Online Safety Bill Etc

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I wouldn't worry too much. It won't be too long where cars will be self driving, in fact people won't usually own a car anymore. They'll simply book a self driving car as they do now for taxis, paid for via monthly subscription or single use charges for infrequent users.

Bad driving, drink driving won't be issues anymore, unless they decide that a sober qualified driver has to be present in driverless cars in emergencies to take over. Saw some footage in America where they get stuck in certain situations, so I don't think the states has such a restriction.

Glad i will be 6 foot under by that time. The world will be a horrible place once the offended have removed every pleasure from life.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Carth

So that's driving instructors and examiners out of a job then, and how will insurance work . . and at what price?

Yes, i've long said that automation/AI will lead to job losses never seen before. It's why I believe that all immigration (apart from exceptional circumstances like skill shortages) should now only be allowed on a temporary basis.

The old attitudes of people being expected to work for a living if they are capable and being expected to work for the things that they want will be swept away in favour of unconditional benefits* for those that would prefer not to work.

This will be costly enough as it is for those living here, without the added burden of immigrants coming here.

* I can see most/all benefits being scrapped in favour of a taxable universal guaranteed minimum income being paid to everyone, paid for by cuts to existing support and a tax on the use of AI/machines by employers dispensing with human labour.

[Carth]

Soon the only actual people working will be the physical/manual workers, and if they decide it's not worth the hassle we really will be in that canoe with no paddle

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Carth

Soon the only actual people working will be the physical/manual workers, and if they decide it's not worth the hassle we really will be in that canoe with no paddle

These jobs will still attract those for whom working provides more than a wage eg an identity, self respect, social networking etc. They will also be paid a wage over and above their Universal Basic Income, so will receive reward for their effort, so I don't think it will be too much of a problem.

[damien c]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I wouldn't worry too much. It won't be too long where cars will be self driving, in fact people won't usually own a car anymore. They'll simply book a self driving car as they do now for taxis, paid for via monthly subscription or single use charges for infrequent users.

Bad driving, drink driving won't be issues anymore, unless they decide that a sober qualified driver has to be present in driverless cars in emergencies to take over. Saw some footage in America where they get stuck in certain situations, so I don't think the states has such a restriction.

Ah yes those ever reliable self driving cars that currently are driving the wrong way down roads, getting stuck at basic junctions, getting stuck in traffic and deciding to drive on the footpath and many other issues that you can find by searching for the Waymo issues.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by damien c

Ah yes those ever reliable self driving cars that currently are driving the wrong way down roads, getting stuck at basic junctions, getting stuck in traffic and deciding to drive on the footpath and many other issues that you can find by searching for the Waymo issues.

Much like humans then , what did you expect

[damien c]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Much like humans then , what did you expect

I would expect them to be smart, not stupid.

Humans wouldn't just stop and block traffic because the power went out.

https://www.facebook.com/SFChronicle...5863638631719/

Or drive around in circles for hours because of a glitch.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/czx20g00ly1o

Humans also intentionally drive into flooded roads instead of finding an alternative route.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy2011dl4xo

Humans also drive into constructions sites don't they for no reason other than "oh it's technically the fastest route, even though the roads are closed"

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/sl-ShGlEylI


I wouldn't even consider getting into one of them!

[Itshim]

Sorry but have seen cars driven all the ways you listed, round and round. A roundabout. Cars driven into flooded roads and getting stuck. Ok so following sat navs. Lorries , buses hitting bridges . Driving the wrong way on motorways. "Dieing "on the road , running out of fuel.. not saying they are safe and I can't see me getting in one. However they are not doing anything that humans haven't done

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I'm not sure you fully understand the complexity of what you're proposing...

Safe sites are already defined. If children’s phones simply had a walled garden of safe sites that were suitable for them, that would not be a tremendous technical problem.

[jem]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Safe sites are already defined. If children’s phones simply had a walled garden of safe sites that were suitable for them, that would not be a tremendous technical problem.

Safe sites are already defined? Are they? Who defined them? Is there a list? But as some three new websites are setup every second, that’s a hell of a job to keep track, determine if they are ’safe’ and add them to the walled garden list, isn't it?

I mean hypothetically, I setup a site ’nicekiddyfriendlystuff.com’, having only educational items and then decide six months later, that it’s not making me any money and decide to host hard-core porn on it. What happens then?

Does each ’safe site’ have to be checked every, let’s say, every week?

No I'm sorry, but it is actually a massive, massive technical problem.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by jem

Safe sites are already defined? Are they? Who defined them? Is there a list? But as some three new websites are setup every second, that’s a hell of a job to keep track, determine if they are ’safe’ and add them to the walled garden list, isn't it?

I mean hypothetically, I setup a site ’nicekiddyfriendlystuff.com’, having only educational items and then decide six months later, that it’s not making me any money and decide to host hard-core porn on it. What happens then?

Does each ’safe site’ have to be checked every, let’s say, every week?

No I'm sorry, but it is actually a massive, massive technical problem.

Indeed. Things are not always as easy or as black & white as people think.

Interestingly, it was on this morning's 'Morning Live' programme that, since last January in order to comply with the Online Safety Act, iPhone users are having to upload a copy of their credit card or driving licence to prove that they are over 18. I'm not allowed to drive, do driving licences have dates of births on them? If not a driving licence holder may only be 17!

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

do driving licences have dates of births on them?

Yes, they do.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Indeed. Things are not always as easy or as black & white as people think.

Interestingly, it was on this morning's 'Morning Live' programme that, since last January in order to comply with the Online Safety Act, iPhone users are having to upload a copy of their credit card or driving licence to prove that they are over 18. I'm not allowed to drive, do driving licences have dates of births on them? If not a driving licence holder may only be 17!

Gosh, are there still people that stupid?
or is it Morning Live making stuff up?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jem

Safe sites are already defined? Are they? Who defined them? Is there a list? But as some three new websites are setup every second, that’s a hell of a job to keep track, determine if they are ’safe’ and add them to the walled garden list, isn't it?

I mean hypothetically, I setup a site ’nicekiddyfriendlystuff.com’, having only educational items and then decide six months later, that it’s not making me any money and decide to host hard-core porn on it. What happens then?

Does each ’safe site’ have to be checked every, let’s say, every week?

No I'm sorry, but it is actually a massive, massive technical problem.

I must say, I find it hilarious that most of the technically minded people posting on this site have such a negative mindset that every new innovation suggested comes fraught with impossibilities! Mate, you need to stop seeing impossible obstacles and free up your mind to find solutions.

The answer to my question is actually very straight forward. Such an I-Phone to protect younger children has found its way onto the market already. It’s designed ‘specifically for children, free from social media and web browsing’, and it’s called Sage Mobile.

These phones automatically filter harmful websites and adult content, and it offers only pre-vetted safe apps. VPN’s and all back door routes into mainstream internet are blocked.

That is the way to go with online safety. Let adults be adults and leave them the hell alone to look at what they want without trying to have them jump through hoops to get at it.

https://tech-user.co.uk/2025/07/17/i...Ddriven%20apps.

For older children, a more appropriate device could be designed. This could ensure that Safari would restrict access to approved sites only, and no App Store access would be possible. Educational and communication apps could be approved by parents and safe search would be enforced. DNS filtering would be active. This would create the ‘walled garden’ similar to how children’s tablets, school devices or services like Gabb Wireless and Pinwheel approach child safety.