Slashdot Mirror
Manchester Attack Could Lead To Internet Crackdown (independent.co.uk)
New submitter boundary writes: The UK government looks to be about to put the most egregious parts of the Investigative Powers Act into force "soon after the election" (which is in a couple of weeks) in the wake of the recent bombing in Manchester. "Technical Capability Orders" require tech companies to break their own security. I wonder who'll comply? The Independent reports: "Government will ask parliament to allow the use of those powers if Theresa May is re-elected, senior ministers told The Sun. 'We will do this as soon as we can after the election, as long as we get back in,' The Sun said it was told by a government minister. 'The level of threat clearly proves there is no more time to waste now. The social media companies have been laughing in our faces for too long.'"
But only because so many people are willing to give them all their personal information for free.
...Mainstream media are reporting today that the government was given credible warnings about the suspected bomber as many as five times over the past few years, from a variety of sources and via exactly the sorts of channels you're supposed to use if you're worried that someone might do something like this. None of these source appear to have relied on high-tech surveillance and intercepted communications. They were reportedly based on in-person observations, which tragically doesn't seem to have set off the right alarm bells soon enough.
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
If the Internet and the World Wide Web become too dangerous for terrorists to communicate they'll find other ways to communicate their nefarious plans which may be more immune to cracking. This could include face to face meetings in secure venues such as caves or messenger transmissions. It may be that the best way to learn of such plans is the old fashion method of inserting moles into such organizations. They must be really good or they'll end up as recent moles have in China.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
Multiple warnings over several years, and the UK government never acted on them. So now, rather than admit they were incompetent or not funding their human agents enough, they're going to cut off free speech online? Congratulations Britain, you have the dubious honor of being the second country in the world to fall to terrorism.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
Yes, you do have something to fear. The removal of your privacy and the abuse of these powers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You should probably read it.
I'm old enough to remember when bombings like Manchester were commonplace in England, but they still let Irish Catholics into the country.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Because it isn't the 60s anymore?
b-b-but they did it too is a pretty piss poor argument. It's completely irrelevant at this point, it doesn't matter who is doing it, it needs to stop.
Clearly they learnt nothing from the CIA exploits leak that cased the NHS to go into meltdown when black hats got hold of the code. They just don't have a clue, compelling legitimate companies to provide ways to break into their encryption just means that the terrorists will use other encryption techniques either developed themselves or from a company outside of the UK who doesn't care about UK laws. End result, law abiding citizens loose their privacy, terrorists continue with impunity.
Mate, the IRA basically established the modern Terror franchise. They were terrorists before all the cool kids were doing it. If you looked up "Terrorist" in the dictionary before 9/11 it would have just been a picture of an Irish bomb maker
Is that you never, ever, EVER give the president a power that you will regret later when someone like Trump steps in.
The IRA could easily have done something like 9/11. It's not like it was that hard at the time to take over a plane and fly it into a building. There are two reasons why they didn't which both stem from the fact that their motives were political, not ideological.
Firstly, they never did suicide attacks. The IRA perceived themselves as soldiers fighting for a cause, not jihadis fighting for God. Consequently, there were no IRA suicide attacks. 9/11 would have been impossible if you had to factor in an escape plan for the perpetrators.
Secondly, (and admittedly this didn't always apply) they had a concept of enemy combatants and civilians. As a rule their attacks were targeted at the system that prevented a united Ireland (police officers, politicians, soldiers) or causing disruption rather than deaths. If they planted a bomb targeted at civilian areas, they normally sent a warning to the police.
Also, let's not forget that they several times got close to "centres of power". They successfully murdered a British MP in the House of Commons car park, they slaughtered a troop of mounted ceremonial cavalry in Hyde Park, they murdered a relative of the Queen and they came close to assassinating the prime minister and many important cabinet ministers at a party conference.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe