The War on The Internet

So today we were greeted by news which was to be expected really, and to be quite honest I don't even know why I'm bothering to write about it seeing as every blog in the UK is probably already covering this story but for the sake of adding to critical mass, I'll state the issues.

Today the news was reporting on the '1984' style press control:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2295658/Press-regulation-Internet-targeted-MPs-time-chilling-threat-free-speech.html

Apparently the British Government has seen fit to bring in a bunch of new laws which not only strongly restrict the media's ability to report on stories (not that the mass media was ever that great at bringing things to peoples attention in the first place) but also means that there is a serious threat of ordinary internet users being sued for damages for cases of slander and or defamation. Those at risk includes me, for writing this blog and it includes you if you decided to post up unsubstantiated bullshit on Facebook or Twitter - quite literally you can be held accountable for saying anything, really, if someone can falsify evidence to the contrary to what you have said. 
 
That said, this is nothing new. Hundreds of people have already been arrested (and charged) for things said on Facebook, and I'm guessing the toll for people losing their jobs for 'I hate my boss, I think he is a cunt' comments, probably extends to the hundreds of thousands mark. Lets face it, the internet isn't safe anymore, in particular Facebook which was always an intelligence finding database from the get-up.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/18030970

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19882618

You have to ask, is this really an attack on the 'free-press'? Or is it really an attack on the internet's ability to quickly get information across?

Lets be honest, if it wasn't for the internet most of us would still be believing there was actually a point to the wars in the Middle East, that the economy really was failing due to genuine mistakes and that politicians actually have our best interests at heart. The internet has been a brilliant tool for unlocking minds and dispelling the bollocks stories we've been told over the centuries, until now. This could be seriously damaging for everyone who actually cares about learning the truth about things.

Lets take a scenario for arguments sake:

A woman is kidnapped and gang raped repeatedly by a group of highly wealthy politicians and bankers. She gets out, and no one believes her, the police are too scared to chase up the case and so in desperation she posts her ordeal up on the internet, because currently if you have a huge problem which no one seems to be helping you with, you post it on the internet to try and get publicity. If these people were so rich that they could pay off the police and pay for some witnesses to vouch for them being some place else at the time this rape allegedly happened, they could then take that woman to the cleaners and infinancially rape her too, just to really rub the salt in the wounds.

Whilst this may seem a bit of an extreme example, there are tons of cases which have received publicity through the internet, people who have won against corruption and blackmail, this Act would potentially put a stop to that.

Thing is, its not just freedom of speech which is under attack.

The past few years has seen both the European Union and America try and bring in internet laws such as 'SOPA' which far extend past their premise that it is just for preventing online piracy. In any case, despite both SOPA in the states and the European equivalent, the legislation was rejected on privacy grounds. Despite that, starting from next year in 2014, in the UK internet service providers will be required to log and monitor your download habits and give you a 'three strikes' warning, where presumably your internet speeds will be slowed until eventually you receive nasty letters through the post asking you to come to court.

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2406323,00.asp

The same is happening in America too, albeit they get six strikes instead of our three.

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-braces-online-piracy.html

Europe and America both have the sinister issue of having to pay £20 (or $30) to appeal against an ISP's decision, because, you know, its not like the UK or America has a Bill of Rights or anything. And it gets worse. You ever posted something like a video of your mate falling over, onto YouTube? You put some music onto that clip? Guess what, if you did, you could be fined under these new proposals.

In any case just be glad you don't live in Germany where the lines between civil and criminal cases are blurred. If you are caught downloading porn illegally over there the porn studio send letters to your home demanding a payment settlement and then post your name publicly for everyone to laugh at (unless they pay £650 straight to the firm straight away without question.) Apparently the potential damage to relationships is neither here nor there to these arseholes.

Trouble is, its set to get worse. Gone are the days where the internet danced to the tune of dial-up tones and the anarchistic web pages ran wild, slowly but surely the internet is becoming standardised and my prediction is that eventually all the websites we take for granted today will be shut down and we will all be given some form of internet passport. The internet will be like a glorified Ceefax, except it draws more information out about you, than you do about it.

For example, there was huge controversy about Google's terms and conditions changing last year. People generally don't care that much anymore now its old news, but in my opinion people should be very scared of an internet organisation which demands you use a 'real name' when filling out your profile. Its not my belief that Google is necessarily some Government sponsored spy (that's Facebook) but I do think that they are deliberately and undeniably creating a file on you to know how best to sell products to you.

Facebook on the other hand is without question being used by police forces to gather intelligence on us, and as technology increases that ability will only grow. They are working on software which can predict where in the world flashpoints and crimes are about to take place and software which evaluates all your likes and dislikes in your Facebook timeline and makes a judgement on you about how likely you are to commit a crime.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/mar/09/facebook-arrested-evgeny-morozov-extract

All we need now is some sort of drug which makes us all docile and apathetic.

Oh hold on!

Welcome to the New World Order!

Facebook Issue? Use a fake name!

Sometimes you get the odd public servant that actually says something which is true or helpful, and usually those few politicians are tarnished and kept down by the rest of the plebian cunts who feed off each others inane ramblings.

Andy Smith who is an internet security chief at the Cabinet Office for Parliament has publicly stated that people should only use their real details on well known and trusted websites and should use fake names and details for unknown or less-trusted ones. Seems legit and solid advice to me and the vast majority of others who actually understand how the internet works, oh except some politicians take an issue with this.

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20082493

Quoting from the BBC story, "his advice was described by Labour MP Helen Goodman as "totally outrageous".

Ms Goodman, shadow culture minister, told BBC News: "This is the kind of behaviour that, in the end, promotes crime.

"It is exactly what we don't want. We want more security online. It's anonymity which facilitates cyber-bullying, the abuse of children.

"I was genuinely shocked that a public official could say such a thing."

Oh of course. This is all to do with protecting the children, isn't it. Sorry, I didn't realise. Hold on a second though. If there were more anonymity, surely noone would be able to find your childs Facebook account if they had a random name, noone can bully someone when they don't know who they are.

Keep internet anonymous! The next step
will be thought crime lists if we are
not careful!

This is not the sort of thing which promotes crime at all Ms Goodman you fucking stupid cow, its the exact opposite. It stops dodgy sites and people from securing data about an individual. If you are someone selling something online which you shouldn't be, or online specifically to commit a crime or cause crime then you aren't going to be using your real name either way. Besides if you politicians are all experts in bloody cyber-crime then why did you need to employ an internet security chief in the first place? Let the guy do his job.

Of course some sites such as Facebook and in particular Google which now hoardes your personal data like no other company (in fact with this blog I had to change to my real name because some turd reported my fake name) demands we use our real details, in the case of Google even suspending services until you provide a real name or provide ID to prove your suspected fake name is indeed your legally held name. Its a slippery slope we are on. The politicians may think this new digital weapon they can use on the public is a good idea, but it cuts both ways. Good cyber-criminals can gain access to anyones information they want if they really have a desire to.

This is just another indication of the direction they want to take the internet. I wouldn't be surprised if the next step in cyber-security won't involve some form of passport system. Enjoy the internet whilst you can, its days as a free exchange of ideas and commerce are almost over.