6 ms·
Wow, what a free society! In the UK if you refuse to unlock your device you can be imprisoned indefinitely! In HK it's just one year!
by tyho 6mo ago
Wow, what a free society! In the UK if you refuse to unlock your device you can be imprisoned indefinitely! In HK it's just one year!
- netsharc 6mo ago[flagged]
- embedding-shape 6mo agoYou're in a place called "Hacker" news, many of us hackers feel like we shouldn't be forced to unlock our private devices, not sure this is surprising.
- netsharc 6mo ago[flagged]
- embedding-shape 6mo agoHow is "against democracies" even on topic here? Parent commentator said HK is now like the UK, why it matter how much of a democracy either of the places are? And no, it isn't a "nazi bar" just because someone disagrees with you, that's not how that label should be applied. Save it for actual nazis, otherwise you're doing the rest of us a huge disservice, as when there are actual nazis, people think we're talking opinions rather than facts. As a human who despise nazis and fascists, please don't contribute to making the world worse.
- ahhhhnoooo 6mo agoI strongly disagree with the parent poster, but they are deploying a specific term. Nazi Bar doesn't imply everyone within is a Nazi. It implies a bar that permits a Nazi to stay and drink. That Nazi will come back later with their friends who are also Nazis, and over time the bar will increasingly become funded by Nazis. It's really really strange to use here, however, because this thread is about not giving in to authoritarianism. If you want to see intolerance, this person should go look at the recent transgender athletes thread. That post might actually be a "Nazi bar".
- netsharc 6mo agoBecause the original commenter is screaming about how the UK is authoritarian without any links, which smells to me like he's a typical right wing idjit, who wants to put in Nigel Farage in power and actually turn the place more Nazi. That's why I asked if he was referring to that overturned conviction, which shows there's still some rule of law, or post a link to what the actual hell he's talking about. Pfft, but well, fuck me, just learned that I'm the idiot who's wrestling with the pig yet again.
- tommica 6mo ago[flagged]
- vlovich123 6mo agoCriticizing democracies with the policies of a police state is Nazi behavior? I’m lost. AFAIK Nazis are associated with those supporting authoritarian regimes not those criticizing the slide into authoritarianism. You even yourself put up a link about someone convicted who had to go through a long legal battle to get their freedom. The claim may have been overbroad in terms of the powers the state has, but they were off only in magnitude what RIPA2000 outlines as powers.
- andylynch 6mo agoWhy are you misrepresenting about UK law? Yes, it can be a criminal offence. But the maximum tariff for this under RIPA 2000 is five years. If it’s not about nation security or CSAM, it’s two. (Incidentally, the USA is a real outlier in this topic)
- gib444 6mo agoOh just 5 years, that's OK then.
- gruez 6mo agoIt's not okay to imprison people for 5 years vs lifetime, but at the same time, facts matter, and we shouldn't get in the habit of allowing fibs to slip through just because they're directionally correct.
- roenxi 6mo agoAre we damning the UK with faint praise now? I'm not even sure how much practical difference there is between 5 and indefinite in practice, 5 years is a long time. I imagine it is pretty life-destroying. Especially for the crime of having something on your phone that you want to keep private. > If it’s not about nation security or CSAM, it’s two. I am sure we all get what you mean, but there is a comic interpretation in vaguely-Soviet style here where if someone hasn't done anything wrong they only get 2 years. I'm going to spend some time this weekend making sure my encryption is plausibly deniable where possible.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- idiotsecant 6mo agoYou're unsure of the difference between 5 and infinity?
- deejaaymac 6mo ago
- pcdevils 6mo agoThe police must obtain appropriate permission from a judge to obtain a s.49 RIPA notice. Before a judge grants the notice, they must be satisfied that: The key to the protected information is in the possession of the person given notice. Disclosure is necessary in the interest of national security, in preventing or detecting crime or in the interests of the economic wellbeing of the UK. Disclosure is proportionate. If the protected information cannot be obtained by reasonable means.
- beambot 6mo agoSo you're saying it's still at the discretion of a single magistrate? I'm sure China could find some judges to rule in the name of national security if it would give everyone warm fuzzies. Judicial checks and balances only function when they're independent of the executive and parliament
- danlitt 6mo agoNot addressing your main point, magistrates and judges are not the same thing. It would be much worse if it were at the discretion of a magistrate.
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- deleted 6mo ago[deleted]
- AlecSchueler 6mo ago> So you're saying it's still at the discretion of a single magistrate? A judge isn't a magistrate, but also: No, of course not. There are different layers of legal protections in the UK. You would be able to appeal the notice itself, you would be able to argue at the court against the decision, and you could make an appeal to a higher court if your were convicted. Furthermore you could make an official complaint about the investigation afterwards.
- 6mo ago
- kindkang2024 6mo ago[dead]
- whatsupdog 6mo agoIn UK you can be imprisoned for liking a post on Facebook that is considered "hate speech".
- amenhotep 6mo agoJail? Just for saying you're English?
- ceejayoz 6mo ago[citation needed]
- halJordan 6mo ago[flagged]
- gruez 6mo ago>No citation needed, it should be common knowledge like stopping at a stop sign. Sounds like you can't (or are unwilling) to produce evidence, and you're trying to handwave that issue away with "it's common knowledge'.
- QuantumFunnel 6mo agohttps://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/select-communications-offences-and-concerns-over-free-speech/ https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/select-communications-off... How convenient that the government doesn't make the numbers public and then have to issue statements like this when journalists do some digging on the matter
- gruez 6mo agoI don't get what you're trying to say here? Yes, there are real issues with the government arresting people for speech, and the number is going up, but that's not proof for the specific claim of "you can be imprisoned for liking a post [...]". You can't just tack on spurious claims onto a more well supported claim on the basis that the former is directionally the same as the latter.