4 ms·

Contempt is the word. I emailed my local MP about this, highlighting how it put us all at risk and did nothing to stop "the bad guys". She ignored all my point

by shocks 10y ago

Contempt is the word. I emailed my local MP about this, highlighting how it put us all at risk and did nothing to stop "the bad guys". She ignored all my points and just said "we cannot let the terrorists and pedophiles communicate". edit: http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL

dasboth 10y ago
That's exactly the nuanced discussion I like to see from my elected representatives...
- shocks 10y ago
  The exact quote is: > I do not believe that it is reasonable to allow terrorists, paedophiles and criminals to be able to use these same services out of sight to perpetrate criminal acts which harm UK citizens.
  - setq 10y ago
    Unsurprisingly they forgot politicians in the list of people who aren't qualified to hold secrets.
setq 10y ago
Stick the reply on pastebin with a note explaining how it doesn't stop pedophiles and terrorists, explain how it protects incumbent pedophiles in the political class as per pizzagate, then post it on reddit, 4chan and to the opposition (actually forget the latter as they're just as bad). Time is up for this attitude.
- shocks 10y ago
  Sure. I'll see if I can dig out my initial email too. I sent it via one of those "contact your MP" forms so I don't have a direct email chain.
- dasboth 10y ago
  I do wonder (perhaps naively) whether this is a genuine misunderstanding of the argument for privacy/encryption or something more malicious. Is it that politicians haven't spent enough time thinking about this or are they willfully ignorant of the wrongness of their argument?
  - setq 10y ago
    I think it's a cross between both depending on what suits the current audience.
  - tremon 10y ago
    That distinction doesn't really matter. Willful ignorance by anyone in power should definitely be classified as malice. Remember that as your representative, they should be able to explain their actions to you.
    - setq 10y ago
      A very valid and often ignored point.
    - bshimmin 10y ago
      It's an interesting point. If they are ignorant (perhaps without the wilful), then perhaps when you present them with facts and information, they might change their mind. If they are malicious, they won't change their mind in the face of any facts or information, because their motivations are underhand and cannot be reasoned with. I suspect in cases like this it's probably a bit of both (and perhaps in the case of this particular MP, she might just be toeing the party line).
- shocks 10y ago
  Here is the paste: http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL
Warp__ 10y ago
They already are communicating, on huge services like Twitter, that are constantly monitored. ISIS & JaN Surrogate accounts, as well as Assad Regime Loyalists (Which for some, count as Terrorists) freely use online services under the radar. The time to stop encryption is gone. TOR & Signal have seen to that.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by shocks 10y ago

dasboth 10y ago

That's exactly the nuanced discussion I like to see from my elected representatives...

shocks 10y ago
The exact quote is: > I do not believe that it is reasonable to allow terrorists, paedophiles and criminals to be able to use these same services out of sight to perpetrate criminal acts which harm UK citizens.
- setq 10y ago
  Unsurprisingly they forgot politicians in the list of people who aren't qualified to hold secrets.

setq 10y ago

Stick the reply on pastebin with a note explaining how it doesn't stop pedophiles and terrorists, explain how it protects incumbent pedophiles in the political class as per pizzagate, then post it on reddit, 4chan and to the opposition (actually forget the latter as they're just as bad). Time is up for this attitude.

shocks 10y ago
Sure. I'll see if I can dig out my initial email too. I sent it via one of those "contact your MP" forms so I don't have a direct email chain.
dasboth 10y ago
I do wonder (perhaps naively) whether this is a genuine misunderstanding of the argument for privacy/encryption or something more malicious. Is it that politicians haven't spent enough time thinking about this or are they willfully ignorant of the wrongness of their argument?
- setq 10y ago
  I think it's a cross between both depending on what suits the current audience.
- tremon 10y ago
  That distinction doesn't really matter. Willful ignorance by anyone in power should definitely be classified as malice. Remember that as your representative, they should be able to explain their actions to you.
  - setq 10y ago
    A very valid and often ignored point.
  - bshimmin 10y ago
    It's an interesting point. If they are ignorant (perhaps without the wilful), then perhaps when you present them with facts and information, they might change their mind. If they are malicious, they won't change their mind in the face of any facts or information, because their motivations are underhand and cannot be reasoned with. I suspect in cases like this it's probably a bit of both (and perhaps in the case of this particular MP, she might just be toeing the party line).
shocks 10y ago
Here is the paste: http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL http://pastebin.com/THvjAvAL

Warp__ 10y ago

They already are communicating, on huge services like Twitter, that are constantly monitored. ISIS & JaN Surrogate accounts, as well as Assad Regime Loyalists (Which for some, count as Terrorists) freely use online services under the radar. The time to stop encryption is gone. TOR & Signal have seen to that.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]