Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:"Emergency" laws. (Score 1) 147

by hazeii (#47427105) Attached to: UK Gov't Plans To Push "Emergency" Surveillance Laws

And the reason this was *scheduled* for news release today?

Because there was a public sector strike too (they knew which would get the TV headlines).

Plus the lame nods about "sunset" clause (yeah right) and reviews of RIPA (yeah, heard that one before).

What do the people of this fine land think?

Well, you only need to start reading the comments to see.

+ - UK government to rush in emergency surveillance laws-> 2

Submitted by beaker_72
beaker_72 (1845996) writes "The Guardian reports that the UK government has unveiled plans to introduce emergency surveillance laws into the UK parliament at the beginning of next week. These are aimed at reinforcing the powers of security services in the UK to force service providers to retain records of their customers phone calls and emails. The laws, which have been introduced after the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that existing laws invaded individual privacy, will receive cross-party support and so will not be subjected to scrutiny or challenged in Parliament before entering the statute books. But as Tom Watson (Labour backbench MP and one of few dissenting voices) has pointed out, the ECJ ruling was six weeks ago, so why has the government waited until now to railroad something through. Unless of course they don't want it scrutinised too closely."
Link to Original Source

+ - UK media now allowed to report secret trials.

Submitted by hazeii
hazeii (5702) writes "Following some pretty heroic efforts here in the UK, we are now allowed to know a secret trial is taking place. We aren't allowed to know who is being tried, or for what (except it's "terrorism related"). And the media are still barred from reporting the outcome (even if the unnamed defendants "AB" and "CD" are found innocent).

More from the BBC, the Guardian, and plenty of other sources."

Comment: Re: Eric "you shouldn't be doing that" Schmidt (Score 2) 155

I thought the point was clear, but to attempt to make it more so:

Eric Schmidt stated if there was stuff we didn't want people to know, we shouldn't be doing it. (this was way before the Snowden leaks).

He made it a clear position - don't do anything you don't want to be made public (search back for the old discussion on here about it, as I recall he didn't come out of it well).

So now he's saying the opposite - that we can trust him with stuff we don't people to know (i.e. everything Google knows about us).

Our opinions in how much trust to him are clearly divergent.

Comment: Eric "you shouldn't be doing that" Schmidt (Score 2) 155

This would be the same Eric Schmidt who said "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."?

And now we're expected to believe him, when he says he's keeping us safe from letting anyone know what we're doing?

He killed a lot of trust with the original comment.

He just killed a whole lot more.

Comment: Hit us, lost 2 trees (Score 1) 95

by hazeii (#46084399) Attached to: Surrey Hit With Catnado

It was more a band of very strong wind (for the UK) - the damage track is several miles wide, nothing like a tornado. Not too severe, about one tree down every 2 miles (rough calculation from seeing about a dozen trees down on a 25 mile local trip). We lost 2, both ripped off about 10 feet from the ground (in from the edge of a small wood - apparently others have seen a similar pattern).

Comment: A curb on *use* (not on *collection*) (Score 3, Insightful) 359

by hazeii (#45988679) Attached to: Obama Announces Surveillance Reforms

Notice how this is a curb on the *use* of the collected data - not on collecting it in the first place.

In other words, politicians have realised how much power this level of information can give them - and that is why control of it is far too important to be left in the hands of the NSA.

So what we have is just a power struggle over the strings of control - and not over the real issue of overbearing intrusion into the private lives of the people of this planet.

Comment: Having read the report, the main points are: (Score 4, Informative) 177

by hazeii (#45908609) Attached to: EU Committee Issues Report On NSA Surveillance; Snowden To Testify

A quick synopsis (so may contain stuff to quibble over) but the meat appears to be the action list (read the original document - link in article - for the rest):

Action 1: Adopt the data protection package

Action 2: Set up an overall agreement ensuring 'proper redress mechanisms' for EU citizens where data is passed to the US for law enforcement purposes.

Action 3: Suspend 'safe harbour' (covering personal data) until the US comply with 'EU highest standards'

Action 4: Suspend the 'TFTP' (Terrorist Finance Tracking Package) until a) Action 2 complete b) the EU have looked into it

Action 5: Worth quoting in full: "Protect the rule of law and the fundamental rights of EU citizens, with a particular focus on threads to the freedom of the press and professional confidentiality (including lawyer-client relationships) as well as enhanced protection for whistleblowers".

Action 6: Develop a european strategy for IT independence (that'll send cold shivers down the spine of certain US companies).

Action 7: Develop the EU as a reference player for a democratic and neutral governance of the internet (my translation: currently it's a US party, we want in on that).

Nothing is faster than the speed of light ... To prove this to yourself, try opening the refrigerator door before the light comes on.