Support NeoGAF

[ruttyboy]

Been thinking about this more since yesterday.

I'm with BT for my internet and part of the deal with that is that everyone's* home router is a wi-fi hotspot for everyone else with BT.

So all I have to do is go sit outside someone's house in my car, use their IP for whatever nefarious deeds I want and they'll get it on their record, not mine...

I know this was already a problem with child porn and stuff as you are legally responsible for what is downloaded on your connection, but that problem is now going to be massively amplified.


* You can opt out but I had to do a lot of digging to find that out, I'd put good money on the number of people who are even aware that their router is effectively public, never mind those who went to the trouble to opt out is miniscule

 

[Nokterian]

What the fuck is this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/30/investigatory_powers_act_backdoors/

This just gets better and better.

This is just vile and fucking evil.

All the idiots here saying 'i got nothing to hide' you do know in a land that had democracy because you can and could say anything and do anything that is not gone right? Don't be obtuse and think about it. Privacy is not only you it is everyone, not being anonymous that you can do stuff everyone does.

The ignorance of people saying that are not smart and not thinking of the bigger picture.

 

[Symphonia]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.

You'd get along brilliantly with May and Hunt.

Perhaps you're already pally with them.

Either way, you are everything that is wrong with this bill.

 

[Dot Matrix]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.

Let me paint you a picture. You're a respectable member of your community. You dismiss concerns of new privacy invading laws because 'you have nothing to hide'. You enjoy occasionally indulging your fetish for watching midget porn. No one gets hurt and even though all performers are consenting adults, you'd rather keep your preference secret. One day a midget is found raped and murdered somewhere in the UK. The police have no suspects and no leads. They check the now legal database of people who like watching midget porn. Greddleok shows as one of the people in the list. You're bought in for questioning. Local press finds out and plasters your picture all over the newspaper. Police wouldn't question you if they weren't confident you have something to hide would they? Your employer comes under fire and so let you go. Eventually the police release you without charge. Local newspaper print a retraction of the original story on page 17 in 2 lines of small print. Family and friends don't know what to think and start to treat you differently. Local children make up rhymes and songs about you and ring your doorbell and run away. You die poor and alone, always remembered as that midget killer who got away with it.

Is that you want? 'Cause that's what'll happen.

 

[Dopus]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.

I did. I don't think a slippery slope argument is very compelling.

Not to mention that the intellectual middle class end up being the powerful caste in that book. As part of that group it's a lot less scary...

• You have zero idea how the data is going to be used and interpreted.
• You're putting full trust in the Government and all other organisations that will have access to this data.
• You're assuming that individuals or the government themselves will not abuse it.
• You don't know if the the data they have access to is going to have adequate protection. You don't know how it it will be stored. If it was compromised what's the excuse then? It's not as if government laptops have ever been stolen before, right?
• Privacy is fundamental to a democracy.
• Collection of metadata is already intrusive, now direct access to everything means there is literally no privacy on what you do when connected to any type of service, including your mobile. Who you call, what you visit, what books you read. They will know everything about you - this data is dangerous.
• Industrial espionage is going to be even easier now.

Glenn Greenwald - Why Privacy Matters.

A Conversation on Privacy - Chomsky, Greenwald & Snowden

"When the government starts monitoring the phone numbers people call, many may shrug their shoulders and say, "Ah, it's just numbers, that's all." Then the government might start monitoring some phone calls. "It's just a few phone calls, nothing more." The government might install more video cameras in public places. "So what? Some more cameras watching in a few more places. No big deal." The increase in cameras might lead to a more elaborate network of video surveillance. Satellite surveillance might be added to help track people's movements. The government might start analyzing people's bank records. "It's just my deposits and some of the bills I pay-no problem." The government may then start combing through credit-card records, then expand to Internet-service providers' records, health records, employment records, and more. Each step may seem incremental, but after a while, the government will be watching and knowing everything about us.

"My life's an open book," people might say. "I've got nothing to hide." But now the government has large dossiers of everyone's activities, interests, reading habits, finances, and health. What if the government leaks the information to the public? What if the government mistakenly determines that based on your pattern of activities, you're likely to engage in a criminal act? What if it denies you the right to fly? What if the government thinks your financial transactions look odd-even if you've done nothing wrong-and freezes your accounts? What if the government doesn't protect your information with adequate security, and an identity thief obtains it and uses it to defraud you? Even if you have nothing to hide, the government can cause you a lot of harm.

"But the government doesn't want to hurt me," some might argue. In many cases, that's true, but the government can also harm people inadvertently, due to errors or carelessness."


"Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say. It's deeply anti-social. Right are not individual; they are collective. What doesn't matter to you today, may matter to an entire population, or a way of life, tomorrow." - Snowden.

