

Privacy International files legal challenge against UK government - justincormack
https://www.privacyinternational.org/press-releases/privacy-international-files-legal-challenge-against-uk-government-over-mass

======
peterkelly
One question that comes to my mind in all of this is the professional ethics
of the engineering staff involved with building & maintaining these systems.

One of the core principles of ethics in the field of medicine is "first do no
harm". The closest thing we have in IT is the ACM code of ethics
([http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-ethics](http://www.acm.org/about/code-of-
ethics)), but that gives conflicting guidance in some areas (e.g. "1.7 Respect
the privacy of others" and "1.8 Honor confidentiality").

I understand that there are many good, well-intentioned people working for the
NSA and similar organisations doing what they at least perceive to be
something in service of their country. I also understand that many people just
view their job as a source of income, and the moral or otherwise nature of
their employer's business is something they consider to be outside of their
concern.

I personally have refused to get involved with the local defense industry in
my hometown of Adelaide (which is perhaps the largest employer of software
engineers in my state) because I didn't want to find myself working on
projects I was personally uncomfortable with.

Should the people involved with building and maintaining these systems (to the
extent that they are aware of how the systems are used and the
moral/ethical/legal violations involved) be considered responsible in part?
There's no rule I'm aware of that says you can't just refuse to take part in a
project if you're not comfortable with it.

EDIT: One other point I forgot to mention before is that these mass
surveillance systems only exist because there are people willing to build
them. If everyone said no, we're not going to do that no matter how much you
pay us, governments would not have these tools.

~~~
capulcu
Reminds me of a security hacker's refusal to work on a project intercepting
Whatsapp messages of Saudi Arabian telco customers.
[http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/saudi-
surveillance/](http://www.thoughtcrime.org/blog/saudi-surveillance/)

This is something I think about a lot, too. But recently, I am thinking that
ethics can't survive in a non-ethical world - especially in one that doesn't
respect ethics.

It's very prevalent, too, not just in engineering. To give a different
example: does Adriana Lima stop and think about what Victoria's Secret does to
body image issues for girls? That the mass-media promotion of a model's figure
gives a too high standard for beauty? No. She takes the money and models. Not
only that - but we love her for it. She is insanely popular.

Now in such a world - if given the chance to model, wouldn't you? Even if you
are morally against promoting 38000$ clothing items in a world where there are
still starving children, even though you think it's absurd that all magazines
have skinny female figures on their covers -- if given a chance to make a lot
of money by modeling, wouldn't you take it?

By denying yourself the opportunity, you are 1) extremely unlikely to change
the system, because you're not so unique that without you things wouldn't work
and 2) not even getting appreciated for the ethical choice you made.

~~~
mahyarm
There are plenty of people with Victoria Secret levels of body fat percentage
walking around in Asia. They are the norm by far, probably over %80 of the
under-35 population there are that skinny or even skinnier, and it's not
because they are starving. It's not Adriana Lima's fault that we live in a
food culture and industry that pushes toward obesity. You don't have to be
anorexic or bulimic to be that skinny, but you'll have to be constantly
telling no to almost everyone to trying to invite you to eat more and more
crap.

A coworker in a previous job was asked by her Korean coworkers at LG to take
pictures of how fat people got in new jersey because they, never, ever saw
people get that fat in Korea.

~~~
contingencies
Let's be honest here, Korean food's not that exciting - it can be good, sure,
but there's not a lot of variety. Plus, if you eat too much of their chilli
and vinegar dominated _kimchi_ , you wind up with stomach cancer. ("It is the
leading cancer type in Korea, with 20.8% of malignant neoplasms.") That
probably contributes to less fat people. Also, they're more image-centric than
Hollywood! (I used to work above a Korean plastic surgery in Hollywood, it was
a veritable production line)

~~~
mahyarm
I think the stomach cancer comes from the sodium actually, the Japanese have a
similar problem. But you have to look at these causes of death on an even
basis too. Cancer is a higher cause of death in Korea than heart disease,
that's fairly impressive!

~~~
contingencies
IIRC most of Asia / developing countries without inactive lifestyles,
overzealous meat consumption and fatty/sugary modern pretend-foods don't have
issues with heart disease.

------
jsmcgd
"While Privacy International intended to file the Prism claim in the
Administrative Court, which would have made the proceedings public, Government
lawyers, upon receiving notice of our intention, vociferously notified us that
we could not bring such a claim in the Administrative Court. Rather, the claim
has been forced to be filed with the IPT, a secret tribunal that does not make
its proceeding public or have to justify reasons for its decisions."

So what's the point then? It would be very easy to lean on a few tribunal
members, and with no pressure in the opposite direction, which way we do
reasonably expect them to act? They will side with intelligence services and
we won't know why. Very unsatisfactory.

~~~
weland
> or have to justify reasons for its decisions.

Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that?

This is dystopian beyond words. Even in the fifties, the most outrageous,
crime-filed years of communism, the People's Tribunals still _justified their
decisions_. It was a facade -- everyone knew it was bollocks -- but all
decisions were motivated.

I get private hearings (e.g. for security reasons, both the state's and the
personal security of those who participate in them); they are used in many
countries. But not having to publish a motivation for a decision, that's...
beyond words.

~~~
Joeboy
> Whoa. What kind of a tribunal is that?

"in the period 2000 to 2009, five out of at least 956 complaints made have
been upheld", says
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investigatory_Powers_Tribunal#Cases)

A bunch of women who were conned into having relationships with, and in some
cases having the children of, undercover police officers are currently
fighting a case behind closed doors in the IPT, which presumably will not find
in their favour. I imagine the IPT's purpose is to present an additional
obstacle before they can go to the European Court of Human Rights. It's fucked
up.

------
chmars
The Swiss Digital Society (Digitale Gesellschaft in German) – the Swiss Chaos
Computer Club (CCC) is among the members – has also filed a legal complaint
because of Prism, Tempora etc.:

[http://www.digitale-
gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-...](http://www.digitale-
gesellschaft.ch/2013/07/07/strafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-nachrichtendienst-
bezuglich-prismtempora/) (German)

[http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&pre...](http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitale-
gesellschaft.ch%2F2013%2F07%2F07%2Fstrafanzeige-wegen-verbotenem-
nachrichtendienst-bezuglich-prismtempora%2F) (Google translation)

------
UVB-76
I'm glad to see this happening. The programmes are unquestionably a breach of
the ECHR; human rights violations on an unprecedented scale.

Alas, if the PRISM/Tempora/etc. scandal has taught us one thing, it's that
governments consider themselves above the law.

Even in the exceptionally unlikely event that these complaints were upheld,
and the government were held to account for their actions, the public have no
way of verifying the programmes are dismantled, and not reassembled in a
different guise.

It's over. There is no trust in government anymore.

------
nodata
Good on those lawyers. Go them!

(Wow. What a turnaround.)

------
bobwaycott
That this case must be tried in a secret court which is not obligated to
promulgate its decisisons ought to indicate what result and information we
will see.

