Nobody Cares about Britain

[Innula Zenovka]

I had not realized these were part of the "age verification for access" requirement. Interesting!

Of course, I'm all for reducing the chances of kids getting exposure to all that stuff, even the more traditional porn. I just think this simplistic approach isn't going to accomplish as much as a more creative approach might.

Most of the publicity about the Online Safety Act has been about access to porn, which is understandable because that's the aspect that most affects the general, adult, public like you and me.

However, that's an incidental aspect of the Act -- it places a statutory duty of care on online platforms, requiring them to prevent exposure to children under 18 of both illegal and legal but harmful content, such as sites promoting self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, and violent or hateful content such as far-right groups and influencers like Andrew Tate. Among other things, this means social media platforms have to ensure their algorithms don't actively direct young people's accounts to legal but harmful content, which both newspaper and academic research suggests they do very readily.

The Act places a general duty on content providers to find ways to protect children and young people from accessing this content, and the Regulator, OFCOM, is actively pursuing companies to ensure they comply.

You and I think of this in terms of how it might affect us -- if we wanted to access porn and didn't want expose our identities to age verification procedures, we'd simply use a VPN, so we conclude it's all an imposition and a waste of time. But if we look at it from the point of view of a teenager simply checking stuff out on YouTube or TikTok rather than actively looking for particular types of content, then it's a bit different.

We'll never stop underage teens from smoking or drinking if that's what they want to do. But that's no reason not to place a duty on retailers not to sell tobacco or alcohol to under 18s (21s in much of the US, I think), despite the inconvenience of adults sometimes being asked to prove their age, and it's certainly no reason not to prevent children being exposed to targeted advertising for alcohol and tobacco products.

I also note that Elon Musk considers all this a potential infringement on free speech.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

It would be a devastating blow to all companies, because VPNs are a much needed piece of technology for road warriors to safely connect to the intranet of their employers.

Yes... banning VPN's would be comparable to earlier discussion around trying to ban encryption. It's a security disaster that sounds good to old, clueless, control freak politicians.

Most of the publicity about the Online Safety Act has been about access to porn, which is understandable because that's the aspect that most affects the general, adult, public like you and me.

However, that's an incidental aspect of the Act -- it places a statutory duty of care on online platforms, requiring them to prevent exposure to children under 18 of both illegal and legal but harmful content, such as sites promoting self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, and violent or hateful content such as far-right groups and influencers like Andrew Tate. Among other things, this means social media platforms have to ensure their algorithms don't actively direct young people's accounts to legal but harmful content, which both newspaper and academic research suggests they do very readily.

The Act places a general duty on content providers to find ways to protect children and young people from accessing this content, and the Regulator, OFCOM, is actively pursuing companies to ensure they comply.

You and I think of this in terms of how it might affect us -- if we wanted to access porn and didn't want expose our identities to age verification procedures, we'd simply use a VPN, so we conclude it's all an imposition and a waste of time. But if we look at it from the point of view of a teenager simply checking stuff out on YouTube or TikTok rather than actively looking for particular types of content, then it's a bit different.

We'll never stop underage teens from smoking or drinking if that's what they want to do. But that's no reason not to place a duty on retailers not to sell tobacco or alcohol to under 18s (21s in much of the US, I think), despite the inconvenience of adults sometimes being asked to prove their age, and it's certainly no reason not to prevent children being exposed to targeted advertising for alcohol and tobacco products.

I also note that Elon Musk considers all this a potential infringement on free speech.

Yeah.... I really wish we could forbid companies like youtube from recommending overtly racist content to children, but that would never fly here given our particular interpretation of free speech and who's in charge.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Yeah.... I really wish we could forbid companies like youtube from recommending overtly racist content to children, but that would never fly here given our particular interpretation of free speech and who's in charge.

