Cybersecurity professional with an interest/background in networking. Beginning to delve into binary exploitation and reverse engineering.

  • 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 27th, 2024

help-circle
  • So as I understand it from conversations surrounding the USB-C stuff and other things the EU was trying to enforce on US headquartered companies, “doing business in” means the company has a registered subsidiary in that region, they have local payment processors, etc. So Meta does business in the EU or UK because they sell advertising space to businesses in those regions that target users in those regions, and the ad fees are paid to that local subsidiary through local payment processors.

    Ofcom is not demanding that age verification is implemented for all users world wide, but for UK users. 4Chan can decide to not comply (which I think is good), but then it is not surprising that if you keep doing business in the UK (not blocking UK users/IPs) that fines (which 4chan will just ignore as they are not UK based) and possible bans on your service in the UK follow.

    I think we’re on the same page. Ofcom can’t force 4chan to do anything, because they don’t have jurisdiction over 4chan. They can’t force 4chan to implement age verification, or to implement geoblocks. They can issue fines if they feel like it, but they’re uncollectible.

    So ultimately that’s what’s so ridiculous and goofy and annoying about all this shit. Ofcom is acting like foreign companies with no business operations in the UK are subject to its decisions. They are not. Ofcom should have never tried regulating entities it has no authority over, it just makes them look silly and naive.

    The UK has every right to restrict their own residents access to things that are illegal internally. Just like how they have customs controls at their physical borders to prevent illegal physical items from being imported, they should have just blocked 4chan off the rip instead of trying to fine them.








  • People have been dropping the preceding adjective. It used to be that temp bans were handed out for first violations or accumulated minor violations, with the severity of the violation dictating whether it was a temporary ban of hours, days, weeks, or months.

    Really egregious violations, or a pattern of temp bans not changing the users behavior would trigger a permanent ban.

    I also hate the use of “ban” alone to mean temporary. The default use of “ban” should, does, mean permanent. If it’s temporary, it should be specifically conditionalized as such. I don’t really know when this started or how we got here, but it’s fucking annoying.