Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

zdnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 302 posts

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#81

Post by fibbery »

anondon wrote: post #63

What is the easiest way to explain to the average citizen that the "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument is not a good reason to let the Government keep tabs on your online activities? Most people don't give any thought to online privacy that it truly scares me.

the only way I have had any success is to describe the problem in terms of "wrong place wrong time" + "misinterpreted evidence" scenarios. this is something I wrote up a while back to try to explain it to a family member:

---------------------------------------------------------------

Imagine a crime takes place in a certain area. Using surveillance technology, police identify everyone who was in the area around the time of the crime. They do this through license plate recognition, face recognition, cell phone tracking, and credit card receipts. You happen to be on that list because you were shopping at a nearby store earlier.

You're now technically a suspect in a crime, although there's a thousand other suspects, and you have nothing to hide, so no big deal, right?

A witness saw the perpetrator running away from the crime. They only saw them from the back, but report that the suspect is a tall white male around 40 years of age.

So police narrow down that list to just people who fit this description. Uh oh, the list is now only about 50 people, and you're one of them.

The crime appears to be a potential race-motivated hate crime. Using web profiling, investigators search for those 50 people to look for any history of involvement with hate groups. The algorithm they use has over-zealously classified certain extreme right wing news sources as potential markers for hate crime.

You're not particularly worried, I mean, you're obviously not some crazy racist. There's no way they'd be interested in you.

But you forgot - six months ago, you started to get interested in the immigration debate, and posted on several anti-immigration forums.

With the additional profiling, the list narrows down to 8 suspects, including you. You happen to fit other markers for this kind of crime as well - you live alone, work a less prestigious job, neighbors say you don't go out much.

Now you're a suspect in a crime. You'll almost certainly not be convicted, because there's no direct evidence. But good luck explaining that to your employer, your family, your friends, and the criminal defense lawyer you now have to pay for.

Still think you have nothing to hide?

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#82

Post by stevetrewick »

s_kilk wrote: post #12

> Despite the uproar, the government's opposition failed to scrutinize any significant amendments and abstained from the final vote. Killock said recently that the opposition Labour party spent its time "simply failing to hold the government to account". What the hell is the point of the Labour party these days? They are absolutely not an effective opposition. Worthless bastards, one and all.

Why would they oppose it? It was their idea in the first place. Putting the entire population under constant electronic surveillance may be the one thing they agree with Tories about.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interception_Modernisation_P...

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#83

Post by ptaipale »

pjc50 wrote: post #69
98Windows wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Worthless bastards, one and all. Why write this crap? The labour party is the biggest left wing party in Europe, are you saying everyone inside it is worthless?

They are also staggeringly ineffective and can't seem to decide what they stand for. Miliband was OK despite the "controls on immigration" equivocation, but since then the party has turned into a circular firing squad. Going back into history, I'm fairly sure we saw attempts at invasive surveillance under Blair's Labour; Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, and the failed ID cards scheme. It's not even clear wheth…

Are they willing to oppose?

Looking at it from the continent, it seems to me that Corbyn is entirely happy with getting out of EU, and is only "opposed" because he's supposed to be "in opposition".

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#84

Post by hackuser »

datamoshr wrote: post #44

As a UK resident, this irks me beyond belief. It's a sickening invasion of human rights[1]. To echo u/rubberstamps sentiments, it's such that there's been little to no coverage of this in the media. But it's the same everywhere, introduce an encroaching bill, have uproar from those with the heads screwed on (the minority). Let it grow a little stale in the publics eye and keep reintroducing with slight alterations it…

Learn political organizing skills, which address these issues: How to build awareness, appeal to people, organize them, etc.

As many veterans of past civil rights battles have said: Don't get mad, organize!

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#85

Post by chillingeffect »

datamoshr wrote: post #44

As a UK resident, this irks me beyond belief. It's a sickening invasion of human rights[1]. To echo u/rubberstamps sentiments, it's such that there's been little to no coverage of this in the media. But it's the same everywhere, introduce an encroaching bill, have uproar from those with the heads screwed on (the minority). Let it grow a little stale in the publics eye and keep reintroducing with slight alterations it…

Interestingly, privacy matters less to "wage-slaves" than to entrepreneurs.

