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 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
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.
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.
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?
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.