Beauty is everywhere
even behind bars.
Go have a look and figure for yourself:
http://tinyurl.com/d4qmrf (This links to a BBC article. I apologise for using tinyurl but I'm just being on the safe side of.. things)
This is almost proof that BBC is generally and largely a government news organisation. If you read it and don't see what the big deal is then you need to read it again, this time between the lines.
They're 'subtly' trying to break to us that they will now monitor all electronic activity and backing it up by trying to create a contrast from the previous attempts at internet law enforcement where they aimed to monitor and to create one big government centralised information database. Ever considered what would happen with all that information in the wrong hands? That is, if the government is the right hands in the first place. Freedom of speech and expression now comes in the form of monitored and controlled activity.
"Ms Smith said that while the new system could record a visit to a social network, it would not record personal and private information such as photos or messages posted to a page.
"What we are talking about is who is at one end [of a communication] and who is at the other - and how they are communicating," she said."
Read that again. "[...]and how they are communicating." I'm sitting here puzzled now. So do they or don't they monitor the content of the activity? All they will monitor is then just what application, where, who, and what we, so called, 'communicate'? Sounds like "private information" to me.
I also read the word "voluntary" somewhere in the article but I don't see much 'voluntary' action when it's the software providers and ISPs who have the choice and not the customers.
This is step one. Will we allow it? Think about what step two might look like if step one is successful.
Did someone say...