You're probably up to no good!

Heineken Helen

Can we address and discuss the concept of people who are naturally distrustful being obviously up to no good? (seems to be the 'well if all else fails' argument)

I'm not AFRAID of people watching me and I'm not up to no good... I just don't like it. Extreme example: if there were two people peering through your window as you sat watching tv would you just think 'well I'm not doing anything wrong so LET them watch me' or would you think 'hang on, I've done nothing wrong, they've no right to invade my privacy in this way'. I'm gonna be presumptious and think you'd go for the latter.

I'm not comfortable with government intrusion into everyday life simply because it gets stronger and stronger and they give themselves more right to pry into our lives... where does it end? AND certain powers they keep giving to themselves have been abused in the past and could well be abused in the future.

humanji

Your analogy is a bit wrong. It would be more like the police going from house to house looking in the window to try and find a guy strapping explosives to himself. They'll see you, see you're doing nothing and then move on.

It's still not nice having people looking in your window, but your analogy is misleading, making it seem like it's just anybody looking in.

Also, having the ability to abuse a technology does not mean that the technology must be abused. If it bothers you so much, get into politics and have the laws changed. IT's the simple solution.

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

Your analogy is a bit wrong. It would be more like the police going from house to house looking in the window to try and find a guy strapping explosives to himself. They'll see you, see you're doing nothing and then move on.

It's still not nice having people looking in your window, but your analogy is misleading, making it seem like it's just anybody looking in.

Also, having the ability to abuse a technology does not mean that the technology must be abused. If it bothers you so much, get into politics and have the laws changed. IT's the simple solution.

These new databases in the UK... anybody working 'for the government' has access to them... even people working for the royal mail, etc. So if your local postmaster was standing looking in your window... would that analogy work? Of course it's not nice... but people just say 'if you're doing nothing wrong put up with it'. Well no, I WON'T put up with it BECAUSE I'm doing nothing wrong.

I just want to know how far are people willing to accept government intrusion into lives? There are many people here will use the same argument to defend biometric ID cards, etc. It's just incredibly invasive... and something more connected to a dictatorship.

robtri

I was going to say the same your analogy is misleading and purposely walking people downt he apth you want them...

currently cctv, google camera's, police survelience camera's, toll camera's, anpr camera's, ect.. all operate in the public domain,
none of these items are looking in your window watching what you are doing..

Here would be my example..

Say Heineken helen, you own your retail shop selling clothes.... over the course of a few months you notice some stock going mising, somebody is shoplifiting from you...
So you decide to put up CCTV to monitor your shop, should customers be able to insist that you take the camera's down because you are recording them???? if a customer did ask this, I know I would be very suspicious of them being up to no good...

Heineken Helen

robtri wrote: »

I was going to say the same your analogy is misleading and purposely walking people downt he apth you want them...

currently cctv, google camera's, police survelience camera's, toll camera's, anpr camera's, ect.. all operate in the public domain,
none of these items are looking in your window watching what you are doing..

Here would be my example..

Say Heineken helen, you own your retail shop selling clothes.... over the course of a few months you notice some stock going mising, somebody is shoplifiting from you...
So you decide to put up CCTV to monitor your shop, should customers be able to insist that you take the camera's down because you are recording them???? if a customer did ask this, I know I would be very suspicious of them being up to no good...

It's not misleading at all... it's just as invasive. They want to moniter ALL of my activities... who I'm talking to and when, what interests I have and every website I visit, my health issues (which should ONLY be between me and MY doctor) and they literally want a piece of me with the national DNA database (I'm living in England).

How is my internet activity a crime like stealing?

Undergod

Under EU directives, you are entitled to a copy of any video you fotage you appear in, for a nominal fee. Public CCTV, police footage of a protest, some guy pointing a camera out his window.

Thinkit's directive 95/46, but I'm open to correction.

robtri

Heineken Helen wrote: »

It's not misleading at all... it's just as invasive. They want to moniter ALL of my activities... who I'm talking to and when, what interests I have and every website I visit, my health issues (which should ONLY be between me and MY doctor) and they literally want a piece of me with the national DNA database (I'm living in England).

