I don't mean Google I mean the government, if they get overwhelmed with false flags they will not be able to sort the wheat from the chaff so to say.
Poll: Investigatory Powers Bill or "Snoopers' Charter" has been approved
- Thread starter thebennyboy
- Start date
I don't mean Google I mean the government, if they get overwhelmed with false flags they will not be able to sort the wheat from the chaff so to say.
I still don't get the need to bulk collect. It appears after every attack that has happened since 9/11 the security services are awfully quick to pick up the offenders. Surely money would be better spent tracking those who are a concern more effectively.
On the whole I don't have a huge issue with bulk collection of data(other than the extra costs) I just really do not like who has access to it. My mate works for the NHS can he just look my history up and use it to take the mick
. Oversight has never been good in this country so the amount of people with access concerns me greatly.
On the whole I don't have a huge issue with bulk collection of data(other than the extra costs) I just really do not like who has access to it. My mate works for the NHS can he just look my history up and use it to take the mick
. Oversight has never been good in this country so the amount of people with access concerns me greatly.Well you should and I feel you are a little ignorant not to see the issues with this bill.
Why do you not see an issue with the bulk collect of personal online data with a 12 month retention span or so they say.
Its like the plod with the DNA and finger print stuff its there for life innocent or guilty.
People need to wise up fast as this is progressing at an ever increasing pace, yet everyone has the heads in snap chat, facebook and instagram.
I dunno a lemming is going to lemming I suppose.
He didn't say he didn't see the issues with this bill. He said he didn't see the issues with bulk collection of data, which has been happening for years anyway.
Well you should and I feel you are a little ignorant not to see the issues with this bill.
Why do you not see an issue with the bulk collect of personal online data with a 12 month retention span or so they say.
Its like the plod with the DNA and finger print stuff its there for life innocent or guilty.
People need to wise up fast as this is progressing at an ever increasing pace, yet everyone has the heads in snap chat, facebook and instagram.
I dunno a lemming is going to lemming I suppose.
Surely querying it would suffice? Not sure the need for the digs
.No I have little concern with data collection it's already happening and afaik GCHQ have a perfect record in regards to no leaks of data. While I dont like the secretive collection and usage I can see the need.
The issues with the bill in my opinion are not with the collection itself it is with the usage and safeguards involved. With so many entities involved most of which have zero right to have access to such data only to be expanded in scope later on is ridiculous. There is no way effective oversight can be maintained on all these entities to prevent leaks, blackmail just overly curious people.
If the data was limited to a warrant and the security services then I see little issue with them having my data. Warrantless access is disgusting.
We know it been happening for years on the sly, but now its in the open and under government approval then the should be issues with it.
Imagine in 1985 the government approved a system to read every ones postal mail!
Imagine in 1985 the government tapped all phone calls!
Its like a communist approach through the backdoor of a so called democracy.
Do as I say approach, I might as well go and live in North Korea or China.
If you people who don't see this for what it is, then I am afraid you are one of them people that cannot see the wood for the trees.
From the OCUK polls its 11 need shooting in the face and another 32 it needs explaining to them very clearly.
Surely querying it would suffice? Not sure the need for the digs
No I have little concern with data collection it's already happening and afaik GCHQ have a perfect record in regards to no leaks of data. While I dont like the secretive collection and usage I can see the need.
The issues with the bill in my opinion are not with the collection itself it is with the usage and safeguards involved. With so many entities involved most of which have zero right to have access to such data only to be expanded in scope later on is ridiculous. There is no way effective oversight can be maintained on all these entities to prevent leaks, blackmail just overly curious people.
If the data was limited to a warrant and the security services then I see little issue with them having my data. Warrantless access is disgusting.
I wasn't digging at you personally I do apologize.
But do you not see that, why on earth would you as an innocent person have personal data collected 24/7/365.
If you under investigation or a suspect then yes I agree, but to tarnish everyone with the same brush is a little over encompassing I feel.
16 senior managers in the gambling commision.
I wasn't digging at you personally I do apologize.
But do you not see that, why on earth would you as an innocent person have personal data collected 24/7/365.
If you under investigation or a suspect then yes I agree, but to tarnish everyone with the same brush is a little over encompassing I feel.
O no I do agree I would much prefer that. However this bill is going through best we can hope for is serious reforms.
Between this bill and what was happening (apparently) before I would prefer the before model if I had no other choice.
Ahh sorry, I haven't slept in a while everything is a personal dig at me when I'm tired. My bad
.
With acess to the list and enough time/people to go through it i reckon one could easily get pretty much everyone you know fired, divorced, imprisoned or put on the sex offenders register (which may lead to at least the first 2 on the list as a consequence)
I totally agree and I can see how as I used to work for the government.
I also worked for a couple of months with the Criminal Records Bureau and I can assure you with all my heart, this bill is going to snipe anyone who is classed as dissident.
One of the security clearances I was vetted for asked me about my porn habits during the interview. Not sure if they knew and were checking for truth or just trying to throw me
. Was a rather surprising question.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2007
- Posts
- 6,647
Wtf....
One of the security clearances I was vetted for asked me about my porn habits during the interview. Not sure if they knew and were checking for truth or just trying to throw me
"Four fingers" = blacklist
Indeed. I must have had a wtf look on my face as he smirked after he asked
. One of my references was asked it as well, maybe me and my mates are weird but we've never discussed porn preferences.Yeah I'm stuffed now
(yes and the pun ).
Last edited:
I never got access to the NPC disk, only a select few bum lickers could issue an enhanced disclosure. Don't forget am talking 14 years ago now so god knows what information they have now.
I suppose its the slow creep so to say, first you collect as much data as possible.
Then you create a situation or problem that requires peoples browsing history.
Then you legislate and its a free for all on all your data and communications.
Its becoming all a little matrix type thing, skin crawl stuff.
I need a shower!
One of the security clearances I was vetted for asked me about my porn habits during the interview. Not sure if they knew and were checking for truth or just trying to throw me
The lower clearances don't bother with that but when you get into the big leagues like MI5 and state secrets, the vetting wants to know all about your sexual activities and history. The reason is that if you are into something that could cause you a lot of embarassment like you are into BDSM and pay to be whipped each week, there's a risk that foreign intelligence or other adversaries could use it to compromise and blackmail you.
My tinfoil mode also thinks that this is a way the security services try to ensure loyalty in their own ranks, and prevent anyone doing an Edward Snowden. Would you betray an organization that keeps detailed files on all the embarassing things in your sexual life?
Last edited:
This wasn't a "big league" one. I'm not that special
Maybe you were being interviewed for more than just the job