nav search
Data Centre Software Security DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes
BOFH
Lectures

back to article
10 social networks ignored UK government consultations

Anonymous Coward

"rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

I look forward to a snap General Election where we can clean out the Stables that are Parliament.

54
13
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

Why? No matter how you vote, its always the government that gets in.

66
3
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

But the Daily Heil readers will still vote for the chinless Tory and the Mirror readers will vote for Corbyn and his rudderless chums.

10
5
Silver badge
Coat

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

"Mirror readers will vote for Corbyn and his rudderless chums."

The Tories are also, currently, Rudderless.

Too warm for a coat ATM so I'll just leave it.

35
7
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

Why? No matter how you vote, its always the government that gets in.

Well, that's not particularly profound.

And neither really is the disappointing reality that's it's usually the same type of numpties standing for election every time.

It's like having only one local store which only sells a couple of brands of sour milk, and you can't take it or leave it as it's delivered to your door and poured on your cereal anyway.

15
3

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

"The Tories are also, currently, Rudderless."

Ruddless. The tories are currenrly Ruddless

19
1
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

The Tories may be Rudd-less, but they are definitely not rudderless.

There are in fact 7 different Tory rudders on the good ship Blighty - some people even have their hands on more than one rudder. There are also several engines, mostly operating in opposite directions and pulling the boat apart.

The captain just stands by the wheel murmuring "strong and steady, strong and steady" whilst the damn thing spins like a catherine wheel, and her crew keep tying her shoelaces together.

Rudderless would be a fucking improvement.

69
2

This post has been deleted by a moderator

"And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

For the advertisers.

A focal point of abject misery for it's users product

46
0
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

No. The number one imperative of a company is to generate a profit. Sometimes the definition of what the profit should look like can sometimes be flexible, it's still the incentive.

On another not, look at how magical thinking around the over-hyped AI, or machine learning for that matter, is roped in to say this is possible with a wave of a politician's hands. Even if you could get them to understand the problems here, you'd never get them to stop invoking Silicon Valley as the great land of Oz.

32
2
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

Magical thinking seems to be the fundamental basis of all Tory policies these days - unicorns, clever cameras that can detect a bottle of whiskey and a Polish plumber in the boot of a car, and now AI.

I wonder what would happen if we asked an AI about whether our politicians are fit for purpose? Smoke coming out of the back?

28
3
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

"On another not, look at how magical thinking around the over-hyped AI, or machine learning for that matter, is roped in to say this is possible with a wave of a politician's hands."

Not that it matters how it's done. Doing it just becomes a cost of doing business irrespective of the AI (that corporations have been hyping) or lots of low-wage workers. It's not just going to be the UK who takes this attitude and by ignoring the issue - and the politicians - the corporations are going to find the cost to be more than it might have been had they taken the matter more seriously, been less encouraging of abuses and more careful about managing politicians' expectations.

6
0
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

Now that statement is either political naivete at it's most dangerous or a really ham-fisted attempt at spin.

The Culture Secretary said that?

Are we absolutely sure it's not a line from Forrest Gump?

22
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

> The number one imperative of a company is to generate a profit.

It is not.

The goals of a company will be stated in its founding and/or policy documents, and may or may not involve generating a profit, either as a goal in itself or as a means to achieving something else.

Perhaps you meant "revenue" instead of "profit"?

4
11
Silver badge
Terminator

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

"I wonder what would happen if we asked an AI about whether our politicians are fit for purpose? Smoke coming out of the back?"

I don't know, let's hand it over to the Allied Mastercomputer and see what it says, shall we?

4
0

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

I have no mouth, and I must scream -- Great, and horrifying, story.

4
0
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

> The number one imperative of a company is to generate a profit.

It is not.

The goals of a company will be stated in its founding and/or policy documents, and may or may not involve generating a profit, either as a goal in itself or as a means to achieving something else.

Perhaps you meant "revenue" instead of "profit"?

Revenue is vanity, Profit is sanity.

The company then might spend most of the profit on worthy causes, but they can only do that as long as the company makes money.

1
2
Silver badge

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

Nope, I meant profit. I did point out that profit can have a different meaning according to company's definition of the term. I could have made that clearer. I will, however, leave with this quote:

"The worst crime against working people is a company which fails to operate at a profit." --- Samuel Gompers

1
1

Re: "And after all, these companies were set up to make the world a better place"

"The goals of a company will be stated in its founding and/or policy documents, and may or may not involve generating a profit, either as a goal in itself or as a means to achieving something else.

Perhaps you meant "revenue" instead of "profit"?"

Oh Bollocks a commercial enterprise that doesn't yield a profit will eventually stop being a commercial enterprise altogether. It doesn't matter what vain, trendy, virtue-signalling bullshit it puts in its policy documents if it fails to make money.

0
1
Flame

"what would happen if we asked an AI about whether our politicians are fit for purpose?"

What smoke coming out of the back? It's just a coincidence that the AI looks just like a crematorium oven. Now if the honourable member for Ham-on-Rye can just lie down, please, we need to put you inside so the machine can scan you.

0
0
Silver badge

"rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

'We are going to ask social media companies to take down abusive content immediately'

I have some serious doubt about the UK government classifying anything as objectionable material.

Based on recent examples quite a few statements by other countries which it claimed to false and/or objectionable material proved to be true in the end. Like it together with Sweden, CZ and USA having Novichok in the 90-es. Now fully confirmed: https://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2018-05/geheimdienst-nowitschok-bnd-nervengift-russland

It screamed bloody murder when that was stated 2 months ago. Under this law that would have had to be removed.

27
7
Anonymous Coward

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

> Under this law that would have had to be removed.

In no universe is "false" a synonym for "abusive".

16
3
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

In no universe is "false" a synonym for "abusive".

Wait and see and remember my word - this will go together with "fake news counter" censorship into the same legislation making it clear that as far as HMG is concerned false==abusive=="inconvenient truth"

25
4
Silver badge

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

"I have some serious doubt about the UK government classifying anything as objectionable material."

They are unlikely to have much idea, quite a lot of their own statements are objectionable and could even be construed as hateful.

Teresa May:- “The aim is to create, here in Britain, a really hostile environment for illegal immigrants”.

Just one example that has also gone on to prove flawed and unreasonable to so many people.

18
4
Anonymous Coward

Re: "rapid removal of abusive and objectionable material"

> In no universe is "false" a synonym for "abusive".

Voland's example wasn't either, yet didn't stop No 10 from screaming murder, as he pointed out.

3
1
Trollface

Just wait

they'll come a' sucking up when they want something.

I'd tend to ignore the 10 Social networks before the British Government.

11
0
Silver badge

Re: Just wait

I didn't even know there were 10 social networks.

15
0
Silver badge

Re: Just wait

"I didn't even know there were 10 social networks."

If you read the piece, you would know there are at least 14.

2
3
Anonymous Coward

Re: Just wait

"I didn't even know there were 10 social networks, until I read the article".

TFTFY.

Why so patronising :/

1
1
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Just wait

Christ, you must be worse at parties than I am.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Just wait

> Christ, you must be worse at parties than I am.

I never saw old Ben Yousef at any parties but he's a popular lad¹ so he must have been quite the animal in his day.

¹ Maybe not with the Romans.

0
0
Facepalm

Take it down

I find that quoted tweet exceptionally offensive and demand it be taken down immediately. The author must be fined for quoting a person with no brains; the quoted person must be fined for having no brains; el Reg must be fined for reproducing no brains.

There, AI at its finest.

34
0
Silver badge

Re: Take it down

I find your comment exceptionally offensive and demand it be taken down immediately. I don't know why and it doesn't matter, but I'm really, really angry and Something Must Be Done!

(Sorry. Channelling my inner Junior Minister.)

