4 ms·

> I don't hide what I do IRL So you change your clothes, bathe, go to the toilet and have sex in full view of others? Or, more pertinently, would be happy to b

> I don't hide what I do IRL So you change your clothes, bathe, go to the toilet and have sex in full view of others? Or, more pertinently, would be happy to be legally required to do so?

pbhjpbhj 10y ago
I'm searching for a convincing argument. This isn't it. Are you saying that the UK IPA is going to let computers magically see me on the toilet and pass those images on to the police, or that the government somehow needs to see me on the toilet and so will get a court order for it? This hyperbole obscures any point you're trying to make IMO. The closest analogy I think that's reasonable on say your "have sex in full view of others" that's pertinent is that the government could overhear me talking to someone about sex and would record that I had talked to someone about sex. Now for an abuser that might be an issue, but for me it's not. Take a step back. What's your best argument to convince me gov access [by warrant] to a list of domains I've visited - where I haven't used a VPN, or other obscuring method - means I'm giving up my civil liberties in a way that will have a damaging impact on me? I can see it can for a small portion of society, a lot of [non-petty] criminals. I can see it might for political dissidents in a country lacking rule of law; UK isn't perfect in that regard but it's close to having a fully independent judiciary and a fully working rule of law. [FWIW I wouldn't vote for such a law, but I'm yet to be convinced by the arguments I've seen, primarily because they are so outlandishly hyperbolic.]
- SturgeonsLaw 10y ago
  In the death of Gareth Williams (he was the ex GCHQ spy who was found dead, enclosed in a locked bag in his bath) the authorities brought up the fact that he'd visited BDSM porn sites as a way of explaining the unusual circumstances of his death. This proves that the government is willing to selectively present out of context information from someone's browsing history in court in order to further their agenda. If you believe every employee at all 49 agencies who have access to this data will never misuse it, well, you're more trusting than me. And I haven't even touched on any of those agencies being the conduit of leaked information, and the ramifications of that. If the NSA can't even keep a lid on confidential information when it's staffed with some of the most experienced and intelligent techs in the world, what hope does the Department for Work and Pensions have?

> I don't hide what I do IRL So you change your clothes, bathe, go to the toilet and have sex in full view of others? Or, more pertinently, would be happy to be legally required to do so?

pbhjpbhj 10y ago

I'm searching for a convincing argument. This isn't it. Are you saying that the UK IPA is going to let computers magically see me on the toilet and pass those images on to the police, or that the government somehow needs to see me on the toilet and so will get a court order for it? This hyperbole obscures any point you're trying to make IMO. The closest analogy I think that's reasonable on say your "have sex in full view of others" that's pertinent is that the government could overhear me talking to someone about sex and would record that I had talked to someone about sex. Now for an abuser that might be an issue, but for me it's not. Take a step back. What's your best argument to convince me gov access [by warrant] to a list of domains I've visited - where I haven't used a VPN, or other obscuring method - means I'm giving up my civil liberties in a way that will have a damaging impact on me? I can see it can for a small portion of society, a lot of [non-petty] criminals. I can see it might for political dissidents in a country lacking rule of law; UK isn't perfect in that regard but it's close to having a fully independent judiciary and a fully working rule of law. [FWIW I wouldn't vote for such a law, but I'm yet to be convinced by the arguments I've seen, primarily because they are so outlandishly hyperbolic.]

SturgeonsLaw 10y ago
In the death of Gareth Williams (he was the ex GCHQ spy who was found dead, enclosed in a locked bag in his bath) the authorities brought up the fact that he'd visited BDSM porn sites as a way of explaining the unusual circumstances of his death. This proves that the government is willing to selectively present out of context information from someone's browsing history in court in order to further their agenda. If you believe every employee at all 49 agencies who have access to this data will never misuse it, well, you're more trusting than me. And I haven't even touched on any of those agencies being the conduit of leaked information, and the ramifications of that. If the NSA can't even keep a lid on confidential information when it's staffed with some of the most experienced and intelligent techs in the world, what hope does the Department for Work and Pensions have?