In principle it’s dumb, but we’ve also seen big tech companies push updates that are not security related under that guise.
Comment on Apple security updates could be banned by British government
sapient_cogbag@sh.itjust.works 10 months ago
The uk has a serious surveillance state cultural problem.
And holy fuck is this dumb.
FarceMultiplier@lemmy.ca 10 months ago
AnonTwo@kbin.social 10 months ago
It doesn't sound like this is regarding non-security related updates though.This seems very strictly towards blocking actual security updates.
Blamemeta@lemm.ee 10 months ago
There’s a reason why 1984 took place in Britain, they have a massive cultural issue.
theinspectorst@kbin.social 10 months ago
It took place in Britain because it was written by a British author for British audiences. It was written at a time when totalitarianism (both fascist and socialist) was a major threat in the world outside Britain.
IngSoc wasn't meant to suggest that Britain was somehow uniquely vulnerable to totalitarianism. It was meant to be a warning to Britons of how the totalitarianism that we could see dominating continental Europe and Russia at the time could also hypothetically develop here - IngSoc was meant to be a sort of 'totalitarianism with British characteristics'.
ToyDork@lemmy.zip 10 months ago
Yeah, and Orwell fucking aced it, sad as that is. He’d be rolling in his grave to know the only prediction that hasn’t come true is that creepy vaguely nazi-esque logo from the 1984 movie they actually made IRL that year, which I don’t think he had a had in designing?
Unfortunately, dystopia comes in many, many forms and no one forsaw internet dragnets or that smartphones, unlike “telescreens”, would be too useful to not have and too universal to not use.
aksdb@feddit.de 10 months ago
It’s like they watched V for Vendetta and thought “awesome, but let’s prevent people like that masked dude”.
x4740N@lemmy.world 10 months ago
That’s what Tories in government gets you
Z3k3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
In this case I don’t think it would matter. Labour are pretty authorial in some areas too
JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 10 months ago
What about lib dems, green, etc? Those aren’t the only 2 parties
theinspectorst@kbin.social 10 months ago
Totally. We've had a few decades now of successive governments that have taken increasingly centralising attitudes towards privacy and civil liberties - essentially going back to the 1980s.
But the one bright spot in there was the 2010-15 Coalition, who abolished Labour's biometric ID scheme (people forget now, but the Brown government had passed legislation that meant that, if they'd won the 2010 election, then we would all have needed to register for these), deleted innocent people's DNA records from the police DNA database, halved the maximum length of time the police could detain people without charging them with any crime (from 28 to 14 days - after Labour has earlier tried to increase it to 90), etc. The Coalition was the one truly liberalising government of my lifetime and that's entirely a consequence of the Lib Dems' role in driving its agenda.
Z3k3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I agree I vote snp myself
x4740N@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Labour isn’t the only other party in the uk
Z3k3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
No shit it’s almost like I said that in another coment probably over an hour ago responding to someone else making the same comment.
But the reality of the situation is qe at best have a 2.5 party system with lib dem ensuring the tories get in when Labour can’t quite get an outright majority.
jabjoe@feddit.uk 10 months ago
Labour at least have at least one MP not clueless:
m.youtube.com/watch?v=-O9ux25lWFI
blackn1ght@feddit.uk 10 months ago
Yep. Unfortunately I have no doubt that Labour would also implement something like this too, they didn’t have a good track record for civil liberties when they were in power.