PDA

View Full Version : UK, surveillance society.


doubleu-anker
8th Feb 2009, 12:51
The screw is gradually tightening.

BBC NEWS | UK | Government plans travel database (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7877182.stm)

Please someone remind me, is the UK a democracy or a dictatorship? What's next? Black leather jacketed boneheads at the end of every street?

Lancelot37
8th Feb 2009, 12:56
Please someone remind me, is the UK a democracy or a dictatorship? What's next? Black leather jacketed boneheads at the end of every street?
=================================

Under Labour the U.K is becoming a Police State. They cannot spell democracy. Anyone under the age of 60 should get out before Brown and his mob bring it to its knees.

tony draper
8th Feb 2009, 13:30
If that is the same clip I watched elsewhere it seems to show that the people who gather hold all this information on us are more likely to be the business world rather than governments.
:rolleyes:

S'land
8th Feb 2009, 13:44
It does not matter how hard the government try to keep the data secure, it will end up being left on some laptop or other in a pub so that anyone can read it. There was a time when one was complimented on coming from such a free living society as the UK, not any more.

Doors to Automatic
8th Feb 2009, 15:17
Please someone remind me, is the UK a democracy or a dictatorship?

It all depends on whether you are a criminal, yob, terrorist or any other sort of undesirable in which case it is the fairest and most lenient democracy in the world.

To the rest of us who work hard, pay our taxes on time and live by the rules it is a Stalinist dictatorship where our rights are being gradually and purposefully eroded - that's 12 years of New Labour for you.

B Sousa
8th Feb 2009, 15:32
Very necessary to keep tabs on the white conspirators who want to make it difficult for third worlders in the U.K.
In all seriousness the Horse is already out of the barn. U.K. is very out of control under the appearance of being under control. Much the same in the states. Those who attempt to do things properly are only hampered by regulations, forms and humans whose highest position in life should be on the business end of a shovel. Everyone else has Carte Blanche to walk right in...........

RJM
8th Feb 2009, 17:22
Well, George Orwell was British. :cool:

It seems to me that there is a pendulum whose arc at one end is at 'the public exists for the benefit of the government' (or big business/public service/government if you like) and at the other end is at 'the government exists for the benefit of the people'.

Unfortunately, the government always holds the aces (except for the joker of 'revolution' which tends to morph into another king once played), and the public has to rely on the political morality of those in power to keep to the script of being a government for the people.

For example, it's in the government's interest to know where we all are and what we're doing at any moment of the day. Such information, and opportunity for control, makes for highly efficient administration. On the other hand individual freedom has been valued by well, individuals for as long as there have been governments.

Other influences such as the in my opinion often exaggerated need for security and the requirements for 'Occ Health and Safety' increase the tendency towards information-gathering and control. They also offer a cop-out: 'It's not our fault, it's...'

Finally, there are examples of totalitarian states of both the left and the right, although those terms become a little meaningless if the experience of an individual under them is the same. Further, freedoms once lost are difficult to recover.

At least forums like this are still possible. Hang on, there's a knock at the door...:ooh:

I'm surprised at how far the Brits have allowed their privacy (and consequently their freedom) to be eroded. In any episode of The Bill, the first thing they do is 'check the CCTV'. Never happened in Dixon of Dock Green or Z Cars. A trivial but telling example. :(

Rwy in Sight
8th Feb 2009, 18:55
However when all started back with the introduction of the CCTV in the mid/late-80's I don't remember any complains and I think it was quite welcome. The door was wide open...

I might be mistaken.

Rwy in Sight

ORAC
8th Feb 2009, 19:50
Which is the same as the US APIS, the Spanish, the Canadian, the Indian, the Mexican, the Chinese etc etc etc . IATA is working on the common message format. It's becoming the industry standard. In short, it's a load of bollocks and scaremongering.

Blacksheep
8th Feb 2009, 23:45
Britain is half way to being a democracy. Once we have abolished the House of Lords and the Monarchy, we shall be well on the way.

