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

UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

private-eye.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 123 posts

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#41

Post by mellosouls »

miki123211 wrote: post #22
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private Eye avoided the paywall problem by not putting itself online at all, it only publishes selected articles online to leave you hungry for the rest :)

It also avoided becoming accessible to the blind and other parts of the population who cannot read print.

This is a good point, accessibility is very important and it's a shame you've been downvoted.

Private Eye is available in audio form through the RNIB, though it may just be a digest version as it looks like it's part of a weekly compilation from various publications.

https://www.rnib.org.uk/daisy-magazines

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#42

Post by bencollier49 »

Sevaris wrote: post #5
bencollier49 wrote: post #4

I think they ought to legislate this into normality. The alternative is to make it mandatory to note all conversations with colleagues for the public record, however trivial, which is obviously absurd. An IM conversation is a personal conversation, treating it any other way will stifle the effective function of government.

It's not a personal conversation if you're working for the government and talking about topics that pertain to government functions. You have no right to privacy in the same way that your average citizen (should) be when your decisions affect the lives of millions. There needs to be a paper trail or power becomes even more opaque than it already is and all accountability goes out the window. There can be no democracy…

Okay, so you believe that all conversations between lawmakers of any sort ought to be recorded?

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#43

Post by iguy »

Sevaris wrote: post #5
bencollier49 wrote: post #4

I think they ought to legislate this into normality. The alternative is to make it mandatory to note all conversations with colleagues for the public record, however trivial, which is obviously absurd. An IM conversation is a personal conversation, treating it any other way will stifle the effective function of government.

It's not a personal conversation if you're working for the government and talking about topics that pertain to government functions. You have no right to privacy in the same way that your average citizen (should) be when your decisions affect the lives of millions. There needs to be a paper trail or power becomes even more opaque than it already is and all accountability goes out the window. There can be no democracy…

We don't only want accountability, we also want good decisions, and good advice, even on delicate topics. IMO this is quite a difficult topic.

Suppose you are concerned that some variants of a policy you're thinking about may be legal or illegal. There is a pretty large gray area. You could corner the relevant legal mind after lunch, and ask his opinion. Then there is no recording, only your memory.

Or you could email him, and get a more considered opinion. This is likely to lead to better policies. But perhaps some of the options you're considering are a bit controversial, and stating bluntly what you really mean (and what you are concerned about) is risky if your email may be subject to a FOI request. So perhaps you re-write it very carefully avoiding the worst options, or perhaps you run it past the PR people before emailing, or perhaps you give up and ask in the pub instead. These all seem like worse outcomes, and ones we should be careful not to encourage.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#44

Post by bencollier49 »

fit2rule wrote: post #19
bencollier49 wrote: post #4

I think they ought to legislate this into normality. The alternative is to make it mandatory to note all conversations with colleagues for the public record, however trivial, which is obviously absurd. An IM conversation is a personal conversation, treating it any other way will stifle the effective function of government.

I disagree entirely. Government must be conducted openly and with critical review by the people being governed, always. All government business should be logged and available for audit for years after the fact. Otherwise, what we get is a totalitarian class society divided between 'those that know the secrets' and 'those that do not'.

So all conversations between politicians ought to be recorded. What about all conversation between government employees?

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#46

Post by mellosouls »

Tangentially, the UK government digital service (and made available to the wider civil service) uses the free tier version of Slack which retains but disallows access to historic messages.

FOI in this case (in lieu of anybody coughing up the licences) relies on regular manual exports and their secure archiving.

This isn't afaik an attempt to avoid accountability (in fact it's the opposite), just a good faith use of free software to enable cross department communication in the absence of a service from a high level mandated corporate partner.

https://www.computerweekly.com/news/450423927/ICO-highlights...

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#47

Post by pjc50 »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #37
dan-robertson wrote: post #17

I’m in two minds about this. I think it’s pretty sleazy to be using signal to evade record keeping requirements. I also think it’s important to have transparency into things governments do. But I also worry that such requirements can lead to worse results. Generally in a well run organisation, you want people to be able to speak their mind and disagree about things, but if the organisation makes a bad decision and th…

More generally: anything that is made public, will be politicised. I agree that it's a fair concern. Another recent example: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jul/07/foreign-off...

The logical conclusion of that is secret government - perfectly "apolitical", but impossible to question or participate in.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#48

Post by waterhouse »

Jestar342 wrote: post #34
dan-robertson wrote: post #17

I’m in two minds about this. I think it’s pretty sleazy to be using signal to evade record keeping requirements. I also think it’s important to have transparency into things governments do. But I also worry that such requirements can lead to worse results. Generally in a well run organisation, you want people to be able to speak their mind and disagree about things, but if the organisation makes a bad decision and th…

> For an arbitrary example, look at the Boeing 737 max. There were some internal emails claiming that the system which turned out not to be safe wasn’t safe (the problem with these was probably that they didn’t seem to make their way up to anyone who could change the decision), and probably the fallout from them will be worse than if there were no such emails and Boeing just appeared to not have considered the possib…

"Should" for us, yes. But consider the perspective of the company—and specifically its lawyers; their takeaway may be "This stuff being in writing made things worse in court, therefore we'll instruct our employees not to put this stuff in writing."

Though I would guess that having an explicit policy of "don't write down any safety concerns" would do badly in court as well. I suspect any real such policy would have to be unwritten, or a not-very-explicit side effect of something that seemed relatively benign.

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#49

Post by kees99 »

mellosouls wrote: post #46

Tangentially, the UK government digital service (and made available to the wider civil service) uses the free tier version of Slack which retains but disallows access to historic messages. FOI in this case (in lieu of anybody coughing up the licences) relies on regular manual exports and their secure archiving. This isn't afaik an attempt to avoid accountability (in fact it's the opposite), just a good faith use of f…

> Slack [...] just a good faith use of free software [...]

Since when is Slack free software?

Re: UK government MPs are using Signal’s automatic deletion feature

#50

Post by ThePowerOfFuet »

kees99 wrote: post #49
mellosouls wrote: post #46

Tangentially, the UK government digital service (and made available to the wider civil service) uses the free tier version of Slack which retains but disallows access to historic messages. FOI in this case (in lieu of anybody coughing up the licences) relies on regular manual exports and their secure archiving. This isn't afaik an attempt to avoid accountability (in fact it's the opposite), just a good faith use of f…

> Slack [...] just a good faith use of free software [...] Since when is Slack free software?

It sounds like you are conflating free software and Free software.
Post reply on HN