It will cost £12 billion, be run by private companies and track every move you make on the internet, every call, text message and every transaction. Yes, this is the UK government proposal to manage and run a communications database that will make Chinese attempts to control and monitor its citizens look like “light touch” regulation.
The only difference with one-party states like China (ok, so apart from the summary trials and executions) is that the government claims that it will not look at the content on our every electronic interaction, but merely at the points of entry. The “pings”, if you like, to use a geek term.
Of course, this is incorrect. By building up a database about our movements - our morning rituals of checking emails, visiting web sites, buying online - this will build up a pattern. This in itself is “content”. This will create a pattern of recognition about our movements. Plus how long would it be before they start to argue that they need to see the content as well? Curiously, because so few people in China - relatively speaking - are online and/or using credit cards, China will look pretty free compared to our electronically driven society.
I could write a 1,000 more words more on this subject. For now the scale of the project beggars belief. From a government which has presided over countless numbers of security breaches, including a missing CD containing every child’s name and address in the UK, it is an amazing act of hubris. Plus, it comes in the wake proposals by the Ministry of Truth (Ok, so the Department of Culture, Media and Sport) to regulate content. So now we are watched as we go online, and the content we view is to be rated and standardised. Welcome to Britain in the 21st Century.
The more salient point to note for TechCrunch readers is that the impact on British online business will be significant. At a time when one of the few areas of growth in the economy is the digital sector, the UK government wants to look over the shoulder of the consumer when they go online. Will this make them feel safer, or preyed upon? Feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments below.
Leaving aside the question of whether this is necessary for a second, I think the government has demonstrated on a number of occassions that it does not have the skills or knowledge to be able to safely manage personal data.
They government is supposed to work for us: if they were pitching for the business of managing data on this scale (even if they are proposing to outsource it), they wouldn’t win the job based on their track record.
There is no way we should be paying them £12bn to mess up again.
Don’t leave aside the most important question - there is no need for such a database.
The justification will be fear marketing.
It’s propaganda and it’s very effective. Makes even reasonable people very pliant.
We use the same technique in advertising. If you don’t by our shampoo, toothpaste, soap powder you will never be like the succesful, happy, beautiful, popular people in our ads.
All you need is the media to keep repeating the message and eventually people feel the anxiety to believe the preposterous.
I am a believer that vigorous attempts to have total privacy online, such as blocking browser and flash cookies by default might have an acute negative effect on small businesses trying to gather important business data.
Large firms can probably manage using very aggregate data collection because they have more data points.
As for governments, I always assumed they already monitored this stuff, though they wouldn’t necessarily store it unless you were on some kind of “watch” list.
Very “Enemy of the State” or “Eagle Eye” like, or for the older generation Big Brother / 1984, but ultimately I can see a need for the capability.
Note in China, they determine what you are allowed to watch, I can’t see that happening in the UK other than for very obvious illegal activities such as child porn.
A whole lot of data currently resides accross the pond, and I don’t see a UK owned search giant appearing any time soon.
Most people think “Law enforcement by robots is tyranny”. I think “Law enforcement by robots is Freedom”. Because it allows us to work round a predictable system. So badly maintained, highly visible speed cameras allow you to speed with impunity with just a little common sense. A fully automated congestion charge system encourages people to have cloned registration, and no tax or insurance.
Track all my communications, and I’ll go back to routinely using PGP. While indulging in SEO to make sure 90% of my online activity is discoverable by Google.
Yes, its a pointless waste of money, just like ID cards. But the more they rely on it, the more opportunities there will be to slip beneath the radar.
We do have to remember that these private businesses technically at least already have this access to their own customers data as it travels across their networks.
What the intelligence service should do is have power to request they put a monitor on a person when they have a court order on a case by case basis. They no doubt have this power anyway but haven’t bothered establishing ISP relationships. Perhaps they can just intercept raw traffic at Layer 1 with the co-operation of NTL/BT who own most of the real cables anyway because other ISP’s normally use there networks.
There is just no excuse for wanting to collect this amount of data. The thing that I think is most stupid is that given the encryptions available now any serious criminal will have encrypted data that is sensitive anyway so why would a massive database of encrypted data help the Gov they probably wouldn’t be able to sort it or decode it when they need it so why spend £12bn on collecting it!