The old unelected House of Lords was at least representative - it represented the land owning classes during the pre-industrial age when the landowners managed the economy.

The modern unelected House of Lords, selected by the Prime Minister at his whim and confirmed by the Monarch on the same Prime Minister's advice, and which she is bound to accept, is packed with failed politicians, and those who donate money to the ruling party in order to gain the huge financial benefits they are able to wring from sitting in the house. It is time we had an elected second house and a head of state selected by a collegiate electoral process.

Mind you, we haven't done too badly for a non-democratic, constitutional monarchy, have we?

hellsbrink
8th Feb 2009, 23:46
Guess I'll just use my Belgian ID card and not my UK passport when travelling to the UK, that'll bork them....

Sciolistes
9th Feb 2009, 00:56
Britain is half way to being a democracy. Once we have abolished the House of Lords and the Monarchy, we shall be well on the way.
Britain is nowhere near being a democracy. Sadly, The House of Lords has now come under the whip so no longer serves as the final defence of common sense that it one did. The Judiciary is now the final bastion. The repeated attempts by the government to undermine the judges will succeed eventually. I used to think of the House of Lords and the Judiciary as sort of Platonic Philosopher Kings, a bit grandiose but anybody who has read Plato's Republic will hopefully understand what I'm getting at.

Without a clear, straightforward and supreme written constitution all the UK democracy has become is ritualised voting, each successive insecure government will be looking to offload more responsibility and install yet more legislation to fight crime and terrorism.

I am coming to the opinion that the US system of democracy is vastly superior. In a near total reversal of my previous opinion on the subject, a couple of factors that help make the system as good as it is are the maximum of two terms and the right to bear arms. The latter is a strange one, despite there being numerous problems associated with it, it means that the US system will never be undermined or become a Police state.

It seems to me that inverse to the US system, our rights in the UK are virtually by default - by consequence of lack of legislation. As Governments fill the gaps so more and more detail and minutia of life will managed by the Government at large, Police and Council appointed inspectors.

My knowledge of constitutional systems is at an early stage, please feel free to lambast or inform, as appropriate :\

Loose rivets
9th Feb 2009, 05:24
Oh, my! I've just had a thought. It's that Draper fella. All these years he's been telling us that he's been putting up cameras...and we assumed it was for somebody else. No! It can't be...can it? Millions of screens in his NE pad. Ppruning? That's just an excuse to be sitting at the master control.


We're all doomed I tell you!

Desert Diner
9th Feb 2009, 05:43
is the UK a democracy or a dictatorship?

It's much more a democracy now than it used to be:=

Look back into your history, before the WWII even, and think what it was like. Unless you were of the right peerage or wealthy, you were treated like scum. Poor Houses, Debtor's Prisons, etc.

How many people were hanged on charges of Seddition?

Why do you think the American Revolution occured? Over a shipment of tea?

StaceyF
9th Feb 2009, 05:50
However when all started back with the introduction of the CCTV in the mid/late-80's I don't remember any complains and I think it was quite welcome. The door was wide open...

I might be mistaken.

Rwy in Sight


What on earth do the sheeple think the "broadband in every home" spin is really all about? Do they really think that the government just want us all to access our (monitored) emails a bit faster??

"A webcam in every room" is more the agenda.

I'd wager a pound to a penny that consultation documentation exists in Whitehall investigating the practicalities of equipping every home with 24/7 surveillance.

All in the name of counter-terrorism, you know.

Of course, the government would start with those families "most at risk" (or whatever bolloxspeak Jacqboots would come out with). These "at risk" families would probably be the unemployed, the single parents and similar groups.

So-called upstanding members of the community like the middle-classes, with more articulacy at their beck and call, would be spared the inquisition initially, but they would not remain free for ever.

