Britons' Internet access bills will soar to pay for Snoopers Charter


#1

[Read the post]


#2

Of course, movie and music companies would never be expected to pay for it.

All this cost is solely for them and will have no benefit whatsoever for anyone else, except for politicians with greased pockets.

This doesn’t serve society. Doesn’t improve anything.


#3

“The indiscriminate collection of mass data is going to have a massive cost,”

They’ll spare no expense to look up your knickers!


#4

What’s going on with the British government these days? A recent New Scientist editorial put it something like, “either the government is scientifically illiterate or they think the public is” - they were talking about this, the attempts to ban/circumvent encryption and a new drugs law that would outlaw, thanks to an overly broad definition of psychoactive substances, literally, everything (including things that aren’t even physical substances). But I don’t think all that insanity is quite covered by scientific illiteracy alone…


#5

Hey, we’re going to spend £176bn on a replacing one phallic deterent system that never got used, with another that is completely unsuited to the geo-political situation we’re in so it’ll be peanuts. Also I’m sure their war on the poor will reduce the amount of people they need to keep their beady, willfully selective eye on.

If there are bad people around, what magical explaination is given for them not attacking/abusing this massive piece of weakly defended digital infrastructure?


#6

Perhaps this is the real motive. Drive more people into Dickensian levels of poverty and then use their internet browsing metadata to convict them and have them sent to the workhouse.

I hope the people that voted in this shower are content.


#7

The political class are in a bubble of privilege wherein they buy votes by proposing and passing laws. They have no perception of anything outside Westminster; it’s like they’re playing a text-based game of politics on an old TRS-80. Blame the poor, get 1 million votes; blame the migrant workers, get two million votes; blame terrorism, get five million votes; tax the poor, lose 1% of your national productivity, but raise your worth in the City (important for that post-Cabinet income) by 5%. Promise to save the NHS, gain 10 million votes; sell off the NHS, £50 million for your pension. Why not fuck a pig? It’s not like it will make a difference.


#8

I wonder which song they’ll appropriate for selling us the wonder of our new protected age.


#9

[quote=“LemoUtan, post:8, topic:69126, full:true”]
I wonder which song they’ll appropriate for selling us the wonder of our new protected age.
[/quote]<A HREF=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMOGaugKpzs>Every Breath You Take by The Police.


#10

I think I understand the true brilliance of Cameron’s two-pronged strategy: by working tirelessly for initiatives to cripple and bowdlerize UK ‘internet access’, he is assuring that, by 2020, it will be such a howling wasteland that ISPs will pretty much just have to record the IP address of the offshore VPN provider or TOR node that each subscriber is connecting to, and roughly how much traffic passed on that route; and thus able to fulfill their sweeping retention mandate at vanishingly low cost!

It’s brilliant! Cameron is an under-appreciated technical genius and master strategist! All glory to the great firewall and the Tory guardians of national purity!


#11

Just to add insult to injury, it’ll be something bitterly, ironically redirected: some Britpunk masterpiece emasculated down to just a bland catchy chant, all anger and anti-authoritarianism sucked out of it: Complete Control, maybe, or Holidays In The Sun, or This Is The Modern World…

Turning rebellion into money


#12

I’d like to suggest something from here:


#13

What I don’t get is: Just what problem does keeping a citizen’s web history solve?

Or are they just saying: “Because, you know, terrorism.” (Because if I were a terrorist, I’d just adapt by doing all my “terror stuff” at the local Starbucks wifi.)

If the law is surveilling a particular person, you get a warrant to monitor their communications. To force 100% of the population to follow a draconian, Orwellian monitoring regimen due to a handful of criminals-- who can and will easily avoid this regimen-- makes no sense.


#14

Did you see this yesterday?


#15

Write to your MPs, people. We need to start now and not let up for moment. Turns out andy burnham is kinda regretting the blind approval he gave this before actually reading it. But still, steeper broadband bills are unfortunately probably the best means to shake your work colleague/family member/friend’s “apathetic bloody planet” mindset over this.


#16

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.