4 ms·

Yeah! That'll work! Just like the Occupy movement. Will there be beer?

toyg 13y ago
I hope you'll be downvoted to hell. HN should be about constructive criticism. We're all intelligent people, we can all tear down anything we put our mind at, but that doesn't mean that we should, or we wouldn't leave our house every day. I know I'm a cynic and it's a bad habit I'm trying to change, maybe you should try too.
- jehovahrova 13y ago
  Do you imagine your comment constructive?
  - toyg 13y ago
    If it can prevent the next wiseass from spouting his mouth, yes.
    - jehovahrova 13y ago
      "I hope you'll be downvoted to hell." "I know I'm a cynic and it's a bad habit I'm trying to change, maybe you should try too." You're just an ass hiding his assyness behind false righteousness.
- dominotw 13y ago
  We'll there is some merit to his comment(Despite the sarcasm). We have seen so many of these types of petitions/movements recently, only to be totally ignored by the gubment.
  - lukifer 13y ago
    If at first you don't succeed...
keithpeter 13y ago
Well now, I live in the UK. We don't have a written constitution, so the Powers That Be don't have to hack the legal system in quite the same way as as they do in the US (secret courts, secret injunctions, requirements for industry leaders to deny activity &c). However, we have absolutely no oversight and no way to gain oversight of the agencies that purport to be acting for our protection. It is difficult even to find out how much we are paying for these agencies. As our Prime Minister has recently demonstrated, our elective representatives have very little understanding of how the Internet actually works. There is a cross party consensus that the 'legal framework' is adequate. Maybe it is, but we don't know, and have no way of knowing. So I'd suggest taking what action you can within your system, because at least you have some avenues for change.
- jacobrobbins 13y ago
  Saying you have absolutely no oversight in the UK is not true. I recently read David Omand's "Securing the State" which is the most informative book I have found on how to integrate secret intelligence into a democratic society. Most of the analysis in the book focuses on the UK system as he is a longtime member of the UK intelligence community. There is a detailed discussion of how to meet the challenges of keeping a secret intelligence system accountable while maintaining its secrecy. Specifically see your JIC (Joint Intelligence Committee) and its history of post-portem analysis after notable incidents such as the Iraq WMD misread. That was about political influence into the workings of intelligence, scope overreach is of course the issue of the day but presumably they could take a crack at it. In fact I have come to believe that your system is more well-managed than ours here in the US partially because it is a smaller country and hence easier to keep track of. See the Washington Post's article (before Snowden's revelations) on the mushrooming growth of myriad, largely redundant secret intelligence groups dispersed throughout various US agencies: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/a-hidden-world-growing-beyond-control/ http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articl...
  - keithpeter 13y ago
    "...David Omand's "Securing the State"..." I shall add that to the summer reading list. I'm still dubious about how much accountability there actually is. For instance, the quote below is from a (generally favourable) Amazon review of the book referenced "The book is a bit weak in the realm of intelligence collection, but this is because this is a very sensitive area and Sir David was clearly trying to avoid stepping on toes." We are good at 'sensitive areas' in the UK. "...the mushrooming growth of myriad, largely redundant secret intelligence groups..." I suspect we have some of those as well but as projects/units within the main agencies.

toyg 13y ago

I hope you'll be downvoted to hell. HN should be about constructive criticism. We're all intelligent people, we can all tear down anything we put our mind at, but that doesn't mean that we should, or we wouldn't leave our house every day. I know I'm a cynic and it's a bad habit I'm trying to change, maybe you should try too.

jehovahrova 13y ago
Do you imagine your comment constructive?
- toyg 13y ago
  If it can prevent the next wiseass from spouting his mouth, yes.
  - jehovahrova 13y ago
    "I hope you'll be downvoted to hell." "I know I'm a cynic and it's a bad habit I'm trying to change, maybe you should try too." You're just an ass hiding his assyness behind false righteousness.
dominotw 13y ago
We'll there is some merit to his comment(Despite the sarcasm). We have seen so many of these types of petitions/movements recently, only to be totally ignored by the gubment.
- lukifer 13y ago
  If at first you don't succeed...

keithpeter 13y ago

Well now, I live in the UK. We don't have a written constitution, so the Powers That Be don't have to hack the legal system in quite the same way as as they do in the US (secret courts, secret injunctions, requirements for industry leaders to deny activity &c). However, we have absolutely no oversight and no way to gain oversight of the agencies that purport to be acting for our protection. It is difficult even to find out how much we are paying for these agencies. As our Prime Minister has recently demonstrated, our elective representatives have very little understanding of how the Internet actually works. There is a cross party consensus that the 'legal framework' is adequate. Maybe it is, but we don't know, and have no way of knowing. So I'd suggest taking what action you can within your system, because at least you have some avenues for change.

jacobrobbins 13y ago
Saying you have absolutely no oversight in the UK is not true. I recently read David Omand's "Securing the State" which is the most informative book I have found on how to integrate secret intelligence into a democratic society. Most of the analysis in the book focuses on the UK system as he is a longtime member of the UK intelligence community. There is a detailed discussion of how to meet the challenges of keeping a secret intelligence system accountable while maintaining its secrecy. Specifically see your JIC (Joint Intelligence Committee) and its history of post-portem analysis after notable incidents such as the Iraq WMD misread. That was about political influence into the workings of intelligence, scope overreach is of course the issue of the day but presumably they could take a crack at it. In fact I have come to believe that your system is more well-managed than ours here in the US partially because it is a smaller country and hence easier to keep track of. See the Washington Post's article (before Snowden's revelations) on the mushrooming growth of myriad, largely redundant secret intelligence groups dispersed throughout various US agencies: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articles/a-hidden-world-growing-beyond-control/ http://projects.washingtonpost.com/top-secret-america/articl...
- keithpeter 13y ago
  "...David Omand's "Securing the State"..." I shall add that to the summer reading list. I'm still dubious about how much accountability there actually is. For instance, the quote below is from a (generally favourable) Amazon review of the book referenced "The book is a bit weak in the realm of intelligence collection, but this is because this is a very sensitive area and Sir David was clearly trying to avoid stepping on toes." We are good at 'sensitive areas' in the UK. "...the mushrooming growth of myriad, largely redundant secret intelligence groups..." I suspect we have some of those as well but as projects/units within the main agencies.