51–60 of 275 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And do what exactly? Go to a protest? It doesn't work and never has; most people are content just by reading The Daily Hate. They already won.
The only time people in power make concessions is when there is a credible threat to them maintaining that power.
London? Why does anyone have an anticipation of privacy in the UK? This is the city with police cameras on every block, surveillance vans, and a prime minister who literally called the privacy of encryption evil.
London doesn't have "blocks". Surveillance vans are a myth. Police cameras? Sure there is plenty of CCTV but most of its is privately owned and operated.
I don't think they meant "block" in the usual American sense, but in the general sense, that is: "an area".
> Surveillance vans are a myth.
Simply Wrong.
Surveillance vans are not a myth, honestly. Maybe not in the what the police would call the "plebian" areas, but in the centre and Canary Wharf, you can see them every now and then, they even have their own WiFi you can try and connect to, which has like 3 password fields (I've tried when I was passing one in Canary Wharf).
> Sure there is plenty of CCTV but most of its is privately owned and operated
No evidence for this, and I think the parent comment meant "street-level" CCTV, not in buildings, and i'de be pushed to say it's more weighted towards public CCTV (govt.) rather than private.
London? Why does anyone have an anticipation of privacy in the UK? This is the city with police cameras on every block, surveillance vans, and a prime minister who literally called the privacy of encryption evil.
I was involved with a long trial that relied heavily on CCTV evidence and I'm interested to read how you think they are operated or owned.
Almost makes you think we only have terrorism just so the countermeasures can be exploited to keep the masses under total control. ;)
London? Why does anyone have an anticipation of privacy in the UK? This is the city with police cameras on every block, surveillance vans, and a prime minister who literally called the privacy of encryption evil.
London doesn't have "blocks". Surveillance vans are a myth. Police cameras? Sure there is plenty of CCTV but most of its is privately owned and operated.
Its an issue when you self censor opinions which deviate from the mass. It also an issue of freedom of press. The government know who you talk to through metadata collection even if you use encryption.
Meanwhile, there are places that are living in a dystopia, and the single most important goal of the powers that be in those places is undermining the rule of law. So I can't help but be skeptical of stories like this.
We have a society where we can air discussions about topics like this, and where criminals can be kept out of the public sphere, and these are good things. There. And hey, tonight at least, for once, I won't go to a throwaway to say so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it's futile now, just wait until they grow even stronger. It's now or never.
And do what exactly? Go to a protest? It doesn't work and never has; most people are content just by reading The Daily Hate. They already won.
This is utterly unacceptable. Time for the electorate to put their foot down and set an example by disbanding the entire force and replace it with a new one. But guess what the electorate will say? "They only came for the Socialists. I'm not a Socialist". Sad times.
The intelligence services have been doing this forever in most countries. If you don't know about it you're not paying attention. Here is PJ O'Rourke writing about this in the 1960s in the US. https://books.google.com.au/books?id=WEmN1ZKrYpsC&lpg=PA238&... People don't just don't care that much. It is worth worrying about though. With the NSA and computer surviellance we've created a 'turn-key tyranny'. And people ha…
> police hacking of journalists and protestors Because they are the real terrorists. I seriously think they had dissidents in mind when pushing for all those "anti-terror" surveillance laws.
If this was illegal surveillance, then obviously it wasn't within the scope of what's allowed by said anti-terror laws. This doesn't add up for me yet, because I don't understand what the supposed motive is. Do the police have much interest in journalists accounts? I mean really, what's the thinking here? Are London police ignoring murders of journalists? The UK is hardly an autocracy. Frankly we should wait to see w…
Not only autocracies do this kind of evil. Especially now that the (deeps state) ruling class consists mainly of capitalist, you can see that the police targeting dissidents fits a clear motive.