Home Secretary reaffirms super database plans for electronic snooping
- Thread starter TopSecret
- Start date
Who needs rights anyway?
It's such a crock. I'm not worried about dying in a terrorist attack. Statistically, you are so much more likely to die in a car crash, or from substance abuse.
Why not spend the money on imporving that. Oh wait, because then they wouldn't be able to spy on us, or sell the data to 3rd parties.
It's such a crock. I'm not worried about dying in a terrorist attack. Statistically, you are so much more likely to die in a car crash, or from substance abuse.
Why not spend the money on imporving that. Oh wait, because then they wouldn't be able to spy on us, or sell the data to 3rd parties.
I think they are trying to catch more than just terrorists though. That's the top end of the scale, but it filters right down to petty criminals. It's basically another form of evidence for a prosecution. I would have no problems with the database itself and the idea behind it, but how the database could be misused quite easily by the government is what worries me. What also worries me is the fact that the government haven't exactly inspired us with data security.
Rastalovich
New member
Now, do we think that if I were to send a terroristic message, that I wouldn`t encode the thing first ? Encode it with something that`d take Sony more than 2 years to decode.
It`s an excuse tbh. Infomation is one of the most valuable commodities today, and that`s what they want.
The smoke screen is all well and good, and there`s also reports coming from N.American isps that they envisage internet to be soley bound to the likes of tv access (similar) by 2012, which could effect the user further.
But don`t think this is a party based thing - even tho it will ofc be spun that way by the media. It`s in the open, where as in some countries it already happens to an extent, and it will happen in those who don`t already have it. Under the guise of anti-terrorism.
It`s like the green debate only with terrorists. An excuse to do other things under a guise.
(OC3D will get alot of search hits now cos of the word "terrorist" lol)
It`s an excuse tbh. Infomation is one of the most valuable commodities today, and that`s what they want.
The smoke screen is all well and good, and there`s also reports coming from N.American isps that they envisage internet to be soley bound to the likes of tv access (similar) by 2012, which could effect the user further.
But don`t think this is a party based thing - even tho it will ofc be spun that way by the media. It`s in the open, where as in some countries it already happens to an extent, and it will happen in those who don`t already have it. Under the guise of anti-terrorism.
It`s like the green debate only with terrorists. An excuse to do other things under a guise.
(OC3D will get alot of search hits now cos of the word "terrorist" lol)
name='Rastalovich' said:
Yes but it will catch the criminals who are too dumb or too arrogant to encrypt or hide their tracks. Take paedophiles for example, it would be easier to convict them with information like this, I should imagine. The data could be used in murder cases, drugs cases etc etc as another form of evidence against the accused.
I don't agree with the database because of the protential drawbacks and flaws, but in principal, it should be worth having. It's a pity our government can't be trusted to get it right though. Look at the DHSS and NHS IT infrastructure fiascos and that should be enough for the government to leave well alone!
name='!TIMMY!' said:
Agreed on that point
I had a lecture on some aspects of forensic analysis of computers. There were lots of really interesting points about how people protect themselves.
This guy seemed to know what he was talking about and he was completely against this kind of database. One point he made was that they wanted to store it on a server that had already been hacked into. A pensions one I think.
Actually, that one might have been for the DNA register. Even so, I really don't understand why people get so riled up and agree to the most stupid of ideas as soon as terrorism or paedophilia is mentioned. You know they have these laws already written up and are just waiting for a suitable disaster, so they can implement them.
That makes me sound a bit like a conspiracy theorist. I'm not saying they cause them to happen, or that they know and allow them to happen, but they will have them shelved away.
This guy seemed to know what he was talking about and he was completely against this kind of database. One point he made was that they wanted to store it on a server that had already been hacked into. A pensions one I think.
Actually, that one might have been for the DNA register. Even so, I really don't understand why people get so riled up and agree to the most stupid of ideas as soon as terrorism or paedophilia is mentioned. You know they have these laws already written up and are just waiting for a suitable disaster, so they can implement them.
That makes me sound a bit like a conspiracy theorist. I'm not saying they cause them to happen, or that they know and allow them to happen, but they will have them shelved away.
Rastalovich
New member
name='stuartpb' said:
Flimsey tbh. Open up a PC repair shop and u could convict 75% of the people who come in to see u I`d imagine. Every1 of them will have something on there that they shouldn`t, even in alot of cases without their knowledge.
name='stuartpb' said:
See u`ve jumped on the govt thing, mostly from previous "news" reports I`d imagine.