All of this is now legal, and you're telling us it's nothing to worry about. Get a grip.

 

[Audioboxer]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.



I did. I don't think a slippery slope argument is very compelling.

Not to mention that the intellectual middle class end up being the powerful caste in that book. As part of that group it's a lot less scary...

I know people will already have jumped on you, but when you have a socialist left leaning party say it's not good enough in it's current form you should at least take note

During the last parliamentary stage of the Investigatory Powers Bill the SNP expressed grave concerns and committed to working towards amending it. We said that if it was not amended satisfactorily we would vote it down at a later stage. As the Bill reaches it’s final parliamentary hurdle tomorrow, It appears that stage has now been reached.

There are parts of this Bill which we want to support because they are necessary for law enforcement across the UK and to replace some powers already in force in Scotland. We also think that the attempt to bring together a number of laws into one piece of modern legislation is a good thing.

However, we are very concerned that some of the powers in the Bill go against decisions of the highest courts in Europe on issues such as privacy and human rights. They also go much further than the powers available in other Western democracies, other countries do not feel the need for such intrusion to enforce the law and prevent terrorism.

The powers to keep your internet browsing history and get bulk data, which have been criticised by the UN, both fall into these categories.

We believe that the power to keep your internet records should be removed from the Bill. What is proposed is unacceptably intrusive and practically unworkable.

In response to pressure from the SNP and others, the UK Government has agreed to review the operational necessity of bulk powers. This is welcome but the SNP do not think that bulk powers should be in the Bill until a convincing case has been made for them. We doubt whether this can be done, given the experience of bulk powers in the USA which led to a recognition that, as well as being extremely intrusive, they didn’t work.

We will also try to change the Bill to improve oversight from courts, to better protect people who communicate with journalists, lawyers or parliamentarians, to tighten up hacking powers that are too wide and to improve transparency.


The SNP believe that law enforcement and the intelligence and security services should have necessary and proportionate powers to fight serious crime and terrorism. However, we also believe that, in order to protect civil liberties, surveillance should be targeted, with warrants from courts that ensure they are focused, specific and based on reasonable suspicion. Oversight and safeguards should also be strong and independent of government.

In committee the SNP tabled numerous amendments to try to achieve these principles as a thread running throughout the Bill and to remove those parts which were unjustifiable.

Not one was accepted.

Last week I wrote to the Home Secretary listing what would need to be done before the SNP could even contemplate giving this Bill our support. I have yet to receive a reply.

It remains to be seen what sort of a response our amendments will receive from the Tory government. We are clear that unless significant amendment has been made to the Bill the SNP cannot support it.

How did the SNP vote on the Investigatory Powers Bill?

The SNP voted against the UK government’s flawed Investigatory Powers Bill. We do not believe the UK government has made the case for new and far reaching powers in the Bill, which are immense and include allowing the state to acquire the personal and private data of all citizens, including significantly unfettered collection and access to Internet Connection records and other communications data. The majority of the contentious areas of the Bill relate to powers that are reserved to Westminster

The SNP supports giving the security services and the police the necessary powers to fight serious crime and terrorism, but it is vital that any new powers are proportionate, focused, and in accordance with law.

http://www.snp.org/the_snp_won_t_support_the_investigatory_powers_bill_unless_it_is_amended

 

[Delusibeta]

What the fuck is this:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/11/30/investigatory_powers_act_backdoors/

This just gets better and better.

The silver lining to this is that as soon as someone like Apple gets notified that they broke this law, they're going to legally challenge it to the hilt. So, yeah, a legal challenge is now an inevitability.

 

[norinrad]

Theresa May is honestly the biggest cunt to ever grace the UK government. Why can't she just fuck off to America with Farage and join Trump? Hopefully someone will then blow that place sky high, and the world is three huge cunts down.

Watch your words, they could be coming for you while you enjoy your daily Marmite.

 

[Beefy]

Theresa May is honestly the biggest cunt to ever grace the UK government. Why can't she just fuck off to America with Farage and join Trump? Hopefully someone will then blow that place sky high, and the world is three huge cunts down.

God is guiding her though.

 

[Audioboxer]

A Scot I recently found on YT has made a pretty well versed video on this

https://youtu.be/dJCyLHZDv3Q

Will take up around 40 mins of your time but well worth listening.

 

[Kito]

To those people semi serious do it. Me and my SO left the UK last November and moved to Vancouver. One of best decisions we've ever made.

Europe is the only option for most of us, which isn't very appealing given the language barrier. Canada and others require a job offer and/or skills that we don't have.

 

[Cronen]

Politicans are exempt from the Investigatory Powers Bill

Ridiculous, but not surprising.

 

[Maztorre]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.



I did. I don't think a slippery slope argument is very compelling.

