Sounds more like a self-imposed penalty by the author. I mean I can read most of the world internet without such a message so I don't know what it even means.

▲

estimator7292 2 days ago | parent [-]

This is what the UK government wants. Kyle has spent an insane amount of effort to get answers from OFCOM, got none, and as such blocks the UK for self-preservation. The UK wants to fine non-citizens for violating online purity rules, so this is the result.

Blame the UK for this bullshit. The rules say you must geoblock the UK or be fined, and then sometimes you still get fined anyway.

▲

YeGoblynQueenne 13 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I have no problem blaming the UK government for all sorts of bullshit, but in this case I don't understand who says the UK has to be geoblocked. I can read literally hundreds of thousands of websites on the internets, it's just this one that seems to have a problem.

My educated guess is that the author is just being precious because he disagrees with the UK Online Safety Act. Everyone else seems to sort of ignore it and move on, so all that this does is that I can't read his site from the UK.

Or, rather, I could use a VPN but I can see here: https://archive.ph/iYLUO that it's a pdf article on some AI stuff. A previous article from the same site posted on HN (https://archive.ph/eXuD0) was also some commentary on using AI.

So is the author implying that the Online Safety Act will cause him to be fined for a couple of articles on AI, or what? What's supposed to be so objectionable to the Online Safety Act on his website that compels him to block the UK from it?

I mean, I'm asking because I really can't tell.

▲

tmvphil 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Demanding that a bureaucracy promise to not fine you or pre-clear your behavior is just not how things are done in any other realm of business.

▲

FrustratedMonky 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Such a delicate balance.

The US 'free speech over everything', also allows anti-science and conspiracy theories.

But this UK example, seems to be a good example why allowing all the US Crazy is better option.

▲

RegW 2 days ago | parent [-]

What exactly is the example?

Sorry, I'm in the UK so I haven't read the article that the author has decided to block my access to.

▲

FrustratedMonky 2 days ago | parent [-]

That block is the example.

The author has said, he blocked it because of UK regulations.

If UK is making authors be defensive and block their own stuff, or have legal charges, it is little backwards to blame the authors for the blocking.

	▲	13 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	YeGoblynQueenne 13 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Yes, well, the author seems to be blocking access to make a point about being forced to block access. Which is a bit, you know. Really? OK, I don't need to read your stuff, I can read literally hundreds of thousands of other pages on the internet without their authors throwing a tantrum.