View Full Version : Government Accessing FB...
... I don't know the whole story as have just heard this report on the radio but whaaaaat?
Apparently, as of April 6th the government will have access to any Facebook account and all your private chats/conversations/photos etc (even those you have deleted).
They're saying it's to help track terrorists... which I'm sure it will do but talk about Big Brother invasion of privacy!! I have nothing to hide but I'm certainly not comfortable with the notion someone I don't know can access everything I have on FB. I've purposefully limited a lot of my FB to certain friends so others canny access it!
*not particularly happy*
I know anything you put on the internet is never going to be 100% secure but this... I just don't like this. One step too far.
BBC news linky (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7962631.stm)
They're reading this now.
Peroxide.
Jihad.
Gordon Brown.
I'm going to post lots of notes about terrorism on my FB and link to a lot of terrorist sites just to waste their time. Childish - yes. Bothered - no.
edit: ok I won't really do that as I can't be arsed. But frankly I'm more disgusted at the waste of resources and money rather than the invasion of any privacy. Nothing is private these days anyway so it's not a surprise.
Hooray for sensationalism
Yet more invasion of piracy under labour. where's the line between government and dictator.
The faster these jokers our out the better. Just hope the next government don't keep invading our rights and privacy.
Matblack
25-03-2009, 16:57
Yet more invasion of piracy under labour. where's the line between government and dictator.
The faster these jokers our out the better. Just hope the next government don't keep invading our rights and privacy.
Your faith in the Conservative party is endearing but I suspect misplaced :D
MB
Your faith in the Conservative party is endearing but I suspect misplaced :D
MB
Just a shame a smaller party would never get in. Not that there's any real contenders at the moment. But even if there was I doubt people would vote for them.
Social networking sites like Facebook could be monitored by the UK government under proposals to make them keep details of users' contacts.
5chars
5chars
Hooray for sensationalism
;)
Assassination.
Obama.
Drugs.
AboveTheSalt
25-03-2009, 18:15
Yet more invasion of piracy under labour. where's the line between government and dictator.
The faster these jokers our out the better. Just hope the next government don't keep invading our rights and privacy.Of course they wont; the Tories will be completely different from New Labour.
Just a shame a smaller party would never get in. Not that there's any real contenders at the moment. But even if there was I doubt people would vote for them.
Scarily, we could see a sharp rise in the popularity of parties like the BNP.
In my new h ometown they are actively recruiting at the moment and instead of walking away, people are listening to them. They are currently spouting off about the amount of appeasement we have for Muslims and how we should stop their spread across Europe.:huh:
This monitoring is nothing new, its just that now it has a face of legitimacy rather than something they did but didn't advertise. Take Echelon for example. It was proven that they were intercepting trade secrets from British and European companies and passing it to the American businesses. Where is the anti commie / anti terrorism in that?
Nothing is sacred anymore.
They probably do it anyway already and we've only known about it since today.
BB x
They're saying it's to help track terrorists...
Makes sense. Facebook, the digital hub of Al Queda.
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif has joined the group "DEATH TO THE WEST"
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif was tagged in a photo, "Terror Cell training camp, Pakistan"
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif says "ALU AKBAR!" - 2 people like this.
Slinwagh
26-03-2009, 00:24
Makes sense. Facebook, the digital hub of Al Queda.
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif has joined the group "DEATH TO THE WEST"
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif was tagged in a photo, "Terror Cell training camp, Pakistan"
"Muhammed Ja Fayed Mudasif says "ALU AKBAR!" - 2 people like this.
Exactly !!
One minute we are told that terrorist are employing more sophisticated techniques are utilising technology and encryption to hide their activity.
Now we are meant to believe that acts of terrorism are being planned via the "Jihad" Facebook application!
Blighter
26-03-2009, 00:34
I read in a newspaper on the train that the government were using Facebook to find out things like people illegally claiming benefits etc.
I.E.
Barbara claims x hundred a week for child support
Barbara's Facebook status: "Woo, just booked a £1000 holiday! \0/"
I reckon the terrorism part is just an excuse tbh
Slinwagh
26-03-2009, 00:46
Looking at posted information and intercepting the chat feature or inbuilt email system is not the same in my eyes.
If someone is stupid enough to admit to benefit fraud as per Blighter example then they deserve everything they get, for fraud and stupidity!
Even *if* terrorists were using Facebook to communicate with each other, now the government have gone and announced their plan to snoop, won't they all just stop and log off? Are we seriously expected to believe all this anti-terrorism action isn't just a smokescreen to push their own surveillance agenda?