Let`s not forget the IT contractors and contracting firms out there who actually do the work. U don`t elect them and they`re not fashionable to blame.
name='Rastalovich' said:
I don't blame the contractors, because the government never had a clear idea of exactly what they wanted their systems to do, neither did they fully appreciate the amount of work required to overhaul the existing and decaying systems. It was their responsibility to ensure that whoever got the contract was up to the job, and had sufficient expertise and knowledge to carry out that job. They also needed to provide the contractors with a workable schedule. Both systems I mentioned went massively over budget, and there are still bugs as big as Dawn French's arse in them. The government have to take responsibilty as it's our money they are wasting.
Rastalovich
New member
I dunno, I mean u vote for some1 and expect them to be fully knowledgable on computer security theory ?
Or u expect them to contract it ?
Or u expect them to contract it ?
Surely, the government has their own IT experts who are supposed to advise on such matters? If not then why in the hell not? And if so, then they deserve the chop!
At the end of the day, the buck stops with the government. It was their decision to overhaul the systems, and if they contracted out to companies which turned out to be inept then the fault lies with them. If I ever sub contract any of my work out, I always vet the subbies, and I ensure they can do what they claim they can do. If they mess up, it's me on the chopping block and not them, the same applies here.
At the end of the day, the buck stops with the government. It was their decision to overhaul the systems, and if they contracted out to companies which turned out to be inept then the fault lies with them. If I ever sub contract any of my work out, I always vet the subbies, and I ensure they can do what they claim they can do. If they mess up, it's me on the chopping block and not them, the same applies here.
Rastalovich
New member
People in the civil servant department I would imagine. The people who practically run the under-govt, pay their own salaries, and are inplace no-matter which govt is in power at the time. The bain of the ruling party - if u like, and consider themselves that much more important.
Wholey doesn`t matter tho, as we blame the govt cos it`s easy. And yes the buck does stop with those who we voted for, cos it`s matter-of fact. Likewize we blame those who take us to wars on the back of inteligence, despite the inteligence turning out to be bad after the fact. We don`t blame those who arranged the inteligence, we blame those who read it, cos we know them, they`re easier and more fashionable to club together to bash.
They wouldn`t sack a minister or servant or any1 of note over things like that, no more than they`d expect a bank that can`t balance it`s books to go out of business. Just fine the IT firm, who`s director know`s a member of the house of lords if not in it, take a further back-hander, and carry on using them.
1 thing tho, it aint Gordon Browns fault - tho it will be at election time.
Fickle.
Wholey doesn`t matter tho, as we blame the govt cos it`s easy. And yes the buck does stop with those who we voted for, cos it`s matter-of fact. Likewize we blame those who take us to wars on the back of inteligence, despite the inteligence turning out to be bad after the fact. We don`t blame those who arranged the inteligence, we blame those who read it, cos we know them, they`re easier and more fashionable to club together to bash.
They wouldn`t sack a minister or servant or any1 of note over things like that, no more than they`d expect a bank that can`t balance it`s books to go out of business. Just fine the IT firm, who`s director know`s a member of the house of lords if not in it, take a further back-hander, and carry on using them.
1 thing tho, it aint Gordon Browns fault - tho it will be at election time.
Fickle.
We blame the government, not because it's easy, but because they have a job to do. If they get it wrong, for whatever reason, then the buck stops with them. Every time they do get it wrong, they always have an excuse, and blaming the back room boys doesn't cut the mustard.
You mentioned the recent wars, and the dodgy intelligence the government received, well I think that they knew the real situation and it was easier to lie and blame others than admit the real truth. They knew that there was no real justification for the wars, but they had to be seen to be doing the right thing!
As for how the country is run, and you saying that it's the civil servants fault when things go wrong, and it's easy to blame the government, here's how I see it:
I sell you a PC, it turns out that the hard drive is fooked. You come to me to repair it. I say to you that it isn't my fault because the hard drive is from a third party. Would I be right in doing this? Nope, and the same applies with the government, it doesn't matter who's fault it is, the buck stops with them, and rightly so.
It's about time we got over the buck passing in our government, and voted in some people who are prepared to take it on the chin when they fook up. As for Gordon Brown, well he's as useless as a piece of second hand bog roll.
You mentioned the recent wars, and the dodgy intelligence the government received, well I think that they knew the real situation and it was easier to lie and blame others than admit the real truth. They knew that there was no real justification for the wars, but they had to be seen to be doing the right thing!
As for how the country is run, and you saying that it's the civil servants fault when things go wrong, and it's easy to blame the government, here's how I see it:
I sell you a PC, it turns out that the hard drive is fooked. You come to me to repair it. I say to you that it isn't my fault because the hard drive is from a third party. Would I be right in doing this? Nope, and the same applies with the government, it doesn't matter who's fault it is, the buck stops with them, and rightly so.
