Slashdot Mirror


Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? (helpnetsecurity.com)

The Brexit shock continues to reverberate throughout the global economic and policy worlds. Andrea Limbago from the security company Endgame responds to a poll showing that most security professionals have concerns about Brexit: Will it weaken cybersecurity because of additional bureaucratic hurdles to information sharing with the EU, as well limited cross-national collaboration in fighting cyber criminals? There is also concern about the possibility of a brain drain -- in-demand security talent pool fleeing the UK -- which could increasingly impact security and data protection.
Limbago suggests tech workers in Britain's financial sector may feel the impact, "with Bitcoin surging and the pound dropping.... London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit, the rise of digital currencies, and the EU's move toward greater digital integration." And there's also the possibility of "a push for digital sovereignty and greater national control over the Internet." But another poll found that 64% of information security professionals didn't think Brexit would affect Britain's ability to defend against cyber-attacks. Can security professionals continue their inter-nation cooperation, elevating data and security concerns over new administrative differences between Europe and the U.K.?

109 of 197 comments (clear)

  1. Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No.

    1. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Um, no.

      FTFY

    2. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by tripleevenfall · · Score: 4, Informative

      But FUD! What about the FUD! The FUD is tanking! FUD! Brexit FUD!

    3. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by bennebw · · Score: 1

      From what I've read, Scotland wants to declare independence in order to sell its soul to the EU.

    4. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

      I thought he moved to Shpain becaush the taxesh in Shcotland were too high?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by jandersen · · Score: 2

      Brexit will hurt a lot of things, but probably not things that are already working int the global sphere, if that is the correct term. Brexit will cause upheavals, and as always, this will harm those at the bottom of the pile (who ironically voted for brexit, it appears) and benefit those at the top. In the long run, however, brexit makes no difference; the internet will see to it, that the globalisation will continue, and national sovereignty will continue to become less relevant in a world where everybody can talk across borders with little effort. A lot of young, educated people no longer identify with their local community, but have close friends in countries on the other side of the world - they are not likely to care much about "Taking Our Country Back" in the future and will be happy to join the European Federation or whatever it is going to be called, when the time comes and they get into power.

      In the short term - 5 to 10 years - brexit will continue cause us small, but significant problems, while we go through the slow and painful process of unraveling 40+ years of treaties that the UK have themselves been one of the prime drivers in building up. It is all very well to gloss over these things with cool sounding slogans or glib arguments about how many cars Germany want to sell, but the truth of the matter is that the negotiations will take a long time and cause endless trouble for the whole of Europe and to some extent to the rest of the world, and their leaders and populations will remember this for a long time. And just like people in the UK voted leave based on something less than rational, these feelings of resent in Europe will count against UK in any negotiations - this may also hit us when we try to get good deals with countries outside EU. We have signalled to the world that we are not entirely rational, and they will have their doubts about any relationship with us for some time. And so on and so on. There are some who will benefit, and who will feel that these problem are a price worth paying; because they won't be the ones paying.

      As I have said in so many discussions, I don't need to win this argument; time will tell soon enough. It would be nice to be proven wrong, but I don't think I will.

    6. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Security? by peawormsworth · · Score: 1

      Well I hope it does. "cyber security" and "information sharing" between nations is just cozy wording for governments who want to violate freedoms by illegally monitoring their own people through agreements with other nations.

  2. Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Spying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Yes, yes it will. Which is a good thing for everyone outside of 5 eyes.

    Seriously though, fuck global panopticon.

    1. Re:Will Brexit Hurt International Cyber-Spying? by GrahamCox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      LIkely it will be the opposite. Without the EU laws reigning it in, the UK govt. can allow GCHQ to do whatever it likes.

  3. "The pound dropping" by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The pound is above the lowest point just after the Brexit vote - and pretty much stabilized.

    There are a lot of people trying VERY hard to scare you into thinking the Brexit is a disaster, when in fact it is a blip. This whole "computer cyber-security" angle is pathetic.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:"The pound dropping" by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure brexit will even happen. I see a new referendum requiring at least 60% with a minimum of voter participation if less than 60. Which is what they should have done, instead if allowing literally a 1 vote difference to make drastic changes to a lot of people's lives.

      Cameron fucked that up, but there were already petitions in place before the vote, that may be considered.

      I'm not taking a stand on what brexit means to anything for at least six months. Sure if its your job carry on, but on a us centric news aggregator its just having a toss.

    2. Re:"The pound dropping" by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      As someone who trades currency on the side, the pound dropping has meant I'm making more money since the currency I start with is already on the low side. Friends of mine who live by just trading stocks made 20-30% returns in the last week betting on the FTSE recovering which it did and was expected to do.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:"The pound dropping" by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Friends of mine who live by just trading stocks made 20-30% returns in the last week betting on the FTSE recovering which it did and was expected to do.

      Awesome. Because that's all that matters.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    4. Re:"The pound dropping" by martin-boundary · · Score: 1
      You're in Denial (first stage of 5). The brexit vote shows that around half of the public doesn't want anything to do with the EU. Fine. What do you think will happen if a new ref gets brexit repealed? You'll STILL have around half the population who don't want anything to do with the EU, and now they're also pissed off at the likes of you. The only thing a second ref can do is polarize the population further, and that's not what you want, trust me. You already have racist attacks increasing by 500% in the last week, it would just get worse.

      If you want to be an EU citizen, your best bet is to get an EU passport and emigrate. Let the little britainers play their experiment, it's the best of all worlds.

    5. Re:"The pound dropping" by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Awesome. Because that's all that matters.

      Pretty much. All I can do is wish I was that damned savvy and could have ridden the train. Probably a lot more people out there with money thanks to it though.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    6. Re:"The pound dropping" by Ramze · · Score: 3, Informative

      A lower pound to the Euro is beneficial to GB's local industries -- people buy local instead of foreign, and people living in the EU will be able to buy goods and services from GB cheaper b/c they can buy more with their euros after converting to pounds to buy GB goods/services.

      International money markets are funny... When your currency goes up compared to others, you hurt exports, but help imports -- and vice versa when your currency goes down. No matter which way it moves, it hurts in some ways and helps in others.

      Given that it wasn't a huge percent shift to begin with, I don't think GB is going to cry about the change even if it stays where it is as the "new normal."

    7. Re:"The pound dropping" by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      If you want to be an EU citizen, your best bet is to get an EU passport and emigrate. Let the little britainers play their experiment, it's the best of all worlds.

      Wrong solution. Throw out anyone who voted to leave the EU. Let them swim to America.

      Seriously, anyone saying "if you don't like it, leave" should be automatically punched in the face.

    8. Re:"The pound dropping" by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The pound has not recovered significantly after the Brexit crash, and is way down over the long term from its usual level of around 200.

