As various bods gather in London for a conference on cyber-security, leading online rights campaigners have penned a letter to Foreign Secretary William Hague urging the government to maintain freedom and privacy while promoting security. "We call for the UK government to seize this opportunity to reject censorship and …
Its good for some but not for us
It amazes me how the government are currently trying to cut down, block, monitor and invade the same technologies that a few months ago they were praising for helping in the Egypt and Libyan uprising.
They were also quick to attack any governments found to be filtering and denying their populations access to such mediums as facebook and twitter yet now they are guilty of doing the very same and for the very same reasons.
...and Hague has recently made another public statement about how important it is that the Internet should be free and open and how some nasty regimes around the world were censoring the Internet traffic of their citizens. Oh, the irony!
"It looks like Hague might be taking the arguments on board, kicking off the cyber-security conference with a speech railing against net censorship."
You don't understand... when THEY restrict access to content, it's bad censorship"... when WE restrict access to content, it's "good government". Small but crucial difference.
If people want their internet connection filtered for porn then give them that option with a price tag - don't make majority pay for the whining minority.
Or we just ban those who whine about the "horrors of pornography" from the Internet.
That said, the Internet really needs an IQ requirement.
I'd love to be able to opt-in for terrorism.
last election statements?
Weren't the conservatives the ones that wanted to do away with all the ID cards, gatsos, the cctv overkill and the general 'labour government nanny state'?
Well done, dear government: Bullshit as usual.
Why do we vote for anything?
The 3 tenets of politics
1: Promise everything.
2: Deliver nothing.
3: Blame someone else.
Wasn't able to leave a comment on
the MP's site, so I will leave it here...
Daily Mail commentators?
"remove legal but undesirable content from the net"
And just who decides what is "undesirable"?
Simon Davies of Privacy International
... who wrote a Privacy Impact Assessment for Phorm, and organised their 'town hall' sham, and who still hasn't delivered the promised video recording of Kent Ertugrul's self inflicted humiliation?