There would be very little useful information for law enforcement from this plan. Brendan has it right on. There are already tools for governments to follow those that they deem suspicous. Use those tools. There’s no need to spend all that money making a huge database of mostly useless info
Very good
http://kisalink.com/fd1a81e/
There’s an event in February organised by a broad consortium of groups and individuals - not all of whom I’d want to share a room with, but some situations call for the widest possible engagement. The Convention on Modern Liberty site is at http://www.modernliberty.net/
Usual disclaimer - these are friends of mine and I’m helping them with their strategy.
My experience (and I have consulted for UK Tax, Pensions, the SFO, and Benefits) is that even when they have the data they won’t be able to use it. They will lose it, it will get stale, they will link it up using bad rules and come up with all sorts of idiotic conclusions about many thousands of individuals that will badly impact the lives of those innocently targeted by the use of this data.
It will be expensive, take decades to deliver, not work and be hated and badly used. And that is just by our current (reasonably incompetant) government and civil service.
Now project the current ‘rule by fear’ ahead a decade. Terrorists detonate a dirty bomb somewhere, Israel and the Arab world spiral further down the drain of hatred. Oil is nearly exhausted. Water wars have already broken out. Low level cyberwar is a fact of life as China and Russia continue to flex their muscles. NOW think of what sort of government we will have and what they will use this sort of data to do to us.
THAT is why they cannot be allowed to have it. Not for what they will do today, but for what someone might do in the future. And, for once, the German government is right in rejecting this and anything like it.
Like all government attempts at technology this plan is fundamentally flawed.
.gov.uk have stated that they will only require logging of the ‘header’ information about communications not the actual content, with today’s web where is the dividing line?
Lets take twitter as an example,
If the intercept is at my ISP’s level then they will record that I send an HTTP post to twitter’s servers.
Now then that POST was me sending a Direct Message to @fred for example,
That DM had a URL in it pointing to tinurl
That Tiny URL resolved to a flickr url
That flickr url was a photo of a hand written note that said:
“Hello Fred, can you tell John that I want to meet him outside the Acme Bank at 9am tomorrow to rob the place”
Fred then repeats the process to John.
Well the ISP have dutifully passed along to Big Brother that I sent a 200 byte POST of data using HTTP to twitter. Now how does that help them!
As usual this will only serve to annoy and oppress the normal population while anyone actually intent on committing a real crime will find a way through in seconds.
NOTE: I am not a bank robber nor do I have any intention of ever becoming one, I have no idea who Fred & Jon are! all details above are for example only, please don’t ship me off to Gitmo
Too easy to render useless for ADSL users with lots of data allowance.
1. A browser extension that makes fake visits to websites bringing on noise data.
2. HTTPs, IP sec, etc
3. Proxies
Bring it on!
Rally people together in opposition to this, and follow those associated with the firms doing this. Follow them around their daily lives all day and write down everything they do, including when they go to the bathroom, etc. Make it obvious they’re being observed. Then send them a report every week.
even if it is very scary it is only a proposal. In Italy also we had very strange proposals of regulamentation about Internet…but none was approved…
Let me know how that ‘blogging thing’ works out when you get to China.
Save the £12 billion just ask google for the info!
Hi
They have the most CCTV then anyone is the world BUT it still does not cut down on crime and this will DO NOTING for crime and terrorism.
So much money and its not wanted by the people.
12 billion to apprehend 58.3 pedophiles and meaninglessly prove 12,000,000 British moms are BDSM fans.
Britain- the paranoUK.
Great sales pitch to the Govt - getting them to fork out 12bn of taxpayers money in a recession, while the businesses whose networks they seek to infiltrate go out bust.
When will the Govt learn to trust us - oh that’s right never, because they believe we are all as dumb and predictable as they are.
These muppets need to stop enforcing the nanny state on us and get into fixing the things that actually need fixing.
Welcome to move to Sweden! We have no such surveilance laws at all. No FRA, no IPRED, no ACTA, no whatsoever. Your internet communication is left alone day and night.
This is some scary shizzle.
