5 ms·
incredible if UK were to ban Signal, but I guess national sovereignty and security are always going to be higher priorities for the state than user sentiment
by hunglee2 4y ago
incredible if UK were to ban Signal, but I guess national sovereignty and security are always going to be higher priorities for the state than user sentiment
- trollied 4y agoI don't think the bill will pass in its current form. Can't see it happening.
- butterNaN 4y agoI don't know, man. After Brexit, it feels anything can happen.
- CommanderData 4y agoLots of bills people thought would never pass have. The recent legislation undermining of protests being one of them. I can see it happening too.
- katet 4y agoThat bill passed the Commons, but has been amended by the Lords (I know the Commons can override the Lords if it wants to, but it's not at that stage yet) https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3153/stages https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3153/stages
- blitzar 4y agoWhen the right wing, small state, less regulation party is obsessed with implementing this sort of policy - who exactly is going to stop them?
- mattmanser 4y agoThey're not really small state, and have never been. They're small state about certain things. They're small state about consumer protections to make it easier for their corrupting donors to pillage Britain and it's workers. They're small state about not letting public bodies solve big problems like forbidding councils from building houses. They're big state about controlling the population. They're big state about centralizing government control. They're big state about gerrymandering to impose a minority view on the population. Very much like the Republican party.
- AdrianB1 4y agoSovereignty on Internet in the Internet age is a nonsense; Internet is not the possession of a government, participating to the Internet at country level (dot uk) is voluntary, if UK wants to get out of Internet as a mesh of interconnected computer networks then it is free to go back to the Dark Ages. Security is another practical nonsense. You don't need to use Signal to encrypt things, anonymous or encrypted communications existed since the dawn of times and will continue to exist no matter what the governments want to do. Criminals will always be able to use one time pad encryption at will, so raping everyone's rights to communication and privacy in the name of security and sovereignty is just a false pretext.
- Dalewyn 4y ago>Sovereignty on Internet in the Internet age is a nonsense; Internet is not the possession of a government, The digital world of the internet exists within physical, analog metal boxes that reside within and thusly are subject to the legal jurisdictions of countries.
- AdrianB1 4y agoInternet can exist without a country or more. It cannot exist if all the countries decide to shut down all the infrastructure in their territories, but Internet can thrive without UK, while UK cannot live without Internet, not today.
- adrianN 4y agoCounterpoint: China just makes its own "Internet".
- Symbiote 4y agoIt was widely reported that the Conservative party moved their internal communications to Signal in 2019. I wonder if they still use it?
- WithinReason 4y agoIf yes, I hope that means the bill is unlikely to pass
- jodrellblank 4y agoRemember that they passed an online snooping bill which requires ISPs to log everyone’s internet activity and made it available to all kinds of organisations? They made MPs exempt. They don’t want to - or have to - live under their own rules.