It's about time we got over the buck passing in our government, and voted in some people who are prepared to take it on the chin when they fook up. As for Gordon Brown, well he's as useless as a piece of second hand bog roll.
Rastalovich
New member
name='stuartpb' said:
Tis. People lend more money than they can afford to pay back and continue to lend more money - Today on the "news" we`re blaming the govt for a bank being "aggressive" in it`s pursuit of it`s money. I don`t think we should blame any1 else cos we`re an idiot.
name='stuartpb' said:
It should. I`ve personally had enough of people effing up all up`n`down the country and blaming a small handful of people cos they happen to be in power. People need to be more responsible and take responsibility for what they do themselves.
name='stuartpb' said:
Conspiracy.
name='stuartpb' said:
The pc would be ur fault. If u contracted some1 to sell it to me it would be their fault - either way I`d give u the opportunity, rightly so to sort it out.
Yeah they should take it on the chin when they fook up, equally the people who do the work on their/our behalf should take it when they fook up, and it`d be up to the govt to be the people to pick it up with them.
There isn`t any buck passing as far as I can see, except directly to who-ever is in power at the time. The nurses screw up - it`s Gordon Brown. The police screw up - it`s Gordon Brown. The teachers screw up - it`s Gordon Brown. Parents don`t give an eff about the trogs they rear - it`s Gordon Brown. It`s all nice`n` cosey but let`s see some real responsibility. The "govt" lose information on members of the public - NO - the contracting firm that the govt have charged with doing the data handling have lost the information. Yay let`s call for some govt minister`s head on a plate for that so they can be replaced by another drone who know`s equally as little as their previous college and take on the next contracting firm who aren`t as-good as the previous firm. See how that plays out.
And I aint a Gordon Brown fan btw. I`d be saying exactly the same thing if some other flakey politician from whatever other faction won the 4 yearly "news"paper led popularity contest.
This already happens on all major ISPs. They have given the goverment free reign to browse their customers. Smaller ISPs have generally told them to shove it but I can see this development being a way for them to just bypass them.
As for the buck passing, it only goes to the top in goverment. Everywhere else the sh|t flows downhill.
Ive always been on the fence about gordan brown and while i dont think hes what we need right now, his idea of buying the privatized banks over to the public sector was spot on. And for Bush to follow suit with the nationalization, of all people, shows that when it comes to the economy hes probably the best chance we've got.
As for the buck passing, it only goes to the top in goverment. Everywhere else the sh|t flows downhill.
Ive always been on the fence about gordan brown and while i dont think hes what we need right now, his idea of buying the privatized banks over to the public sector was spot on. And for Bush to follow suit with the nationalization, of all people, shows that when it comes to the economy hes probably the best chance we've got.
I agree that people should take more responsibility for their actions and their lives. I also think that the government should take responsibility when they mess up, which they never really do. How many times have you heard a politician say they have got it wrong over their policies? I can honestly only think of a few in the past few years. Normally, they come out with some babble to try and detract from the question.
Politicians are voted into office to become the public face of our government, and as such they should be held accountable when mistakes happen. If they don't like that, then they should find another job. I am not saying everything worng with our country is down to the politicians or is the governments fault, but when they do make mistakes they should be made to pay for them.
Politicians are voted into office to become the public face of our government, and as such they should be held accountable when mistakes happen. If they don't like that, then they should find another job. I am not saying everything worng with our country is down to the politicians or is the governments fault, but when they do make mistakes they should be made to pay for them.
Rastalovich
New member
Even without public admission, the govt dept in question and most notably the minister in charge, are almost always held in account when something goes wrong and they need a patsy. This is why we have reshuffles and "sideways promotions" all throughout the political year.
Never understood why people want a politician or people of note to come out and say or claim responsibility for things. I know the media love it, absolutely drool over it, have vacations named after the day things happen and smack their chops over articles instead of looking for real news.
But hey, the public sheep buy these media presses over it, follow anything thats said within them pretty blindly. And who the heck cares if.... a nuclear sub explodes of the coast of an island killing a mass of kids who happen to be on a trip - as long as the defense minister accepts responsibility and appologizes. Everything is then fine.
Never understood why people want a politician or people of note to come out and say or claim responsibility for things. I know the media love it, absolutely drool over it, have vacations named after the day things happen and smack their chops over articles instead of looking for real news.
But hey, the public sheep buy these media presses over it, follow anything thats said within them pretty blindly. And who the heck cares if.... a nuclear sub explodes of the coast of an island killing a mass of kids who happen to be on a trip - as long as the defense minister accepts responsibility and appologizes. Everything is then fine.
Similar threads
