Yet More Pointless Legislation Begged For...

A bereaved mother has said getting more rights for parents would take her one step closer to making something positive come out of the loss of her son. 

Ellen Roome, from Cheltenham, believes her 14-year-old son Jools died after an online challenge went wrong and his social media accounts could provide the evidence needed. She has been campaigning for "Jools' Law", which would allow parents to access the social media accounts of their children if they die, and the petition is due to be debated in parliament on Monday.

Isnt this more a matter for the police? 

Jools was found unconscious in his bedroom in April 2022. An inquest into his death found he took his own life. The coroner at the time said it was unlikely he intended to end his life, but the exact events leading up to his death were unclear.

Sounds like the coroner doesn’t really know what happened, so why would the social media access make a difference? Surely if there was anything to find, the police would have found it? 

Forensic data of Jools' phone was not gathered at the time and Ms Roome has been asking for access to his social media accounts for more than two years.

Ah. Sounds as though she’d be better off campaigning for better policing to me… 

But Activists Are Happy For Children To Experience All This IRL

“Deeply disturbing” research exposes how easy it is for children to encounter inappropriate content and interact unsupervised with adults on the gaming platform Roblox.

While the company said it “deeply sympathised” with parents whose children came to harm on the platform, it said “tens of millions of people have a positive, enriching and safe experience on Roblox every day”.

OK, this does sound horribly like 'Look, all our other ships made it to New York!' said the CEO of the White Star Line' but it's also not wrong... and how many of the people clutching their pearls over virtual perversion are at all concernced with its real life counterpart?

The report also found the avatar belonging to the 10-year-old’s account could access “highly suggestive environments”. These included a hotel space where they could view a female avatar wearing fishnet stockings gyrating on a bed and other avatars lying on top of each other in sexually suggestive poses, and a public bathroom space where characters were urinating and avatars could choose fetish accessories to dress up in.

Blimey, sounds almost as bad as Drag Queen Story Hour, doesn't it! 

Researchers found that their test avatars overheard conversations between other players verbalising sexual activity, as well as repeated slurping, kissing and grunting noises, when using the voice chat function.

Well, so what? They'll have heard worse if they'd ever attended something like this. 

Damon De Ionno, the research director of Revealing Reality, said: “The new safety features announced by Roblox last week don’t go far enough. Children can still chat with strangers not on their friends list, and with 6 million experiences [on the platform], often with inaccurate descriptions and ratings, how can parents be expected to moderate?”

If that sounds too much like 'How can parents be expected to do the bare minimum of what it is to be a parent?' then I suspect that's no coincidence. 

In A Government Of Failed Lawyers, Legal Caution Trumps Everything....

Tomorrow should be a watershed moment for children and families as the Online Safety Act comes into effect. But regrettably, it feels as if we are going backwards. The regulator Ofcom has decided to deploy timidity where ambition is needed. Rather than focusing on reducing harm and preventing tragedies, its approach seems aimed at minimising the economic costs for tech firms cleaning up the harm they have caused. Instead of prioritising the fundamental principles of child safety, one minister indicated that the codes coming into force were consulted on to make them “judicial review proof”. Legal caution trumps children’s safety.

And he's outraged because he has skin in the game, his daughter having killed herself. Purely down to social media? No. Obviously not, but he's not going to look inwards when there's a third party to blame. 

Teenagers are no longer at risk only from being exposed to suicide ideation and self-harm content by aggressive algorithms, a preventable harm that cost my daughter Molly her life.

Global law enforcement agencies are clear that some young people, often struggling with their mental health, are being groomed to commit violent acts against themselves and others on video or live streams. These groups are driven by the same “fluid ideologies” and violent motives that have been thrust into the spotlight by Axel Rudakubana and the horrific events in Southport.

Yes, he's seemlessly switched from 'social media will tell your kids to kill themselves!' to 'social media will tell your kids to kill other kids!'. 

I want to be clear that the secretary of state’s inaction and inertia will cost more young lives. His proposals are the sticking-plaster politics that the prime minister has rightly said he rejects. Bereaved parents are now losing trust in Kyle. We very much believe the public is on our side – 85% of parents want stronger laws. Parents want the government to act decisively on the side of children and families.

Why don't parents act decisively themselves? Why do they need the government to do it? If you think social media is a risk, don't buy your children a smartphone.  

