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

Why MPs have two mobile phones

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#11

Post by dazc »

lordnacho wrote: post #2

The real problem is that not everyone gets the PM's number. If you have it, you have a chance to get special treatment like Greensill attempted. A select few people have the ear of government and will sell it, as demonstrated by the former PM. I'm not sure we can continue like this, it's possible that we just need total openness, even if it makes the PM's private life a bit weird. Just complete pants down government,…

Did the Guardian have special access to Tony Blair? But that's OK because only the descruction of the middle east was at stake.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#12

Post by shoto_io »

eplanit wrote: post #4
spaceribs wrote: post #3

> They can also stop screenshots being taken of exchanges if they are using an Android phone. Does anyone else feel infuriated that apps can restrict screenshots from occurring? I can use an external camera if I really wanted to save a copy of a communication, or use a personal computer with no such limitations. Why would android even allow such restrictions to be enabled in the first place?

Because mobile computers are the antithesis of personal computers -- you don't get to really own and control the very expensive device you bought. That people accepted this is an example of how truly powerless (or just ignorant) consumers are.

The truth is: No one cares. I mean, very few people really care.

Mobile phones have been able to bring computation to the masses, including poor countries. PCs were a luxury item even in the Western World.

Accessibility and standardization have been the driver of this change, not customization.

After all, mobile phones are now sort of a mass product like TVs back then. No one really "owned" a TV either.

You can call these masses ignorant, but I think most just want to live a good life with a handy tool that works.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#14

Post by II2II »

lordnacho wrote: post #2

The real problem is that not everyone gets the PM's number. If you have it, you have a chance to get special treatment like Greensill attempted. A select few people have the ear of government and will sell it, as demonstrated by the former PM. I'm not sure we can continue like this, it's possible that we just need total openness, even if it makes the PM's private life a bit weird. Just complete pants down government,…

There is a big difference between privacy in the PM's life and transparency in government. Note that I'm saying privacy here, not secrecy. The difference may be subtle to most people, but the difference is enough to matter.

I would argue that politics is enough of a spectacle to discourage most people from pursuing office. Suggesting that everything is visible to everyone would discourage all but the most special breed of narcissist from pursing office. While that degree of transparency may catch transgressions that the public has a legitimate right to know, it would also expose the deeply personal and leave it open to interpretation. Put in other terms: would you want the public to judge you from your apparent emotional response to a conversation with an ailing family member?

There comes a point where we have to trust our leaders judgment or, if their judgment is faulty, find other means of pursuing it.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#15

Post by Arnt »

eplanit wrote: post #4
spaceribs wrote: post #3

> They can also stop screenshots being taken of exchanges if they are using an Android phone. Does anyone else feel infuriated that apps can restrict screenshots from occurring? I can use an external camera if I really wanted to save a copy of a communication, or use a personal computer with no such limitations. Why would android even allow such restrictions to be enabled in the first place?

Because mobile computers are the antithesis of personal computers -- you don't get to really own and control the very expensive device you bought. That people accepted this is an example of how truly powerless (or just ignorant) consumers are.

Well, who's "you"?

20-25 years ago, "you" (whoever was able to run software, as well as whoever had momentary physical access) got to really control the expensive device "you" (the buyer) bought. That wasn't so great for the buyer, and it would have been even worse now. That naïve security model would not do well against today's sophisticated threats.

IMO, the android/iphone state is a clear improvement, and we're not going to get another improvement until the people who dislike the current state stop confusing "you" and "you". Only then will we get enough clear thinking on the subject to work out another improvement.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#16

Post by frosted-flakes »

Arnt wrote: post #15
eplanit wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because mobile computers are the antithesis of personal computers -- you don't get to really own and control the very expensive device you bought. That people accepted this is an example of how truly powerless (or just ignorant) consumers are.

Well, who's "you"? 20-25 years ago, "you" (whoever was able to run software, as well as whoever had momentary physical access) got to really control the expensive device "you" (the buyer) bought. That wasn't so great for the buyer, and it would have been even worse now. That naïve security model would not do well against today's sophisticated threats. IMO, the android/iphone state is a clear improvement, and we're no…

What does that have to do with restricting the use of screenshots?

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#17

Post by Arnt »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #16
Arnt wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, who's "you"? 20-25 years ago, "you" (whoever was able to run software, as well as whoever had momentary physical access) got to really control the expensive device "you" (the buyer) bought. That wasn't so great for the buyer, and it would have been even worse now. That naïve security model would not do well against today's sophisticated threats. IMO, the android/iphone state is a clear improvement, and we're no…

What does that have to do with restricting the use of screenshots?

Screenshots are made by performing an API call, or a sequence of call. Calls to that API are subject to a security model that's intended to protect the device's owner (or ordinary user) from malevolent programs or momentary users.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#18

Post by MikeUt »

shoto_io wrote: post #12
eplanit wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because mobile computers are the antithesis of personal computers -- you don't get to really own and control the very expensive device you bought. That people accepted this is an example of how truly powerless (or just ignorant) consumers are.

The truth is: No one cares. I mean, very few people really care. Mobile phones have been able to bring computation to the masses, including poor countries. PCs were a luxury item even in the Western World. Accessibility and standardization have been the driver of this change, not customization. After all, mobile phones are now sort of a mass product like TVs back then. No one really "owned" a TV either. You can call…

No one cares, until they do, and it's too late. A chain does not stop being a chain just because your master hasn't yanked it yet.

Apple pulls police-tracking app used by Hong Kong protesters after consulting authorities - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/apple-pulls-police-tracki...

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#19

Post by woleium »

motohagiography wrote: post #5

There is definitely an aversion to email because it creates a paper trail. Messenger apps can be organized privately and not be subject to information requests. Current surveillance capitalism tech could easily keep politicians and governments 100% accountable if we turned it on them. If you live in an outwardly democratic country with strong rules about public service transparency and individual citizen privacy, but…

They learn much faster than chimps with cutlery though.

Re: Why MPs have two mobile phones

#20

Post by t0mas88 »

bmsleight_ wrote: post #13

I am not alone by having two phones. One personnel and one work. Knowing that the work phone I do not the phone or the data or anything. I also guard my own phone number like a hawk.

We offer the choice to all employees, either get a company phone which we pay for or a reimbursement for the costs of using your private phone plan for work if you only want to carry one phone. We pay $ 60 / month + whatever costs you make for travel or international calling in that case.

Out of ~150 people I think 140+ choose to use their private phone for work. We had expected that to be very different.

Post reply on HN