The government, and its' motives, are so transparent and yet the sheeple can't see past their tax credit handouts :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Blacksheep
9th Feb 2009, 09:33
...investigating the practicalities of equipping every home with 24/7 surveillance.And they've already taken away our guns... :uhoh:

Avitor
9th Feb 2009, 09:48
And they've already taken away our guns... :uhoh:

My wife says they will never take away our knives as well!

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 09:49
And they've already taken away our guns... http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/worry.gif

Not to worry, you can get another one VERY easily. Come to think about it, probably easier than the military/police/gov can suplly themselves

Windy Militant
9th Feb 2009, 10:31
We must be a secret police state, that's why people are complaining they never see any policemen any more! :}

tony draper
9th Feb 2009, 11:15
To be brutally frank I think you buggas need watching.:rolleyes:
Then there is this.
Privacy group calls Google Latitude a 'danger' to security (http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9127440)
:E

capewrath
9th Feb 2009, 11:27
Just a matter of time until we are all getting stopped by men in long black leather coats- "Your papers, please".

UK is more like a commie state now.

Windy Militant
9th Feb 2009, 11:42
long black leather coats
Naw wouldn't be allowed not PC/ VEGAN/ORGANIC/CARBON FOOTPRINT/ETHNIC* Friendly
Now ethically derived, sustainably grown hessian or bamboo coats!;)

*delete where applicable

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 11:43
Well, Mr D, to start with the Google thingy means you have to agree to them being able to track your phone and show where you are and you can restrict who gets that knowledge. That means that a stalker, etc, cannot set things up so they can trace you. I can see the use of the system for businesses and for parents wanting to make sure their kids are safe, but Privacy International should really stop the scaremongering.

weido_salt
9th Feb 2009, 12:25
I can tell you what is coming but don't know when. Hopefully not in my lifetime. It will be the microchip implanted into all of us, probably right between the eyes. :E

frostbite
9th Feb 2009, 13:03
Maybe that's started already in the form of all that ghastly facial/body piercing 'jewellery' that people are inflicting on themselves?

G-CPTN
9th Feb 2009, 13:12
Folk can already be traced from their mobile 'phones.
Electronic tags . . .
. . . carried voluntarily too . . .

Cpt_Pugwash
9th Feb 2009, 13:31
G-CPTN, yes indeed, all in the name of market research. One such system is PathIntelligence (http://www.pathintelligence.com/)

Davaar
9th Feb 2009, 13:57
Nothing new in this, of course. The English secret service picked up Guy Fawkes in the crypt of the House of Commons, complete with gunpowder in the most incriminating place and circumstance, at the most incriminating time, all of their choosing. You didn’t think it was good luck at the last moment, did you? He could not go to the bathroom but they knew of it, and that was in 1605.

It was much like Pancho and Lefty (Willie Nelson version). The Federales, you will recall, always say they could have had him any day; they only let him slip away, out of kindness I suppose. Delete "kindness", substitute "dramatic effect".

‘Twas ever thus. Still is.

Whiskey Oscar Golf
9th Feb 2009, 14:14
I find the whole social surveillance cctv thing a joke. The baddies always evolve to beat it and the goodies get taken advantage of by a range of interests.

I remember reading a book about Crossmaglen or Bandit Country. In the early 90's it was the most surveilled spot in the world yet the Snipers were pinging away happily for years. They just figured the blind spots, took longer shots and used the locals.

The devolution of terrorist comms and methods means all the elint in the world won't stop what we need to stop. Back to basics and stop thinking we're all guilty.

Davaar
9th Feb 2009, 14:21
The devolution of terrorist comms and methods means all the elint in the world won't stop what we need to stop. Back to basics and stop thinking we're all guilty.

Would it not be fair to accept that it stops some of it? If so, it then becomes a question of balance: How much?

After all, all the police in the world do not stop murder; all the securities commissions in the world do not stop stock fraud; but they deter some of it.

