Slashdot Mirror
After London Attack, PM Calls For Internet Regulation To Fight Terrorists (cnn.com)
CNN reports that "At least seven people were killed in a short but violent assault that unfolded late Saturday night in the heart of the capital, the third such attack to hit Britain this year." An anonymous reader quotes their follow-up report:
Prime Minister Theresa May has called for closer regulation of the internet following a deadly terror attack in London... May said on Sunday that a new approach to tackling extremism is required, including changes that would deny terrorists and extremist sympathizers digital tools used to communicate and plan attacks. "We cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed," May said. "Yet that is precisely what the internet and the big companies that provide internet-based services provide. We need to work with allied democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremist and terrorism planning."
1. Terrorist attack.
2. Call for increased surveillance, overreach.
3. Learn more about the terrorists, but don't arrest the right ones in time.
4. Rinse, repeat.
This is almost starting to feel staged at this point. Every single country does this, and it always turns us more towards 1984. The terrorists are winning.
"Stop importing mass numbers of insane subhumans who want to kill us."
What?! That would be CRAZY! It would be like... um... actually solving the problem?
Islam and Christianity are both dangerous evils. Let's be done with this fictional nonsense.
Why stop at regulating the Internet? They were driving a white van when they carried out the attack so clamping down on white van use seems like a good idea right now. They were also carrying knives so those must be made illegal or their sales closely monitored.
What I'm waiting for is the usual statement that 'these men were already known to the security services', further proving that all of the Internet monitoring and phone tapping is of no use whatsoever.
This is weapons grade stupidity. People who commit terrorist acts use the internet, have cellphones, all that.
"Old man yells at systemd"
That's what this is actually about. "Oh noes! Terrorists! We must immediately implement my agenda of Internet censorship, which is actually about porn not terror but shut up!"
You know what I'm fed up with? Politicians who crap their pants every time a terrorist does anything. That means you Ms May. You're doing exactly what they want you to do. For all Thatcher's faults, she didn't act like you and the majority of those politicians who proclaim themselves anti-terror do.
Terrorists are not going away. Either live your values, or live in fear. Your choice.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
"Madam, a bunch of barbarians with knives jumped out of a van and killed civilians!"
"Begin spying on people on the Internet. That'll surely prevent it from happening!"
As if said barbarians are using internet to communicate at all, much less for openly discussing their acts... "Nahoul, have you acquired the weapons of our holy jihad to take place on London Bridge on June, 3th?" — "Yes, Assoud, very long sharp knives and a Hertz van".
They probably discuss shit in private in some back alley or something, geez.
Does she have any evidence these people actually used the internet to plan what they were doing?
And if so, why didn't all the existing mass surveillance catch them? Is ratcheting up the level of surveillance really going to help? That was their excuse for implementing it to begin with, and so far it hasn't.
There is no end to it:
(1) call for more censorship and surveillance.
(2) another attack happens anyway.
(3) goto step one, because it must not have been enough yet.
It's electioneering. Normally politicians wait for the bodies to be cold, but in this case there is an election less than a week away so...
She wants to shift blame away from herself, and be seen to be doing something. I really doubt she thinks that mass surveillance will make any real difference.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Since the dawn of time, people have confused 'stopping speech' with solving the problem. It doesn't. Despite the lying panic, communication does NOT 'radicalize' people. Instead it lets other people find out about the radicalization. While it is true that a small number of lunatics that were considering minor criminal actions upgrade to larger actions, free speech does not create problems, it REVEALS them.
Stopping free speech delays the problem at best, rather than solving them. Eventually the pent up issues burst forth into violence.
Better to have a constant small stream that is deal able rather than a flash flood.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
How about starting to fight back in a serious way? They are at war with us. It's time we realized that
The terrorists and the political leaders who are most vociferous about "fighting terrorism" need each other. It's almost like they're fighting for the same side.
One thing for sure: nothing that any of these leaders have proposed or implemented - mother of all bombs, travel bans, heightened security theater, arming the populace, internment, keeping people from bringing nail clippers on airplanes, foreign wars, building walls - is going to do anything to reduce terrorism.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Their backyards are large parts of our cities. I hope you're prepared for civil warfare.
Interesting people can move messengers around the world and wait for a week for a message to be delivered in person.
Faith groups working in closed communities don't need to bother with an internet that is been watched. They have their leaders, teachings and have a large protective community around them.
