Slashdot Mirror
Digital IDs Needed To End 'Mob Rule' Online, Says UK's Security Minister (independent.co.uk)
Digital IDs should be brought in to end online anonymity that permits "mob rule" and lawlessness online, the security minister of United Kingdom has said. From a report: Ben Wallace said authentication used by banks could also by employed by internet firms to crack down on bullying and grooming, as he warned that people had to make a choice between "the wild west or a civilised society" online. He also took aim at the "phoniness" of Silicon Valley billionaires, and called for companies such as WhatsApp to contribute to society over the negative costs of their technology, such as end-to-end encryption. It comes after Theresa May took another step against tech giants, saying they would be ordered to clamp down on vile attacks against women on their platforms. The prime minister will target firms such as Facebook and Twitter as she makes the pitch at the G7 summit this weekend, where she will urge social media firms to treat violent misogyny with the same urgency as they do terror threats. Mr Wallace told The Times: "A lot of the bullying on social media and the grooming is because those people know you cannot identify them. It is mob rule on the internet. You shouldn't be able to hide behind anonymity."
UK's security minister needs to go bugger a diseased goat, says anyone who's not an authoritarian skumbag...
That way it will be easier to track down Islamophobes and put them in jail. Good move UK.
*Slow clap*
His plan to make everyone who uses the Internet "show papers" aside, his commentary about the hypocrisy of Silicon Valley billionaires is to the point.
But the solution to this isn't LESS privacy, it's MORE privacy, if anything.
Completely inappropriate.
May as well be putting barcodes on our arms or for us all to wear a yellow star... and most of us know how well thase worked.
Provided this is coupled with significant privacy and free speech reforms. Let's have accountability, but let people control their data and treat these public platforms as public spaces regardless of who owns the hardware.
Digital ID's needed for all - so we can arrest Twitter users speaking out against the State.
Sounds farfetched? The UK is doing that today.
I mean, they do that already without digital ID"s, but it would save the police state a lot of time and bother if they could have the address pop up alongside the reported thought crim... er I mean tweet.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Some of the biggest trolls on the internet are not the kiddies on 4chan or the infamous "alt-right", but the leftists, progressives, and their minions.
He wants his 18th century security ideas back.
Hey, King George was on the phone, he had some ideas about stamp taxes, too. You might like those. Are you interested, Mr Security Minister?
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Really? You're using that as an excuse to force digital IDs on the people?
There's real bullying going on in the real world, where we know the face and name of the aggressor and a lot of the time, NOTHING is done anyway and often the victim is the one being blamed or gets punished, like being "removed" from school to avoid being in contact with their bullies... while the bully is still able to go to school without any issues.
So really, it ain't gonna solve ANYTHING.
like forcing folks to to give the government something to target if you say something they disagree with. :|
Come and take it, bitch.
Funny how the dark night of fascism is always descending on the US but winds up landing in Europe.
The cat's out of the bag. How are you going to stop swarms, PGP, TOR? Free and anonymous speech and transfer of data is necessary for advanced societies and probably can't be effectively denied by legislation. That's what the network was designed for.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
for MI5, MI6 and the GCHQ to keep track of all the innovative US tech people in the UK and Ireland like to use online.
What could return the internet to a 1970's phone exchange? Every dwelling gets an internet, an ip for that dwelling and it has an ISP paper billing address on it?
How to ensure every internet user in the UK has an IP connected to one ISP?
To return to a phone network all over the UK with all UK social media use returning to an approved ip range and a dwelling.
Let the great network begin. Nation building. To place a network from a government network exchange to each dwelling.
The government will build racks what will hold network cards in a secure local location. Every home shall have one network card back at the government network rack.
The government network cards will be able to provide voice and network services in a asymmetric or symmetric way to the dwelling depending on the ISP option selected.
One network card, one network connection, one registered account in a dwelling.
The security services can then get a direct connection into any connected computer at the end of this one connection.
All other networks will not be approved.
Any people using the internet to make political comments about government policy can be quickly found.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
because free speech is human nature, people have opinions and they are going to express them, like me for example i dont trust religion and consider them meddlesome and divisive, and i dont trust government and consider them fascistic and runs on mostly treachery
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Why is it always leftists promoting fascist pig sh1t? Fake news is going to have to rewrite history and make Adolf far right.
Take care of your royal pedo problem first and i might listen. maybe.
But until then you can fuck off.
A site that requires registration of a truly, opensource, non Government controlled unique identity that voluntarily uses such a (to be developed) technology would attract the people who want to contribute while allowing the trolls to bottom feed at the sites that don't. Soon after all these non-conforming sites will dry up when all they have are bottom feeders.
Government mandates like this never work, but as we also all know, its not about making people civil, it about more control.
Be cautions.
Off you be fucking, Mr Wallace, off you be fucking.
Isaac Newton felt the need for anonymity. That's good enough for me.
But what about the children?
In GOD we trust, all others we monitor.
When it tries to claim that certain domestic politicians don't officially exist:
https://www.independent.co.uk/...
even to the extent of imprisoning people who mention his name, it has lost any authority to comment on what might be fake news.
What a bunch of Hypocrites, Right!, Any government! will take care of things. Didn't we just read about "Unresolved Login Issue Prevented Florida 'Concealed Weapon' Background Checks For Over a Year" does that not prove the government is usually not part of the solution to problems?
;)
I know that was the only time government failed, NOT!
Just my 2 cents
When Trump hears of this and announces his new plan he will roast the Brits for stealing his idea.
Why is Snark Required?
Or at least that is what the people on the top want the rest of us to believe. An authoritarian's ideal structure is one with a small number at the top and the rest of the people on the bottom. Online communication is the most profound change to society in the last few centuries, perhaps in all of human history. So of course authoritarian-leaning people want to be the gatekeepers to it.
Fear mongering would be telling you that we'll have a lawless wild west if we don't quickly transfer authority to a central entity. As if this is an either or scenario.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
The English are already boring enough, do we really need to stamp out all character and enforce conformity. Online trolling would be acceptable free speech if following the liberal harm principles.
What I do know is that these actions would stifle democracy. I have been permanent AC since the Snowden leaks. I'm sure I could be tracked regardless. I'm not a trouble maker or law breaker, I just want a bit of privacy and to be able to control who is listening to what I have to say.