      I've personally lost a small fortune this year because the Pound has lost 30% of its value when exchanged with the Yen.

      The real long term damage hasn't really started yet. If we come out of the Single Market then several major companies have already announced that they will leave, for obvious reasons. We will probably just suffer a few more years of austerity and some long term slow down if we stay in, but if we come out we will be really screwed. In fact, I expect there will be a sharp correction when the new PM is announced, depending on their position.

      As for cyber security, I think it will get worse. At the moment European companies are suing GCHQ for hacking. Unrestrained and emboldened by the human rights-busting and illegal under EU law Snooper's Charter the computers of UK citizens will be all the more vulnerable.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    9. Re:"The pound dropping" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      If only UK had something to export ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    10. Re:"The pound dropping" by Sax+Russell+5449D29A · · Score: 1

      They manufacture Nissans over there. Don't underestimate the global demand for Nissan Notes and Jukes!

      --
      -SR
    11. Re:"The pound dropping" by johanw · · Score: 1

      This will be fixed with import tariffs if the UK wants to export to the EU.

    12. Re:"The pound dropping" by itsdapead · · Score: 2

      The pound is above the lowest point just after the Brexit vote - and pretty much stabilized.

      It's still at its lowest point for years but hey, yes, a low pound is swings and roundabouts for the economy as a whole... and the FTSE 100 index just had a little wobble because of the shock of calling it wrong (and traders who predicted the wobble won big). The FTSE 250 which includes more UK-focussed companies is still down a bit - but, hey, it'll be back after a few weeks of normal trading. So, panic over, Brexit isn't going to harm the economy.

      One small problem...

      Brexit hasn't happened yet!

      Now, I hate to be all hysterical and put that in bold, but I think its generally accepted that evidence of the effect doesn't usually turn up until after the cause. I know that the "Remain" campaign told us all that a giant hand would reach up and snuff out the sun the moment the ballot was counted, but those clowns were part of the problem.

      So far, we don't know when Brexit will happen or even if it will (I don't thing the government can just ignore the vote, but they could water it down to some token change in relationship) it we don't know on what terms, and what wonderful deals we'll be able to cut with India and China: the UK is not allowed to start negotiating other trade details outside the EU until we leave (and some in the EU are claiming that we can't negotiate trade deals with the EU until we've left, although I suspect that will get talked out). The important decisions - whether City institutions will be allowed to continue clearing in Euros, whether whatever trade deals we cut with the EU will be enough to keep companies like BMW/Mini and Nissan investing in manufacturing plants in the UK etc. are yet to be made.

      Its kinda like that day about 15 years ago when the Euro was first launched and the world didn't end - obviously all the concerns being discussed then about all the mismatched economies, some of whom had fudged the entry criteria, were wrong, yes? (Now, putting some clear blue water between us and the ticking timebomb that is the Euro is one area where I do sympathise with Brexit - although the disadvantage is that we're about to give it a good solid kick and we're not quite at safe distance).

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    13. Re:"The pound dropping" by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

      All people have a right to migrate.

      However, ALL sovereign nations have a RIGHT to let in, or reject anyone they do now wish to migrate that are not legal citizens of their country.

      If you want to apply, and follow the legal means, then sure, they should consider you, but it isn't a given you should/will be accepted.....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:"The pound dropping" by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      No, it shows that 35% of the people that voted, voted for leaving (for what ever reason).

      So, everyone is lying when they say that "leave" got 52% of the vote?

      I'm assuming you have some evidence to support your belief that only 35% of the people who voted said "leave" in spite of the news reporting that 52% of the people who voted said "leave"?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    15. Re:"The pound dropping" by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you should learn to read?

      The parent (and I quoted it for more ease) claimed that 52% of _all people_ voted for leave, while in fact 30% off all voters did not even vote, and about 40% _of all people_ are to young to vote.

      Voting participation was 70%. 51.something% for leaving 48.something% for staying. Over whole UK. OTOH, every single electoral ward in Scotland voted for staying, partly with 60% majourity.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    16. Re:"The pound dropping" by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      I think it's pretty likely that under half of the population want to leave, but that the young people of England were too lazy to vote. If you're going to have a referendum on something as important at leaving the EU, mandatory voting is surely essential to establish a mandate.

  4. Utter nonsense by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There is no magic or silver bullet in security, just a set of best practices (processes), technology and people working together. If done according to any major standard defense in depth will be used. There is no such concept as 'if national politics =X then Y. Best practices are widely publicized and available to any organization or government in the world.

    Whether or not an organization follows security best practices has everything to do with their culture and nothing to do with their politics. There is no tool that any given country has a lock on.

    What's next? Brexit endangers air supply?

    1. Re:Utter nonsense by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

      What's next? Brexit endangers air supply?

      Remember folks - you read it on Slashdot first!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Utter nonsense by Ramze · · Score: 1

      Not Air Supply! What will we do without those great love songs?!?!?

      EU: Come back, Great Britain! We can make it work!

      Air Supply: I'm all Out of Love
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    3. Re:Utter nonsense by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1

      According to Juncker, the Chairman of the European Commission, Brexit is also threatening to upset the leaders of other planets. No kidding, no missing context, no metaphor. Well, the guy isn't called "Druncker" for nothing.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Utter nonsense by Tom · · Score: 1

      There is no magic or silver bullet in security,

      There is, however, a kind of "potion of level-up". It's called taking security seriously and changing it from an afterthought to a nonfunctional requirement, in the language of enterprise architects.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    5. Re:Utter nonsense by onyxruby · · Score: 1

      Doing what you're talking about is part of my job. Security can't be an afterthought, bolt on security is one of the bane's of my work. Culture is the number one issue the security field faces.

  5. FUD by elcor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Fear Uncertainty Doubt The campaign to turn people's opinion has started. It seems that the good people of Britain took by surprise some very powerful goups.

    1. Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It seems UK took itself by surprise. But sure, it's FUD, same as FTSE250 still being below the closing value of June 23rd, or the still pound being below June 23rd value (after having recovered a bit it went down again), right? You lot kinda sound like the knight in Monty Python movie... Wait until your arm (Scotland) takes itself from UK, and than say "it's just a flesh wound" and it will be exactly like the knight in the movie.

    2. Re:FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      the good people of Britain took by surprise some very powerful goups.

      Ahhh! And it feels SO GOOD! There will not be a politically correct dictatorship ran by unaccountable ghosts. Bye EU! Buh bye!

    3. Re:FUD by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Very much this, some of the articles have been outright ridiculous. Infact most of the articles have been ridiculous.

    4. Re:FUD by eastlight_jim · · Score: 1

      Yes there will. So many of the options for a post-Brexit agreement with the EU (the "Norway model" comes to mind) rely on us accepting free movement and EU legislation in order to retain access to the common market. The catch is that we will be subject to the same regulation without a hand in saying how it is made or implemented.

