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

UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

reclaimthenet.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 158 posts

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#91

Post by itronitron »

IshKebab wrote: post #74
brnt wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CCTV capital of the world for a decade or two was an indication perhaps.

Anyone that brings up this factoid instantly gives away the true depth of their knowledge. The US and China have over twice as many CCTV cameras per person than the UK does. https://www.precisesecurity.com/articles/top-10-countries-by...

It would be interesting to do some sort of analysis based on geography and population density. If someone travels 40 kilometers per day as part of their usual routine then more CCTV cameras will be needed to record their activities. Both the US and China are significantly larger than the UK.

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#92

Post by account-5 »

itronitron wrote: post #82
kypro wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be more specific about what I suspect the actual intentions are behind the online safety bill. A few months back the UK charged five retired police officers with hate crimes because they had a private WhatsApp group in which the police found content racist[1] comments about the Duchess of Sussex (Meghan Markle). In the UK it is illegal to say something online that could be considered hateful. But the issue is th…

Wow, I didn't realize just how messed up the UK is. Whatever happened to the childhood axiom, sticks and stones can break my bones but words will never hurt me ?

That stopped when speech people didn't like became "violence". Unfortunately a lot of this is imported from America.

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#93

Post by [deleted] »

kypro wrote: post #61

> The scope and depth of this surveillance has led to growing skepticism about the Department’s priorities and resource allocation. Lol. That about sums it up. Whenever a dystopian UK government surveillance thread makes it to the front page of HN I generally try to remind people of two things: 1. This will not make headlines in the UK. 2. People in the UK do not care about privacy. The fact that the person they spok…

[deleted]

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#95

Post by adhesive_wombat »

kypro wrote: post #61

> The scope and depth of this surveillance has led to growing skepticism about the Department’s priorities and resource allocation. Lol. That about sums it up. Whenever a dystopian UK government surveillance thread makes it to the front page of HN I generally try to remind people of two things: 1. This will not make headlines in the UK. 2. People in the UK do not care about privacy. The fact that the person they spok…

It will make headlines, in Private Eye. Which means it'll be forgotten in days because there's no searchable archive of them unless you are or know a hoarder with a spare few feet of shelf space or find and travel to a library with a back archive longer then a few months.

Of all the publications with the power to string together a long-term narrative account of local and national government malfeasance, it's the one the most needs a historical index and least has one.

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#96

Post by [deleted] »

happytiger wrote: post #8

Remember this is “keeping files on posts that criticise education policies” — tracking political dissenters who don’t like the government’s policies but have done nothing wrong or illegal. While we’re off focusing on encryption debates and the online safety bill, the UK government isn’t waiting around. Just what is “accredited technology”? As defined in that bill, and how much does encryption play a role when monitor…

[deleted]

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#97

Post by [deleted] »

gustavus wrote: post #10

Good evening, London. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of you, appreciate the comforts of everyday routine, the security of the familiar, the tranquillity of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of commemoration, whereby those important events of the past, usually associated with someone's death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, are celebrated with…

[deleted]

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#98

Post by graemep »

some_random wrote: post #63

I remember getting in arguments like a decade ago with British people who insisted that their lack of actual rights didn't matter and it was actually better to have privileges bestowed upon them by decree of their Queen as chosen by God. I wonder if any of them think differently now.

I have never heard any British person say anything remotely like that.

I have not heard any British person say the Queen was chosen by God.

I THINK people may have been talking about the value (or not) of written constitutional guarantees.

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#99

Post by bluefirebrand »

ryandrake wrote: post #80
none_to_remain wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it counts as surveillance when it's published material, but surveillance of public material does not seem so troublesome to me. For ex. if these teachers had instead published their complaints in old-fashioned letters-to-the-editor in print newspapers, I don't think anyone would be complaining that the government reads the newspapers. You could still complain about the chilling of dissent and the waste of res…

But, posting publicly to social media is almost exactly like a letter to the editor. You send your message to a company, the company reviews it, and then usually publishes it publicly for all to see. I would not feel "chilled" if someone (an employer, government, or whoever) trawled through my HN posts and made some kind of judgment or took action over what I post. I would expect it. It's public after all. I certainl…

> I certainly moderate what I say here knowing this (maybe that's the chilling effect you mention?)

Yeah that is the chilling effect.

Yes, it's likely there are some things that are better to be "chilled". For instance if you were advocating for violence against public figures.

But imagine the day your credit rating gets dinged because you post online that you disagree with some new tax reform bill being proposed. This happens because the agency managing your credit score is also lobbying for this tax reform.

Or you criticize a government official online and the police show up at your door, which is something that absolutely has happened throughout history.

The fact they are watching your social media isn't the problem. It's how they can (and eventually probably will) abuse that surveillance. Or whoever replaces them next time there is an election.

Re: UK government surveilling social media of teaching assistants

#100

Post by mecha_ghidorah »

ryandrake wrote: post #80
none_to_remain wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it counts as surveillance when it's published material, but surveillance of public material does not seem so troublesome to me. For ex. if these teachers had instead published their complaints in old-fashioned letters-to-the-editor in print newspapers, I don't think anyone would be complaining that the government reads the newspapers. You could still complain about the chilling of dissent and the waste of res…

But, posting publicly to social media is almost exactly like a letter to the editor. You send your message to a company, the company reviews it, and then usually publishes it publicly for all to see. I would not feel "chilled" if someone (an employer, government, or whoever) trawled through my HN posts and made some kind of judgment or took action over what I post. I would expect it. It's public after all. I certainl…

I'd definitely feel chilled, because what I post here isn't under my meatspace identity. I don't think they should have a right to pass judgement over something I'm doing under a pseudonym that can't be attached to me easily
Post reply on HN