How is my internet activity a crime like stealing?

I never said your internet activity was a crime... but just like the shop the interent is a public area... and like the shop owner putting up cctv to montior his shop so he can find the 1 in a thousand customer who come to his shop to steal stuff, the government has the same right to montior activities in the public domain, to try to stop that 1 in a thousand person committing a crime...
internet activity can be equivilant to stealing, is rife and massive... from downloading music, video's ect....to illegal filesharing of software....
the numbers of crime being committed on the interent is vastly more than physicals crimes of stealing ect......
therefore the people charged with stopping crimes need the ability to monitor and stop crime.

humanji

Where exactly does it say that all government employees have access to it? Also, Royal Mail is a PLC and not a government agency.

Heineken Helen

robtri wrote: »

I never said your internet activity was a crime... but just like the shop the interent is a public area... and like the shop owner putting up cctv to montior his shop so he can find the 1 in a thousand customer who come to his shop to steal stuff, the government has the same right to montior activities in the public domain, to try to stop that 1 in a thousand person committing a crime...
internet activity can be equivilant to stealing, is rife and massive... from downloading music, video's ect....to illegal filesharing of software....
the numbers of crime being committed on the interent is vastly more than physicals crimes of stealing ect......
therefore the people charged with stopping crimes need the ability to monitor and stop crime.

what about private sites? Like my internet banking or my email or anything I need to enter a password for or use my credit card? It's not exactly the same as walking into a shop as I'm doing it all from the 'privacy' of my own home. If it were just the Chinese government monitoring all movement we'd all be going nuts about the invasion of privacy and human rights violation

And, for the record, it's not JUST the internet monitoring that I'm talking about... it's when that's put together with all the other databases that we have a problem... and they ARE talking about a central database which will centralise all this information. So it's more than just seeing if you're up to no good... it's monitoring everything you do and keeping all this information on file.

Humanji, I'll find a link for ya now, gimme a minute

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

Where exactly does it say that all government employees have access to it? Also, Royal Mail is a PLC and not a government agency.

I WILL find it... damn, I was looking at it yesterday and I'm sure I posted it somewhere so hang on.

In the meantime, here's one that says hundreds of thousands of people will have access to this info and it says public bodies.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6036286.ece

humanji

Heineken Helen wrote: »

and they ARE talking about a central database which will centralise all this information.

But that's just it. They're talking about a central database. It's much easier said than done. I'd be none to happy with it, but I don't live there, so it's up to the people to do something about it if they have a problem with it.

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Humanji, I'll find a link for ya now, gimme a minute

Thanks. I was trying Run_to_da_hills' link fromt he other thread, but it doesn't seem to work.

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

But that's just it. They're talking about a central database. It's much easier said than done. I'd be none to happy with it, but I don't live there, so it's up to the people to do something about it if they have a problem with it.

Thanks. I was trying Run_to_da_hills' link fromt he other thread, but it doesn't seem to work.

well they're talking about next year for the central database so it's not quite far off into the future stuff that will never happen. Over here there's just more of a sense that the government will just do anything they want regardless of what the people want... think the Iraqi war as a blatent example. I've yet to meet ONE English person who supported that from the start but there IS an election coming up... so hopefully something will happen. Problem is, I'm not sure these things are heavily featured on the mainstream news here and it seems to be more mentioned in editorials.

Anyway, still looking

humanji

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I WILL find it... damn, I was looking at it yesterday and I'm sure I posted it somewhere so hang on.

In the meantime, here's one that says hundreds of thousands of people will have access to this info and it says public bodies.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6036286.ece

You have to admit that ironically enough, that story shows the good that can come from the system.

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

You have to admit that ironically enough, that story shows the good that can come from the system.

