5 ms·

My biggest issue with all this is that when you give them the power to take away rights to prevent terrorism or protect children, the government will use their

My biggest issue with all this is that when you give them the power to take away rights to prevent terrorism or protect children, the government will use their powers wherever convenient. For example, the patriot act has been used in 1,618 drug cases and only 15 terrorism cases[1]. It has also been used for everything from copyright violations to Las Vegas money issues[2]. 1. (2011) http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/post/patriot-act-used-to-fight-more-drug-dealers-than-terrorists/2011/09/07/gIQAcmEBAK_blog.html http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/post/patriot-... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_the_Patriot_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversial_invocations_of_th...

SixSigma 12y ago
B.B.C. used Anti terror Laws to catch license fee dodgers http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/bbc-uses-ripa-terrorism-laws-to-catch-tv-licence-fee-dodgers-in-northern-ireland-30911647.html http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northe...
- nailer 12y ago
  For American: these are people who don't pay a mandatory tax for consuming government-run media like the BBC and Channel 4 (perhaps because the don't watch or listen to that content).
  - alextgordon 12y ago
    The BBC isn't run by the government, it's run by the state.
    - 0942v8653 12y ago
      U.S. citizen here—what's the difference?
      - tomhoward 12y ago
        TL;DR "run by the state" = run by the executive appointed by the trust appointed by the monarch. The government doesn't have direct operational control. The BBC executive is appointed by the BBC Trust. Trustees are appointed by the monarch in accordance with the recommendations of the government. So, beyond the selection of the trustees, the BBC is independent of government.
      - thristian 12y ago
        That is to say, the BBC is supposed to be run for the benefit of the United Kingdom and its citizens, not for the benefit of whoever happens to be the elected leader at the moment.
        deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - spiralpolitik 12y ago
        In the past the BBC has been somewhat anti-establishment especially during the Thatcher years. Recently its been a bit more pro-establishment especially as the BBC's charter is to be renewed in 2016 and during which issue of funding will come up.
    - hackerboos 12y ago
      It's run by the BBC Trust which is given power by Royal Charter in order to stay independent of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Trust http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Trust
    - nailer 12y ago
      Those terms are synonymous. I have read your subsequent reply but being run by the government does not in any way imply being run by the party that is currently in power.
      - jackweirdy 12y ago
        Not in this case, BBC is run by royal charter. So “Run by the state” means the BBC’s power comes from the Monarch, not Parliament.
  - vertex-four 12y ago
    The tax is for picking up TV signals, not for consuming BBC broadcasts. It does fund the BBC, though. Additionally, Channel 4 gets none of the license fee, and it is not Government-run. (Nor's the BBC for that matter run by the Government - it merely has requirements to be for the public benefit, to represent the UK, and a variety of other things, by law, and in return it gets money from the TV license.)
    - nailer 12y ago
      The post you're responding to did not say anything about broadcasts. But the tax is not for picking up signals, any consumption of BBC media means the viewer must pay the license fee. The term government is preferable because the term 'state' is vague to people outside the UK. Being a government run service does not mean the BBC is required to follow the ideology on the current party in power. You're right about channel four though.
      - AlecSchueler 12y ago
        Not any consumption, just live broadcasts. Watching shows from a week ago on e.g. iPlayer is totally fine
      - vertex-four 12y ago
        > But the tax is not for picking up signals, any consumption of BBC media means the viewer must pay the license fee. Actually... it's consumption of live TV broadcasts specifically (you can consume news, radio, and BBC iPlayer catchup without paying a penny), and it covers all live TV - even if you only watch, say, Channel Five online, and never access any BBC content, you have to pay the fee.
        nailer 12y ago
        Only if you never use 'watch live' in iPlayer. See http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence
        12y ago
  - semperfaux 12y ago
    Sounds like Japan's NHK totally-not-a-tax fee.
- quintinoliver 12y ago
  I have a question to anyone living in the UK: how much do you pay per month/year for this license fee?
dllthomas 12y ago
Not to mention potential misbehavior by rogue elements, even when official policy is innocent. LOVEINT being a recent example in precisely this domain, but instances are manifold.
- TheCondor 12y ago
  And LOVEINT resulted in zero people going to prison. It was a blatant abuse of power too. They violate the rules and nothing happens.
  - dllthomas 12y ago
    Another important point about LOVEINT in particular is that the known cases were all self-reported. Which speaks to the integrity of those involved compared to hypothetical officers who did the same thing but did not report themselves... but does not speak well of the internal checks in the system, and I have a hard time believing those other officers are entirely hypothetical.
    - ipsin 12y ago
      I'm not impressed by the "self-reported" cases. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/ http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-someti... "Such admissions can arise, for example, when an employee takes a polygraph tests as part of a renewal of a security clearance." I also want more internal checks than "hoping the bad actors can't fool polygraph examiners".
snowwrestler 12y ago
That argument probably has limited utility among the general public because a lot of people think drug dealers are fair game for "any means necessary" too. As I recall, the strongest argument in the late 1990s was that there was no possible way to design a weakness in crypto for government that bad guys couldn't also exploit--and at much greater scale. "This bill will make it easier for someone to steal your identity" type stuff.