This is not groups in the 1980's getting funds from banks, making phone calls and moving funds around using computers, emails and fax machines.
This is not the Soviet Union where the GCHQ can surround the Soviet Union and listen in on Soviet officials making daily phone calls.
The UK needs to fund MI5 overtime and get its expert surveillance teams out into UK cities.
Fund the army, MI5 and let them do their work in every UK city. Watch groups, who they meet, who they talk to, who they listen to.
Map the networks of people.
Keep all results away from any groups or people in the UK gov who talk to the media.
Learn for Ireland in the 1980's. Trust only the GCHQ, MI5, the elite UK mil units and any version of Special Branch that is as secure and dedicated as the Royal Ulster Constabulary Special Branch was. That will ensure no information gets to groups/workers/contractors who will sell/talk/give UK policy information to the UK press/media/their company.
Learn from the 1920-70's issues when the UK had to hire a lot of experts on trust. Just as Communists filled the UK clandestine services for decades expect interesting groups to try and fill the ranks of the UK security services with needed new staff. Only hire on merit and after deep vetting of all new UK staff.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Basically all terrorists in Europe of the last 10 years or so were _known_ to the state before. Did that help at all? No, it id not. And now they want to put everybody else under surveillance, despite it being completely clear that this will not help? That is at best utterly stupid, and at worst a preparation for the establishment of full-blown fascism.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
I think the only long term morally correct answer is to correct the behavior that helped provoke the jihad in the first place. We're talking about a decades long effort here. In the meantime there will be more deaths on all sides and we'll have to work through that and find ways to cope that don't involve inciting more violence. Essentially this is chickens coming home to roost that were released over the previous decades, centuries, and even eons. Is it fair, nope, but life isn't fair and if we want peace eventually someone has to be the better person and bury the hatchet instead of using it.
will they also want cellphone firmware that has no auto wipe / pin code time lock down. So they can force update an locked phone and try code after code to unlock it?
Theresa May thinks she'll be able to get global social networks and application to sacrifice data integrity and encryption because some people in 2017 still think religious views, belief and devotion, is anything else then a mental illness.
if the problem is "Acts of Violence against the general population" then yeah, doesn't work. If the problem is "Theresa May isn't going to get re-elected because she's hopelessly in over her head and can't govern since she hails from a party that doesn't believe government can be effective in the first place", well, carry on then.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I think you're horribly wrong by suggesting that modern nations are responsible for this. Those aren't our chickens coming home to roost. Sectarian violence has always been a thing in the parts of the world that are fueling this fire. The mistake we made was letting "refugees" migrate to our countries. Now it's those refugees or the spawn of those refugees carrying out these small scale attacks. They come to our countries and bring their baggage with them. Anyone who doesn't believe what they believe must die. And now we've brought them inside our borders. That's reality. Letting this go on for decades with the hope that things will get better with no plan would be even more of a disaster. We're going to get to the point were everyday people refuse to put up with this anymore to the point where they defy our governments and then all hell is going to break loose. We don't have decades. Maybe the US does, but large parts of Europe do not. Censoring dissent on Twitter is going to change that.
- Year 2013: "BBC's websites killing Press and threatening local democracy, says Theresa May" https://goo.gl/ccgTPH
- Year 2014: "Theresa May: We need to collect communications data 'haystack'" https://goo.gl/Ew4gMf
- Year 2015: "Theresa May: Internet data will be recorded under new spy laws" https://goo.gl/1hNBdk
- Year 2016: "Theresa May's Snoopers' Charter dealt major setback as EU court rules against 'indiscriminate' collection of internet data" https://goo.gl/455OWU
- Year 2017: "Theresa May Wants A ‘New’ Internet Monitored By The Government" https://goo.gl/mGPKlx
That woman simply hates that people can freely speak through the medium she does not control!
Terrorist attack? We need more control and censorship.
Child abuse? We need more control and censorship.
Meteor heading to earth? We need more control and censorship.
Is it Sunday today? We need more control and censorship.
Nothing happened? We need more control and censorship.
Well, I've got to get back to work. When I stop rowing, the slave ship just goes in circles.
The issue is Islam itself. Arguments about it being a poverty or education issue don't hold water: the people on the planes on 9/11 had college diplomas, they were doctors or engineers. It's not a society issue; many of the terrorist acts were committed by second generation Muslims, who had grown and been educated in first world countries. The common factor is Islam.
