Mecky Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 We don't want to go to Disasterous Dave's Utopian promised land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 I’m not a criminal or a terrorist so why does it matter if they know about my online activity. I occasionally slag the government off, and I’m happy for them to read what I have to say about them. And you'll be happy when a system failure means that your data ends up in the hands of criminals? Or when it's sold to commercial organisations? Or when you fall out with a neighbour, who turns out to work as a clerk at the council and accesses the data despite the 'numerous' safeguards? There's a level of trust in the government which is reasonable, but there's a level that is downright naïve and you're well above that level if the "nothing to hide" argument makes you feel okay about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 We don't want to go to Disasterous Dave's Utopian promised land. Whilst I'm against the currently proposed scheme, you are aware that Labour's scheme was even worse aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 In that instance I don't think I have a problem with this, but I've also heard rumours that the government employs proffesional trolls to undermine political argument on forums and blogging sites. They do this not with sound political argument but by getting the thread closed down for breaching rules such as swearing and abuse and sidetracking the arguments. Why would a government go to the expense of paying people to do that? All the main parties have enough supporters to do that for free and many of them would do so without any official encouragement - you only have to look at this forum to see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Well it looks like they are finally getting round to asking our opinion on whether we want to have all our communications blanket monitored, oh and pay for the blanket monitoring as well. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18731565 The public is being invited to submit evidence on the government's "web snooping" plans. ... "Each and every one of us" will be affected by the bill, according to Conservative peer Lord Blencathra. He chairs the joint committee of MPs and peers holding the inquiry and stressed a privacy-security balance. The call for evidence ends in August. Clearly not expecting much in the way of a response. My personal view is that my communications is my business and if anyone has the need to look at my communications data then they should be able to justify this by obtaining a warrant from a judge, not one rubber stamped by a representative of the home secretary. If their need is not demonstrably sufficient then no warrant should be issued and my business should remain my own and not be subject to monitoring. This bill removes the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty", everyone using any form of communication will henceforward be regarded as a suspect and reduced to a state of "guilty just not been caught yet" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 And you'll be happy when a system failure means that your data ends up in the hands of criminals? Or when it's sold to commercial organisations? Or when you fall out with a neighbour, who turns out to work as a clerk at the council and accesses the data despite the 'numerous' safeguards? There's a level of trust in the government which is reasonable, but there's a level that is downright naïve and you're well above that level if the "nothing to hide" argument makes you feel okay about this. What data? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 What data?That would be all of your communications data - who you talked to when you talked to them, what sites you visit and when, any purchases you made, when and how much you paid for them, a profile of the types of sites you like to frequent, who you bank with, what diseases you are concerned about and therefore may be suffering from. Basically your entire on line life history, including a fair stab at your off line life as well, such as location, what you do for a living, how much you earn, where you go for holidays and when, who you are friends with. You can tell an awful lot about a person from communications data without actually knowing the content of the communications. Facebook for example ( http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428622.000-mindreader-facebook-of-revelations.html - you may need a subscription ) make a fortune mining such information from profiles and have developed techniques for extrapolating missing data from those profiles based on friendhips and links, up to and including where you are within a 100 meter radius. That's just using data you choose to share, your communications data gives away much, much more than this and if this bill passes as is then you won't have any choice about giving this data away, and then it's an accident waiting to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 That would be all of your communications data - who you talked to when you talked to them, what sites you visit and when, any purchases you made, when and how much you paid for them, a profile of the types of sites you like to frequent, who you bank with, what diseases you are concerned about and therefore may be suffering from. Basically your entire on line life history, including a fair stab at your off line life as well, such as location, what you do for a living, how much you earn, where you go for holidays and when, who you are friends with. You can tell an awful lot about a person from communications data without actually knowing the content of the communications. Facebook for example ( http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21428622.000-mindreader-facebook-of-revelations.html - you may need a subscription ) make a fortune mining such information from profiles and have developed techniques for extrapolating missing data from those profiles based on friendhips and links, up to and including where you are within a 100 meter radius. That's just using data you choose to share, your communications data gives away much, much more than this and if this bill passes as is then you won't have any choice about giving this data away, and then it's an accident waiting to happen. Who you talked to when you talked to them, They will find it boring. What sites you visit and when, They probably already know and its of no concern. Any purchases you made, when and how much you paid for them, They must have sad lives if they want to know but it doesn’t bother me. A profile of the types of sites you like to frequent, They wouldn’t find it very interesting. Who you bank with, They already know, What diseases you are concerned about and therefore may be suffering from. They already know. Basically your entire on line life history, including a fair stab at your off line life as well such as location, They already know What you do for a living, They already know How much you earn, They already know Where you go for holidays and when, They already know Who you are friends with, I don’t have any Facebook I don’t use it The only thing that concerns me is, Will it cost money? Or will it save money? Will it catch criminals and make everyone safer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 It will not catch criminals or make anyone safety, it will mean that you are considered a criminal until proven innocent and monitored as such (no proof is possible), instead of being considered law abiding until proven otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 ...The only thing that concerns me is, Will it cost money? Or will it save money? Will it catch criminals and make everyone safer? Will it cost money? - Yes, either service providers or the government will pay which means either higher prices for the service or higher taxes. Or will it save money? - Nope, this is all new equipment being installed which has to be paid for and maintained at some cost, plus all the bureaucracy which will be created to handle the government side of things Will it catch criminals and make everyone safer? - No, criminals and terrorists will simply switch to different forms of communication- dead letter drops, word of mouth, steganography, whereas innocent people will be monitored unnecessarily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.