The government is suggesting that it might ban some Apple security updates. Under the latest plans, tech companies would need to notify the British government before rolling out a security fix but might be refused permission if it blocks a vulnerability that’s being exploited by security services.

      • Z3k3@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        In this case I don’t think it would matter. Labour are pretty authorial in some areas too

          • theinspectorst@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year 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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I agree I vote snp myself.

            Just to expand a wee bit

            Lib dem who sold out their vote voters for the illusion of power.

            The greens don’t stand here (the Scottish greens are a separate party from the one in eng/wales) the etc tend not to stand here with the possible exception of ukip and fringe people that are some how more insane

            • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Independence issues notwithstanding, the SNP seem to have a pretty authoritarian streak of their own, especially under Yousef. Their attitude to free speech is quite lacking.

              • Z3k3@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                You ate absolutely correct in that regard.

                They get my vote for a couple reasons.

                They are the least bad option outside of what I used to do and vote for an independent.

                Some of their policies that have been implemented have directly benefited me and mine. Annoyingly with policies that Labour should be pushing.

                They are never going to be in government at the UK level with labour’s policy of rather having a tory government than work with them.

                They are a means to an end without being as bigoted as the lot that split off with Alex for the most part.

                I find yousef very bland but I would say if the other nutter got the job I’d ho back to independents

          • Z3k3@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year 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.

      • blackn1ght@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • Throwaway@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s a reason why 1984 took place in Britain, they have a massive cultural issue.

      • theinspectorst@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year 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’.

    • aksdb@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s like they watched V for Vendetta and thought “awesome, but let’s prevent people like that masked dude chap”.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t sound like this is regarding non-security related updates though.This seems very strictly towards blocking actual security updates.