Comment on 4chan fined $26K for refusing to assess risks under UK Online Safety Act

sturmblast@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

• ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online ⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Damn fucking straight. I hope it starts an privacy movement so big they realize that all the laws passed since 2000 against terrorism were abject failures and repeal all of them.

  Canada is trying to pass major surveillance shit on par with the patriot act on steroids and effectively nullify the need for warrants, all in the name of ‘strong borders’ and anti terrorism even though it literally gives many US owned and operated companies full and complete access to digital information on Canadians, ironically weakening borders in every way.

  And for what? What is the terrorism threat? Al-Qaeda was a always a joke, and the fact that 9/11 happened was far more due to a monumental failure of all intelligence services combined and not due to a lack of resources. Terrorist schemes have been thwarted in the past without the need for extensive surveillance… and most plots are still thwarted primarily by informants and insiders speaking to authorities. The whole 'we need to be super proactive ’ has yielded shit results.

  Most of the stuff that they claim was 'prevented proactively ’ was literally entrapment. They found some mentally ill and/or lonely people who would have done nothing on their own, but ended up being goaded into stupid crap when undercover agents flirted with them, encouraged them, and even offered weapons and explosives for them to use, and if they agreed… well, that’s when they nabbed them. No terrorism would have occurred if agents didn’t do shit.

  Have you ever wondered why so many people are highly distrustful of people talking about doing violent shit? Fed posting? Its because agents have such a long ass history of doing that that you cannot tell who is and who isn’t a Fed.

  source