4 ms·

Failing to understand the logic behind this. How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen prot

Failing to understand the logic behind this. How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen protection. Wouldn't it make more sense for the government/ISPs to take care of the AgeID product themselves? They are the gatekeepers to the internet basically isn't it?

caseysoftware 9y ago
Why should anyone collect this data? Can you imagine the first time it's hacked and we have complete details of everything that anyone watches and when? It will be awful, hilarious, and horrifying all at once. "Your Royal Majesty, according to the recent Mindgeek hack, it appears you.." NO ONE in their right mind wants that.
- samsonradu 9y ago
  Needless to say it shouldn’t be done, but if anybody...a 3rd party?
switch007 9y ago
> How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen protection. Well it's the same country that let business lobby the ICO (the regulatory office that deals with the Data Protection Act etc) to permit social landlords to pass on rent-payment data to credit agencies on an OPT OUT basis, because it would "help them build up a credit score". (Presumably to take on more debt and to also report payment failures for landlords to filter our undesirables in the future?) The same country that has a government that is creating a blockchain implementation with the aim to track benefit recipients’ spending. (Google "DWP" "blockchain") The same country putting immense pressure on tech companies to install backdoors because terrorism. It goes on and on and and on and on...(notice the paternalism?) The third-party point: we've had a Conservative-majority government since 2010 who enjoy outsourcing and privatisation. (Nobody need waste keystrokes mentioning PFI/academies/tuition fees nor to accuse me of being pro-Labour ;))
- samsonradu 9y ago
  Still, it's alarmingly wrong. I mean the usual modus operandi for a government would be to assume the project themselves (to have citizen trust) and externalise it quietly to a 3rd party, bureaucratically so that people can't really tell who is doing what. But this really is too much "in your face", they don't even bother pretending.

caseysoftware 9y ago

Why should anyone collect this data? Can you imagine the first time it's hacked and we have complete details of everything that anyone watches and when? It will be awful, hilarious, and horrifying all at once. "Your Royal Majesty, according to the recent Mindgeek hack, it appears you.." NO ONE in their right mind wants that.

samsonradu 9y ago
Needless to say it shouldn’t be done, but if anybody...a 3rd party?

switch007 9y ago

> How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen protection. Well it's the same country that let business lobby the ICO (the regulatory office that deals with the Data Protection Act etc) to permit social landlords to pass on rent-payment data to credit agencies on an OPT OUT basis, because it would "help them build up a credit score". (Presumably to take on more debt and to also report payment failures for landlords to filter our undesirables in the future?) The same country that has a government that is creating a blockchain implementation with the aim to track benefit recipients’ spending. (Google "DWP" "blockchain") The same country putting immense pressure on tech companies to install backdoors because terrorism. It goes on and on and and on and on...(notice the paternalism?) The third-party point: we've had a Conservative-majority government since 2010 who enjoy outsourcing and privatisation. (Nobody need waste keystrokes mentioning PFI/academies/tuition fees nor to accuse me of being pro-Labour ;))

samsonradu 9y ago
Still, it's alarmingly wrong. I mean the usual modus operandi for a government would be to assume the project themselves (to have citizen trust) and externalise it quietly to a 3rd party, bureaucratically so that people can't really tell who is doing what. But this really is too much "in your face", they don't even bother pretending.