It's possible. Or perhaps Corybn will be pushed out and the Labour party will take a more authoritarian stance again.
And even if Labour get in, they still voted the IP Bill in. So they are pro-surveillance. So overall, I can't be convinced that "things are looking positive" from an individual liberties point of view, in the UK. Is there anywhere it's looking positive?
I'm certainly no Cameron supporter but The Investigatory Powers Bill was passed under May's government. It also had no real opposition from Labour. We are still subject to EU law and there has already been a ruling in the CJEU (in December 2016) against the UK's surveillance which will have consequences for the IP Act. And the 'porn filter' (Digital Economy Bill) is still being debated so hopefully something can be done about it.
I don't doubt that the government can make life hell for its opponents if it wants to, I just doubt that ordinary voters will allow it to get that bad. Tories have such power right now because they're taking actions (and making signals) popular with the people, whether the rest of us agree or not. I don't buy that they've so corrupted the system that it no longer matters what the voting public think, which is why I still believe this bill is not going to be implemented or enforced in a way that removes real freedoms, once the public notice.
Besides, don't plenty of despotic countries already ban VPNs around the world, to limited effect? A large, liberal country like the UK banning them would I'm sure drive improvements to VPN protocols to make them even harder for ISPs to detect.
Reminder that the European courts are currently restraining the UK from the worst of its surveillance plan, as they’ve found it to be incompatible with the Human Right to Privacy.
All signs point to the UK taking an increasingly authoritarian attitude to the net post-Brexit.
I assume that the UK government has been doing these extremely pro-surveillance, anti-encryption, and anti-porn stances because they detect sufficient support from the UK population?
Agreed, but Britain also has a pretty bad track record when it comes to surveillance, basic liberties, and Internet freedom. I would not be surprised if they independently pass a similar law in the future.
While I think you are correct in your prediction, I also think that the UK government can simply outlaw any type of attempts at protecting ones' data, such Tor, VPN ect.
At the very least, they could make a law that would focus most of the energy in hacking those who do try to conceal and protect their privacy. They blindly believe the time trotted motto of "if you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide."
Here's the Open Rights Group (a UK group who aspire to emulate the EFF) on the latest development - note in particular the link at the bottom of the article, to their "campaign hub" on the bill:
It's like it's all coming together for these Governments. I wouldn't be surprised if more of them decided to push for this type of laws in the same time, and it's not completely coincidental.
It's remarkable how close the UK is getting to CN-styled internet. It would not surprise me to see a proposal to firewall the island off from the rest of the world, mandatory British government apps for services, etc., following the permanent installation of a dictator. Coupled with the promotion of a national digital currency, it's hard to see a future where Britain does not devolve into fascism. It has not had a democratically elected leader for years now.
I'm from the UK. The reason the British government can propose such outrageous laws is because a) we don't have a functioning opposition party capable of challenging or scrutinising the Government. The Labour party is completely spineless and ineffectual; and b) that lack of opposition has emboldened the Government to push through some of the most invasive surveillance laws in the Western World. The British Prime Minster, Theresa May, has a nasty authoritarian streak - she had it when she was Home Secretary responsible for domestic security, and she has it now with even more zeal as the Prime Minister.
If you picture in your minds eye the most dysfunctional, deceitful, lunatic-filled version of politics you could possibly imagine, you still won't come close to the giant sinkhole that is British politics right now. Utterly depressing.
My first reaction to this was that VPN usage will explode, but I'm not sure how a VPN server hosted in another country would work with their desire to effectively ban encryption.
I feel like the UK is slowly goose stepping its way to a Chinese style firewall.
Given the right's obsession with what I'm ordering on Amazon, and the left being essentially unelectable right now, I'm not really sure where to put my vote at the next election.
it's definitely a big change in attitude from previous governments (conservative and otherwise) - i still remember Labour trying to introduce mandatory internet censorship a decade ago.
Don't know to be honest, unless EVERYONE is running encrypted traffic/VPN/Tor then the few that are using it stick out like a sore thumb. It is bound to raise some suspicion. I am British too btw and hoping it is just a proposal at the moment, but these things have a way of being watered down to make them "more acceptable" or revived under a different guise still have a whilst still have the core concepts in them.
Problem is I don't trust our government with our data, they've shown sheer incompetence far too many times when it comes to IT systems. And it's always a case of do as we say, not as we do as the expenses scandal and the current Leveson enquiry is showing.
Sadly these freedoms were under attack even during Labour’s time in power. They also want more restrictions and windfall taxes on tech firms then we do already. GCHQs Mastering the internet program started under Labour.
I’m not saying that the Tories are angels in all this, far fucking from it (Their current porn law is more fucking stupid than the last). But Labour laid the ground work and the Tories fucking ran with it. Labour's stance on Article 11 and 13(renamed 17) was to pass them. In my area only one MEP from the "mainstream" parties voted against Article 11, 13/17 and he is conservative, the others who voted against in my area were independent and UKIP. Not a single Labour MEP in my area voted against them.
Granted that surveillance state is what the UK is now, but Corbyn is a person with a political ideology that would have you get the free internet without surveillance. Not something that can be achieved easily though.
The UK is actually much less progressive than the US when it comes to censorship and filtering. There is no Internet filtering of any kind by any ISP in the US; it's illegal for a common carrier to filter traffic in that way. Some lobbyists are pushing ISPs to block access to sites that allow copyright infringement, but nothing of that nature has started yet.
The UK is very arguably also less progressive in terms of surveillance and espionage; GCHQ seems to be even more unethical than NSA, going by a few dozen of the leaked presentations.
Sadly there wasn't much hope of this bill not making it into law. The opposition parties if anything felt that the law wasn't strong enough and pushed to make it even more draconian. The British public at large are in favour of any law that imposes harsher penalties and regulation on the tech giants. 'Protect the children' is far more emotive than 'But we might eventually lose encryption', and the collateral damage to our freedoms is slow and insidious enough that it's not recognised or appreciated. I think given everything we have to take the governments vague concession of 'when the technology becomes available' as a win, it was the best we were going to get, no way was this bill not going to pass.
We are still in the early Wild West days of the internet, but in the decades ahead bills like this will become more commonplace as governments try to wrestle back control of what citizens can access
And even if Labour get in, they still voted the IP Bill in. So they are pro-surveillance. So overall, I can't be convinced that "things are looking positive" from an individual liberties point of view, in the UK. Is there anywhere it's looking positive?
reply