I used to engage in long political discussions and felt as if I was participating within the social wheels behind democracy. Now I don't trust governments and keep to myself, which is making me more anarcho-libertarian than I would otherwise have been. I think these policy makers should be careful of the unintended consequences of their ideas.
I also think incel hate speech is usually only within make only echo chambers while almost every day I am reading mainstream news articles written by mostly women and people who identify as diverse attacking older white men. When I change the language around to be targeted at them the articles are sexiet and racist. This used to make me really angry, generating feelings they are trying to confirm because I felt I was being attacked for who I was. This gives me both empathy to their cause now but also strong concern. I really do feel identity politics serves to split the populace and stop them uniting and allow existing power structures to maintain control. Trump is a good example of this. He is in power because of identity politics.
Identity politics is mob rule. Because you try and engage even politely with a feminist (to be fair, feminists who believe in equality are fine, I mean the she feminazi troll kind) as a man, your voice and opinion do not count because of who you are. It's just the same oppression by a different set of scum bags.
My partner and I are a team so of course I want what is best for her and I think many modern men believe that too. We won't always see eye to eye. That's called individuality and that's a good thing.
The more the western countries strengthen their authority the less scary the rise of China becomes. We are loosing the moral high ground with respect to freedom. Stories everyday on Slashdot alone confirm this. China implements facial recognition in schools. So do US schools... China's great firewall blocks and censors content. The UK can't wait to control everything their subjects view.
The sooner we automate more structures of governance and remove social and moral issues from politics the better. There are already laws that sufficiently govern what societies deem as crimes and for the most part they are working.
There are enough reports of hackers being arrested (people who know what the fuck they are doing) that I really struggle to believe more surveillance of the digital world is justified.
Child probably rings are disgusting and politicians historically should be wary to call the kettle black. I would support death penalties for these depraved human beings over the incursion in to innocent citizens lives. We know that rape and pedophilia are most often crimes committed within real life social circles (especially within the family), stranger danger is a very very small percentage of these kinds of crimes.
With respect to mass surveillance, you can not have a functioning democracy when the government already knows the answer to the question.
I am all for this, seeing as I am Lord Go Fuck Yourself Britshit, Duke of Worcestershire Sauce.
The Internet with its anonymity is individual rights while democracy and modern society is mob rule. This authoritarian scumbag is on the right track though, the modern society cannot allow individual freedoms.
You can't handle the truth.
Mobs can only form online anonymously, it never happens otherwise
How about instead of stopping bullying you produce children that can actually fucking cope with the world around them
Children these days live in a world that is too sanitized. We've gone off the deep end to a place were children are traumatized if the sun doesn't rise at 713am.
Teach your kids to grow a fucking pair for the goddamn sake of the future.
Fucking muzzie appeaser.
Free Tommy Robinson!
There's a reason we killed them then kicked them out of this country and this story shows it well. They have no respect for individuals or liberty. They only permit ideas like "respect" and "freedom" to be defined in the negative so they can control their subjects, as in " freedom from being disrespected" and "freedom from being offended".
Real freedom and respect is just too noisy and offensive for them, despite the consequences of maintaining that state of pseudo harmony. They prefer that the unwashed masses be forced into agreeing that everything is fine, even if it means their children are gangraped hy the tens of thousands:
https://rotherhampolitics.wordpress.com/2016/02/25/police-conspired-to-protect-rotherham-child-sex-abusers/
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/239926/muslim-rape-rotherham-bob-unruh
https://redice.tv/news/police-dont-know-why-rape-is-up-20-per-cent-in-sadiq-khans-london
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/20/rotherham-sexual-abuse-victims-rises-to-1510-operation-stovewood
https://gellerreport.com/2018/03/rotherham-rape-100.html/
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/5589/instant_view_political_correctness_raped_rotherham_s_children
Amazing. Everything you wrote. Is untrue.
The sooner these nutjobs are gone the better. The EU does a lot of objectionable stuff but holy hell the UK has gone full 1984 and then some.
That's the whole point, they want to silence their critics and continue the replacement of native Europeans...
Since when do Muslims represent âoeThe Stateâ in the UK?
Really not been keeping up on the UK, have you. Sad.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
We want to know who you are so you don't vote wrong...
... I thought for sure it was going to be in the name of protecting us from child porn, not online bullying.
Up Theresa May on... And dealing with this issue appropriately relative to the very real threat to society she poses and that's not to say we should be doing this to woman. I'd say the same to any man who argues for "safety" over freedom.
The notion, espoused by some, that this will help envisions an internet in which everything everyone does is indelibly stamped with the ID of whoever said it, requested it, bought it, etc., as if that will make the realm of online, digital reality akin to real life. BUT in order for THAT to be true, you would need a society in which you walk around with a shirt, a hat, and pants anywhere you go, emblazoned with your serial number, so that the cameras, or anyone with a notepad can record everything you say and do. Nowhere on Earth has seen a whole nation-state get THAT bad, that INSANE with the progress of their surveillance state, except maybe North Korea, and that is just speculation. The idea would make online or digital interactions even LESS free, more restrictive than real life, and for WHAT?!? So people will not get their feelings hurt? So no one will be able to say mean things online? The cure here looks far worse than the disease.
Our reign has gone on long enough. Indeed. Summon the meteors.
You just linked to a major national newspaper "mentioning the name" of your supposed unperson. More than "mentioning" it, in fact - it's the focus of a whole story, headline and all.
When you can link to a story about the editorial staff of The Independent being jailed for that, then you'll maybe have a talking point that isn't complete fantasy. Right now all you have is a link to a story that directly contradicts everything you wrote.
Every few years, someone comes out with a social thing for forum thing or whatever, and they insist that using "real" names will make people better-behaved. Every time they are proven wrong. People we well-behaved in small groups, people are not well-behaved in large groups. Full stop. There's surely a marginal size where knowing who people are will make a difference, like when you grow from 50,000 people to 100,000 people maybe, but "online" or "The Internet" are far far far beyond that region, so it doesn't matter.