Unmasked: the man behind one of the fastest growing far-right YouTube channels

The Guardian has identified the self-described “national socialist” behind an openly extremist YouTube channel that in just over two months has accumulated 50,000 subscribers, seen more than 2.3m views, and likely made thousands of dollars from YouTube’s revenue-sharing monetization program.

Johnathan Christopher “Chris” Booth, 37, lives in the unincorporated community of Coral, a part of Maple Valley Township in Michigan’s Montcalm county, and is married to a senior local Republican official.

Booth has published more than 70 YouTube videos since May on his Shameless Sperg account, whose graphic design elements feature stylized SS bolts. Titles of his videos – generally a recording of him delivering his views direct to camera – include: “Why I Dislike Jews. It’s not complicated”, “Black Crimes Matter: Never Relax” and “Jews and FBI hate you and your free speech”.

 

[Essence Lumin]

Xvideos.com is a large porn site which has much to say about adult verification services. (No doubt but most of it rings true). Their post is quite long but I chose this part to quote. The vast majority of their content is just ridiculous however their post is well thought out imo.

The Scam of Age Verification - PORNBIZ.COM

The Scam of Age Verification - PORNBIZ.COM

pornbiz.com

Are sex and porn really harmful?

The idea that adult content is inherently harmful to teenagers is a fallacy. In social sciences, it’s always possible to find a study that supports almost any conclusion.

In fact, Ofcom (UK regulator for AV) acknowledges that research into pornography’s impact on children is limited and inconclusive — prompting calls for further study.

It’s a debate very similar to the old panic over video game or movie violence — where the consensus today is that these things are not inherently harmful.

This is a textbook case of moral panic. We've seen it before — over rock music, comic books, Dungeons & Dragons, rap lyrics, and video games. Each time, fear was whipped up around the idea that a new form of media would corrupt “the youth.” And each time, the panic faded once it became obvious that society had not collapsed. Today’s AV push is just the latest version of that same irrational reflex.

It says a lot about a society that will move faster to restrict the viewing of sex — a universal and natural human drive — than it will to ban depictions of torture, murder, bombings, or decapitations.

Religions and ideologies have long exploited the universality of sexual desire to instill guilt — because guilt is a powerful tool of control.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Xvideos.com is a large porn site which has much to say about adult verification services. (No doubt but most of it rings true). Their post is quite long but I chose this part to quote. The vast majority of their content is just ridiculous however their post is well thought out imo.

The Scam of Age Verification - PORNBIZ.COM

The Scam of Age Verification - PORNBIZ.COM

pornbiz.com

Whenever I hear arguments from a business that, while someone should certainly take responsibility for mitigating whatever ill effects may follow from the manufacture, sale or use of their product, it certainly shouldn't be them, and anyway there's no real evidence it causes anyone any harm in the first place, I have to confess I'm always rather sceptical.

My scepticism increases in this particular case when I read

On a free site, users do not expect to hand over private data. They simply refuse — and move on to other sites. Why wouldn’t they?

and I remember the adage that

If you're not paying for the product, you are the product

and then realise that if British visitors to Xvideos.com can't be identified as such because they use a VPN so they appear to be from some other jurisdiction that doesn't require age verification, the site cannot monetize their data and they also dilute the value about all the site's visitors because the site's customers (advertisers and anyone else paying for visitor data) can't be sure it's accurate.

 

[GoblinCampFollower]

I even wonder if porn producers could benefit from age verification laws a little bit if it cracks down on people sharing the free and stolen content. We'll see what actually happens though.

And I'm not very concerned about children "accidentally" viewing vanilla sex and softcore. I'm far more concerned about them seeing extremist content or violent fetish content they aren't ready for.

 

[Essence Lumin]

Whenever I hear arguments from a business that, while someone should certainly take responsibility for mitigating whatever ill effects may follow from the manufacture, sale or use of their product, it certainly shouldn't be them, and anyway there's no real evidence it causes anyone any harm in the first place, I have to confess I'm always rather sceptical.

My scepticism increases in this particular case when I read...

