科技巨頭稱英國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法“不容談判”

Tech giants told UK online safety laws ‘not up for negotiation’

2025-01-16 jiangye111 5098 12 2 收藏糾錯(cuò)&舉報(bào)

譯文簡(jiǎn)介

科技巨頭稱英國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法“不容談判” ——高級(jí)內(nèi)閣部長(zhǎng)承諾不會(huì)淡化新措施，盡管扎克伯格攻擊國(guó)家“審查”內(nèi)容

正文翻譯

Tech giants told UK online safety laws ‘not up for negotiation’
-Senior cabinet minister promises not to dilute new measures despite Zuckerberg’s attacks on countries ‘censoring’ content

科技巨頭稱英國(guó)網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法“不容談判”
——高級(jí)內(nèi)閣部長(zhǎng)承諾不會(huì)淡化新措施，盡管扎克伯格攻擊國(guó)家“審查”內(nèi)容

(UK prime minister Keir Starmer is preparing to woo big tech companies with an action plan for AI development in Britain.)

（英國(guó)首相凱爾·斯塔默正準(zhǔn)備通過(guò)一項(xiàng)在英國(guó)發(fā)展人工智能的行動(dòng)計(jì)劃來(lái)吸引大型科技公司。）
新聞：

Britain’s new laws to boost safety and tackle hate speech online are “not up for negotiation”, a senior government minister has warned, after Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg vowed to join Donald Trump to pressure countries they regard as “censoring” content.

英國(guó)一名高級(jí)政府部長(zhǎng)警告稱，英國(guó)旨在提高網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全和解決仇恨言論的新法律“沒(méi)有談判的空間”。此前，Meta創(chuàng)始人馬克·扎克伯格發(fā)誓要加入唐納德·特朗普的行列，向他們認(rèn)為正在“審查”內(nèi)容的國(guó)家施壓。

In an interview with the Observer, Peter Kyle, the technology secretary, said that the recent laws designed to make online platforms safer for children and vulnerable people would never be diluted to help the government woo big tech companies to the UK in its defining pursuit for economic growth.

科技大臣彼得·凱爾在接受《觀察家報(bào)》采訪時(shí)表示，最近出臺(tái)的旨在讓在線平臺(tái)對(duì)兒童和弱勢(shì)群體更安全的法律，永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)被削弱，以幫助政府在追求經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的過(guò)程中吸引大型科技公司到英國(guó)來(lái)。

His comments come as Keir Starmer prepares a major big tech charm offensive this week in which he will pitch the UK as the “sweet spot” for the development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

在他發(fā)表上述言論之際，凱爾·斯塔默正準(zhǔn)備在本周發(fā)起一場(chǎng)重大的科技魅力攻勢(shì)，他將把英國(guó)稱為人工智能技術(shù)發(fā)展的“最佳地點(diǎn)”。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

However, the prime minister will do so with his government facing constant and wild attacks from Elon Musk, one of Silicon Valley’s most prominent figures and a leading Trump supporter.

然而，首相將在他的政府面臨埃隆·馬斯克持續(xù)而猛烈的攻擊的情況下這樣做，馬斯克是硅谷最杰出的人物之一，也是特朗普的主要支持者。

Zuckerberg also used a wide-ranging statement last week to reveal he was ditching “politically biased” factcheckers and reducing restrictions on topics such as immigration and gender on Meta’s platforms, including Facebook, Instagram and Threads.

扎克伯格上周還發(fā)表了一份內(nèi)容廣泛的聲明，透露他正在放棄“有政治偏見(jiàn)的”事實(shí)核查員，并減少M(fèi)eta平臺(tái)（包括Facebook、Instagram和Threads）上對(duì)移民和性別等話題的限制。

He added that he would “work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more”.

他補(bǔ)充說(shuō)，他將“與特朗普總統(tǒng)合作，反擊那些對(duì)美國(guó)公司窮追不舍、推動(dòng)更多審查的世界各國(guó)政府”。

While he did not single out the UK, which passed the Online Safety Act last year, Zuckerberg said Europe had “an ever-increasing number of laws institutionalising censorship”.