Just found this e-petition on this subject:
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/no-to-1984/#detail
Off to sign up…
HHmmm, you are against the government having all our personel data, so you go sign a petition with your details and send it to number 10 so that they will in effect have a list of people they now know to be fully against these propersitions. if petitions worked we would not have gone to war in Iraq (remember the NOT IN MY NAME petitions that millions signed) that worked really well !!! infact they used the petitions data to help identify people to arrest at the protest march that then took place.
How about to get inside the bed with me? Explore the food I cook, wth going on :s
@Mats Henricson — That is great, Enjoy it, it will all change after a terrorist attack. France and Spain had the same attitude, in the name of “personal privacy” then things had to change…
Yes, it is a lot of money and government employees will screw things up. But, what is the alternative? Do nothing while Muslim extremists are crawling all over Britain? This not only affects British citizens but also people living in the rest of Europe, the US and many other countries.
I say forget the absurd political correctness and the paranoid cries of “protection” for individual “privacy” — bring it on! If it saves my family from being blown up by terrorists, it is worth every penny of it.
just out of curiousity how many terror attacks have taken place since 9/11 over 7 years ago, how much risk do you really believe your family to be in from a terrorist attack. you mentioned the muslim extremists all over britain (not really mate, bear in mind the size of our population it would be far less than 0.5%) and what about christian extremists dropping bombs all over the middle east what about the innocent familys and children there, we are causing more TERROR to the innocent over there than they could ever do western countries. if anyone is to be called terrorists its the people running the U.S and U.K. as for what is the alternative, pull out of there countries and leave their resources alone let them have control over there country without our interferance, stop stealing from them. maybe then they might not think us to be complete cunts,
If you are not a terrorist, you have nothing to be concerned about.
Okay, I’ll bite. We’ve all heard that argument before, and it’s still just as flawed as the last time it was peddled out.
Give authorities a new power and they use it to its fullest extent. There are plenty of examples of systematic use of the “anti-terrorism” legislation brought in since 2001 for purposes unrelated to terrorism… crowd control, detaining pensioners who heckle Labour politicians, etc.
In addition there’s the fact that “terrorist” itself is a broad and subjective term… prone to mistakes… that regularly includes innocent people like Jean Charles De Menezes.
Considering that the danger to the public from terrorism is tiny in comparison to virtually any other danger (crossing the road, lightning, stairs) I think there should be a significant burden of proof before our laws are permanently changed to ‘protect’ us from it.
Scary in light of the newly proposed “big brother” systems of Australia too, what terrorist intelligence is available to make them suggest such politically unfriendly policies.
Do you want “proof” of terrorism before government officials get off their asses and do something?
Sigh! You know what? I would love to go back in time and live in a world of innocence, candy and puppies… Unfortunately, we have to sober up and face reality, The sooner, the better.
Faced with possibly the most severe recession since the 30s, and generally being seeing as the weakest positioned country in the EU, surely there are more pressing things to spend £12bn on.
@Patrick
Yep. You are right. Also, if you are not a jew you will not go to the concentration camp, if you are not a anti-communist you won’t go to GULAG.
Very french 
I love your way of thinking.
Notice that both statements are not true: you are a terrorist (Patrick knows who they are they will tell) - you will get caught = Not True; you are not a terrorist and you will not get caught = Not True, because again, people like Patrick will be deciding.
Down with ‘Patricks’!
I was in the train that was blown up by Muslim terrorists’ bombs in Spain a few years back, and survived with just one leg and I am grateful that I am still alive. My girlfriend did not make it.
I hope that you, “Alex” and many other adolescents like yourself who really need to grow up, will one distant day understand that terrorism changes many people’s lives around the world every single day, and not in a “cool” way.
This is not a matter of childish, absurd logic or semantics, it is *real* life, not the joke you seem to be living. You show that you are really stupid when you joke about Jews and the Holocaust. Yes, please grow up.
Peace.
Guys, please cut down the personal attacks. It’s not part of rational discussion, and rationality *must* be the only basis for legislation.
Yes, terrorism is bad. However, our laws and freedoms are balanced carefully and should not be unbalanced lightly.
I say “lightly” and I mean it, because 50-60 deaths in London, while tragic, are not the basis for changing forever an entire nation’s approach to privacy and freedom.
>To Rich — Yes, you are correct. We should be concerned about the privay and freedom of terrorists, while they murder innocent people, even when they are “only” 50 or 60.
