Online Safety Bill Etc

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

once the Online Safety Act is fully operational in 2025 and website owners will be required to ensure that children below the age of 13 do not have access to their sites.

I think you mean social media sites - children under 13 will not be banned from all websites at all, thats utter nonsense you have made up.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

In Australia they are in the process of banning social media for those under 16.

They are debating it, its not quite a law yet.
Also, again, you completely miss the point that it wont stop anyone.
Under 18's (16s in the past) have been banned from buying cigarettes (& Alcohol) for decades, its never stopped them getting either.

[pip08456]

Originally Posted by Paul

They are debating it, its not quite a law yet.
Also, again, you completely miss the point that it wont stop anyone.
Under 18's (16s in the past) have been banned from buying cigarettes (& Alcohol) for decades, its never stopped them getting either.

Voted on and now law.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Voted on and now law.

Yes like others laws passed really work don't they. No-one steals, speeds or murders since becoming illegal. Just another way for lawyers to make money 💰

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Yes like others laws passed really work don't they. No-one steals, speeds or murders since becoming illegal. Just another way for lawyers to make money ��

I'm pretty sure that there's fewer murders, theft and speeding because of the laws against them. They're not there for the lawyers. The penalties act as deterrents, they can't prevent these situations entirely due to human nature.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I'm pretty sure that there's fewer murders, theft and speeding because of the laws against them. They're not there for the lawyers. The penalties act as deterrents, they can't prevent these situations entirely due to human nature.

Exactly.

---------- Post added at 01:50 ---------- Previous post was at 01:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Paul

I think you mean social media sites - children under 13 will not be banned from all websites at all, thats utter nonsense you have made up.


They are debating it, its not quite a law yet.
Also, again, you completely miss the point that it wont stop anyone.
Under 18's (16s in the past) have been banned from buying cigarettes (& Alcohol) for decades, its never stopped them getting either.

I was speaking in the context of social media sites.

If by the use of this term they specifically mean sites like Facebook, Snapchat, etc and not all sites with user to user content, I wonder if there will be more children joining forums such as this one as an alternative??

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Exactly.

---------- Post added at 01:50 ---------- Previous post was at 01:45 ----------



I was speaking in the context of social media sites.

If by the use of this term they specifically mean sites like Facebook, Snapchat, etc and not all sites with user to user content, I wonder if there will be more children joining forums such as this one as an alternative??

Hopefully not, at times there’s already enough children on here……

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Exactly.

---------- Post added at 01:50 ---------- Previous post was at 01:45 ----------



I was speaking in the context of social media sites.

If by the use of this term they specifically mean sites like Facebook, Snapchat, etc and not all sites with user to user content, I wonder if there will be more children joining forums such as this one as an alternative??

no they'll stay on the sites their on now,they'll just work around the legalities i don't believe it's that easy to put the geanie back in the bottle

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

no they'll stay on the sites their on now,they'll just work around the legalities i don't believe it's that easy to put the geanie back in the bottle

I'm sure that some will try as it's always been the case that children have tried to do things that they're not supposed to, not just online, but things like drinking under age etc.

If they do manage to succeed they will have nothing to lose as it won't be them or their parents that get into trouble, it will be the site owners that cop for it.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I'm pretty sure that there's fewer murders, theft and speeding because of the laws against them. They're not there for the lawyers. The penalties act as deterrents, they can't prevent these situations entirely due to human nature.

If it wasn't against the law it would be legal, so questionable if it was recorded laws could be a lot simpler, politicians, a lot of whom are lawyers , don't choose to pass , if you do this the sentence is this , but add a lot of but ........ so back to passing this won't stop it happening. Which Richard clearly believes it will.

[RichardCoulter]

As the Online Safety Act is introduced, website owners have been given three months notice by Ofcom that they must ensure that their sites are compliant with their code of practice by next March:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safe...es-into-force/

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

As the Online Safety Act is introduced, website owners have been given three months notice by Ofcom that they must ensure that their sites are compliant with their code of practice by next March:

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safe...es-into-force/

Thats a lot of websites they have to check, i have one and i have checked my contact details on the site so lets see if they contact me as mine is not compliant on one little issue

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

As the Online Safety Act is introduced, website owners have been given three months notice by Ofcom that they must ensure that their sites are compliant with their code of practice by next March:

Again, you imply this is ALL websites, when its not.

The Act places new safety duties on social media firms, search engines, messaging, gaming and dating apps, and pornography and file-sharing sites.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Paul

Again, you imply this is ALL websites, when its not.

Indeed and that is why i posted what i did. My site is not compliant and never will be. I think those that do use it which are friends and is invite only would kick up a stink if i changed it to compile with those who are offended on behalf of those they think should be offended but are not offended.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Paul

Again, you imply this is ALL websites, when its not.

I was talking in the context of social media sites.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I was talking in the context of social media sites.

No, you made no such distinction ..

As the Online Safety Act is introduced, website owners have been given three months notice by Ofcom

No one here is a mind reader, if you mean "social media sites" then you need to say so.