This isn't just a problem in online forums. I've seen it in workplaces, a workplace with under a thousand people can feel fairly homey and interconnected and grounded, 5,000 people starts to get a little dicey but workable, but when you get up to like 25,000 people, even with the best intentions things routinely get out of control and mobs are always forming. It's not only that people fell they can get away with stuff, it's that people stop standing up for what's right. In a smaller group, when someone gets drunk at a company event and starts making an ass of themselves, unrelated people step up and usher them out. In a larger group, everyone feels like they aren't responsible for the group, so nobody steps up, and the asshole just keeps on going until something horrible happens.
called for companies such as WhatsApp to contribute to society over the negative costs of their technology, such as end-to-end encryption.
You do not break end-to-end encryption because of bad behaviour on-line. You break it because of a serious real-world threat to the lives of real people. The interest of national security, the need for investigation of imminent threats and the privacy of the citizens always have to balanced with each other. At which moment does a virus of the mind lonely, unloved teenagers dwell on become a threat to national security? Perhaps never?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Its all free speech until the SAS van pulls up. Then its gets all 1980's Ireland.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Once we give them that power over the internet, it will need to be replaced wholesale with a TRULY dark internet, which works for them, because they mostly just want to ensure the continuance of the status quo, while themselves having access to 'undocumented' channels to illegal wares.
Keep in mind UK Parliament is the one that had a non-trivial pedophile ring abusing its authority to sexual abuse children for 30+ years, had it covered up by MI5, then destroyed evidence and tried to pretend it didn't exist/never happened because all the evidence of the misdeeds was gone, despite individuals who investigated it for years, at significant damage to their professional careers, in order to bring it to light because what they had been doing to children while leveraging their positions of authority was so offensive that it had to be followed through on no matter the cost.
Centralized Authority is there for one purpose: to keep centralized authority in power. Sometimes it may help correct neglect/abuses at the local level, but that is simply necessary makework to help cover its true purpose as the pedestal for authoritarians to climb so that they may be above the law.
This comment being at +3 is a good example of why mob rule is a problem. Digital IDs are not the solution however. Holding web hosts accountable for the content they publish is.
"The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way." - this is not going to work for much longer. It should never have worked at all. Take it to court and it will fail.
Digital IDs should be brought in to end online anonymity that permits "mob rule" and lawlessness online
What... Like the fact when voting during an election, your vote is supposed to be anonymous
The secret ballot is a voting method in which a voter's choices in an election or a referendum is anonymous, forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation, blackmailing, and potential vote buying. The system is one means of achieving the goal of political privacy.
Democracy *IS* mob rule... right?
Help! help!, the termites are eating my DRAM!!!
> they would be ordered to clamp down on vile attacks against Margaret Thatcher on their platforms.
Fixed That For You. The British have a long history of using government decided media monitoring and restraint from reviewing government behavior or policy. There are reasons that George Orwell wrote the book 1984 back in 1948, when England was at a new zenith of political crackdown against Communism and any groups that could be labeled as being anti-this-week's-government.
He's talking to the wrong people. Technology companies aren't equipped to verify the identities of billions of people all over the world. If governments are willing to issue digitally-verifiable IDs that they'll back with their own laws, then the problem space would be reduced.
If Digital IDs were available, tech companies wouldn't have to require them. Just make them optional, and give people the ability to filter out messages from anyone who isn't IDd. I doubt it would take long for users to choose to filter out anonymous users.
If you think that goes against the "ideals" of the internet, remember that people have been using the internet to filter their view of the world for as long as it has existed.
The right to protest the State is more sacred than the State.
Sounds like Lenin has awoken from the grave but this time he's London!
This authoritarian idiot's solution to tyranny of the majority is to effectively pre-dox everyone? What could possibly go wrong with that idea?
Given those two choices, I will take wild west any day, thank you very much.
The court's gag order didn't last long. It had to be abandoned after the story broke internationally. Since it had been suppressed in the compliant press, the government is hopping mad that the Internet saw their gag order as damage, and routed around it.
Just needs to added to a blockchain, and then all your lies can be traced back to you readily and easily. Will stop all those Windy clones dead in their tracks, they can all get social credit scores for different categories so it's easy to spot the idiots, one for lying one for trolling one for just incompetence etc. add as many as you like blockchains dont run out.
I'm getting so fucking tired of immature ignorant whinning of dim prepotent politicians trying to vilify and polarize technologies they don't understand and trying to paint a black and white picture that only exists in their fantasy land... or more likely, don't exist at all because they never tried to understand the stuff they are talking about.
That is the true problem we have today. This sorta shit. If we had less shitheads berating against anonymity, privacy and encryption - and by now we had a very long time to understand it's not as one sided and clear as some moronic politicians will try to put it -, we'd be dealing with criminals who uses those to their advantage better today. Goddamn it feels like a virus spreading in governments and courts all around the world...
because they targeted the lower-classes, but say something that the middle and upper class doesn't like and it's an emergency.
"saying they would be ordered to clamp down on vile attacks against women on their platforms"
The thing with anonymity is that your gender and race do not need to be disclosed, you can claim anything or be anyone. Everyone is equal online and that's the whole point.
As for the word "attack", you can't attack anyone online, you can only throw insults at them, it's only words from random people who you don't know and who don't matter to you. Ignore them, respond in kind or better yet just laugh and ridicule their feeble attempts to insult you.
People need to take the internet for what it is and embrace the anonymity. You can be who you want to be online, if you feel that being a woman online makes you weak and opens you up to "attacks" then pretend to be a man and see what happens. If someone anonymous doesn't like you then so what? You can be just as anonymous as them, they can't do anything to you.
People troll because they get a response, by running away crying about being "attacked" you are giving them a response and making them feel powerful because they had the ability to affect you. If you laugh at them and show them that not only are you suffering no negative effects from their trolling, but you are actually finding their pathetic attempts to insult you amusing then they will soon give up anyway.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Obviously you're going to have to ensure any connection to the barbarians on the outside be sanitized by government protectors.
"I like systems, their application excepted", George Sand (French)
Take trade agreements - all done in secrecy - the public have no say
So called rendition papers and torture - more govt secrecy - or outright lies
So called national security and bugging laws - secrecy again
Tax cheating settlements - no disclousures
Cabinet in confidence papers
Barristers going to jail for questioning evidence origins
It seems the pot is calling the kettle black. Its working just fine. Your perception is wrong.