I don't think there is a need for studies or whatever to be sceptical about. If one is old enough (as I think we both are), it is remembering about considering restricting content of whatever in the name of the children always that is the reason. To paraphrase, exposure to films of bombs and violence are fine but sex, even dumb and for the paycheck is abhorrent now. Requote -

It’s a debate very similar to the old panic over video game or movie violence — where the consensus today is that these things are not inherently harmful.

This is a textbook case of moral panic. We've seen it before — over rock music, comic books, Dungeons & Dragons, rap lyrics, and video games. Each time, fear was whipped up around the idea that a new form of media would corrupt “the youth.” And each time, the panic faded once it became obvious that society had not collapsed.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

I even wonder if porn producers could benefit from age verification laws a little bit if it cracks down on people sharing the free and stolen content. We'll see what actually happens though.

And I'm not very concerned about children "accidentally" viewing vanilla sex and softcore. I'm far more concerned about them seeing extremist content or violent fetish content they aren't ready for.

I don't think people realise that porn freely available online isn't the sort of material they may have encountered >30 years ago. I don't think I'd heard of sexual choking (breathplay) until 1994, and then again in the case of R v Coutts (2006).

Now,. Erotic asphyxiation has become mainstream among under-35s. How did we get here?

I don't think there is a need for studies or whatever to be sceptical about. If one is old enough (as I think we both are), it is remembering about considering restricting content of whatever in the name of the children always that is the reason. To paraphrase, exposure to films of bombs and violence are fine but sex, even dumb and for the paycheck is abhorrent now. Requote -

It’s a debate very similar to the old panic over video game or movie violence — where the consensus today is that these things are not inherently harmful.

This is a textbook case of moral panic. We've seen it before — over rock music, comic books, Dungeons & Dragons, rap lyrics, and video games. Each time, fear was whipped up around the idea that a new form of media would corrupt “the youth.” And each time, the panic faded once it became obvious that society had not collapsed.

The fact that there have been moral panics (usually whipped up in the US by right-wing religious groups) about potential harms to children does not, to my mind, mean that no harms to children and young people exist.

The UK's Online Safety Act was a bipartisan measure, based on a huge consultation among all manner of interested parties that went on for years. Content providers are now under an obligation to make robust efforts to protect children and young people from all manner of potential harms -- including violent content.

Content providers are concerned about this because it disrupts their business model. Their reaction reminds me rather of the right wing outrage over Michelle Obama's attempts to encourage healthy eating and prevent childhood obesity.

ETA For what it's worth, the most serious opposition to the Online Safety Act in the UK comes from Nigel Farage.

ETA 2 This article is worth a read Everything the right - and the left – are getting wrong about the Online Safety Act

 

[Essence Lumin]

This is a thread about Britain. It is somewhat difficult to imagine life over there. Here in my town and neighborhood where I am there is no violence but it is all over the country. A little dumb porn has nothing to compare to this song, though 14 years old I have just heard. Only in America. I hope people in the EU will realize this needs to be stopped despite deep ties to here which are falling apart.

I don't think people realise that porn freely available online isn't the sort of material they may have encountered >30 years ago. I don't think I'd heard of sexual choking (breathplay) until 1994, and then again in the case of R v Coutts (2006).

Now,. Erotic asphyxiation has become mainstream among under-35s. How did we get here?


The fact that there have been moral panics (usually whipped up in the US by right-wing religious groups) about potential harms to children does not, to my mind, mean that no harms to children and young people exist.

The UK's Online Safety Act was a bipartisan measure, based on a huge consultation among all manner of interested parties that went on for years. Content providers are now under an obligation to make robust efforts to protect children and young people from all manner of potential harms -- including violent content.

Content providers are concerned about this because it disrupts their business model. Their reaction reminds me rather of the right wing outrage over Michelle Obama's attempts to encourage healthy eating and prevent childhood obesity.

ETA For what it's worth, the most serious opposition to the Online Safety Act in the UK comes from Nigel Farage.

