[smudgie]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

The problem is not particularly one piece of information on its own. Its the combination of data that they collect from a now huge resource pool and the fact that it can be used for purposes outside that which it was intended. Also, as no data is safe and secure, it can be fraudulently manipulated meaning that if someone in power decides they want to target an individual, they make the data match the offence they want you to have committed.

My biggest worry is all the ruddy spam emails I get, no doubt due to people sharing my data.

[user104658]

It amazes me how many people would be willing slaves, so long as they're comfortable slaves.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It amazes me how many people would be willing slaves, so long as they're comfortable slaves.

That is chillingly close to something Orwell once said!

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

It amazes me how many people would be willing slaves, so long as they're comfortable slaves.

Please stop with the hysterics and hyperbole T.S. -- 'Slaves'?

I have no manacles or shackles. I can go where I want, do what I want. Eat and drink what I want.

You need to look very, very closely at the many countries around this fractured world where THEIR Security Services and Governments were not as diligent or efficient as ours to see the REAL meaning of SLAVERY.

SLAVERY in its TRUE sense - a life SHACKLED by fear and trepidation. Not knowing if you will be beheaded today for simply being the wrong Nationality, Religion or Caste.

Not knowing if you will be kidnapped, raped, then sold off into real sex SLAVERY simply for being female.

Not knowing whether you are going to be thrown from the top of a high building simply because you are Gay.

Stop please T.S. - I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Please stop with the hysterics and hyperbole T.S. -- 'Slaves'?

I have no manacles or shackles. I can go where I want, do what I want. Eat and drink what I want.

Yes you can. Do you know why? Because luckily for us, our forefathers believed strongly in civil liberties and fought hard, and fearlessly, to secure that freedom.

And now a few hundred years later, here we are, slowly selling those freedoms, accepting more and more government surveillance and control, in exchange for security and comfort. Like a bunch of big, fat, lazy labradors.

As has been mentioned, a big part of the Tory campaign 6 years ago was them hammering Labour for being a nanny state, for mollycoddling and nannying citizens. Remember the proposed mandatory citizen ID cards? Remember how much of a stink Cameron's Tory opposition made about those in the name of freedom? And yet here they are, merrily clawing away at exactly the same things.

It's not this one proposal. It's the slow, steady grinding effect of a proposal here and a proposal there, which will see this country - in a few relatively short decades - a sad little ant farm controlled entirely by fear.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes you can. Do you know why? Because luckily for us, our forefathers believed strongly in civil liberties and fought hard, and fearlessly, to secure that freedom.

And now a few hundred years later, here we are, slowly selling those freedoms, accepting more and more government surveillance and control, in exchange for security and comfort. Like a bunch of big, fat, lazy labradors.

As has been mentioned, a big part of the Tory campaign 6 years ago was them hammering Labour for being a nanny state, for mollycoddling and nannying citizens. Remember the proposed mandatory citizen ID cards? Remember how much of a stink Cameron's Tory opposition made about those in the name of freedom? And yet here they are, merrily clawing away at exactly the same things.

It's not this one proposal. It's the slow, steady grinding effect of a proposal here and a proposal there, which will see this country - in a few relatively short decades - a sad little ant farm controlled entirely by fear.

..I do completely understand this as well, which is why also why my thoughts are not completely formed yet...but it's still though an extreme I think to think that we're all slaves and willing slaves for comfort because comfort doesn't come into it and 'slaves' doesn't come into it either...lives being lost is not comfort/potentially lives being saved is not comfort ..a deep fear from some people is nothing to do with comfort...whatever yours or my thoughts are/it's just not so black and white, type thing/virtually nothing is...and one extreme or the other...more surveillance for all and everyone..or none at all because of the privacy invasion and loss of freedom that has been fought for..

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=Toy Soldier;8156278]Yes you can. Do you know why? Because luckily for us, our forefathers believed strongly in civil liberties and fought hard, and fearlessly, to secure that freedom.

/QUOTE]

And which wars were these then T.S of which you so surprisingly approve - in direct contrast to your normal stance on our deployment of troops?

Incidentally, I need no lecture on what our 'forefathers fought for' there being 6 generations of British Military Service in my family.

[user104658]

[QUOTE=kirklancaster;8156332]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Yes you can. Do you know why? Because luckily for us, our forefathers believed strongly in civil liberties and fought hard, and fearlessly, to secure that freedom.

/QUOTE]

And which wars were these then T.S of which you so surprisingly approve - in direct contrast to your normal stance on our deployment of troops?

Incidentally, I need no lecture on what our 'forefathers fought for' there being 6 generations of British Military Service in my family.

Says more about you that when I talk of our forefathers fighting for things, you automatically assume I mean "the military" and "in wars".

[Kizzy]

Store the records of the entire population.. And how long will it be before they are dipping into that info for everything?

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Store the records of the entire population.. And how long will it be before they are dipping into that info for everything?

They will be, that's the big downside. Remember "a previous government" wanted all our medical details held in a giant system too, and were negotiating to sell that information overseas. We don't have privacy, many young people have already sacrificed their privacy for life by using social media. Once you are in the systems, its already too late.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

They will be, that's the big downside. Remember "a previous government" wanted all our medical details held in a giant system too, and were negotiating to sell that information overseas. We don't have privacy, many young people have already sacrificed their privacy for life by using social media. Once you are in the systems, its already too late.

Yep they were planning the big NHS garage sale and needed to know the most profitable areas.

[lostalex]

Well the US increased our surveillance after 9/11 and we haven't had any major terror attacks since, so it seems like it works.

