Online activity to be stored under new law

[PeteMorris]

I haven't NOW. I don't think this or any government over the past couple of decades would use this information to fit people up for stuff. But what about 10 years? Twenty years? Am I going to get a knock on the door with men in riot gear accusing me of (for example purposes only ;)) looking at women who weren't completely clothed which in twenty years time might be illegal.

 

Or, as on occasions I've been victim of, on a perfectly innocent website, you suddenly get a pop-up you can't close, which takes you somewhere 'dodgy'...Or at least somewhere you didn't plan on visiting!

[exxon]

I haven't NOW. I don't think this or any government over the past couple of decades would use this information to fit people up for stuff. But what about 10 years? Twenty years? Am I going to get a knock on the door with men in riot gear accusing me of (for example purposes only ;)) looking at women who weren't completely clothed which in twenty years time might be illegal.

 

Unless you are using a webcam it will only tell them which computer was logged on. Not who was using it.

 

I would imagine proxy servers will start doing a lot of business. I've just logged on here using one in case I'm being bugged.

[Mr Regret]

Or, as on occasions I've been victim of, on a perfectly innocent website, you suddenly get a pop-up you can't close, which takes you somewhere 'dodgy'...Or at least somewhere you didn't plan on visiting!

 

Victim, yeah right

You were 'taken somewhere dodgy' Yeah, double right :hihi:

[flamingjimmy]

Say what you like about the Lib Dems at least they stopped the tories last time they tried to pull this trick.

[Mr Bloke]

I haven't NOW. I don't think this or any government over the past couple of decades would use this information to fit people up for stuff. But what about 10 years? Twenty years? Am I going to get a knock on the door with men in riot gear accusing me of (for example purposes only ;)) looking at women who weren't completely clothed which in twenty years time might be illegal.

Well the link in the OP says they're only keeping records for a year, so you should be OK for now.

 

But, purely for our own future safety you understand...

 

... I wonder if you'd provide us with a link to a few of the sites we should all stay well away from?

[flamingjimmy]

Not sure what benefit this will give. I'd be surprised if any terror/criminal groups use much technology these days given how it appears the NSA/GCHQ can hack it at will.

 

Shockingly what the government are trying to do is actually not law in the US, nor anywhere in Europe. This would make us the absolute number 1 when it comes to surveillance in the developed world, yay!

[Mr Regret]

Well the link in the OP says they're only keeping records for a year, so you should be OK for now.

 

But, purely for our own future safety you understand...

 

... I wonder if you'd provide us with a link to a few of the sites we should all stay well away from?

 

Borrow PeteMorris's computer. Apparently he gets taken to the dodgy sites without having to do a thing.

[JFKvsNixon]

You do wonder if the government is trying to legalise current practice.

[Mr Regret]

Shockingly what the government are trying to do is actually not law in the US, nor anywhere in Europe. This would make us the absolute number 1 when it comes to surveillance in the developed world, yay!

 

Consider that Cameron is wanting to get us out of the Human rights act too and i can only see things getting worse.

[Anna B]

I haven't NOW. I don't think this or any government over the past couple of decades would use this information to fit people up for stuff. But what about 10 years? Twenty years? Am I going to get a knock on the door with men in riot gear accusing me of (for example purposes only ;)) looking at women who weren't completely clothed which in twenty years time might be illegal.

 

Totally agree

(not about the women, but I get your point...)