I've no doubt good CAN come from it... it's just that it's not just the nazis who have proven that monitoring all activity and information is a bad thing... will we never learn from history?:o

Phew... found it thought it would be one of those things that you know you've seen but can never find it again. It was a quote from the Shadow security minister so I presume she'd have a clue as to who can access it.

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2009/04/03/235528/independent-oversight-needed-over-database-state-lords.htm

'Baroness Neville-Jones, shadow security minister, said that the government have not given enough regard to privacy or the need for public trust in the amount of data collected, how it is retained and how it is used.

"It is hard to see what has so changed in our national life that it is necessary and right to give all 474 local councils in England, every NHS trust and fire service, the Environment Agency, and even the Royal Mail and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society access to communications data or surveillance powers, or how that increases the security of the nation," she said.'

robtri

Heineken Helen wrote: »

what about private sites? Like my internet banking or my email or anything I need to enter a password for or use my credit card? It's not exactly the same as walking into a shop as I'm doing it all from the 'privacy' of my own home. If it were just the Chinese government monitoring all movement we'd all be going nuts about the invasion of privacy and human rights violation

And, for the record, it's not JUST the internet monitoring that I'm talking about... it's when that's put together with all the other databases that we have a problem... and they ARE talking about a central database which will centralise all this information. So it's more than just seeing if you're up to no good... it's monitoring everything you do and keeping all this information on file.

Humanji, I'll find a link for ya now, gimme a minute

private sites.... there is nothing private on the interweb.... its a public domain.... if you don't want your information out in the public don't use the interent....
you are not in privacy of your own home, thats the problem, by using the internet you access a public use area... as such anybody on the web can monitor you.... i.e "IP" address....

Heineken Helen

robtri wrote: »

private sites.... there is nothing private on the interweb.... its a public domain.... if you don't want your information out in the public don't use the interent....
you are not in privacy of your own home, thats the problem, by using the internet you access a public use area... as such anybody on the web can monitor you.... i.e "IP" address....

My bank branch is in Ireland... I can't afford to fly home everytime I want to transfer or something.

I'm looking for work at the mo... about 70% of that is done online and most of the correspondence is via email.

Ah the old 'if you don't like it, don't do it' thing :rolleyes: I DO like the internet... I like using it... I just don't like them monitoring us regardless of whether we're committing a crime or not... whatever happened to innocent til proven guilty? I think it's disgraceful.

robtri

Heineken Helen wrote: »

My bank branch is in Ireland... I can't afford to fly home everytime I want to transfer or something.

I'm looking for work at the mo... about 70% of that is done online and most of the correspondence is via email.

Ah the old 'if you don't like it, don't do it' thing :rolleyes: I DO like the internet... I like using it... I just don't like them monitoring us regardless of whether we're committing a crime or not... whatever happened to innocent til proven guilty? I think it's disgraceful.

Sorry I didn't mean to pull out the old "if you don't....." but if you use public area's your information isn't secure.... and visible to anyone who really wants to look at it...

this is a public area, and as such need to be monitored accordingly, just like motorists have speed checks all the time, the majority of motorists pass these checks with no issues, but some the dangerous ones get caught.... surely you can't be suggesting this sort of police work shouldn't be allowed because of the old adage " innocent till proven guilty"

Heineken Helen

robtri wrote: »

Sorry I didn't mean to pull out the old "if you don't....." but if you use public area's your information isn't secure.... and visible to anyone who really wants to look at it...

this is a public area, and as such need to be monitored accordingly, just like motorists have speed checks all the time, the majority of motorists pass these checks with no issues, but some the dangerous ones get caught.... surely you can't be suggesting this sort of police work shouldn't be allowed because of the old adage " innocent till proven guilty"

In fairness, you won't find one post from me griping about speed checks... if I do 100 I'm breaking the law and could possibly kill somebody. If I check my email... . I highly doubt terrorists conduct their meetings over the phone or through their email anymore so why do the rest of us have to face stricter restrictions cos of a few bad apples? If you MUST, monitor the sites where illegal stuff is possible... LIKE the downloading sites etc.

