Obelix 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? He who is prepared to sacrifice essential liberty for the illusion of temporary safety, shall enjoy neither liberty nor safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 You really should attribute your quotes, even if it's to a dead US President. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 So you would want me to attribute it incorrectly? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Thank God we did not have to rely upon MrSmith's apathy to vanquish UK's experimental Phorm and its global follow-up ACTA The irony is, for a long time I had substantially the same viewpoint of "I'm with the good guys, what harm can there be to me?" Thank God for the increasing regularity of Gvt/Big Corpo scandals these past few years, the ensuing dirty laundry washing-in-public session, which eventually shows beyond a shadow of a doubt how and why such legislation comes about. For the record, I am a legal practitionner btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 So you would want me to attribute it incorrectly? :-) Were you not attempting to quote Benjamin Franklin? http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Benjamin_Franklin ah I see, I mistakenly thought he was a US president, but he never was! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 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 Well based on these answers its a stupid idea, makes one wonder why they are wanting to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 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. You'd think so wouldn't you? But these are different. They don't engage with the argument, (I've no problem with people who have an opposite point of view, I enjoy a passionate discussion.) These people would rather waste time arguing over the silliest things that don't matter, and sidetrack the discussion, constantly stopping it from getting back on course, or they become personal and abusive until the thread is closed down. It's got so bad that I know several people who will no longer use Sheffield Forum because of it, so I know it's not just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
esme Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Looks like town halls are fighting to keep their access, under RIPA as well despite the Government "considering" restricting their access. Telegraph 12th July 2012 Hundreds of other public bodies that currently have monitoring powers at varied levels will lose them unless they can argue their case during the Bill process. Paul Bettison, LGA regulatory champion, told the joint committee he was not seeking extra powers but wanted to retain those they already have Councils respond to 'snooping claims' LGA media release 13 July 2012 Local authorities would never seek to intrude into people's personal affairs and have no desire to use these powers to investigate minor offences. Sometimes it is essential for councils to be able to access communications data to protect the public.Never ? really ? Mail : 1,000 innocent victims of Big Brother Britain: Families were spied on wrongly because of blunders by officials He also revealed details of a council going beyond its legal powers to use snooping laws to spy on a family suspected of cheating school catchment area rules.Seems to have missed that one. In my opinion we can't trust the authorities with unrestricted access to this data, they provide us with examples of why we should not trust them regularly, if they can demonstrate a need to collect this information then they can obtain a warrant before they start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Is anyone outraged at this, or not bothered because its not the government? Facebook software screens chats for criminal behaviour Facebook is using a piece of software which screens it users’ conversations for criminal activity and suspicious behaviour, according to a report. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/facebook/9398590/Facebook-software-screens-chats-for-criminal-behaviour.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I'm bothered by it, I'll avoid using facebook messages and try to use email instead. I can do that because it's not the government and isn't ubiquitous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.