扎克伯格并沒(méi)有特別提到去年通過(guò)了《網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法》的英國(guó)，但他表示，歐洲“有越來(lái)越多的法律將審查制度制度化”。

Kyle, who is preparing to unveil the government’s AI strategy alongside Starmer this week, said Zuckerberg was struggling with the same issues of free speech that he had to consider as a legislator.

凱爾準(zhǔn)備本周與斯塔默一起公布政府的人工智能戰(zhàn)略，他說(shuō)扎克伯格正在努力解決與他作為立法者必須考慮的相同的言論自由問(wèn)題。

However, Kyle said he would not countenance rolling back Britain’s new online safety laws.

然而，凱爾表示，他不會(huì)支持撤銷英國(guó)新的網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法。

“The threshold for these laws allows responsible free speech to a very, very high degree,” he said. “But I just make this basic point: access to British society and our economy is a privilege – it’s not a right. And none of our basic protections for children and vulnerable people are up for negotiation.

“這些法律的門檻在很大程度上允許負(fù)責(zé)任的言論自由，”他說(shuō)。“但我只想說(shuō)一個(gè)基本的觀點(diǎn)：進(jìn)入英國(guó)社會(huì)和我們的經(jīng)濟(jì)是一種特權(quán)，而不是一種權(quán)利。我們對(duì)兒童和弱勢(shì)群體的基本保護(hù)都沒(méi)有討價(jià)還價(jià)的余地。

“I was in California speaking to these companies in December. I was there in November. None of this has been challenged. There is a great deal of interest in our direction of travel. I think there is a great deal of suspicion about some countries around the world and the way that they are acting.

“去年12月，我在加州對(duì)這些公司發(fā)表講話。我是11月份去的。這些都沒(méi)有受到質(zhì)疑。人們對(duì)我們的行動(dòng)方向很感興趣。我認(rèn)為，人們對(duì)世界上一些國(guó)家及其行動(dòng)方式存在很大的懷疑。

“But I think we have not only led the world in online safety, I think we’ve done it in a way which is sensitive and on the side of innovation.”

“但我認(rèn)為，我們不僅在網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全方面處于世界領(lǐng)先地位，而且我們采取了一種敏感和創(chuàng)新的方式?！?/b>
0

Under the Online Safety Act, large social media platforms will eventually have to make sure illegal content – including hate speech – is removed, enforce their own content rules and give users the means of screening out certain types of harmful content if they choose to do so.

根據(jù)《網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全法》，大型社交媒體平臺(tái)最終必須確保包括仇恨言論在內(nèi)的非法內(nèi)容被刪除，執(zhí)行自己的內(nèi)容規(guī)則，并為用戶提供篩選某些類型有害內(nèi)容的手段，如果他們選擇這樣做的話。
0

The news comes as the father of Molly Russell, the teenager who took her own life in 2017 after seeing harmful content online, warned this weekend that the rules were not tight enough.

2017年，茉莉·拉塞爾在網(wǎng)上看到有害內(nèi)容后結(jié)束了自己的生命，她的父親本周末警告說(shuō)，這些規(guī)定不夠嚴(yán)格。
0

After last summer’s riots, which were fuelled by online misinformation, Kyle asked Ofcom to examine how illegal content, particularly disinformation, spread during the disorder and whether further measures would be needed. He said that his judgments on the issue would not be swayed by the demands of big tech.

去年夏天的騷亂是由網(wǎng)絡(luò)錯(cuò)誤信息引發(fā)的，在此之后，凱爾要求Ofcom調(diào)查非法內(nèi)容，尤其是虛假信息，是如何在騷亂中傳播的，以及是否需要采取進(jìn)一步措施。他說(shuō)，他在這個(gè)問(wèn)題上的判斷不會(huì)受到大型科技公司要求的影響。
0

“The safety of people across Britain is not up for negotiation,” he said. “But also, investing in a country where its citizens are safe and feel safe is a better bet than one where they don’t. People do vote with their feet on these issues and platforms upon which people don’t feel safe are ones that tend not to do as well as others.”

