Talk:Encryption ban proposal in the United Kingdom

Election promises
Perhaps the promises in the conservative manifesto should be added.

One source: https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/theresa-may-internet-conservatives-government-a7744176.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.180.191.49 (talk) 18:22, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Untitled
This is not a very good article

This is the actual speech. He doesn't mention anything about snapchat, WhatsAp or iMessage. This is just speculation and possibly even strawmanning by his critics. And I could rewrite it from a more neutral POV, but this is a really an article on a fairly trivial news item about a general proposal from a British Prime Minister. Does it even merit an article? Luckykaa (talk) 12:38, 18 January 2015 (UTC)


 * 15 notable sources state that it is a notable article. It's title "encryption ban" because that's the term used in all the major newspapers: BBC and guardian.


 * Please note that a you tube video is not notable and can't be used as a source.


 * Regards.NetworkOP (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Why, exactly, is a YouTube video not consider a good source? Granted YouTube itself may have its issues, but a primary source video of a speech from YouTube should be considered reliable unless it has been edited in some way to skew the information. I'm beginning to think that wikipedia has started a vendetta against primary sources for some reason. – Darius von Whaleyland,  Great Khan   of the Barbarian Horde  03:36, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Move proposal
I propose that the article should be moved to "United Kingdom encryption ban proposal" or "Encryption ban proposal in the United Kingdom" since the name should be written in full. See similar articles at: Internet censorship in the United Kingdom. w.carter -Talk  23:01, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Just One Thing
Are British politicians braindead? I mean, more than the typical politician? If terrorists don't shy away from using automatic weapons to carve new holes into people, though there is ample and well-established legislation against that, why would they care about laws prohibiting encryption? The point of end-to-end encryption is precisely that: You don't depend on anyone to make it work. Banning WhatsApp & such will only make terrorists turn to GnuPG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.133.49 (talk) 04:47, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

C class importance?
Just wondering?--NetworkOP (talk) 21:10, 21 November 2016 (UTC)