mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 09:48 AM |
|
|
Is this the death nail of free wifi in the uk?
Now the lawyers have something else to chase for money...no better than the mafia......or bankers.
Why it's the end for public Wi-Fi
Is there any tech the Government can't wreck?
By Gary Marshall
wi-fi-zone
Perhaps we won't be seeing these around so much?
If you haven't seen it already, Richard Gale's fake trailer for The Horribly Slow Murderer With The Extremely Inefficient Weapon is
wonderful and hilarious.
The trailer is also a pretty good illustration of what the Government's doing to our internet freedoms, so you might want to watch it before you
read the rest of this.
Done that? Good.
The Extremely Inefficient Weapon isn't a particularly good weapon, it has to be said, but over time it drives its victim crazy. The
Government's a bit like that.
Boink! Insane plans to monitor everyone's online activity. Boink! Plans to slow down alleged file sharers' connections so they struggle
with email, let alone anything useful. Boink! Forcing ISPs to spend between £360 million and £420 million per year on pointless anti-piracy
systems.
And then the Government swaps its Extremely Inefficient Weapon for a rocket launcher. WHOOOOOOOOSH! BWAAAAAAP! Bye-bye, public Wi-Fi!
We're not exaggerating. Public Wi-Fi is already under threat. This week it was reported by ZDNet that a British pub with a wireless hotspot had
been fined £8,000 for customers' illegal downloads, and while the story seems odd - details are sketchy, but it's much more likely that
the sum is an out of court settlement rather than a fine handed down by a court - the prospect of open Wi-Fi operators being sued silly by cash-happy
legal firms isn't hard to envisage.
But that's nothing compared to what the Digital Economy Bill is up to.
Under the proposed new regime, Wi-Fi will work like this. You can choose between one of two options: either you're essentially an ISP, in which
case you'll need to become a copyright cop and police the connections of anyone using your network at great expense, or you're not an ISP,
in which case you're responsible for any dodgy downloads.
Placing impossible demands on providers
As Lilian Edwards, professor of internet law at Sheffield University, puts it in The Guardian, the intention of the Bill "is to ban open Wi-Fi
so that it cannot be used as an excuse when (whenever that is) the opportunity comes to repel the unfounded allegations of infringement which generate
the warnings."
Edwards suggests that the law would place impossible demands on closed Wi-Fi providers, too: identifying alleged infringers "will be fiddly and
expensive though and the cost of Wi-Fi to [places such as] McDonalds would probably go up so much it would be uneconomic to supply. Bang goes a free
service which has proved a public boon and a remarkably popular enticement to customers in the ongoing recession."
* Mandelson pushes ahead with 'three strikes' policy
Maybe it's that the Bill is badly drafted, or maybe it's that the Government still doesn't understand the internet - which, given
its importance to our economy, is a pretty terrifying thought. Or maybe it's a global conspiracy that involves everyone from the Freemasons to
The Nolans.
Whatever the reason, what we've got here is a War on Piracy, which we're sure will be as cost-effective, as precisely targeted and as
successful as the War on Drugs and the War on Terror - and it's a war in which public Wi-Fi looks set to be an early casualty.
We should just ban the internet as its all bad.....politits dont like it.....china has more freedoms
Whats next a yearly licence for computers ......
[Edited on 17-12-09 by mangogrooveworkshop]
|
|
|
|
|
turbodisplay
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 10:00 AM |
|
|
The government wants no wi fi so it is possible to monitor communications. At the moment it is possible to use the internet anom.
Darren
|
NOTE:This user is registered as a LocostBuilders trader and may offer commercial services to other users
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 10:08 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
We should just ban the internet as its all bad.....politits dont like it.....china has more freedoms
Whats next a yearly licence for computers ......
wrong. a tax on fixed telehpone lines to pay for
braodband
|
|
|
snakebelly
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 10:13 AM |
|
|
yeah and we dont live in a police state either...
|
|
|
David Jenkins
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 10:13 AM |
|
|
There was a telling comment on Jonathan Dimbleby's program about Russia last week...
He was talking to some fairly wealthy Russians in St Petersberg - who said that they had lived in western Europe (e.g. Germany) but preferred Russia
as they had more personal freedom!
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 11:52 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by David Jenkins
There was a telling comment on Jonathan Dimbleby's program about Russia last week...
He was talking to some fairly wealthy Russians in St Petersberg - who said that they had lived in western Europe (e.g. Germany) but preferred Russia
as they had more personal freedom!
Rich people always have more personal freedom in countries where the police force and the people in it are under a lot of economic pressure (if you
see what I mean)
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 12:16 PM |
|
|
I just do not comprehend how somebody as totally useless on every coneivable level as Peter Mandelson is still in a position of importance within the
government of a supposedly free country.......but then I thought the prime minister of a democracy had to be elected as well...............
I really am beginning to dislike living in this country, which is a great shame as its a beautiful place, being spoilt by politicians.
I do wonder whether we should have a form of national service for government, where a representative cross section of society are seconded to
government on a yearly term??
PS Having visited Russia (well Siberia) I can see exactly the freedom talked about.
Yea there is corruption and dubious goings on high up in government and mafia etc, but at the level of the average man on the street they can make
what they want of their lives. I loved the place.
[Edited on 17/12/09 by NS Dev]
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
SteveWalker
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 12:23 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
I just do not comprehend how somebody as totally useless on every coneivable level as Peter Mandelson is still in a position of importance within the
government of a supposedly free country.......but then I thought the prime minister of a democracy had to be elected as well...............
