Slashdot Mirror
Britain Has Passed the 'Most Extreme Surveillance Law Ever Passed in a Democracy' (zdnet.com)
Zack Whittaker, reporting for ZDNet: The UK has just passed a massive expansion in surveillance powers, which critics have called "terrifying" and "dangerous." The new law, dubbed the "snoopers' charter," was introduced by then-home secretary Theresa May in 2012, and took two attempts to get passed into law following breakdowns in the previous coalition government. Four years and a general election later -- May is now prime minister -- the bill was finalized and passed on Wednesday by both parliamentary houses. Civil liberties groups have long criticized the bill, with some arguing that the law will let the UK government "document everything we do online." It's no wonder, because it basically does. The law will force internet providers to record every internet customer's top-level web history in real-time for up to a year, which can be accessed by numerous government departments; force companies to decrypt data on demand -- though the government has never been that clear on exactly how it forces foreign firms to do that that; and even disclose any new security features in products before they launch. Not only that, the law also gives the intelligence agencies the power to hack into computers and devices of citizens (known as equipment interference), although some protected professions -- such as journalists and medical staff -- are layered with marginally better protections. In other words, it's the "most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy," according to Jim Killock, director of the Open Rights Group.
Truly despicable! I understand WHY they're doing it, but it's still wrong.
The only good thing is, at least they're letting you know ahead of time they're violating your privacy. (not that that is much of a prize).
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Nice to have the focus off the United States every once in a while. USA! USA!
Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
During the Bush administration, I used to remind people of the dangers of giving too much power to the executive branch by reminding them that one day, another "Clinton" will have control.
During the Obama administration, I reminded people that one day, another "Bush" will have control.
Eventually, I'll remind people that another "Obama" or "Trump" will have control.
Never give anyone, even your allies, the kind of power you would fear in the hands of your enemies.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
If it weren't muslims, there would be some group that governments would position as requiring these powers to fight.
... democracy.
Some people would say that laws like this mean you've forfeited the right to call yourself a democracy.
Others define democracy to mean only how you elect your leaders (although all but the purists typically include republics in the definition), not whether you have freedom of speech, etc. With that definition, there have probably been other "democracies" with far more draconian laws.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
If not muslims, the Irish, if not the Irish the Russians, if not Russians the Bogeymen.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
There was a survey about this particular one a little while ago. 97% of people were against it, if they knew about it or after they had the contents explained to them, but only around 10% even knew it was being proposed. I hope that the opposition parties make a lot of noise about it at the next election.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
They did take back control. The small print said that they took back control on behalf of the Westminster Parliament, which had been consistently acting against their interests for decades, but that's not the point. I still don't understand the people who decided that voting to give Parliament more power was a protest vote against the establishment.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
The news suppression must be in force.
No mention of it on the BBC website, but that's frequently the case if the government want something suppressed, the BBC is not the impartial news service that some people outside the UK think it is.
What's more annoying is that it has no mention of this on the bills before parliament site which shows the last action as Lords bouncing back to Commons.
But even if it's not actually law yet, it's going to be soon. There are just formalities left.
Given the set {Diversity, Security, Liberty}, you can pick at most 2. Britain chose Diversity, and as surely as the sun rises in the east, Security evaporated. To restore Security, they are throwing out Liberty.
If Brexit was the harbinger of a rising tide, I expect that the country will complete the cycle by using Security to drive out Diversity so that they can restore Liberty.
It helps to remember that the history of Britain for the last 1000 years or so has been the rise of Liberty. The people will have to decide if we are seeing the end and reversal of that trend, or just an 80 year detour.
See that "Preview" button?
The problem with that argument (and I agree with your point), is that both sides believe people are waking up from the lies of the other. They both see history as being on their side, and their position as the inevitable conclusion. Why fear the future? "We've won!"
If you're a nice approachable person, many people will assume you'd agree with them on politics, simply because you seem sane and decent. They absolutely cannot understand how anyone could agree with the other side unless they're stupid or evil.
While your point makes a lot of sense to a rational actor, in politics very few are.
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
This is just formalizing and bringing out into the open what has already actually been happening in secret for years.
My only concern is given what happens in secret is often beyond the law, if the law itself is beyond the edge of decency, how bad can/will the secret stuff become?
Seriously, we all know it's coming.
Eastern Europe, Erdogan, Putin, Le Pen, Frauke Petry, Donald Trump ... these are special effects, smoke & mirrors.
The real action happens when laws like this get passed or Tim Cook and his Silicon Valley Bros push for everything-as-a-service / 'ecosystem' and proprietary payment systems instead of cash.
You can read it in Aldous Huxleys work, and in William Gibsons and Neal Stephensons.
We are moving into an all-out full-blown cyperpunk society where anyone halfway free from 'the system' is a potential suspect or locked out of essential basics , only able to acquire them by semi-legal / grey-market means. A world where *everything* has a price-tag and you can't move without Big Brother watching you.
Tamper-free FOSS IT systems are becoming more and more exotic a concept while the brainwashed masses think Fakebook or Twotter is some sort of innovation over other services we've had for decades.