ETA 2 This article is worth a read Everything the right - and the left – are getting wrong about the Online Safety Act

Things are so different over there. There is so much violence and cruelty over here. It likely is not the same there. To go off on a tangent, I hope the UK and EU don't get sucked into the current madness here and somehow fend off the economic, military or other ties to here. It's depressing, but here I am and we are.

 

[Free]

Scotland is still a part of Britain, yes?

Scotland Trolls Trump With Massive New Wind Farm on His Doorstep (archive.today)

The Scottish government has green-lighted one of the world’s biggest wind farms, just days after President Donald Trump ranted about “windmills” while visiting the country.

The U.S. president was in Scotland to visit his golf courses in South Ayrshire and Aberdeenshire, the latter of which has a history with wind farms. While Trump International Golf Links in Aberdeen was still being built, Aberdeen Renewable Energy Group also started constructing a row of wind turbines that impeded the view at his course.

 

[Beebo Brink]

Adrian Mardell, the CEO of Jaguar, announced that he will step down. He is the one who initiated the failed rebranding of the Jaguar brand.

That "brand campaign" was such a glaring and utterly predictable fail. Only someone incredibly tone-deaf and culturally dense could have created that fiasco.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

This is a thread about Britain. It is somewhat difficult to imagine life over there. Here in my town and neighborhood where I am there is no violence but it is all over the country. A little dumb porn has nothing to compare to this song, though 14 years old I have just heard. Only in America. I hope people in the EU will realize this needs to be stopped despite deep ties to here which are falling apart.




Things are so different over there. There is so much violence and cruelty over here. It likely is not the same there. To go off on a tangent, I hope the UK and EU don't get sucked into the current madness here and somehow fend off the economic, military or other ties to here. It's depressing, but here I am and we are.

I don't mean to give the impression that everything is OK here. Far from it -- there's a widespread feeling that nothing works, and there's a danger -- to my mind, at the moment overstated, but who knows? -- that the next general election could see Nigel Farage's Reform party in government, if only as part of a right-wing coalition. I'm not prepared to speculate that far ahead but it's certainly not as impossible a prospect as it would have seemed two years ago.

However there are, as you say, big differences between the US and the UK. Far from being a "red meat" measure designed to appeal to the Evangelical and Christofascist far right (who aren't as yet a problem over here), it's a bipartisan measure, crafted over several years, designed to place a duty of care on large content providers to protect children and under-18s from both illegal and legal but harmful content.

The main targets aren't the Porn sites. They're Meta, X, Tik-Tok and other social media sites, who now have an obligation to do what they can to prevent minors from accessing not only hard-core porn but, more importantly, self-harm sites, including those promoting anorexia and bulimia, and sites promoting extreme violent content, extremist political and incel sites, and so forth.

In order to discharge that obligation, which I think is not unreasonable, Meta, Tik-Tok and the rest will need to know how old their UK visitors are, and that's what they're complaining like hell about.

From my point of view, as an adult, it's not a big problem. If I'm unwilling to provide personal details (PornHub simply wanted an email address for me when I tested it, and was quite content to accept Innula's credentials), I can easily use a VPN, as I'm used to doing when I see that, for copyright reasons, music videos aren't available in the UK/EU, or newspaper sites are open only to US users because of the EU's data protection legislation. It's at most a minor nuisance that takes a couple of clicks to resolve.

It's a rather larger problem for large social media platforms because it disrupts their business model. It requires them to be both a lot more active and proactive about moderating and removing content, at least for accounts belonging to UK minors, and also to change their algorithms to ensure under-age users aren't directed to this kind of material.

To my mind, the argument "but they'll just use a VPN" is specious and misses the point. Whether or not individual underage users decide to use VPNs, Meta, X, Tik-Tok and the rest will still be obliged -- at risk of hefty penalties if they don't -- actually to act upon their declared policies on harmful content, deal promptly with complaints when they receive them, and moderate proactively, looking for particular types of objectionable content and either removing it or flagging it as unsuitable for minors.

