General News/Current Affairs Thread

vashdaman said:
But surely that's the way thing's are going to go sooner or later.
Click to expand...
Yeah... I don't think so. At least, not without extreme consequences.

This John Twelve Hawks guy sounds like a bro, though.
 
I think the powers that be will get all these lists sooner or later, we already know they've been doing it (though maybe illegally) and have been hell bent on it for years now. They won't give up, and seem to come closer every day. If you want true privacy, you might really have to go fully "off the grid". I know it sounds kind of defeatist to accept government intrusion as a fact of life, but that's what we have.
 
vashdaman said:
But surely that's the way thing's are going to go sooner or later. Don't me wrong, I don't praise the move or anything, but I think a lose of privacy is probably inevitable, even though I'm not really fully comfortable with the idea either. So, part of me think it's a waste of time getting all John Twelve Hawks and stuff. Being able to be comfortable with all your stuff "out there" so to speak, may be the only real solution.
Click to expand...
You know what? I'd have very few problems telling you, the rest of AUKN or anyone else who was my equal and had no power over me what I look at on the internet.

I do however have a serious problem with being required to provide that information to people who are the authority in this country, who may at some point decide that the things I'm looking at (or have looked at in the past) are now unacceptable*, and who are capable of throwing me in prison or placing me on the sex offenders register.

*Let's not forget, pornography which is actually illegal in this country now includes simulated depictions of rape and other sexual violence (it's debatable how far into BDSM territory that goes) and drawings of characters who appear to be underage despite the fact they don't even exist. What happens if they pull an Australia and attempt to ban flat-chested girls in porn? What happens if they succeed?
 
vashdaman said:
I know it sounds kind of defeatist to accept government intrusion as a fact of life, but that's what we have.
Click to expand...
It's not only defeatist, it is being ignorant of how these things have tended to go for governments or or authorities historically,
 
ayase said:
vashdaman said:
But surely that's the way thing's are going to go sooner or later. Don't me wrong, I don't praise the move or anything, but I think a lose of privacy is probably inevitable, even though I'm not really fully comfortable with the idea either. So, part of me think it's a waste of time getting all John Twelve Hawks and stuff. Being able to be comfortable with all your stuff "out there" so to speak, may be the only real solution.
Click to expand...
You know what? I'd have very few problems telling you, the rest of AUKN or anyone else who was my equal and had no power over me what I look at on the internet.

I do however have a serious problem with being required to provide that information to people who are the authority in this country, who may at some point decide that the things I'm looking at (or have looked at in the past) are now unacceptable*, and who are capable of throwing me in prison or placing me on the sex offenders register.

*Let's not forget, pornography which is actually illegal in this country now includes simulated depictions of rape and other sexual violence (it's debatable how far into BDSM territory that goes) and drawings of characters who appear to be underage despite the fact they don't even exist. What happens if they pull an Australia and attempt to ban flat-chested girls in porn? What happens if they succeed?
Click to expand...

I can understand that. The whole simulated rape thing aside though, the government probably have plenty of secret lists we don't know about, they steal information from Google, from Facebook, the internet has been a perfect tool through which to spy on the population, and if you use it, then I think that lose of privacy sort of comes with the territory. But of course even outside of the internet a lose of privacy is happening. They will use the excuse of terrorism, or moral erosion, or health safety or even pet safety, as we have seen recently. They already know if you've been vaccinated, can monitor your pet dog's movement (mandatory chipping will be implemented in a few years), can track your movement too if you have a registered oyster card, and know if you've visited any supposed jihadist websites. The whole slippery slope started a long time ago. Thankfully though, in England, we're actually doing OK in regards to maintaining freedom of movement (much better than many other nations), and while they might be watching, they haven't actually blocked us from anything too crucial yet. And that's the main thing.
 
Well, yeah. But is this really some kind of new precedent? It's just more of the same ol surely. I'm more concerned about the outcry for American style vaccination mandatory school entry conditions (that would be real lose of freedom) that came after that outbreak in Wales a while ago, than having to opt in for porn.
 
No-one is really as bothered about the specifics of what they are asking you to opt into or out of, it is quite a precedent in terms of how they are trying to regulate internet usage.
 
Vash, why do you think mandatory vaccination of children against certain serious illnesses is a bad thing? Is it about the freedom to choose, or do you disagree with vaccination itself?
 
I don't have anything against people wanting to vaccinate their kids, fair-dos. But yes, it is their freedom to choose I'm concerned about. If you take away that freedom like many US states have, then I'll indeed be following ayase out the country.
 
Lawrence said:
At least the SNP don't want to add me to a database.
Click to expand...
No, they're just going to implement a filter that replaces all Union Flags with the Saltire. And all other flags. And all web-page backgrounds. And forces you to browse to constant bagpipe music. And superimposes the face of Alex Salmond on every picture of a great historical leader.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I dunno Lawrence, does that make you more or less likely to vote for him?

In other news royal babby still has no name - It better be Arthur or Damien.
 
PrivateEyeWomanHasBaby.jpg
 
In other news, this morning's episode of The Daily Show with John Stewart gave its take on the city of Detroit filing for bankruptcy. The interesting part for me was about the city's declining infrastructure, declining population, and escalation in crime. It also mentioned how the city would be forced to sell its assets (Airport, Parks, etc) to private enterprises just to stay afloat.

Sounds like the premise for a real-life Robocop movie, doesn't it?
 
Detroit will be carved up by private corporations and become the Gibsonesque libertarian paradise / hell (delete as appropriate to your worldview) it is in Deus Ex Human Revolution.

jfgs.png


I would seriously consider buying property there. It's worth nothing now, but when the megacorporations move in...
 
ilmaestro said:
ayase said:
I would seriously consider buying property there. It's worth nothing now, but when the megacorporations move in...
Click to expand...
You'll have to hand it over or lose your knees?
Click to expand...
While I'm sure that comment was made with tongue firmly in cheek, oddly enough for someone who was tucked snugly into the pocket of big business, one of the few good things Dubya did was make sure private companies can't seize property.

The only other good thing was allowing the Federal Assault Weapons Ban to expire.

::lights touch paper and runs::
 
Back
Top