←back to thread

UK Effort to Keep Apple Encryption Fight Secret Is Blocked

(www.msn.com)
170 points flanked-evergl | 1 comments | 08 Apr 25 07:46 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
amelius ◴[08 Apr 25 09:22 UTC] No.43619760[source]▶
I don't understand people who want to defend Apple in this case. UK is a functioning democracy, and why would you want to put a (foreign) company above that? If you want change, you know the route ...
replies(8): >>43619777 #>>43619778 #>>43619785 #>>43619790 #>>43619794 #>>43619795 #>>43619821 #>>43619952 #
rodwyersoftware ◴[08 Apr 25 09:28 UTC] No.43619790[source]▶
The UK is not a functioning democracy, at all.
replies(2): >>43619799 #>>43620516 #
ohgr ◴[08 Apr 25 09:29 UTC] No.43619799[source]▶
Well it is because the judiciary smacked the secrecy side of it down pretty hard to make sure that it was done in public. That's a pretty strong indicator of a functioning democracy.
replies(4): >>43619836 #>>43619841 #>>43619945 #>>43620563 #
AndrewDucker ◴[08 Apr 25 09:56 UTC] No.43619945[source]▶
It's run by a government elected with 34% of the vote. Before that, 43% of the vote. Before that 43%. Before that 37%.

None of that sounds like democracy to me.

replies(2): >>43620081 #>>43620229 #
dijksterhuis ◴[08 Apr 25 10:50 UTC] No.43620229[source]▶
we have a constituency based first past the post system.

we vote for a local MP to represent our constituency in the house of commons. first one past the threshold wins and represents our area in the house of commons.

each MP gets one vote. one vote in the house of commons for each constituency.

so yes. this is possible. because it’s not about total votes — it’s about representing the individual local areas and the people within those areas.

labour won a landslide of “areas”. that’s how our system works.

just because it doesn’t match what you think democracy should look like doesn’t mean it isn’t democratic. it’s just different.

plenty of criticisms exist about our system (esp house of lords). we even tried to have a referendum on first past the post about two decades ago. i voted for AV. but oh well.

replies(1): >>43620321 #
AndrewDucker ◴[08 Apr 25 11:07 UTC] No.43620321[source]▶
I know how the system works.

I don't consider FPTP to be democratic, because it disenfranches large swathes of the population and means that you can rule the country with a massive majority despite only getting 34% of the vote.

replies(1): >>43620581 #
milesrout ◴[08 Apr 25 11:48 UTC] No.43620581[source]▶
FPP does not disfranchise anyone. If you vote for someone that loses their seat or wins in a landslide your vote still counts.
replies(2): >>43620682 #>>43620768 #
HPsquared ◴[08 Apr 25 12:10 UTC] No.43620768{5}[source]▶
One's vote physically being counted is not the same as having any representation in Parliament, let alone government. It's a system of artificial consensus. Managed democracy, in other words. Not that that's necessarily a bad thing, but it's very arbitrary.
replies(1): >>43627256 #
1. milesrout ◴[08 Apr 25 22:53 UTC] No.43627256{6}[source]▶
An MP represents everyone in his constituency regardless of whether they all voted for him. That is his job. He represents the constituency. It is quite false to say that someone lacks representation in Parliament because his preferred candidate was unsuccessful. Everyone's preferred candidates obviously can't all be successful! That wouldn't be democracy.

>let alone government

The idea that everyone is entitled to have his preferred local candidate become a minister of the Crown is truly absurd.

>artificial consensus ... Managed democracy ... arbitrary

I don't know what this means.