The laws are already there, they need someone to enforce them not make new ones.
And as a matter of interest, please quote any posts on here that offered violence, I seem to have missed them.
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
And as a matter of interest, please quote any posts on here that offered violence, I seem to have missed them.
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
It was removed and you know full well when because you commented about it. ( What goes on between individuals is their business, or words to that effect)
And yes I agree with your last post. There are laws to cover most infringements but sites chose not to pursue prosecution. But, to be fair the police are starting to take internet threats etc much more seriously and there have been arrests made.
Actually the police are much more enlightened on this point than general public assume.
Fact is nobody is actually anonymous, everybody is findable with various degrees of investigation. The level of anonymity on this site is only superficial. Some chose to surrender that superficial anonymity in their comments and descriptions. I think that is very naive and dangerous. Hence my Father Christmas etc.
A friend of mine's daughter was victim in revenge porn and later in an internet threat from same person ,he was traced,found arrested and charged. Not sure about outcome. This is rare though.
Always seems odd that folk will say things on here they would not dream of doing in a phone call but suspect as time moves on that will change.
Last edited:
Well done, that was one of your better posts, and not full of outrage as they usually are.
Although I don't doubt that the incident you remarked on did occur, I honestly don't recall it, but then as you have often pointed out I can be wrong too, still it's nice to think that people do react if you object to their wayward comments, even if the criticism comes from me!
Propaganda indeed noted in the Guardian
"
Conservative HQ has launched a wave of digital attack adverts targeting Jeremy Corbyn into voters’ Facebook feeds, a snapshot of the opening stages of the online election campaign reveals.
Labour’s response meanwhile largely avoids mention of its party leader, according to a sample of more than 77 adverts sent out by party HQs to over 2,000 Facebook users that have been collected by a new initiative called Who Targets Me.
The two main parties are expected to spend well over £1m between them during the 2017 general election by exploiting Facebook’s ability to target specific voter groups with tailored messaging.
The rise of Facebook, which now has some 32m accounts in the UK, has empowered campaigners to experiment with video, beyond the strict limits of the traditional televised party election broadcasts. The ability to splice together TV footage and post it to Facebook streams within hours of an event is bringing to Britain elements of the “attack ad” culture previously more prevalent in the US.
In contrast with billboards or TV broadcasts, such campaigning has hitherto been hard to track because of its semi-private nature. Who Targets Me is asking voters to sign up and become part of a nationwide project to map the phenomenon. So far over 4,000 volunteers have signed up across nearly 600 constituencies.
The Conservatives appear convinced of Corbyn’s value in their own Facebook ads and attack him directly in 10 out of 10 of the ads sent from Conservative Central Office. Nine out of 10 contrast him unfavourably with May, who is typically rendered in colour while Corbyn is in monochrome."
This is much more of a menace than a few hot words between individual making idle threats.
This is insidious character assasination at it's worst
"
Conservative HQ has launched a wave of digital attack adverts targeting Jeremy Corbyn into voters’ Facebook feeds, a snapshot of the opening stages of the online election campaign reveals.
Labour’s response meanwhile largely avoids mention of its party leader, according to a sample of more than 77 adverts sent out by party HQs to over 2,000 Facebook users that have been collected by a new initiative called Who Targets Me.
The two main parties are expected to spend well over £1m between them during the 2017 general election by exploiting Facebook’s ability to target specific voter groups with tailored messaging.
The rise of Facebook, which now has some 32m accounts in the UK, has empowered campaigners to experiment with video, beyond the strict limits of the traditional televised party election broadcasts. The ability to splice together TV footage and post it to Facebook streams within hours of an event is bringing to Britain elements of the “attack ad” culture previously more prevalent in the US.
In contrast with billboards or TV broadcasts, such campaigning has hitherto been hard to track because of its semi-private nature. Who Targets Me is asking voters to sign up and become part of a nationwide project to map the phenomenon. So far over 4,000 volunteers have signed up across nearly 600 constituencies.
The Conservatives appear convinced of Corbyn’s value in their own Facebook ads and attack him directly in 10 out of 10 of the ads sent from Conservative Central Office. Nine out of 10 contrast him unfavourably with May, who is typically rendered in colour while Corbyn is in monochrome."
This is much more of a menace than a few hot words between individual making idle threats.
This is insidious character assasination at it's worst
It wasn't kiwi who is responsible for the sticks and stones comment or the comment that exploitative behaviours existed prior to the world wide web... I take responsibility for these.
Kids and adults have been bullied and physically beaten since the time of Cain and Abel, it's not a new phenomenon. It's not a internet invention . While so called cyber bullying is unpleasant and with unpredictable results, and vulnerable people have been driven to sucide, it has always been so. I am not going to be sidetracked into a discussion on suicide, but unreasonable expectations, feelings of inadequacy, plain depression and substance abuse are generally listed as factors.
If there is a prevelence for more unsocial behaviour on line , than in face to face activity, it is because of an erroneous belief in anonymity. On line activity can always be traced, just takes time and effort.
My point was that if I wish to protect my data, it is my responsibility and not to be foisted onto any third party.
If that's the case sincere apologies to kiwi.
