• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Tech companies face criminal charges if they notify users of UK government spying

jamesrage said:
The fact that you support punishing companies who inform their customers that they are being spied on shows that you support governments spying on people.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/europ...sers-uk-government-spying.html#post1065407224

If the monitoring is legal it would seem reasonable that it could be illegal to inform the monitored.
Click to expand...

Anomalism said:
Security will always be the excuse used to hinder our rights. The safety people believe this will bring is an illusion. The government's ultimate goal is to repress our rights as much as possible and take over the internet so they can control the flow of information like they do with the MSM. Every concession we make brings them a little bit closer.
Click to expand...

That is why one should concentrate on building a good system of checks and balances in order to be able to utilize the powerful new technologies and not act as though we were still living in the parameters that formed the ideas of the class of '68.
 
joG said:
That is why one should concentrate on building a good system of checks and balances in order to be able to utilize the powerful new technologies and not act as though we were still living in the parameters that formed the ideas of the class of '68.
Click to expand...

The class of 75' already warned of these dangers with the technology available at that time, which is dwarfed by today's. No blanket monitoring without the due process of law, in the US, the fourth amendment is not in the slightest ambiguous as to what that is. The UK, I'm not sure. But the checks and balances must first be in place before any government surveillance. If they aren't, then that must first be addressed. I think that by and large they exist but are constantly laking the necessary scrutiny.
 
joG said:
If the monitoring is legal it would seem reasonable that it could be illegal to inform the monitored.
Click to expand...

Why? Should the People purposefully be lied to about the actions of their own government when against them? If it's legal, there is no problem informing people about it.
 
Ikari said:
Why? Should the People purposefully be lied to about the actions of their own government when against them? If it's legal, there is no problem informing people about it.
Click to expand...

If you as a telephone technician notice a tap and inform the mafia hit woman she is being tapped?
 
joG said:
If you as a telephone technician notice a tap and inform the mafia hit woman she is being tapped?
Click to expand...

The government is a mafia hit woman?
 
cpwill said:
Yup. That was one of the entertaining things about the Snowden affair - the Europeans criticizing us often are actually much more aggressive about monitoring their own populations (and less transparent) than we are.
Click to expand...

That's right. All those Europeans are just the same. The ones who were criticising the US NSA for their illegal data-gathering are the exact same ones threatening private tech companies in order to keep their data gathering activities secret. Bunch of hypocrites, those Europeans eh?
 
Andalublue said:
That's right. All those Europeans are just the same. The ones who were criticising the US NSA for their illegal data-gathering are the exact same ones threatening private tech companies in order to keep their data gathering activities secret. Bunch of hypocrites, those Europeans eh?
Click to expand...
Gen'rally speaking, yup.

:roll:
 
gunner said:
opposed to, a state with secret police, neighbour pitched against neighbour, indiscriminate purges for reason of fancy of the day. I'll take a liberal democracy, all day long...
Click to expand...
Well, time to move house then, eh? :mrgreen:

On a more serious note, the question does arise why anyone in Britain need be told. Surely everybody knows anyway.
 
Montecresto said:
The class of 75' already warned of these dangers with the technology available at that time, which is dwarfed by today's. No blanket monitoring without the due process of law, in the US, the fourth amendment is not in the slightest ambiguous as to what that is. The UK, I'm not sure. But the checks and balances must first be in place before any government surveillance. If they aren't, then that must first be addressed. I think that by and large they exist but are constantly laking the necessary scrutiny.
Click to expand...
it's actually a lot easier.

The Brits will eavesdrop on you and pass their findings to the likes of NSA etc.

NSA eavesdrops on Brits (and everyone else) and passes its findings on to GCHQ, MI 5 and 6.

That way nobody has spied on their own and everyone is happy, checks and balances be damned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom