Those of us in Starmer's Labour UK will now have less privacy than elsewhere, the government wants all your data. No more end-to-end encryption.

This government and its overreach gets more sinister by the day.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj54eq4vejo

In Hampshire companions/carers can no longer get free travel even if they are caregivers or caretakers for the person.

Own nothing but you will be happy.

Rich wrote:
Those of us in Starmer's Labour UK will now have less privacy than elsewhere, the government wants all your data. No more end-to-end encryption.

This government and its overreach gets more sinister by the day.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cgj54eq4vejo

Russia and China must be delighted.

As per my late Dad's comments about China where he worked for a time: "the population is so enormous that for every brilliant Westerner there are 1000 in China".

Imagine the net geniuses there scooping up data on foreign politicians and agencies.

And of course- Nth Korea.

… Prof Alan Woodward - a cyber-security expert at Surrey University - said it was a "very disappointing development" which amounted to "an act of self harm" by the government….

Rani Govender, policy manager for child safety online at the NSPCC, said it wants tech firms like Apple to ensure they are balancing child and user safety with privacy.

"As Apple looks to change its approach to encryption, we're calling on them to make sure that they also implement more child safety measures, so that children are properly protected on their services," she told BBC News.

The UK children's charity has said that end-to-end encrypted services can hinder child safety and protection efforts, such as identifying the sharing of child sexual abuse material (CSAM).

But Emily Taylor, the co-founder of Global Signal Exchange which provides insights into supply-chain scams, said that encryption was more about protecting consumer privacy and that it is not the same as the dark web where CSAM is usually distributed. ...
Wonder if NSPCC lobbying has helped the government to make this decision and if the NSPCC has deployed any influence it gained over Starmer when he was DPP. Surely it should be possible to crack down on people sharing child abuse material without everyone's data privacy being jeopardised or the nation being made vulnerable to hostile states.

Some nonces are very clever when it comes to tech Jo, a lot of them get overconfident and end up being caught. It's only a small number.

It's disgusting they get suspended sentences these days, Huw Edwards should be locked up but he is walking the streets.

He looks like the creepy neighbour we were told to avoid.

A very good point Jo. Surely our national security, as well as our own personal security, is not being undermined almost fatally by the need to catch a few child abusers, vile as they are. I suspect the truth is that it's a convenient hook to hang this government's rapacious desire for information on because who could possibly argue about the need to stop such people sharing such material. But you can't undermine everyone else and national security in the meantime in doing so.

At the heart of Starmer there is something deeply troubling. Just who is he? On the one hand he is keen to be at the forefront against Putin's Russian dictatorship with all that entails, whilst on the other hand he is presiding over attacks on civil liberties at home in a free western democracy with actions that demonstate quite clearly autocratic tendencies against the population which are very un-British and should not be accepted.

Why can't the tech companies and Government agree that the tech companies will randomly search data and if anything illegal is found inform the authorities?

Anyone using the tech will be made aware and can choose whether to use it on these terms. Users can enjoy privacy from Government surveillance, offenders will be punished and never rest easy. Children will be afforded some protection.

Balance.

But yes I agree Starmer is troubling; he has deep roots in communism.

Wyot wrote:
Why can't the tech companies and Government agree that the tech companies will randomly search data and if anything illegal is found inform the authorities?

Anyone using the tech will be made aware and can choose whether to use it on these terms. Users can enjoy privacy from Government surveillance, offenders will be punished and never rest easy. Children will be afforded some protection.

Balance.

But yes I agree Starmer is troubling; he has deep roots in communism.


That in itself should disqualify anyone from being PM. It shows in the decisions he is making.

The trouble for Apple is that even they say they can't see end-to-end encrypted data, although why do I not feel confident in that assertion. I'd treat anything I place as able to be viewed somewhere.

Rich wrote:
Wyot wrote:
Why can't the tech companies and Government agree that the tech companies will randomly search data and if anything illegal is found inform the authorities?

Anyone using the tech will be made aware and can choose whether to use it on these terms. Users can enjoy privacy from Government surveillance, offenders will be punished and never rest easy. Children will be afforded some protection.

Balance.

But yes I agree Starmer is troubling; he has deep roots in communism.


That in itself should disqualify anyone from being PM. It shows in the decisions he is making.

The trouble for Apple is that even they say they can't see end-to-end encrypted data, although why do I not feel confident in that assertion. I'd treat anything I place as able to be viewed somewhere.

I don't agree that communist sympathies should bar Starmer from being PM, just as Trump's fascist leanings should not bar him from the Presidency.

If that is what the people want under the current system. But democracy doesn't work at all now because people are too ignorant and suggestible.

I am sure, like you suggest, Apple could come up with a technical solution to checking contents internally, but otherwise securing them. And that Goverments would pursue this were it not for their innate desire for data.

The trouble with this Starmer Government is that it's trying to tell global businesses like Apple what to do not just here in the UK but with implications elsewhere well beyond the juristiction of the UK government.

While Starmer wants all our private data we can't know much of his own private shenanigans which are still being covered up. More hypocrisy.