Online Safety Bill Etc

[Sirius]

Just be careful that someone does not report you all to the thought police for promoting VPN’s.

[thenry]

freedom is no more you're nicked.

Originally Posted by Jaymoss

yeah but I only have to part with less than £2 a month plus I only use it to bypass geo locks and now this so do not need anything more. If I did I would use Tails

Around £1 more each month DOH! Is tails an autocorrect?

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by thenry

Around £1 more each month DOH! Is tails an autocorrect?

yeah but I pay monthly that is what I mean I do not have to buy blocks

Tails is a linux based operating system that integrates Tor

[thenry]

You mean a monthly rolling commitment. Digibit was that way for me but it's not worth it at £2.50 monthly.

Your knowledge exceeds mine

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by thenry

You mean a monthly rolling commitment. Digibit was that way for me but it's not worth it at £2.50 monthly.

Your knowledge exceeds mine

I am not committed to anything I just pay £1.50 because I use it sometimes. Do not use it enough to want to pay for blocks and have that size chunk come out of my tight wallet

[jem]

Originally Posted by Chris

Post edited - please see comments above

My apologies, I was intending to pick out particular points in the post I was responding to and answer them explicitly, rather than a generic response to the whole lot.

If bold text is not allowed, or reserved for mod comments; is there no ability to block this for ‘normal’ people’s use? It does strike me that it seems to be easy for users to fall fail of this rule innocently.

Just an observation.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by jem

My apologies, I was intending to pick out particular points in the post I was responding to and answer them explicitly, rather than a generic response to the whole lot.

If bold text is not allowed, or reserved for mod comments; is there no ability to block this for ‘normal’ people’s use? It does strike me that it seems to be easy for users to fall fail of this rule innocently.

Just an observation.

best way to do it is to split the quote up, if you're not sure how that works, you copy and paste the tags which are {QUOTE=user;post}{/QUOTE} but with square brackets instead, around the bit you want to quote and then respond to, and keep going. A bit like it currently looks when you see a post to quote.


Responding inline within the quote does look confusing as to who's said what.


In my experience with forum software especially from the admin/moderator end I'm not sure that the permission to restrict bold text would be possible. It would depend on the option existing within the preferences. I'm sure one of the team would be able to answer that for sure but that's what I'd expect.

Originally Posted by jem

My apologies, I was intending to pick out particular points in the post I was responding to and answer them explicitly, rather than a generic response to the whole lot.

If bold text is not allowed, or reserved for mod comments;

Bold is fine to highlight words, just not whole sentances.

[Sirius]

More unconfirmed rumours that scammers have moved quickly on this. Rumours of txt messages pertaining to be OFCOM enforcement quoting the Online Safety Bill demanding payment of a fine for accessing porn online or the police will attend and arrest you.

[Taf]

I decided to try to get rid of an annoying advert on Facebook, but using the option "Comment on this post".

But the instant response was not what I expected.

Is this due to Age Verification being required?

[Carth]

What it really says is

"why would we remove a revenue stream? Ads are big business"

[damien c]

Had another request for "Must provide id to use our service", Microsoft are now demanding either a photo or your id be uploaded in order to continue to use Xbox services like voice and text chat.

I wonder how long it is going to be before all these companies that are saying "We delete your image and id" get found out to be holding on to them.

[Carth]

No idea if related to this 'online safety bill' or not,

Just logged into youtube (google account) to comment on a music video (I do this about once a month).

To keep my account safe, and for easier recovery in case it's hacked, they asked for an alternate email address and/or a phone number. (first time I've had this extra step)

Luckily I could skip that and was then presented with . . . enter your home address - skipped that too, obviously

The thing is, are google just fishing for more data to sell on, or are they so worried about being able to keep my account secure that they need extra data for when it gets hacked?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Carth

No idea if related to this 'online safety bill' or not,

Just logged into youtube (google account) to comment on a music video (I do this about once a month).

To keep my account safe, and for easier recovery in case it's hacked, they asked for an alternate email address and/or a phone number. (first time I've had this extra step)

Luckily I could skip that and was then presented with . . . enter your home address - skipped that too, obviously

The thing is, are google just fishing for more data to sell on, or are they so worried about being able to keep my account secure that they need extra data for when it gets hacked?

Having an opinion das ist verboten

[Jaymoss]

Originally Posted by damien c

Had another request for "Must provide id to use our service", Microsoft are now demanding either a photo or your id be uploaded in order to continue to use Xbox services like voice and text chat.

I wonder how long it is going to be before all these companies that are saying "We delete your image and id" get found out to be holding on to them.

There are AI sites out there that Generate ID for this. Not gonna link or say I promote this but .....