LulzSec hacks NHS. • Hacker News Board

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#41

Post by bh42222 » Fri, Jun 10, 2011, 3:09 PM UTC

dsplittgerber wrote: post #11

Anonymous is the best that could ever happen for proponents of a crackdown on freedom (through/via/on the internet). No one knows who's behind it, so no one will stand up for them, no one will complain if they get harassed and all the blaim for everything that goes wrong in the future goes to Anon/hackers. It's the perfect scapegoat for incompetence.

Oh please, like proponents of a crackdown on freedom need any excuses.

Or like "save the children" isn't the political slogan which always has been, and always will be, used to justify anything.

I am not sure if LuLzSec is good or bad, or a wash, in terms of how politician will use them. It does not really matter, politicians will use anything and nothing to get what they want.

But this BBC coverage is surprisingly fair. And if coverage like this becomes the norm, who knows LulzSec might actually be good for the public image of what anonymous hackers on the internet are.

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#42

Post by robin_reala » Fri, Jun 10, 2011, 3:29 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #37

arethuza wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a salary cap for public sector employees might be another way of doing things - say the same level as the PM (£140K or so).

A more interesting scenario would be to cap all MP's pay, incl. the PM's, at the national average wage.

Make it the median wage rather than the average one and I’d agree with you.

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#43

Post by ern » Fri, Jun 10, 2011, 4:11 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #37

arethuza wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a salary cap for public sector employees might be another way of doing things - say the same level as the PM (£140K or so).

A more interesting scenario would be to cap all MP's pay, incl. the PM's, at the national average wage.

All that power and responsibility, and not being compensated for it could be dangerous. Wouldn't it deter anyone who wasn't wealthy from office, and/or make them vulnerable to corruption?

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#44

Post by tkahn6 » Fri, Jun 10, 2011, 6:11 PM UTC

tkahn6 wrote: post #35

jbooth wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it really matter who the scapegoat is? At all? A few short years ago we had scary arab terrorists, I think they're still a bigger scapegoat than anon. Anonymous doesn't change anything as far as excuses. If they're looking for an excuse to crack down, they can always make up an Emmanuel Goldstein.

> A few short years ago we had scary arab terrorists, I think they're still a bigger scapegoat than anon. Both Anon and arab terrorists have carried out numerous attacks...

^ This is a statement of fact and yet I am being heavily downvoted. Just because the threat is overblown, does not mean it's not a real threat.

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#45

Post by gaius » Sat, Jun 11, 2011, 12:54 PM UTC

ern wrote: post #43

gaius wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A more interesting scenario would be to cap all MP's pay, incl. the PM's, at the national average wage.

All that power and responsibility, and not being compensated for it could be dangerous. Wouldn't it deter anyone who wasn't wealthy from office, and/or make them vulnerable to corruption?

Serving as an MP is a privilege, not a normal job.

Re: LulzSec hacks NHS.

#46

Post by Nat0 » Sat, Jun 11, 2011, 7:44 PM UTC

mrvc wrote: post #17

Nat0 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work at a company that implements medical IT solutions for hospitals and anything with the NHS takes 3-5 times longer than in the US and other parts of Europe.

How come? What's causing it?

I am not sure that I can fully answer what the root cause is, but most of the delays are due to the various levels of approval that take forever. In addition, they are very concerned with patient information security, and have various process to work through in regards to that.