Slashdot Mirror
For The UK's 'Snoopers' Charter', Politicians Voted Themselves An Exemption (independent.co.uk)
The "Snoopers' Charter" passed in the U.K. greatly expands the government's surveillance power. But before they'd enact the new Investigatory Powers Act, Britain's elected officials first voted to make themselves exempt from it. Sort of. An anonymous reader writes:
While their internet browsing history will still be swept up, just like everyone else's, no one will ever be able to access it without specific approval from the Prime Minister. And according to The Independent, "That rule applies not only to members of the Westminster parliament but also politicians in the devolved assembly and members of the European Parliament."
The article adds that the exemption was the very first amendment they approved for the legislation. And for a very long time, the only amendment.
The article adds that the exemption was the very first amendment they approved for the legislation. And for a very long time, the only amendment.
The UK masquerades as a democracy, and has for a long time. In reality it's the most hilariously over the top nanny state, The politicians there seem to make up laws for the sake of making up laws. I often wonder if this is just to give the illusion that a politician is doing something because fixing real problems is too hard.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
So how will the request filter know who is and is not an MP? It won't, so their details will still be leaked all over the place from the food standards agency to the ambulance service, those hotbeds of fighting serious crime and terrorism.
Spying on MPs is bad, unless of course you want politicians to be blackmailed by spy agencies and entrenched political powers.
"If you aren't doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about." -Us, parroting their own logic right back in their face.
The Prime Minister can still allow access to the browsing history of his political opponents, should there be a need for it.
Brits, why did you let them do this? You're letting them take your freedom and letting them grant themselves powers that will keep you out of the loop and perpetuate their own power, preventing you from being able to do anything about it in the future. And what can you do to stop this from snowballing? Absolutely nothing now.
Basically everyone in here is like "well we're fine we can circumvent this with encryption" yeah for now, but why bother implementing laws you have to circumvent? Just get off your asses and get rid of the root of the problem. Oh wait you can't do anything about it.
You know a country that isn't?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You think you could get rid of the useless sponges if you had guns? If you do, take a look at the US and ponder again.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Because all the US gunowners have stepped up to fight the State in their never ending desire to track you more?
Where were the Gun owners after the the Patriot Act? Or the NSA leaks? Or any time a local sheriff forgets about the 4th amendment?
It's often just laziness. Sexting children is a hard problem to solve, requiring more than 2 minutes of thought... So screw it, pass the problem on to the social media companies. Just say they can fix it, people will assume you know what you are talking about and no one can accuse you of not doing anything.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
The UK masquerades as a democracy, and has for a long time. In reality it's the most hilariously over the top nanny state
Democracies and nanny states are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are strongly correlated. Lots of voters want the government to be their mommy.
The problem with the UK is that they lack the checks-and-balances that many other democracies have. The lower house has nearly all the power, and the PM has a majority coalition that can ram through stupid laws very quickly.
I don't think this achieves what the people proposing the amendment intend. They're being stupid.
Wikileaks will leak their browsing history once it will be captured as mandated by law.
I'm looking forward to perusing it.
Yeah, it's so much better when only the prime minister can obtain "blackmail-enabling information", because he, of course, would never abuse such information to pressure members of the opposition party! Oh, no, not the prime minister!
Teens sexting each other is not a problem to be solved. Adults sexting minors is about as solved as it's going to get, going down the legal system road. If you want to lessen the problem, we're going to have to explore other avenues besides making it illegaler.
What the actual fuck is wrong with you "Republic" clowns ?
The US is supposed to be a democracy.
A republic is one form of government. A democratic vote is how its selected.
Fuck.
To quote the ministerial adviser from a well-known British poltical satire:
"Something must be done. This is something. Therefore, this must be done."
One could make a very strong argument that gun owners played a big part in getting Trump elected.
The Democrats continue to yammer on about gun control despite a HUGE portion of the population being against gun control (yep, I said it - the polls the liberals like to say showing the opposite are BS, plain and simple, and it wouldn't be at all surprising to find out a majority are actually NOT on their side). Most people think guns cost the Democrats control of Congress after the AWB was passed and most gun owners very likely went for Trump, and not because they legitimately thought he was a good candidate, I bet many in fact did not think that, but because they knew how bad Clinton would be for gun rights, and that matters a great deal to them. Gun owners are a highly mobilized voting block, possibly larger and more reliable than any other block, and a bigger one than the left seems to think, and so it could very well be that guns played a large part in this result.
I'd say that's a meaningful change at least, though whether it's for the better is debatable.
If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
It perfectly achieves the goal of those who want the spying. Telling the ministers they are "exempt" from the spying is cheaper than bribing them to pass this law.
US, Canada, India, UK... I guess this golden era of democracy is over. Here comes another round of dictatorships, population control and whatnot. Quite the dark heritage we're leaving for future generations.
Coalition governments are quite rare in the UK, thanks to our first-past-the-post electoral system. We had one from 2010 to 2015, but the one before that was during the Second World War.
Just another wannabe fantasy novelist...
Data is stil collected. This means at some time, an insider or a hacker will leak it.
And since it is tagged "for use after prime minister approval only", it will be easy to leak only that data
This is quite clever of the established ruling elite. Their data is exempt and will not be collected or retained. But people new to politics running against them are not covered by this until they win.
So anyone feeling challenged by a new player will now have an additional valuable tool in keeping their job.