The problem is that we're not allowed to say anything about the root causes. It's "islamophobic" and "racist". Let Islam be shown for what it is, and let the civilized world defend their values, instead of the shameful pandering that happens every time more people are murdered by crazy believers. We should speak publicly about the many ways Islam isn't compatible with the modern world; that it's barbaric to consider women less valuable that men; that it's barbaric to murder people that criticize Islam or dare to draw a portrait of the Prophet; that it's barbaric to impose the death penalty for apostates. Instead, the Western world is cowardly discarding their own values to avoid offending barbarians. We create laws against free speech, because, if we dare say that maybe Mohammed marrying a nine years old is not a holy and admirable action, some fanatics may be offended (and anybody who thinks it's OK to marry a nine year old IS a fanatic, no matter what he or she says). As Theresa May proposes, we should relinquish our freedoms and live in prisons, because that's the only way to be secure, as if the threat is a nameless unknown.
Instead, what should be done is speak openly and forcefully about the problems. We should encourage Muslims to quit a barbaric religion - heck, we should make this a condition for immigration. We should cut links with countries like Saudi Arabia that spread the poison all over the world, with any country that has Sharia law, with any country that has the death penalty for leaving Islam.
Yea, the US gets a lot of blame for the whole puppet government thing. But you know what? Sectarianism has existed for far, far longer than the US has. As for the coalitions.. they went in to bust up terrorist breeding grounds, to stop genocides, to try and get democracy to take hold. Some of it was misguided, sure. We can't fix that now. As for colonization, what are you smoking? No one is setting up colonies in those places. What new American, British, or French flagged colonies popped up as a result of the coalition's activities? None.
They don't murder or maim unbelievers as they are less evil than their holy books tell them to. They do, however, cheer the murderers, and demand laws to put unbelievers to death. Likewise, most nazis (21M kills) -- or worse, communists (~180M) and christians (~100M) -- didn't personally murder anyone.
The thing is, while Christianity cost us ~1500 years of scientific progress, ~100M of directly killed and untold billions of deprived of important joys of life (because "sin"), the grip of Christianity is slipping and mostly already gone. The Islam, though, is on the rise.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Her main problem is that she seems to have limited grasp of her brief, and is very exposed when she is asked unprompted questions. For example when a nurse told her that she has been on the same salary as a National Health Service Nurse as she earned in 2009, she looked the nurse in the eye and declared that there is no 'Magic Money Tree'
She has coped with her poor people skills by refusing to turn up for election debates, instead using the tame UK media, papers like the Daily Mail, and the BBC to promote her. However her lack of ability has become so obvious that what looked like a massive majority (which is the reason why she called a early election) is evaporating and it looks like the UK will enter Brexit negotiations with a hung Parliament)
To add to her problems She has refused to liaise with the Scottish Parliament to the result that they have asked for a referendum on Scottish Independence to co-inside with the end of the Brexit negotiations.
Theresa May may go down in UK history as the most incompetent Prime Minister in our long history.
These people are heroes:
1) A British Transport Police officer didn't have a gun. Instead of running away, he fought the terrorists with his baton.
2) As people were escaping out of the back of a restaurant, a woman stayed at the front of the restaurant. She stayed there to block the front door closed with her body, as the terrorists were trying to force their way in. Her blocking the door saved about 20 people, by giving them time to escape. After the terrorists overpowered here and forced their way in, she was able to escape.
I sometimes wonder how unselfishly brave I would be, if I were in a situation like that. I hope I'd unselfishly brave, like those two people.
"Provoke Jihad"? What the hell are you talking about. These people have been killing people at what any rational human being would describe as random for 1200+ years. It's a fundamental part of their belief system. All the other world religions grew out of it, but not Islam, it's as bat-shit crazy at it has always been.
The only thing that has consequentially changed is that about 20-30 years ago, "western society" became so concerned about possibly offending someone that we started tolerating it. Or in your case, excusing because you feel guilty about being part of a wildly successful, superior, culture.
You can debate the wisdom of holding the referendum in the first place, the choices offered
Ding ding. "Leave EU or remain in EU?"
How about customs union? (what's that?) Single market? (what's that?) Passporting? (What's that?) Schengen agreement (whats that?)
Most popular google search the friday after the vote "What is the EU?". These goons voted out because the papers made them think it would make all the foreigners go away. The British do what the Mail, Sun and Express tell them to do. Good little peons.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.