• ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    So this law wouldn’t even accomplish what it claims to be attempting to do.

    That’s because “think of the children” was only a fig leaf over an attempt to impose massive state surveillance.

    • tal@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s because “think of the children” was only a fig leaf over an attempt to impose massive state surveillance.

      It’s always either pedophiles or terrorists when it comes to trying to promote laws against encrypted communications.

    • Blake [he/him]@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Absolutely - I know that is absolutely the case. I just wanted to explain that even if we accept that it would be worth sacrificing privacy to protect children, this bill wouldn’t even accomplish it.

      • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Indeed, they’re just relying on your average Daily Mail reader to not ponder this too much and they’ve already demonstrated that they’re hard-of-thinking by buying the Daily Mail.

        It’ll be interesting seeing the reaction when all the chat groups they are in disappear over night. They’ll not think it’s a good idea then. Although, that said, I don’t know anyone who thinks it’s a good idea now. This seems to just be being forced through by a dying government because they can.