15
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Take it down

I haven't read the tweet. I now however feel I need to read the tweet to see what the fuss is about.

4
0
Flame

Re: Take it down

I haven't read the tweet. But some of my friends on social media apparently did, and are demanding for it to be taken down. So I'm going to demand the same thing.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Take it down

"I was offended" - Steve Hughes

youtube.com/watch?v=ceS_jkKjIgo (2m24s)

2
0
Gold badge
Unhappy

Be interesting to see who did turn up, would it not?

Who thinks the the UK Government matters and who does not.

And wheather they turned up to the relevant EU Commissioner hearing instead.

60million people versus 490million people in the rest of the EU.

So that's making "Making Britain stronger" means, as one of my British friends put it when they voted Leave.

25
5
Silver badge

Re: Be interesting to see who did turn up, would it not?

So that's "Making Britain stronger" as one of my British friends put it when they voted Leave.

Apparently, Europe are going to realise they need the UK and accede to all Brexit wishlist demands

Or so most the Cabinet seem to believe anyway.

30
4
Silver badge

Re: Be interesting to see who did turn up, would it not?

> So that's "Making Britain stronger" as one of my British friends put it when they voted Leave.

Your friends thought it was the anagram round in "Countdown" - not so much global Britain as gob-all Britain.

13
4
Gold badge
Joke

Apparently, Europe are going to realise they need the UK and accede to all Brexit wishlist

May: How are the talks going Boris

Boris: Very well. My sources tell me my plan is working perfectly, although the other side continues to posture for effect.

May: Who exactly are your "Sources" Boris?

Boris: I've been using "The European Research Group." I find them very sound on the important stuff.

18
1

Re: Be interesting to see who did turn up, would it not?

60million people versus 490million It's not a playground fight John, then again ......

1
1
Gold badge
Unhappy

60million people versus 490million It's not a playground fight John, then again

Tell me that after the UK tries to negotiate any new trade deals and isn't part of a 550million person trading block and 1 of 1 instead of 1 of 28.

Back here in 2022 say?

1
2
Anonymous Coward

UK taxpayers won’t have to fund

How does f*ck right off sound? If for one minute they think that me as a UK taxpayer is going to fund the clean up of social media I don't even use then they can suck my balls. You want a revolution? That there is revolution talk. I will seriously go full revolution on all their asses, no more putting the bins out, I'll stop paying the tv tax and I'll write a strongly worded letter to the newspapers.

36
0
Gold badge
Happy

I will..go full revolution on all their asses, no..putting the bins out, I'll stop paying the tv tax

Nice.

Nearly thought you were serious there. The "Strongly worded letter to the newspapers" nailed it.

Or in the words of media mogul CA Magnusen "You can do what you like in Britain. They are a nation of herbivores. I try everything in Britain first. If it works there I try it in a real country."

22
0

Re: UK taxpayers won’t have to fund

Just tweet them, oh...

2
0
Silver badge

So, everyone else has to tighten up . . .

but Leveson is taken down a dark alley and shot.

16
0
Silver badge

Re: So, everyone else has to tighten up . . .

That tells you who the Tories are going to count on to win the next election. Though of course they're all utterly confident they will win because by then everyone will agree that they've made a brilliant job of delivering Brexit to the lasting benefit of everyone in the country.

4
3
Silver badge

mystery

Is there something which actually prevents these people from understanding how the internet functions?

31
1
Gold badge
Unhappy

Is there something which..prevents these people..understanding how the internet functions?

Yes.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." as Upton Sinclair put it.

Sinclair ran for Governor of California in the late 1940's.

His Campaign Manager was a certain Dr RA Heinlein.

34
0

Re: mystery

I think they understand vaguely about the internet but understand very well that to a majority of voters this looks like they are taking action and sticking it to those pesky social media companies. Given the polarisation of debate and general prevention of discourse they're probably trying to get access to a ban-hammer on platforms they do not control. It is never for the public now is it.

19
0

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing