SleafordMod @ SleafordMod @feddit.uk Posts 26Comments 176Joined 4 mo. ago
Realistically I don't think Britain is going to rejoin the EU (or even the single market or customs union) any time soon.
I think it can happen one day. Maybe in at least 10 years' time.
The xenophobes are mostly outside of London. In London, 60% of voters wanted to remain in the EU. But in the UK overall, 52% of voters wanted to leave the EU.
But yes I think the EEA would be too politically risky at the moment. The EU Customs Union might be more realistic (Turkey is part of this) but I think the current UK government don't even want to do that. They don't want to lose the votes of people who wanted Brexit.
Maybe I should read more about encryption. I was thinking maybe a company like Apple could just keep the encryption keys stored somewhere. So if needed they could decrypt particular messages. There could be big punishments, prison time, for anybody within Apple who decrypts messages without a court warrant.
I don't know much about Merz but it's possible to have a politician who is shitty and self-serving, but who still says good things occasionally.
E.g. Boris Johnson. Purely a self-interested politician who has said many stupid things. But one of his views which I liked was his support for Ukraine.
I would probably argue that China is a little different to the UK, given that China is a one-party state.
Yeah maybe the UK government shouldn't be able to spy on Apple messages sent anywhere in the world. But maybe UK agencies like GCHQ should be able to get the messages of specific individuals who threaten the UK, with a court warrant, like how law enforcement has been able to bug the phones of criminals with a court warrant.
I dunno. Maybe I should educate myself more on encryption and how it all works.
I guess I think of it like bugging a phone. The technology for bugging phones has been around for a long time, but that doesn't mean the authorities are bugging everybody's phones all the time. Even if they can theoretically listen to everyone's conversations, that doesn't mean they are always listening. There would be too many conversations to listen to.
I guess it's not the kind of thing I normally listen to, but I came across Jobseeker on YouTube and thought it was good. That feeling of authority figures being patronising and belittling and you just want them to piss off.
Maybe people just use what's popular. Telegram is pretty popular in some countries even though I don't think they have end-to-end encryption by default.
Anyway I guess I don't know what the answer is. Personally I would probably still use iMessage and WhatsApp even if I knew the companies behind them could potentially read my messages by decrypting them. If there's a proper system in place so that messages are only read when there's a court warrant, it's probably unlikely my boring messages to friends and family would be spied on by anybody.
Maybe I need to send more interesting messages and then I would care about the privacy of them a bit more.
Fair points. Also I guess practically big companies like Apple would never allow a situation where their encryption is compromised while encryption on smaller platforms like Signal isn't. Apple etc would spend billions lobbying so such a situation never happens.
I like the deadpan style. Yeah he's had quite a few TV shows. If people keep offering you work and you find the work pretty straightforward and you get paid, why not take it, I guess.
HMD are Finnish. I think their phones are assembled in China but that's the case for many smartphones (e.g. iPhones).
However I noticed that some HMD phones use Unisoc CPUs, and Unisoc are Chinese. I don't know how much that matters. Other HMD phones use Qualcomm CPUs - Qualcomm are American.
I think Romesh is alright. I liked the travel shows he did for the BBC.
Maybe only the biggest companies should be required to be able to decrypt certain messages if a court warrant is produced. Privacy fans could use services exempt from this requirement, like Signal. But there are laypeople who just use iMessage because it's the default, and you could catch criminals sending bad stuff over iMessage.
I think there are valid concerns on both sides of the argument... but I am just imagining if you have a group of violent people planning an attack over iMessage, I want law enforcement to be able to read those messages.
I don't want end-to-end encryption entirely outlawed. But for the biggest platforms from massive corporations, maybe those corporations could keep their encryption keys stored with high security somewhere, so they can decrypt particular messages if a court warrant is issued.
People who are uneasy about that could go to a more privacy-focused platform like Signal. Some criminals would do that too, but at least something would be done to catch criminals on the popular platforms.
I'm not comparing privacy fans to paedophiles and terrorists, that's not what I mean. What I mean is that I want serious criminals to be caught.
I think properly private technology is good to protect yourself from an authoritarian government for example. You could use something like Signal for messaging (I've not used it, but apparently it's good).
But the big popular platforms like WhatsApp and iMessage, which many laypeople use just because they're popular - on those platforms I think it makes sense for law enforcement to be able to access messages, but only in certain circumstances. So maybe Apple could keep the encryption key and they could decrypt someone's messages if a court warrant is issued.
I'm not saying end-to-end encryption should be entirely outlawed. Hopefully services like Signal would still exist. Sure, some criminals might jump to those platforms, but you could still catch some at least, who use big services like iMessage.
Maybe they're smart enough to choose someone who is either British or who has a flawless British accent.
But I do bet they'll start doing spin off TV shows on Amazon Prime, like Disney has done with Star Wars. If it helps them milk the franchise for more money then surely they'd do it.
Fair enough. I guess I could possibly forgive an American actor as long as they can do an extremely good British accent. If the accent sounds at all American I will be annoyed.
I thought Pierce Brosnan was good as Bond and his accent was fine (he's Irish of course - I don't think he has British citizenship).
The outrage from certain sections of the public would be pretty huge. According to them, Bond must always be white and male.
I wasn't meaning to criticise any particular country, I just meant that goals aren't inherently a good thing.
Regarding China and the US, I think both countries have a lot to offer, and there will be decent people from each country, but I don't think I'm a fan of the current government of either country.
No I haven't, in fact I think I only know one song by them... good song though (Jobseeker). I should probably check out more of their stuff.
I just chose this username because I was trying to think of something randomly and it popped into my head.