UK Parliament Undermined The Privacy, Security, And Freedom Of All Internet Users

[justdoit]

good bye freedom

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[maxd]

I thought it would be worthwhile to provide a little context:

The U.K. Parliament has passed the Online Safety Bill (OSB), which says it will make the U.K. “the safest place” in the world to be online. In reality, the OSB will lead to a much more censored, locked-down internet for British users. The bill could empower the government to undermine not just the privacy and security of U.K. residents, but internet users worldwide.​

A Backdoor That Undermines Encryption​

​

A clause of the bill allows Ofcom, the British telecom regulator, to serve a notice requiring tech companies to scan their users–all of them–for child abuse content.This would affect even messages and files that are end-to-end encrypted to protect user privacy. As enacted, the OSB allows the government to force companies to build technology that can scan regardless of encryption–in other words, build a backdoor. ...​

​

The article continues at

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

.

 

[goatwack]

Well, that's definitely let the cat out of the bag, hasn't it. They've only gone and finally done it!....

No one would dispute many Social Media platforms' slackness towards regulating its extreme content, with the likes of terrorism, people smuggling, violence etc in full view, under the guise of Free Speech.

Fair to say some of the more brazen displays needed reining in, badly, as it had no place being there to begin with.

Yet with this blanket approach towards *all* online encrypted content, one can kiss goodbye to any semblance of privacy, and I'm sure there are some that will get positively giddy at this prospect, under the guise of 'safety'. Maybe we could have live 24/7 feeds from our living rooms next, incase of wrong-think!

I await the AI conversation-intruders to begin reeling off any problematic posts in due time, as having one's autonomy handed over to governments always, always ends well, comrades

 

[GourdFollower]

I still can't belive this passed into law -- the government seems to do so much of their communicating on WhatsApp you'd think they'd like the encryption.

This Bill -- I don't even know where to start ranting.

Platforms absolutely do need to take responsibility and rein in the hate, death threats, etc., but "politicized censorship decisions" are not something we need.

As for "age-gating" -- who's going to go through all 50 billion pages of Wikipedia and decide which entries are "inappropriate for children"? And what criteria are they basing those decisions on? Who gets a say in drawing up the rules? Wikipedia couldn't afford to go through that process if they wanted to -- they'll just have to block the UK.

Well, @goatwack summed it up beautifully. Clean up your wrong-think, folks!

 

[megadam]

I still can't belive this passed into law -- the government seems to do so much of their communicating on WhatsApp you'd think they'd like the encryption.

This Bill -- I don't even know where to start ranting.

Platforms absolutely do need to take responsibility and rein in the hate, death threats, etc., but "politicized censorship decisions" are not something we need.

As for "age-gating" -- who's going to go through all 50 billion pages of Wikipedia and decide which entries are "inappropriate for children"? And what criteria are they basing those decisions on? Who gets a say in drawing up the rules? Wikipedia couldn't afford to go through that process if they wanted to -- they'll just have to block the UK.

Well, @goatwack summed it up beautifully. Clean up your wrong-think, folks!

As it's proving though a lot of the Government idiots have decided to either turn on disappearing messages or hit delete so for them they can just get away with destroying evidence and communication so encryption is by the by.

I saw over the weekend a slot review site wrote an article where the UKGC has given them a cease and desist and have threatened to block UK access to the site. I think this raises an even bigger point, how the fucking hell have we gotten to the point where a gambling regulator can now willingly make requests to censor parts of the Internet because there's something on there they don't like/agree with? If that's the case, wonder because Casinomeister and other sites through the simple act of showing reviews about crypto casinos that are not licensed or have any jurisdiction in the UK that the UKGC will have the audacity to file a similar request.

All of this comes down to in the UK people that are in positions that have no fucking clue making decisions about things that they shouldn't have the authority to do.

 

[justdoit]

I still can't belive this passed into law -- the government seems to do so much of their communicating on WhatsApp you'd think they'd like the encryption.

This Bill -- I don't even know where to start ranting.

Platforms absolutely do need to take responsibility and rein in the hate, death threats, etc., but "politicized censorship decisions" are not something we need.

As for "age-gating" -- who's going to go through all 50 billion pages of Wikipedia and decide which entries are "inappropriate for children"? And what criteria are they basing those decisions on? Who gets a say in drawing up the rules? Wikipedia couldn't afford to go through that process if they wanted to -- they'll just have to block the UK.

Well, @goatwack summed it up beautifully. Clean up your wrong-think, folks!

this is another one UKGC is going from forum to forum UK or EU ASIA Africa USA trying to stop ppl advertising Crypto casino are they joking?

 

[interlog]

this is another one UKGC is going from forum to forum UK or EU ASIA Africa USA trying to stop ppl advertising Crypto casino are they joking?

