'Snooper's Charter' law being rushed through.

[RDM]

The clever terrorists will be using secure networks anyway.

Thankfully not all terrorists are clever.

Alas they don't always need to be clever, just lucky.

 

[WillyNelson]

No it doesn't. It lies with the terrorist who carries out the act.

Ok, I'll change that to 'partly'.

 

[arknor]

Termination clause ensuring these powers expire at the end of 2016

does anyone believe that will actually happen

 

[WillyNelson]

That's a deliberately emotive way of moving responsibility for someone elses actions onto people who want to preserve our freedoms. So I will ask a similar question...

The ultimate outcome of stepping out of the house may result in children being accidentally run over. How many childrens deaths would you be happy with to preserve our rights to leave our houses or should we all be locked up for our own protection?

Yes it is deliberate emotive, as are the claims that our freedoms are being inhibited and our liberties breached when in fact the impact of this legislation on our everyday lives will be largely nothing.

By the way, the price we currently pay for being allowed out of our homes is 60 0-15 year olds killed or seriously injured per year (2013). This is an 8% reduction on the previous year and 35% on 5 years previous. Reductions gained through road safety laws, infrastructure designs and campaigns, none of which has had any impact whatsoever on my rights and abilities to leave my house.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Yes it is deliberate emotive, as are the claims that our freedoms are being inhibited and our liberties breached when in fact the impact of this legislation on our everyday lives will be largely nothing.

Google keeps a record of what you are doing and ISPs do watch what you do anyway. As long as it's for the right reasons (it not sold to a company) then i have no problem with it.

 

[scorza]

Except that those people are already using the deep web and encryption. All this does is violate the privacy of ordinary citizens for marginal, if any, gain.

As I said, it makes it more difficult for them to operate

 

[RDM]

Google keeps a record of what you are doing and ISPs do watch what you do anyway. As long as it's for the right reasons (it not sold to a company) then i have no problem with it.

Google does sell this information though. Hence targeted adverts exist.

 

[apg]

Well, I don't know where I stand on this subject overall, but I know where I stand on this post.

Does it not seem slightly off to you that in one sentence, you are deriding him for 'letting other people tell him what his opinion is'. In the very next sentence you tell him that he is wrong to have that opinion, and you ... tell him what his opinion should be.

one of the reasons why i didn't reply to his/her post. obviously a half whit.

 

[RDM]

obviously a half whit.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Google does sell this information though. Hence targeted adverts exist.

I know, but I choose to use Google + chrome and know that they do this. I meant if they get it directly from the ISPs and paying for our private communications.

 

[LateX'Dog]

https://www.writetothem.com/ - Locate your MP using your postcode.

http://pastebin.com/g868GTKi - For a quick sample letter i threw together

Copy Paste

 

[oldbag]

A use of a VPN is worth considering? Or is that pointless?

 

[RDM]

A use of a VPN is worth considering? Or is that pointless?

I guess it depends on what you are doing and if you think the trade-offs in using one justify the increased anonymity. Which isn't really something that any of us would be able to tell you.

 

[MikeTheNative]

Are people really that bothered about ISP's holding their data for a year? I understand that it's meant to be private but unless you have a criminal investigation against you then no one is going to see it.

 

[arknor]

https://www.writetothem.com/ - Locate your MP using your postcode.

http://pastebin.com/g868GTKi - For a quick sample letter i threw together

Copy Paste

sign them up to the next website.


worse than poop through your letter box

 

[Hades]

Yes it is deliberate emotive, as are the claims that our freedoms are being inhibited and our liberties breached when in fact the impact of this legislation on our everyday lives will be largely nothing.

By the way, the price we currently pay for being allowed out of our homes is 60 0-15 year olds killed or seriously injured per year (2013). This is an 8% reduction on the previous year and 35% on 5 years previous. Reductions gained through road safety laws, infrastructure designs and campaigns, none of which has had any impact whatsoever on my rights and abilities to leave my house.

Improved road safety cannot be used retrospectively to track you or use that information against your wishes. Logging if online and telephony activity does.

 

[LordSplodge]

How much security are you prepared to sacrifice for your freedom? 1 death? 10 deaths?

The logical conclusion of your argument here is to have everybody monitored 24/7 in every location you are at. Otherwise if a death happens then the system has failed.

In reality freedom and privacy must be balanced against security. In this case the mass storage of records adds no real additional security. It does, however, allow Government access to a lot of useful data...data that *could* be used against its citizens.

Deficient security, in this context could equate to successful terrorist attacks and/or pedophiles operating freely. So a logical outcome would be persons killed and/or kiddies fiddled with. How many of each would you be happy with in order to preserve your freedoms?
.

All you needed to do was add Nazis to that and you'd had broke the Internet.

 

[Freefaller]

Or not using the internet at all.

Indeed.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

To protect your liberties - we must infringe your liberties. Don't buy it.

Intrusive surveillance is essential in some cases but it should never be arbitrary.

 

[Amp34]

Isn't a lot of our information scoured already anyway and they've stopped things happening already with the access they get already. Giving more access may dilute this, but also it may uncover things which just do not need to be uncovered which serves nothing other than causing personal problems for millions at the cost of not necessarily preventing anything.

The clever terrorists will be using secure networks anyway.

They aren't gaining more access or getting more information. This legislation is ostensibly to replace existing legislation that was struck down as a major infringement of privacy in the EU courts.

I do wonder how long it will take for a privacy group to take this law to the EU courts and see if they can get it struck off.