As far as I'm aware, there have been less than 10 deaths in the UK due to terrorism since 7/7 (10 years ago). A similar number have died in elevator accidents.
Conservative proposal to end 'end-to-end' encryption technologies
- Thread starter opethdisciple
- Start date
As far as I'm aware, there have been less than 10 deaths in the UK due to terrorism since 7/7 (10 years ago). A similar number have died in elevator accidents.
I agree that law enforcement is generally good in this country but it's not perfect. And what happens if there's a data breach? Your bank details could get leaked from a government source almost as easily as, say, Sony.
You don't have to be a criminal to need privacy, even if it is just for your bank details. How do you think that Internet banking keeps your details safe? That's right - end-to-end encryption.
You'll do a roaring trade on these forums. A lot of people here are muito louco !
Well in 42 years, that has not happened to me. So I'm gonna bet that in the next 42, it won't happen either.
If it does, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.Well in 42 years, that has not happened to me. So I'm gonna bet that in the next 42, it won't happen either.
It's not about you, or me, or anyone else as an individual. I mean, how many times have you actually been killed by terrorists anyway?
It's about being in disagreement with the restriction of freedoms and the right to a private life. And a concern over the unintended (on unrevealed) non-terrorism effects of changes in privacy and data collection laws.
It's not just dataleaks though is it. It's datamining and profiling that at some point in the future might be sold to third parties. I don't want any of my private information being available to anyone unless I specifically give it to them.
Hey step away from the keyboard and breathe deeply.
Ok, now remain calm. Here's my response.
I couldn't care a less if the government tap my phone, read my e-mails, intercept my mail (providing after reading they forward it to me) or put me under 24/7 surveillance. I have nothing to hide, so let them crack on.
I think we have to be very careful in handing over power. I say this in nearly every thread of this kind but it's amazing how the security services are never really discussed at election time. Governments come and go but we have almost no power to vote on the direction of the security services. They are part of the establishment that are almost untouchable.
You know that bit where I said "it's not about you, or me, or any individual"?
Well, it's not about you, or me, or any individual, so why do you keep talking about you? It's a bit narcissistic, don't you think?
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,293
- Location
- London
The other issue is that our governments are doing all this surveillance and data capture and mining without public consent!
Did any of you watch the live broadcast from New Zealand over Xmas with some of the major players (Edward Snowden & Julian Assange) in this story?
The point being not only did they show the sheer scale of the NSA and its capabilities, but also that the New Zealand government where lying to their citizens about not corroborating with the NSA.
The New Zealand Government was basically allowing data on its citizens to be collected and sent to the NSA without their consent and at the same time saying that they were not doing this.
Nothing to hide or not, you do not want someone looking over your shoulder.
Did any of you watch the live broadcast from New Zealand over Xmas with some of the major players (Edward Snowden & Julian Assange) in this story?
The point being not only did they show the sheer scale of the NSA and its capabilities, but also that the New Zealand government where lying to their citizens about not corroborating with the NSA.
The New Zealand Government was basically allowing data on its citizens to be collected and sent to the NSA without their consent and at the same time saying that they were not doing this.
Nothing to hide or not, you do not want someone looking over your shoulder.
This shows the absurdity of government propaganda.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
So before I comment, do we have a link to what they're actually proposing? I can't see it in this thread unless I've missed it?
Oh lawd, you were being serious?
So you'd be happy to have government accessible CCTV throughout your house as you have nothing to hide?
But it is about all of us. I don't see your point. It will effect all of us at some point ergo it is then about me at some point.
We're not really discussing the specific Whatsapp situation, more the general creep of surveillance and data collection
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,293
- Location
- London
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 36,750
- Location
- Southampton, UK
I agree that law enforcement is generally not only good, but world class. I still don't think the mass surveillance of the population is justified though. I stick the the principle that privacy is important in any truly free society and I don't like giving that up easily.
I think his point is fairly simple, just because you are happy having no privacy does not mean others are. Therefore it's hard to see how it's in everyone's best interests because people will have differing opinions. Perhaps an opt-in register for state surveillance?
And "I've got nothing to hide" is one of the most horrible phrases of modern society.
Don't get me wrong, I don't particularly think that the government want to put a telescreen in everyone's house, but I am concerned about third parties being sold/getting hold of this information. When has government data ever been safe?
Last edited:
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 24,293
- Location
- London
I agree.
Having 'nothing to hide' does not mean I am comfortable with someone collecting information on me.