3 ms·

> and while the public knows full well that the Conservatives are openly shitting the bed on their way out, knowing it will be someone else’s responsibility to

> and while the public knows full well that the Conservatives are openly shitting the bed on their way out, knowing it will be someone else’s responsibility to change the sheets, they’re not dumb. The author really believes that Labour are gonna throw out this overreaching set of powers? They were the ones arguing that the Online Safety Bill didn't go far enough as to include VPNs...

radicalbyte 3y ago
They never have and never will.. and that is what makes this kind of legislation extremely dangerous. After all the talk from the Tories around Brexit and "public mandates" - this is controversial regulation being passed by an non-elected Prime Minister of what can only be described as a dead duck government. They should be calling a General Election not passing legislation like this.
- cbeach 3y ago
  Are you aware that Labour want to "toughen" the Online Safety Bill? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jan/01/labour-pledges-toughen-online-safety-bill https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jan/01/labour-pl... A snap General Election would make our situation worse, not better. We need to ensure the opposition parties (all of them, not just Labour), understand our concerns about weakening encryption.
  - pimterry 3y ago
    The toughening discussed in that article entirely applies to protections for children themselves on social media - requiring limits to stop them seeing harmful content. An interesting debatable question, but not related to the encryption & communication security concerns being discussed here. Also, from a political POV, they're clearly incentivized to say that what the government is doing is wrong, in all cases - that doesn't necessarily imply that's exactly what they'd actually do in practice (when they too would have to deal with industry backlash directly). If they have publicly stated somewhere that they'd like to create tougher controls, banning or limiting security tools like encryption I'd be interested to see more information, but I haven't seen any obvious discussion of that.
mvc 3y ago
The author is from Glasgow. My bet would be they don't support Labour either.

radicalbyte 3y ago

They never have and never will.. and that is what makes this kind of legislation extremely dangerous. After all the talk from the Tories around Brexit and "public mandates" - this is controversial regulation being passed by an non-elected Prime Minister of what can only be described as a dead duck government. They should be calling a General Election not passing legislation like this.

cbeach 3y ago
Are you aware that Labour want to "toughen" the Online Safety Bill? https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jan/01/labour-pledges-toughen-online-safety-bill https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jan/01/labour-pl... A snap General Election would make our situation worse, not better. We need to ensure the opposition parties (all of them, not just Labour), understand our concerns about weakening encryption.
- pimterry 3y ago
  The toughening discussed in that article entirely applies to protections for children themselves on social media - requiring limits to stop them seeing harmful content. An interesting debatable question, but not related to the encryption & communication security concerns being discussed here. Also, from a political POV, they're clearly incentivized to say that what the government is doing is wrong, in all cases - that doesn't necessarily imply that's exactly what they'd actually do in practice (when they too would have to deal with industry backlash directly). If they have publicly stated somewhere that they'd like to create tougher controls, banning or limiting security tools like encryption I'd be interested to see more information, but I haven't seen any obvious discussion of that.

mvc 3y ago

The author is from Glasgow. My bet would be they don't support Labour either.