I'll forgive ya that one just grates on me but of course you have a point that my info is visible to anyone like hackers... illegally though

Punish the people who are doing wrong by all means... but don't put the rest of us through all that crap.

I'm all for airport security for example but it really has taken a lot of the bloody fun out of travelling

humanji

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I've no doubt good CAN come from it... it's just that it's not just the nazis who have proven that monitoring all activity and information is a bad thing... will we never learn from history?:o

Phew... found it thought it would be one of those things that you know you've seen but can never find it again. It was a quote from the Shadow security minister so I presume she'd have a clue as to who can access it.

http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2009/04/03/235528/independent-oversight-needed-over-database-state-lords.htm

'Baroness Neville-Jones, shadow security minister, said that the government have not given enough regard to privacy or the need for public trust in the amount of data collected, how it is retained and how it is used.

"It is hard to see what has so changed in our national life that it is necessary and right to give all 474 local councils in England, every NHS trust and fire service, the Environment Agency, and even the Royal Mail and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society access to communications data or surveillance powers, or how that increases the security of the nation," she said.'

That doesn't make sense at all. Could she be just exaggerating for effect? There's little reason why the Fire service would need any details at all. Is it that these groups have access to parts of information, ie the fire service has your address, the NHS has your medical history etc? That's the only way I can see what she says is happening, make sense.

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

That doesn't make sense at all. Could she be just exaggerating for effect? There's little reason why the Fire service would need any details at all. Is it that these groups have access to parts of information, ie the fire service has your address, the NHS has your medical history etc? That's the only way I can see what she says is happening, make sense.

I don't know who exactly has access to what exactly... but I've seen similar claims on other websites and not one quote from the government to suggest otherwise so, while it's possible (and probable) that what you say is correct, there's no proof to really suggest it unfortunately.

Besides, Robtri brings up a point of everything online being possibly viewed by anybody... isn't the same true for national databases? Forgetting about who's LEGALLY allowed to view it, what about how these things can't be 100% hackproof? We've all seen data protection at work when laptops and stuff get 'stolen' and any national database is only as strong as the weakest person with access to it. I'm sure they'll all sign confidentiality clauses (or maybe not) but there's big money in stealing identities these days

humanji

Heineken Helen wrote: »

I don't know who exactly has access to what exactly... but I've seen similar claims on other websites and not one quote from the government to suggest otherwise so, while it's possible (and probable) that what you say is correct, there's no proof to really suggest it unfortunately.

Besides, Robtri brings up a point of everything online being possibly viewed by anybody... isn't the same true for national databases? Forgetting about who's LEGALLY allowed to view it, what about how these things can't be 100% hackproof? We've all seen data protection at work when laptops and stuff get 'stolen' and any national database is only as strong as the weakest person with access to it. I'm sure they'll all sign confidentiality clauses (or maybe not) but there's big money in stealing identities these days

Well, I think the information on government databases is different as data protection laws take precedence. There's always the possibility of hackers getting info, but that's the age we live in and sadly, there's little that can be done. There is the possibility of someone with an agenda trying to exploit the information, but equally, there's also the possibility that nobody will ever exploit the information.

The thing is, if someone wants to get information on you, they can and will if they are determined and resourceful enough.

meglome

My friends put up a camera in front of their shop for security. Now this camera films the street in front of their shop 24/7. It's the only camera on that street. The Gardai have come in three times exactly. 1. A guy was attacked (horrible I don't want to even go into it). 2. A neighbours door was damaged. 3. A woman's bags was snatched. The Gardai now have footage of two of these crimes being committed which has already led to arrests. So for all the could, might or possibly I know that this camera in a public place has not been abused and has helped to catch people who have committed nasty crimes. The world might end tomorrow but until I see real evidence that it is I'm not going to worry about it.