Of course, there are those who refute this, putting the free expression of platforms over reasonable and necessary measures to protect children from harm. Among them is a hawkish White House, which has issued an executive order that instructs officials to “recommend appropriate actions to counter” the Online Safety Act.

UK parents are watching, too. They do not want their children’s safety jeopardised by an exported agenda written by tech libertarians and JD Vance. They expect to be heard by their own government.

The answer's in your own hands. You're the grown ups here. Stop looking to Big Nanny Government to blame.  

A Sign Of Societal Change...

Another moral panicmoral panic rears its head, and inadvertantly throws a light on how we've changed in the last 50 years.

The next government should consider proposals to ban smartphones for under-16s within its first year, a committee of MPs has said.

And predictably, it's been met with scorn by the young themselves, and not greeted with wholehearted delight by parents. Why? Well, let them tell you: 

In Glossop, Derbyshire, parents' views on a potential ban were mixed. Courtney Clarke, who has a 13-year-old daughter, said she hated her having a smartphone but liked to be able to contact her when she is walking to and from school or out with friends.

Not something my parents used to be concerned about, but the need for parents to be in constant contact is a reflection of how unsafe society now seems. 

When I was on my way to school, I did so in a homogenous neighbourhood, where everyone knew each other, and authority figures (not just teachers, but neighbours, lollipop ladies, actual police officers, park staff) were always to be found and would act without hesitation or the need to consult H&S rulings or standard procedures. The violently mentally ill were not roaming the streets, and - though the IRA was active at the time - we had little to fear that indescriminate street terrorism would be a factor in our lives.  

“If I took my daughter’s phone off her, I am taking away her social life, and that is not good, either”, she said, adding that her daughter did not have the same access to youth clubs that she did when she was young. She said she would worry about her being bullied if she was forced to use a "brick" phone instead.

The killing of schoolchildren by other schoolchildren was unheard of, yet now, it's a constant worry. Even those who agree that there's a danger in smartphones are reluctant to give up the contact they provide:   

Joanne Whaley said she had already gone through bad experiences with her 12-year-old son's smartphone. “If I could change it, I would never have let him have one,” she said. “I would have let him have the old Nokias that we used to have so he could tell me where he is, but the internet being so available has been a disaster."

Is it just 'the internet' that's been a disaster? I don't think so. 

Holding Companies To Ransom…

Staff at the UK’s national institute for artificial intelligence and data science have expressed “serious concerns” about the organisation’s approach to diversity after it appointed four men to senior roles. A letter addressed to the leadership of the Alan Turing Institute (ATI) said the appointments showed a “‘continuing trend of limited diversity within the institute’s senior scientific leadership”.

“Our intention is not to undermine the professional achievements of these esteemed colleagues and that we’re looking forward to working together with them. Rather, our aim is to highlight a broader issue within our institute’s approach to diversity and inclusivity, particularly in scientific leadership roles, with a specific eye towards gender diversity and inclusivity,” said the letter.

So, just how 'unrepresentative (as if that mattered) is the technology industry? 

One in four senior tech employees in the UK are women, according to the annual diversity in tech report by the Tech Talent Charter, a government-backed industry group, while 14% of senior tech role holders are ethnic minorities.

According to the 2021 census, the ethnic minority population of the UK is 18% so they aren't really doing too bad.

ATI’s chief executive said the part government-funded organisation was “committed” to increasing the presence of people from under-represented groups in AI and data science.

I have only one question: why? 

“But It’s What You Asked For!”

NatWest has been accused of 'intrusion' after starting a new function that combs customers' accounts to track their carbon footprint.

A 'Carbon Footprint Tracker' on the bank's mobile app uses transaction data of its customers to make suggestions on how to reduce their carbon footprint based on their shopping habits.

More fool anyone who selected the setting to turn this aspect on, then! 

According to The Telegraph, the bank told customers to consider fixing their clothing instead of buying new items, and start drinking plant-based alternatives to dairy milk. The bank also urged customers to share car journeys, wash clothes in cold water and turn off tumble dryers.

Yes, as I suspected, the usual pointless stuff designed to make you feel virtuous while actually doing nothing at all when set against actual climate reality. Still, if it's what people want, right..? 

One customer, Faith Scott, said she thought the bank's carbon footprint calculator was an 'intrusion'. 'We don't need all this preaching to us. I don't take flights hither and thither. I grow my own vegetables and make my own food,' she said.

