Street cameras vs bulk surveilance
I'm a little confused as to why someone can't tell the difference between being observed 100% of the time when i'm in public (where, likely, i shall be most likely doing things that i don't mind other people seeing me doing, cos i'm in public - and would quite like to have criminals caught out because they are doing things they don't want others to see, also in public) and with someone monitoring 100% of what I do when i'm in the privacy of my own home, on my own PC - where i should feel safe to do the legal things i'd like to do that, despite being 100% legal, i'd still like to keep private.
I feel like this is a slightly more nuanced version of 'if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear' which totally fails to take into account that i do have something to hide, which is why i don't walk around in public naked - i wear clothes, even when the weather is awesome and totally suited to nudity.
Having something to hide doesn't mean the something is illegal, just private.
I'm personally of the opinion that anyone who says "if you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear'" should be forced to publish every aspect of their life (active webcams in every room of their house, broadcasting all the time - total access to their bank accounts to everyone, all their bills, browsing history and 100% of their life totally viewable by anyone at any time.)
Tbh, i'd be less concerned by the IPB if only GCHQ and the police could access the details, and only with a warrant. As it is, it is accessible by almost anyone in government (or even NGO/QUANGO's) without any warrant at all.