Live data from Hacker News

UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

theguardian.com

21–27 of 27 posts

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#21
I can see it now.

A wizened old judge sits in court, looming down on the accused (the term defendant implies they have a hope in hell of defending themselves), presiding over a trial he doesn't understand. A young man did something dangerous with a computer.

There is no jury, because this is a secret trial - what is being discussed here is a matter of national security. The young man is suspected of some kind of technological terrorism, the judge understands. The young man looks unhealthy, sallow - the judge doesn't consider that he has spent a month in a holding facility being politely but forcefully questioned about his political beliefs, his thoughts on terror, his religion, his economic orientation.

The trial proceeds. Great stacks of print-out of browser history are wheeled out on trolleys. The volumes are enormous. The young man must be pathological. The security cleared expert witnesses explain that this young man clearly uses the internet heavily, he is possibly an addict, many of these "URLs" are very technical, possibly dangerous. It appears he has been hacking thousands of websites. He is clearly a threat, a dangerous product of a world gone mad that the judge only knows to fear. His wife is making casserole and he wants to get home.

Sentencing is passed. The young man is not allowed to talk about these proceedings lest a harsher sentence yet be meted out. He is sentenced to prison and is thus conveyed. His life in this society is effectively over, and his future holds only scrutiny and prejudice, to which he is not permitted to respond, and cannot even have the solace of mute rage, as the drugs he is made to take by the state for his dangerous addictive and compulsive tendencies prohibit such.

In his cell he sits and reflects on his crime - being a web developer who retweeted a link to a leaked GCHQ document.

With enough data and the right apparatus, you can achieve political harmony within your populace in the matter of a generation.

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#22
post #3

He accepted it would be “far too intrusive” for officers to be able to access content of internet searches and social media messaging without additional safeguards, such as the requirement for a judicial warrant. When you need to scale the walls of a seemingly impenetrable castle, it is easier to slowly and quietly dig under the foundations until they fall of they own accord. Once they have this, then don't be surpri…

> it is easier to slowly and quietly dig under the foundations until they fall of they own accord.

The phrase "access browsing history" could go from meaning ISP logs to browser logs without ever needing to change the argument.

What they really want are tools that can hack the OS and browser without needing individual permission from the companies that control those ecosystems.

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#23
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it's ok for the police to get a warrant and track a person's internet usage in real time but it's not ok for them to get a warrant to view a person's browser history? This is seriously the illogical nonsense this place has devolved to at any mention of surveillance of any kind on Hacker News, even when it involves warrants.

It is ok to assassinate a terrorist with a sniper and not ok to nuke a whole city on the suspicion that a terrorist must be inside...

> It is ok to assassinate a terrorist with a sniper

Legally ok, or morally ok in your view? Because organisations like Greenpeace have been branded terrorists in the past, and I'm quite sure the definition of "terrorist" is malleable beyond belief, especially when the government needs to explain itself for killing an individual.

Of course there may be situations where life-and-death intervention may be required (as in, sniping the person holding a bomb trigger), but I'm seriously opposed to your unqualified statement that it's ok to shoot a terrorist.

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#24
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean the StaSi (Staatssicherheit - state security)?

Pedanzi.

I went on a google search to figure out what you could have meant. There are many things I do not know, and a single word without context is seldomly enough to assume. (Starzi appears to be a last name and not much more.)

Also, if I'm googling it, most of the time there are others wondering.

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#25
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedanzi.

I went on a google search to figure out what you could have meant. There are many things I do not know, and a single word without context is seldomly enough to assume. (Starzi appears to be a last name and not much more.) Also, if I'm googling it, most of the time there are others wondering.

Fair enough :-). I just assumed everyone knew who the Stasi were! I can't recommend the film The Lives of Others enough. Really is a scary insight into the end game of a surveillance state...

Re: UK police seek powers to access browsing history of computer users

#26
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ok to assassinate a terrorist with a sniper and not ok to nuke a whole city on the suspicion that a terrorist must be inside...

> It is ok to assassinate a terrorist with a sniper Legally ok, or morally ok in your view? Because organisations like Greenpeace have been branded terrorists in the past, and I'm quite sure the definition of "terrorist" is malleable beyond belief, especially when the government needs to explain itself for killing an individual. Of course there may be situations where life-and-death intervention may be required (as i…

Greenpeace also used bombs. Morally is also ok, but if you check my posting history - I don't value moral or human life at all.

Edit: I was thinking of PETA not greenpeace.

Post reply on HN