Not really. If I understand it correctly, we elect MPs to parliament and then the Monarch asks someone to form a government. By convention that person
is the leader of the party with the outright majority in the Commons (or the leader of the largest part of a coalition in the event of a hung
parliament), but legally it could be anyone at all (not necessarily even an MP) and I'm pretty sure that it has been done so in the past.
|
|
|
wilkingj
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 04:34 PM |
|
|
Ah its part of the plan to be come the most closely monitored nation on earth that does not live in a Police state.
If fact.... Its the most closely monitored nation regardless of any police states anywhere in the world.
All done under the pretence of "Anti Terrorist Laws"
Free Country... My A*se
1. The point of a journey is not to arrive.
2. Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.
Best Regards
Geoff
http://www.v8viento.co.uk
|
|
|
A1
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 04:44 PM |
|
|
its going too far...might aswell move to a police state, wed have more freedom.
soon theyll be openly tapping our phones, cctv in our houses, black boxes in cars filming it all...
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 05:00 PM |
|
|
Why do so many people here get so cross about this sort of thing? I say cross, because I am sure they wouldn't use expressions like
'police state' if they were thinking rationally.
Anyone who thinks this is a police state should go and live in North Korea or Iran for a while.
There will always be a difference of opinion between those whose job it is to do what they can to protect us from nutter terrorists and other scum,
and those who see their own freedoms being eroded by measures that are taken to protect everybody.
What about people who complain about cctv monitoring of public places? Would they still be complaining if one of their young relatives were kidnapped,
and cctv images led to their rescue?
And those people who complain about 'this country', may I suggest they put forward the name of a country where they would prefer to live?
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 05:24 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
There will always be a difference of opinion between those whose job it is to do what they can to protect us from nutter terrorists and other scum,
and those who see their own freedoms being eroded by measures that are taken to protect everybody.
I think you mean "measures being taken to monitor the populace as closely as possible using the excuse of prevention of terrorism".
Terrorism is a dream device for governments, they can roll in almost anything they want in the name of terrorism, and if you try to argue the case
then you must be supporting terrorism.
Do you honestly believe that the erosion of personal liberties created by the Labour government are purely for our own protection?
|
|
|
skodaman
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 05:39 PM |
|
|
I bet you can still smoke a cigarette in a pub in North Korea and they don't have speed cameras everwhere. Not much point in speed cameras cos
water buffalo are too slow and the only people with cars are government officials.
Still the only place I've had a gun pointed at me was China and it's happened twice. Police or army both times. Hard to say which cos
they're both short with black hair.
Skodaman
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 17/12/09 at 05:48 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
I think you mean "measures being taken to monitor the populace as closely as possible using the excuse of prevention of terrorism".
If you want to know what I mean, all you have to do is read what I said, and I neither said nor meant that.
If you want people to believe that the government want to monitor us all as closely as possible, then you must put forward a viable motive for them
doing so, and I haven't heard one yet.
All I've heard so far is stuff like 'big brother is watching you', but no one seems to be able to offer a reason as the why
he is watching us. Or indeed, why any normal person would be bothered about being watched.
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 09:08 AM |
|
|
Well this is going to be a balls-up from the start, my mum's wifi thingy has no security on it (and buggered if I know how to set it up) so I
could use it outside, anonymously, and who's going to send two pensioners to jail cos someone's sat outside using Pirate Bay or
Bittorrent?
If they want to stop piracy we need to stop this "cheap is everything" culture. I don't get dodgy films cos I was sick of the crap
quality. I won't buy pound shop stuff because it breaks so easily
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 09:23 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ninehigh
Well this is going to be a balls-up from the start, my mum's wifi thingy has no security on it (and buggered if I know how to set it up) so I
could use it outside, anonymously, and who's going to send two pensioners to jail cos someone's sat outside using Pirate Bay or
Bittorrent?
If they want to stop piracy we need to stop this "cheap is everything" culture. I don't get dodgy films cos I was sick of the crap
quality. I won't buy pound shop stuff because it breaks so easily
That's a good point, of course another approach would be if the people who provide the material which is being pirated didn't ask so much
for it when it is being bought legitimately.
|
|
|
geoff shep
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 09:40 AM |
|
|
death knell
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 10:23 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by geoff shep
death knell
We all know that but were too polite to say anything.
|
|
|
coozer
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 11:06 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
Why do so many people here get so cross about this sort of thing? I say cross, because I am sure they wouldn't use expressions like
'police state' if they were thinking rationally.
Anyone who thinks this is a police state should go and live in North Korea or Iran for a while.
There will always be a difference of opinion between those whose job it is to do what they can to protect us from nutter terrorists and other scum,
and those who see their own freedoms being eroded by measures that are taken to protect everybody.
What about people who complain about cctv monitoring of public places? Would they still be complaining if one of their young relatives were kidnapped,
and cctv images led to their rescue?
And those people who complain about 'this country', may I suggest they put forward the name of a country where they would prefer to live?
Australia.
1972 V8 Jago
1980 Z750
|
|
|
mr henderson
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 11:12 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by coozer
And those people who complain about 'this country', may I suggest they put forward the name of a country where they would prefer to live?
Australia.
And the reason you are still here is...........
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 19/12/09 at 11:23 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mr henderson
quote:
Originally posted by coozer
And those people who complain about 'this country', may I suggest they put forward the name of a country where they would prefer to live?
Australia.
And the reason you are still here is...........
That they have bloody big spiders and the like over there... They don't just crawl across the carpet they wait for you round the corner with a
cricket bat!
I'd go to Canada... And I'm still here cos I can barely afford to fart!
|
|
|
