• Buelldozer@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    24 hours ago

    Why do you assume that the old school forums are going to get exempted? They are going to get on the bus or get run over by it just like everywhere else. Government has already proven that they can, and will, regulate those forums.

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Great question!

      First, that the definition of content that is considered “adult” doesn’t necessarily mean every forum qualifies. Privacyguides.org likely would not. A car forum likely would not. Facebook must comply because links shared can be “harmful” anywhere on the platform. The fractured nature of Web 1.0 is a feature now, not a bug.

      Second, that proxy measures can reasonably work for forums with smart admins. If I register with an email I can show has been in use since 2007, some forums are willing to accept that as enough evidence. I saw an article somewhere I can’t find right now that someone was accepting 5 year old tickets to a concert or something that was an 18+ event. Typically age verification laws are focused on large Web 2.0 platforms and can include lower cost, lower threshold options for sites with a very small number of users.

      Finally, that it might simply take a longer time for anyone to care or even notice some smaller sites. By the time someone comes calling, policies might have already changed several times and reasonable exemptions now mean no work is needed.

      • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        First, that the definition of content that is considered “adult” doesn’t necessarily mean every forum qualifies. Privacyguides.org likely would not. A car forum likely would not. Facebook must comply because links shared can be “harmful” anywhere on the platform. The fractured nature of Web 1.0 is a feature now, not a bug.

        if it were so easy. you can post links to the privacyguides forum too. but the bigger problem is that anyone can post anything. if they don’t do age verification, they are liable for any forbidden content that slipped through. that can also be used as a form of blackmailing.

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Sure you can post links, but that’s not the topic of the forum, and it’s not specific the a xountrybor market, which is also a factor right now with the UK law, so it doesnt ping as a problem worth dealing with.

            • hansolo@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              17 minutes ago

              I’ve read what seems like 30+ articles and explainers about the UK law the last few days - this has some lousy (official) defintions. I think the most recent episode of Power User with Taylor Lorenz might cover some of this enough to get the overall sense.

              The topics under scrutiny of the “user-to-user” site is extremely vague beyond obvious porn, but it amounts to if it allows the sharing of links of basic news of any topic, it counts. Because in terms of categorizing “harmful content” for minors, seeing fucking protests happening anywhere, at all is “controversial adult content.” But if the links are limited to a very specific topic, say Honda Ridgeline owners, privacy and cyber nerd shit no one cares about) etc., cooking, and other innocuous things, it’s a grey zone that doesn’t demand compliance. YMMV, but even for a fascist wannabe set of policies can’t justify “harmful” material for kids with a Linux forum or a forum for owners of the Honda Ridgeline (WTF?)