4 ms·

It's so organic and grass roots and good for democracy™ that every single Western country suddenly decided that eliminating privacy online in lockstep was the t

by int32_64 10mo ago

It's so organic and grass roots and good for democracy™ that every single Western country suddenly decided that eliminating privacy online in lockstep was the top priority despite none of the ruling parties running on it as a platform or with any meaningful referendums from the voting public. But to what end?

stebalien 10mo ago
> democracy house of lords
- blibble 10mo ago
  they're subordinate to the commons it's really not a problem, they're essentially a reviewing chamber it works quite well
- etothepii 10mo ago
  The House of Lords is the most democratic hereditary system in the world. The 90 of the 92 heredities are elected from amongst the available candidates.
- u_sama 10mo ago
  The house of lords is a stamping system at this point, and maybe a stopgap to authoritarianism. All power resides in the House of Commons which is elected The true issue lies in the fact that the Westminster style of government is de facto an elective tyranny, with no real checks and balances other than the misused ECHR
  - EmptyCoffeeCup 10mo ago
    If this were true, the papers wouldn't have run an article yesterday bitching about the lords sending back the workers rights bill again. The commons may _eventually_ overrule them, but it takes time and costs political capital. The majority of our population want more law, more rules, more restrictions : they don't see the value or enjoyment in doing something, so they don't think anyone should be able to do it. Ask the average joe whether or not cars should prevent drivers from being able to "chose" to break the speed limit: You'll get a resounding "yes" 8/10 times - the value of freewill seems to be increasing lost on my country men.
    - u_sama 10mo ago
      I actually dont think your comment invalidates mine. The house of lords cannot really do anything than be a pain in the ass by sending the bill 3 times. The commons will eventually outrule them if they have sufficient political capital. My comment on elective tyranny comes from the fact that if a trifecta of: leader/party mps/house of lords are aligned there is little to stop them. This done I think all of the debates around authoritarianism and censorship put too much blame on the government which seems to represent the views of the majority of people rather well. I think it also comes from the fact that the median age is older and older people are more conservative in their choices and thus more willing to put limitations on everything (and also the fucking boomers vote as a 25% bloc which imposes their choices on the remaining poplation i.e the infamous triple lock of retirements)
Barrin92 10mo ago
>It's so organic and grass roots It is though. This is one of the few surveillance issues actually driven by grassroots organisations like (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Shout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Shout) in particular when it comes to adult content who have been at this globally for well over a decade. There's no shadowy cabal trying to age-restrict porn or social media, this is more like a modern day Carrie Nation. Puritanism always comes from the bottom up
- oncallthrow 10mo ago
  Sorry, which grass roots group exactly campaigned for this? Which party’s manifesto was it on?
  - Barrin92 10mo ago
    In Britain in particular? The NSPCC, Molly Rose Foundation, IWF among a bunch of others. 70% of Brits are supportive of the online safety act[1], it's been supported by Conservatives, Labour and the SNP. There's simply no data in favor of the argument that this is a minority position or even some kind of conspiracy. Child safety is (not very surprisingly) usually a voter driven concern. You think banning people from social media is an idea coming from big tech and shadowy three letter agencies? What kind of sense does that make [1] https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/52693-how-have-britons-reacted-to-age-verification https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/52693-how-have-brit...
    - YurgenJurgensen 10mo ago
      Of course a poll that asks a leading question can get 70% in favour. It’s not a conspiracy by TLAs (the people they’re interested in won’t be fazed by these paper-thin measures) or big tech (this hurts their bottom line). It’s legacy media, who have lost a lot of ground to the Internet, and stand to lose nothing by making it worse, and coincidentally also have a captive audience of voters who wouldn’t know one end of a USB cable from another who simply don’t understand any of the downsides.
    - 10mo ago
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
varispeed 10mo ago
> Role and responsibilities of MI5 in law > The Security Service Act 1989 sets out our functions and gives some examples of the nature and range of threats we work to disrupt. > In summary, our functions are: > to protect national security against threats from espionage, terrorism and > sabotage, from the activities of agents of foreign powers, and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means Imagine you and I pay likely billions a year and these jokers just let asset managers like Larry Fink influence policies affecting fundamental rights of British people like it's nothing. The country is corrupt beyond belief and soon we will wake up in corporate prison as slaves. See: https://thewinepress.substack.com/p/tokenization-blackrocks-larry-fink https://thewinepress.substack.com/p/tokenization-blackrocks-... https://www.cityam.com/reeves-and-starmer-meet-blackrocks-larry-fink-for-growth-talks/ https://www.cityam.com/reeves-and-starmer-meet-blackrocks-la... https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-digital-id-scheme-to-be-rolled-out-across-uk https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-digital-id-scheme-to-...
- hexbin010 10mo ago
  Your account is very curious. You constantly attack many British institutions (NHS, parliament, MI5 etc) and you're not a native English speaker. You claim to pay tax in the UK. You dislike many many aspects of the UK fundamentally so I'm curious, why stay?
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
tick_tock_tick 10mo ago
Britain has been in love with this idea for decades at this point. It's not a surprise 1984 was British. But yes in the last ~20 years are so it's somehow become a top EU goal as well.
- dmix 10mo ago
  3-in-5 british people supported the Online Safety Act (age verification) https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GxxNnMsWUAALm75?format=jpg&name=medium https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GxxNnMsWUAALm75?format=jpg&name=... Far more people strongly support it than strongly oppose The idea it's being done in spite of the public doesn't seem to track with reality. You also don't have to look very hard on social media to find lots of British people supporting strong government policing of the internet.
  - tick_tock_tick 10mo ago
    I don't think I really implied the people of the UK didn't want it? The UK and most of Europe seemingly love the government policing their speech even in private communications. The concept of free expression basically doesn't exist in most of the UK/EU today and that's scary.
bamboozled 10mo ago
On the other hand, what's your solution for completely anonymous people to be infiltrating western democracies information space and spreading propaganda lies and falsehoods. I'm 100% not in favor of this level of authoritarianism, i'm just honestly curios what your solution is? Just let it continue? Let your children be subjected to misinformation about the holocaust etc? Let children be exploited and images of them being sexually assaulted just run wild online ? Again I'm just curious what the alternatives might?
- admash 10mo ago
  The alternative is to refuse to delegate the formation and development of the character of our children and culture to automated systems and regulatory policies. Engage with your children on topics that matter. Discuss the pros and cons of various viewpoints and political platforms with your friends and neighbors, colleagues and fellow bus-riders. We, ourselves, are the psychosocial immune system for society, and if we construct an environment in which we can not be exposed harmful concepts, then we will never learn how to respond and combat it when we inevitably are exposed to it. This is not to say that we should not actively work to prevent criminal acts, but that trying to establish a world in which such acts are impossible will cripple society in ways which will leave us vulnerable to much larger and more systemic abuses. Benjamin Franklin’s statement rings as true as ever, if in a rather updated context: “ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
  - HWR_14 10mo ago
    > Engage with your children on topics that matter. And what do we do for the children who have parents who fail them. How do we even detect it in time to help those children?
    - Taurenking 10mo ago
      [dead]
    - d0100 10mo ago

stebalien 10mo ago

> democracy house of lords

blibble 10mo ago
they're subordinate to the commons it's really not a problem, they're essentially a reviewing chamber it works quite well
etothepii 10mo ago
The House of Lords is the most democratic hereditary system in the world. The 90 of the 92 heredities are elected from amongst the available candidates.
u_sama 10mo ago
The house of lords is a stamping system at this point, and maybe a stopgap to authoritarianism. All power resides in the House of Commons which is elected The true issue lies in the fact that the Westminster style of government is de facto an elective tyranny, with no real checks and balances other than the misused ECHR
- EmptyCoffeeCup 10mo ago
  If this were true, the papers wouldn't have run an article yesterday bitching about the lords sending back the workers rights bill again. The commons may _eventually_ overrule them, but it takes time and costs political capital. The majority of our population want more law, more rules, more restrictions : they don't see the value or enjoyment in doing something, so they don't think anyone should be able to do it. Ask the average joe whether or not cars should prevent drivers from being able to "chose" to break the speed limit: You'll get a resounding "yes" 8/10 times - the value of freewill seems to be increasing lost on my country men.
  - u_sama 10mo ago
    I actually dont think your comment invalidates mine. The house of lords cannot really do anything than be a pain in the ass by sending the bill 3 times. The commons will eventually outrule them if they have sufficient political capital. My comment on elective tyranny comes from the fact that if a trifecta of: leader/party mps/house of lords are aligned there is little to stop them. This done I think all of the debates around authoritarianism and censorship put too much blame on the government which seems to represent the views of the majority of people rather well. I think it also comes from the fact that the median age is older and older people are more conservative in their choices and thus more willing to put limitations on everything (and also the fucking boomers vote as a 25% bloc which imposes their choices on the remaining poplation i.e the infamous triple lock of retirements)

Barrin92 10mo ago

>It's so organic and grass roots It is though. This is one of the few surveillance issues actually driven by grassroots organisations like (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Shout https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_Shout) in particular when it comes to adult content who have been at this globally for well over a decade. There's no shadowy cabal trying to age-restrict porn or social media, this is more like a modern day Carrie Nation. Puritanism always comes from the bottom up

oncallthrow 10mo ago
Sorry, which grass roots group exactly campaigned for this? Which party’s manifesto was it on?
- Barrin92 10mo ago
  In Britain in particular? The NSPCC, Molly Rose Foundation, IWF among a bunch of others. 70% of Brits are supportive of the online safety act[1], it's been supported by Conservatives, Labour and the SNP. There's simply no data in favor of the argument that this is a minority position or even some kind of conspiracy. Child safety is (not very surprisingly) usually a voter driven concern. You think banning people from social media is an idea coming from big tech and shadowy three letter agencies? What kind of sense does that make [1] https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/52693-how-have-britons-reacted-to-age-verification https://yougov.co.uk/technology/articles/52693-how-have-brit...
  - YurgenJurgensen 10mo ago
    Of course a poll that asks a leading question can get 70% in favour. It’s not a conspiracy by TLAs (the people they’re interested in won’t be fazed by these paper-thin measures) or big tech (this hurts their bottom line). It’s legacy media, who have lost a lot of ground to the Internet, and stand to lose nothing by making it worse, and coincidentally also have a captive audience of voters who wouldn’t know one end of a USB cable from another who simply don’t understand any of the downsides.
  - 10mo ago

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

varispeed 10mo ago

> Role and responsibilities of MI5 in law > The Security Service Act 1989 sets out our functions and gives some examples of the nature and range of threats we work to disrupt. > In summary, our functions are: > to protect national security against threats from espionage, terrorism and > sabotage, from the activities of agents of foreign powers, and from actions intended to overthrow or undermine parliamentary democracy by political, industrial or violent means Imagine you and I pay likely billions a year and these jokers just let asset managers like Larry Fink influence policies affecting fundamental rights of British people like it's nothing. The country is corrupt beyond belief and soon we will wake up in corporate prison as slaves. See: https://thewinepress.substack.com/p/tokenization-blackrocks-larry-fink https://thewinepress.substack.com/p/tokenization-blackrocks-... https://www.cityam.com/reeves-and-starmer-meet-blackrocks-larry-fink-for-growth-talks/ https://www.cityam.com/reeves-and-starmer-meet-blackrocks-la... https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-digital-id-scheme-to-be-rolled-out-across-uk https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-digital-id-scheme-to-...

hexbin010 10mo ago
Your account is very curious. You constantly attack many British institutions (NHS, parliament, MI5 etc) and you're not a native English speaker. You claim to pay tax in the UK. You dislike many many aspects of the UK fundamentally so I'm curious, why stay?

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

tick_tock_tick 10mo ago

Britain has been in love with this idea for decades at this point. It's not a surprise 1984 was British. But yes in the last ~20 years are so it's somehow become a top EU goal as well.

dmix 10mo ago
3-in-5 british people supported the Online Safety Act (age verification) https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GxxNnMsWUAALm75?format=jpg&name=medium https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GxxNnMsWUAALm75?format=jpg&name=... Far more people strongly support it than strongly oppose The idea it's being done in spite of the public doesn't seem to track with reality. You also don't have to look very hard on social media to find lots of British people supporting strong government policing of the internet.
- tick_tock_tick 10mo ago
  I don't think I really implied the people of the UK didn't want it? The UK and most of Europe seemingly love the government policing their speech even in private communications. The concept of free expression basically doesn't exist in most of the UK/EU today and that's scary.

bamboozled 10mo ago

On the other hand, what's your solution for completely anonymous people to be infiltrating western democracies information space and spreading propaganda lies and falsehoods. I'm 100% not in favor of this level of authoritarianism, i'm just honestly curios what your solution is? Just let it continue? Let your children be subjected to misinformation about the holocaust etc? Let children be exploited and images of them being sexually assaulted just run wild online ? Again I'm just curious what the alternatives might?

admash 10mo ago
The alternative is to refuse to delegate the formation and development of the character of our children and culture to automated systems and regulatory policies. Engage with your children on topics that matter. Discuss the pros and cons of various viewpoints and political platforms with your friends and neighbors, colleagues and fellow bus-riders. We, ourselves, are the psychosocial immune system for society, and if we construct an environment in which we can not be exposed harmful concepts, then we will never learn how to respond and combat it when we inevitably are exposed to it. This is not to say that we should not actively work to prevent criminal acts, but that trying to establish a world in which such acts are impossible will cripple society in ways which will leave us vulnerable to much larger and more systemic abuses. Benjamin Franklin’s statement rings as true as ever, if in a rather updated context: “ They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
- HWR_14 10mo ago
  > Engage with your children on topics that matter. And what do we do for the children who have parents who fail them. How do we even detect it in time to help those children?
  - Taurenking 10mo ago
    [dead]
  - d0100 10mo ago