So, Faith, did NatWest hijack your phone and force this setting on you? Reader, what do you think? 

A NatWest spokesperson said: 'Customers tell us they want to take action to live more sustainably, and to save money at the same time on things like energy bills, but they don't aways know where to begin. The Carbon Footprint Tracker is an opt-in feature in our app that helps customers to see the carbon impact of their spending, at an aggregated level, and provides tips and suggestions to reduce this and to help them to save money too. If a customer opts-in, they can then opt-out at any point in settings in the Insights section of the app'.

Always RTFM, Faith... 

Technology Sledgehammer To Crack Justice System Nut...

Home Office officials have drawn up secret plans to lobby the independent privacy regulator in an attempt to push the rollout of controversial facial recognition technology into high street shops and supermarkets, internal government minutes seen by the Observer reveal.

The covert strategy was agreed during a closed-door meeting on 8 March between policing minister Chris Philp, senior Home Office officials and the private firm Facewatch, whose facial recognition cameras have provoked fierce opposition after being installed in shops.

Wouldn't you be better off sorting out the justice system instead, to ensure that theft is properly policed and punished? But no, falling for shiny new toys is so much more fun...

They Can't Stop The Boats Coming Across The Channel...

...but they can stop you FaceTiming Auntie Joan:

Apple has said planned changes to British surveillance laws could affect iPhone users’ privacy by forcing it to withdraw security features, which could ultimately lead to the closure of services such as FaceTime and iMessage in the UK. The firm has become a vocal opponent of what it views as UK government moves against online privacy, and it said last month that provisions in the forthcoming online safety bill could endanger message encryption.

Is this really the most existential threat facing the UK at this time? Is it really what we should be spending money and resources on? 

Apple also expressed concern over a proposed amendment that it says would allow the government to immediately block implementation of a security feature while a TCN is being considered, instead of letting the feature continue to be used pending an appeal.

And the possible consequences are huge: 

Alan Woodward, a professor of cybersecurity at Surrey University who has signed an open letter warning against online safety bill proposals that could dilute encryption, said Apple’s submission on the 12-week consultation represented a “stake in the ground”. He said: “If the government push on regardless then Apple will simply join the growing band of vendors that would leave the UK. British users could end up as one of the most isolated and insecure groups in the world. In that scenario, nobody wins.”

So...why is the Home Office dead set on this destructive path? What's the real agenda here? 

Stop Talking, And Start Fining...

Officials have launched renewed talks with Deliveroo, JustEat and UberEats after a week-long operation saw 60 moped riders held for illegal working. Most of them have now been detained pending removal from the country.

Ah, the 'immigrants who are vital to our economy' again, I see... 

Follow-up searches uncovered two imitation guns, a machete and a telescopic baton, a Home Office spokesman said. Telescopic, or ‘friction-lock’, batons can be flicked out to use as a cosh, and are banned under offensive weapons laws.

The operation also found evidence that legitimate moped riders were sharing delivery jobs with acquaintances - usually by the WhatsApp messaging service - and allowing them to carry out the work, the spokesman added.

And what are the authorities doing to ensure these companies take steps to crack down on their employees? 

‘We are in conversations with the delivery app companies to try to improve their engagement with the rules on carrying our right to work checks,’ the spokesman said.

*sighs* 

Have They Thought Of Taking This To Its Logical Conclusion?

McDonald's has opened up a fully-automated restaurant in Texas, which is completely run by machines so you don't have to speak to anyone, and it has left people on the internet divided.

Between those who think it's a great idea, and those who think it's a wonderful idea, I assume? 

In a press release, the fast food chain explained that the restaurant, which is now open, is geared towards customers who are planning to 'dine at home or on the go,' so there is no seating inside the restaurant and it's 'considerably smaller than a traditional McDonalds.'

It described the new concept as a 'fast and seamless experience for both customers and crew.'

'There's never been a McDonald's restaurant quite like this before,' the press release stated.

And oh, what the 'staff' will miss! So...why stop at automating just the food delivery?

 You know it makes sense!

Play Silly Games, Win Silly Prizes…

Tyler had three weeks earlier “caused upset to some very dangerous young men” by uploading a drill music track to YouTube, the court heard. Ms Carberry said the lyrics mocked, “in pretty vile terms”, Tanueh’s associates, in particular one member of the group who was stabbed, though not fatally.

And, following an unsuccessful armed attack just over two weeks before the fatal stabbing, Tyler “taunted the group” after he managed to escape unhurt, she told jurors.

