Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardCoulter
Just been on the news that the committee scrutinising the Online Harms Bill doesn't think that it goes far enough. They believe that certain things should be made outright illegal before they are even posted and subsequently dealt with eg encouraging suicide, cyber flashing etc.
They have concluded that the fine line between freedom of speech and protecting vulnerable people from online harm hasn't been met voluntarily by websites.
In addition, they believe that ISP's should be made more responsible for online harm prevention too.
|
I wonder just how they are going to make that work?
Will ISP's have to employ an army of people who's role and responsibility is to do nothing but trawl the internet looking for breaches of the 'new' rules?
It can't be even more algorithms thrown into computer programs that constantly scan web pages, because they just spot words and phrases, not intent or subtle innuendo.
No, it will still be people 'reporting' posts where they believe something now '
illegal' has been written, therefore a '
crime' has been committed hasn't it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth
Just look at how many times on this forum, that a MOD has had to step in and tell people to cool down . . then take it a stage further where instead of warning people, you have to (by law) report them to the authorities as 'posts that could be construed as offensive'
That could eventually lead to bye bye forum, closed down and possibly fines handed out. Do we want it to reach that stage?
|