“全英國(guó)人民的安全沒(méi)有商量的余地，”他說(shuō)?！暗瑫r(shí)，投資于一個(gè)公民感到安全的國(guó)家比投資于一個(gè)公民感到不安全的國(guó)家要好。人們確實(shí)會(huì)在這些問(wèn)題上用腳投票，而那些讓人感到不安全的平臺(tái)往往做得不如其他的好?！?/b>
0

This week’s launch of the government’s AI action plan will seek to encourage tech investment in the UK by pitching the country as less regulated than the EU and well placed to host development. Kyle is also toning down the previous government’s “overbearing” focus on AI safety concerns.

英國(guó)政府本周推出的人工智能行動(dòng)計(jì)劃將尋求鼓勵(lì)英國(guó)的科技投資，方法是將英國(guó)描述為監(jiān)管比歐盟少、適合發(fā)展的國(guó)家。凱爾還緩和了上屆政府對(duì)人工智能安全問(wèn)題的“專橫”關(guān)注。
0

The action plan’s launch coincides with big tech leaders moving closer to Trump as his inauguration approaches. Meta is replacing its factchecking with a “community notes” style system, similar to that used by the Musk-owned X.

隨著特朗普就職典禮的臨近，該行動(dòng)計(jì)劃的推出恰逢科技巨頭向特朗普靠攏。Meta正在用“社區(qū)筆記”風(fēng)格的系統(tǒng)取代它的事實(shí)核查，類似于馬斯克擁有的X的做法。
0

Musk has become an outspoken critic of the Labour government, amplifying far-right criticism of Starmer. The tech boss’s attacks began in earnest last year over the government’s response to the summer riots, when he accused Britain of “turning into a police state”.

馬斯克已經(jīng)成為工黨政府的直言不諱的批評(píng)者，放大了極右翼對(duì)斯塔默的批評(píng)。去年，這位科技公司老板對(duì)政府對(duì)夏季騷亂的反應(yīng)進(jìn)行了猛烈抨擊，當(dāng)時(shí)他指責(zé)英國(guó)“正在變成一個(gè)警察國(guó)家”。
0

There is increasing anger within the Labour party over comments made by Musk, whose most recent forays into British politics have seen him make wild claims about the safeguarding minister, Jess Phillips. She has said the comments had made her more worried about her safety.

工黨內(nèi)部對(duì)馬斯克的言論越來(lái)越憤怒，他最近對(duì)英國(guó)政治的攻擊讓他對(duì)國(guó)防大臣杰斯·菲利普斯發(fā)表了瘋狂的言論。她說(shuō)，這些言論讓她更加擔(dān)心自己的安全。
0

Musk has also raged at the government for rejecting his calls for another national inquiry into grooming gangs.

馬斯克還對(duì)政府拒絕接受他對(duì)洗錢團(tuán)伙進(jìn)行另一次全國(guó)調(diào)查的呼吁表示憤怒。
0

Starmer has said his government is open-minded about holding one in future, but argued that it should first prioritise enacting recommendations from a 2022 independent report into child sexual abuse.

斯塔默表示，他的政府對(duì)未來(lái)舉行一次聽(tīng)證會(huì)持開(kāi)放態(tài)度，但他認(rèn)為，應(yīng)該首先優(yōu)先落實(shí)2022年一份關(guān)于兒童性虐待的獨(dú)立報(bào)告中的建議。
0

However, in a sign Labour is trying to avoid fanning the tensions with Musk, Kyle said he would be happy to talk with the billionaire, but only as part of his determination to deliver the benefits of new technology to Britain.

