6 ms·

The Open Rights Group - https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ - is probably a reasonable place to start. Curious about wh

The Open Rights Group - https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ - is probably a reasonable place to start. Curious about what is scaring you btw.

pixxel 2y ago
> I'm interested in updates to facial recognition, social media monitoring, "anti-social behavior" (AKA ASBOs), CCTV, basically all the things that scare me about the UK.
p4trik 2y ago
Scaring me is getting to prison for expressing my opinion on a social platform.
- n4r9 2y ago
  For context, there's a right-wing narrative in the UK that "thousands of people have been arrested just for posting their opinion on social media". The reality is that the UK's "Communications Act" [0] does allow prosecutions for electronic communications (email, forums, and social media). The number of arrests under this Act are in the thousands, but it covers a wide range of issues like grooming, stalking, and racially aggravated hate crimes. Earlier this year there were a number of violent & destructive riots across the UK which happened in response to a stabbing of 3 kids in Southport [1]. The riots were whipped up by a number of far-right entities on social media - personalities such as Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, Andrew Tate, and Katie Hopkins - as well as more nebulous entities such as Europe Invasion. A crucial aspect of the far-right narrative was a false claim that the perpetrator was a Muslim asylum seeker. Arrests were made for directly inciting violence [2] as well as for generating misinformation about the perpetrator [3]. The discussion around this is in the sensitive area of free speech vs hate speech. In the UK we are a little more nuanced about the absolute requirement for freedom of speech. While I do appreciate the argument that policing of speech can become dangerous depending on who does the policing, I think the case of the riots is a good example of where we may need to evolve our ideas about what it means to incite violence. This episode demonstrates social media's potency and the horrific potential of the deliberate spreading of misinformation. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots [2] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/09/two-men-jailed-for-social-media-posts-that-stirred-up-far-right-violence https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/09/two... [3] https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/08/woman-first-shared-fake-southport-suspect-rumour-sparked-riots-arrested-21389346/ https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/08/woman-first-shared-fake-south...
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - n4r9 2y ago
      The relevant information is that they are neither muslim nor a migrant, two false claims that formed the basis for the riots.
    - jsheard 2y ago
      The stabber was British-born of legal Rwandan immigrants, and from a devout Christian family. The incitement was the completely fabricated narrative that the stabber was an immigrant, which he isn't unless you count him being second generation, and/or a Muslim, which he isn't in any sense, hence the protests being mostly directed at immigrants and Muslims rather than anything actually relevant to the stabbings.
  - mdp2021 2y ago
    I just stumbled for an article on the Spectator (looking for something else), posted nearby, and I read: > After the recent riots, people were given prison sentences for posting words and images on social media. In some cases, the illegal incitement to violence was obvious [... But] Lee Dunn, fifty-one, on the other hand, got eight weeks for sharing three images of Asian-looking men with captions such as “Coming to a town near you”
    - n4r9 2y ago
      In my view The Spectator is being disingenuous (which makes sense as one of the most right-wing mainstream publications in the UK). They omit to describe the content of the images, which showed Asian men entering Britain by boat and wielding knives in Westminster. This fuels the narrative of Asian/muslim asylum seekers being a violent threat to British society. In the context of an ongoing frenzy being whipped up based on false claims about asylum seekers, I think this did verge into the realm of racist hate speech. Note that Lee Dunn pled guilty to the charges.
- sofixa 2y ago
  Unless your opinion is that XYZ group of immutable characteristics is subhuman/has to be expelled/deserves less rights/has to be killed , you're safe.
  - carlosjobim 2y ago
    I take it that you cannot be pro abortion in the UK, then? "Oh, but they are not human that can have any rights. Of course they can be killed and expelled."
    - n4r9 2y ago
      You're comparing people saying "All people of a certain ethnicity should be removed" vs people saying "Women have a right to decide whether to abort a pregnancy".
      - carlosjobim 2y ago
        Which is worse: Being expelled from a foreign country or being killed because as a fetus you are considered subhuman? Historically newborns in Europe have also been considered subhuman, without any rights, and subject to the practice of "exposure" if the parents pleased. Just as easily as upstanding citizens today consider the unborn to be subhuman, just as easy has it been in the past (and in the future) for upstanding citizens to consider certain groups of people as subhuman. It only depends on what the rulers consider convenient at the moment, and 90% of the population are ready to adopt any opinion at the drop of a hat if instructed so by their rulers. Especially intelligent people, who can take pleasure in mental games to justify following orders.
        n4r9 2y ago
        I wouldn't say that a foetus is subhuman. I just think that a human's right to life does not extend to the right to use another's body for 9 months. Which is another reason why this doesn't compare to immigration.
- mdp2021 2y ago
  Coincidentally, I just met this article from the Spectator: # Free speech is dying in Britain - https://thespectator.com/topic/free-speech-died-britain/ https://thespectator.com/topic/free-speech-died-britain/ Everything should be verified, but the article mentions cases that can be of concern.
  - gadders 2y ago
    See also: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/britain-isnt-a-free-country/ https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/britain-isnt-a-free-coun...