    5. Re:FUD by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Fear Uncertainty Doubt The campaign to turn people's opinion has started. It seems that the good people of Britain took by surprise some very powerful goups.

      It also took by surprise the likes of lying coward Boris Johnson and lying Gove. These two shit stirrers wanted to gain political points by getting the government in trouble. They were shitting themselves when their campaign was more successful when they thought. They were shitting themselves even more when Cameron stepped back and said "you got us into this shit, now you try to get out of it".

    6. Re:FUD by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Fear Uncertainty Doubt The campaign to turn people's opinion has started.

      Started? FUD is exactly the reason why people voted for the Brexit in the first place. The FUD started a year ago and has even resulted in massive egg on people's faces on both sides.

    7. Re:FUD by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      Why would BR bother? There are hundreds of other countries, a great many who trade with the EU, that are not part of the EU, nor subject to its regulations (except with respect to the trade itself). Why would BR be any different?

  6. Actual evidence by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Informative

    A recent slashdot reply caught my eye, because it succinctly sums up the situation in the UK.

    In her department, which requires high-end medically-skilled professionals, her boss posted after Brexit. The basic gist was "Don't worry, everyone, your cancer diagnosis will still be safe in the hands of our department consisting almost entirely of Spanish, Italian, German, French, Polish, Greek, ...... personnel for the time being".

    The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism.

    Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job.

    It could happen - right?

    Globalism was sold to us as a way to increase our standard of living. It was well known that salaries would stagnate, but (we were told) the lower prices on imported goods would more than make up for the difference.

    In hindsight, we see that salaries did stagnate, and also unemployment went up while per-capita gdp about doubled.

    Globalism is good for a handful few people, while it has driven half the workforce to the brink of poverty.

    The economic rationale says that the economy is doing great (which it is, actually) and ignores the dissatisfaction of millions of citizens as valueless.

    Why should *any* country sacrifice the welfare of its citizens for the benefit of people in other countries?

    If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.

    It's the difference between a rationalization and actual evidence.

    1. Re:Actual evidence by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Informative

      Basically there were too things that propelled the Leave vote. First the lie that Brits had no representation in the EU (even some using the phrase "no taxation without representation"), except that the UK had representation in the EU, all member nations do. Sure they don't always get their way but that's true for all unions. Ie, California does not get it's way and is overridden by Washington but it doesn't throw a fit and demand to leave, since part of being a democracy is realizing that you don't always get the majority vote.

      Second, a big push was the idea that they'd get rid of all the non-Brits if they left the EU. First off, amazingly racist and there is currently a big surge in racism in the UK. Many of those people with the wrong color were born in the UK, they can't be kicked out and the government will never allow it and will never have a majority "kick out the damn foreigners" faction. Who cares if the department has Spanish, Italian, German, Polish, and Greek staff? Is he really so stupid that the thinks a true blooded Brit would do a better job? No one is firing qualified British doctors to replace them with foreign workers, the foreign workers are getting the jobs because there's a demand for health care professionals that isn't being filled by the locals.

    2. Re:Actual evidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nice talking points. A little stale but palatable. Maybe next time condescend some more.

    3. Re: Actual evidence by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 5, Informative

      First, the British are not trying to throw off a government they elected, like in your example of California. The Californians elect representatives to the Federal government. The British representatives to the EU are unelected. California did not exist as a state before becoming a part of the USA. The UK was a powerful independent state for centuries before "becoming part" of the EU.

      As to your screed about racism. What total garbage. The citizens of the UK want to close the border to indiscrminant immigration. It isn't a matter of race. There are many people of many skin hues and cultural backgrounds within the Commonwealth who are British citizens. The key is that they are westernized citizens. It has nothing at all to do with race.

    4. Re:Actual evidence by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Fuck me, that's the biggest load of bullshit I've read on Slashdot in recent memory.

      How one can distil down an enormously complex situation into "too"[sic] paragraphs of dubious authenticity and simultaneously claim to understand the issues involved sufficiently to invoke two strawmen designed to be easily knocked down is beyond me, but hey, knock yourself out.

      Just don't expect to be taken seriously.

      1) The "representation" for the *people* in the EU is horribly undemocratic. All the people get to elect representatives to is the toothless chamber, ironically named the European Parliament. Forgive me, but any so-called parliament that can't even propose legislation, or even have the final say in enactment of the legislation graciously imposed upon it, is no parliament worth bearing the name. I'm used to the people (or at least our elected representatives) having the power, not an unelected body of career politicians out to line their own (or their own countries) pockets.

      2) There is an element of racism in every society on this planet, it's a leftover from the "us" vs "them" tribal nature of our shared history. There were indeed people with money who were advertising and therefore getting their message across this time, and some of those people had a xenophobic and sometimes racist agenda, agreed. To immediately paint all those who voted leave (for whatever reason of their own) as racist, because some other person was being racist in an advertising campaign beggars belief. Clearly critical thinking in whatever country you're from is lacking (and the point stands if that country is Britain).

      The issues involved were complex, and it's not anywhere near as simple as "fuck those brown people"; to imply such is frankly insulting. Perhaps those who voted to leave simply chose the probability of lesser prosperity as an acceptable compromise for real self-determination.

      --
      Physicists get Hadrons!
    5. Re:Actual evidence by Ash-Fox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Basically there were too things that propelled the Leave vote. First the lie that Brits had no representation in the EU (even some using the phrase "no taxation without representation"), except that the UK had representation in the EU, all member nations do.

      Indeed.

      Sure they don't always get their way but that's true for all unions.

      You forgot the legitimate point that there was representation, however the bit where majority vote can be completely overruled by the EU commission and ignore the will of the majority which genuinely was never used to protect the interests of the people, but of the EC.

      You also seem to have forgotten that areas that had an overall majority leave were places where the common fisheries policy, the common agricultural policy, the sustainable development project, the European climate change programme and so on all lead to drastic problems that affected people's life adversely.

      UK MEPs have previously brought up problems such as the Common Fisheries Policy leading to overfishing (in 2013 it's powers were extended and became in some respects more problematic after 40 years of problems already) and killing the environment in some waters, there have been instances of other MEPs (particularly from nations benefiting such things) denounce them as xenophobic and wanting to keep the fish stocks to themselves (as opposed to hearing out the issue) - Majority vote wins in these cases.

      But then, even if you ignore all these particular issues and just look at prosperity, it doesn't lead to a good number either. When you consider what power the EU has, when Iceland, a relatively small and no where near a big player in the world stage is able to negotiate a free trade deal with China in less than a year and the EU is going on for decades trying to negotiate one... There isn't really much in this department either.

      Of course, you won't see that reported in the media that prefers polarised and sensational issues.

      Second, a big push was the idea that they'd get rid of all the non-Brits if they left the EU.