然而，有跡象表明，工黨正試圖避免加劇與馬斯克的緊張關(guān)系，凱爾表示，他很樂(lè)意與這位億萬(wàn)富翁交談，但這只是他決心將新技術(shù)的好處帶給英國(guó)的一部分。
0

“I am so focused on getting our country to the point where we are fully exploiting all of the technology that is out there, so that we then move to a position where we’re creating more of it and innovating for more of it,” he said. “Nothing will distract me from that mission.

他說(shuō)：“我非常專注于讓我們的國(guó)家充分利用現(xiàn)有的所有技術(shù)，這樣我們就能創(chuàng)造更多的技術(shù)，為更多的技術(shù)進(jìn)行創(chuàng)新。沒(méi)有什么能讓我分心。
0

“I’m available to talk to any innovator, any potential investor, but it is on those terms. The rest of it, I’m just not interested in - with the exception of when it tips over into the kind of content which started to emerge around Jess, where it does need challenging.

“我可以和任何創(chuàng)新者、任何潛在投資者交談，但要基于這些前提。剩下的部分，我只是不感興趣——除了當(dāng)它變成圍繞著杰西開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)的那種內(nèi)容時(shí)，它確實(shí)需要挑戰(zhàn)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

0

“But I have a very high threshold for this. My priority is to be 100% focused on what will put food on the plates of Britons today and into the future.”

“但我對(duì)此有很高的門檻。我的首要任務(wù)是100%專注于今天和未來(lái)英國(guó)人盤子里的食物。”

0

評(píng)論翻譯

AcademicIncrease8080 91
The OSA is going to descend into a horrific farce, one of the changes will be forcing porn websites to verify everyone's ages - this will be achieved via people uploading ID documents such as passports, credit cards, driving licences... In other words the UK will force the sleaziest websites on the internet to create a gold mine of blackmail-data about Brit's porn watching habits. I predict that it will lead to several closeted gay men committing suicide after there are data hacks or leaks. It is an abhorrent intrusion of privacy.
Additionally, the OSA (which the Tories began) is an egregious act of self-harm which will deter tech investment in the UK (because of onerous requiremen of expectations of companies to censor their own platforms).
It is a product of the bizarrely totalitarian impulse that emanates from both the Tories and Labour. There's been remarkably little pushback against it.

《在線安全法案》將演變成一場(chǎng)可怕的鬧劇，其中一項(xiàng)變化將迫使色情網(wǎng)站核實(shí)每個(gè)人的年齡——這將通過(guò)人們上傳護(hù)照、信用卡、駕照等身份證件來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)……換句話說(shuō)，英國(guó)將迫使互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上最低俗的網(wǎng)站創(chuàng)造一個(gè)關(guān)于英國(guó)人觀看色情習(xí)慣的勒索數(shù)據(jù)的金礦。我預(yù)測(cè)，在數(shù)據(jù)遭到黑客攻擊或泄露后，它將導(dǎo)致幾名未出柜的同性戀男子自殺。這是對(duì)隱私令人憎惡的侵犯。
此外，《在線安全法案》（由保守黨發(fā)起）是一種令人震驚的自我傷害行為，將阻礙英國(guó)的科技投資（因?yàn)楣緦彶樽约浩脚_(tái)的期望要求繁重）。
它是保守黨和工黨發(fā)出的奇怪的極權(quán)主義沖動(dòng)的產(chǎn)物。而且反對(duì)它的聲音非常小。

Saltypeon
This highlights the entire problem. The general public has no idea how any of it works, and legislators have even less idea.
You don't need to upload an actual ID. Most won't go that route as then it hits all kinds of GDPR nightmares. Users can be authenticated without the site ever knowing who it is (up to a point, of course). The whole thing is to generate traction into online authentication while sacrificing large swathes of the Internet and business.
Porn is the least of the worries with this.

