Amber Rudd fails to understand the internet

Fishbait · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:34

V F said:
The same Government that loses laptops and classified discs and disks on trains, taxis and posting classified stuff through Royal Mail?

Vague memories of Cameron saying he was trying to protect children, by blocking porn on the internet in blighty. Instead of doing some more obvious like, telling parents to keep an eye on their kids.

P.S. Oh no, porn! Won't somebody rush to our defense! :rolleyes:

This was the same bloke, hell bent on protecting children, that drove home from a pub, with his misses & body guard in tow, only to have to turn around because they'd forgotten their kid in the pub.

/failol

Fishbait · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:34

Pawnless Endgame said:
Granted I was a bit OTT there, the whole things still smacks of Nanny May. Her new nickname I saw on Encyclopaedia Dramatica today

Reminds me of a quote:
"We're slowly reaching the point where the most far fetched part of V for Vendetta is the bloke smoking in a pub."

FishFluff · 26 Mar 2017 at 18:52

The Government are trying to use a terrorist incident to erode our civil liberties some more? Shocker.

If the security services want to look at a suspects encrypted WhatsApp messages (obviously with a warrant) then we already have laws in place making it illegal to unlock an encrypted device. Amber Rudd is either a moron or dangerously uninformed. Or both.

scorza · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:03

Terrorism is just part and parcel of everyday living in a big city, so says the Mayor of London. So what do you expect?

Caged · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:06

Did he say that, or are you misquoting?

Or quoting from a misquote, more precisely.

Edit: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/worl...nd-parcel-of-life-in-a-big-city-a3347891.html

I think a lot of journalistic license has been used to interpret that quote.

Mynight · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:07

Fishbait said:
Reminds me of a quote:
"We're slowly reaching the point where the most far fetched part of V for Vendetta is the bloke smoking in a pub."

Any idea who said that originally? Drawing a blank from Google

.

scorza · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:11

Caged said:
Did he say that, or are you misquoting?

Or quoting from a misquote, more precisely.

Judge for yourself:

Threepwood · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:15

So no, he did not say that.

He is saying that the city has to be prepared for these things.

It would be a bit daft if not.

Caged · 26 Mar 2017 at 19:16

Can't say I disagree with the statement - large global cities are more valuable targets for this sort of thing.

I don't think trying to mess with encryption at a legislative level is the right answer, it won't solve the problem and it will expose people to a greater threat of other crimes.

APM · 26 Mar 2017 at 20:37

A proper bunch of numpties.

That's about the best I can do in praise of our dear leaders.

If we're all so smart however then surely it's only a question of time before we get the leadership we deserve...

cheesyboy · 26 Mar 2017 at 20:54

Just think of all the death and injury those poor people in Westminster could have been saved from if only police were able to break encryption on the phone of that guy they weren't watching after he'd gone and terrorismed them all.

Can't believe anyone would oppose it...

Pawnless Endgame · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:06

cheesyboy said:
Just think of all the death and injury those poor people in Westminster could have been saved from if only police were able to break encryption on the phone of that guy they weren't watching after he'd gone and terrorismed them all.

Can't believe anyone would oppose it...

Really? Just really? :rolleyes:

If phone encryption was broken or prevented, they would have just used another device to circumvent surveillance. Us law-abiding citizens are the losers at the end of the day with our privacy going the way of the Dodo.

Caged · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:07

Well that's one way of reading that post

neil_g · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:07

Pawnless Endgame said:
Really? Just really?

If phone encryption was broken or prevented, they would have just used another device to circumvent surveillance. Us law-abiding citizens are the losers at the end of the day with our privacy going the way of the Dodo.

Think you missed the sarcasm dude

scorza · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:12

Caged said:
Can't say I disagree with the statement - large global cities are more valuable targets for this sort of thing.

Not in large global cities like Seoul or Tokyo.

dowie · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:16

scorza said:
Not in large global cities like Seoul or Tokyo.

yes but they've got tiny muslim populations and also no white supremacists and no Irish Republicans

Japan has had terror attacks before though - the cult gassing their underground for example

and Seoul has a rather large threat to the north

Fishbait · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:21

neil_g said:
Think you missed the sarcasm dude

That was one major case of "Whoosh!"

cheesyboy · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:21

scorza said:
Not in large global cities like Seoul or Tokyo.

Tokyo subway sarin attack wasn't all that long ago, really.

Fishbait · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:21

Mynight said:
Any idea who said that originally? Drawing a blank from Google .

Duckduckgo'd to the rescue hehe.

https://np.reddit.com/r/britishprob...slowly_reaching_the_point_where_the_most_far/

scorza · 26 Mar 2017 at 21:23

cheesyboy said:
Tokyo subway sarin attack wasn't all that long ago, really.

... and nothing like the terror threat we face today.