      That was really a remain camp's claim, not really anything to do with the leavers.

      First off, amazingly racist and there is currently a big surge in racism in the UK.

      A few hundred reported incidents in a nation of 65,000,000 since brexit is not really a "big surge" to me. The idea that over 50% of the UK is racist to the degree leavers are portraying it to be is somewhat laughable too. Certainly the timing represents brexit has a catalyst for some acts. I should also note that I live in a major UK city that has a history of racism, prejudice and acts of violence against foreigners, not a single racist incident since the vote.

      The reality is that there were legitimate reasons and concerns to leave the EU and you're just perpetuating more of the remain camp's story and media sensationalism, you should be ashamed.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    6. Re:Actual evidence by yuvcifjt · · Score: 1

      The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism.

      Wow, you must be a kid or completely clueless to make such an ignorant statement!
      Clearly, you've never for a large company which required skilled labour, and most clearly, you've never been involved in recruitment or interviews.

      Go to any hospital and ask the senior doctor or management why most of the docs/nurses are from abroad!
      I've been involved in recruitment, and I can tell you it's damn hard to find anyone skilled in UK... strange, I know. I didn't understand either, and even after quizzing HR, I assumed either all the devs were employed and don't change jobs, or we simply don't have skilled devs / docs / nurses in UK.

      I desperately wanted a dev from UK who had a similar cultural understanding and mentality towards code quality, but we struggled, and in the end our work force comprised of... polish, italian, spanish, french, few romanian, few americans, and many indians!

      Oh, and by the way, go take a look at the skilled staff in Tesco Head Office in Welwyn, especially the devs, and you'll quickly understand what I mean.

    7. Re: Actual evidence by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      British representatives are chosen by elected representatives.

      If it's not a matter of race then why is there a sudden upsurge in racism in the UK? Coincidence?

    8. Re:Actual evidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I read the same BS here in the US, something along the lines of "Waah, we can't find anyone clued here, so we need more cheap foreign labor", while there are many, many college grads and people with real experience looking for work.

      Just be honest and drop the excuses. You want cheap offshore labor.

      I worked for a startup as a PM contractor in an interim until I found permanent work a while back. Another PM was making the same whining about needing H-1Bs for his developer roles, since he said he couldn't find anyone. I went to a local university, got me people looking for work, and some damn good interns, and cranked out my project and goals in record time. No foreign labor needed. No need to offshore the coding. You will be surprised by what older, experienced people are back in college getting their degrees.

    9. Re: Actual evidence by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      The British representatives to the EU are unelected.

      You're a little mixed up, the powers you're questioning is to do with secret voting (makes it easy for people to say one thing to their people and do something else entirely) on the European Commission president by the European Parliament (made up of people we elected) who elects 27 other members of the commission. Once in power, these people have authority over the European Parliament and can override any majority vote or interest. As these people are detached and not answerable to anyone but the politically elite, it has lead to a massive disconnect between what the people want and EC's interests.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    10. Re:Actual evidence by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Why should *any* country sacrifice the welfare of its citizens for the benefit of people in other countries?

      Because if the country next door collapses, it has economic ramifications. And they might just pick up their weapons and come visit if things get bad enough at home. Ask a hard one.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re: Actual evidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The surge in racism is easy to explain.

      You see, whites never had a racial identity, and so they got pushed around by the identity groups around them. For years this went on, until no one could remember anything else.

      Now they are starting to wake up, and they are rapidly coming to the conclusion that they don't want to be on the losing end of your genocide.

      And so now you racist fucks are getting pushback, often for the first time in your miserable coddled little lives. "How dare you whites not wither under our cries of 'racism' and 'sexism'?" you cry as you throw your little tantrums.

      Your racism was there all along, you see. You just can't maintain the illusion any more, now that things aren't going exactly your way, and so your vile hate is now on display for all to see.

    12. Re:Actual evidence by yuvcifjt · · Score: 1

      No, employing a non-UK personnel actually costs us far more, more to the agency, and even more for their visa, especially outside the EU, so the Indian devs.
      It's got nothing to do with cheap labour, and the salary we pay isn't decided by HR, it comes out of our departments budget.

      As I said, we seriously struggle to find a dev from UK alone.
      And as I also said, if you don't believe me, please, by all means, go and speak to the senior people and management... or better yet, work for a company and try to recruit a dev or doctor or nurse, and you'll understand the frustration.

      Seriously, as I said, either all UK dev are already in full-time employment and stick to their jobs, or they are leaving the country, or, maybe we just don't have the skill.

      And by the way, look at the reason why Raspberry PI was created in the first place ;)

    13. Re:Actual evidence by Ramze · · Score: 1

      That's... one way of putting a spin on things, I suppose.

      The legitimate arguments I've seen for leaving are:

      GB is obligated to conform to EU law domestically even though the EU began as a set of trade treaties. (Best example I've seen of this is local industries in GB that couldn't make things to different specs b/c the EU mandated something else and there was no system to get a waiver or to dispute the regulations) GB citizens and businesses didn't like that their local rules were being superseded by the EU regs.

      GB is obligated to allow free movement between the EU member states which has led to an erosion of their culture (This is likely where a lot of racism comes into play, but there's a lot of Muslim influx which resists conforming to local customs and in some cases brings violence) GB has taken in roughly the same number of immigrants just last year as the entire USA for the same time period. It's a lot of people to support and integrate -- and they often don't speak the language, get free medical care, and free housing if they don't have jobs. It's understandable that its' a burden and would inflame locals with such a large influx of immigrants to support.

      I definitely think there's a lot of ignorance and racism involved, but there are some underlying reasons for the frustrations that are valid.

    14. Re:Actual evidence by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      Wow. Just wow. I guess you're gonna be really pissed off when machines take most of the human jobs away.

    15. Re: Actual evidence by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The British representatives to the EU are unelected.

      Fuck off, liar. I voted for my MEP.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    16. Re:Actual evidence by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      1) The "representation" for the *people* in the EU is horribly undemocratic.

      It's better than what we have in the UK, so in terms of "democracy", we've just voted to lose a bunch of it. I voted for my MEP, and the Council member is selected from my elected representatives.

      The commission which is more like a bunch of civil servants proposes legislation

      My elected representatives get to reject, accept or arbitrarily amend it.

      The so-called "undemocratic" commission can do nothing without the ascent of the democratically elected bodies. At worst one could accuse them of being inefficient, not undemocratic. But given there are in fact 24 official languages in the EU, it's perhaps not especially surprising that a permanent, professional body is there to actually write the initial legislation.

      But you know, you should certainly vote on my future without the slightest understanding of what it is you're actually voting on.

      The issues involved were complex, and it's not anywhere near as simple as "fuck those brown people"; to imply such is frankly insulting.

      It was for some people, not for everyone.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    17. Re:Actual evidence by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Of course, other EU members have the same problems. Britain isn't unique here. While there were more rationale reasons for leaving the EU the aftermath of the vote seems to show that a lot of people accepted the simplistic reasons. Similarly all the states in the US are obliged to follow federal rules even when they don't make sense. When a region decides to leave because they don't like more distant rules then where does it stop, does it keep fracturing until there are only city states left, or smaller?

      As for globalization as some have said, that's not quite right, it's really about the European neighbors right next door and not about shipping jobs off to third world countries in a different hemisphere. Maybe it's a British thing, since everyone in the world assumes the UK is European except for the British.

      The trick is if they can keep the same trading deals that they had while in the EU, otherwise they'll feel the pain of going it alone. They weren't that strong economically before, except for London's financial sector.

    18. Re:Actual evidence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I'm used to the people (or at least our elected representatives) having the power

      Oh? Which system of government is that? Certainly not the EU, but also certainly not any government of any Commonwealth nation or former British empire (looking at you USA)

      The idea that in the modern and common western world of incredible lobbying, corruption, career politicians, and massive disparity between the wealth of people; that the people have any power at all is nothing more than a fantasy.

    19. Re:Actual evidence by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A surge is not related to a percentage of absolute, but rather a previous value to a new value. If one person a year spontaneously combusted in the world, right up until this year when suddenly 3 did, it's still a surge.

      And quite frankly the surge of racism in the UK has been bad enough to severally drop people's opinion of the British in the past 2 weeks is disgusting. Yeah it's just a bunch of pre-existing racists high on the idea that their views are now legitimate, and there's no more racists in the country now than before, but frankly this legitimisation is bad enough.

    20. Re:Actual evidence by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      A surge is not related to a percentage of absolute, but rather a previous value to a new value.

      Well, we'll see at the end of the year how many racist hate crimes took place then because I can tell you, so far the actual acts over where I live have gone down for this year.

      And quite frankly the surge of racism in the UK has been bad enough to severally drop people's opinion of the British in the past 2 weeks is disgusting.

      Of course, nobody was reporting really on racism at all in Britain until after the vote. I know for a fact that in my city, during Battle of the Boyne, you'll see something closer to 80 cases of it happening; but you won't see that reported in the news.

      Yeah it's just a bunch of pre-existing racists high on the idea that their views are now legitimate, and there's no more racists in the country now than before, but frankly this legitimisation is bad enough.

      Quite frankly, this legitimisation is being fuelled by the media showing it's 'wide-spread' (but isn't), the remain campaigners who tried to make it that leave was about that etc. Yet nobody wants to actually point at those responsible and instead blame 'brexit' generally. The remainers and the media are significantly to blame for what happened and rather than take responsibility and deal with it, they'd rather just point at the leavers and go on about how they did this.

      The legitimization is literally only being portrayed by the remainers and some racist individuals because pretty much everyone in the leave campaign are saying and have been saying since the start that we're not going to be sending masses of people who are already here, away and doing so would be crazy.

      You don't even understand regular news here, which makes the impact of the news reporting this more significant. Our regular news on reporting acts that are caused by a minority is not mention the minority connection at all, for example, look at this article, these three men all have a well known belief system and a common background that has nothing to do with Oxford, but the media won't actually report that. The media is very happy though to report how racist people are in Britain since Brexit though where before they wouldn't even put a blurb up about it. You miss a lot of facts about what goes on here and the media clearly manipulates a narrative if you just spend a little bit looking at all the media stories from any one provider.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    21. Re: Actual evidence by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The British representatives to the EU are unelected.
      That is nonsense.

      Either they are selected by people who are elected, as in the case of the European Commission, or they are elected by the people, as in the case of the European Parliament.

      The European Parliament had 766 members in 2014. All elected. How else should they get there? From those 73 are UK members and elected by the people of the UK. Again: how else should they get there?

      Every member state sends an amount of european parliamentarians proportional to its population size, hence the UK have the third biggest amount of members after France and Germany.

      How idiotic must one be to really believe that in a supra national organization like the EU the parliament or the Commissions are not set up via democratic ways?

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    22. Re:Actual evidence by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      He's right, the Leave EU campaign was based on lies

      I'm not going to through each article, because I'm not here to pointless disprove every little thing shown. But let's start addressing your first one.

      1. We aren't going to see a fall in immigration levels

      It has the potential to be changed, depending on the final agreements with the EU, it's not a simple open and shut case and even then, changes are much easier to negotiate outside of the EU than inside since there is no EC overriding any UK political decisions.

      2. We aren't going to have an extra £100 million a week for the NHS

      Again, this up in the air, we could allocate those funds to the NHS if we wanted.

      3. We aren't going to be able to stay in the single market

      No other country has a set up like that: both France and Germany have made it abundantly clear that we are not going to be able to have our cake and eat it, ie, take advantage of the free-trade zone without contributing a single penny to it, as Leave says we will.

      We'll be able to join the European Free Trade Association and if we didn't have a FTA with the EU (such as the 23 nations under European Union Association Agreement that aren't part of the Customs Union/EU membership), the tariff fees would still be less than the imposed VAT laws the EU applied and wouldn't cost the country as much as EU membership does.

      But, I guess I should list the countries just so we can be clear on which ones are part of the European Union Association Agreement:

      Albania, Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Chile, Egypt, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Jordan, Kosovo, Lebanon, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, Norway, Serbia, South Africa, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey

      (Some, but not all may have signed up to additional agreements separately to this)

      4. We aren't going to get our sovereignty back

      Looks like we're going to get a new prime minister by the end of the autumn Conservative party conference. It'll be a short list of two people, nominated by MPs.

      This unelected leader could then theoretically hold office unopposed until a general election has to be called in three year's time.

      We elect parties, not individuals, so actually yes, we did elect whoever will be in power if it's up to the party.

      5. We aren't going to save £350m a week

      The Leave claim that the UK gives £350m a week to the EU has been thoroughly debunked.

      It's not been debunked.

      6. We won't remain a world leader in research and development

      UK investment in science and universities has dried up since the recession, whereas the EU gave us £7bn in science funding alone between 2007 - 2013.

      Absolutely, of course, this would never have been a problem if we hadn't had European Exchange Rate Mechanism cause a recession previously, or the destruction over 100,000 jobs from the common fisheries policy (not including jobs lost due to growth in the last 40 years), the common agricultural policy (which has forced farmers to grow certain types of crops that won't sell and forced them into poverty situations where they need EU handouts to keep operating), the sustainable development project, the European climate change programme and so on all lead to drastic problems that affected people's life adversely. I'm sure none of those had any influence on any of those things at all! Are you really saying that being able to build new industries and revitalize parts of the UK bogged down by legislation wouldn't be able to sustain research and development? Wow.

