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

Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

techradar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 299 posts

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#111

Post by chii »

flowerthoughts wrote: post #17

> He warns that developers of apps like Signal and WhatsApp could technically fall within the legal definition of "hostile activity" simply because their technology "make[s] it more difficult for UK security and intelligence agencies to monitor communications. Sounds like Let's Encrypt would also fall under that. This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the stree…

> I see why governments think they are doing this to protect the people.

they're not doing this to protect people, they're doing this to ensure there cannot be rebellion against unpopular policies. Organization is harder if all communications is monitored.

But this is how gov't get to be kept in check - the risk of "rebellion". If this risk is removed, you get authoritarian states - see north korea.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#112

Post by AlexandrB »

eterm wrote: post #50
omnicognate wrote: post #23

This is a terrible headline, despite being the original. The "watchdog" is a KC (senior barrister) officially appointed to review the legislation. He's warning that this could be considered hostile activity under the act, which would be a bad thing . In other words, he's criticising the act for being overly broad, a view that most on HN agree with, and his criticisms of it presumably carry some weight, given his offi…

Once again, the transparency we do have in the UK is weaponised against it. You see this with "OMG knife-crime is out of control in London" type stories that the US love to run. It's because we were : 1. a decade or more ahead of the rest of the world in actually collecting knife-crime stats 2. Include in those stats people who were simply carrying the kind of knife that wouldn't even get you noticed elsewhere, let a…

> The actual rate of stabbings per capita is higher in the USA than the UK.

This fact seems to have no impact on UK politicians who now want to try to ban knives with pointy tips: https://theconversation.com/why-stopping-knife-crime-needs-t...

In general, this approach to crime is ridiculous and has no rational end-point.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#113

Post by dbdr »

miroljub wrote: post #58
Kbelicius wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't understand why you got heavily downvoted. Because his post contributes nothing to the discussion. > Yes, there are governments that are worse than European, but the decline of European government is the fastest. What makes it the fastest? > You may be surprised that the UK is the world leader in the number of people arrested because of internet posts. And that Germany, which is still way behind the UK, has…

The UK arrests 12k people per year for social media posts, using vague laws to undermine free speech. Here's the citation from the EU parliament itself [1], since I doubt you'd believe non-government sources. > That is because Germany and UK are beacons of democracy when compared to the countries that you listed. Read my comment again. The fact that the UK and Germany are in some aspects still better than the ones I…

> The UK arrests 12k people per year for social media posts, using vague laws to undermine free speech.

A spokesperson for Leicestershire police clarified that offences under section 127 and section 1 can include any form of communication and may also be “serious domestic abuse-related crimes”. [1]

It seems misleading to count arrests related to domestic abuse as "anti-free speech".

[1]: https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/select-communications-off...

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#115

Post by jokoon »

If a government is legitimately elected, and respects due process, I don't see why people would want to hide from the government.

There are very few situations where a journalist would need to hide himself from a legitimate government who respects due process.

With the Trump administration, in China, Russia, yes of course. Those apps do matter. Conventional apps are probably giving data to abusive governments if their laws require it.

With criminals using those apps to not get caught in those legitimate due process countries, I don't really know if those apps are worth using it they help criminals.

I agree that I don't want to give my data to big companies or for ads.

But I trust a legitimate government and due process.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#116

Post by stuaxo »

lordfarquad wrote: post #93

The authorities here (UK resident) are already pushing hard for as much authoritarianism as they can get. They are also increasing prison capacity and the two tier system is a genuine thing with public services collapsing. Police militarization, drones, army unit investigating private civilians, digital powers widening... I am more scared of the government than I am of local paramilitary forces at this point. It may…

The two tier bit is Palastine action people being in prison for up to two years before getting tried, being on hunger strike without much reporting in the press.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#117

Post by callamdelaney »

eterm wrote: post #50
omnicognate wrote: post #23

This is a terrible headline, despite being the original. The "watchdog" is a KC (senior barrister) officially appointed to review the legislation. He's warning that this could be considered hostile activity under the act, which would be a bad thing . In other words, he's criticising the act for being overly broad, a view that most on HN agree with, and his criticisms of it presumably carry some weight, given his offi…

Once again, the transparency we do have in the UK is weaponised against it. You see this with "OMG knife-crime is out of control in London" type stories that the US love to run. It's because we were : 1. a decade or more ahead of the rest of the world in actually collecting knife-crime stats 2. Include in those stats people who were simply carrying the kind of knife that wouldn't even get you noticed elsewhere, let a…

Per capita is a pretty useless stat. I'm much more interested in why there are particular cities where being stabbed is much more likely than in my rural village, per capita.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#118

Post by simianparrot »

flowerthoughts wrote: post #17

> He warns that developers of apps like Signal and WhatsApp could technically fall within the legal definition of "hostile activity" simply because their technology "make[s] it more difficult for UK security and intelligence agencies to monitor communications. Sounds like Let's Encrypt would also fall under that. This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the stree…

They can’t even prosecute grooming gangs, the pretence it’s about “the children” rings completely hollow.

The UK is a failing nation run by pedophile apologist imbeciles. This is just desperate flailing to hold onto power by any means.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#119

Post by blitzar »

dathinab wrote: post #101
mosura wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the streets they walk on. That would be against everything european governments stand for.

this is simply not true it was the EU which had stopped many similar unhinged attempts from the UK when the UK was still a member similar it had been the EU which had shut down various other surveillance nonsense of the EU you are basically pretending the EU is a person with one uniform opinion and goals but it's like the opposite of it, like in a lot of way it's a union of states, each having a vastly different goal…

> blaming "the EU" instead of blaming your own elected leaders

The elected leaders like to blame the EU (or for those without an EU - any external body or even the mythical deep state) for everything adverse. The reality is these "failures" they blame on someone else are generally in alignment with their own policies goals and objectives.

Re: Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

#120

Post by 9dev »

chii wrote: post #111
flowerthoughts wrote: post #17

> He warns that developers of apps like Signal and WhatsApp could technically fall within the legal definition of "hostile activity" simply because their technology "make[s] it more difficult for UK security and intelligence agencies to monitor communications. Sounds like Let's Encrypt would also fall under that. This has got to stop. If you want to stop criminals, then focus on their illegal activites, not the stree…

> I see why governments think they are doing this to protect the people. they're not doing this to protect people, they're doing this to ensure there cannot be rebellion against unpopular policies. Organization is harder if all communications is monitored. But this is how gov't get to be kept in check - the risk of "rebellion". If this risk is removed, you get authoritarian states - see north korea.

I know its satisfying to think of the government as some singular nefarious entity, but the reality is far worse: There is no one in charge. It’s chaos all the way down.
Post reply on HN