這凸顯了整個(gè)問(wèn)題。普通公眾不知道它是如何運(yùn)作的，立法者更不知道。
你不需要上傳實(shí)際的身份證。大多數(shù)公司不會(huì)走這條路，因?yàn)檫@會(huì)帶來(lái)各種各樣的《通用數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)條例》噩夢(mèng)。用戶可以在網(wǎng)站不知道其身份的情況下進(jìn)行身份驗(yàn)證（當(dāng)然，在一定程度上）。整個(gè)事情是在犧牲大量互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和業(yè)務(wù)的同時(shí)，為在線認(rèn)證創(chuàng)造吸引力。
色情領(lǐng)域是最不值得擔(dān)心的。

wkavinsky
Technically it's a simple solution - have the government provide an API that sites can call to request a verification token on the current user.
Since the government already holds the information needed to verify someone's age, users can sign up, and then they can simply authorise the access to that website of their age, job done.
Yes, it means the governments API will see a request from a site, but if you don't think the government can't already get all of your internet requests from your ISP, I've got a beach in Marianas to sell you.

從技術(shù)上講，這是一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)單的解決方案——讓政府提供一個(gè)應(yīng)用程序接口，站點(diǎn)可以調(diào)用它來(lái)請(qǐng)求當(dāng)前用戶的驗(yàn)證令牌。
由于政府已經(jīng)掌握了驗(yàn)證某人年齡所需的信息，用戶可以注冊(cè)，然后他們可以簡(jiǎn)單地授權(quán)訪問(wèn)與他們年齡相符的網(wǎng)站，任務(wù)完成。
是的，這意味著政府的應(yīng)用程序接口會(huì)看到來(lái)自一個(gè)網(wǎng)站的請(qǐng)求，但如果你不認(rèn)為政府不能從你的網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商那里得到你所有的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)請(qǐng)求，我可以把馬里亞納島的海灘賣給你（譯注：諷刺天真好騙）。

dave8271
As someone who's been in web technology professionally for over 20 years, I view the OSA as a disaster that will choke off what little remaining incentive there is for global tech businesses to invest in Britain.
The government say (in the lixed article) access to the British economy is a privilege, but that's exactly the problem; the rest of the world is increasingly seeing us as an arrogant economy which offers comparatively little, yet expects everyone else to jump through a million contorted hoops of varying sizes for the "privilege" of doing business with us. It's a privilege no one wants, just like how no one was queuing up to sign trade deals with us after Brexit.
Much like the cookie consent disaster, the OSA couldn't be more conspicuously drawn up by the technologically illiterate. It will almost certainly further the monopolization of most major web services under the existing top 5 and drown out the little remaining competition. It will definitely lead to the censorship of legitimate opinion and all sorts of other content that will give false positives, since the sheer scale of responsibilities imposed will require extensive automation from nascent technology that's unreliable.
It threatens privacy by making the practical application of end to end encryption impossible in many cases, opening up private content between individuals to be not just accessible, but actively subject to monitoring by private businesses.
There are other issues, but these are the main ones which concern me.

作為一個(gè)在網(wǎng)絡(luò)技術(shù)領(lǐng)域工作了20多年的人，我認(rèn)為《在線安全法案》是一場(chǎng)災(zāi)難，它將扼殺全球科技企業(yè)在英國(guó)投資的本就所剩無(wú)幾的動(dòng)力。
政府說(shuō)（在鏈接文章中）“進(jìn)入英國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)是一種特權(quán)”，但這正是問(wèn)題所在；世界上的其他國(guó)家越來(lái)越把我們看作是一個(gè)傲慢的經(jīng)濟(jì)體，提供的東西相對(duì)較少，但卻期望其他國(guó)家為了與我們做生意的“特權(quán)”而跳過(guò)一百萬(wàn)個(gè)大小不一的扭曲的圈子。這是一種沒(méi)有人想要的特權(quán)，就像英國(guó)脫歐后沒(méi)有人排隊(duì)與我們簽署貿(mào)易協(xié)議一樣。
就像“cookie許可”的災(zāi)難一樣，《在線安全法案》的制定者顯然是技術(shù)文盲。幾乎可以肯定的是，它將進(jìn)一步壟斷現(xiàn)有的前5大網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)，并淹沒(méi)剩下的一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這肯定會(huì)導(dǎo)致對(duì)合法意見(jiàn)和各種其他內(nèi)容的審查，這些內(nèi)容會(huì)產(chǎn)生誤報(bào)，因?yàn)樗┘拥呢?zé)任規(guī)模將需要來(lái)自不可靠的新興技術(shù)的廣泛自動(dòng)化。
在許多情況下，它使端到端加密的實(shí)際應(yīng)用變得不可能，使個(gè)人之間的私人內(nèi)容不僅可以訪問(wèn)，而且還受到私營(yíng)企業(yè)的積極監(jiān)控，從而威脅到隱私。
還有其他問(wèn)題，但以上是我關(guān)心的主要問(wèn)題。

