
      This is paranoid bullshit. Firstly the incumbent legislation is actually being rolled back at the moment by Mahmood. The FB posts are all inciting violence against others which should not be protected speech. As for the jury trials, have you ever been in a jury? I'd rather not thanks myself. My peers are mostly fucking idiots. And they're changing that as well.
- HerbManic 6mo ago
  20 years seems long to me. I give it less than 5. Just think of what the internet was like in 2006, these things can happen fast.
- ohhman11 6mo ago
  >the effects of social media on kids is too strong, and too negative to deny at this point. Bold claim that really needs some evidence. Is there research which shows that kids who grow up with social media are less likely to succeed as adults because of social media exposure?
- lmf4lol 6mo ago
  Are all the news items about people being arrested for exercising speech not true? I‘ve heard from multiple people already that there is a massive prosecution going in the UK against people that say „hateful“ things on the internet. Whereby „hateful“ is vaguely defined but usually in relation to religious feelings. All fake news? Honest question
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
  - sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
    Honestly that is happening, and I think it's an overstep. I have never heard anyone talk about this in real life (that could be a London bubble though). I will say - I am nearly 40, and I've spent the last 25 years online reading about the Orwellian hell my life is (or is about to become). It has never felt like it comes from a place of lived experience. For example we infamously have a lot of cameras in the UK. 90% of them are on closed circuits in shops and it doesn't affect anything. Right now the biggest issue in the UK is the same as most places - lack of money. It's killing our services, poisoning our politics. Everything else feels abstract in comparison.
  - pjc50 6mo ago
    Most of those cases turn out to be: - ex-partner disputes involving harassment - actual incitement to violence, like the hotel arson And if you look at the actual convictions, first offense for most things is usually a suspended sentence. I'd be interested to see if you can find a case on bailii (no, not social media, actual court transcripts only) which matches: - first offense custodial sentence - one off post, not a pattern of harassment - between strangers - does not include even implied threats of violence (Last one I can think of was the Robin Hood Airport one, which hinged on whether a joke threat to blow up an airport should have been taken seriously.)

The UK is turning in the very definition of a nanny and police state under the usual guise of think of the children. And don't get me wrong I'm just all for banning social media entirely.

pixxel 6mo ago

[dead]

sweezyjeezy 6mo ago

I reckon in 20 years most countries will be doing this - the effects of social media on kids is too strong, and too negative to deny at this point. Also in what way is the UK a police state? The amount of police is falling - we're strapped for cash...

ReptileMan 6mo ago
I guess imprecise wording. I suppose they mean unholy crossover of Kafqueske and Owellian state.
dgxyz 6mo ago
Everyone likes to say the UK is a police state. It’s a bit of a meme. I mean we are literally going through legal reform at the moment to make it less of one while people with a masked presidential police force scream at us for being a police state.
- hunterpayne 6mo ago
  Keep in mind that the UK government is currently locking people up for FB posts. Not exactly a police state but close enough that its a distinction without a difference. Oh, and they are debating if to get rid of jury trials so they can just lock up people for FB posts without a trial. If it quacks like a duck...
  - dgxyz 6mo ago
    This is paranoid bullshit. Firstly the incumbent legislation is actually being rolled back at the moment by Mahmood. The FB posts are all inciting violence against others which should not be protected speech. As for the jury trials, have you ever been in a jury? I'd rather not thanks myself. My peers are mostly fucking idiots. And they're changing that as well.
HerbManic 6mo ago
20 years seems long to me. I give it less than 5. Just think of what the internet was like in 2006, these things can happen fast.
ohhman11 6mo ago
>the effects of social media on kids is too strong, and too negative to deny at this point. Bold claim that really needs some evidence. Is there research which shows that kids who grow up with social media are less likely to succeed as adults because of social media exposure?
lmf4lol 6mo ago
Are all the news items about people being arrested for exercising speech not true? I‘ve heard from multiple people already that there is a massive prosecution going in the UK against people that say „hateful“ things on the internet. Whereby „hateful“ is vaguely defined but usually in relation to religious feelings. All fake news? Honest question
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- sweezyjeezy 6mo ago
  Honestly that is happening, and I think it's an overstep. I have never heard anyone talk about this in real life (that could be a London bubble though). I will say - I am nearly 40, and I've spent the last 25 years online reading about the Orwellian hell my life is (or is about to become). It has never felt like it comes from a place of lived experience. For example we infamously have a lot of cameras in the UK. 90% of them are on closed circuits in shops and it doesn't affect anything. Right now the biggest issue in the UK is the same as most places - lack of money. It's killing our services, poisoning our politics. Everything else feels abstract in comparison.
- pjc50 6mo ago
  Most of those cases turn out to be: - ex-partner disputes involving harassment - actual incitement to violence, like the hotel arson And if you look at the actual convictions, first offense for most things is usually a suspended sentence. I'd be interested to see if you can find a case on bailii (no, not social media, actual court transcripts only) which matches: - first offense custodial sentence - one off post, not a pattern of harassment - between strangers - does not include even implied threats of violence (Last one I can think of was the Robin Hood Airport one, which hinged on whether a joke threat to blow up an airport should have been taken seriously.)