- 1.13K Posts
- 4.8K Comments
8·16 hours agoBecause Iran was causing Americans so badly problems every day. A world war will surely keep Americans safe.
And remember, the “imminent” threat any day now from Iranian missiles is something Netanyahu has been saying since 1995.
27·4 days agoI refuse to believe Trump “weighs” anything, despite the media’s constant sanewashing.
Heather Doshay, head of people at SignalFire, told the New York Times: “Nobody has patience or time for hand-holding in this new environment, where a lot of the work can be done by A.I. autonomously.”
This is how they think. It’s not smart.
4·6 days agoThe link I see is https://media.thebrainbin.org/07/d0/07d00b948c11cabc80df4924731e168ff9bf6797ba0580e7b94b9baf18b9c31b.jpg which is just an image.
17·6 days agoNobody who’s into vibe coding wants to talk about it. The sane people, on the other hand, are already well aware.
3·6 days agoI think Labour is just trying to die.
We got one! A terrorist right here!
I remember in the 1990s when you went to download Netscape you could only use the 40-bit encryption if you were in Europe, not the 128-bit encryption people in the USA could use.
12·8 days agoTurn your volume down before opening the link in public. Someone thought it would be a good idea to have background music.
That’s often the point of this kind of legislation. The review from which this comes points out that the law is very broad and a lot is left up to the discretion of the police about how to apply it. In other words, they implement a law that just about everyone is breaking, then enforce it against environmentalists, critics of Israel, privacy advocates, socialists, anarchists and human rights campaigners, while leaving Meta execs, MPs, banks and the far-right untouched.
I found it and posted a link in this thread.
I found it:
It’s an independent review of some UK laws concerning national security, and the reviewer is warning that the laws could be used against people unfairly. Note the last sentence of the section: “Serious responsibility is put on police to use the power wisely.”
Engagement in Hostile Activity
6.16. Under Schedule 3 a person may be engaged in hostile activity even though unaware that their activity is hostile activity[footnote 428].
So a person could be examined on account of their wholly inadvertent and morally blameless conduct.
Examples could include a journalist carrying confidential information whose significance to national security he did not understand, or the victim of planted material. The examining officer could act if there was no possibility that the person was aware that its dissemination might be in the interests of a foreign state, or even that they were carrying the material.
The Code of Practice to Schedule 3 refers to the innocent dupe, who “…may believe that they are working for a legitimate business, or charity, which is in fact being utilised specifically for the purpose of espionage”[footnote 429].
6.17. Since hostile activity does not require any knowledge or tasking by a foreign state[footnote 430], the phenomenon of double-ignorance could arise. A person may be engaged in hostile activity if they do something which, unknown to them threatens, national security and which is in the interests of another State, also entirely in the dark. For example:
The developer of an app, whose selling point is end-to-end encryption which would make it more difficult for UK security and intelligence agencies to monitor communications. It is a reasonable assumption that this would be in the interests of a foreign state even if though the foreign state has never contemplated this potential advantage.
The lobbyist for a foreign firm, who seeks to persuade an electronic chip manufacturer to build its factory in France rather than the UK. This would engage the UK’s economic well-being in a way relevant to national security even though France is entirely unaware of the lobbying and the lobbyist is only doing his normal day job.
A journalist carrying information that is personally embarrassing to the Prime Minister on the eve of an important treaty negotiations affecting UK security interests.
6.18. In each of these cases the motive of the app developer/ lobbyist/ journalist may be more sinister than first appears, so permitting an officer to examine whether the individual is a witting or unwitting agent of a foreign state might be described as necessary in the right circumstances. Serious responsibility is placed on police to use the power wisely.
What document is this from?
Yes, the trick is to outlaw it entirely then enforce the law selectively against those whom you find politically awkward.
Yes, Librewolf runs Firefox extensions just fine.
1·8 days agoDo they need this to keep MAGA going after the boomers die off?
1·8 days agoAnd the freedom to view Nazi sites and say things that promote Nazism.
And our Canadian PM had said Canada supports this US/Israeli attack. I am ashamed of him.