11 ms·

David Cameron: TV crime dramas prove we need warrantless electronic surveillance

19 points by gb 13y ago

KiwiCoder 13y ago
From the BBC article referenced by boingboing - "He said TV crime dramas illustrated the value of monitoring mobile data." From the boingboing article - "David Cameron: TV crime dramas prove we need mass warrantless electronic surveillance"
- Squarel 13y ago
  I am not sure that makes it any better. Crime dramas illustrate many things, not all of them related to reality.
  - collyw 13y ago
    Yes, all passwords can be cracked by using a unix terminal and typing fast enough.
bdfh42 13y ago
I don't know. His parents spent all that money to send him to a public school (that's private for most of the world) and then a top university. And it turns out he gets all his ideas from newspapers and TV drama.
Ygg2 13y ago
Wat. Wat. blinks Wat. This must be stupidest thing I've ever read in my entire life. It's like saying that we should all affix a gun to our hand because it works so well in FPS. Or that hiding in a corner makes you recover from cancer. I don't care if he didn't say it really. I blame either him for saying or the journalist for writing so illogical.
- gb 13y ago
  The exact quote from the linked BBC article is: "In the most serious crimes [such as] child abduction communications data... is absolutely vital. I love watching, as I probably should stop telling people, crime dramas on the television. There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device."
  - Ygg2 13y ago
    Ok, then the writter is just a moron. It's a weak position, but he is using an analogy, so that makes (slightly) more sense. I wonder how much of such data can be used in a police investigation? I'm actually Ok that they use it to prevent a crime, but charging you for it, if they don't have any legal evidence is also fine by me.
DateK 13y ago
The April Jokes season is starting early this year.
fit2rule 13y ago
This is so typical of the British attitude - its on TV, so it must be true, or have weight, or .. something. I cannot fathom how an entire nation of people can allow themselves to be duped so well, by so few. The entire 'keeping people safe' position is a button that gets pushed and pushed - do the English really fear for their lives so much that they are willing to give up so much freedom, and to allow a powerful elite to rule them? The answer, centuries old: YES. It is my belief that the English zeitgeist is so riddled with guilt over what IT did to its colonies and foreign possessions, that it is currently in the death throws of a society crippled by its own crimes against humanity. This notion of the elite nature of the British Empire serves no purpose other than to polarize the people of that tiny nation against all others .. and this is terribly shocking. The British people will never be truly safe for as long as they continue to deny their own empires criminal behaviour. What England did to Ireland; what it did to its colonies; what it continues to do in foreign lands, daily - this is the true source of danger for the English people. No amount of pontificating/Mind Control being force-fed on the British public will ever address the dire straits in which England has forcefully left millions of people, not subjects of their empire but nevertheless victims, all over the world.
- lewispollard 13y ago
  > I cannot fathom how an entire nation of people can allow themselves to be duped so well, by so few. The same reason as in every western democracy, including the US: massive marketing budgets & the media. > It is my belief that the English zeitgeist is so riddled with guilt over what IT did to its colonies and foreign possessions, that it is currently in the death throws of a society crippled by its own crimes against humanity. What absolute nonsense. So many countries have committed atrocities on a similar level, and many more recently than the British empire. Should the Norwegians be crippled by guilt for the actions of the vikings? Should the Americans be crippled by guilt for crimes against the native people? Should the Japanese and Germans be crippled by guilt for atrocities committed in WW2? People don't live in the past.
  - fit2rule 13y ago
    Nobody should be crippled by guilt - but todays generations ought to damned well be held responsible for the wealth they enjoy as a result of the slaves their parents owned. It wasn't that long ago, and we still have people in modern society who are responsible for atrocities, yet are nevertheless getting away with it - because, as you say, 'people dont live in the past' ..
mavus 13y ago
The actual BBC article linked on boingboing is less editorialised and contains the actual quote: "In the most serious crimes [such as] child abduction communications data... is absolutely vital. I love watching, as I probably should stop telling people, crime dramas on the television. There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device." While I strongly oppose any warrant-less surveillance bills. I can agree with the statement. Nothing makes me a sympathise with the police more than crime dramas. So much to the point where I feel some American TV procedurals are almost propagandist and a lot of people assume the police have more rights than they do because of TV. But this is reality and things aren't as black and white as that.
- bengillies 13y ago
  > "There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device." All you can really tell from that statement though is that script writers enjoy adding in wiretapping, etc as it's both reasonably engaging to watch and really easy to write about. It says nothing whatsoever about actual policing or indeed the ramifications involved.
cyphax 13y ago
I have to admit that I think I understand where this idea comes from. I watched The Wire a while back. In the series, the ability to tap phone lines is vital to uncovering the criminal activities they seek to end. So vital, in fact, that they named the whole show after it. It proved to be an important tool. The problem is that it is fiction, so I don't worry all that much about privacy of characters, because they don't exist. It is also absolute, in terms of us knowing who the bad guys are, and why. So while it might be a realistic enough view on events that happen in real life, it's still bound by it being a TV show and therefor I'm not too sure if we could ever use it to illustrate, let alone prove anything this important (our privacy). I should hope that the prime minister of the UK makes this distinction, too, before basing any actual decision on it.
DanBC 13y ago
Shitty source means people are not commenting on what he actually said. The actual law any how right / wrong it is is ignored; what happens if that law is broken is ignored. This is a type of article that Hacker News fucking sucks at - ignorant flamebait attracts indignant comments which get many upvotes. Ignorance is spread and people don't bother finding out the reality.
cafard 13y ago
Damn. I look forward to his thoughts on driving.