Heineken Helen

meglome wrote: »

My friends put up a camera in front of their shop for security. Now this camera films the street in front of their shop 24/7. It's the only camera on that street. The Gardai have come in three times exactly. 1. A guy was attacked (horrible I don't want to even go into it). 2. A neighbours door was damaged. 3. A woman's bags was snatched. The Gardai now have footage of two of these crimes being committed which has already led to arrests. So for all the could, might or possibly I know that this camera in a public place has not been abused and has helped to catch people who have committed nasty crimes. The world might end tomorrow but until I see real evidence that it is I'm not going to worry about it.

The Irish government is FAR behind the British government regarding tracking and monitoring their people.

In fairness, I guess the British government are saying they've no trust in those who voted them into power... can't say I really blame them

Heineken Helen

humanji wrote: »

Well, I think the information on government databases is different as data protection laws take precedence. There's always the possibility of hackers getting info, but that's the age we live in and sadly, there's little that can be done. There is the possibility of someone with an agenda trying to exploit the information, but equally, there's also the possibility that nobody will ever exploit the information.

The thing is, if someone wants to get information on you, they can and will if they are determined and resourceful enough.

So why make it easier for them by having all your info in one place? And the data protection means that ONLY those few hundred thousand can view your info?

robtri

Heineken Helen wrote: »

So why make it easier for them by having all your info in one place? And the data protection means that ONLY those few hundred thousand can view your info?

actually its harder to get the info out of those govenment databases, it is easier for someone to get your information from different sources than from a government database.. these databases usuallly have the best security protocols around and are very hard to get into... much easier to hack into a poorly designed website, that you have purchased soemthing from, that has your name address, credit card number, phone numbers.....

meglome

Heineken Helen wrote: »

The Irish government is FAR behind the British government regarding tracking and monitoring their people.

In fairness, I guess the British government are saying they've no trust in those who voted them into power... can't say I really blame them

We'll I'll put it this way to you with all this big brother stuff it should be easy to show were the actual abuses are. So, for example, list off all the dodgy convictions? Feel free to list anyone who has suffered.

And if you can't then we're back to might, could and possibly. And if we're down that road sure just about anything is possible just most of it is very very unlikely.

Heineken Helen

meglome wrote: »

We'll I'll put it this way to you with all this big brother stuff it should be easy to show were the actual abuses are. So, for example, list off all the dodgy convictions? Feel free to list anyone who has suffered.

And if you can't then we're back to might, could and possibly. And if we're down that road sure just about anything is possible just most of it is very very unlikely.

it was in one of the three links i posted today about all the abuses... i'll find it for ya

meglome

Heineken Helen wrote: »

it was in one of the three links i posted today about all the abuses... i'll find it for ya

I look forward to it.

Heineken Helen

meglome wrote: »

I look forward to it.

Just from one link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6036286.ece

'None of this information will be safe. Already ContactPoint is accidentally revealing the details of 55,000 vulnerable children, whose contacts are supposedly secret, every time the database is updated. At HM Revenue & Customs, more than 600 staff have been dismissed or disciplined in three years for snooping and one woman has been jailed for twice revealing the details of a battered woman’s whereabouts to her ex-husband. Local authority staff in 30 areas have been making unauthorised searches on the Department for Work and Pensions database, curious about the employment and income details of people they know. As the databases expand, the problem will only get worse. '

robtri

Heineken Helen wrote: »

Just from one link:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article6036286.ece

'None of this information will be safe. Already ContactPoint is accidentally revealing the details of 55,000 vulnerable children, whose contacts are supposedly secret, every time the database is updated. At HM Revenue & Customs, more than 600 staff have been dismissed or disciplined in three years for snooping and one woman has been jailed for twice revealing the details of a battered woman’s whereabouts to her ex-husband. Local authority staff in 30 areas have been making unauthorised searches on the Department for Work and Pensions database, curious about the employment and income details of people they know. As the databases expand, the problem will only get worse. '

so as per your quote, its not the government who is misusing or abusing information, it is indiviuals .....

Heineken Helen

robtri wrote: »

so as per your quote, its not the government who is misusing or abusing information, it is indiviuals .....

Yes... and isn't a government made up of individuals?