      7. We aren't going to save £2bn on energy bills

      Leave promised we could end VAT on household energy bills. While that's possible, it won't save us any

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    23. Re:Actual evidence by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      but there's a lot of Muslim influx which resists conforming to local customs and in some cases brings violence
      Would be interesting to know from which EU states those muslims immigrate ... AFAIK the EU has no muslim member state ... but well, who am I to know such things.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    24. Re:Actual evidence by Kjella · · Score: 1

      The important part of this post is that the jobs in this lab are denied to UK citizens due to globalism. Of course, proponents of globalism will tell us that the UK citizens can easily move to Greece and get an equivalent job. It could happen - right?

      Just to put this in perspective for US citizens, this is like saying you should be able to move from Silicon Valley to Montana and get an equivalent job. That people from Texas and Chicago and New York are taking the jobs that "belong to" Californians. Because those jobs would always be there, it's only a matter of who fills the position.

      If want to argue globalism, please include the analysis that indicates why having 75 million households on the brink of poverty and 10% unemployment is a good thing.

      Sure, protectionism can protect the domestic market but it won't stop other countries from getting their stuff from China and India. And once you start putting up the fences it works both ways, your trade partners will start protecting their markets from you as well. Eventually you end up with an economy that only sells to itself which will end up like the Soviet Union.

      Trade barriers won't let you turn back time to the "good old days" when your products were the envy of the world. When the competition gets tough, you can either adapt to compete or you can withdraw from the world market. Not not compete with China and India is not the same as going back to a time before China and India were competitors.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    25. Re:Actual evidence by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Perhaps those who voted to leave simply chose the probability of lesser prosperity as an acceptable compromise for real self-determination.

      That's a great idea, except that it's not going to provide real self-determination, and the people who think that are only kidding themselves. Salt of the earth. The common clay. You know, morons.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    26. Re: Actual evidence by lisaparratt · · Score: 1

      So it's a bit like being given the choice between Tory or Labour?

      Funny, that sounds almost exactly like British democracy.

    27. Re:Actual evidence by Tom · · Score: 1

      Right on everything, except the globalisation attack.

      The problem isn't globalisation. It would've been entirely possible for the entire population to profit from globalisation. If the 1% hadn't decided that they'd rather have all that nice money to themselves.

      Here is a pretty good writeup with some graphs:

      https://medium.com/@jamesallwo...

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    28. Re: Actual evidence by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      The British representatives to the EU are unelected

      Nigel Farage is unelected?

  7. Because the people calling the shots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    are traitors to their nation, in collusion with multinational business, power brokers, and foreign politicians to line each other's pockets at the expense of their constituents/citizens/slave dogs.

    For all the talk about the 'Free world', it has just been indentured servitude under a different guise. You might be able to change jobs, but you can't really 'leave' the system. If you were to dispassionately compare history to modern times you would note it has been no different for periods with slaves or eunichs or under-represented groups than it currently is today, only the names and categorizations have changed, but the level of economic if not legal oppression is the same, or in some cases worse thanks to increases in recordkeeping.

  8. This by s.petry · · Score: 4, Informative

    The Globalists took a bit hit and are not happy. Of course the media outlets they own are trying to scare people in hopes of a fascist takeover to negate the vote. Hell, the day the votes were cast they started petitioning for another referendum trying to negate the first vote. That was the point in the claim that people were so ignorant and stupid that they had to Google search after the vote. I already spotted quite a few shill posts in this thread preaching that message.

    Does cyber security get worse because people will be paid with Pounds instead of Euros? Nope, not at all. If the currency mattered we would never have an exchange. This is just more Globalist fear mongering. It's the easiest way to try and bend the public to their will, and has had huge success in the last 20 years or so.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:This by Ramze · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I agree the EU backers crapped their pants when GB gave them the finger and actually voted to leave... and are looking for any angle to fear-monger this as a disaster for GB (mostly b/c it's a disaster for the EU if it goes through as it sets a precedent that even major countries can just up and leave if they are pressured enough.)

      but, one small point -- the petition for a 2nd referendum you mention was actually started BEFORE the vote -- as a precaution by those that wanted to leave so that if their "Leave" campaign failed the first vote, they'd have a shot at a second. Turns out they won, and couldn't stop the petition which was then taken up by their opponents

    2. Re:This by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      The Globalists took a bit hit and are not happy.

      No the fans of "globalization" are rubbing their hands in glee, because this is precisely what they want.

      The UK (or what remains of it) will negotiate a bunch of trade deals for freer movement of goods and capital which is so beloved by corporations, but won't have that pesky free movement of people that stops you fucking over people locked to one location.

      In other words, if you dislike globalisation, you've just voted to keep the worst part of it while scrapping the bit that makes it better for people rather than companies.

      So well done! You're officially as foolish as the London haters who decided to stick it to London good and hard, by... er... voting to give them more power.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    3. Re:This by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      The UK don't use Euro. They use Pound. So the potential Brexit won't change anything :D

      What the Brexit should/could have to do with cyber security: I don't know.

      On the other hand, looking at all the back pedaling in the UK right now, I doubt they will leave the union.

      On the other hand with Scotland doing everything to join the EU on their own and probably leave the UK, Europe might be at the turning point where national constructs vanish and the regions start to become members of the union. E.g. Catalonia leaves Spain and becomes a member of the EU at its own. Similar for Bavaria or Lombardia of course.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    4. Re:This by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      It is not even a disaster for the EU. Don't forget that GB isn't in the eurozone and Shengen. They never played along with the rest of the EU.
      The French considered an exit for a long time but even now that is probably the time where a "frexit" is the most appealing, the majority wants to stay. In fact only the Front National wants France to leave the EU, and they will never win the elections.

    5. Re:This by tomhath · · Score: 1

      No the fans of "globalization" are rubbing their hands in glee

      "Globalists" are the "One World Government" crowd, they are on the opposite end of the political spectrum from corporate globalization.

    6. Re:This by johanw · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For exactly that reason Spain will probably veto an independent Scotland from entering the EU.

    7. Re:This by Tom · · Score: 1

      Does cyber security get worse because people will be paid with Pounds instead of Euros?

      You were always paid in Pounds in the UK, because the UK was even before the Brexit vote basically half a member in the EU. No Euro, no Schengen zone and a lot of other special rules.

      The difference really isn't all that big.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  9. EU membership is more economic than political by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Politics does have some impact, but not a tremendous amount in this case. The bigger question is: If a Brit gets paid a fair wage, would they work. Yeah, they would. Their bank would take the currency and convert it for them in almost all cases so that they could use their native currency.

    TFA's question is fear mongering trash.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  10. Of course it will. by Z80a · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After all, when the corrupt members of the EU finish doing their plans and turn the block into a supercountry ruled by a group of unelected dictators with its own army and thirst for the rest of europe, they will attack UK both physically and via internet to take it down and conquer the land for themselves, thus indeed putting the UK's cybersecurity at risk.