The last one we had was boston, and only 4 people died, compared to 3,000 on 9/11 and hundreds in oaklahoma. The government seems to be doing a good job here.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by lostalex

Well the US increased our surveillance after 9/11 and we haven't had any major terror attacks since, so it seems like it works.

So true Alex.

[Kizzy]

The IRA used coded warnings as an alert to any device, therefore that threat was relatively overt.
Security services already have access to information whenever they deem it necessary as part of RIPA and also the Civil Contingencies Act.
So again why would they have to have the records of everyone when all they have to do is apply for the information, is it because they don't want to apply and would prefer to simply indiscriminately 'snoop'?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/surveill...nter-terrorism

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

The IRA used coded warnings as an alert to any device, therefore that threat was relatively overt.
Security services already have access to information whenever they deem it necessary as part of RIPA and also the Civil Contingencies Act.
So again why would they have to have the records of everyone when all they have to do is apply for the information, is it because they don't want to apply and would prefer to simply indiscriminately 'snoop'?

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/surveill...nter-terrorism

Again - If the Government WANTED to 'snoop' on any of us then they would not need to secure public approval to do so.

I don't know what - if any - personal information is stored on 'secret Government data bases' but I personally could not give a shet. When it comes to someone knowing which porn site I might be masturbating to, or which TV channel I prefer watching, I will take this anyday over the UK being another Syria or The Lebanon.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Again - If the Government WANTED to 'snoop' on any of us then they would not need to secure public approval to do so.

I don't know what - if any - personal information is stored on 'secret Government data bases' but I personally could not give a shet. When it comes to someone knowing which porn site I might be masturbating to, or which TV channel I prefer watching, I will take this anyday over the UK being another Syria or The Lebanon.

They do that's the entire issue though... we have the right to a private life without state interference, atm they have to apply to snoop should there be a need, why is this not sufficient it's working perfectly well.
We are not Syria because of these rights.
Countries the world over are crying out for democracy and civil rights and all we want to do in the UK is give them away it seems :/

[Livia]

If it "worked perfectly well" they would not be applying for more powers. They're not doing it for laughs.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Livia

If it "worked perfectly well" they would not be applying for more powers. They're not doing it for laughs.

There hasn't been a successful terrorist attempt so what is the measure here? I didn't suggested they were doing it for the comedy.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There hasn't been a successful terrorist attempt so what is the measure here? I didn't suggested they were doing it for the comedy.

This is the whole point. There has not been a successful terrorist attempt for a long time just BECAUSE of our Security Services work, now though, there is a definite new threat which they know about and we do not, which neccessitates them asking for the relevant new powers to deal with it.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

This is the whole point. There has not been a succsseful terrorist attempt for a long time just BECAUSE of our Security Services work, now though, there is a definite new threat which they know about and we do not, which neccessitates them asking for the relevant new powers to deal with it.

So you're frightened of something, but you don't know what?...

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

So you're frightened of something, but you don't know what?...

Genuinely - I am frightened of NOTHING on this planet. I have never said anywhere that I am frightened by this but HAVE pointed out repeatedly that there is a huge difference in being diligent and aware to being hysterical and frightened.

Oh, and I do not need to know details - if our Security Services say that there is a need for more funding/powers to combat 'A' new or increased threat from these demented bastard terrorists, then I trust them and don't need to know.

[Northern Monkey]

I'm in two minds about this.
On the one hand i think MI5 do an incredible job in stopping terrorist attacks in this country and they should get the resources they need.
However,Where is the limit?
There has to be a limit on the power they are given.Nobody should be all powerful and able to do anything they want.A limit on just how much power we are willing to give our security services needs to be established before they are given free reign to do absolutely anything they choose.People have a right to some privacy.
Yes i believe terrorists give away that right with their acts but what about all the innocent people.Innocent people who have'nt committed any crime?They still should have a right to privacy.
So i think any power that is given should be transparent and there should be a limit set by the people(us) by vote on how much power we want to give to MI5.They are here to serve us remember.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Northern Monkey

I'm in two minds about this.
On the one hand i think MI5 do an incredible job in stopping terrorist attacks in this country and they should get the resources they need.
However,Where is the limit?
There has to be a limit on the power they are given.Nobody should be all powerful and able to do anything they want.A limit on just how much power we are willing to give our security services needs to be established before they are given free reign to do absolutely anything they choose.People have a right to some privacy.
Yes i believe terrorists give away that right with their acts but what about all the innocent people.Innocent people who have'nt committed any crime?They still should have a right to privacy.
So i think any power that is given should be transparent and there should be a limit set by the people(us) by vote on how much power we want to give to MI5.They are here to serve us remember.

MI5 are not now, nor will they ever be, all powerful. They are governed and restricted by a whole host of laws both British and international. Their sole purpose is the safety and security of the UK.

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Livia

MI5 are not now, nor will they ever be, all powerful. They are governed and restricted by a whole host of laws both British and international. Their sole purpose is the safety and security of the UK.

No but i think if no boundary is given to the power they are afforded then it is a slippery slope to that.I mean i'm not a conspiracy guy who thinks they want to create a new world order but i think we have to be careful and have a debate on how far we are willing to let this go.

[lostalex]

Kizzy you have it all backwards. when you have a government protecting you, you don't have to be scared, that's the whole point. we have a government that is protecting us and we can trust it, that means we don't have to be scared.

You are the one that seems scared, because you are paranoid about the government.

You seem more scared of the government than we are of the terrorists. and that's so backwards and paranoid.

Stop being so paranoid.