LAW: No more hating on each other!

I don't know about anyone else but much of that doesn't seem to have anything to do with hate crimes.

INB4 an Orwell quote.
 
This would appear to be taking the idea that "words are violence" to it's logical legal conclusion, especially with sending "knowingly false" info becoming a criminal offence if the bill is passed. Ah well, at least the "won't someone think of the children" brigade will be ecstatic over this, irrespective of the "unforeseen" damage that will undoubtedly occur.
 
I just wonder how it will be enforced.

The biggest problem I think a lot of women have is random men sending them a picture of their privates. I think its being called cyberflashing in the article. I wonder how these people will be prosecuted. I've heard sites like facebook, twitter etc won't be held to the same standard.
 
At some point they will realise that the world is becoming an ever nastier and more toxic place despite all these stupid laws they are concocting. Its almost like mean words aren't a big issue and there are far bigger problems that we should be focussing on.
 
fez said:
At some point they will realise that the world is becoming an ever nastier and more toxic place despite all these stupid laws they are concocting. Its almost like mean words aren't a big issue and there are far bigger problems that we should be focussing on.
Click to expand...
Lol dude how can that even possibly be true?
 
ianh said:
especially with sending "knowingly false" info becoming a criminal offence if the bill is passed.
Click to expand...
This is possibly the most scary thing about this, because social media companies are now being expected to be the arbitars of the "truth", or more realistically the prevaling socially acceptable narrative at the time.
 
dLockers said:
Lol dude how can that even possibly be true?
Click to expand...

The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, the environment is ******, people are more divided than ever, media is manipulating and segregating people based on the most pointless of opinions, people are being accused of racism and hate crime for daring to voice any opinion that doesn't agree with the current woke view on that issue.

But no, mean words online are the big ticket item here. Its genuinely depressing how little time and effort goes into fixing actual issues and how much goes into fixing this sort of crap.
 
There are some here that just WANT to be outraged. Did anyone actually read the article:

The government confirmed offences to have been added to the list of priority offences, which must be removed by platforms under the changes, include:
  • Revenge porn
  • Hate crimes
  • Fraud
  • The sale of illegal drugs or weapons
  • The promotion or facilitation of suicide
  • People smuggling
  • Sexual exploitation
Surely this is a GOOD thing and a long time coming?! Also as it hurts these companies in the £££'s, maybe they will be more inclined to do something about it.
 
ivrytwr3 said:
There are some here that just WANT to be outraged. Did anyone actually read the article:

The government confirmed offences to have been added to the list of priority offences, which must be removed by platforms under the changes, include:
  • Revenge porn
  • Hate crimes
  • Fraud
  • The sale of illegal drugs or weapons
  • The promotion or facilitation of suicide
  • People smuggling
  • Sexual exploitation
Surely this is a GOOD thing and a long time coming?! Also as it hurts these companies in the £££'s, maybe they will be more inclined to do something about it.
Click to expand...


Jeez, how's a fella` supposed to make a living with this lot coming? ;)
 
ivrytwr3 said:
There are some here that just WANT to be outraged. Did anyone actually read the article:

The government confirmed offences to have been added to the list of priority offences, which must be removed by platforms under the changes, include:
  • Revenge porn
  • Hate crimes
  • Fraud
  • The sale of illegal drugs or weapons
  • The promotion or facilitation of suicide
  • People smuggling
  • Sexual exploitation
Surely this is a GOOD thing and a long time coming?! Also as it hurts these companies in the £££'s, maybe they will be more inclined to do something about it.
Click to expand...
Aren’t all of these already crimes regardless of the platform used to orchestrate them? The only difference now is that the platform used becomes liable?
 
ivrytwr3 said:
There are some here that just WANT to be outraged. Did anyone actually read the article:

The government confirmed offences to have been added to the list of priority offences, which must be removed by platforms under the changes, include:
  • Revenge porn
  • Hate crimes
  • Fraud
  • The sale of illegal drugs or weapons
  • The promotion or facilitation of suicide
  • People smuggling
  • Sexual exploitation
Surely this is a GOOD thing and a long time coming?! Also as it hurts these companies in the £££'s, maybe they will be more inclined to do something about it.
Click to expand...

The devil as always is in the details....

For example you will have people, and not just randoms on twitter, accusing you of a hate crime' because you say that peope can't change their sex (absolutely objectively true ) and therfore that men cannot become women and vice versa.

Ditto when you ask gender cultists what their definition of man and woman actually is (if not sex based)

(SPOILER alert they don't have a coherent definition )

Also see the issues about pointing out that certain religions and their prophets might just pose some issues for people's of other religions and thoose of no religion.

'Hate crime' is a rather broad term these days.
 
paradigm said:
Aren’t all of these already crimes regardless of the platform used to orchestrate them? The only difference now is that the platform used becomes liable?
Click to expand...

Ofc they are, but

Previously, companies were only forced to take down these posts after they were reported - but will now be required to be proactive in preventing people from seeing them in the first place.
 
Caracus2k said:
The devil as always is in the details....

For example you will have people, and not just randoms on twitter, accusing you of a hate crime' because you say that peope can't change their sex (absolutely objectively true ) and therfore that men cannot become women and vice versa.

Ditto when you ask gender cultists what their definition of man and woman actually is (if not sex based)

(SPOILER alert they don't have a coherent definition )

Also see the issues about pointing out that certain religions and their prophets might just pose some issues for people's of other religions and thoose of no religion.

'Hate crime' is a rather broad term these days.
Click to expand...

I agree, it's a **** show, but I see this as at least a positive step.
 
Caracus2k said:
'Hate crime' is a rather broad term these days.
Click to expand...

Its a meaningless word now. Hate just means you have said something that another person has decided is offensive to them or more likely, offensive to some other person / group that you are valiantly protecting.
 
paradigm said:
Aren’t all of these already crimes regardless of the platform used to orchestrate them? The only difference now is that the platform used becomes liable?
Click to expand...
Yup IIRC they're all crimes already, and ones that the police are meant to investigate, and I say meant to investigate, they often don't have the resources to do so, so can't or won't spend much time on it.

I can see the problem for the platforms is that you can't automate working out if something is "revenge porn" or fraud, let alone "the promotion of facilitation of suicide" in any meaningful way given the number of ways that you could describe the act that would make sense to someone who knows the language fully (so not some $1 a day employee in India who is given 30 seconds per report) but would completely confuse a bot (or result in things like suicide prevention sites and excepts from songs and books being removed).

It feels like it's basically a "we need to do something to look like we're doing something" move rather than anything meaningful, it's like the idea of making a named person at the company responsible for dealing with it with the possibility of them going to jail if they fail - all that's going to do is mean there is an official scapegoat at the company who is paid well to be that scapegoat (think Barney Stinson in How I met your mother) unless that person also has the official authority at the company to devote the resources needed without interference which isn't going to happen unless it's the main shareholder or CEO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom