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

Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 291 posts

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#51

Post by rsynnott »

xienze wrote: post #23
HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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).

> nobody expected the result and would not have put it to referendum otherwise I think you're right, you see this sometimes where the powers that be are extremely over-confident in themselves and think "sure, let's put this thing up for referendum and show those stupid right-wingers how unpopular they really are." Which works until it doesn't. A US example was Proposition 8 in California (banning same-sex marriage) i…

It's even a bit sillier than that. David Cameron promised a dumb thing to get elected, on the assumption that he'd be in another libdem coalition, and the libdems wouldn't allow it. Then he got a majority. And campaigned against his own dumb thing.

Not only was it expected to fail at referendum, but the referendum itself was never really meant to happen.

> What's shocking of course is that the Brexit vote didn't end up the same way ("ok the vote passed but it can't be done anyway").

It went very much the opposite; they went for almost the most extreme possible version of the thing. A lot of people voting for Brexit had been sold on, basically, Norway's status (effectively in the EU, but can pretend not to be, and has its own rules on fish and can have whatever weird passports it wants). This is part of why support for it evaporated so quickly (the last time any serious poll showed staying out as having more support for rejoining was early 2022); the delivered product was simply not what most people had been sold.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#52

Post by andrewaylett »

Nursie wrote: post #30
xienze wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> nobody expected the result and would not have put it to referendum otherwise I think you're right, you see this sometimes where the powers that be are extremely over-confident in themselves and think "sure, let's put this thing up for referendum and show those stupid right-wingers how unpopular they really are." Which works until it doesn't. A US example was Proposition 8 in California (banning same-sex marriage) i…

> What's shocking of course is that the Brexit vote didn't end up the same way ("ok the vote passed but it can't be done anyway"). There was an attempt. A campaigner managed to get the courts to issue a verdict that the referendum was not binding, and Parliament must then have a vote on whether or not to implement the result. Remain voters rejoiced and lauded her as a hero. Brexit voters demonised her as an enemy of…

Which was, procedurally, the correct course of action: the referendum was non-binding, because the UK's constitution only allows for non-binding referendums. Parliament is sovereign, whether you and I like it or not (and I'm generally ambivalent about it).

Given one of the major themes of the leave campaign was "restoring parliamentary sovereignty", it's darkly ironic that leave also campaigned against parliament actually using that sovereignty, and indeed came closer than anyone else (including the EU) to restricting parliamentary sovereignty.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#53

Post by danaris »

xienze wrote: post #23
HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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).

> nobody expected the result and would not have put it to referendum otherwise I think you're right, you see this sometimes where the powers that be are extremely over-confident in themselves and think "sure, let's put this thing up for referendum and show those stupid right-wingers how unpopular they really are." Which works until it doesn't. A US example was Proposition 8 in California (banning same-sex marriage) i…

> (kind of funny those legal arguments never came up BEFORE it could even be put up for a vote, again showing the level of confidence on display)

Actually, IMO, it shows one of the weaknesses of our legal system.

The courts can't rule on something that someone's talking about doing. They can only rule on actual legislation.

It would genuinely be great if there were a formal legal process for writing a bill, submitting it to some particular court (maybe the top state appeals court?) for review, and only after that review letting it be voted into law.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#54

Post by RobotToaster »

IndySun wrote: post #24
HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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%

> The campaign to stay too weak.

I can definitely support that. It seemed to basically boil down to "you dirty proles aren't going to stop poor Tarquin going on Erasmus are you? :'("

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#55

Post by NoddingPudding »

mrtksn wrote: post #47
HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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).

> nobody expected the result Including those who pushed for Brexit. Farage gave a speech accepting a defeat around midnight, the value of GBP skyrocketed for a moment etc. The referendum was supposed to be a tool for the political class to wrestle each other, not a real life changing decision. Turns out if you fuel enough BS you may not be able to control it. The same for this fear mongering about evil people messagi…

The Farage speech just seemed to be part of a pump and dump on the pound.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#56

Post by FartyMcFarter »

danaris wrote: post #50
FartyMcFarter wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then we'd have to hear the Brexiteers whining on and on about democracy. This way we get to see their project fail. I don't know which one is worse.

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?

That's a good point, but sometimes it's a good thing for people to see the consequences of their (and others') choices. Perhaps it could have some good medium / long-term effects.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#57

Post by bluebarbet »

HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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).

This is conspiracism-adjacent, IMO. Plenty of consequential decisions have been put to referendums, if only because the political class may not want to take responsibility for them. And the outcome of a referendum is never certain.

The more interesting difference is surely in how the elite responds to unexpected referendum results. Plenty of mainland Europeans assumed that Brexit would somehow be canceled (which was surely the right thing to do on paper). That was never going to happen. British political culture sacralizes majorities. Canceling a referendum "victory" is as anathema as proportional representation, coalition government, or limits on parliamentary sovereignty. This (IMO archaic) understanding of democracy partly explains the Brexit result itself.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#58

Post by p-e-w »

mrkeen wrote: post #37
p-e-w wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s tinfoil hat nonsense. Of course there is privacy, otherwise those agencies wouldn’t be constantly lobbying for more invasive surveillance powers. What would be the point of that, if they could already read everything?

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2015/09/how_gchq_trac...

Yes, an article explaining online tracking proves the claim that “privacy doesn’t exist”.

I guess it is true for certain people who no longer distinguish between their life and browsing the web…

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#59

Post by armchairhacker »

HPsquared wrote: post #15

Generally 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).

"Democracy is the worst form of government except for all others that have been tried".

If the people aren't capable of handling an issue, who is? Bureaucrats who are...elected democratically?

Brexit's issue is that it can't be easily reversed, I don't understand why they don't just hold another referendum and undo everything.

Re: Brits would quite like their private messages to stay private

#60

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

IndySun wrote: post #41
TulliusCicero wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno about 2/3rds, but there should definitely be some kind of supermajority required for things like joining or leaving the EU. Even a 55% requirement would be a lot better than a simple majority imo.

55%, maybe. But that still leaves a divided country for decades afterwards. It was handled badly from start to finish. Many 'remainers' didn't take the threat serious enough. Never under estimate your opponent.

Cameron put a Eurosceptic in charge of the Remain campaign, and Nick Clegg - supposedly an arch Remainer - went to work for Meta after Cambridge Analytica and its contribution to Brexit became public knowledge.

The public were conned. The oligarch-adjacent ruling faction of the ruling class knew exactly what they were doing, the lack of specificity for any Leave plan was deliberate, the lies and propaganda were cynical and calculated, and they were delighted with the result.

Then they gave us Boris as the first of a succession of clown car comedy Prime Ministers, and started hyping Farage.

It's all a stage set. The public in the UK have zero influence on any of these developments.

Post reply on HN