jim boosted

NHS Must Explain Role Of Surveillance Company #palantir

@jim said:

“Everybody’s goal must be to build trust the national response to COVID-19.

“Palantir have a poor reputation, as engaging in activities which threaten personal privacy and may lead to other human rights abuses.

“The NHS therefore needs to be extremely cautious and transparent.

“The last thing that we need as a nation at this time is for ill-thought out arrangements to generate a privacy backlash.”


Do something practical to help your neighbours, who may have difficulties with their Internet access:

Make an open, secure guest network available to your neighbours from your router. Name it:


— so your neighbours know what it’s all about @eff

jim boosted

In the Coronavirus crisis, privacy will be compromised—but our right to know must not be.

The UK Government urgently needs to open up on its plans to maintain public confidence.

openrightsgroup.org/blog/2020/ #coronacrisis

As far as we know, there has been *nothing* from No 10 on data, what new measures are needed.*

Worse still, they are refusing to comment on the story about mobile telcos.

Yet data is central to tackling COVID-19.

There is a gaping hole in government announcements, but work is clearly going on.

* except on surveillance commissioners

Show thread

The Covid-19 response travel and movement is going to be monitored through your mobile data: but is the government being open and transparent?

Government *must* get this right, explain what it is doing or it risks public trust and co-operation.

This story is leaking out via journalists and news stories.

The government must be proactive and explain what it does with data.

This is not optional; or the government will add to the crisis and make it harder to manage.



But very few of the police and regulators that suspend domains have a public policy, regarding suspensions. As far as we know, there is no oversight mechanism.

Show thread

More: The Home Office needs to get the police, such as CTIRU at
the Met Police fully transparent and accountable, because today they are *not*.

The UK government needs to uphold the same standards as it demands.

We collect lots of evidence about
Home Office / UK Police non-transparency. For instance, they suspend .UK domains via Nominet in bulk. Statistics, we do have:


Show thread

There is an objection that academics take too long and are behind the game. Maybe — but academic research has been critical to
@openrightsgroup's understanding of many issues and frankly is often *ahead* of the policy curve.

There's also a tendency to manipulate evidence from groups that have special interests (especially but exclusively commercial ones). This often has to be exposed and refuted through academic, robust evidence.

Show thread

Out of meeting with digital minister
Caroline Dinenage and tech cos on and transparency.

A few thoughts on this: first, transparency is the easy bit, we all agree we need evidence.

However, making transparency generate comparability is really hard, or in practice impossible. Platforms are different, practices are different, users are different.

What we really need is *evidence*: neutrally generated, independent academic evidence.

This extends to platform systems and algorithms.

jim boosted

"We have no reason to trust a Donald Trump government with information about UK citizens. The possibilities for abuse are enormous, from US immigration programmes through to attempts to politically and racially profile people for alleged extremist links.

Show thread
jim boosted

NEWS: Google Move endangers UK privacy

Moving UK users’ data to the USA makes bulk surveillance easier.

Jim Killock said:

“Moving people's personal information to the USA makes it easier for mass surveillance programmes to access it. There is nearly no privacy protection for non-US citizens.


jim boosted

Today is Data Protection Day

As the United Kingdom prepares to exit from the European Union, our privacy standards are at a crossroads.

The signs from Government are unclear: as the future trade agreement is likely to be loose, it would be open to Government to dilute data protection, to make it harder to enforce, or to lower fines.

It is more important than ever for the United Kingdom to commit to respecting the right to privacy.


#dataprotection #dataprotectionday

jim boosted


"the United Kingdom will not be required to implement the Directive, and the Government has no plans to do so. Any future changes to the UK copyright framework will be considered as part of the usual domestic policy process."

In other news, the Directive's is in a quagmire in France and Germany, and the Commission has to create guidance as to how to do filters.

So maybe it's not so surprising that a deregulatory government would steer clear of regulation that's clearly going wrong.

Show thread

The UK's controversial porn block is making a comeback—says

Vendors pushing to get to market, whether the legislation is safe, or not.

“The problem is that, unless there is government legislation, or other publicly enforceable commitments to make things safe, you only have the word of a private company,”


"Age Verification demands could become a barrier to adults reaching legal content, including news, opinion and social media. This would severely impact free expression.

"The public and Parliament deserve a thorough discussion of the implications"


Show more

To support this server and the OMN project https://opencollective.com/open-media-network