• lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    As much as I hate Reddit this is just continuation of the UK government steamrolling and destroying the free Internet, ruining the adult experience.

    One of the wonders of the Internet was that it was wildly unregulated - if you wanted it and you could disable safesearch you could get it, with the caveat of ISP-enforced content locks on all mobile data subscriptions under the name of a legal child (under 18), workplace and school security and filters, unremovable Safesearch on most search engines etc. Broadband required an adult, who in turn could activate parental controls. I couldnt wait until I turned 18 so I could finally access many sites for porn, news, gaming, forums and anything containing keywords without being blocked. I had a list of proxies for bypassing school filters.

    In short there is significant existing protection in place and we know that this is simply more evidence of Orwellian enforcement.

    • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      20 hours ago

      The unregulated internet had literal child porn sites that were available to anyone.

      I don’t disagree with some of your points but the “wild West” internet shouldn’t exist in society.

      • 87Six@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 hours ago

        And how the fuck, exactly, are their new laws preventing CP sites from existing?

      • lyralycan@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Well yes, the more CSAM detection and predator hunting, the better. Task forces and, dare I say it, detection programs with algorithms that may or may not include AI learning, are invaluable to eliminating the actually terrible stuff, anything that can’t even be educational.

        I believe the Online Safety Act and Chat Control’s sections that tie every user’s real identity to their online actions is not a solution, because when that data gets leaked and/or abused many innocent lives are in danger. I trust the state very little. I trust unidentified malicious hackers even less.

        • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Leaked data doesn’t even need to be dangerous to life. I, like many others, don’t have “nothing to hide”, but I don’t still want my real name next to a list of content I’ve watched from streaming sites. Also I don’t really want my identity tied to this pseudonym, or any other accounts on any platform. There’s a crapload of problems and it would be a heaven for scammers if there was no way to stay at least relatively anonymous around the net.

      • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        okay so, first, were the CSAM websites illegal then? is the issue you see one of enforcement, not how the laws are written?

        • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Yes, it has been illegal for quite some time. I’m guessing you are on the younger side?

          I’m the 90s clicking a link, even one with a legit looking url, could be a rather risky proposition. On slashdot and the like many of us would deliberately avoid many random links unless someone else commented about it first.

              • MinnesotaGoddam@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                the text only music forums i was on in the 90s strangely didn’t have any problems with csam. it’s all where you congregate.

                • paul@lemmy.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  5 hours ago

                  To be honest it probably did. There’s a whole army of broken heroes behind every social media site whose job it is to block and remove that kind of content. If you didn’t see anything, thank the admins.

                  The problem with the kinds of people who are into that kind of stuff is that they want to shove it under your nose to make you uncomfortable.

                  • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    God bless the poor bastards, because they permanently sacrifice themselves to save the rest of us from the absolute fucking worst.

                    That is one of the few professions I would like AI to reliably take away.

                • a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 hours ago

                  Lol, you don’t understand the internet, good person, but you are the physical embodiment of its current base.

                  Step 1: Call fraud on a legitimate claim from someone who was there at the time.

                  Step 2: Boast about your long, prolific history on the Internet to establish your credentials.

                  Step 3: Double back because you stayed an a strangely singular lane, and as @paul points out, still avoiding getting it.

                  Keep on keeping on, I guess.