Free speech must not be tolerated. Only correct speech.
Except the guy the protesters were supporting was charged, convicted, sentenced and thrown in jail in ONE day...his crime? Filming outside a courthouse and posting it online.
O and just Google Thomas Robinson, you'll quickly find out that the UK police denied even having him...
THIS is what you get when u police speech.
OOOh vile attacks on women, good excuse to get rid of secure encryption.
Go well
"Wild west" or "totalitarian big brother will invade everyone's privacy" the internet ? We'll opt for the wild west thank you very much.
Also if everyone had to walk round carrying a placard with their real name and address, this would cut down on real life antisocial behaviour. I imagine he has this lined up for phase two
Comrades, we're winning!
Being able to obtain anonymity on the Internet is important, for the same reason that reporters should never reveal their sources. Sometimes information MUST be made known to the public, and the identity of the provider of that information MUST remain unknown for that person or group's safety. A bit of hateful trolling is a small price to pay for this.
There are other methods for rooting out trolls, and more importantly methods people can learn to recognize, and discount the opinion of, online trolls.
This unnamed "security minister of the United Kingdom" needs to fuck off.
(Intentionally NOT anonymized.)
Tommy Robinson breached a reporting ban (his second offense of this type). This type of ban is typically put in place in order to prevent mob justice and harassment of suspects who are still not convicted, in cases of a sensitive nature.
Would you want your name and face live streamed to Facebook, simply for being the suspect in a trial, where you may or may not be guilty?
Tommy Robinson tried to short-circuit the legal system, including the protections put in place for suspects who are yet to be convicted. In other words he tried to impose his own personal judgment on a case in which he has absolutely no right to interfere. Not to mention that this is the second time he's done so, hence the harsher punishment this time. Tommy Robinson is a radicalized extremist who apparently thinks he is above the law. He is not.
Eat the rich.
His crime was attempting to short-circuit the legal protections of the suspect in an ongoing court case. That is contempt of court, and realistically actually contempt for the entire legal system. Something which the legal system does not look lightly upon.
You may disagree with their decisions, but that is not the right way to change things.
Eat the rich.
This may seem obvious, but all the same, I fell it needs to be said again: Anonymity is a double-edged sword in so far it protects the innocent from persecution, ridicule and harassment on the other hand it also allow the guilty to avoid identification, retaliation and prosecution.
Personally, I am willing to allow a certain amount of "crime" (especially if the crime is of wielding words) for the benefit of having at least a modicum of anonymity in society, offline as well as online.
I don't need a signature to draw attention to myself.
As someone who lives in the UK, I take a slightly different view from the somewhat rabid and over-hyped fear-mongers on this site.
Let's have some context:
The UK government is in a mess. The whole Brexit fiasco was poorly thought out and people were asked to vote on little/no information at best and outright lies at worst. This has resulted in many many views on what the result meant and massive in-fighting in the government which is spending so much time on the issue nothing else substantive seems to be happening. Couple this with an election leaving a minority party in power, with little opportunity to make any changes and you have a confused muddle.
So what to do? take decisive action? no too hard!! -- let's have a distraction: royal weddings are good for a couple of months run-up but even they pass. An attack on internet companies is always a short term winner - it panders to the worst elements of the press (who see their business model of peddling hate and discord being threatened) and hits the hot buttons of "terror" and "what of the children/women?".
The level of debate here shows the distraction technique works.
As for implementation -- just look at history: England have more chance of winning the world cup than a UK Government IT system working properly. A few consultancies and IT companies may make some money (but at least nowadays the government does try to claw back overspend on its fiascos)
I seriously doubt that anything will really change and in six months to a year's time things will be just the same.
I agree. But it's needs to be a Single Sign on not at all related to your name or IP.
I still want to be DoucheAss69 not forced to be "David S. from Texas"
Don't worry, the first amendment covers that.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
The idea of the greater internet dickwad theory is an attractive one. Normal person + anonymity = dickwad. So if this is true, then it stands to reason removing anonymity is the solution.
But heres the thing ,we've tried that in facebooks real name property, and it never worked. In fact it made things worse. If people want to bully someone, that person is right there easy to find on facebook. If they want to hide, they can't unless they want to pull out a significant chunk of their social life. This , by the way includes people hiding from drug gangs, battered wives, whatever todays target of 4chans regular idiot crusade is, journalists who work in risky fields, police, judges, etc.
The thing is, its not anonymity that makes the internet turn into dickheads, its the lack of consequences. If I get on facebook and start issuing death threats at journalists or game reviewers or whatever, theres very little chance anythings going to happen to me. Hell I'll end up with a bunch of socially stunted millenialls even defending my behavior. Theres no downside to it. After all *I* can forge a fake identity, as long as it sounds plausible, but that journalist is probably just using her own ID.
None of this happens in the real world with any great frequency, because if I knock on someones door and threaten to kill them, if they are larger then me, they'll knock my lights out, and if they are not, the cops will do it for them. Because thats how things work in the world of adults.
So thats the real problem. Its not anonymity that induces bad behavior, its the lack of consequences. Its peoples acceptance of shitty behavior from those in their friend circle, its the legal professions disinterest in people getting harassed.
This might seem anathema to a lot of folks, but it only takes the thought experiment of taking the way people behave online and putting it in the real world to see that its precisely the lack of consequences thats turned half the internet into giant raving dickwads.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Fix the internet or we will fix you!
"If you don't go along with tyranny, you're against women".
The next payload is ready..
"...the negative costs of their technology, such as end-to-end encryption"
Negative. Costs.
Well, that's a fairly subjective view of the situation, isn't it it, old chap? I think there are a great many people who would like to see your working on that one, before giving you a smash in the face with a frying pan for being an utter twatknacker.
It's not you: I'm just this horrifically socially awkward with everybody.
... is the first act of tyranny.
In other words, another shabbas goy is doing his Jewish masters' bidding by trying to silence any dissent. We must stop "hate" - "hate" meaning "anything the Jew doesn't want you to hear"...
