Open Rights Group
@openrightsgroup@social.openrightsgroup.org  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago

Blink and you’ll have never seen it in the first place 🫥

Age verification rules in the UK Online Safety Act are snapping parts of the Internet out of existence.

But it’s not what you think (porn)!

News on conflicts: GONE. Support for sexual health and smoking: GONE.

Watch as ORG’s @JamesBaker shows how censorship works ⬇️

#OnlineSafetyAct #onlinesafety #osa #censorship #reddit #ageverification #vpn #privacy #freeexpression #ukpolitics #ukpol #freedomofexpression

Video of James Baker, ORG Programme Manager, demonstrating how stop smoking subreddits are being blocked from view completely in the UK, compared with search results when using a VPN.
Video of James Baker, ORG Programme Manager, demonstrating how stop smoking subreddits are being blocked from view completely in the UK, compared with search results when using a VPN.
James Baker
@JamesBaker@social.openrightsgroup.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago
@shoppingtonz @openrightsgroup I think the answer is yes in theory Ofcom could consider the owner of the instance responsible for any content that comes via their node. If you host or moderate a Mastodon instance in the UK, you may need to:

- Document moderation policies
- Implement a way to report illegal content
- Proactively de-federate with high-risk instances
- Possibly age-gate content or profiles if minors are involved
Open Rights Group
@openrightsgroup@social.openrightsgroup.org replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago

Teens are left in the dark when it comes to getting support or news online.

Adults have to stay in the soft play area unless they scatter their ID or biometrics across the Internet.

The UK Online Safety Act is a shoddy, dangerous law.

Tell your MP it’s gotta change ⬇️

https://action.openrightsgroup.org/tell-your-mp-online-safety-act-isn%E2%80%99t-working

#onlinesafetyact #onlinesafety #ageverification #privacy #dataprotection #ukpolitics #ukpol #agegating #censorship #freeexpression
Caro S.
@Heidentweet@todon.eu replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago
@jim @openrightsgroup That could very well be the case. I read in a political science book about Dutch Parliament that higher educated people in politics/government have a very strong tendency to rationalise their decisions in the face of very legitimate criticism. However, that's still not an excuse, IMO. We all should look more at what a bill does as the intention, instead of what the people responsible say it will, who doesn't implement it right, etc. Where are they getting paid for otherwise?

Besides, the American War on Drugs and No Child Left Behind laws are very good examples of "the real agenda is what the law does."
Graham Smith
@cyberleagle@mastodon.social replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago
@Heidentweet @jim @openrightsgroup Inability or unwillingness? What would it profit a Parliamentarian who had invested substantial political capital in the project to look behind the label on the tin and discover a can of worms? There was no shortage of people pointing out the design defects in the Bill.

And when it all goes horribly wrong, blame the platforms, blame the regulator; then claim that this was only ever a trial run and we always knew we would need OSA v2.
Caro S.
@Heidentweet@todon.eu replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago
@jim @openrightsgroup That could very well be the case. I read in a political science book about Dutch Parliament that higher educated people in politics/government have a very strong tendency to rationalise their decisions in the face of very legitimate criticism. However, that's still not an excuse, IMO. We all should look more at what a bill does as the intention, instead of what the people responsible say it will, who doesn't implement it right, etc. Where are they getting paid for otherwise?

Besides, the American War on Drugs and No Child Left Behind policies are very good examples of the real agenda behind the words.
Caro S.
@Heidentweet@todon.eu replied  ·  activity timestamp 7 days ago
@jim @openrightsgroup That could very well be the case. I read in a political science book about Dutch Parliament that higher educated people in politics/government have a very strong tendency to rationalise their decisions in the face of very legitimate criticism. However, that's still not an excuse, IMO. We all should look more at what a bill does as the intention, instead of what the people responsible say it will, who doesn't implement it right, etc. Where are they getting paid for otherwise?

Besides, the American War on Drugs and No Child Left Behind policies are very good examples of the real agenda behind the talk.