Online Safety Bill

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

This information about the online rape has subsequently come out since the BBC initially reported it, thank God it wasn't a real little girl as was first reported.

Hopefully this will prompt a change in the law as nobody should be exposed to this whatever their age.

The forthcoming age verification system will help to keep children out of adult environments and adults out of environments intended for children.

Since the game in question is specifically for those over the age of eighteen years old and has the personal boundaries function to be explicitly disabled what else would you have them do ?

Too many parents buy their children adult/mature games such as CoD & GTA V which in the U.K. both carry an 18 rating as they think it’s ’just a game’

Software developers and games companies can put in age verification all they want but if a parent is going to buy them the game then they’re more than likely going to give them a eg a credit card to verify their ID which btw is completely useless as an identity factor on its own.

The simple fact is this, protection of children starts with, and is the primary responsibility of the parent(s) be that not purchasing the game for them, ensuring internet access is controlled and supervised etc.

Just for S&G i rang my local police force this morning told them that I had been playing CoD had been teabagged and considering the news I wanted to report a sexual assault. After the laughter stopped they told me that there was no offence…….

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Since the game in question is specifically for those over the age of eighteen years old and has the personal boundaries function to be explicitly disabled what else would you have them do ?

Too many parents buy their children adult/mature games such as CoD & GTA V which in the U.K. both carry an 18 rating as they think it’s ’just a game’

Software developers and games companies can put in age verification all they want but if a parent is going to buy them the game then they’re more than likely going to give them a eg a credit card to verify their ID which btw is completely useless as an identity factor on its own.

The simple fact is this, protection of children starts with, and is the primary responsibility of the parent(s) be that not purchasing the game for them, ensuring internet access is controlled and supervised etc.

Just for S&G i rang my local police force this morning told them that I had been playing CoD had been teabagged and considering the news I wanted to report a sexual assault. After the laughter stopped they told me that there was no offence…….

So i can continue my murder spree in elite, I need the credits

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Since the game in question is specifically for those over the age of eighteen years old and has the personal boundaries function to be explicitly disabled what else would you have them do ?

Too many parents buy their children adult/mature games such as CoD & GTA V which in the U.K. both carry an 18 rating as they think it’s ’just a game’

Software developers and games companies can put in age verification all they want but if a parent is going to buy them the game then they’re more than likely going to give them a eg a credit card to verify their ID which btw is completely useless as an identity factor on its own.

The simple fact is this, protection of children starts with, and is the primary responsibility of the parent(s) be that not purchasing the game for them, ensuring internet access is controlled and supervised etc.

Just for S&G i rang my local police force this morning told them that I had been playing CoD had been teabagged and considering the news I wanted to report a sexual assault. After the laughter stopped they told me that there was no offence…….

Children have always wanted to participate in adult activities before they are legally entitled to eg drinking under age.

A lot of paedophiles who target children on websites intended for over 18's use the defence that it is an over 18 site, this never washes with the courts as it's accepted that children nevertheless do join such sites and if they make it clear that they are a child then the fact that it's a site intended for over 18's is regarded as not relevant.

This would be the case even if any parent was irresponsible enough to buy them a game intended for over 18's.

In a real world situation a 15 yo girl may manage to get into a nightclub. If she discloses that she's only 15 to a man who she meets and has sex with, the fact that they met in an environment for over 18's would not be a defence.

If she never mentioned her age or lied and said she was older, then it would.


---------- Post added at 04:19 ---------- Previous post was at 04:12 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

A) no we don’t know it’s a "little girl", as no links have been provided.

B) If it was a "little girl" (define, please), what was a young child doing online in a VR environment without adult supervision?

Update - just seen pip’s post - it was an adult researcher….

I was verbally told about this by a colleague, so no link was available at the time. Now that it's been picked up by the media I am able to provide this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...tar-raped.html

Sadly, the incident referred to by Pip appears to refer to a historical case and it was a real little girl that was targetted

Her age had not been disclosed, only that she was under 16.

The definition of rape requires physical penetration to take place, so I imagine that other laws will be used against the perpetrators until if/,when the law is updated to take into account modern technology.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Children have always wanted to participate in adult activities before they are legally entitled to eg drinking under age.

A lot of paedophiles who target children on websites intended for over 18's use the defence that it is an over 18 site, this never washes with the courts as it's accepted that children nevertheless do join such sites and if they make it clear that they are a child then the fact that it's a site intended for over 18's is regarded as not relevant.

This would be the case even if any parent was irresponsible enough to buy them a game intended for over 18's.

In a real world situation a 15 yo girl may manage to get into a nightclub. If she discloses that she's only 15 to a man who she meets and has sex with, the fact that they met in an environment for over 18's would not be a defence.

If she never mentioned her age or lied and said she was older, then it would.


---------- Post added at 04:19 ---------- Previous post was at 04:12 ----------



I was verbally told about this by a colleague, so no link was available at the time. Now that it's been picked up by the media I am able to provide this:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...tar-raped.html

Sadly, the incident referred to by Pip appears to refer to a historical case and it was a real little girl that was targetted

Her age had not been disclosed, only that she was under 16.

The definition of rape requires physical penetration to take place, so I imagine that other laws will be used against the perpetrators until if/,when the law is updated to take into account modern technology.