A 'digital ID' would mean the government can track everything everybody says, to keep us all in place. This is sickening. Free speech is the most fundamental of all human rights, second only to freedom of NON-association. (What's that you say? Ever wonder why you've never heard that phrase before? Freedom of NON-association means the right to NOT associate with anybody or any group that you don't want to. That means that if white people don't want to associate with non-whites, we don't have to, but somebody is FORCING us all to... I wonder who that could possibly be. Not the Jew, surely!)
will mean implementing strong censorship rules after Brexit.
Is to access government services - taxes, passports, benefits etc. There is no reason whatsoever for it to extend beyond that, and besides it would be trivially easy to sidestep, e.g. using a VPN to another country.
Given the timing, this must be some sort of viral advertising by NordVPN - just can't go anywhere these days without seeing their ads :p
0x or or snor perron?!
Here that's how every trial of a celebrity is handled, with the judge only able to control reporting from inside the courtroom. Are you saying that if O J Simpson had been tried in the UK, nobody would know he had even been tried because of being acquitted?
Is the intent to protect the privacy of the defendant, or to prevent publicity about what the prosecutionis doing?
There's nothing a State hates more than the people as a whole possessing means by which to be truly independent, in any sphere.
In all that men say, they have a good reason, and a real reason.
This is about State power.
All your Euro-dreams will come true. As soon as you have a few bottles of french wine in yourself.
It is "xenophobic" if you want to protect your nation from being overrun by random African and Arab invaders.
We also know you and your ilk are nicely paid by the Mohammedists of Riad.
Say yes to civilization, no to anarchy. If you don't like having your name attached to something you say or do, you shouldn't be saying or doing it. If you want to keep doing it while remaining anonymous, you're a coward. And no, I'm not about to register on this forum of deplorables so you can insult me with impunity. I will when all of you will have to be accountable for. And it will happen. The days of anarchy are over. Embrace the new reality, there are no alternatives, just as it should be.
He just kicks out the ILLEGALS, whatever skin color they have. The CHEAP LABOR who take the jobs of Americans at 1/3rd of the wage. Living with five other Illegals in a single bedroom and sending money to Calcutta, where you can have a family for $500 a month.
Of course the elitists are shedding crocodile tears on this. All their nice investments have their profits reduced from 50% annually to just 48% !
Soros, Clinton, Obama, Bush, Brin, Schmidt, Zuckerberg, Gates - they are all maniacs ready and willing to sell our their compatriots in order to add some more to their piles of money.
Thank god Donald Trump has been elected !
That is what the UK has become. 10 years ago they had Border Guards sporting a Mohammedist veil.
Now they clamp down on free speech which criticizes the ideology of Mohammedism. Why ? Because the Mohammedists have BOUGHT the British elite. Right down from Prince Charles, who will get a cut on every single bullet, spare part or fighter jet sold to Riad.
Britain worships MONEY. That's how you turn your nation into a shithole.
does that not prove the government is usually not part of the solution to problems?
Since you ask: No, it most certainly does not.
It does, however, demonstrate that you're indulging yourself in a juvenile "It's not perfect therefore it's wrong" temper-fit, though.
>> as he warned that people had to make a choice between "the wild west or a civilised society"
1. Creating a fair number of on-line fake ID's. Because when legislation like this becomes popular, your real name and address absolutely will wind up making you available in the real world to hate groups, stalkers, and other varieties of creep.
Two things are certain: there will be wholesale leaks of personal information, and this kind of legislation will contain provisions to protect governments and corporations from the consequences those inevitable leaks.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
It would have been bad for all involved if that trial had collapsed because of Robinson's actions.
These days he's just trying to martyr himself because the far right/UKIP support is drying up after the Brexit vote. His supporters are the types who used to be football hooligans and have now moved on to a slightly more respectable brand of tribalism.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Seems like humans are doing everything possible to make technology suck for everyone. Forced telemetry/spying in all products, facial recognition, license plate readers and other compelling items.
Hmm, could this have anything to do with increased decrease in physiological health across the world? Can't image.
Humans need to wake up.
This is where "grooming" happens in the UK:
The problem isn't a lack of mandatory government IDs online, the problem is an abject failure of Britain's government and governing elites to protect children from rape.
Furthermore, if mandatory IDs online had been used, these horrific abuses would never have come to light because even more people would have been carted off to jail for "causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety."
And: you forgot to mention the Vast Russian Conspiracy against Your Royal Highness !
If there is no anonymity on line, the problems will move offline.
I post as AC here and with a dozen or more fake names on other sites because I don't want the tech companies to be able to pull them all together and put them in a profile to sell to prospective employers or anyone else. With real ID, someone at work or in church will suddenly hate me because I may eat meat or collect stamps or plant roses or any of a thousand other things they could learn from my newly detailed profile.
The minister may eventually get his way but, as nice as I try to be online, someone will take issue with me offline if they know everything about me. I could even be killed for not respecting someone's prophet.
I would like to see criminal charges for anyone who links address or phone number or email address to a proper name in any database without the express written permission of the individual every 6 months. Never going to happen.
So when people want to be *anonymous*, they just require companies and governments to investigate in a little extra metadata tracking, and they can get the job done. If someone cares, they will track you. All that current anonymity does is give a false sense of security to those emit bile on the internet. It is consequence-free because tracking is hard for normal people. Some of that bile is from state actors. surprise. Free speech is about not being punished for frankly stating a view. It is not about *anonymity.*
Believing that you are untraceable because you called yourself a silly name is silly. If anyone cares, they will track you down. Believing that internet anonymity is real is dangerous because if you start saying things that are of interest to authorities, they will find you. Its a false sense of security, and one that gives the governments and large corporations that make the investment power over all of us by giving them exclusivity over the ability to track.
Real identities are better for all of us, and more transparency will get us more than security by obscurity. Make it easier for everyone to track everyone so that that power is democratic. Yeah spousal abuse... ok, but isnt it a heck of a lot easier to enforce a court order if everyone is wearing a tracking device, that anyone can see and report?
I actually hate that future is ubiquitous tracking, but just as arguing that water isnt wet does not make sense, the technology makes it very easy to track people, and people will be tracked, the only thing we can realisticially do is track the people doing the tracking. It sucks, but calling yourself doofus doesnt do a thing.