Please, Rich, take your head out of your rectum…
Unfortunately, there are many people who refuse to accept the fact that terrorists are all around us. Are they “terrorists lovers” Maybe they are by ignorance and fear.
There is only one way to deal with terrorists: kill them. Kill them all… That is what Israel is justifiably doing right now. Hamas must be wiped off the face of the earth, by fire.
@Leon
Your position is too simplistic, acknowledging only black and white. It doesn’t represent the real world, which contains shades of grey.
Between the lawlessness of anarchy and the slavery of dictatorships exists a compromise between individual freedoms and public safety.
That is the space in which democracies live. That is the only space in which democracies CAN live.
Your position, and those of the people who use terms like “terrorist lovers” to describe people who oppose the increase of state powers, doesn’t promote democracy, it decreases it. That decrease is very, very hard to win back.
I don’t think you understand the long term repercussions of your willingness to bow to terrorism by giving up freedoms.
Please explain any flaws in my logic, I’d like to hear them.
Rich
@To Rich - You are comparing apples and oranges.
The Muslim [Saudis] terrorists who brought down the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001, murdered over 3,000 innocent civilians, and incredibly, cowards like yourself have tried to explain to their families that the terrorists –like anyone else, deserve their privacy and freedom.
You blatantly, deliberately fail to recognize that, terrorists are not like “everyone else.” THEY ARE NOT. They are non-human blood-thirsty brutal animals that deserve to be executed on site, wherever they are found.
This is “simplistic” –something that even children understand: there are innocent, law-abiding citizens and then. there are terrorists, who do not belong in the human race.
This is not about a “rational concersation” –It is about swift, definite justice. We Americans understan these facts, because we were attacked by terrorists multiple times.
People like you would also try to have a “peaceful” conversation with the Israeli families that had [and have now] their members blown up by the Iranian rockets fired by Hamas into their homes…
Is this “simplistic” enough for you? Asshole.
@Leon,
If you want people to take your arguments seriously you should try and it civil. Do you honestly expect people to say “wow, that guy can really cuss, he must be right”.
One reason your position is too simplistic is that it’s not the terrorists who are having their privacies and freedoms invaded. It’s everybody. Who is or isn’t a terrorist is decided afterwards.
Another reason your position is too simplistic is that when governments award themselves more powers it’s very hard to get them back. Governments tend not to hand back power. You’ve changed the rules for *every* subsequent generation, each of which will have its own grasping politicians.
Another reason your position is too simplistic is that you assume that only Americans understand terrorism. I live in London, which has been a terrorist target for decades. I train with Israelis, and work and socialise with Jews. You do not have (or at least haven’t revealed so far) any special insight that makes your opinion more valuable than mine.
Another reason your position is too simplistic is that our military forces have been strolling through these peoples countries for decades, installing governments, overthrowing democratic movements (Iran anyone). I’m not condoning terrorism, I never will, but I understand WHY some people in those countries resent the West. If Russia invaded Alaska for oil, the US military would fight back, but what if you didn’t have a military? Can you honestly say that individuals wouldn’t take the fight to the Russians themselves, with bombs and guerilla tactics?
From what you’ve said so far I think your position is simplistic and naive… and if all you can do is call me names and stamp your feet then you’ll prove me right.
To all, Patrick i understand how you feel i was caught up in the London bombings 2005 and yes it was horrific and very disturbing, however we must see things in context to be able to react in a productive way, all bombings in the west are basically retaliation for many years of the west stealing oil and other valuable resources leaving them without any control over the use of there own land, please take time to look at history when you see the damage we have done to these people over the last 100 years, there small retaliations are in no way a justification for the wars and the wars are in turn no justification for the systematic scrapping of what is basically the human rights act. it is very easy to angry at what happend in london and spain and 9/11 but anger will not solve the issue, understanding why these things happend and excepting that we have been at fault and in many cases provoked such attacks. we will only solve the situation when we rise above it and can see all sides not just our own, while we continue to fight we remain in the situation, unable to see a amicable solution.
>Alex — I cannot believe your stupid comment. Your sarcasm and ignorance are stunning = you are a total f***ng idiot! You really define what an industrial-strength douche bag you are, moron!
