Live data from Hacker News

Independent review of UK national security law warns of overreach

techradar.com

291–299 of 299 posts

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

#291
post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You my friend must live in an alternate reality where political leadership isn't obviously enmeshed with corporations to a pathological degree - without a revolving door of people circling between them, without lobbying, without corruption, without special deals to the benefit of the biggest corporations, where private corporations aren't abused to bypass restrictions on government powers, and vice versa.

Lobbying is a tiny industry in the United States and corruption is basically a nonissue. With the exception of the current president I haven’t seen any evidence for widespread corruption in the United States - at most it’s a collection of isolated low impact and rare incidents.

I can only speak for the U.S., but I know a lot of large instances where lobbying was a direct result or sibling of corruption. BMW, Mercedes-Benz, and Bosch all combined their efforts to kill grey market imports into the U.S. starting in 1994 after a campaign they initiated in 1988. This effectively killed imports from Britain, France, Spain, Russia, and Italy and severely shrunk the market for luxury sedans and coupes in the U.S., which backfired as the Japanese were faster to manufacture and took up the slack. Oshkosh created a system to undercut AM General in order to push the L-ATV design over competing JLTV designs. They repeated this tactic in 2021 to ensure they got the contract for the mail delivery vehicle despite not matching the statement of objectives paper as well as Mahindra or Workhorse. Verizon and Comcast combined forces to kill net neutrality, each whittling away at it with targeted campaigns since 2011 until it was finally ended in 2017 and barred from reimplementation this year. Uber, Lyft, AirBnB, Doordash, and other "disruptor" companies collectively spent hundreds of millions of dollars to bypass classifying their workers as employees and to excuse themselves from taxation. Even now they're still trying to reverse the legal landmark that those workers are employees and can form unions. Blue Cross Blue Shield spent tens of millions of dollars cutting off parts of the Affordable Care Act they didn't like. Currently license plate reader manufacturers are lobbying to get contracts with local governments at the city and county level to install facial recognition cameras everywhere they can, and they're lobbying the federal government to allow this breach of privacy in exchange for access to the databases.

Lobbying is only tiny if you look at the individual amounts. Most lobbyists only put forth $5-10,000 at a time because they're not doing it at a national level. But it's the fact that so many do it in so many different places that makes it a threat. Somebody running to be on the city board can have their entire campaign financed by a single donor. A mayor can have their entire income for the year matched by two lobbyists laying the groundwork for a national campaign. One Senator or House member having seven to eight lobby sponsors can almost match their guaranteed salary for that year. There are entire divisions of the finance departments of companies that are dedicated to budgeting for lobbying over the fiscal year. It's a massive force, composed of nearly $4,000,000,000 in "contributions" in 2024 alone.

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

#292
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devolving? Already there. Mostly the public are ok with it because they're ignorant of the facts, believing whatever they read on Facebook, see on GB news[1], etc. and are happy with "if you've done nothing wrong, you've nothing to be afraid of?"[0] By the time the leopards eat their faces, it's too late. [0] Much like the people who voted for Trump and are now slated for deportation because 15 years ago they cashed…

> Also the BBC has some blame here because if they weren't platforming Farage for years Farage is one of the few politicians who has opposed these laws. He wants to repeal the Online Safety Act.

> Farage is one of the few politicians who has opposed these laws.

Farage is in the same position as the Tories currently - he can say whatever he wants because he's not in power and has no responsibility to anyone.

I would be wholly unsurprised that if Reform won a GE and Farage became PM, anything he said before that would be unceremoniously dropped (see: almost every politician who gains power) and, frankly, Farage goes full Trump and, e.g., applies the OSA to censoring everyone he disagrees with.

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

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The constitution is being summarily ignored by the current administration. There is a right to trial in there that we've just totally blown past, and the deep integration between party insiders and media consolidation is a sideways assault on the first amendment. The idea that "they're coming for your guns" is something we can begin to discuss when the first step to curb our mass shooting problem is actually taken. F…

>The constitution is being summarily ignored by the current administration. There is a right to trial in there that we've just totally blown past, and the deep integration between party insiders and media consolidation is a sideways assault on the first amendment. To what extent does the US have the right to maintain its borders? The idea that anyone should be able to enter the country illegally and be given the righ…

> The idea that anyone should be able to enter the country illegally and be given the right to due process presupposes that the state has the resources to deal with the volume of people who decide to do that.

No. It presupposes that every human being deserves to be treated with dignity no matter the circumstances. But I don't expect you to agree with me. Your interpretation of contemporary life in the USA is clearly distorted, but again, I don't expect you to agree. You're being lied to, fwiw.

> what do you do? You can't shoot them

There's no reason for me to engage with you further if this is how you think.

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

#294
post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You my friend must live in an alternate reality where political leadership isn't obviously enmeshed with corporations to a pathological degree - without a revolving door of people circling between them, without lobbying, without corruption, without special deals to the benefit of the biggest corporations, where private corporations aren't abused to bypass restrictions on government powers, and vice versa.

Lobbying is a tiny industry in the United States and corruption is basically a nonissue. With the exception of the current president I haven’t seen any evidence for widespread corruption in the United States - at most it’s a collection of isolated low impact and rare incidents.

I strive to live in a version of the USA half as nice as the one you think we live in. We definitely didn't overthrow legitimate governments in the name of big business in South America, the Middle East, or even Hawaii. /s

I remember when I found out that a highly intelligent friend believed the earth was six-thousand years old. But at least he had the excuse that his idiotic religion was pushed on him since birth. Intelligent people on this site are sometime incapable of basic media literacy and I find it wholly depressing.

Keep voting against your interests while others of us fight you tooth and nail to try to make the world better for everyone (rather than just our own teams), even including you.

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

#295
post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lobbying is a tiny industry in the United States and corruption is basically a nonissue. With the exception of the current president I haven’t seen any evidence for widespread corruption in the United States - at most it’s a collection of isolated low impact and rare incidents.

I strive to live in a version of the USA half as nice as the one you think we live in. We definitely didn't overthrow legitimate governments in the name of big business in South America, the Middle East, or even Hawaii. /s I remember when I found out that a highly intelligent friend believed the earth was six-thousand years old. But at least he had the excuse that his idiotic religion was pushed on him since birth. I…

Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest. A good chunk of HN will be able to relate to this as SWEs in the SF bay area.

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

#296
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strive to live in a version of the USA half as nice as the one you think we live in. We definitely didn't overthrow legitimate governments in the name of big business in South America, the Middle East, or even Hawaii. /s I remember when I found out that a highly intelligent friend believed the earth was six-thousand years old. But at least he had the excuse that his idiotic religion was pushed on him since birth. I…

Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest. A good chunk of HN will be able to relate to this as SWEs in the SF bay area.

> Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest.

Which is why people like me have to fight people like you tooth and nail. Despite having a very privileged life, probably similar to yours, I still want the best for everyone, not just my team. I pointed this out in my prior comment. You've now confirmed that you're too selfish to vote against your interests for the betterment of humanity. And you apparently have no sense of shame about it. Have a great holiday.

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

#297
post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest. A good chunk of HN will be able to relate to this as SWEs in the SF bay area.

> Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest. Which is why people like me have to fight people like you tooth and nail. Despite having a very privileged life, probably similar to yours, I still want the best for everyone, not just my team. I pointed this out in my prior comment. You've now confirmed that you're too selfish to vote against your interests for the betterment of humanity. And you app…

Correct. I have zero shame for voting in favor of the interests of myself and the people that matter to me.

Have a good holiday as well!

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

#298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The decline of the US government is the faster than "Europe", because it's been declining rapidly in a few months. The US government currently has a monthly quota for ICE arrests. ICE agents racially profile people and ignore non-white people telling them they are US citizens because they assume they are lying. Non-white US citizens need to have papers on them that prove their status (US citizen), or else might be di…

As someone not in the US. Isnt ICE just enforcing the immigration law of the country? Is that a bad thing? I've got friends in the UK crying out for something like ICE so keen to understand why it's viewed as rapid decline.

ICE arrests U.S. citizens, which is bad.

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/ice-apprehension-o...

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

#299
post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sorry but voting in favor of the 1% is very much in my interest. Which is why people like me have to fight people like you tooth and nail. Despite having a very privileged life, probably similar to yours, I still want the best for everyone, not just my team. I pointed this out in my prior comment. You've now confirmed that you're too selfish to vote against your interests for the betterment of humanity. And you app…

Correct. I have zero shame for voting in favor of the interests of myself and the people that matter to me. Have a good holiday as well!

Seeing this thread again scrolling through my comments, and after the holidays feeling perhaps calmer than when it was current. I'd like to make a case, invite you to look at things from a different angle, because I think we might have more common ground than it appears otherwise.

> I have zero shame for voting in favor of the interests of myself and the people that matter to me.

...and you shouldn't. It's better than fine to do so and you ought to work towards things that benefit you. This is something a lot of people seem to misunderstand when I talk about anything political, and it's likely a failing in how I communicate. I don't think that people should sacrifice themselves for the common good just because "it's the right thing to do". It isn't and that's never what I'm driving at.

When I (and perhaps others who share part of my worldview) talk about governance and lobbying and similar stuff, it's not out of a sense of pure morals or ethics - these are issues of ecosystems. Some shapes of systems are healthy and robust and others are self-destructive. Mesh networks are strong, centralized (and unreplicated) control systems are fragile - as an SWE you know this to be true.

What I'm arguing here is that it's in your interest to exist in an environment that:

- prevents an accumulation of power or control too tightly, to avoid single points of failure in decision and governance

- avoids recursive loops which have a habit of wastefully consuming resources and starving critical systems

- maintains flexible responsiveness to environmental conditions due to being reactive to the state of all constituent stakeholders / subsystems / individuals

The issue with the top 1% of the top 1% having too much power is that it breaks all those safeties, and is actually bad for those people too. What will happen in this kind of a situation is that the excessively empowered will desiccate the environment for everyone - including themselves.

You already see it playing out in the form of crumbling infrastructure, ballooning homelessness, economic shocks, and the empowerment of bad actors who take advantage of the disenfranchised masses. This is bad for you, too.

Post reply on HN