Shut down all non-elite-sanctioned discussion.
The elite controls Radio, TV and newspapers. Now they are badly offended by the plebejans making their voice heard.
Actually, there is more freedom of expression on RT.COM than on most NATO-run discussion boards, with the exception of Slashdot and some more sites. The Economist shut down their discussion system, for example.
The elite is truly scared they might face true democracy as opposed to their simulation of democracy.
If someone harasss you why donâ(TM)t they ignore them and block them. Is there really such a huge issue of women unable to make their own decisions?
Digital ID's is nothing but a way for those in power to have more power over you.
As somebody said to me:
"NEVER tolerate it.
ALWAYS find a way around it.
ALWAYS sabotage such efforts to control people.
ALWAYS go after any politicians that try to force it upon you."
I suggest remaining peaceful, but this all makes complete sense.
You are arguing that all the ANTIFA and Union Thugs* should be able to crack down on dissenters at almost no cost.
Because that is what is happening if you use your real name anywhere and go against the flow.
*very strong in Germany
He also caused the jury to be dismissed and a new jury to be called because he tried to interview the jury. He's stunt almost had the case against a sex offender gang to collapse as the defence pushed for a mistrial.
You are free to register your own domain, setup your own website and publish whatever you want, and take responsibility for it.
So what's this bullshit about free speech?
Given a choice I would choose "the wild west", I like the hats
See subject: It's always a pleasure showing everyone how stupid you are drug addict mentalboy https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... you piece of SHIT from a country of men w/ NO BALLS & yes, you're from Sweden shitbag!
Which you tried LYING about to me after your twisted weak ass sent me a postcard from there (like the obsessed stinking little MENTALBOY whimp w/ "depression" (lmao, whimp) & drugged up CREEP you are fucker) but too bad I saw your post about the restaurant in Stockholm recently.
* You & yours from "SWEDEN"? NO BALLS - you let your women get RAPED by muslims (whereas MY TRIBE, poles, DROVE THEM OFF when all the rest of Europe, except Lithuania, RAN)!
You pitiful little no balls worms (which is WHY You are HOW you are - you can't help it - you're DESCENDED FROM SHITBAG PUNKS!)
APK
P.S.=> Truth HURT cocksucker? Meet me in person (you 'brag' you're a 'world-traveller' (big deal, I've seen europe too) 'rich man' (not - you're just some impoverished little LOSER, no questions asked) - come meet me FACE TO FACE & talk your shit to me bitch... apk
When it comes to the UK and "grooming", I don't think it's the West (wild or otherwise) that's the main problem ...
But don't worry; they are very efficient at locking you up for saying not nice things like that. 'cause that's the important thing.
So... now I have to worry about the kid down the street spray painting my real life car, to pay me back for blowing up his online spaceship. Pass.
I have been pushing multiple American candidates to do several things:
/., they could then enable us to say that we will view ONLY vetted certs (which means person is new OR has not been kicked off), OR anonymous at say level 3. That way, moderators can decide which of the unvetted ppl have comments worth while looking at.
1) say that intel world is free to get to data from non-encyrpted data streams/storage. The reason is that it is not much different than sending a postcard to glass mailbox that is without a front. IOW, you seed without any effort.
2) OTOH, we need to require a warrant on anything that is encrypted.
This will have the effect of causing all the apps and OSs to encrypt everything.
Then we need VETTED certs for everybody, at least in the west. This does not mean that all things must use these certs. However, if send in a vetted cert to
The best way to vet this is not at the bank, but at post offices, DMVs, or those that issue gov IDs. Have them either generate a cert pair and give you the private via bluetooth OR they person send the public key to the vetter. Regardless, the public key is then installed on a central DB and marked vetted.
Nice advantage is that if a site boots a vetted person, they can keep them off as being vetted. In addition, others of us do not have to deal with the trolls who never have anything intelligent to say.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
See subject SOYBoy (rotflmao) in your UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous "courageous" trolling you "not man" - LMAO!
(You know - I understand your SOYMilk & Bisphenol A "notman" SOYBoy formulas have addled your brains but that takes the cake for "illogic logic" from "your kind", lol!)
* The other poster's not I but they are making you get all "triggered" when you see your addled thinking fools nobody but your sick in the head chemically NEUTERED (lol) selves, lmao!
APK
P.S.=> Classic - one for my bookmarks... apk
The UK's security minister is not content with having video cameras on every vertical support in the country, and feels the UK can only be saved from a "wild west" mob rule if every comment we make online is securely identified by a digital ID. The will allow the government to monitor all antisocial remarks and, of course, keep an eternal record of every one of them on the Internet. Obviously, the Land of Hope and Glory has descended into the pits of authoritarian government and totalitarian monitoring of all of its subjects. It was a good place once, but there's no England anymore.
does that not prove the government is usually not part of the solution to problems?
What is unique to government in that situation?
Provided this is coupled with significant privacy and free speech reforms.
The problem is, even if those things do happen, they can un-happen. Meanwhile, the government will still be in charge of ID.
If we want to see it not happen, we have to provide an alternative, perhaps tying pgp keyservers to web services. Something where we can be reasonably sure that the person we're talking to today is the person we were talking to yesterday... on the web. I realize that pgp offers this already; why isn't anyone using pgp key verification on websites?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Lol. Tommy didn't even mention them by name, he was only informing people that there *was* a trial going on. His lawyer also came out saying that he was informed by the authorities that Tommy would be released and that there was no reason for him go to the courthouse.
You know how a while back a guy was arrested for putting a bacon sandwich in front of a mosque? He was murdered in prison, I'll let you guess the demographic of the people responsible. This is a death sentence for Tommy if they don't keep him isolated.
While you are at it, reveal the names of the moderators.
My guess is the quality of discussions will skyrocket.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
I think a more apt comparison would be something like "wild west vs 1984"
See my subject: You're DAMN RIGHT I'd kick YOUR FUCKING ASS for stalking & harassing me you unidentifiable little cowardly cunt - tell me your REAL name, address, & phone # so I can verify it's REALLY you & we can settle this once & for all, fucker...