That's what so much upsets Musk, Zuckerberg and the other silicon valley oligarchs.

The measures, if not particularly popular over here, are at least seen as in many cases necessary and, as I keep saying, the main opposition in the UK comes from the far right.

ETA: Besides porn, this is the kind of thing the UK law targets:


‘Children are entering a hellscape’: the terrifying film about grieving parents taking on social media giants

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Airbnb host suspended after rejecting Cwmbran guests because they are Welsh

Jemma Louise Gough and Jamie Lee Watkins had their Airbnb stay rejected because of their nationality.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Casey Pelous]

Airbnb host suspended after rejecting Cwmbran guests because they are Welsh

Jemma Louise Gough and Jamie Lee Watkins had their Airbnb stay rejected because of their nationality.

www.bbc.co.uk

1) From this side of the pond, this looks so weird and arbitrary as to seem like some sort of Pythonesque sketch or something. Is there some stereotype of Welsh people that would lead to this? Perhaps some recent victory by a Welsh sportsball team against an English team that would lead to hard feelings?

2) +100 to the Welsh woman who said her "flabber has never been so gasted!" No, heck, +1000.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

1) From this side of the pond, this looks so weird and arbitrary as to seem like some sort of Pythonesque sketch or something. Is there some stereotype of Welsh people that would lead to this? Perhaps some recent victory by a Welsh sportsball team against an English team that would lead to hard feelings?

2) +100 to the Welsh woman who said her "flabber has never been so gasted!" No, heck, +1000.

It seemed really weird to me, too. I know there is, or was, traditionally some bad feeling between North Wales and Birmingham, to do with a valley in North Wales being flooded to provide drinking water for Birmingham, but that was back in the 1960s and 70s, and I've never heard it about Manchester. All I can think of was that the Manchester AirBnB hosts had once received a hostile reception in one of of the Welsh-speaking areas of North Wales, which are very picturesque but can also be pretty insular, and had decided the Welsh are all miserable buggers (many Welsh people from the English-speaking south of the principality think the rural North Walians are miserable buggers, too).

 

[Beebo Brink]

It seemed really weird to me, too.

Wait, what? Didn't someone post this on VVO recently? Or did I run across it somewhere else?

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Wait, what? Didn't someone post this on VVO recently? Or did I run across it somewhere else?

Not me, no.

 

[detrius]

It seemed really weird to me, too. I know there is, or was, traditionally some bad feeling between North Wales and Birmingham, to do with a valley in North Wales being flooded to provide drinking water for Birmingham, but that was back in the 1960s and 70s, and I've never heard it about Manchester. All I can think of was that the Manchester AirBnB hosts had once received a hostile reception in one of of the Welsh-speaking areas of North Wales, which are very picturesque but can also be pretty insular, and had decided the Welsh are all miserable buggers (many Welsh people from the English-speaking south of the principality think the rural North Walians are miserable buggers, too).

Speaking of Birmingham: do you have any idea how people living in this row of houses move furniture in and out of their homes? They only seem to be connected to the road via two narrow footpaths.

Is that a common thing in the UK?

 

[Free]

Speaking of Birmingham: do you have any idea how people living in this row of houses move furniture in and out of their homes?

They don't? Perhaps all furniture intended for use there are built on the premises.

 

[Innula Zenovka]

Speaking of Birmingham: do you have any idea how people living in this row of houses move furniture in and out of their homes? They only seem to be connected to the road via two narrow footpaths.

Is that a common thing in the UK?

As far as I can tell from playing round with the arrows, the link takes me to the back of the houses on Holly Avenue. Holly Avenue itself is a small narrow side street, off the main road, the A441. I imagine they simply bring the furniture van down Holly Avenue (or unload on the A441 and bring the furniture down Holly Avenue on a dolly) and in through the front door.