HerMajestyTheQueef1
I'm more concerned with a billionaire class owning these sites and ultimately deciding what people's opinions are going to be.
UK, Europe and those with sense should be banning the likes of twitter and tik tok already.
People think america is some sort of God and we should succumb to their tech billionaires because they could cut us off and not invest... That is the language of a society that has already allowed them too much power, we should never be succumbing the the whims of foreign billionaires.
Together with Europe and other sane countries, we don't need twitter, someone will very gladly take their place and I really think they should.
These mega companies should be split up anyway, it's these conglomerates and billionaires with the turnover of entire countries that are destroying the world, co-opting us to their will through donations and bribery and now using their media companies as the perfect tool.
I'm honestly more surprised how many people or possibly bots are so desperate to defend these billionaire elites.

我更關(guān)心的是擁有這些網(wǎng)站的億萬(wàn)富翁階層，并最終決定了人們的觀點(diǎn)。
英國(guó)、歐洲和那些有理智的國(guó)家應(yīng)該已經(jīng)禁止推特和抖音之類的東西了。
人們認(rèn)為美國(guó)是某種上帝，我們應(yīng)該屈服于他們的科技億萬(wàn)富翁，因?yàn)樗麄兛梢郧袛辔覀兊穆?lián)系，不來(lái)投資……這是一個(gè)已經(jīng)給了他們太多權(quán)力的社會(huì)的語(yǔ)言，我們永遠(yuǎn)不應(yīng)該屈服于外國(guó)億萬(wàn)富翁的妄想。
與歐洲和其他理智的國(guó)家一起，我們不需要推特，有人會(huì)非常樂(lè)意取代他們的位置，我真的認(rèn)為他們應(yīng)該這樣做。
這些大公司無(wú)論如何都應(yīng)該拆分，正是這些擁有整個(gè)國(guó)家營(yíng)業(yè)額的企業(yè)集團(tuán)和億萬(wàn)富翁正在摧毀世界，通過(guò)競(jìng)選捐贈(zèng)和賄賂讓我們服從他們的意愿，并且現(xiàn)在把他們的媒體公司當(dāng)作完美的工具。
老實(shí)說(shuō)，我更驚訝的是，有多少人或者可能的發(fā)帖機(jī)器人如此不顧一切地捍衛(wèi)這些億萬(wàn)富翁精英。

Banana_Bread__
I think its incredibly ignorant to think that banning websites is a good idea. I ask how disinformation on twitter is any different to disinformation on any other social media websites, its not. The last thing you want is the government having more control over its people and its not going to get rid of the issues with society at hand.
Proposing stuff like this is oppressive and authoritarian in nature and has no place in the uk, but I guess its the future giving away our rights to not be offended or challenge opinions and misinformation (both sides of the political spectrum).
And no I'm not a bot, but have you ever wondered why people listen to people like elon or trump its because they are demonised by the left leaning and society for thinking a "wrong opinion".
Unpopular opinion: Elon and trump can have valid points but also have bad takes, and like most people I don't lean to any particular side of politics as some of my views can be left leaning for certain subjects and others right.
I don't get how none of the extreme left leaning understand why the right is rising and suddenly take issue with foreign billionaires getting involved with UK politics. Many parties including labour are funded by foreign wealthy individuals and no I'm not trying to justify it, but its a fact of life.