APK
P.S.=> Everyone SEES you constantly stalking & harassing me bitch, so WHO ARE YOU FOOLING but yourself - & IF I ever get to you? You'll WISH you were dead cocksucker... I shit you not! apk
Going to make more sockpuppets to stalk & troll me with you LITERALLY ADMITTED loon https://slashdot.org/comments.... + sending me postcards w/ threats too https://slashdot.org/comments.... you little STALKING whacko??
... apk
Zontar, take your meds you ADMITTED mentalcase https://slashdot.org/comments....
&
You're also a druggie too https://slashdot.org/comments....
* You're a butthurt loon freak, plain & simple - you did it to yourself, loser... see below for proof.
APK
P.S.=> Still trying to live down how I shot you to pieces in the art & science of computing Mr. Butthurt https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?
How about proving hosts & my program that builds them are useless too https://slashdot.org/comments.... ?
the gov cannot ever have ALL the power. a little privacy is all that remains. voting is fake because the media is controlled. you think Jesus will save us if they ever fuck up again?
Are you saying that if O J Simpson had been tried in the UK, nobody would know he had even been tried because of being acquitted?
No. Had OJ been tried in the UK the media would have been able to report that a trial was taking place, and the outcome of that trial.
If, to assure a fair trial, reporting was restricted during the trial, the media would have been able to report on the contents of the trial and its outcome following its completion.
Nobody is preventing trials from being reported. There is a just temporal adjustment to maximise the chances of a fair trial.
It's called justice. The US might like to learn from it.
See subject & my ps (classic, lol): There's REALITY https://yro.slashdot.org/comme... that works vs. SOYboy addled by estogen mimickers in SOYMilk (lol, that you're addicted to) "Phantasy" - lol!
... apk
I see your estrogen is LOW - lol, don't worry: Make SURE you put your soymilk in bisphenol A plastic containers (You'll get a "good dose" then - you need it (Cravings to be a woman, you sure act like one you do-nothing "ne'er-do-well", lol)).
Eventually, you'll get SO bad you'll inject it like Bruce Willis in LOOPER (you are 'loopy' lol) from Year 6 -> Year 23 (LMAO).
* RoTfLmAo... you want to get rid of me/kill me? For once you're doing a GOOD job making me laugh myself to death!
Ah, it's good to see I've BLOWN you away w/ truth & fact & YOU ARE OUT OF DOWNMODPOINTS evidently (your kind? Can't EVER win vs. guys like me - accept it - your destiny in this LIFE was to be the LOSER almost WOMAN you are, lol).
APK
P.S.=> Hahahahaha "HELP ME MOMMY" lmao (apk's outsmarted us AGAIN & ran us DRY of our ABUSED "downmodpoints" lol) https://it.slashdot.org/commen...
I find the choice of reasons pretty peculiar, "bullying and grooming" since they already seem to have a grooming problem, but this doesn't happen online.
The way I see it is that they are just mixing unrelated problems to try and pass some law and hope nobody is contesting it, otherwise they are bullies and are grooming I guess.
Just my 2 cents
cap: hounded
Meanwhile, it’s the British justice system that is turning into that legendary boot stamping on a human face forever.
Labour couldn't get ID cards through, with a massive majority. The current government might succeed with no majority purely because Labour will want them.
It wont end well. The Brexit vote showed the British people have limits on the shit they'll take, and the Government will do well to remember this.
What's concerning me is that every single female minister we have seems to have a vicious authoritarian bent. May was held in check by her party, Rudd appeared to be appointed to continue the terrible work and this security minister appears to want to ignore the common sense her own security services will tell her.
Where the fuck are the intelligent sensible female MPs and why aren't they being given cabinet posts?
Namely, we wish to encode *argument from authority* into the Internet. If I were to post this as AC, you would be forced to evaluate my statement based purely on its content since AC could be anybody. OK, perhaps you might judge it based on your perception of the general attitudes of ACs, but that's about it. Next, by posting it under my pseudonym as I am now, you'll judge it a bit more based on possible prior experience with my pseudonym which doesn't really tell you very much about me unless you're a creepy stalker. Finally, I could be forced to post under my Real Name (TM), in which case you could pull in more judgey crap like bias against the ethnicity of my surname, my skin color, etc.
It is the final form of judgement that the UK wishes to encode onto the Internet--judgement based more on reputation than the content of what's being said.
The classic solution to undesirable content from anonymous sources is usually to ignore it if nobody is willing to stand by it. Usually anonymous content is garbage, but on rare and important occasions it shines. Then you must refute it based purely on logic. Historically this isn't something the Brits have handled well, so I don't suppose we American patriots should be terribly surprised.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
To put it bluntly, are largely being made everywhere by idiot legislators that don't know 'digital' from the 'digits' that they diddle their own anus with.
Create sockpuppets to have more modpoints than any 1 account has & abuse 'em stupid. Zontar does it per https://it.slashdot.org/commen... WHO IS NOT VERY "SMART" HERE, stupid?
YOU Khyber (where you SLIP giving away it is you, jailbird homo druggie felon loony loser) https://it.slashdot.org/commen...
* Unbelievable, lol... ONLY a freaked out BITCH queer who likes it up the ass (& yes, I KNOW you do) acts like you - no shit!
APK
P.S.=> I almost SPIT out my Miller HighLife I am drinking seeing you TRY that utter bullshit, lol... apk
Rather than the bland, approved, sanitized pap that the world's governments would inevitably use to control us.
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
Small notes:
The purpose of the ban is to avoid influencing juries. This is partially because the British system handles jury selection differently than the US system. Additionally, they do not do sequestration either at all, or in the same fashion - I'm not quite as clear on that facet. As such, there is some potential that reporting may influence the jury. I'm not really sure how that impacts the 'celebrity' cases, but that is the purpose of the news blackouts.
Second, Tommy supposedly believed he was there for the sentencing portion of a trial - i.e. after the deliberation was complete, so there was not risk of biasing the jury. Except, due to the number of defendants in the child rape gang, the case was being in 3 tranches. Tommy was there for the sentencing of the second tranche.