    1. Re:Of course it will. by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Actually we all dream about this!
      Especially we Germans! Now as we have most of Europe as backup, a hick up like between 1939 and 1945 won't be repeated! Please safe us some virgins on the islands!!

      (And please: remember to keep the tunnel open so we can bring in the tanks by train, much safer than using ships!)

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    2. Re:Of course it will. by Z80a · · Score: 1

      Can you guys come up with a rocket engineer that can make one that goes to mars this time?

  11. London financial hub threatened? by manu0601 · · Score: 1, Informative

    London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit

    UK's financial industry has nothing to fear from brexit, since Article 63 of the Treaty on Functioning of UE forbids "all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between (...) third countries".

    1. Re:London financial hub threatened? by symes · · Score: 2

      "the movement of capital" - what are you on about? Really? For reasons of compliance certain EU centric activities must be conducted within the EU. Banks are already moving jobs from the UK to the UK so that they can start the process of accreditation and remain compliant. Second. "Brexit" is the divorce. It takes two years. Then. Only then. Comes the negotiations for what role the UK will play in the EU. Passporting in the city of London will end before there is an option to negotiate an alternative. In the words of one analyst I know - you'll not see anything sudden happen. What you will see is that over time new projects will not come to London. Over 10 years you will find London slowly slipping in dominance.

    2. Re:London financial hub threatened? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      In the words of one analyst I know - you'll not see anything sudden happen.

      You mean like a sudden plunge in world markets and an immediate tanking of the UKP? One analyst you know has already been proven wrong. Maybe that one analyst isn't a great source.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:London financial hub threatened? by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      A "third country" isn't just any country. It's a country that isn't a member but still follows the rules set by the EU.

      Where do you got that definition? A "third country" is definitively a country outside of EU. Countries inside EU are covered by the words I omitted for the sake of clarity using (...) in my citation of article 63.

      Here is the complete article:

      1. Within the framework of the provisions set out in this Chapter, all restrictions on the movement of capital between Member States and between Member States and third countries shall be prohibited.

      2. Within the framework of the provisions set out in this Chapter, all restrictions on payments between Member States and between Member States and third countries shall be prohibited.

  12. Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    EU is irrelevant. Before the EU ever existed, nations functioned. If the EU stopped existing, nations would still continue functioning.
    Outside of the EU there are nations that perfectly function, inside the EU there are nations that perfectly function, and inside the EU there are also nations that are regressing and degrading daily as there are outside of the EU.
    Whether UK stayed or left the EU is of no relevance. The EU is not an economic litmus test, and it isn't a litmus test on this topic as well.
    Whether the UK will get its shit together and stabilize and progress its economy, infrastructure, industry, all depends on the people themselves putting their backs into fixing shit instead of daydreaming about symbolic EU wankery. It depends on whether the people have the shrewdness and open-mindedness to make good trade agreements through other trade organizations, and with other sectors, or go about it individually with nations within the EU (because you know, sovereignty is a thing and nations withing the EU don't give a fuck about what the EU echelons thing when their national self-interest is in question).
    For every listed negative consequence of leaving the EU, there is a counter-solution which only requires to put some work into it and some strategizing.
    Everything depends on the people of the UK themselves doing shit with their own hands, not on some external stimuli like the imaginary nanny who makes shit work with magic simply because people say so.
    So no, the Brexit will not hurt International Cybersecurity, because the only way it can hurt it is if the people involved actively pursue to hurt it and use Brexit as an excuse to be reckless in an associative attempt to intentionally connect the two events for political reasons.
    Will a sudden pouring of rain hurt my attempts at fixing a car? Not unless i decide to abandon the repair because the rain started, no.

    1. Re: Nope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "EU is irrelevant. Before the EU ever existed, nations functioned. If the EU stopped existing, nations would still continue functioning."

      Those that don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it .....

      "Nations" in Europe managed to have two quite big problems during the 20th century.

      You might have heard of them. The treaty of Rome was to bind Europe together to hopefully stop it happening again.

  13. Re:There are far bigger risks. Systemd is one. by davester666 · · Score: 1

    You forgot to do the Yoda hand-wave thing. Or is it the NSA-finger?

    --
    Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
  14. So called cyber-security by ka9dgx · · Score: 1

    As long as our operating systems assume programs can be trusted, there will be no effective computer security. The Brexit has no effect on the current stupidity.

  15. oops by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    undo mod

  16. Bitcoin vs Britcoin by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

    Limbago suggests tech workers in Britain's financial sector may feel the impact, "with Bitcoin surging and the pound dropping.... London's role as the financial hub is now threatened thanks to the Brexit, the rise of digital currencies, and the EU's move toward greater digital integration."

    Wow, those Bitcoin stories/fantasies are getting more ridiculous as they try to stay in the news.

    --
    Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
  17. Re:Brexit will not happen. by martin-boundary · · Score: 2
    And every time it does not happen, expect the UK political class to lose further ground to the far right loonies like BNP and UKIP, until enough of them are in power to run the country and take it out of the EU anyway. Meanwhile, the uncertainty in the markets will punish the country even more than it is going to (the skirmish on Friday was just the foreplay).

    The UK has a choice between leaving the EU and having a responsible set of people negotiating the exit, or leaving the EU with Nigel Farage negotiating the exit. If I was british, I know what I would want.

  18. It does that now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    GCHQ does whatever it wants now. When the EU tries to attack it, Britain uses its veto to block action. Without Britain in the EU, EU countries can protect themselves from 5 eyes surveillance.

    It is however bad for Britain, because Brits cannot go to the European Court of Justice to have this shit declared illegal.

    And they can't rely on their own government, Parliament rejected Snoopers Charter bad in 2010, GCHQ did it anyway, and now the Home Secretary they helped put in power is trying to make it legal. So much for democracy in Britain.

    Her side is trying to put her in as the next Prime Minister, and has access to all that mass surveillance data to help them do it.

    1. Re:It does that now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So much for democracy in Britain.

      I gave up on democracy here after the previous referendum when the idiots voted to keep our shitty first past the post voting system instead of switching to AV+. The problem is that most people aren't able to critically examine the arguments presented to them by politicians, and when people aren't able to separate the facts from the bullshit they can't make an informed decision on how to vote, which makes a farce of the whole system.

  19. Re:I'll tell you what Brexit hurt... by Z80a · · Score: 1

    Use lube?

  20. Why is it that any event... by Torp · · Score: 1

    ... will have the "cybersecurity" industry giving out press releases forecasting doom?
    A bird shat on my car today. Cybersecurity will be weakened!
    Toddler says first word. Cybersecurity will be weakened!

    If they would shut up once in a while I may take them seriously...