So a couple of points here

1. This reads very much as it’s the same instance as the researcher
2. The metaverse again has a boundary protection which is enabled by default and must be explicitly disabled

[RichardCoulter]

The one that Pip referred to took place in 2022.

If this was taken off then, as she was a child she will have been unable to take responsible decisions.

Nevertheless, it is the men who are at fault. If a woman takes the unwise decision to walk home at night instead of taking a taxi and gets raped, it would be the fault of the rapist not the woman.

[jfman]

I would be shocked by the comparison but nothing shocks me in this thread.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The one that Pip referred to took place in 2022.

If this was taken off then, as she was a child she will have been unable to take responsible decisions.

Nevertheless, it is the men who are at fault. If a woman takes the unwise decision to walk home at night instead of taking a taxi and gets raped, it would be the fault of the rapist not the woman.

I’m not sure how to get this through that thick skull of yours but I’ll try

1. Not one post is trying to say that the men are innocent, this is about minimising potential for these issues to occur

2. You cannot compare the physical act of rape or sexual assault to something that happens in a virtual environment. By doing so your doing a disservice to actual victims


3z If she can’t take responsible decisions regarding disabling personal boundary when it explicitly states what the possibilities are and you’re also requested to confirm your decision before the change is made then they should not be playing the game.

4. The child is capable of configuring the vr environment, sign up to the service knows how to disable the boundary, but isn’t responsible enough to understand the explicit warnings about the risk of disabling the boundary ?

5. Have creators implemented safeguards ? Yes. Could they potentially do more ? Possibly. Are creators solely responsible for the child’s safety in a virtual environment ? No. Should parents be engaging to make sure their children are safe ? Definitely !

If I had a teenage daughter who wanted to play VR , I’d be using the cast function of vr headsets to make sure I knew what she was doing, she would have a child account that couldn’t disable things such as personal boundaries


You’re clutching at straws and you’re being a tit.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Nevertheless, it is the men who are at fault.

What proof do you have it was Men ?

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

I’m not sure how to get this through that thick skull of yours but I’ll try

1. Not one post is trying to say that the men are innocent, this is about minimising potential for these issues to occur

2. You cannot compare the physical act of rape or sexual assault to something that happens in a virtual environment. By doing so your doing a disservice to actual victims


3z If she can’t take responsible decisions regarding disabling personal boundary when it explicitly states what the possibilities are and you’re also requested to confirm your decision before the change is made then they should not be playing the game.

4. The child is capable of configuring the vr environment, sign up to the service knows how to disable the boundary, but isn’t responsible enough to understand the explicit warnings about the risk of disabling the boundary ?

5. Have creators implemented safeguards ? Yes. Could they potentially do more ? Possibly. Are creators solely responsible for the child’s safety in a virtual environment ? No. Should parents be engaging to make sure their children are safe ? Definitely !

If I had a teenage daughter who wanted to play VR , I’d be using the cast function of vr headsets to make sure I knew what she was doing, she would have a child account that couldn’t disable things such as personal boundaries


You’re clutching at straws and you’re being a tit.

If you'd like to post this again after removing the gratuitous rude & innapropriate remarks, I will address your points.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If you'd like to post this again after removing the gratuitous rude & innapropriate remarks, I will address your points.

You refuse to consider an opposing point of view,you have your own agenda on the issue and you have the square root of bugger all knowledge of either

A) the law
B) the technology

So, no I don’t think I will.

Furthermore, if you’re unable to deal with that then I’m sure you can report me to the mods/admins just make sure you turn off your personal boundary so they can hand you the ‘show me where you were hurt teddy’

[peanut]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If you'd like to post this again after removing the gratuitous rude & innapropriate remarks, I will address your points.

Grow up.

[GrimUpNorth]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

If you'd like to post this again after removing the gratuitous rude & innapropriate remarks, I will address your points.

Admitting when you got it wrong is the grown up thing to do. People will respect you so much more if before you post something you leave your ego at the log in screen. You should try it sometime.

[RichardCoulter]

An interesting discussion about the incident features in the first part of this programme:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001tr3f

---------- Post added at 12:07 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth

Admitting when you got it wrong is the grown up thing to do. People will respect you so much more if before you post something you leave your ego at the log in screen. You should try it sometime.

To my knowledge I haven't got anyth8ng wrong. I sometimes do due to brain injury and, if it's politely pointed out, will apologise and make amends.

[mrmistoffelees]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

An interesting discussion about the incident features in the first part of this programme:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m001tr3f

---------- Post added at 12:07 ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 ----------



To my knowledge I haven't got anyth8ng wrong. I sometimes do due to brain injury and, if it's politely pointed out, will apologise and make amends.

I was wondering when that statement would make an appearance, glad to see you didn’t disappoint.

Your brain injury isn’t a get out of jail free card to allow you to talk complete drivel and not to be held accountable for it.

[Sirius]

Another get out of jail free card is when someone does get it wrong but decides to turn it on its head and report it to the mods of the forum they were posting on and complain that they are being targeted ( for clarity i am not saying that has happened here YET as far as i am aware). Of course nowadays the same type of person has a trump card in the Online Safety Bill that lets them be offended at anything they want and report anything they want.