Lemmy.zip has already blocked UK users and Lemmy.world will almost certainly do the same.
For clarity, lemmy.zip had blocked them months ago because the owner of lemmy.zip is based in the UK and theoretically could actually be fined. This is not the same situation as lemmy.world.
What do you mean “centralise”? Into larger websites?
I highly doubt the US government would look fondly on a US-based service taking down a US-based social media site because Ofcom complained to them about them not adhering to local laws. Especially under this administration. It would be seen as foreign interference. And for that reason, I very much doubt Ofcom would ever do that. They’d just block the site violating OSA.
As a sidenote, I remember that UK has an odd and ancient “law” stating something in the lines “” (i.e. being anti-monarchy and advocating for the end of monarchy, even without any violent language/means but a pacific defense of anti-monarchy). I couldn’t find it, nor I can remember the exact phrasing, but such a “law” threatens prison time for those who “dare” to “offend” the crowniness of UK Crown. Also, I’m not sure to what extent this law is applied in practice.
Given there’s an active pro-republican campaign site I’d wager not at all.
If countries are capable of passing draconian laws against their own citizens, don’t expect that those same countries couldn’t go further to impose these laws beyond their own lawns, especially in times of interconnectedness.
UK against the USA? I think the UK isn’t winning that.
No, I mean I chose lemmy.world as the instance to show the announcement on.
Not when it comes to tech. You think the USA would let Saudi Arabia force the total shut-down of a USA-based site because they allowed people to make fun of Islam? Come on. Saudi Arabia just quiety blocks sites.
UK doesn’t have enough pull to start extraditing thousands of people for not complying with their weirdo laws.
I agree with you there too. The forum owners here fear Ofcom pressuring their hosts to force compliance, not extradition. I think its misguided and unlikely (especially for small arms of the fediverse) but it is what it is.
I think in practice Ofcom would just geoblock your site specifically.
Saudi Arabia has no soft power here. UK does.
Not saying that UK will here (I think they won’t), but the relationship dynamics are a bit different.
They believe that Ofcom could pressure their hosts to cut their services off if they don’t comply with the act, or believe they could be fined.
To be clear, the specifics in the act go beyond not specifically hosting pornographic content.
Currently Twitter is doing the bare minimum by simply allowing UK users to bypass the age-checks by setting their location to another country.
Tbf so are lots of Brits in the passive sense.
Anyone banning for downvoting is incredibly petty or thin skinned, just my observation. If it wasn’t for the instance shutting down, it would have made a good post on yptb. Reading other comment threads on this post support the thin skinned theory imho. I just happened to be browsing all when I found the post. Looking at my subs, I wasn’t subscribed to any community there.
What about in the context of mass-downvoters? I can’t speak for Dubvee, but mass-downvoters do exist - and they can be corrosive for smaller communities trying to grow, as early downvotes of threads can effectively kill them. These are accounts that seem to primarily downvote and don’t actually interact on-site, and have no real pattern to it. This kind of response has little to do with sensitivity.
No idea, but it’s not an active instance so idk what happened.
There’s two factors to this. Lemmy has been slow on developing new features. Eventually people give up despite all the promises. This sort of competition was inevitable, and two - and this cannot be changed - there’s a lot of resentment and resistance to using their software for political reasons.
Tbf Idk what you imagine Lemmy can somehow do to entice new people
Americans arent exactly in a great position to judge right now.