    --
    I apologize for the lack of a signature.
  21. Hyperbole by eWarz · · Score: 1

    The so called 'Brexit' is media hyperbole and nothing more. Mark my words. The slang 'Brexit' itself was invented by the media. Will there be change? Oh sure, there will be. Has there always been change? Yep. Is change bad? Nope. Will the world end as predicted by CNN or other news sources? Nope. Anything to drive the traffic...

  22. Are you for real ? by aepervius · · Score: 1

    Yes the pound stabilized. For this week. There is not much on week end. let us see next week whether it drops further... Or climb back up. But this is taking the crown : "There are a lot of people trying VERY hard to scare you into thinking the Brexit is a disaster, when in fact it is a blip." It has not even started. There has been NO brexit yet. There has only been a referendum and the 52% leave vote. taht is it. It has not yet been officially announced, negotiated, and done. So before declaring victory and think that all those egg head economist had it wrong, maybe you should wait a few years. Now while you fire your victory and "there is no sky falling" you'll excuse me will I prepare the welcome mat for my city of Frankfurt : we are already starting to think of how many from the financial sector from london we'll be able to grab.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Are you for real ? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      On a 5% deficit, the pound was 12-18% over-valued -- according to the IMF.

      Yes, which was very nice for those who had them while it lasted.

      Dropped ~10% after the referendum and Carney announced he may be cutting rates which will take the pound lower and allow him to raise rates at a later date. This will be necessary to stem inflationary pressure from more expensive imports.

      You don't have stuff to buy locally, so you will be importing regardless. The pound would have to fall a long, long way to change that.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  23. Re:Liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    >why would Brexit campaign demand a harder barrier to challenge

    Obviously because at the time the petition was created they thought Remain would win and wanted to challenge the result.

    Oliver Healey, a candidate for the far-right English Democrats party, is the petition's founder. He is now crying that his petition, which he can't cancel, has been hijacked.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-petition-second-eu-referendum-latest-news-vote-leave-a7104076.html
    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/william-oliver-healey-referendum-petition_uk_576f8b28e4b0232d331e1b39

  24. Re:LOL by johannesg · · Score: 1, Funny

    Unlike the US, EU, and China, we Canadians actually understand how to implement cybersecurity.

    Having your entire country on a 19k2 modem line is _not_ cyber security.

  25. Will sun stop shining after Brexit??! by N3wsByt3 · · Score: 1

    People should give all this hyperbole and pent-up claims a rest.

    The Brexit will be a bit of a re-adjustment for a couple of months, especially after (finally?) invoking article 50, but all in all, it'll just be a footnote in history. In 5 years time, no-one will even remember what the fuss was about, and things will continue to run as they did before.

    But I *DO* expect the politicians to keep their word and brexit. They said they would abide by the referendum, well, the people have spoken, whether one likes it or not. If you're not going to keep yourself to the referendum when the outcome doesn't suits you, you can as well hold no referendum at all, then. that remains true, EVEN with the absolute deplorable and saddening - and despicable, in fact - behaviour of the top 'Leave'-advocates, who now seem to curtail and do everything to *not* leave the EU. It's incomprehensible. What kind of cowardly fucktards are they? I actually think they were right to leave, but for gods' sake, what a bunch of wussies, once they've won.

    Point is, the referendum was clear. The remain lost. Deal with it. Now whining for yet another referendum doesn't make any sense at all. I mean, let's say the other side gets 52%, then. What then? Can the 48% of the populace then not ignore the outcome too, and don't they then have the same right in demanding yet another, third referendum? Ad infinitum.

    No, the outcome was clear, the people have spoken... leave the EU. And do it now, not in 6 months. It'll already take 2 years to negotiate the departure as it is, and Junkers made it clear there were to be NO negotiations *before* article 50 ws invoked.

    --
    --- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
    1. Re:Will sun stop shining after Brexit??! by khz6955 · · Score: 1

      "The Brexit will be a bit of a re-adjustment for a couple of months, especially after (finally?) invoking article 50, but all in all, it'll just be a footnote in history. In 5 years time, no-one will even remember what the fuss was about, and things will continue to run as they did before."

      I think the real reason for all these vague threats coming out of the EU Commission is fear that this is that GB will not be the last to exit the 'Union'. Especially given the treatment of Italy, Spain and Greece. Matters not that the Greek people voted against the the so called ‘austerity measures’, their EU overlords had spoken. ref

  26. Is it even possible by bravecanadian · · Score: 1

    For cyber security to be any worse in general?

  27. I think it will be an improvement by ooloorie · · Score: 1

    Anything that makes data sharing between UK, French, and German spy agencies harder will be an improvement to cybersecurity and privacy. It's too bad that Brexit won't probably make a significant dent in it long term.

  28. Cybersecurity and EU bureaucratic hurdles .. by khz6955 · · Score: 1

    "Will it weaken cybersecurity because of additional bureaucratic hurdles to information sharing with the EU"

    No, because EU bureaucratic hurdles was never the cause of weak cybersecurity, but defects in the computer Operating System connected at either end, namely Microsoft Windows, which is at the root cause of the vast majority of online breeches.

  29. Re:Liar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    """
    In a statement posted on Facebook, a campaigner for the English Democrats party identifying himself as Oliver Healey says he started the petition "when it was looking unlikely that 'leave' were going to win, with the intention of making it harder for 'remain' to further shackle us to the EU".
    He says the petition has since been "hijacked by the remain campaign".
    """
    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36634407

    and then you have this

    """
    last month he [Nigel Farage] announced that he would fight for a second referendum on Britain in Europe if the remain campaign won by a narrow margin.
    ""
    http://metro.co.uk/2016/06/24/remember-that-time-nigel-farage-said-52-48-votes-should-lead-to-second-referendum-5963900/

    insightful for parent post is disgrace to slashdot, it takes few seconds to google above

  30. fearmongering on drugs by Tom · · Score: 1

    Nonsense. Information Security (as it was called before "cyber" became the new black) is plagued by much more basic problems. For example that half of the companies in any given country basically don't have any. Or that we've still not solved basic problems like account enumeration or brute-force attacks (which, you wouldn't believe, way too many applications still allow).

    There are essentially two games. The one is where baseline security is attacked, hackers looking for the weakest link, for targets of opportunity, and if you have adequate security, you're good. It's a case of not having to outrun the bear.

    And then there are the target attacks on high-priority targets. Done by top-notch professional attackers, often backed by organised crime and/or nation states. Unless you have equally top-notch security, you're toast.

    In both cases, Brexit or not makes little difference. In the first case, everything you need to know is in basically any "IS for dummies" guide. In the later case, the required information isn't shared by bureaucrats in Brussels, but by tech experts in conferences and informal meetings. Since the UK isn't part of the Schengen zone anyways, no difference in travel arrangements, Brexit or not.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org