@Alex. this is really disturbing. Another terrorist lover. I wish that someday you find yourself in a real terrorism situation and see if you can cope with that, trying to use your twisted, useless “reasoning” You are a disgusting piece of s**t…
Apps like TOR and Freenet come to mind as a way to offset this sort of abuse of power.
Well, you may call it “abuse of power” but if it works, it may save your sorry ass. Do you deserve to be saved? If you do, tell us why, genius…
I have every sympathy with Patrick, and I wish him very well. I have no sympathy for terrorists, and I find attacks on civilians repulsive.
There are still reasons I object to what is proposed:
The UK government has a proven track record of mishandling data. Take for example the loss of CD-ROM discs in the post, the losing of classified data on a train, or the theft of MoD laptops.
The UK government has a proven track record of bungling private contracts. Take for example the NHS computer system, the Olympics budget or the recent issues surrounding school tests.
The UK government has a proven track record of pushing for 1984-style surveillance measures, such as 90 day detention of terrorist suspects (innocent until proven guilty??) or the ID card system, which are massively expensive to the taxpayer and are opposed I feel by a broad consensus of public opinion.
I feel the money would be better spent on additional police officers.
What makes the UK, or any other democratic nation, great is the extent to which the ordinary peace-loving people are listened to, and their liberty and freedoms upheld.
A database such as is proposed would be a very sad erosion of this basic principle.
It’s precisely because I am innocent I don’t feel the tapping of my phone calls, web behaviour, or emails is warranted at any cost.
If we lose sight of “innocent until proven guilty” we may as well live in a police-state and throw our long fought for freedoms down the toilet.
@James C — In the US, where I live, a similar situation was presented, more or less, to the American citizens, in the months that followed the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and Washington DC on September 11, 2001. Congress authorized very quickly a number of measures that would have been unthinkable before, namely, wiretaps and arrests of suspected terrorists, close surveillance of many individuals, American citizens or not, and much more.
At this time there was an uproar from everywhere in the country opposing anything that would even remotely compromise individual freedoms and privacy. Powerful, well-funded organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union [ACLU] fought vehemently against *any* government action that would limit in any way the individual rights of any American. Phone wiretaps were authorized by federal law against fierce opposition –At the time, the allegations were that “Big Brother” would spy on innocent citizens… Several years later, not a SINGLE case of this nature was brought forward by anyone, even considering the fact that the US is the most litigious country in the world. There were no violations of any kind affecting individual rights and freedoms.
What is my point on all this? It is simple, since September 11, 2001, we have not had a single terrorist episode in the US, hundreds of terrorists [from all over the world] have been detained/arrested and prosecuted/convicted/jailed with strict following of existing laws.
Anti-terrorist measures have worked just fine in the US. There were many mistakes made, mainly in the sense that many terrorists [Muslim extremists] got away, for many reasons.
At this time, now, thousands of terrorists are being carefully watched in the US. We know that hundreds of “sleeper” Al Qaeda cells are in the US and Canada, but again, all their members are unable to conduct any terrorist activity because of “Big Brother.” –Now, we can really say in the US, thank you to “Big Brother.”
The US authorities work very closely with British and Canadian authorities to prevent terrorist activities that would affect any of these countries.
Unjustified, harsh criticism of anti-terrorist activities are motivated by both, political interests and just plain ignorance.
I just want to say we are all using the word terrorist alot. lets just define what a ‘terrorist’ is, I will use the oxford english dictionary for this, anyone who governs others buy fear of force and military action, now ask yourself about our own leaders, how many laws have been past under the pretence that if they dont have these laws we are at immediate danger !! is that not governing by fear, we also tell countries that dont live in the same way we do or believe in what we do, we will bomb them to the stone age or you can come along with us, they make us live in fear and threaten other countries with military action or embargoes, sounds to me like terrorist actions.
my issues do not come from what people would do now with such data but in a decades time, who is to say we dont get another Hitler in power somewhere, no one had any idea when he came to power what he would do, once laws are passed its very hard to change them, i hope we never see another Hitler in power but we have to accept it is always possible and make sure that people always have there freedoms and rights it is the only way to ensure that no one is ever allowed to do what he did to so many innocent people, hitlers campaign for the S.S police was very similar to our currant cctv campaign SAFE UNDER THE WATCHFULL EYES was a slogan used in nazi germany to promote the S.S police it is also a slogan being used all over London right now.
