Poll: Investigatory Powers Bill or "Snoopers' Charter" has been approved

Are you happy with the investigatory powers bill being passed?

  • Yes, I fully agree with it.

    Votes: 14 2.5%

  • Yes, but I am uncomfortable with certain aspects of it.

    Votes: 31 5.5%

  • I am undecided.

    Votes: 27 4.8%

  • No, but I do agree with parts of it.

    Votes: 103 18.2%

  • No, I fully disagree with it.

    Votes: 391 69.1%
  • Total voters
    566
If mass surveillance is about counter-terrorism then why are they (the NSA) targeting
the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the Bank of Japan, the European Union, the United Nations, and at least 38 different countries, including U.S. allies such as Italy, Japan, Brazil, France, Germany, Greece, Mexico, and Cyprus.

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/16/the-nsas-spy-hub-in-new-york-hidden-in-plain-sight/

Let's just be honest, it's about control

The UK has decided it wants to be the big boy in the spying relationship and have gone as far as they have because of all the sheeple who just don't care as long as they can go down the pub on a friday and use facebook.

When all these databases get hacked there is going to be a poostorm like no other.
 
oldbag said:
It's very likely they've been collecting logs for years anyway.
Click to expand...

It's not the logs that are the greatest concern in this cluster**** of a piece of legislation.

Amp34 said:
Then there is the cost of storing all that data ISPs will be required to collect. Unless the government drastically increases the funding they plan on giving them ISPs are going to have to claw back the money needed for that as well.
Click to expand...

Well the chancellor is going to announce £400m funding for FTTP in his autumn statement. We all know that a FTTP rollout is a farcical dream whilst BT are in control, so they can just use that money to buy storage for these logs.
 
Greebo said:
Which is allowed in the UK>
Click to expand...

The hope would be that with every internet-going man and his gran in some way connected to an infringement or two through their ISPs, hacks and naughty pinching of intellectual property, or what can be construed as such, cannot be fined or sent to prison en masse. And although technically possible in our system, it's harder to achieve in practice (well, if MPs do their jobs anyway and you're attempting to strip legal rights in the process). So in the end they'll fudge that bit of it, with patchy enforcement. The real risk is test cases for particularly litigious entities, making them bolder, and anti-competitive behaviour sabotaging startups and industrial rivals. A potential garden of trumped up charges in other words.
 
platypus said:
MPs, lawyers, journalists and religious ministers are exempt from aspects of the legislation.
Click to expand...

Unbelievable.

It's inevitable that the isp's storing these logs will be hacked in the future, they will be a veritable gold mine for hacker groups, and to be honest I can't wait until it happens just to watch the **** storm ensue.
 
platypus said:
MPs, lawyers, journalists and religious ministers are exempt from aspects of the legislation.
Click to expand...

How convenient.

Those with the most to gain from such a law financially, are exempt.

Those who are most likely to have their perversions and indiscretions discovered, are exempt.

Can't for one moment wonder why Keith Vaz wouldn't want his internet history logged - can you?? :confused:
 
I wan to know does the exemption only applies while you are an MP or does it continue when you are voted out for 4 years?
 
Greebo said:
I wan to know does the exemption only applies while you are an MP or does it continue when you are voted out for 4 years?
Click to expand...

Whatever comes under parliamentary immunity, which I think is the principle they'll be relying on for MPs, will not extend to the people no longer in parliament. Though it'd be inconsistent having one higher privacy group or groups with a permanent exemption while opening up former holders of public office to the this net, it's technically possible with bad legislation in our legal system. I guess they figure that the judges will help bash it out for them once it gets applied in practice. Can't wait for the British Bill of Rights now, or whatever May's hoping for next!:o
 
What % of the population would be needed to run http://ruinmysearchhistory.com/ on constant to a: create massive ammounts of space needed to hold the data, and/or b: to make it annoying for TPTB?

Also, how hard would it be to make a really horrible version of that search history destroyer and plant it onto someone's computer?

Does this not also give them powers to hack and plant? hmmm.
 
Threepwood said:
What % of the population would be needed to run http://ruinmysearchhistory.com/ on constant to a: create massive ammounts of space needed to hold the data, and/or b: to make it annoying for TPTB?

Also, how hard would it be to make a really horrible version of that search history destroyer and plant it onto someone's computer?

Does this not also give them powers to hack and plant? hmmm.
Click to expand...

Entrapment and Jeremy Kyle -- I think you're onto something here, sir! :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom