3 ms·

Was the "full take" system in the UK mentioned previously? That's the scariest thing, to me. They're literally saving every bit of data that enters or leaves

by beedogs 13y ago

Was the "full take" system in the UK mentioned previously? That's the scariest thing, to me. They're literally saving every bit of data that enters or leaves the UK, and they can store three days' worth already.

DanBC 13y ago
{EDIT: I meant to upvote you, but I might have accidentally downvoted you. Sorry.} Yes, it has been mentioned previously. UK media is under a notice from the Department of Defence - a D notice - which is an informal arrangement where the DoD asks media not to report things which they think are strategically important, and the media agrees. The Official Secrets Act is the legal framework for secrets. People "Sign the Official Secrets Act", but all that means is that they've been made aware that the act exists. You can be prosecuted for revealing secrets even if you haven't signed the act. (I seem to remember some protesters being prosecuted for publishing photographs of missile transport in the 80s?) So, while the D notice system is informal and is not a prohibition I guess it's a warning about what is considered really important. There's interesting discussion about why a free media pays any attention at all to D Notices. I think the D Notice for the full take system is an abuse of the D Notice system. (Location of troops during war, for example.)
- chii 13y ago
  exactly - secret keeping is a privilege that is granted to the state in order for it to win fights against an "enemy". What is this enemy that the state is currently fighting that warrants these secrets? i don't believe "terrorists" is the answer.
  - buro9 13y ago
    trade enemies, preservation of self-interest
    - malandrew 13y ago
      Is that a blanket term for everyone that isn't us, or do we actually have an official list of countries we consider trade enemies?
    - beedogs 13y ago
      So "the rest of the world" counts as "trade enemies" now?
alan_cx 13y ago
Heh, that's just buffering..... (BTW that was a bad joke, for those who take tings seriously) Tell you what this does mean though, our parliament has been lied too, which is supposed to be a big deal. But I guess all the opposition MP's are too worried that GCHQ know all the porn sites they visit. Lets face it, we all have something to hide, and chances are now that the gov knows about it, or can do with the right Db query.
madaxe 13y ago
Does this not mean that GCHQ are the greatest child pornographers on the planet, by their own standards? They've successfully prosecuted and imprisoned private individuals who've ended up with child porn on their computers due to botnets etc., so if they're wilfully collecting this data, they surely have a criminal case to answer?

by beedogs 13y ago

DanBC 13y ago

{EDIT: I meant to upvote you, but I might have accidentally downvoted you. Sorry.} Yes, it has been mentioned previously. UK media is under a notice from the Department of Defence - a D notice - which is an informal arrangement where the DoD asks media not to report things which they think are strategically important, and the media agrees. The Official Secrets Act is the legal framework for secrets. People "Sign the Official Secrets Act", but all that means is that they've been made aware that the act exists. You can be prosecuted for revealing secrets even if you haven't signed the act. (I seem to remember some protesters being prosecuted for publishing photographs of missile transport in the 80s?) So, while the D notice system is informal and is not a prohibition I guess it's a warning about what is considered really important. There's interesting discussion about why a free media pays any attention at all to D Notices. I think the D Notice for the full take system is an abuse of the D Notice system. (Location of troops during war, for example.)

chii 13y ago
exactly - secret keeping is a privilege that is granted to the state in order for it to win fights against an "enemy". What is this enemy that the state is currently fighting that warrants these secrets? i don't believe "terrorists" is the answer.
- buro9 13y ago
  trade enemies, preservation of self-interest
  - malandrew 13y ago
    Is that a blanket term for everyone that isn't us, or do we actually have an official list of countries we consider trade enemies?
  - beedogs 13y ago
    So "the rest of the world" counts as "trade enemies" now?

alan_cx 13y ago

Heh, that's just buffering..... (BTW that was a bad joke, for those who take tings seriously) Tell you what this does mean though, our parliament has been lied too, which is supposed to be a big deal. But I guess all the opposition MP's are too worried that GCHQ know all the porn sites they visit. Lets face it, we all have something to hide, and chances are now that the gov knows about it, or can do with the right Db query.

madaxe 13y ago

Does this not mean that GCHQ are the greatest child pornographers on the planet, by their own standards? They've successfully prosecuted and imprisoned private individuals who've ended up with child porn on their computers due to botnets etc., so if they're wilfully collecting this data, they surely have a criminal case to answer?