Not so sure:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Page 9:

In the case of remote gambling, section 333 provides that any regulations made by the Secretary of State (under s328), and the prohibition against advertising unlawful gambling(s330), apply where the advertising satisfies various tests. One of these is that, with regard to the gambling to which the advertising relates, at least one piece of remote gambling equipment to be used in providing facilities for that gambling is, or will, be situated in Great Britain.

So it doesn't apply to promoting casinos not based in the UK? Well that is the way I read it, but then again I am not a lawyer!

 

[slot_zombie]

I read the article about the UKGC threatening that other site, that wasn't even targeting the UK.

The attempted overreach is getting ridiculous at this point. It's quite creepy to think that the UKGC not only wishes to dictate not only where, how and, indeed if I should be allowed to play - but also, what I should be allowed to read about online?

@justdoit please tell me they are not actually creating forum accounts and posting on forums too?

 

[justdoit]

I read the article about the UKGC threatening that other site, that wasn't even targeting the UK.

The attempted overreach is getting ridiculous at this point. It's quite creepy to think that the UKGC not only wishes to dictate not only where, how and, indeed if I should be allowed to play - but also, what I should be allowed to read about online?

@justdoit please tell me they are not actually creating forum accounts and posting on forums too?

what u talking about it?

 

[goatwack]

Wouldn't fret about any UKGC chatbot accounts popping up, if anything, they'll be fairly easy to pick out from their ChatGPT leanings and UK-based casino bias.

Certainly no different to any of the number of sock accounts already present here

 

[jasonuk]

this is another one UKGC is going from forum to forum UK or EU ASIA Africa USA trying to stop ppl advertising Crypto casino are they joking?

So if they are three years away from understanding crypto casinos... how many decades away are they from understanding international law?

As for the overall legislation, the government have been pushing this for years... it was dangerous three decades ago, it's just as dangerous now. There is no such thing as "good guys" and "bad guys" when it comes to encryption - a backdoor negates the encryption and makes it worthless. The laws already existed to take action against platforms not doing enough to protect people, but they weren't being applied - instead they saw the opportunity to push one step closer to full surveillance which has been a pet project of the tories in recent years.

 

[Guntis]

Not so sure:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Page 9:

In the case of remote gambling, section 333 provides that any regulations made by the Secretary of State (under s328), and the prohibition against advertising unlawful gambling(s330), apply where the advertising satisfies various tests. One of these is that, with regard to the gambling to which the advertising relates, at least one piece of remote gambling equipment to be used in providing facilities for that gambling is, or will, be situated in Great Britain.

So it doesn't apply to promoting casinos not based in the UK? Well that is the way I read it, but then again I am not a lawyer!

A bit of info here.

About 330, the

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

says: "A person commits an offense if he advertises unlawful gambling.". This seems an original document, and there have been no updates since 01/09/2007 if to look at that blue arrow above the text.

The latest info about gambling advertising they usually keep here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

For businesses providing gambling online, UKGC states "You need a license from us if you provide facilities for remote gambling to consumers in Great Britain.", and then another line says "You must have a license to serve British consumers." Here is the source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[megadam]

A bit of info here.

About 330, the

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

says: "A person commits an offense if he advertises unlawful gambling.". This seems an original document, and there have been no updates since 01/09/2007 if to look at that blue arrow above the text.

The latest info about gambling advertising they usually keep here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

For businesses providing gambling online, UKGC states "You need a license from us if you provide facilities for remote gambling to consumers in Great Britain.", and then another line says "You must have a license to serve British consumers." Here is the source:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

In that case Casinomeister is in trouble.......I'd consider the Bonanza thread to be the depraved depths of unlawful gambling I've ever seen!

 

[Guntis]

I read the article about the UKGC threatening that other site, that wasn't even targeting the UK.

The attempted overreach is getting ridiculous at this point. It's quite creepy to think that the UKGC not only wishes to dictate not only where, how and, indeed if I should be allowed to play - but also, what I should be allowed to read about online?

@justdoit please tell me they are not actually creating forum accounts and posting on forums too?

 

[jasonuk]

That makes a bit more sense, if sites and/or users are impersonating the UKGC then they have more reason to go after them. Similarly, forums with any shred of integrity (I know, I know) would be banning such accounts at the first opportunity - nothing good is going to come from them.

 

[maxd]

So far no UKGC accounts here so ...

- Max

 

[Guntis]

That makes a bit more sense, if sites and/or users are impersonating the UKGC then they have more reason to go after them. Similarly, forums with any shred of integrity (I know, I know) would be banning such accounts at the first opportunity - nothing good is going to come from them.

I believe, there could easily be some of them around on the internet, usually trying to mislead the masses and make people only look in one direction. Something like this one below:

 

[LoopsterAU]

You mean the UK finally made it official ?

I can almost guarantee they been doing this (unofficially) using 5 eyes agreement since Australia passed it first years ago (in 2018).

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[justdoit]

View attachment 189447

I am sure UKGC are the same as GOV