So while his reporting could have no impact on the outcome of the trial he was reporting on, it may have had some impact on the next set of defendants getting an un-biased jury. Or at least that is what the expectation is that the defense would argue. Of course, an argument could also be made that what he was reporting on had already been published in at least one newspaper, so it's a bit of a question as to what he was a doing different - except for perhaps expanding the number of people that would see the defendants.
Third, while he was convicted for 'Contempt of Court' for doing something similar ~12 months ago, there are a couple of differences worth noting. From the case last year - A) He was filming on court property, which is illegal. B) The judge in that case gave him some leniency in his use of language and the approach he took with the accused due to not being a trained journalist. Why is this relevant? Because in this instance, while he was reporting, he was following the instruction he had been giving from that previous court case to avoid running afoul of the court again.
Forth is the general arrest shenanigans. He was arrested for 'Suspected Breach of the Peace', his lawyer was told he was going to be released and not to travel, he was hustled (in less than 5 hours) before the judge (who may have watched him getting arrested), where the charges shifted to Contempt of Court, and he was defended by a court appointed lawyer. It's believed that his 'Guilty' plea was done at the advise of that court lawyer, despite it not being in his defendants best interest. Following all of that, the judge put in a reporting ban on Tommy's case. There is a lot to be scared of in that scenario - in next to no time, a thorn in the state's side got vanished, and no one was allowed to talk about it.
I'm not really a fan of Tommy - but I do tend to support those who any government dislike. I believe Tommy, like Brexit, is one of many 'blow back' responses to failures of the UK government; and the British government specifically. I believe Tommy is latching on to the rape gang issue to promote his platform. But if the government had done it's job, he wouldn't have anything to associate himself with.
Been posting for decades. Never registered.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Awww, did I run you DRY of downmodpoints already Khyber (known homosexual multiple felon druggie whimp) https://news.slashdot.org/comm... ?
LMAO, it appears I have & like you are in LIFE? You're HELPLESS... lol, & I win.
* Always!
(Especially vs. "your kind", the DeViAnT "AbNoRmAL OnEz", lmao!)
APK
P.S.=> Having fun TOYING w/ your DO-NOTHING zero "ne'er-do-well" jailbird ass now Khyber - it's FUN showing everyone JUST what you are - a loser, lol - especially while I drink a Miller HighLife in the SUN just smiling @ the thought of CRUSHING you as always, lol... apk
The names of the accused and the crimes, and even their photographs were already available to the public.
And in his own words:
This is the problem, you see that - it's not my concern, it's not his concern.. hundreds of young girls have been gang raped in our country in every town and city across this country, and some of the alleged perpetrators are in court today, and people need to know what's going on.
At no point in that livestream does Robinson assert that the persons involved are guilty and that the trial is a waste of time. He states the need to be careful what he says, and that there is a press restriction on reporting the details of the case. The worst that I could find was that when asking those entering the courthouse, of which he did not identify, was "how do you feel about the verdict" he characterizes some of the profanity-laced responses he receives.
I'm willing to give Robinson the benefit of the doubt, because it is all too evident what happens to those who act as whistleblowers or are otherwise problematic for a corrupt political establishment. The myriad of laws that exist are conveniently enforced with extreme prejudice for personas non grata, in other words, "show me the man and I'll show you the crime."
I think your forgetting WHAT he was trying to report on.. There was a news blackout on the trial itself. They are trying to cover-up not just this case but many cases of kidnapping and sex slavery of thousands (some say ~100k) native european girls by this culture enrichment from the middle-east and africa.
He didn't actually reveal anything the regular news print/tv media didn't already.
> Tommy Robinson is a radicalized extremist who apparently thinks he is above the law.
That's what they called the people who had a certain tea party in Boston a couple centuries ago. Just because it's against the law doesn't mean it's wrong, you see.
What you need is a system that only allows people to see your post if they identify themselves as accurately as you do. The government wants you to unmask yourself while they trace you in secret. The result of unmasking only the unapproved users will be an internet containing only advertizing and propaganda.
Good to see that authoritarianism, greed, hatred, and good old assholishness cross all boundaries regardless of creed, color, nation, or gender.
Simply put, haters gonna hate.
So, Europe wants you to ID yourself and what you post. But wait, they want you to be able to be forgotten after posting things. Isn't this a bit of a conflict? So, we want to know who you are when you post BUT only for a short period of time, then you can ask to be forgotten.
This is lame to say the least. I agree with the ID as people have no respect when anonymous. When writing anonymous people say things that they would NEVER want anyone to know that they believe what they right, nor do they believe it most of the time. Speaking from experience, I know.
He's very specifically trying to rile people up, get some vigilante "justice" going. It's painfully transparent.
Eat the rich.
My personal issue with it wasn't his arrest - he commuted a crime, and deserved to go through the justice system.
What I felt was the big mis-step of the UK gov was that he was tried and imprisoned for over a week, with no public notice whatsoever, and a "no comment" to anyone asking where he'd gone.
He deserved prison for his repeated law breaking, but he should have gone to jail publicly, not been "disappeared"
Who was surveyed, and by whom? Link to results please, to demonstrate how this is a reputable survey with solid statistical underpinning and not some shit you just made up.
Incitement to racial hatred isn't a "thought crime", it's not just something in the perp's head, it requires communication with others, inciting them to act. And there's still no incitement against "the State", it's about identifiable groups. So you're allowed to have as many nasty bigoted thoughts in your head as you desire, but you won't be criminalised unless you encourage others to act on your hatred.
What next, are you going to try to tell me that Stephen Christopher Yaxley-Lennon is a victim of state oppression, rather than a longstanding criminal who breached the terms of his suspended sentence?
The UK Government tried to prevent anonymous pamphleteers before and during the Colonies in North America revolted under UK rule. This is old news. This is an old, as well as a bad idea. The UK Governments in all its successive iterations will Always want to imprison their own people -- as they tried in the Colonies, Scotland, Northern Ireland, etc.
As usual, alpha test something unpopular in the UK then bring it to the US 5 to 10 years later :-(
only dissenting lynch mobs.
Iâ(TM)m only on season 1 episode 3, but they should have Abernathy break through and post all the shit they go through on Facebook.
Is the poor little politician having trouble controlling the narrative? More spying is sure to fix that!