Olives @olives@qoto.org

Not that long ago, a Minister wanted to give a minister the power to overrule any court decision they didn't like (when it came to a court deciding the government violated someone's rights).

I can't remember who had this bad idea. It might have been Dominic Raab or Jacob Rees-Mogg (however you spell his name).

I believe it was in response to the possibility that the decision to send migrants to Rwanda might be found to be unlawful.

"Have we really reached a point where we believe our political processes and our courts are incapable of ensuring all arms of the British State obey the law?"

Yes. Though, "law" is a mutable thing, perhaps "rule of law" / individual rights are better terms.

It's not that unusual for them to quietly insert highly controversial ideas into the "terms" (and to use particular language where it isn't immediately apparent what they mean).

These particular "guidelines" actually appear to be from November 2022 (although, still displayed so prominently, so I'll take it as their current propaganda), so take from that what you will.

https://aseanictforum.com/ South East Asian "think of the children" conference (involving the usual suspects) where anti porn propaganda (take a look at the "guidelines" for one example) is being disseminated.

https://qoto.org/@olives/111440906410871858 It goes without saying that such propaganda is baseless.

"Other parties should form a coalition without Wilders and his party. His desperation to be in power is clear. He will revert to form asap, and use his time in government to gain more control in a future election. I hope people are not fooled."

Interesting take.

https://nichegamer.com/discord-issues-warning-to-all-using-the-little-witch-nobeta-server/

Discord's Policy Lead appears to be Savannah Badalich. The Head of Trust & Safety is John Redgrave. So, you might want to go lobby them (or anyone else for that matter, although if they're too far down the rungs, they might not have actual power) for Discord to be less stupid about anime art, although I'd recommend not being overly hostile.

I'm personally not fond of this sort of tit for tat rhetoric in this article.

Also, porn science (for debunking puritans): https://qoto.org/@olives/111440906410871858

https://stallman.org/articles/extreme.html

If the text is still the same, it is... troublesome...

For instance, what if someone was to use a model to generate a sexual scene involving a corpse? Also, how realistic is "realistic"?

The mere existence of this law is also quite questionable. It appears to have been passed over highly dubious concerns of whether it "leads to more violence"...

"The concept of "sexual interference with a human corpse" is curious. All a corpse can do on its own is decay, so the only possible "interference" is to prevent its decay. Thus, "sexual interference" rationally would mean some sexual activity while injecting embalming fluid, or while putting the corpse into a refrigerator. However, I doubt that the censors interpret this term rationally. They will have cooked up an excuse for some twisted interpretation that enables them to punish more people."

Richard is so funny. I thought of citing something else but this take is more... interesting.

While I'm not going to argue these are radically different for the purposes of this post (although, maybe they are), it is also interesting that "sex" and "sexy" and "sexy" and "simple nudity" might get conflated here too.

I think "sex worker" is preferred (in advocacy), in part, as "prostituted woman" suggests that someone is a victim to be rescued (from their job, and often in the form of locking them up, which can mean locking up someone's mother).

It was something like that.

I think it was a hallucination. The algorithm's accuracy isn't that good. I think it got him mixed up with another politician who *was* corrupt.

Well, I say Julie but some of these are probably created, or co-created, by the people who work for / with her.

Here's a funny one. One of the things which Julie was worried about in terms of misinformation (in one document) was the possibility that ChatGPT might falsely accuse a politician of corruption, and even cited a case of this.

Not really one which is usually at the top of our minds (and probably extremely rare).

Basically, he's trying to play up the number of "predators".

Anyway, here's another one "they know someone who has done the same thing". This revelation apparently completely changes things... Except it doesn't...

As the data here (different data set) shows, 50% of teens in the late 80s, and 40% in 2013 had sex with each other, therefore the probability that someone "knows" someone who has done this approaches 100%.

If there's a correlation between that, and "perversity", or whatever, it might be they're more willing to talk about their private sex lives with each other. Who knows.

Still, it's easy to think of non-conspiratorial explanations.

Julie doesn't seem interested in going after E2EE for now.

I have a strange feeling someone is going to claim there are child predators everywhere in the U.K. because they might have seen The Sun's "Page 3" once in the 90s or 00s (plucking that interaction out of context).

I never got far in Made in Abyss, but apparently it gets pretty dark. Didn't expect that.

I'm not saying it should be censored, lol.

Oh sorry, his best friend was the conspiracist. He only put the theories about ritual abuse in schools in his speeches before the Parliament. Right.

"safety by design" is a euphemism for censorship / authoritarianism invented by an official appointed by a right wing conservative government which was led by a religious fanatic QAnon conspiracist.