Bit by bit, the liberties are removed. Not quick enough to provoke to much of a reaction, and slow enough to keep the "You're over-reacting" crowd on their side. Maybe the 2010 GE will point us in a better direction, Jacqui Smith is a crap Home Secretary IMO. Bending over arse over tit for the US again to let them pluck Britons off their own soil under flaky extradition procedures, not even questioning them. How's that for security to its citizens? Get suspected by the yanks and whoosh, no argument, no questioning why a Briton committing a crime on British soil isn't even supported or encouraged by their own government to apply for a UK trial, no, instead you're at American's mercy. Now these Orwellian style techniques for snooping on citizens. The easy way out, secure the country by sacraficing all the freedoms given to its citizens, ironic that they're supposed to be combating terrorism, the main threat to our freedoms apparently. Methinks the real threat to our daily way of life, is from much closer to home.
Blighter
26-03-2009, 01:25
[QUOTE=Slinwagh;286392]If someone is stupid enough to admit to benefit fraud as per Blighters example/QUOTE]
Well obviously they don't post saying "I'M COMMITTING BENEFIT FRAUD?!!?1111" :p
But say someone is claiming disability allowance for not being able to walk, and then they go and post (privately) a picture of them riding rollercoasters/skateboarding/whatever....
This is nothing!
RIP Act 2000
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_1
Doing CompSci we had a few lectures on all this stuff and its insane, you even mention anything about it to anybody and they can just shove you in prison.
I hope im never in a position to be affected by it.
Terrorism Act 2006
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060011_en_1
Also bloody mental.
Simple rule of thumb: If you don't want people to find out about it, don't post it on line.
Can't get any more basic than that.
There was a recent "shock" news only maybe a week ago that Canadian courts could subpoena someone to reveal what took place in a "private" conversation between two people on Facebook. http://www.thestar.com/News/GTA/article/602324
All the privacy groups went crazy, and some tech journalists laughed and pointed out it comes under legislation that's over 50 years old. Under law, as soon as you tell someone something that is a secret, it no longer counts as such. The only exceptions are where the third party is in a privileged occupation, e.g. Doctor, Priest, Qualified Psychiatrist.
Greenlizard0
26-03-2009, 23:51
There was an old rumour that Facebook was actually a C.I.A. invention, due to adverts being a recent addition it wasn't really understood how it broke even at the beginning.
I'm not bothered, they can have a look at my rubbish photos of trips and nights out in Liverpool, interspersed with terrible jokes.
LeperousDust
27-03-2009, 02:48
due to adverts being a recent addition it wasn't really understood how it broke even at the beginning.
Due to massive investment from backers of good internet startup companies? Adverts were to bring a return to pay investors back...
There was an old rumour that Facebook was actually a C.I.A. invention, due to adverts being a recent addition it wasn't really understood how it broke even at the beginning.
Same way twitter works. It was fully reliant on what's called "Venture Capital" funding.
You can bet people who were rumour mongering it was the CIA behind it are NOT people who have any experience with entrepreneurial stuff. Venture Capital is a big thing, with the way markets are these days you need to hit big and loud as fast as possible, VC is about the only way to get the money in. Thing of it as Dragons Den but talking about real money, not piddly short change.
Twitter has taken in over $50m so far this year IIRC from venture capital financiers, all effectively saying "I believe in you, I believe you can make a profit, here's some money for you to develop the product, this is what we want by way of return." The potential for money making with twitter is enormous, data mining etc. etc. A good part of the tech press and industry is waiting with baited breath to see what happens and what ideas they can gather from it.
Dymetrie
27-03-2009, 10:50
This is nothing!
RIP Act 2000
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_1
Doing CompSci we had a few lectures on all this stuff and its insane, you even mention anything about it to anybody and they can just shove you in prison.
I hope im never in a position to be affected by it.
Terrorism Act 2006
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060011_en_1
Also bloody mental.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 was introduced to combat article 8 of the Human Rights Act 1998, which basically made it illegal for the Government to conduct directed surveillance on individuals it suspected of acting illegally.
There were a few other acts around that time which closed loopholes/solved problems from overly liberal acts.
Those who know what I do will understand why I am pro surveillance, however I dislike this blanket approach and believe that surveillance, of any kind, should be proportionate, justifiable and accountable. This isn't any of those things.
If it were me writing the policy on this then it would a) be far less intrusive and b) not be heard about :p
Greenlizard0
27-03-2009, 19:03
Due to massive investment from backers of good internet startup companies? Adverts were to bring a return to pay investors back...
I'm aware of venture capital funding. It seems some people weren't though...
So this is why users are inundated with "singles" websites as adverts lol. :p
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.