4 ms·
If the UK record on anti-terror scope creep is anything to go by, not creating this backdoor is a very good idea. In the UK, laws originally intended for surve
by Robin_Message 11y ago
If the UK record on anti-terror scope creep is anything to go by, not creating this backdoor is a very good idea.
In the UK, laws originally intended for surveilling terrorists were/are routinely used by local councils (similar to districts I think) to monitor whether citizens are putting the correct rubbish/recycling into the correct bin. [1]
This is a pandora's box, and the correct answer is not to debate whether we should open it just this once, it's to encase it in lead and throw it into the nearest volcano. Good on Apple for "wasting" shareholders money and standing up for this.
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-councils-use-anti-terror-laws-to-spy-on-bin-crimes.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3333366/Half-of-counc... - and lest the source be questioned, this is one of the more reactionary newspapers in the UK.
- madaxe_again 11y agoAnd that was eight years ago - the state of affairs has since worsened - and the sheer irony of those same tory critics now spearheading the push for even broader surveillance powers. It's like crack for the political class (except rob ford) - once they start they want more and more.
- crimsoneer 11y agoRIPA was never designed for purely to fight terror - it was always designed to agglomerate all surveillance powers under one umbrella, including stuff like "putting up a covert camera to catch dog fowlers" or HRMC tapping your phone for serious tax avoidance investigation. All that has been written directly into the legislation since day 1.