I am not convinced they do, they keep voting to give away their privacy every year.
First past the post isn't a genuine democracy.
What is?
Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
171–180 of 292 posts
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
>kids are too young to vote I said 16 yo should've had a Brexit vote/say because, especially in this case, it's the kids that reap the choices made. More Generally 16 year olds are old enough to take part in democracy vote-wise, and maybe in all votes too. The point being - look at the short term, actually make that 'not long term', policies being made now by us olds, they don't favor young people, on the whole - or…
I mean, so do the 14 years olds and 10 year olds, and newborns, and the ideas still separated, because future mommy and daddy didn't have sex yet. But as a society, we've decided that 16 year olds are too young to do many proper things, be it buy alcohol in most countries, drive a car in many, open a bank account, or legally jerk off to porn. They don't watch the news, they have no recollection of previous government…
Ideally children are taught more about what voting is at school. Additionally they could vote in elections with their vote recorded but not counted. So they get into the swing of it. This might avoid rampant apathy, which suits extremes. Sidenote, I wouldn't want you to read into this I am ignorant just how third rate most political parties and their policies have become.
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hm, which is worse: An entire country of millions of people suffers from the shortsighted actions of a few with reduced quality of products, increased prices, worse access to other countries, and a host of other problems... ...or we have to listen to some people whine?
> Hm, which is worse: An entire country of millions of people suffers from the shortsighted actions of a few Few? 51% is a few? I mean, I also think Brexit was a monumentally stupid decision, but 51% of people wanted it, no? Even assuming that everyone who didn't vote would have voted for remain, given the voter turnout of 71% (which is already very high for any election, typical turnout is around 57%), 35% of people…
The biggest issue is that at the time of the vote, nobody had any idea of what Brexit actually meant. The leave campaign could literally promise anything and a) they wouldn’t have to deliver it and b) everyone who voted for Brexit can reasonably suggest that they voted for something other than what was actually delivered.
The best you can say about the Brexit vote is that 51% wanted something other than the status quo.
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The trick is to have a two party system and agree on all the important points. This is the exact characteristic about US politics that Americans wish were removed so their government was better for them. It favors a two party system, so no one is actually represented and have to choose between two parties they likely only agree with on few points, unless they are subscribed to that party's propogandic kool-aid.
The UK has the same system with the same problems. It always converges to a two-party system eventually, the US just speedran the process.
Plurality ("first past the post") voting systems always converge to a two-party system. There's even a theorem saying so, though of course the real world isn't always so polite as to behave the way the mathematics tells it to. Countries with better electoral systems don't so consistently seem to converge to a two-party system.
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#175Generally speaking the more important an issue is, the less it is allowed to be affected by democratic processes. That's why Brexit was such a big upset, it bucked the trend (the management miscalculated, nobody expected the result and would not have put it to referendum otherwise).
I see some public intellectuals who do support Brexit so that's fair enough but I do get mad when I see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQSMr-3GGvQ These were not only ads, but shadow ads; they were different per person and effectively couldn't be vetted (if I have the technical underpinnings wrong do let me know) It's bad regardless of which political side or issue you support. You go on FB to talk to your friends a…
[dead]
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#176A long time ago I walked into a public library to get a library card, already my ID in hand. Staff looked at me aghast "why would we need an ID for a card, that'd be ridiculous!". I feel Brits take privacy quite seriously.
And yet, they voted for the governments that killed privacy and established surveillance in public, because they love privacy so much.
No they didn't. They voted for several different parties who brought in the same policies and did not discuss them prior to elections.
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#177Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#178In the US we have tech companies complying with sketchy DHS subpoenas that don’t require warrants. We have DoJ targeting political enemies. We have FISA mass surveillance. It’s naive to think politically motivated surveillance can’t happen in the UK and elsewhere. Or to assume that only the “right people” will be the ones able to break encryption.
> In the US we have tech companies complying with sketchy DHS subpoenas that don’t require warrants. We have DoJ targeting political enemies. We have FISA mass surveillance. You also have a president who has just said he will "report" a journalist to the FCC for "rebuke or punishment". I regret to inform people that fear over people cracking your encryption is quite niche, at this point; you have a looming fascist re…
I’ll have you know that due to inflation $5 is no longer a reasonable price even for a very cheap wrench!
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#179Generally speaking the more important an issue is, the less it is allowed to be affected by democratic processes. That's why Brexit was such a big upset, it bucked the trend (the management miscalculated, nobody expected the result and would not have put it to referendum otherwise).
It was virtually 50/50 and should not have proceeded. The bar to leave was set too low. 2/3rd better, and larger turnout should have been mandated. 16 year olds should have voted. The campaign to stay too weak. Mass confusion. Some particularly pernicious lies on the leave side too convincing. Brexit wasn't 100% going to happen, it was more like... Leave 17,410,742 51.89% Remain 16,141,241 48.11%
Were these conditions implemented in a referendum to join the EU?
Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
You could flip that argument. The bar set to remain was too low. As for 16 years old voting, I'd argue the age to vote should be raised to 21. > Some particularly pernicious lies on the leave side too convincing Both sides lied, both sides exaggerated. The referendum to simply leave or remain would never have happened if UK Parliament went to the public more often with referendums about various treaties such as Maast…
>> As for 16 years old voting, I'd argue the age to vote should be raised to 21. Why? Brexit will impact 16 year olds for decades. A large number of the old farts who voted for it are dead now and won't have to suffer the consequences. If you're going to adjust voting ages but don't want to lower it, it makes sense that those over 75 don't get a say in something like Brexit. And if your thought is that 16 year olds d…
Brexit also impacts 12 year olds.
>And if your thought is that 16 year olds don't have the education yet to understand the implications of something so big, I'd say they're much better informed than most people over 60 who are consuming Facebook AI slop and believing it wholesale.
Care to back this claim?