The Open Rights Group - https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/ - is probably a reasonable place to start. Curious about what is scaring you btw.

pixxel 2y ago

> I'm interested in updates to facial recognition, social media monitoring, "anti-social behavior" (AKA ASBOs), CCTV, basically all the things that scare me about the UK.

p4trik 2y ago

Scaring me is getting to prison for expressing my opinion on a social platform.

n4r9 2y ago
For context, there's a right-wing narrative in the UK that "thousands of people have been arrested just for posting their opinion on social media". The reality is that the UK's "Communications Act" [0] does allow prosecutions for electronic communications (email, forums, and social media). The number of arrests under this Act are in the thousands, but it covers a wide range of issues like grooming, stalking, and racially aggravated hate crimes. Earlier this year there were a number of violent & destructive riots across the UK which happened in response to a stabbing of 3 kids in Southport [1]. The riots were whipped up by a number of far-right entities on social media - personalities such as Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, Andrew Tate, and Katie Hopkins - as well as more nebulous entities such as Europe Invasion. A crucial aspect of the far-right narrative was a false claim that the perpetrator was a Muslim asylum seeker. Arrests were made for directly inciting violence [2] as well as for generating misinformation about the perpetrator [3]. The discussion around this is in the sensitive area of free speech vs hate speech. In the UK we are a little more nuanced about the absolute requirement for freedom of speech. While I do appreciate the argument that policing of speech can become dangerous depending on who does the policing, I think the case of the riots is a good example of where we may need to evolve our ideas about what it means to incite violence. This episode demonstrates social media's potency and the horrific potential of the deliberate spreading of misinformation. [0] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127 [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_riots [2] https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/09/two-men-jailed-for-social-media-posts-that-stirred-up-far-right-violence https://www.theguardian.com/politics/article/2024/aug/09/two... [3] https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/08/woman-first-shared-fake-southport-suspect-rumour-sparked-riots-arrested-21389346/ https://metro.co.uk/2024/08/08/woman-first-shared-fake-south...
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - n4r9 2y ago
    The relevant information is that they are neither muslim nor a migrant, two false claims that formed the basis for the riots.
  - jsheard 2y ago
    The stabber was British-born of legal Rwandan immigrants, and from a devout Christian family. The incitement was the completely fabricated narrative that the stabber was an immigrant, which he isn't unless you count him being second generation, and/or a Muslim, which he isn't in any sense, hence the protests being mostly directed at immigrants and Muslims rather than anything actually relevant to the stabbings.
- mdp2021 2y ago
  I just stumbled for an article on the Spectator (looking for something else), posted nearby, and I read: > After the recent riots, people were given prison sentences for posting words and images on social media. In some cases, the illegal incitement to violence was obvious [... But] Lee Dunn, fifty-one, on the other hand, got eight weeks for sharing three images of Asian-looking men with captions such as “Coming to a town near you”
  - n4r9 2y ago
    In my view The Spectator is being disingenuous (which makes sense as one of the most right-wing mainstream publications in the UK). They omit to describe the content of the images, which showed Asian men entering Britain by boat and wielding knives in Westminster. This fuels the narrative of Asian/muslim asylum seekers being a violent threat to British society. In the context of an ongoing frenzy being whipped up based on false claims about asylum seekers, I think this did verge into the realm of racist hate speech. Note that Lee Dunn pled guilty to the charges.
sofixa 2y ago
Unless your opinion is that XYZ group of immutable characteristics is subhuman/has to be expelled/deserves less rights/has to be killed , you're safe.
- carlosjobim 2y ago
  I take it that you cannot be pro abortion in the UK, then? "Oh, but they are not human that can have any rights. Of course they can be killed and expelled."
  - n4r9 2y ago
    You're comparing people saying "All people of a certain ethnicity should be removed" vs people saying "Women have a right to decide whether to abort a pregnancy".
    - carlosjobim 2y ago
      Which is worse: Being expelled from a foreign country or being killed because as a fetus you are considered subhuman? Historically newborns in Europe have also been considered subhuman, without any rights, and subject to the practice of "exposure" if the parents pleased. Just as easily as upstanding citizens today consider the unborn to be subhuman, just as easy has it been in the past (and in the future) for upstanding citizens to consider certain groups of people as subhuman. It only depends on what the rulers consider convenient at the moment, and 90% of the population are ready to adopt any opinion at the drop of a hat if instructed so by their rulers. Especially intelligent people, who can take pleasure in mental games to justify following orders.
      - n4r9 2y ago
        I wouldn't say that a foetus is subhuman. I just think that a human's right to life does not extend to the right to use another's body for 9 months. Which is another reason why this doesn't compare to immigration.
mdp2021 2y ago
Coincidentally, I just met this article from the Spectator: # Free speech is dying in Britain - https://thespectator.com/topic/free-speech-died-britain/ https://thespectator.com/topic/free-speech-died-britain/ Everything should be verified, but the article mentions cases that can be of concern.
- gadders 2y ago
  See also: https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/britain-isnt-a-free-country/ https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/britain-isnt-a-free-coun...