Overdrive
9th Feb 2009, 14:23
I can tell you what is coming but don't know when. Hopefully not in my lifetime. It will be the microchip implanted into all of us, probably right between the eyes. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/evil.gif



There are people of unbelievable stupidity that have already voluntarily allowed subdermal implantation of these things in their bodies. Several hundred of them for no other purpose than to avoid the hitherto incredibly traumatic task of carrying ID and cash/credit cards in a Dutch nightclub. It is that easy to steal peoples' very souls.


and for parents wanting to make sure their kids are safe



Safe from what? Just how unsafe have they ever been to now? Almost everybody dies of old age. How will being constantly snooped on every step help? There'll be much more to worry about from electronic enslavement.

Out Of Trim
9th Feb 2009, 15:16
Well, George Orwell was British. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/cool.gif



Yeah, and his real name was Blair too. Yes, Eric Arthur Blair! :suspect:

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 15:26
Quote:
and for parents wanting to make sure their kids are safe

Safe from what? Just how unsafe have they ever been to now? Almost everybody dies of old age. How will being constantly snooped on every step help? There'll be much more to worry about from electronic enslavement.

How about parents wanting to know where their kids are? So they know they are where they say they will be and ain't being carted off in a car by someone? After all, I was talking about that Google Latitude thing and and how Privacy International were getting hysterical and NOT the way the government is hell bent on making sure it knows when you fart s they can slap an environmental tax on you.

Do read what people are saying, and do try to keep up

StaceyF
9th Feb 2009, 18:46
G-CPTN, yes indeed, all in the name of market research. One such system is PathIntelligence (http://www.pathintelligence.com/)

Redundant technology once the much touted ID card (with its built-in RFID chip) comes into force.

All you'll need to know is what frequency the cards transmit at and bingo :D:D:D

You'll be able to pinpoint an individual's movements to a few millimetres accuracy.

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 20:56
Redundant technology once the much touted ID card (with its built-in RFID chip) comes into force.

All you'll need to know is what frequency the cards transmit at and bingo :D:D:D

You'll be able to pinpoint an individual's movements to a few millimetres accuracy.

Of course you will because the RFID chip typically has a max range of around 30 feet (unless you have an Active RFID Tag which has a battery powered booster pack to extend your RFID's range, which will be hard to fit into the ID card!!!) so you'll be able to see that individual anyway unless HMG suddenly puts a networt of readers spaced 1 foot apart (range of low frequency tags) covering the entire country (impossible to do)

Overdrive
9th Feb 2009, 21:36
Do read what people are saying, and do try to keep up


I did read what you said, that's how I know you didn't mention kids being carted off in a car the first time, and so used the words "from what".

To make my point even more clear than I did: Whilst the risk you quote, and others, are a reality, they are actually tiny and not measurably increased that I've ever seen proven. They've been exaggarated hugely to the point that people are willing to play along with meaningless, costly and invasive technology to address the promoted "risks". Fear enhancement. As I've said before, I'm still waiting to be shown any genuinely demonstrable benefit that this explosion in life-tracking technology has provided to our daily lives. No-one has done so yet.

From what I've seen so far, there are almost always secondary possibilites and intentions to technology that tracks/collects/monitors personal data that should be private.

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 21:52
And that is why my post was referring to the new Google toy mentioned by Mr. D, stating how you have to OPT IN to the thing, nobody can just type in your phone number and find out where you are unless you say so. That is totally different to the things HMG are doing as you are DECIDING to make said info semi-public.

Oh, and surely I shouldn't have to list the reasons a parent would have regarding knowing their kid was "safe". There's a lot more than just being dragged into a car, and to most parents it is things that concern them.

Lon More
9th Feb 2009, 22:03
Goes back a long way i think. Ever since record keeping (Birth, Marriages and deaths) started.

Democracy. In many ways an improvement. How many here are divorced? Of them how many know how diffcult it would have been a couple of hundred years ago to get one? (Private members bill etc.)

hellsbrink
9th Feb 2009, 22:15
How difficult it was to get a divorce a couple of hundred years ago? I don't think you have to go back that far before you had to jump through hoops to get a divorce