我認(rèn)為覺(jué)得禁止網(wǎng)站是個(gè)好主意是非常無(wú)知的。我問(wèn)推特上的虛假信息和其他社交媒體網(wǎng)站上的虛假信息有什么不同，沒(méi)有不同。你最不想要的就是政府對(duì)人民有更多的控制，而且它不會(huì)擺脫手頭的社會(huì)問(wèn)題。
提出這樣的東西本質(zhì)上是壓迫和專制的，在英國(guó)沒(méi)有立足之地，但我想這是未來(lái)賦予我們不被冒犯或挑戰(zhàn)觀點(diǎn)和（來(lái)自政治光譜雙方的）錯(cuò)誤信息的權(quán)利。
不，我不是機(jī)器人，但你有沒(méi)有想過(guò)為什么人們會(huì)聽(tīng)埃隆或特朗普這樣的人的話，因?yàn)樗麄儽蛔髢A和社會(huì)妖魔化了，因?yàn)樗麄冇小板e(cuò)誤的觀點(diǎn)”。
不受歡迎的觀點(diǎn)：埃隆和特朗普可能有正確的觀點(diǎn)，但也有不好的觀點(diǎn)，和大多數(shù)人一樣，我不傾向于任何特定的政治派別，因?yàn)槲业囊恍┯^點(diǎn)可能在某些問(wèn)題上偏左，而另一些觀點(diǎn)可能偏右。
我不明白為什么沒(méi)有一個(gè)極左人士理解為什么右翼勢(shì)力正在崛起，并突然對(duì)外國(guó)億萬(wàn)富翁參與英國(guó)政治提出異議。包括工黨在內(nèi)的許多政黨都是由外國(guó)富人資助的，不，我不是想為它辯護(hù)，但這就是生活中的事實(shí)。

BadgerGirl1990
As some who also works in tech I take the opposite opinion, I've seen the destruction social media and and the Internet has wrought on society and I feel great shame at what we allowed to happen in the pursuit of money. And have equally as much expectation that the rise of AI will make things even worse.
The utopian ideal of a free Internet as a market place of ideals was a complete vanity project by tech elites in silicone Valley, scientists sharing ideas across the globe in an instant, the reality is over half of humanity is fucking stupid and filled it with porn, hate and vapid garbage.
Worst mistake in human history.

作為一個(gè)也在科技行業(yè)工作的人，我持相反的觀點(diǎn)，我看到了社交媒體和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)對(duì)社會(huì)造成的破壞，我對(duì)我們?cè)谧非蠼疱X的過(guò)程中允許發(fā)生的事情感到非常羞愧。同時(shí)也同樣認(rèn)為人工智能的崛起會(huì)讓事情變得更糟。
自由互聯(lián)網(wǎng)作為理想市場(chǎng)的烏托邦理想完全是硅谷科技精英的虛榮心工程，科學(xué)家們?cè)谒查g分享全球的想法，現(xiàn)實(shí)是超過(guò)一半的人類都是他媽的愚蠢的，充滿了色情、仇恨和無(wú)聊的垃圾。
人類歷史上最嚴(yán)重的錯(cuò)誤。

buffer0x7CD
But it’s not the social media sites who are going to suffer here but mostly small sites.
Take lobster.rs as an example which is one of the pure technical discussion site ( since hacker news tend to have a lot more political content as well )but because of this, they are going to restrict the site to U.K. based users since it’s literally run by few people.

