News Conservative Party pledges to take control of the UK's Internet

Ignoring for a moment what their intentions are, (and I'm going to go against the grain here and say I reckon they're probably more misguided than nefarious) but does anyone actually think that this government, any British government, is even capable of carrying out what it says it wants?

I mean, not to be blunt, but it's not like government has an outstanding track record when it comes to IT is it?

The perennially delayed and eventually abandoned NHS 'super-duper-IT-project' - supposedly to cost £6.4 billion, ended up costing between £12-20 billion, (depending on who you believe). How did that work out? Oh, right. (Hello Windows XP old friend...)

The NHS, CSA, Passport Agency, tax credit system, Prison Service, etc, etc. Letting the government (or civil service) near an IT system is like letting Uncle Albert pilot your nice shiny new boat.

If the government tried to implement this it would almost certainly end up exactly like that NHS project: Three times over budget, three times over the original time scale and then abandoned due to it being grossly impracticable, (and the next government of the day wanting to rid itself of the stench of the previous government's failure).

Oh the joys of being an optimist!

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Licensing_Order_of_1643

I think the advent of the printing press and the internet share a good few things in common.

 

As the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and there's no doubt that their intentions are good, however as good and bad are just a matter of perspective I'm fairly certain the bad far outweighs the good.

And yes the government has a terrible track history when it comes to IT projects but as, much like they did with the snooper charter, they'll be putting the responsibility for implementing this on the digital companies, social media platforms, and content providers with us ultimately footing the bill we will see tighter regulation of the internet in the UK and perhaps eventually the world.

 

I thought it was pretty clear that what they are proposing was to try to intimidate/force various websites to limit what is accessible in the UK on their end, rather than on "our" end. Nefarious, but not nearly as bad as the subtitle claims! There'll be a backlash to this from all parties as well, and as we've seen recently the Conservatives are not averse to the odd major U-turn!

I think the other comments here about the government actually having the capacity to follow through on these claims are valid too - they've talked this talk for a while but lack any of the technical ability to implement it if Google et al. are resistant.

 

Following similar half-baked half-arsed schemes (e.g. 'blocking' Piratebay): ISP enforced blocking of IP addresses of known "naughty" servers, and ISP-hosted DNS servers that refuse no resolve "naughty" addresses.

Basically, a bunch of extra work for ISPs for no benefit, and ultimately ineffective against anyone who can type "how to get to X" into Google.

 

I wouldn't be so sure that there will be backlash from the other parties, as RedFlames rightly pointed out a few post ago Labour are broadly in favor of controlling the internet and snooping on the public.

I also wouldn't put any faith in the tech companies refusing to play ball as despite wide spread criticism of the snoopers charter from every civil liberties group and tech company who gave evidence at select committees the government still pushed ahead with it.

 

Like people needed another reason to vote for the opposition. lol.

I say lol, but it's not even funny now. We need saving from the sanctimonious greedy cretins.

 

I agree that the opposition are unlikely to oppose this (ho ho), but going after peoples' porn would be far more unpopular a move than I think most people believe. It's taboo to talk about it for now, but it won't stay so if a ban can become more popularly discussed.

 

The problem is that since the internet isn't in any one jurisdiction the only way to enforce it is to tell ISPs to block access to everything non compliant with the opinions of whoever currently holds power or get fined, ISPs will then have no choice but to overblock with very broad strokes to be on the safe side.

 

VPN's will have to go then.. Guess it would be like a school filtering system.. government blocks sites globally, then ISP filters kick in.. Good luck controlling the entire flow of the UK internet - guess we'd better go back to dial up.

 

They're not planning to ban it, the idea is to introduce an ID system so people would have a way of proving their age before accessing such content.

Obviously that's a highly flawed system for many reasons, chiefly because there's no way to know if little johnny hasn't stolen his parents ID, you'd be forced to trust the site you provided with your ID, and by linking an ID with a person enables very precise tracking of your viewing habits and that's just to name a few of the problems that come from linking an online persona with a real life person with a real life address and phone number.

 

Thanks to everyone for sharing different angles and thoughts on this!

Let's hope it's as ineffectual as possible, anyway...

 

there's a lot of people who will back this kind of thing now - following the attack in Manchester. It's likely that the guy was spurred on by other like minded people online, etc....

Hard to argue with this point - other than 'look at North Korea'.

 

FTFY

But seriously....

 

The thing is there's not been much research done into the role that the internet has on radicalisation, the most extensive study that i could find says...

So basically the internet makes it easier for people to connect with like minded people and helps to confirm what someone already believes, like most things an older generation don't understand, rock-n-roll, comic books, films, video games, and the list goes on of things that corrupt the moral fiber of poor, helpless children and the weak willed, the internet is just the latest thing in a history replete with examples of censorship.

 

First thing I thought when I read the article, then looked at the date and realised, bugger, it might be true. Sounds like something you'd find on the Onion, not on a UK tech site.

 

I don't see anything there about a replacement for the internet? It's talking about a regulatory framework.

 

Then i can only assume you don't know what the Internet is "The Internet has no centralized governance in either technological implementation or policies for access and usage; each constituent network sets its own policies."

If you propose to regulate and introduce centralised governance each constituent network is no longer setting their own polices and as such it's no longer the internet but an intranet.

Nobody owns the Internet and the Conservative manifesto says they intended to change that by imposing regulations on the collection of inter-networked computer systems that make up the internet in the UK.

 

WOW, WOW!. The criminals don't even try to hide anymore.......... Holeee shiiiiiiiiiiiii...................

 

Worked for Trump.