Some people walk to their appointment in Samarra. Some people run. 

Some people, it seems, don't even need to leave the house any more, they can keep it via YouTube! 

Don't Blame The Tech, Blame The Idiots Working It...

The man, only identified as Mark by the New York Times, took pictures of his son’s groin to send to a doctor after realizing it was inflamed. The doctor used that image to diagnose Mark’s son and prescribe antibiotics. When the photos were automatically uploaded to the cloud, Google’s system identified them as CSAM.

As the system is programmed to do. But it's OK, because humans are in ch... 

Two days later, Mark’s Gmail and other Google accounts, including Google Fi, which provides his phone service, were disabled over “harmful content” that was “a severe violation of the company’s policies and might be illegal”, the Times reported, citing a message on his phone.

He later found out that Google had flagged another video he had on his phone and that the San Francisco police department opened an investigation into him.

Oh.

Mark was cleared of any criminal wrongdoing, but Google has said it will stand by its decision.

Wait, what..?!? 

“We follow US law in defining what constitutes CSAM and use a combination of hash matching technology and artificial intelligence to identify it and remove it from our platforms,” said Christa Muldoon, a Google spokesperson.

And when that proves to be in error, you...refuse to acknowledge it? 

“These systems can cause real problems for people,” he said. “And it’s not just that I don’t think that these systems can catch every case of child abuse, it’s that they have really terrible consequences in terms of false positives for people. People’s lives can be really upended by the machinery and the humans in the loop simply making a bad decision because they don’t have any reason to try to fix it.”

They need to be given one, then. Perhaps by passing a law that says if your software makes an error and you don't resolve it to the customer's satisfaction, you face huge, swinging fines?  

Calling Down The Lightning...

A female-only app has come under fire for discriminating against transgender women with its facial recognition AI.

Giggle, a social network 'only for females', which launched in early 2020, has since been the subject of complaints from transgender women, who told the Verge, that their requests to join have been denied by the app's facial recognition system, because their features ware not 'feminine' enough.

Oh dear, I bet the CEO is grovelling wretchedly in the teeth of the resulting media firestorm, and promising to...

Wait! 

However, now Giggle's CEO Sall Grover, who is based in Queensland, has doubled down, claiming that there is no space on the app for 'men claiming to be women'.

*gasps* 

Grover, who does not believe trans women are female (Ed: Like it was some kind of wacky fringe belief, eh? In fact, as Longrider points out, it's not even 'a belief' at all...), told Femail: 'The fact is, women of colour are on Giggle. Giggle is used by women of every race, religion and culture. The quality that Giggle users have in common is they are female.'

Look well, oh women, look well: this is how you draw a line in the sand and say 'Yhis far, and no further!'. 

Grover continued: 'I understand that PinkNews will be writing an article in support of trans women with the belief that they are female, with the specific purpose to condemn Giggle, an app for females.'

She said that she hoped the article would point out that there are plenty of apps created specifically for trans people, which she fully supports, and added: 'All I ask is for is the same respect for female spaces.'

I think she knows full well that this is not the goal of the trans activists; they don't want equality with women, they want subjugation of women. But it sounds like she's up for a fight. Which is so very refreshing, isn't it?   

The Pace Of Change...

The death knell has been sounded for the traditional landline telephone. From 2025, all households and businesses will need the internet to make calls under a major digital shake-up.

It means millions of customers will be pushed online for the first time or forced to rely on a mobile phone instead.

Can you still call them 'customers' when they've not got a choice? 

Strangly, this isn't being pushed by the Tory government's relentless 'change everything' policies, for once:

Those without internet may need an engineer to visit their home to get them set up and those with older phones could need to buy a new handset.

Industry insiders compared the move to the switch to digital TV in 2012, when broadcasters stopped transmitting traditional analogue signals to household rooftop or indoor aerials. But while that change was led by the Government, the switch to 'digital' calls is being driven by the telecoms industry.

And while it's not going to affect me much, since my landline merely serves to generate spam calls and 'Microsoft engineers' who want me to go online to fix things on my computer (I just laugh and hang up) there are real fears for a lot of customers:

...experts have raised concerns that millions of older and vulnerable households which are not online, do not use a mobile phone or live in a rural area with poor connectivity are at risk of being left behind.

One thing's for sure - this is to benefit the providers of the service, not the consumers of it.