Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yikes! Historically, revolutions are bloody and generally do not end well. Cultural revolutions less so. Having said that, I would not mind seeing King Charles abdicate; England, Wales, Scotland, N-Ireland become proper republics; help the remnants of upper class strongholds adapt to reality, if that's what you mean. :-)
> Yikes! Historically, revolutions are bloody and generally do not end well. Cultural revolutions less so. I specifically said cultural revolution because I tried to imply a non-violent revolution. Not all revolutions are violent. Think technological revolution.
UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
61–70 of 160 posts
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they are trying to get the law passed, despite the obvious objection that message filtering is impossible, by saying "we know it's impossible but we would like to have the legal right to do it in case it becomes possible in the future"?
>they are trying to get the law passed they did pass the law through the lower house. the upper house can demand amendments and stall things a bit, but it can also just be completely ignored given enough time. > despite the obvious objection that message filtering is impossible it's not impossible, it's just a horrificly bad idea, and why would being impossible affect if it gets passed or not? > by saying "we know it…
If I was giving them the benefit of the doubt I would say they are trying to avoid losing face.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bigger picture of why UK is hell bent on surveilling their citizens, communities is that the number one problem is that governments are losing control over society. Off course the whole point of democracy is that governments should fear their citizens, rather than vice versa.
I try to take a charitable, open-minded position in this. Two of us in the cybershow are parents. Taking on analysis of this bill was a tough decision, but something we felt obliged and qualified to do as parents and security experts. There are obviously grave harms around digital technology, plus its obvious myriad benefits. Covert communications enabling criminal and anti-social activity is just one small part. Our…
Five thousand years of recorded human history should serve as adequate evidence against making this assumption. And we all know that even if the current government is sincerely invested in doing its job in good faith, any powers that are given to the current government can and will be abused by a future government that may be invested in doing something else.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
The bigger picture of why UK is hell bent on surveilling their citizens, communities is that the number one problem is that governments are losing control over society. Off course the whole point of democracy is that governments should fear their citizens, rather than vice versa.
> the whole point of democracy is that governments should fear their citizens, rather than vice versa. I think that's more an optimistic interpretation of democracy. After all, it's the government that gets to decide who is a citizen, and who has the franchise. Historically the US said that African Americans were not citizens, within the meaning of the Constitution. In 1858 your statement might be 100% true about the…
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yikes! Historically, revolutions are bloody and generally do not end well. Cultural revolutions less so. I specifically said cultural revolution because I tried to imply a non-violent revolution. Not all revolutions are violent. Think technological revolution.
Unfortunately the usual referent of "cultural revolution" is the Maoist one which was extremely violent. You could try referencing the colour revolutions or the Portuguese "carnation revolution" maybe.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
>they are trying to get the law passed they did pass the law through the lower house. the upper house can demand amendments and stall things a bit, but it can also just be completely ignored given enough time. > despite the obvious objection that message filtering is impossible it's not impossible, it's just a horrificly bad idea, and why would being impossible affect if it gets passed or not? > by saying "we know it…
>lots of governments pass lots of laws and regulations and are untruthful about what they'll do later. If I was giving them the benefit of the doubt I would say they are trying to avoid losing face.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
So they are trying to get the law passed, despite the obvious objection that message filtering is impossible, by saying "we know it's impossible but we would like to have the legal right to do it in case it becomes possible in the future"?
>they are trying to get the law passed they did pass the law through the lower house. the upper house can demand amendments and stall things a bit, but it can also just be completely ignored given enough time. > despite the obvious objection that message filtering is impossible it's not impossible, it's just a horrificly bad idea, and why would being impossible affect if it gets passed or not? > by saying "we know it…
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#68The reporting on this is horrific, including by the businesses involved. Absolutely nothing legally was changed. The government put out a press release saying some worthless crap, that's the entire thing that happened. edit: sorry, not a press release, sent a minion to read out a non-binding statement, who then confirmed the the law was not actually changed at all: https://www.reuters.com/technology/uk-minister-says-…
Politics ain't tech - a non-binding agreement that signals "we're not going to do this, at least for the next 3-5 years" is a win in politics.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#69I've read six of these "Oh no we didn't back down" stories this morning. What worries me is the appearance of wishful thinking around the language of "technically feasible". Follow this road far enough and we'll have government ministers with marketing credentials defining what is "technically feasible", instead of scientists. https://cybershow.uk #016 | S2 | Special | UK Online Safety Bill Published on Friday 01st S…
The bigger picture of why UK is hell bent on surveilling their citizens, communities is that the number one problem is that governments are losing control over society. Off course the whole point of democracy is that governments should fear their citizens, rather than vice versa.
I suspect theres a bunch of things going on.
They've come down so hard on recent protest movements like Just Stop Oil, Insulate Britain, etc because as you say they feel like they've lost authority and they want it back. National-scale surveillance is a way to remind everyone who really runs the country, and who just does as they're told. The uk has almost always been governed by essentially the same elite group, and they have a lot of experience of keeping it that way. Not by Spectre-style secret meetings, just by convergent overlapping objectives.
I think part of their fear comes from seeing how popular devolution has been in the UK. And partly how successful the EU has become, hence brexit. Theres also a part of the tory party that wants to nope out of the ECHR jurisdiction, and this kind of legislation potentially sets-up a fight with the court that could be used as a pretext for withdrawal. Some of them undoubtedly also simply see the potential to make some money from a surveylance society.
I also suspect they've finally woken up to the climate-related crisies that are now just down the road and they've decided that a more authoritarian society is the only way to keep their position at the top.
> Off course the whole point of democracy is that governments should fear their citizens, rather than vice versa.
Err... nope. Can't build stable societies on fear. The "whole point of democracy" is how to negociate the divergent desires and opinions of the nation's citizens.
Re: UK drops 'spy clause' for scanning encrypted messages, admits not 'feasible'
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it’s very much this latter. The multiplying force of technology has made it extremely difficult to overthrow a government by force. I do not think it is possible in the West. Governments have never had so much control over money and information. They’re not losing control, they just keep tightening their grip. I don’t know if this Democratic experiment can survive in that environment. I certainly hope it does…
> Governments have never had so much control over money and information. They’re not losing control, they just keep tightening their grip. Well - East Germany must've had worse, surely? All money controlled by the state and state-sponsored spying?