Entrepreneurs value their reputations more, having to gain approval from strangers more often. Meeting with a customer/VC/bank/mayor/state committee/supplier for the first time? good chance they'll google you.

In a typical corporate desk job, they do some basic checking (arrest record) at hire, then leave you alone.

I'm sorry this doesn't help directly, but it I share it to help interpret the apathy of your typical human. Perhaps if they considered the future when they might be subject to judgment by a group they don't know.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#87

Post by atom_enger »

hackuser wrote: post #84
datamoshr wrote: post #44

As a UK resident, this irks me beyond belief. It's a sickening invasion of human rights[1]. To echo u/rubberstamps sentiments, it's such that there's been little to no coverage of this in the media. But it's the same everywhere, introduce an encroaching bill, have uproar from those with the heads screwed on (the minority). Let it grow a little stale in the publics eye and keep reintroducing with slight alterations it…

Learn political organizing skills, which address these issues: How to build awareness, appeal to people, organize them, etc. As many veterans of past civil rights battles have said: Don't get mad, organize!

I think we should also focus on making our current technology impervious to this type of tracking. If the flaw exists in the system that exposes our personal information then we should work to plug the hole. I think organizing is important too but I guarantee someone is going to try this type of power grab again in the future.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#88

Post by hackuser »

anondon wrote: post #63

What is the easiest way to explain to the average citizen that the "Nothing to hide, nothing to fear" argument is not a good reason to let the Government keep tabs on your online activities? Most people don't give any thought to online privacy that it truly scares me.

Read up on the history of government abuse of power and explain to them why doing nothing wrong will not protect them, and the necessity of standing up for others.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#89

Post by anigbrowl »

s_kilk wrote: post #12

> Despite the uproar, the government's opposition failed to scrutinize any significant amendments and abstained from the final vote. Killock said recently that the opposition Labour party spent its time "simply failing to hold the government to account". What the hell is the point of the Labour party these days? They are absolutely not an effective opposition. Worthless bastards, one and all.

A place to corral dissent, nothing more. Putting Jeremy Corbyn in charge and getting all the radicals to sign up as members to keep in there (in the wildly mistaken belief that he would stand up for the causes the radical left holds dear) was simply a way of getting an up-to-date list of radical thinkers in the UK, who ave now identified themselves as such, and indeed paid a few quid each for the privilege.

Assume your primary political platform has already been compromised and start setting up new loosely connected networks now.

Re: Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever passed in a democracy”

#90

Post by DonaldFisk »

s_kilk wrote: post #12

> Despite the uproar, the government's opposition failed to scrutinize any significant amendments and abstained from the final vote. Killock said recently that the opposition Labour party spent its time "simply failing to hold the government to account". What the hell is the point of the Labour party these days? They are absolutely not an effective opposition. Worthless bastards, one and all.

What is Jeremy Corbyn supposed to do? He was elected twice by the overwhelming majority of party members on a socialist platform, but the majority of his MPs aren't socialist and support a "Blairite" (neoliberal) agenda. Since his election, those MPs have tried to force him to resign, staging various incidents (an MP calling Ken Livingstone a Nazi apologist for pointing out the existence of the Haavara Agreement, a heckler at a Gay Pride march who it transpired was an employee of a Blairite PR firm, a brick through an MPs window, except it wasn't her window and there was no brick, and several other incidents) and forced an unnecessary leadership election (and a court case challenging the incumbent's right to stand), when they could have been attacking the Government's policies. They refuse to join his shadow cabinet, so many of its members lack experience.

That's the current situation. Those MPs who caused the trouble can't be deselected until the next election. If Jeremy Corbyn was replaced by neoliberal, Labour wouldn't oppose government policies to anything like the extent it now does, and would almost certainly lose any subsequent general election. Or we could dispense with democracy altogether.

Post reply on HN