Not to mention that the intellectual middle class end up being the powerful caste in that book. As part of that group it's a lot less scary...

Don't know how you can claim to be an intellectual after this bile. 10 seconds of critical thinking is enough to make this law a non-starter.

Outside of the privacy concerns that everyone else has gone over in detail, the practical issues of mass storage of personal information in an age where both state and non-state entities are engaging in high profile hacking activities against government and private targets are obvious. Especially concerning this law, where even the fucking Food Standards Agency are given remit to access citizen's browsing history. Given how tone-deaf the Tories have been when it comes to other technology-related laws of late, no sane individual could place any faith in them actually implementing any of this in a secure way. But hey, it's ok if foreign governments and private hacking groups get a hold of your personal info, after all there's "nothing to hide".

 

[Kito]

Politicans are exempt from the Investigatory Powers Bill

Ridiculous, but not surprising.

Makes sense, half of the male politicians are paedophiles.

 

[Sumio Mondo]

Makes sense, half of the male politicians are paedophiles.

And the other half are married to them helping them cover it up.

 

[31GhostsIV]

Assholes.

https://twitter.com/jimkillock/status/806223349781319680

 

[Bony Manifesto]

Assholes.

https://twitter.com/jimkillock/status/806223349781319680

To be fair, this isn't exactly something that was sneaked through Parliament. The problem was that it wasn't an issue Labour and the SNP really had any interest in, so they complained about some of the details out of some sense of obligation, then proclaimed victory when it was altered slightly in response. So as far as the three biggest parties are concerned, the democratic process was completed successfully.

 

[Psychotext]

Populace never really had a chance to have their say on it... but then I guess we never do.

 

[Coxy100]

Populace never really had a chance to have their say on it... but then I guess we never do.

Did it make the front pages though? By and large the vast majority of the population probably have no idea about this.

 

[Psychotext]

Did it make the front pages though? By and large the vast majority of the population probably have no idea about this.

Why would we care about this when we have tallow in our £5 notes and the UK courts stealing away our sovereignty?

 

[nekkid]

Watch your words, they could be coming for you while you enjoy your daily Marmite.

I wish I could afford Marmite.

 

[Lightning Count]

A Scot I recently found on YT has made a pretty well versed video on this

https://youtu.be/dJCyLHZDv3Q

Will take up around 40 mins of your time but well worth listening.

Thank you for this, let's just hope the government don't try to silence this guy or declare him a political dissident.

 

[ruttyboy]

"Before it was introduced into Parliament, the Bill was investigated by a Committee of MPs and Members of the House of Lords, who heard evidence and produced a report with recommendations about the Bill."

Every reply from the Government points to how there were lots of recommendations for changes, but omits that they didn't implement nearly all of them, slimy bastards.

 

[Monocle]

Theresa May is honestly the biggest cunt to ever grace the UK government. Why can't she just fuck off to America with Farage and join Trump? Hopefully someone will then blow that place sky high, and the world is three huge cunts down.

Let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater now. It's possible to experience minimal fuckery in your daily life if you stay out of our rural areas.

 

[Ashes]

Politicans are exempt from the Investigatory Powers Bill

Ridiculous, but not surprising.

Far greater implications for law is the unethical intrusion of client / lawyer confidentiality. The Bar council is pretty understandbly upset by this.

 

[Slavik81]

Eh, it's all pretty vanilla. I guess I just don't see why it matters if the government know what porn I look at. I don't know why it matters if the government know whether I like Mario more than Sonic.

I find it really hard to be outraged by it when I have no clue what it matters. Everyone just goes on and on about "b-b-b-b-but privacy." If you want to keep things to yourself, cool, it doesn't bother me.

You may have nothing to hide, but the next Turing, Ghandi or MLK might. Giving up the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is like giving up the right to free speech because you have nothing upsetting to say. It's not there just for you.

 

[Symphonia]

Did it make the front pages though? By and large the vast majority of the population probably have no idea about this.

It didn't make the papers at all, let alone the front page. This country gives no fucks about its right to privacy, apparently. Either that or the media are scared to publish anything that slags off the government.

 

[Frozenprince]

The first bloody paragraph of that response is bunk. How long are governments going to lean on 9/11 as an excuse to do anything they please? I swear, when I die of old age they'll still be playing the "In a time of heightened security" card. Somehow we got through the entire cold war and the troubles without resorting to spying on everyone, how long is this going to go on

An important lesson to learn. Civil liberties are always there first to go once the brown people are the ones starting shit.

Always.

 

[Jezbollah]

It didn't make the papers at all, let alone the front page. This country gives no fucks about its right to privacy, apparently. Either that or the media are scared to publish anything that slags off the government.