Whatever behaviour is prevalent pre internet is irrelevant. Fact is many people abuse internet for there own gain or gratification with in many instances little redress. That is wrong. In an ideal world I would agree with you Danidl but we do not live in one, consequently we see a great portion of internet used for negative aspects and a force of evil rather than good. Accepted its impossible to prevent human nature doing such things but its also human nature to attempt to lessen such behaviour. Any legislation enforcing of, can only be of benefit, even if it limits our own use of the media.
As OG has pointed out legislation //lawsetc are already in place to protect us, its really only a matter of enforcing those laws.
Defending criminal behaviour in any forms in the name of freedom is as age old as my argument and far more dangerous.
The introduction and enforcement of most laws always brings forth the things such as imposition, dangerous, loss of freedoms etc etc. Then we grow up and accept reality. Human nature needs boundaries.
Last edited:
... We are not far apart on this topic, I would like for a number of high profile cases to be identified by the police services using their current powers under blackmail, threatening behaviour, demanding with menaces and then spending the resources necessary to break through the apparent anonymity of IP addresses and prosecute. If it were known that the users are not actually anonymous, it would do wonders.
What I do not want to see is more legislation.
Back to Brexit...
A lead item on the Irish news today was that whereas Irish exports to the UK in 2015 had grown in value by 12% from the previous year, that in 2016, they had grown by only 2%. This was not a result of a reduction in the volume of product exported, which had actually increased, but in the payments received
This was attributed solely to Brexit related currency fluctuation in the latter half of the year.
The assumption being that Irish suppliers had negotiated prices in sterling, as as the value of sterling dropped, there was this reduction. Conclusions from this are obvious, Irish producers will seek more lucrative markets for their product or will negotiate new orders with this exchange rate factored in.
A lead item on the Irish news today was that whereas Irish exports to the UK in 2015 had grown in value by 12% from the previous year, that in 2016, they had grown by only 2%. This was not a result of a reduction in the volume of product exported, which had actually increased, but in the payments received
This was attributed solely to Brexit related currency fluctuation in the latter half of the year.
The assumption being that Irish suppliers had negotiated prices in sterling, as as the value of sterling dropped, there was this reduction. Conclusions from this are obvious, Irish producers will seek more lucrative markets for their product or will negotiate new orders with this exchange rate factored in.
Microsoft has just released an emergency security patch update for all its unsupported version of Windows, including Windows XP, Vista, Windows 8, Server 2003 and 2008 Editions.
"The exploit code used by WannaCrypt was designed to work only against unpatched Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 (or earlier OS) systems, so Windows 10 PCs are not affected by this attack," Microsoft says.
He (Steve Wilson) just needs judges with a bit of (cyber) education. My point is there is no need for new laws, the existing ones are plenty enough.
BUT... that requires cooperation between nations. We have that within the EU, you don't want to be part of it... What can I say?
Interpol will continue to exist but brexit will create distrust in UK police forces seen from this side of the channel. Sorry but that is more or less a fact despite the respect many police forces over here hold for Scotland Yard. (was going to include despite recent scandals... but looks like I just did, oops...)
As for your question on restriction, the EU and the ECJ have been talking to all the players including Google and facecrap about hate speech and other things. The recent cyber scandal is because cheapskates or penny pinchers are using crappy operating systems that were expired years ago. Apparently even the UK nuclear launch system runs windoze XP... WTF are your people thinking?
There aren't two worlds. Sorry if that isn't in your current world view but the law is the law wherever crime is committed we just need a few clued in judges or even (is that possible) politicians.
My youngest son was guilty of facecrap bullying. The parent of the child concerned called us to inform us of what was going on so we went over and talked. Result: son banned from facecrap account and from internet access for a month, then on "parole" (internet access in presence of a parent) for the next month. There aren't bad kids but there are bad parents, that was very easy for us to do and enforce as soon as we were informed by a (very) distressed parent.
Without going into "Microshit is evil" etc they do tend to put profit before security. Their first TCP/IP stack was such cr@p so they bought the one from BSD and apparently don't have a clue how it works since the 1990 somethings... What do you want, profit or security?
Frankly I am surprised that no one has had the good sense to bring a case against the conservative party for cyber bullying Corbyn.
Surely there is enough evidence for a successful prosecution?
Their campaign goes well beyond fair comment.
Surely there is enough evidence for a successful prosecution?
Their campaign goes well beyond fair comment.
Remember the claims from the various liars, particularly Cameron, Hunt and May in recent times, about the NHS being in safe hands?
Are you stupid enough to believe anything these professional liars tell you on other issues?
Tom
Are you stupid enough to believe anything these professional liars tell you on other issues?
Tom
A decent living wage.....a better minimum wage? These tory lies in the run-up to a general election are becoming increasingly gross each day.
This idiot woman posing as a Prime Minister has lied so often and continues to do so, yet unbelievably expects the nation to trust her as a safe pair of hands to steer the UK out of the EU.
As for human rights, workers' rights and minimum levels of pay, forget the rhetoric - this is how she voted when she had the chance:
Tom
This idiot woman posing as a Prime Minister has lied so often and continues to do so, yet unbelievably expects the nation to trust her as a safe pair of hands to steer the UK out of the EU.
As for human rights, workers' rights and minimum levels of pay, forget the rhetoric - this is how she voted when she had the chance:
Tom
possibly a civil prosecution but I don't think the Labour party's coffers are big enough for legal costs.