Basically we're smack in the middle of a cyberpunk society already.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
--- This comment was deleted by the UK government ---
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
Not really. Reality is much worse.
When they get repeatedly burned by Trumps and Obamas, maybe they'll figure it out. I'm not very hopeful, but at least it's an easy argument to make these days.
Maybe the UK is trying a new approach to stop terrorism. Take away freedoms one at a time until the terrorists no longer hate them! /s
Get a program that will load a thousand random websites every hour. When millions of subscribers will each load 24000 websites every day, the storage will quickly overflow, and if the ISPs feel the pain, they are better placed than John Q. Public to effect pressure on the government.
Perhaps the most depressing thing is that this isn't even mentioned on major news outlets like the BBC today.
The second most depressing thing is that Labour wanted it as well and basically allowed the Tories to wave it through as soon as they were no longer hampered by being in coalition. If you look at the Parliamentary speeches, a lot of MPs seem to genuinely believe this is a good and necessary law.
Most of the public don't want it, once they know about it and understand what it is. Most of the smaller political parties don't support it either. Legal challenges about violating the right to a private life and so on are inevitable. But the reality is, both big parties love this authoritarian measure, so it's going to be an uphill struggle -- and probably a Sisyphean one -- to rein it in.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Not really. Reality is much worse.
Have you actually read 1984? If you think present reality is worse than that, then I have a bridge to sell you.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
America is, for the most part, a very safe place to live. If you can avoid visiting a few specific zip codes, your chances of dying violently are very, very low. My understanding is that England is pretty much the same, except that they use post codes instead of zip codes.
In those parts of those countries, there is pretty much no need or desire to spy on or restrict anyone. The few exceptions seem mostly to be people that don't want their government to push diversity on them by force.
Without diversity, you get security for free. With diversity, the best you can do is to sell your Liberty for a veneer of security.
See that "Preview" button?
People like to argue "We're not a Democracy!" on this side of the pond too. They are wrong.
Democracy isn't a strict term with a single definition, but rather a master set of associated governing styles, of which includes representative governments like the US and the UK. Representatives don't listen to and act on behalf of their voters as a courtesy, it's their job. They have to bend to the public will in order to keep their job. While this isn't always true - thanks to gerrymandering and other such schemes to defraud the public will - we should continue to hold ourselves to that democratic ideal, and not proudly thumb our noses at the concept all together.
This is nothing to do with terrorism and all about control! The internet allows the people to communicate, share, learn and oppose. Not something the government generally wants - this is about monitoring the population, detecting trends, silencing opposition and influencing thought.
Two years of Trump and even the thickest Brit would think twice about Brexit.
Even though the vast majority of the country would refuse to pay the price for Hard Brexit, our unelected authoritarian Prime Minister (whose legislation this is) is determined to push for it anyway.
I wish I had reason to share your optimism re: Article 50.
Yes. Several times, and yes I still think reality is worse.
Expect every IM, website, and social media post to be readable with an ip and account details in real time by teams of in house SJW, NGO's and gov/mil staff. :)
So all freedom of speech is gone from any UK isp account with a UK ip.
Tempora https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "gain access to large amounts of Internet users' personal data, without any individual suspicion or targeting."
Once noticed, expect computer entry. The gov and mil will enter and alter your computer, network or any other device.
Expect that device to report all movements if your in the media or in contact with the media.
Whistleblowers reaching out to the traditional media won't get beyond the first call or meeting.
What can the press and media do?
Create a series of devices and fill them with fiction. Reports, searches, contacts. Use any UK isp for searches for amazing new stories with background help from informants and insiders. Sock puppet contacts with details of meetings. Walk, drive out for such meetings so gps and other tracking can collect. Select a good location to meet "someone" handing over vast amounts of data.
Then do days of background research with as much jargon, mil, science and party political terms as possible.
Flood the digital collection system with a lot of work related fiction everyday in plain text. Any real contact would be without an electronic devices, away from CCTV. Any phone been given to a friend to walk around with and handed back later. Buy a typewriter. Create your own secure shorthand for paper notes. Learn about one time pads. Once a story is ready, publish early, fully and often. Expect all networks and digital files to be searched. So have a lot of digital fiction ready
The UK gov and mil hope that a lot of new SJW, gov staff and volunteers can cover an entire nation of networked users. Physical access to a site will be rare as such teams of contractors are so expensive and might be reported or seen. Buying any new computer or network device with a CC or online is a risk if working in the media. Expect upgrades as delivered. Use and buy any such devices for fictional creativity.
VPN and onion routing are not much use for the media given the public court reporting about online tracking at a now low cost per case.
Democracy and public interaction and the fear of been reported will be very chilling for democracy.
The other real issue will be for the reader comments in the UK. Expect SJW reporting to gov and teams of gov staff looking over any and all comments.
A good VPN well outside 5 eye nations or the EU might still allow freedom of speech until the comment is removed or comments get turned off.
Credit card use on a VPN would also be an issue.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Yes. Several times, and yes I still think reality is worse.
You think that a reality where you will be kidnapped and tortured for criticising the government is better than what we have now? You do realise that Twitter telling nutcases where to go is not the same as literally being tortured, right?
SJW n. One who posts facts.