Its tragically amusing that the £5 thing has got 10x the media coverage than this bill.

 

[Symphonia]

Its tragically amusing that the £5 thing has got 10x the media coverage than this bill.

That, and Marmite and Toblerone. I mean, I fucking love Marmite, but I value my basic human right of privacy more than a yeast spread. It's sickening that this bill has garnered no attention in the papers or on TV.

 

[Cow1337killr]

I blame ISIS for this, I feel the only reason they are putting this stuff in place is to help them counter terrorism, after the whole fiasco with whatsapp's end-to-end encryption, that's not to say it wont be used for other purposes.

 

[Frozenprince]

That, and Marmite and Toblerone. I mean, I fucking love Marmite, but I value my basic human right of privacy more than a yeast spread. It's sickening that this bill has garnered no attention in the papers or on TV.

Here's the thing though.

Most people are fucking idiots.

 

[ruttyboy]

I blame ISIS for this, I feel the only reason they are putting this stuff in place is to help them counter terrorism, after the whole fiasco with whatsapp's end-to-end encryption, that's not to say it wont be used for other purposes.

Rather than blame ISIS, you should rather congratulate them, they have achieved a large part of their aims with the willing assistance of, in this case, the UK Government.

 

[Frozenprince]

I blame ISIS for this, I feel the only reason they are putting this stuff in place is to help them counter terrorism, after the whole fiasco with whatsapp's end-to-end encryption, that's not to say it wont be used for other purposes.

This long predates ISIS. If anything, that are cheering on current events in Europe, this has been a massive boon for them.

 

[hodgy100]

I blame ISIS for this, I feel the only reason they are putting this stuff in place is to help them counter terrorism, after the whole fiasco with whatsapp's end-to-end encryption, that's not to say it wont be used for other purposes.

this bill isn't the fault of ISIS. this is the fault of stupid technologically inept politicians thinking they are keeping people safe.

 

[VDenter]

Yea as somebody who lives in Finland who had to write a report on the UK EU referendum this year and as as a result getting caught up in allot of UK politics. Man all i got to say is good luck folks watching the UK over the past year has been almost like a slow motion car crash. Its a sight to behold but unfortunately for all the wrong reasons.

 

[Commander Jameson]

this bill isn't the fault of ISIS. this is the fault of stupid technologically inept politicians thinking they are keeping people safe.

I don't think the politicians are concerned about keeping us safe. It is more about control.

 

[Psychotext]

This part is fun...

The UK's Investigatory Powers Act allows the State to tell lies in court

 

[Antiwhippy]

This part is fun...

The UK's Investigatory Powers Act allows the State to tell lies in court

Jesus Christ.

What kind of hell hole is the uk turning into?

 

[StayDead]

This part is fun...

The UK's Investigatory Powers Act allows the State to tell lies in court

What the fuck?

 

[hodgy100]

What the fuck?

welcome to the UK!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCKVD9578eQ

 

[Pie and Beans]

Well, there it is.

It's hard to think of a more evil, corrupt and stupid government than this current set. I almost miss Osborne's big ol sweaty cunt face.

 

[Protome]

Indieref when tho?

Well, there it is.

It's hard to think of a more evil, corrupt and stupid government than this current set. I almost miss Osborne's big ol sweaty cunt face.

To be fair, this bill predates May's government. She just finally has the support to push it through.

 

[hodgy100]

To be fair, this bill predates May's government. She just finally has the support to push it through.

Yeah I've been hammering on about this bill from well before the 2015 election :/

 

[Lagamorph]

There has to be some legal challenges to this going through surely.

 

[Jezbollah]

There has to be some legal challenges to this going through surely.

The sad thing is that legally this has gone through the correct law making process prior to its final stage of royal assent. This includes scrutiny by the opposition, who have seemingly deemed it not worthy of voting down in sufficient numbers.

 

[Ephidel]

Jesus Christ.

What kind of hell hole is the uk turning into?

Even if you know that the story being told in court is false, you and your legal representatives are now banned from being able to question those falsehoods and cast doubt upon the prosecution story.

Well that just sounds fantastic :|
Just curious, what's the "this is a good thing" spin on this part? Because I haven't yet been able to think of something, which makes me feel rather unimaginative.

 

[Kareha]

Next we'll be getting suicide booths

 

[Symphonia]

This part is fun...

The UK's Investigatory Powers Act allows the State to tell lies in court

I'm genuinely considering moving. You can't even defend yourself in court should you be taken in? Fuck that, May and the rest of those cunts can go rot in Hell.

 

[Ashes]

I don't think the politicians are concerned about keeping us safe. It is more about control.

The sad thing is that they probably are concerned about keeping us safe. MPs are hardly the best ethicists on the floor, but it seems unlikely that this isn't well intentioned.