1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Snooper's Charter back on the table, says May

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 8 May 2015.

  1. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,377
    Likes Received:
    1,803
  2. Maki role

    Maki role Dale you're on a roll... Staff

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2012
    Posts:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    97
    It was never going to go away and die peacefully. Had the election results been different I'd have been surprised if a similar proposition didn't turn up eventually.
     
  3. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    Theresa May really is an extremely unpleasant human being, or close approximation thereof.
     
  4. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    312
    To be fair wasn't this in their manifesto?

    I'm guessing from the results of the election that the majority of the public are happy with the government knowing they've been looking at sites relating to weight loss, drinking problems, pregnancy tests, etc, etc.
    Or that they sent a text message to their boss at 12:57 today, that they spoke on the phone to someone who attended a march against cuts last week, that they are associated with extremist groups like the Green party.
     
  5. Maki role

    Maki role Dale you're on a roll... Staff

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2012
    Posts:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    97
    Remember that just because you vote for a given party doesn't mean you have to agree with every policy. But on that note, I raised the point about this proposal in the office this morning, nobody legitimately cared, like at all. Personally I'm not afraid of the government using this data as quite frankly I don't belive they're compentant enough to be an issue. I'm more worried that simply having it all there means somebody else can theoretically get to it. Given the events of the last couple years in regards to security breaches etc. that doesn't sound all too far fetched.
     
  6. spolsh

    spolsh Active Member

    Joined:
    4 Feb 2012
    Posts:
    729
    Likes Received:
    98
    Download your free copy of "GCHQ helps you encrypt your data" a free cloud based service from the Home Office. Please note all other encryption methods are illegal and full of Trojans and back-doors and made by those Russian hacker chaps. Stay safe, stay monitored.

    And why not get your very own free GCHQ home-cam set, it keeps you safe by letting us see that you're OK.

    Wonder what'll trigger full monitoring - a visit to the truecrypt site or something maybe.
     
  7. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    312
    We can only hope it's going to be limited to the government, but based on previous wording i highly doubt it, in previous attempts the data would have be accessible to any "relevant public authority" While that sounds all safe and sound its not until you look at how a "relevant public authority" is defined do things get a little murky..
    There's a rather dry PDF document that attempts to set out what a public authority is and i think its safe to say they don't know as the meaning is a subject of constant judicial review, In one such judgment they found that a farmers market was a functional public authority.

    It's kind of worrying that as you say "nobody legitimately cares, like at all. ", I do wonder if these same powers were given to a privately owned company if peoples perceptions would change, if for instance Google not only knew what websites people viewed but also knew who they phoned, who they texted, where they live, what they spend their money on, and every other detail of their lives, if they would change their mind.
     
  8. Maki role

    Maki role Dale you're on a roll... Staff

    Joined:
    9 Jan 2012
    Posts:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    97


    To be honest, I reckon if I asked the same people whether they'd care if such a company had their info, their answer would be the same. If anything I'd be more inclined to trust Google than the government, at least I know it's hard to get a job in there. My cousin worked for an arm of the council down south who deals with personal records and probation. Frankly she's one of the last people I'd want to have my data with. Doesn't fill me with confidence for other parts of the UK.

    Besides, I think Google already knows all my info, just seems to net me better adverts. I get ads for camera lenses, rucksacks, computer bits, electrical goods, cookware etc. On one hand it's unnerving, on the other hand it's intriguing as they're honestly getting it right for me at least.
     
  9. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    312
    I so badly misread that, i was about to suggest Ann Summers. :D
     
  10. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,161
    Likes Received:
    141
    Perhaps some irony has been lost on me. But Google has exactly that information.

    For example if I click a link in an email in Gmail, Google redirects me through their server first before Im taken to the link location, thus recording which site I'm going to.
     
  11. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Staff Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    12,377
    Likes Received:
    1,803
    Then there's its advertising department, which can record your visits to sites you find in other ways. Oh, and it runs a popular public DNS which allows it to log every single DNS lookup you make. If the NSA wanted to run a public-facing business, it'd probably rhyme with "oogle..."
     
  12. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    312
    No, you got all the irony. ;)

    Although i would add that i hope it's unlikely that Google also knows where we live, who we associate with, phone, text, or is storing other forms of metadata on us. A relationship database is only as powerful as the information put into it, the more data entry points you have the more accurately you can see what associations exist between your data.
     
  13. wolfticket

    wolfticket Downwind from the bloodhounds

    Joined:
    19 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    208
    Google stores information through and regarding our use of their commercial services. Although a lot of people don't mind/care/realise this and Google so ubiquitous that this data is far reaching is it is still essentially a choice.

    It is a very different beast to our government collecting blanket data on communications and not analogous in my opinion.
     
  14. fluxtatic

    fluxtatic New Member

    Joined:
    25 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    507
    Likes Received:
    5
    Even though they're different beasts, is it any better that Google is doing it, to the extent that they can?
     
  15. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,161
    Likes Received:
    141
    If you are an android user google has all of that. If you are not they can geolocate you with an accuracy it makes no difference. In fact if you are a gmail user and your address is on an online purchase invoice, they know exactly where you live.
     
  16. Nexxo

    Nexxo Queue Jumper

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,571
    Likes Received:
    1,249
    I think people freak out too much. Your privacy is perfectly safe, if you know where to sit:

    [​IMG]
     
  17. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,249
    Likes Received:
    312
    And that's why I choose not to use Google services and products, we can all choose if we're comfortable with that level of intrusion, if we are happy to trade some of our privacy to get something in return.
    When the state enacts a law that mandates the collection of metadata on the population your choices are very limited

    We may have come a long way since the days of slapping a yellow star on people so they can be easily recognized and targeted, now days things are much more nuanced.

    Steve Biko:- "The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.
     
  18. mucgoo

    mucgoo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    1,602
    Likes Received:
    41
    The government can lock you up (and in some parts of the world kill you) "legally". Google can't.
     
  19. Yadda

    Yadda Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2003
    Posts:
    3,217
    Likes Received:
    49
    Winston was far too introverted. There's a time and a place for everything, and that was clearly naked hula time. :)
     
    Nexxo likes this.
  20. wolfticket

    wolfticket Downwind from the bloodhounds

    Joined:
    19 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    2,887
    Likes Received:
    208
    In a word: Yes.

    Google are a corporation that acts upon the information it is voluntarily given to them. Their power to act upon this information is limited buy the rule of law.

    The Government isn't.
     

Share This Page