Jobs & Education0 min ago
Government To Spy On Computers Of The Jobless, Also Blocking Computers Of Households With Children
18 Answers
Will the government be able to implement either of these two, (on the face of it) good ideas, or are they just pipe dreams?
http://
http://
http://
http://
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Both rather silly ideas. The first which will be based on cookies will be easy to manipulate. Especially as, by law, sites have to explain and warn you of any usage they make of cookies.
The second will be unworkable, and is based on the idea that DM readers who are parents, can't be arsed to set up their own filters. Not sure why the DM would want to brag that it has such a low opinion of its readership.
The second will be unworkable, and is based on the idea that DM readers who are parents, can't be arsed to set up their own filters. Not sure why the DM would want to brag that it has such a low opinion of its readership.
Idea Number One:
From the Telegraph report:
"The tracking element of the programme will not be compulsory as monitoring people's behaviour online without their consent would not be allowed under EU law."
So that's the end of that. Another example of the EU interfering in matters that should be for the UK Parliament to decide.
From the Telegraph report:
"The tracking element of the programme will not be compulsory as monitoring people's behaviour online without their consent would not be allowed under EU law."
So that's the end of that. Another example of the EU interfering in matters that should be for the UK Parliament to decide.
The idea of blocking porn websites of those households with children may sound laudable, but it would introduce a whole load of problems.
First of all, would the enforcement be the responsibility of the ISPs? Who would sanction private data to be gathered by ISPs? What about households with multiple devices, where one computer is used by the family, but Dad has an iPad?
What about kids with smartphones?
What about families who have kids, but they are at boarding school?
And most importantly - should the government even be playing 'nanny' like this?
First of all, would the enforcement be the responsibility of the ISPs? Who would sanction private data to be gathered by ISPs? What about households with multiple devices, where one computer is used by the family, but Dad has an iPad?
What about kids with smartphones?
What about families who have kids, but they are at boarding school?
And most importantly - should the government even be playing 'nanny' like this?
//the EU interfering in matters that should be for the UK Parliament to decide. //
So NJ
do you believe, left to our own devices, the UK would decide it's ok for people to have their online activity monitored without their consent?
I hope not.
In reality, the Job Centre staff have ways to 'encourage' or coerce people to actively engage in a job hunt - this will just be another way of measuring whether someone is being 'good' or 'bad'
Sadly, this cookie sign up and monitoring may just become another box to be ticked, taking preference over people genuinely making their own efforts to find a job.
So NJ
do you believe, left to our own devices, the UK would decide it's ok for people to have their online activity monitored without their consent?
I hope not.
In reality, the Job Centre staff have ways to 'encourage' or coerce people to actively engage in a job hunt - this will just be another way of measuring whether someone is being 'good' or 'bad'
Sadly, this cookie sign up and monitoring may just become another box to be ticked, taking preference over people genuinely making their own efforts to find a job.
I don't see either idea as being good ideas. Spying on citizens ought to be only related to suspected criminal activity and with an order signed by a judge. Parents ought to take responsibilty for their kids and not expect the world to change making hoops for the rest to jump through in order to remove that responsibility.
"So that's the end of that. Another example of the EU interfering in matters that should be for the UK Parliament to decide."
Well, it's actually the EU telling the UK Parliament that IT cannot automatically interfere with people's privacy. I leave it to others to decide if that's a good thing or not :-)
I had the same thought as rojash about the irony of the Daily Mail bragging about the laxity of its own readers :-)
Well, it's actually the EU telling the UK Parliament that IT cannot automatically interfere with people's privacy. I leave it to others to decide if that's a good thing or not :-)
I had the same thought as rojash about the irony of the Daily Mail bragging about the laxity of its own readers :-)
Astonished at how illiberal some conservative supporters are, both on here and in real life.
The first story further reinforces the negative stereotype of the unemployed,once again portraying all unemployed as workshy scroungers, and goes so far as to suggest that "spying" on its citizens by the government is a good idea! Thankfully, we have the EU reminding the government that it has obligations to its citizens to protect their civil liberties.
Second story is a "meh" as far as I am concerned. Not entirely sure that I buy into this whole "won't somebody think of the children" hyperbole, nor that children are necessarily more "sexualised" now than they were, say 20 years ago.
Added to that the practicality of designing and enforcing these filters, which the kids will figure out a workaround for in about 5 minutes, and it does not boil down to much except the Mail! and DC trying to find favour with the parents.....