但首當(dāng)其沖的不是社交媒體網(wǎng)站，而大多是小型網(wǎng)站。
以lobster.rs為例，這是一個(gè)純粹的技術(shù)討論網(wǎng)站（因?yàn)楹诳托侣勍懈嗟恼蝺?nèi)容），但正因?yàn)槿绱?，他們將限制該網(wǎng)站的英國(guó)用戶，因?yàn)樗鼘?shí)際上是由少數(shù)人運(yùn)營(yíng)的。

OakAged
Well I'd say they're most likely, as many small businesses seem to do, grossly over-reacting without having the full detail of the regulations.

我想說(shuō)，他們很有可能，就像許多小企業(yè)一樣，在沒(méi)有了解法規(guī)的全部細(xì)節(jié)的情況下，反應(yīng)過(guò)度。

Exige_
Are you in favour any form of regulation out of interest?

出于利益考慮，你是否贊成任何形式的監(jiān)管？

dave8271
Propose some specific regulation and I'll tell you. I'm not against the principle of regulation, but the internet is a very difficult thing to regulate by its technological nature and its borderless nature. You have to be Draconian to a level far, far greater than I'm comfortable with to even begin to regulate the internet for your population in a way which is effective.
I think the better answer is education. Improve standards of education, make online safety, information analysis, scepticism and critical thinking core parts of the curriculum from early childhood. Educate parents about online safety and what they can do to supervise, monitor and limit their children's exposure to harmful content online in the home.

提出一些具體的規(guī)定，我會(huì)告訴你的。我不反對(duì)監(jiān)管原則，但由于互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的技術(shù)性質(zhì)和無(wú)國(guó)界性質(zhì)，它是一個(gè)非常難以監(jiān)管的東西。你必須要嚴(yán)厲到遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)我所能接受的程度，才能開(kāi)始以一種有效的方式為你的民眾管理互聯(lián)網(wǎng)。
我認(rèn)為更好的答案是教育。提高教育水平，使網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全、信息分析、懷疑主義和批判性思維成為兒童早期課程的核心部分。教育家長(zhǎng)關(guān)于網(wǎng)絡(luò)安全，以及他們可以做些什么來(lái)監(jiān)督、監(jiān)控和限制他們的孩子在家里接觸到有害的網(wǎng)絡(luò)內(nèi)容。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

warriorscot
That's not relevant to the OSA, can you name a single British company in the space that will be impacted? They are all US and China based, if a UK competitor was going to come a out it would have done. So it's hard to argue your point has any relevance because that market isn't present in the UK and it is entirely valid to say access is a privilege.

這與《在線安全法案》無(wú)關(guān)，你能說(shuō)出一個(gè)在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域會(huì)受到影響的英國(guó)公司嗎？它們都是美國(guó)和中國(guó)的，如果英國(guó)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手要脫穎而出的話，它早就出來(lái)了。所以很難說(shuō)你的觀點(diǎn)有什么相關(guān)性，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)市場(chǎng)并不存在于英國(guó)，所以說(shuō)進(jìn)入是一種特權(quán)是完全合理的。

wkavinsky
Suggesting that other economies don't want access to the 6th largest economic market in the world is absolute insanity.
They absolutely do want access to the market, and will do whatever is required to access it, just like they do the EU and Chinese markets.

暗示其他經(jīng)濟(jì)體不想進(jìn)入世界第六大經(jīng)濟(jì)市場(chǎng)是絕對(duì)瘋狂的。
他們絕對(duì)希望進(jìn)入這個(gè)市場(chǎng)，并將采取任何必要措施進(jìn)入這個(gè)市場(chǎng)，就像他們對(duì)歐盟和中國(guó)市場(chǎng)所做的那樣。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)注明出處

Redcoat-Mic
I really don't care how much money we will or won't have invested in us by tech billionaires.
I care if the ultra-rich further dominate every aspect of our society.

我真的不在乎科技億萬(wàn)富翁會(huì)或不會(huì)給我們投資多少錢。
我關(guān)心的是超級(jí)富豪是否會(huì)進(jìn)一步主導(dǎo)我們社會(huì)的方方面面。

科技 英國(guó) 網(wǎng)絡(luò) 安全法

很贊 ( 2 )

收藏