They forgot to list one of the major items of suspicion for escalation - not opting in to Oversight.
I opted in. I'm hoping to be granted full citizenship.
Brilliant. But for some reason I kept expecting the Vogons to turn up.
"Legal and social restrictions in other countries may differ from your own; Remember to be impartial, and to follow the instructions on screen."
"Opted into Clearway by Government"
Opt-in to Clearway and earn Tesco Clubcard rewards.
dont give the bastards ideas.... expect this to become Tory party policy in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.....
Umm..... I'm kinda part of a moderation system similar to this at okcupid.com, having used the site for about two years and communicated regularly with other members I was deemed safe to become a moderator. Basic process was almost identical to Overwatch apart from one crucial point: users had to report violations of terms of service before I could see anything about a reported indecent.
Ok it was only looking at either conversations (with names removed) that had been released by one party as possible harassment or profile information publicly available on the site and for the most part I think it was an easy way for the company to manage there complains process. I can see how some mindless drone could see this as being practical to apply to all internet security and that scares me.
Finally a clear explanation of David Cameron's "Big Society".
Join Nightwatch, earn extra credits and help keep Earth safe from alien races!
“Political parties have nothing to do with religious problems, as long as these are not alien to the nation, undermining the morals and ethics of the race; just as religion cannot be amalgamated with the scheming of political parties.” ~Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 3
Edit: something tells me I better put a #sarcasm hastag here.
The dating industry is not a model to be applauded.
I'd agree that online dating isnt the most ethical of industries. I was just trying to point out a system where (in my opinion) crowd sourced moderation works reasonably well and how a technologically ignorant government policy operative could see it as being something that could be applied to all situations regardless of privacy.
Also much as I'm not able to view the panorama edition you posted I'd take it with a pretty big shovel full of salt. After watching the Panorama report on video game addiction I'm wary of the program sensationalizing any issue investigated.
"Scott nails the weirdly upbeat and blandly evil voice of
global corporatism democratically-elected government and produces something that is chillingly convincing."
FTFY. Let's be honest: whether you're a fan or not, global corporatism just wants to make a buck. They don't care if you're a terrorist, they don't care if your kids see porn, they don't care if you're interested in weird religions: they just want to sell you something. The only reason they would be involved is exactly what's in the video - they are getting paid to do the government's dirty work. What's a corporation going to do with a search warrant? Take away your airline points or gift card? It's the government you elected that wants to control what you say and do and get your neighbors to spy on you.
Government, at least in the US and UK, is not democratically elected. The whole political process is owned and controlled by and small number of conservative capitalists. The upper class promotes the drug war, terror war, racism, religion, etc in order to exploit and oppress the working class.
Maybe corporations don't care if you're a terrorist but they do care if you're a socialist; especially, if you happen to be an anti-global-corporatism-kind-of-socialist and I believe that the terrorism wrapper on all this is just there to hide the main agenda of setting up a spying apparatus to nip things like Occupy in the bud or to prepare for growing environmental activism that is sure to result from climate change.
Well, at last they're thanking me for all my hard work over the last few years working in the pilot project. Up to now,all we've really had to show for it has been the priority channels at airports. Oh, and of course, the ability to turn on our neighbours' and colleague's laptop and phone-cams.
It's kind of altered office dynamics, now I know about my boss's extra-curricular 'meetings', and Shirley's tattoos.
Neat. I'm volunteering for Phase-II, now, ability to edit and alter other people's websites.
If your assertion is true, then that's all the more reason to oppose them rather than blame "corporatism" as the culprit. The fact remains that government is the only organization approved by society to actually harm people by throwing them in jail or killing them. Remove that, and you remove both the threat of this kind of surveillance and the means by which it is enforced. What is the conspiracy of "conservative capitalists" going to do then?
if you are so naive as to imagine that being thrown in jail or killed is the only way your life can be made miserable, then you'll deserve what you get when the anarcho-capitalist libertarian paradise finally touches down on earth from its trip around the noosphere.
Isn't it far more naive to believe that giving people permission to use violent aggression to achieve their desired goals is going to result in something other than what the video discusses? Isn't it far more naive to believe that granting power to the power-hungry will result in anything but tyranny?
you are conveniently forgetting about all of the bad people that big government is too busy or fragile to prosecute.
Endangering your freedom and your life with impunity might not be official fascism but it sure does look, smell and feel like it.
'I can't believe it's not fascism.'
next page →