The first story further reinforces the negative stereotype of the unemployed,once again portraying all unemployed as workshy scroungers, and goes so far as to suggest that "spying" on its citizens by the government is a good idea! Thankfully, we have the EU reminding the government that it has obligations to its citizens to protect their civil liberties.
Second story is a "meh" as far as I am concerned. Not entirely sure that I buy into this whole "won't somebody think of the children" hyperbole, nor that children are necessarily more "sexualised" now than they were, say 20 years ago.
Added to that the practicality of designing and enforcing these filters, which the kids will figure out a workaround for in about 5 minutes, and it does not boil down to much except the Mail! and DC trying to find favour with the parents.....
going on a recent survey conducted with thousands of children, the results bore out that they are. A week or so ago was watching TV, the teens being interviewed were some who had taken part in the survey.
they said that hard core pore is available on any computer also on their mobiles. That most of the girls 13, 14, 15 year old were constantly pestered by boys of the same age, and some older lads, for explicit nude pictures, and that they had received explicit images from the boys. I wasn't so much shocked but rather saddened that they see these images, some very hard core, before knowing anything about the caring side of real relationships, and that love is rarely mentioned. Some of the young girls said that they didn't send explicit images, but many others had and those were posted on web sites and around the schools.
they said that hard core pore is available on any computer also on their mobiles. That most of the girls 13, 14, 15 year old were constantly pestered by boys of the same age, and some older lads, for explicit nude pictures, and that they had received explicit images from the boys. I wasn't so much shocked but rather saddened that they see these images, some very hard core, before knowing anything about the caring side of real relationships, and that love is rarely mentioned. Some of the young girls said that they didn't send explicit images, but many others had and those were posted on web sites and around the schools.
"...do you believe, left to our own devices, the UK would decide it's ok for people to have their online activity monitored without their consent? "
I don't know, Zeuhl. But I passionately believe is that it is a question that the UK's elected representatives should decide. It is not a matter that should be determined by an unelected body consisting of people from nations which, shall we say, have a less than reasonable attitude to their citizens' rights.
"Well, it's actually the EU telling the UK Parliament that IT cannot automatically interfere with people's privacy."
Ditto, Ichkeria.
There is a balance to be struck here between the right to privacy and the right of the State to interfere with that privacy for a stated purpose. The right to privacy is not absolute and what suits the people of one nation may not suit those of another. It is not a matter which should be determined on a Europe-wide basis. It all depends who you would like to control your behaviour. I find it extremely amusing that those who bang on about "Human Rights" (and that is what this would become an issue of) are quite happy to accede to an unelected body over which they have no control.
I don't know, Zeuhl. But I passionately believe is that it is a question that the UK's elected representatives should decide. It is not a matter that should be determined by an unelected body consisting of people from nations which, shall we say, have a less than reasonable attitude to their citizens' rights.
"Well, it's actually the EU telling the UK Parliament that IT cannot automatically interfere with people's privacy."
Ditto, Ichkeria.
There is a balance to be struck here between the right to privacy and the right of the State to interfere with that privacy for a stated purpose. The right to privacy is not absolute and what suits the people of one nation may not suit those of another. It is not a matter which should be determined on a Europe-wide basis. It all depends who you would like to control your behaviour. I find it extremely amusing that those who bang on about "Human Rights" (and that is what this would become an issue of) are quite happy to accede to an unelected body over which they have no control.
Sadly some parents aren't pc savvy and buy a pc for their children and have no idea how to switch it on or what to do with it.
It sickens me that children have very easy access to extreme porn. This is not the same porn that kids used to look behind the bike sheds at in top shelf mags.
I don't know what the answer is. Parents can take every step to make sure it is not available on the home pc, but that doesn't stop kids seeing it on their friends' pcs, tablets and smartphones.
Regarding the unemployed, does the government have to know that you have an online computer?
It sickens me that children have very easy access to extreme porn. This is not the same porn that kids used to look behind the bike sheds at in top shelf mags.
I don't know what the answer is. Parents can take every step to make sure it is not available on the home pc, but that doesn't stop kids seeing it on their friends' pcs, tablets and smartphones.
Regarding the unemployed, does the government have to know that you have an online computer?
1 to 18 of 18
Latest Posts
Film, Media & TV1 min ago
Trump's Cabinet Picks. What Do We Think?
News7 mins ago
ChatterBank20 mins ago
News28 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.