China is a good place.
Hi Sidney and thanks for your message - it’s always good to get a perspective from across the pond
From my understanding (I could be wrong) it’s only suspects who currently are wiretapped or placed under surveillance. I gather what is proposed in the UK is rather more wholesale - data would be collected regardless of whether you’re a suspect.
Perhaps in the US you’ve had a better record with the handling of personal data. In the UK we’ve had so many cases of mishandling recently that it’s hard to trust the government on this.
I don’t doubt that around the world forces are doing their best to prevent the spread of terrorism.
Again in the UK we had the case of Jean Charles de Menezes who was a completely innocent man shot dead on the London tube by anti-terrorism officers mistaking him for another man.
In a separate case an innocent Muslim man was shot (not fatally, thankfully) by police in an armed raid.
This makes me feel there has to be a balance between civil liberties and the risk of terrorism, otherwise we end up living in fear of the police and government as well as terrorists.
I’d also argue that suspects haven’t always been treated in accordance with the law, particularly in relation to Guantanamo Bay and interrogation techniques such as waterboarding, and rendition flights to other countries. Thankfully it seems Obama is about to end this. Suspects have been held for years without proper trial.
It’s not an easy problem, and I won’t pretend I have answers to all these problems. But I do think we need to protect our liberties and rights.
Guilt or innocence needs to be decided upon in a court of law, not by the government or the police.
@ James C - “it’s only suspects who currently are wiretapped” This is true: there are thousands of suspects in the US, some of them are here legally. For instance, “students” from Arab countries, who get their student visas and never show up for classes. There is an ongoing problem with many US universities that are very interested in the money that foreign students bring in - however, they do not do a good job of screening these individuals, alleging that they “will not do the federal government’s job.”
This would help, but it does not really matter because these “students” are now watched even before they reach the US. British authorities help in this sense. French authorities [not a surprise here] have not done so, to the point of [Air France] allowing young Middle Eastern men board planes bound for the US with forged papers or without papers. This is not happening at present due to “negotiations” such as banning any flight from France to the US if the passengers do not carry proper documentation. Many of these passengers still come to the US with forged passports which they dispose of during the flight –But, no problem, because when they reach the US they are immediately sent back, usually on the same plane.
The case of Jean Charles de Menezes is sad, but I immediately understood when it happened. This electrician from Brazil had experience with the “wild” unsupervised police officers in his home country. He ran away from the British police officers fearing police brutality and while doing so he got himself into more trouble. As a personal experience while traveling in South America, I learned that policemen [in any South American country - plus Mexico] can grab anyone on the street and take you to jail, for no reason whatsoever. I also learned that a folded US $20 is the equivalent of a miracle most of the time: you are freed in a matter of seconds.
Regarding the government’ handling of personal data in the US is dismal. We learn every now and then that government employees lose laptop computers and files with millions of personal records. Theft of laptops is a constant problem too, However, very, very few cases of misuse of these records are reported… We have to remember that the population of the US has reached 300 million.
“suspects haven’t always been treated in accordance with the law” — this is not accurate. In most cases, international organizations such as the Red Cross are allowed to talk to prisoners in the presence of their lawyers. “Rendition” has been possible only with the cooperation of European and Middle Eastern countries. Many times at their request, wishing to get rid of terrorists.
Terrorist prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and other locations are not covered by the Geneva convention. They are what are known as “enemy combatants” –Again, not protected by any international agreements, which cover “members of legitimate armies.” The interrogation techniques you mention, water boarding, also sleep deprivation, used in several European countries, are, really nothing compared to beheading by terrorists.
In many cases, prisoners remain at Guantanamo Bay because the government of their country of origin refuse to take them back; they know who these characters are… they relent when the US threaten them to cut off the millions they receive as “humanitarian aid” every year.
“Thankfully it seems Obama is about to end this. Suspects have been held for years without proper trial” — These are prisoners under military jurisdiction. Civilian law does not apply here, however, many US civilian liberal judges have “mandated” that these prisoners be processed through the civilian courts.
The European view of Obama is quite different from the US reality. He has confirmed Robert Gates, the current Secretary of Defense, as the future one… because he agrees with the manner the war on terrorism has been conducted so far.
Something that is missing for many people outside of the US is that most of the American citizens are satisfied with the way the “war on terror” is working. Why? Well, precisely that: it is working. Domestically, most of us are aware of our surroundings and report any suspicious activities.
There is much more, but better stop here…
They are already doing it.
This is pretty easy to get around. All you have to do is create a program similar to p2p apps that randomly crawls the web to completely obfuscate what you are really doing. Amongst all that noise, what would be the point in monitoring? It’s like denial of service attacks but targeted at monitors.
Web 1.0 > Web 2.0 > WebGov …….. arrgghh
Just to reiterate:
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/no-to-1984/#detail
The idea is absurb!
It is hard to believe and, frankly, appalling!
These idiots posting comments here on how to “neutralize Big Brother” facilitating the activities of terrorists… Can you really be more stupid?
This is a joke, right?
You’re making a big assumption here that the government will be able to build and run such a large technology project. There are countless examples of them failing to do so and therefore the odds are this will be yet another techno-waste of taxpayer’s money.
they have already made it - it’s called “Phorm” - all a phone companies data (people’s surfing habits, content,images viewed etc.) will be redirected through their servers - even if you have their “advertising service” switched off all your data is still collected. maybe they might sell all this collected information to the government aswell as other companies ?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/25/phorm_isp_advertising/
This is almost worst than depression, for web companies at least. Any plans for a coordinated reaction?
Please tell me this is just a really, really early April Fool’s joke/post?!?
Ahhh…..sadly it’s not.
we’ll be lving in a police state within 10 years:
->Collection of all our communication data
->CCTV all over the place, even when it’s not needed
->Proposals for “By the mile charging” and “automatic speed limiter” which would mean they would have to track everywhere you drive
->Already face visit by police or even arrest if you say anything outside of the views of the ‘politically correct’ elite
->People have been arrested for legitimatly protesting against Heathrow Expansion, some guy even threatened with arrest for wearing a Transformers T-shirt
->Can no longer protest outside Parliament
->Opposition MPs arrested for disturbing the government
->Rediculous detention periods for “terrorist activity”
->Police using anti-terror laws willy-nilly and in some cases to stifle political activity (remember they guy arrested at the Labour party conference for heckling)
->Use of anti-social behaviour orders to me specific legal activities illegal for a certain person (rather than to stop low level unlawful or illegal activity)
->Use of asbo laws to introduce curfews.
->removal of double jeperdy in certain cases enabling any retrial to have the possibility to make the evidence fit the crime.
->usless ID cards (when there are compulsory ID cards you loose freedom of movement, because you can’t leave you home without it)
->DNA databases, proposals for every citizen to be on it etc.
When all the things this government are doing or allowing to happen things start to look a little sinister. Or maybe it’s because we have a Labour government and at some stage every Labour government has wanted to rule every aspects of our lives.
Next we’ll have the legally binding diet and excercise plans….
Hi Mike,
Maybe, as Europeans, we can do something about it. We’re planning numerous things here to protest, let’s unite and try to change things! Only Europe can help us here (and God knows that’s not an easy thing to hear for a Brit 
seems you guys in England are gonna get the same treatment as us in France
“I was in the train that was blown up by Muslim terrorists’ bombs in Spain a few years back, and survived with just one leg and I am grateful that I am still alive. My girlfriend did not make it.”
Aww, poor Patrick thinks his leg and his girlfriend are more important than the freedom of an entire country.
Tough shit. Stop whining you manipulative cunt. Your appeal to pity has no relevance to the debate on internet privacy. The government has no business spying on people unless they can prove they have a good reason for doing so. People like you who believe that others are innocent until proven guilty deserve no sympathy.
*guilty until proven innocent
Citizen, you are out of line
Welcome to move to Sweden! We have no such surveilance laws at all. No FRA, no IPRED, no ACTA, no whatsoever. Your internet communication is left alone day and night.
Welcome to move to Sweden! We have no such surveilance laws at all. No FRA, no IPRED, no ACTA, no whatsoever. Your internet communication is left alone day and night.