SixSigma 12y ago

B.B.C. used Anti terror Laws to catch license fee dodgers http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/bbc-uses-ripa-terrorism-laws-to-catch-tv-licence-fee-dodgers-in-northern-ireland-30911647.html http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northe...

nailer 12y ago
For American: these are people who don't pay a mandatory tax for consuming government-run media like the BBC and Channel 4 (perhaps because the don't watch or listen to that content).
- alextgordon 12y ago
  The BBC isn't run by the government, it's run by the state.
  - 0942v8653 12y ago
    U.S. citizen here—what's the difference?
    - tomhoward 12y ago
      TL;DR "run by the state" = run by the executive appointed by the trust appointed by the monarch. The government doesn't have direct operational control. The BBC executive is appointed by the BBC Trust. Trustees are appointed by the monarch in accordance with the recommendations of the government. So, beyond the selection of the trustees, the BBC is independent of government.
    - thristian 12y ago
      That is to say, the BBC is supposed to be run for the benefit of the United Kingdom and its citizens, not for the benefit of whoever happens to be the elected leader at the moment.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
    - spiralpolitik 12y ago
      In the past the BBC has been somewhat anti-establishment especially during the Thatcher years. Recently its been a bit more pro-establishment especially as the BBC's charter is to be renewed in 2016 and during which issue of funding will come up.
  - hackerboos 12y ago
    It's run by the BBC Trust which is given power by Royal Charter in order to stay independent of government. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Trust http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Trust
  - nailer 12y ago
    Those terms are synonymous. I have read your subsequent reply but being run by the government does not in any way imply being run by the party that is currently in power.
    - jackweirdy 12y ago
      Not in this case, BBC is run by royal charter. So “Run by the state” means the BBC’s power comes from the Monarch, not Parliament.
- vertex-four 12y ago
  The tax is for picking up TV signals, not for consuming BBC broadcasts. It does fund the BBC, though. Additionally, Channel 4 gets none of the license fee, and it is not Government-run. (Nor's the BBC for that matter run by the Government - it merely has requirements to be for the public benefit, to represent the UK, and a variety of other things, by law, and in return it gets money from the TV license.)
  - nailer 12y ago
    The post you're responding to did not say anything about broadcasts. But the tax is not for picking up signals, any consumption of BBC media means the viewer must pay the license fee. The term government is preferable because the term 'state' is vague to people outside the UK. Being a government run service does not mean the BBC is required to follow the ideology on the current party in power. You're right about channel four though.
    - AlecSchueler 12y ago
      Not any consumption, just live broadcasts. Watching shows from a week ago on e.g. iPlayer is totally fine
    - vertex-four 12y ago
      > But the tax is not for picking up signals, any consumption of BBC media means the viewer must pay the license fee. Actually... it's consumption of live TV broadcasts specifically (you can consume news, radio, and BBC iPlayer catchup without paying a penny), and it covers all live TV - even if you only watch, say, Channel Five online, and never access any BBC content, you have to pay the fee.
      - nailer 12y ago
        Only if you never use 'watch live' in iPlayer. See http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence http://iplayerhelp.external.bbc.co.uk/tv/tvlicence
        12y ago
- semperfaux 12y ago
  Sounds like Japan's NHK totally-not-a-tax fee.
quintinoliver 12y ago
I have a question to anyone living in the UK: how much do you pay per month/year for this license fee?

dllthomas 12y ago

Not to mention potential misbehavior by rogue elements, even when official policy is innocent. LOVEINT being a recent example in precisely this domain, but instances are manifold.

TheCondor 12y ago
And LOVEINT resulted in zero people going to prison. It was a blatant abuse of power too. They violate the rules and nothing happens.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  Another important point about LOVEINT in particular is that the known cases were all self-reported. Which speaks to the integrity of those involved compared to hypothetical officers who did the same thing but did not report themselves... but does not speak well of the internal checks in the system, and I have a hard time believing those other officers are entirely hypothetical.
  - ipsin 12y ago
    I'm not impressed by the "self-reported" cases. http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-sometimes-spy-on-love-interests/ http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2013/08/23/nsa-officers-someti... "Such admissions can arise, for example, when an employee takes a polygraph tests as part of a renewal of a security clearance." I also want more internal checks than "hoping the bad actors can't fool polygraph examiners".

snowwrestler 12y ago

That argument probably has limited utility among the general public because a lot of people think drug dealers are fair game for "any means necessary" too. As I recall, the strongest argument in the late 1990s was that there was no possible way to design a weakness in crypto for government that bad guys couldn't also exploit--and at much greater scale. "This bill will make it easier for someone to steal your identity" type stuff.