19 points by gb 13y ago

From the BBC article referenced by boingboing - "He said TV crime dramas illustrated the value of monitoring mobile data." From the boingboing article - "David Cameron: TV crime dramas prove we need mass warrantless electronic surveillance"

Squarel 13y ago
I am not sure that makes it any better. Crime dramas illustrate many things, not all of them related to reality.
- collyw 13y ago
  Yes, all passwords can be cracked by using a unix terminal and typing fast enough.

bdfh42 13y ago

I don't know. His parents spent all that money to send him to a public school (that's private for most of the world) and then a top university. And it turns out he gets all his ideas from newspapers and TV drama.

Ygg2 13y ago

Wat. Wat. blinks Wat. This must be stupidest thing I've ever read in my entire life. It's like saying that we should all affix a gun to our hand because it works so well in FPS. Or that hiding in a corner makes you recover from cancer. I don't care if he didn't say it really. I blame either him for saying or the journalist for writing so illogical.

gb 13y ago
The exact quote from the linked BBC article is: "In the most serious crimes [such as] child abduction communications data... is absolutely vital. I love watching, as I probably should stop telling people, crime dramas on the television. There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device."
- Ygg2 13y ago
  Ok, then the writter is just a moron. It's a weak position, but he is using an analogy, so that makes (slightly) more sense. I wonder how much of such data can be used in a police investigation? I'm actually Ok that they use it to prevent a crime, but charging you for it, if they don't have any legal evidence is also fine by me.

DateK 13y ago

The April Jokes season is starting early this year.

fit2rule 13y ago

This is so typical of the British attitude - its on TV, so it must be true, or have weight, or .. something. I cannot fathom how an entire nation of people can allow themselves to be duped so well, by so few. The entire 'keeping people safe' position is a button that gets pushed and pushed - do the English really fear for their lives so much that they are willing to give up so much freedom, and to allow a powerful elite to rule them? The answer, centuries old: YES. It is my belief that the English zeitgeist is so riddled with guilt over what IT did to its colonies and foreign possessions, that it is currently in the death throws of a society crippled by its own crimes against humanity. This notion of the elite nature of the British Empire serves no purpose other than to polarize the people of that tiny nation against all others .. and this is terribly shocking. The British people will never be truly safe for as long as they continue to deny their own empires criminal behaviour. What England did to Ireland; what it did to its colonies; what it continues to do in foreign lands, daily - this is the true source of danger for the English people. No amount of pontificating/Mind Control being force-fed on the British public will ever address the dire straits in which England has forcefully left millions of people, not subjects of their empire but nevertheless victims, all over the world.

lewispollard 13y ago
> I cannot fathom how an entire nation of people can allow themselves to be duped so well, by so few. The same reason as in every western democracy, including the US: massive marketing budgets & the media. > It is my belief that the English zeitgeist is so riddled with guilt over what IT did to its colonies and foreign possessions, that it is currently in the death throws of a society crippled by its own crimes against humanity. What absolute nonsense. So many countries have committed atrocities on a similar level, and many more recently than the British empire. Should the Norwegians be crippled by guilt for the actions of the vikings? Should the Americans be crippled by guilt for crimes against the native people? Should the Japanese and Germans be crippled by guilt for atrocities committed in WW2? People don't live in the past.
- fit2rule 13y ago
  Nobody should be crippled by guilt - but todays generations ought to damned well be held responsible for the wealth they enjoy as a result of the slaves their parents owned. It wasn't that long ago, and we still have people in modern society who are responsible for atrocities, yet are nevertheless getting away with it - because, as you say, 'people dont live in the past' ..

mavus 13y ago

The actual BBC article linked on boingboing is less editorialised and contains the actual quote: "In the most serious crimes [such as] child abduction communications data... is absolutely vital. I love watching, as I probably should stop telling people, crime dramas on the television. There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device." While I strongly oppose any warrant-less surveillance bills. I can agree with the statement. Nothing makes me a sympathise with the police more than crime dramas. So much to the point where I feel some American TV procedurals are almost propagandist and a lot of people assume the police have more rights than they do because of TV. But this is reality and things aren't as black and white as that.

bengillies 13y ago
> "There's hardly a crime drama where a crime is solved without using the data of a mobile communications device." All you can really tell from that statement though is that script writers enjoy adding in wiretapping, etc as it's both reasonably engaging to watch and really easy to write about. It says nothing whatsoever about actual policing or indeed the ramifications involved.

cyphax 13y ago

I have to admit that I think I understand where this idea comes from. I watched The Wire a while back. In the series, the ability to tap phone lines is vital to uncovering the criminal activities they seek to end. So vital, in fact, that they named the whole show after it. It proved to be an important tool. The problem is that it is fiction, so I don't worry all that much about privacy of characters, because they don't exist. It is also absolute, in terms of us knowing who the bad guys are, and why. So while it might be a realistic enough view on events that happen in real life, it's still bound by it being a TV show and therefor I'm not too sure if we could ever use it to illustrate, let alone prove anything this important (our privacy). I should hope that the prime minister of the UK makes this distinction, too, before basing any actual decision on it.

DanBC 13y ago

Shitty source means people are not commenting on what he actually said. The actual law any how right / wrong it is is ignored; what happens if that law is broken is ignored. This is a type of article that Hacker News fucking sucks at - ignorant flamebait attracts indignant comments which get many upvotes. Ignorance is spread and people don't bother finding out the reality.

cafard 13y ago

Damn. I look forward to his thoughts on driving.