this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024

40 points (95.5% liked)

Canada

7215 readers

390 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

🏒 Sports

Hockey

Football (NFL)

List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

List of All Teams: unknown
Toronto Blue Jays

Basketball

List of All Teams: unknown
Toronto Raptors

Soccer

List of All Teams: unknown
General Community: /c/CanadaSoccer
Toronto FC

💻 Universities

UBC
UWaterloo
SFU
UoGuelph
OTU
McGill
U Western
UofT
UofA: unknown

💵 Finance / Shopping

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social and Culture

Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

otter@lemmy.ca

Canada's long-awaited online harms bill is coming. Here's what we know (www.ctvnews.ca)

submitted 9 months ago by sik0fewl@kbin.social to c/canada@lemmy.ca

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Years in the making, the federal government is poised to introduce a new piece of legislation on Monday aimed at addressing a series of online harms.

all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 34 points 9 months ago (2 children)

five kinds of harmful content: hate speech, terrorist content, incitement to violence, the sharing of non-consensual images, and child exploitation

Sounds good on the surface but I'm sure there will be massive oversteps and oversights.

[–] tootoughtoremember@lemmy.world 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

massive oversteps and oversights.

It's ok, you won't be needing those pesky privacy rights anyways.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago

I'm confident in my ability to stay one step ahead of bureaucrats but most people can't even set up a router. When companies comply with regional locks most people will have no choice but to comply.

[–] blindsight@beehaw.org 5 points 9 months ago

Exactly. I'll look for Michael Geist's analysis after the text is available.

[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 14 points 9 months ago

I don't like the government infringing on my right to bear harms

[+] TakiMinase@slrpnk.net -27 points 9 months ago (4 children)

Will Trudeau be punished for his blackface pictures causing harm....

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 20 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

That wouldn't make sense, but even if that was not a joke, it would be out of scope. The legislation is likely to focus on requiring platforms to moderate content more strongly; plus maybe penalties for cyberbullying, deepfakes and such.

Being insensitive online is unlikely to ever become a crime, let alone something that can prosecuted retroactively.

[–] Paragone@lemmy.ca -2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

There's a law, possibly international/UN or something, against making laws that retroactively criminalize stuff, so you're right, on that point.

Pretending that such things won't ever become a crime, however, when the US is at the point of criminalizing

miscarriage
some brain-wirings/genders
violating christofascist supremacism
not being a Trump-cult member

as the next few years will demonstrate,

is naive/incompetent.

Yes, criminal-law is going to be used to enforce ideological-conforming, throughout much of the West, exactly as China, Israel, Russia, etc, now "use"/abuse law.

That tipping-point has already been crossed, on this world.

[–] villasv@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

All your examples indicate that if anything, having an actual black face is riskier than doing blackface in the long term.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Only if churches stop portaying Jesus as a white man. 😄

[–] TakiMinase@slrpnk.net -5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You can blame a certain emperor for making everyone paint his son as Jesus.

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

Cool - but why do churches keep painting Jesus white.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 5 points 9 months ago

You used ellipses instead of a question mark. Will you be held accountable for the harm you've inflicted?

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

If he makes new ones in the future that would be possible if they could be shown to cause harm, but you don't actually get to retroactively charge somebody for something over a decade ago that wasn't a crime then.

Speaking of over a decade ago, maybe you should move on eh?

[–] TakiMinase@slrpnk.net 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Apply that to other politicians. Move on. Heh.

[–] phx@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago

It's not about the politician, it's about the pulling out crap that happened decades ago before he even was one.

Seriously, get a new schtick, it's not like there's a leak is current issues to pissed at JT (or as you say, other politicians) about.