That's actually a variant of the original quote, which is:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Govenment to spend £12 billion spying on our Email & Internet Browsing Habits
- Thread starter magick
- Start date
That's actually a variant of the original quote, which is:
They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I do hope so, the company I work for make them
I've never been under the impression that anything I do on the internet is private.
Absolutely love the idea if it helps to catch terrorist scum like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland
and paedos. Joe Public need not fear in terms of liberties if they are not criminal.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Copeland
and paedos. Joe Public need not fear in terms of liberties if they are not criminal.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 8,011
- Location
- Wiltshire
My ticket out of the country is booked.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
Unfortunately, you're uploading your nasty email to the internet (the hotmail site, in this case), and the government suddenly want to know why the hell you're wanting to know the code to the staff only entrance for GCHQ and what the hell this 'bomb' business is all about
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
What happens when the definition of what is criminal changes? A system that monitors everything is dangerous for that very reason. If I could know everything you're doing under the pretense that I want warning in case you do something criminal and I find out you're doing something (even something technically legal) that I totally disagree with, what happens next?
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 8,436
- Location
- Kent
He worked alone and didn't communicate with anyone. This is precisely the kind of scum it wouldn't help you with
It isn't stupid. People will complain for a few weeks, Labour will back off while implying that anyone who objects for any reason is guilty of something very bad.
Then they'll do it anyway, probably indirectly, once the fuss has died down.
They know that will work.
The main purpose of the modern Labour party is to increase the degree of routine surveillance and control of everyone by the state. That's why they will spend vast amounts of money on it rather than on anything beneficial to people in general.
For the first time ever, I am going to vote conservative.
Are you joking?
If not, would it be OK with you if I come round to your house and fit it with video cameras everywhere, feeding to the net, so that you are under constant surveillance at home? If that bothers you at all, you are by your own argument a criminal and probably a terrorist and/or paedophile.
"The innocent have nothing to fear" is something claimed by many tyrannies.
Has nothing to do with having something to hide, if you don't see that then you are so clearly missing the point.
Whether you vote labour or con is going to mean diddly squat to what changes in any case. If they decide to implement it, then it will happen regardless of who is in power. They're only puppets after all.
Government rely on our fears, after all our fear of 'factor X' and their 'solution X' is all that matters. The facts often speak very differently then the dribble that's fed to us through mainstream media and political puppets.
Whether you vote labour or con is going to mean diddly squat to what changes in any case. If they decide to implement it, then it will happen regardless of who is in power. They're only puppets after all.
Government rely on our fears, after all our fear of 'factor X' and their 'solution X' is all that matters. The facts often speak very differently then the dribble that's fed to us through mainstream media and political puppets.
I do see the definition of a terroist changing over the coming years from 'islamic extremists' to *anyone* who isn't aligned with the political will of that state or speaks out/protests against it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 3,761
- Location
- here
What you are implying is something different though. Yes a terrosit may be a criminal, but a criminal doesnt need to be a terrorist.
Read 1984. Protesters, those who speak out, criminals will all become terroists.
Associate
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 1,937
- Location
- Isle of Wight
The government finds yet another IT-based project to waste billions of pounds on. It will cost far more than their initial projections, projects always do...
Last edited:
It's obvious what you're supposed to do regarding incoming communications that you think might not be approved by the authorities - do your duty and inform on the sender. Vigilance, citizen!
Things are likely to become more economically strained in the future, as new countries (China, India) become economically dominant and the UK's content-free economy runs out of famous names to sell to them. That sort of thing tends to promote extremism. Imagine a truly authoritarian tyranny that knows everywhere you go, everything you buy or sell, every non-verbal communication you send or receive and which watches you every minute of the day. They'll have no trouble finding people to publically torture and/or kill to maintain a suitable level of fear in everyone else. Every day, you can wonder if it will be you. Or your lover. Or perhaps one of your children.
But hey, you've got nothing to fear if you're innocent. Everyone knows that. The innocent have never had anything to fear from any regime, obviously. Of course, it couldn't happen here anyway because...err...King Arthur will return to stop it! With Aslan beside him! Obviously.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 3,750
- Location
- Manchester
It's very short sighted for people to use the, "It's ok because if i'm not a criminal then I have nothing to worry about". We are living in a time where everything is fairly stable. Do you trust some government or person in power in 15 years time you don't yet know with ALL your information and the way you've lived your life so far, the contacts you have and people you are associated with in some vague way.
It's a very frightening prospect to think so many people are so quick to let other people who they dont personally know with all their information. You do realise that people in the government are just normal people with their own flaws, would you go blindly handing your information to a random christian on the street because christians are supposed to be trustworthy so therefore it's fine? Everything is open to abuse and exploitation.
If it was all paper based then it would still be a huge worry but we are in the electronic age and where people could photocopy paper and send it to people it wasn't so easily distributed. These days, things are held in massive databases, is easily searchable and very easily copied/distributed. One minor slip up by one person and everyones entire history/details is out there for everyone to see and use. Bit scary in my opinion.
It's a very frightening prospect to think so many people are so quick to let other people who they dont personally know with all their information. You do realise that people in the government are just normal people with their own flaws, would you go blindly handing your information to a random christian on the street because christians are supposed to be trustworthy so therefore it's fine? Everything is open to abuse and exploitation.
If it was all paper based then it would still be a huge worry but we are in the electronic age and where people could photocopy paper and send it to people it wasn't so easily distributed. These days, things are held in massive databases, is easily searchable and very easily copied/distributed. One minor slip up by one person and everyones entire history/details is out there for everyone to see and use. Bit scary in my opinion.
It's very useful for a suitably controlling state to make them so. It gives the people another reason to be scared (terrorists could strike at any time!), positions the state as a courageous protector (protection from terrorist attacks, obvously) and provides a never-ending excuse for as much surveillance as possible, imprisonment without trial, all that sort of stuff (to enable the state to effectively protect the people against terrorism). If you disagree with any of it, you are therefore helping terrorism. If you commit any other crime, then you are weakening the state, therefore you are helping terrorism. Therefore criminals are terrorists.
The heuristics used to scan emails are pretty sophisticated, a post like yours would be dismissed.of course (anthrax) if everyone started randomly (London) putting certain "keywords" into (allah) every digital (jihad) communication, it would render the (bomb) system pretty useless, since it would (ricin) flag up everything.
He worked alone and didn't communicate with anyone. This is precisely the kind of scum it wouldn't help you with
Haven't we all seen enough movies, books and games that show where this sort of stuff could lead? Go back and check some out as a reminder why these things are bad regardless of whether you feel its ok now, doesn't mean it is or will be in the years to come!