Government snooping of all your internet useage set to go ahead

[anywebsite 10]

I was trying to make the point that every time you do anything it is at some company or other's convenience. You are right neither is ok, but is one really that much worse than the other? For example I would rather the home office could access my phone calls from last year than say Boots log my details and record that I bought condoms from them and proceed to spam me through the post and email and by telephone with offers of suggested similar products.

I'm sure that has a greater effect on my life.

 

And there is always a choice. You are welcome to join me in my nuclear bunker with satellite phone and optional tinfoil hat.

I'm even considering keeping pigeons as an alternative form of communication to circumvent censorship.

 

If the home office is logging everybody's emails & phone calls, you don't get any choice in that. If Boots is logging online purchases (pretty much guaranteed) then you're free to buy your condoms elsewhere if you object. You can (un)tick the boxes to say you don't want to be spammed by the private companies, they have to obey laws like the DPA, etc.

 

Boots can't force your ISP to find out where else you're buying condoms from, or whatever. They can only see what you're doing on their website or in their shop. The government can do whatever they feel like.

Edited July 5, 2012 by anywebsite

[Cyclone 10]

You have the right to object to anything and everything. Especially before it comes into being when there is still a chance it could be prevented.

Governments are taking the lead from private companies in respect to data collection and monitoring.

Why am I not allowed to compare the two or object to the actions of private companies too?

I agree that it will be abused and doubt that it will help to prevent any crimes.

You are allowed to compare what you like. But a direct comparison with the implication that the behaviour is the same is erroneous.

I have no choice about what government I use, I can vote, but the side I vote for may not win.

I can choose not to use any specific private company if I don't like their policy on data capture.

 

Why is one form of censorship and control ok and another isn't?

Because one is a breach of privacy (not censorship) and the other isn't. It's quite simple really.

If they were actively following you around and actively monitoring you that would be much more extreme IMO. Surely what the government enacts will have a number of protections included whereas private companies would not.

I'm sure the government will tell you that it has numerous safe guards. And I'm sure I don't trust them.

Again, I can walk away from a private company, I cannot choose an alternate government.

[dosxuk 10]

Do not forget commenting on riots, as in making a big joke about it lands one automatically in prison.

 

Who's been jailed for just commenting on riots?

 

Who's been jailed for just joking about riots?

 

Many people tried to use "I was joking" as an excuse for their behaviour when caught after posting "Lets smash up the town centre, I want a new XBox. Meet at Maccy D's at 9pm" (obviously minus every other letter and adding extra vowels) and then turning up at McDonalds only to be arrested after the Police read their message.

[Cyclone 10]

For that matter, if you pay by cash, Boots don't know who you are and so can't record that you bought anything.

[Teddybare 10]

You are allowed to compare what you like. But a direct comparison with the implication that the behaviour is the same is erroneous.

I have no choice about what government I use, I can vote, but the side I vote for may not win.

I can choose not to use any specific private company if I don't like their policy on data capture.

Because one is a breach of privacy (not censorship) and the other isn't. It's quite simple really.

I'm sure the government will tell you that it has numerous safe guards. And I'm sure I don't trust them.

Again, I can walk away from a private company, I cannot choose an alternate government.

 

If you agree to that breach of privacy by using net banking, mobiles etc, is that not the same as giving them permission to do it? Kinda like phoning Barclays and hearing "this phone call may be recorded".

 

As for changing governments, you could always emigrate

I hear Ecuador is very nice.

[Cyclone 10]

There is no breach of privacy if I interact with a company and expect them to store data about me.

It is a breach of privacy for the government to intercept all my communications.

 

I don't see why you're having such difficulty understanding the difference between voluntarily entering into a contract with the expectation that some data will be captured, and having no choice about it being captured.

[splodgeyAl 10]

We've talked about this before, you come across as extremely defensive regarding the forum rules. In this context it's perfectly reasonable to use it as a comparison to the government snooping (and I will continue to defend the way the forum operates).

 

The government does not operate T&Cs, it makes the law and it does so on behalf of us. We do not simply have to accept whatever it does and try to find means to circumvent it, we participate in the democratic process and make it clear that we don't approve and hopefully the policy will never be implemented.

 

I'm not really sure what your point is anymore, the forum doesn't intercept anything, it is in no way comparable to the policy discussed, nor is the government really comparable to a privately run forum or even a company.

 

Do you not object to the government interception of all your communications? Do you not think that people have a right to object?

 

I wonder what changed in two minutes

[Cyclone 10]

My opinion apparently.

[Anna B 1,414]

OK after checking with the Admin team and obtaining permission to reply.

 

The Admin team have access to the registration details of the users, they are bound by the Data Protection Act and are not allowed to disclose them unless compelled by a warrant.

 

No one on this forum can access the private messages of another user unless a user reports a private message they have received.

 

No one on this forum can see what password you log in with, not even the Admins.

 

The remaining moderation team has no access to your registration details.

 

Any questions regarding cookies should be answered by the Privacy & Cookie Policy.

 

If that doesn't answer your forum related queries then I'm sorry but you need to speak to the Admin team via the helpdesk.

 

I heard a throwaway remark on Radio 4 this afternoon ('World at One' I think) that during the riots, Sheffield did not join in because undercover police were posting on forums such as this, trying to counter any inflamatory remarks that might instigate rioting in Sheffield.

 

In that instance I don't think I have a problem with this, but I've also heard rumours that the government employs proffesional trolls to undermine political argument on forums and blogging sites. They do this not with sound political argument but by getting the thread closed down for breaching rules such as swearing and abuse and sidetracking the arguments.

 

The internet and its potential for freedom of speech is a major problem for the establishment, and I think they would do anything to cripple its power, unfortunately they can't close it down whenever there's an incident like they do in China, they have to be more devious.

Edited July 5, 2012 by Anna B

[Jag82 10]

I’m not a criminal or a terrorist so why does it matter if they know about my online activity. I occasionally slag the government off, and I’m happy for them to read what I have to say about them.

 

Big brother knows best eh?

[Darth Vader 10]

For that matter, if you pay by cash, Boots don't know who you are and so can't record that you bought anything.

 

Unless you use your Boots Advantage Card, of course.

[Darth Vader 10]

I heard a throwaway remark on Radio 4 this afternoon ('World at One' I think) that during the riots, Sheffield did not join in because undercover police were posting on forums such as this, trying to counter any inflamatory remarks that might instigate rioting in Sheffield.

 

In that instance I don't think I have a problem with this, but I've also heard rumours that the government employs proffesional trolls to undermine political argument on forums and blogging sites. They do this not with sound political argument but by getting the thread closed down for breaching rules such as swearing and abuse and sidetracking the arguments.

 

The internet and its potential for freedom of speech is a major problem for the establishment, and I think they would do anything to cripple its power, unfortunately they can't close it down whenever there's an incident like they do in China, they have to be more devious.

 

Didn't Blackberry networks go down at a crucial time of protests in the world recently?