Summer break. The “think of the children” and security will be back shortly in a tweaked version
UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
261–270 of 320 posts
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a subscriber and I'd say it is small-c conservative (which I'm not really, I just appreciate that it's relatively open about its biases and enjoy the quality of writing), but it isn't aligned with the Conservative Party, which has become almost entirely unmoored from reality.
Usually I would tend to agree that the articles are well written and well researched, however after reading this steaming pile of surface level dross on a subject I have technical knowledge of, I might be less trusting of their editorial slant and quality of journalism in future.
This is called Knolls Law of Media Accuracy:
“everything you read in the newspapers is absolutely true, except for the rare story of which you happen to have firsthand knowledge”
Edit: actually I was thinking of the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect. They both work though.
Both discussed in this thread:
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#263I don't really like the headline, it makes it sound negative. Big Tech tends to have negative connotations, nowadays. So, here the FT is trying to say that a democratically elected government is living in fear of private firms. While it may be true that our government are now living in fear of not just Big Tech but all types of Big whatever, the fight was way beyond just big tech. Sure Big Tech helped but it still is…
Similar story (no pun intended) in The Guardian [1]:
> UK ministers seek to allay WhatsApp and Signal concerns in encryption row
Nothing to see here folks, just a minor dispute between the Gov and two companies ...
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/sep/06/whatsapp-signa...
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
What has the UK government done to protect children recently? In the last decade, say.
This question is really too broad to answer. What sort of thing are you looking for? For a general overview of the whole system, this strategy is the best place to start. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
Thanks. I guess I meant either new primary legislation that improves something tangible, but more importantly, provided more resource.
As far as I can see, it's still funded from local authority budgets.
I worked briefly in children's homes a long time ago. Kids were placed in assessment centers where they were supposed to be evaluated and sent on to an appropriate home. But there were no places for them, and they stayed in this temporary place for years.
Not sure if much has improved in the last decade.
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not completely untrue, there was a whole hoo-hah over getting Boris Johnsons WhatsApp messages. They use it to get around the requirement that official communications be logged and available for later scrutiny, much like a bank has to retain communications in case of an audit.
Also worth a note that Boris Johnson (former prime minister for those far from the UK) himself said he was happy to share all those WhatsApp messages on his phone with the investigation team, and it was a government department that stepped in to refuse access to those messages, repeatedly. They considered the WhatsApp messages too sensitive for an official investigation to read.
He wanted to share messages from mid 2021 onwards, not covering the onset of covid.
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think its increasingly true of several countries, not just the UK. Any State with strong Freedom of Information legislation not surprisingly creates incentives for certain political operatives to want to avoid exposure by use of unofficial channels further out of reach of FoI - private WhatsApp groups etc etc. I don't see this as any different than the instances of private email service mischief that has occurred i…
I think that if you hold a position in the government, all of your communication (including private email, chats, etc) should be subject to public scrutiny. A government official should be defined not as someone who is holding power, but as an elected representative of the people.
"should" being the operative word here.
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#267Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think so. When you text somebody it's assumed it's SMS, but if your friendship circle is on Android then in actual fact it's Google Messages. All the same benefits: end-to-end encryption and data mining.
No. I have lived in the UK for 35 years and I didn't even know Google Messages existed until you mentioned it. WhatsApp is the default and I would only use SMS in the rare case that someone did not use WhatsApp. There is no automatic integration on Android phones between SMS and another network the way iMessage is automatic.
Germany chiming in to agree.
WhatsApp is the default
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#269I don't really like the headline, it makes it sound negative. Big Tech tends to have negative connotations, nowadays. So, here the FT is trying to say that a democratically elected government is living in fear of private firms. While it may be true that our government are now living in fear of not just Big Tech but all types of Big whatever, the fight was way beyond just big tech. Sure Big Tech helped but it still is…
You're making it sound as if the headline was poorly written, perhaps by accident or by a poor writer. I can assure you that isn't the case. Whoever wrote that headline is a copywriting genius. The headline conveys almost the exact opposite of what really happened, without being factually wrong. That doesn't happen by accident.
Can you give an example of what you think a better headline would be in this case?
Re: UK pulls back from clash with Big Tech over private messaging
#270The real question is will Signal, WhatsApp, Apples, etc stick to their principals and withdraw UK service if the Bill passes in its current form? Or will they decide to believe that the powers will not be used, and keep their service in operation?
Can you elaborate? The article is paywalled. In what sense did they “back down” if not by backing down from the legislation that would violate privacy?