Someone asked me to describe the circumstances which brought about the Online Safety Act

About a decade ago a bunch of porn company executives who want to make additional advertising streams of revenue, found common cause with evangelical anti-porn Christians and prescriptive post-second-wave radical feminists, inflated as a group by a cohort of ageing boomers who are scared of technological change and some reflexively anti-capitalist (and possibly anti-semitic) middle class do-gooders with a battlecry of “won’t somebody please think of the children!?!”.

They decided that a proportionate response to weak parenting skills of the masses (not themselves of course, never themselves, especially not the ones who had children who committed suicide) was to force the government to obligate platforms to spy on all the world’s conversations – which of course would solve all the problems – a position with which GCHQ and the NSA happily agreed.

So they drafted a document describing how they think the internet works and therefore how they think the internet should be fixed, put it through several government committees over the course of several years in order to make sure that it was correct, and then passed it as legislation – on the obvious grounds that the kids would appreciate this and not attempt to circumvent any of the  controls.

It turns out that there were a few poorly grounded assumptions in play throughout this process.

Fediverse reactions

Comments

13 responses to “Someone asked me to describe the circumstances which brought about the Online Safety Act”

  1. @alecm

    Wow!

    What a creative account of the origins of #OSA that leaves out the real world harms of illegal content on an unregulated internet. Or the massive profits made by ignoring real-world regulation because somehow online doesn't count.

    I've got a story of do-good free speech absolutists who made common cause with techbros to attack even the most modest efforts at regulation, so the techbros could freely exploit human weaknesses for grotesque profits. Wanna here more about that?

    1. @TCatInReality it is inevitable that any post leaves out very much more than it includes.

      And when dealing with complex phenomena that becomes more acute because everyone wants their most important thing placed in.

      I think it’s clear the internet has an engineered grain to it and it’s really really hard to go against that grain. We can see that play out in all kinds of domains that have nothing to do with porn.

      All Alec is doing imo is highlighting the direction of the grain

      @alecm

      1. @urlyman @alecm

        I take your point.

        But what I read was a pretty wild conspiracy theory involving "…a bunch of porn company executives who … found common cause with evangelical anti-porn Christians and prescriptive post-second-wave radical feminists…"

        1. @TCatInReality “common cause” doesn’t mean shared morality.

          For example, rapaciously extractive and amoral arch capitalists who don’t give a fig for Christian notions of propriety have found common cause with evangelicals within the American Republican party.

          That kind of thing happens often enough under systems of wild asymmetry

          @alecm

          1. @urlyman @alecm

            I won't be drawn into a terminology debate and be distracted from my point about conspiracy-mongering amongst vaguely defined groups.

            In fact, anyone who unironically uses the term "prescriptive post-second-wave radical feminists" sets off my manosphere radar and their arguments are automatically suspect (to me)

            1. Maybe there exist objective observations which can be applied irrespective of your radar?

            2. @TCatInReality @urlyman @alecm
              TC, the Gov’t must (one fervently hopes) be listening to somebody, but it certainly wasn’t the huge body of experts who were screaming “we agree with the objective, but THIS WON’T WORK, and it will cause loads of highly undesirable side-effects, including increasing risks to vulnerable children”. So who were they listening to? Or are they so far up their own political arses that they just don’t care, as long as they get the political win of “we did something”?

              1. @KimSJ @urlyman @alecm

                Well, it is a Tory creation so of course it is half-baked and allows way too much room for tech company data abuse. Not sure who they listened to other than Tory donors.

                That's why I consistently say it should be improved and enhanced.

                But repealing the entire thing and allowing unfettered ability to exploit users definitely is a step in the wrong direction (IMO)

                1. @TCatInReality @urlyman @alecm
                  On that I agree. We’ ve already done most of the damage the #OSA can do. We might as well leave it in place while we actually listen to experts and come up with a solution that stands half a chance of working.

                  1. @KimSJ @TCatInReality @urlyman @alecm Don't try to regulate it. You end up not protecting the kids, and a ready to use censorship infrastructure that can be abused even by a democratically elected government, and now think what somebody like Orbán or Trump would do with such an instrument.

                    I can explain it a hundred times more, but simply solve the problem how you can cheat on an extremely proctored online exam from home. So we go the ugly US way with only secure booted computers running

                2. Quite a lot of it was lobbied for by Labour’s Thangam Debbonaire, and it is pretty squarely a cross-party project

                3. @TCatInReality @KimSJ @urlyman @alecm It's conceptually broken.

                  The UK literally demanded that international banking conventions were weakened (so KYC did not require a state issued ID to open an account), OTOH, they demand that porn consumers lose their anonymity for porn???

                  You can open (at least in theory) a bank account in the UK without an official photo ID with some bills from utilities and similar (wait are these just printouts from normal printers that anyone can print on

    2. Go right ahead.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *