***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 25 *****
==============================================================
Ongoing debate.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 5 Oct 20 at 12:49
|
Copeland Council (Cumbria) have released a statement on Social media that ahead of of the release of the Gov's new test and trace app, all Hospitality and leisure businesses must download and display a QR Code from the www.Gov website. This must be displayed at the business entry points and must be scanned by all incoming customers as a means of "checking-in". Any person that does not comply must be refused entry and service - or the business can be fined!
How long before every business will req one? Shops, hairdressers garages etc etc, - - no comply, you die!
Big Brother's Police state is happening!
More details and code download here: ow.ly/Sy9L50BuuFI
|
|
I have no objection to it whatsoever but I hope it proves worthwhile.
|
Presumably this is so that if a customer subsequently has Covid symptoms or tests positive names can be passed to Track and Trace.
We're in the process of implementing something similar at work with QR codes for the for people who visit the office once it's been fitted our for Covid safe interviewing. However, based on the non QR version we're using pro-tem, there is an opt out for referrals to Test and Trace.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 11:16
|
>> How long before every business will req one? Shops, hairdressers garages etc etc, - -
>> no comply, you die!
>>
Why would you die if you don't download an app?
|
Or indeed have a smart phone. Am away with family now, four of us. Two have a smartphone, one a dumbphone, one no phone at all.
Cant be that unusual.
|
>> Or indeed have a smart phone. Am away with family now, four of us. Two
>> have a smartphone, one a dumbphone, one no phone at all.
>>
>> Cant be that unusual.
It is. but in the glimpses of your unusual world we get, that's not unusual.
|
>> It is. but in the glimpses of your unusual world we get, that's not unusual.
>>
Hmm. Well, quick Google for some stats, and it seems as if about 6 to 10 million people in the UK don't have a smartphone in 2020, so that's a lot of inaccessible lattes.
|
>> Hmm. Well, quick Google for some stats, and it seems as if about 6 to
>> 10 million people in the UK don't have a smartphone in 2020, so that's a
>> lot of inaccessible lattes.
About 10% of them are in prison or care homes, so the only lattes they get is of the baldric variety.
|
>>Why would you die
Metaphorically speaking! - If every business in the country has to have one, you will have to sign in everywhere everytime you go anywhere, multiple times a day! - if you don't "sign in" you get no service. It is forcing you to comply, meaning the Gov and other "bodies" can track you virtually every second of the day, Every place you visit has all your private details and they all know where you live, who you are, your tel no - you have no privacy or anonynity any more.
It won't take long for this to fall into undesirable hands or be used for nefarious purposes! - whilst it's pertaining to be "for the NHS it's wearing a good disguise, but what happens if Covid were to be eradicated, do you think the "powers that be" will just scrap it? - not a chance, far to a powerful control tool to just bin! - they will find other uses for it!! ;-)
|
>>
>> It won't take long for this to fall into undesirable hands or be used for
>> nefarious purposes! - whilst it's pertaining to be "for the NHS it's wearing a good
>> disguise, but what happens if Covid were to be eradicated, do you think the "powers
>> that be" will just scrap it? - not a chance, far to a powerful control
>> tool to just bin! - they will find other uses for it!! ;-)
>>
I do enjoy a good conspiracy theory. Could you develop yours just a bit more, do you think?
|
>> It won't take long for this to fall into undesirable hands or be used for
>> nefarious purposes! - whilst it's pertaining to be "for the NHS it's wearing a good
>> disguise, but what happens if Covid were to be eradicated, do you think the "powers
>> that be" will just scrap it? - not a chance, far to a powerful control
>> tool to just bin! - they will find other uses for it!! ;-)
If you ever use any form of electronic payment ie your card, you are doing the same thing. All the tie you carry your phone you are tracked, every time you order anything on line, etc etc - 8< snip!!! You know why
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 13:19
|
|
which is why I don't have cards, or a moble phone! If they want to track me by my online orders they've only got my bank acct or my mates card, I pay him cash!!
|
>> which is why I don't have cards, or a moble phone! If they want to
>> track me by my online orders they've only got my bank acct or my mates
>> card, I pay him cash!!
>>
I'm surprised you are on the Internet.
|
|
Just don't go out then, no one is forced to. You sound like you might be worried about people following and spying on you, best to stay in doors.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 13:24
|
>> You sound like you might be worried about people following and spying on you
No, not really, but we've all got rights, and Privacy is one of them, A lot of folk have started kneeling for theirs, but I like to try and stand up for mine!
|
>> Big Brother's Police state is happening!
>>
>> More details and code download here: ow.ly/Sy9L50BuuFI
Never mind Corona Virus will get you soon, then you will have nothing to whinge about.
|
>> devonite said some stuff about Covid and checking in to cafes using a QR code
>>
If we leave out the various exclamation marks and if you think that the new guidance is wrong, what are you suggesting we should do instead?
|
>> what are you suggesting we should do instead?
Not sure who your referring to but.... at the moment Test and trace is an absolute farce! for every carrier (and associated non-carriers) they pick-up and isolate, many thousands (probably) are going about their business un-detected, - The Gov can put all the measures they like in place, but they will not defeat this virus, it's got the upper-hand it always has had and it always will have! and until it's done with us, we've got just get on and live with it and hope it gets bored!! ;-)
Until there is a vaccine that is guaranteed 100% effective (which if there ever is), do we ever have a chance of beating it.
Some folk may not like my view of the future, but one day some of them may un-bury their heads and realise I may ..just...have a valid point! (doubtful) but there you go! ;-)
|
" for every carrier (and associated non-carriers) they pick-up and isolate, many thousands (probably) are going about their business un-detected"
Is there a reliable source for that?
Isn't catching some better than catching none?
|
>>
Is there a reliable source for that?
How about 4000+ new cases a day? - how many are tracked and isolated in the same time period?
|
>> >>
>> Is there a reliable source for that?
>>
>> How about 4000+ new cases a day? - how many are tracked and isolated in
>> the same time period?
>>
>>
I'm not sure why you bothered, aren't you saying government should just let every one get on with their lives?
|
I don't know the answer though, do you?
[For Devonite]
Last edited by: smokie on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 14:28
|
|
For what it’s worth, my experience of France, Italy and Germany while I was away was that at the data collection level their track and trace systems rely heavily on bits of paper and pens, as ours do at the moment. So I wouldn’t see a QR code driven system as necessarily being the answer. And yet Italy, which started so badly, seems to be doing pretty well now
|
|
A few of the restaurants and bars I visit use QR codes to capture track and trace info already. But it’s far from infallible...they watch you scan it, but have no idea if your phones got a data connection, and there are plenty of places round here where data can be v patchy indeed! So unless this new system has real time feedback to the staff on the door I can’t see how they can tell if you’ve actually ‘checked in’ . But they know I’ve been there and when from contactless payment anyway...
|
Re “Copeland Council (Cumbria) have released a statement on Social media that ahead of of the release of the Gov's .....
Big Brother's Police state is happening!”
I find that intolerable. Many people can’t afford or be IT literate enough to have a smartphone (I’m thinking 86 year old mother in law).
They will effectively be banned from shops or facilities. It’s not good enough.
Last edited by: zippy on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 15:04
|
I'd be surprised if there was not a paper based alternative, the app/QR code just speeds up the process. Certainly that's how we'll implement it at work.
If what's reported about Copeland is accurate they may have jumped the gun as the legislation isn't yet laid never mind in force.
|
|
As someone said above, what do you suggest then?
|
>> As someone said above, what do you suggest then?
>>
The current solution is fine - pen and paper.
|
>> They will effectively be banned from shops or facilities. It’s not good enough.
AIUI, the generation and use of a QR code is to support the NHS COVID-19 app (and preparation for this is being "recommended" by Copeland Council).
The use of that App is not mandatory (at least yet ;-) ), it is intended as a "value add" service for all of the user, the venue, and the health authorities.
Whilst it is conceivable that a venue might choose to insist on people entering using the App, I think it is extremely unlikely (think commercial loss) that they will do, and they'll simply fall back on pen and paper (which is entirely allowed for - leaving details in some form definitely being mandatory).
Of course, if Devonite resorts to this latter and doesn't sign in as "David Icke" or some such, then he will still be trackable (albeit less easily).
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 20:25
|
Somebody in my daughter's circle of friends has tweeted re Boris on TV last night:
'Archetypal case for this meeting could have been an email'.
|
Given the delayed normal running program, I found the following comment amusing:
"Put the TV on for Bake Off at 8.00 last night. Seems it was fudge and waffle week"
|
www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2020/973/made
The Coronavirus (Retention of Fingerprints and DNA Profiles in the Interests of National Security) (No. 2) Regulations 2020
or just a bad title for the regulation?
|
It is easy to get into conspiracy theory mode and anticipate malign state control which ultimately leads to chips implants at birth. Sadly the ship has sailed on his particular worry - the technology is now well and truly embedded even if the implants are not (yet).
We can wave a piece of plastic with an embedded chip at a gizmo and pay for goods and services, get entry to places, book tickets etc etc. To replace this functionality with paper and pen today would be laughable - it is (technically) feasible but it ain't going to happen.
Other personal records are held online, usually without paper backup - health records, criminal records, banking details, passports, online activity, shopping etc etc. MI5 and sophisticated techies may be able to access and integrate all this data but at the moment it is not shared.
Adding track and trace data is a trivial addition to data already held. Working effectively it has the potential to identify contacts within minutes rather than days, increase the % of contacts traced, isolate individuals within hours rather than days or weeks.
Whether you believe the government has the ability to implement such a scheme is a valid question. That it would massively improve T&T is in my mind beyond doubt.
That some people are unable to use the technology is not a reason not to do it - we need to find a way to enable, them not deny society the benefits because a few cannot cope.
|
Working in banking, I do wonder if the State has access to open banking data without permission from the bank account holder.
I know they track ownership of "burner" phones by seeing what registered phones they travel with.
The only saving grace is that I think they are too incompetent as a whole.
|
WHat with you coming from an industry with such a fine heritage - just off the top of my head
Fred the Shred
that drug taking CEO (Chairman?) bloke from the Co-op
all of those involved with LIBOR rigging
Barclays devious support arrangements from the middle east in the banking crisis
HSBC & Std Chartered for money laundering
Lloyds - in fact most of them - most of them for mis-selling across a range of products
Deutsche for precious metals price fixing
makes me think of the old adage about people in glass houses. :-)
|
>>
>> makes me think of the old adage about people in glass houses. :-)
>>
I appreciate the smiley!
There have been some right sharks in the industry, but don't paint all hundreds of thousands with the same brush.
I have mentioned here several times of walking away from unsavoury characters and deals.
At my current employer, I even worked on a project, again I am sure mentioned here somewhere, where we found a tiny currency conversion rate error and went over hundreds of thousands of transactions to refund over payments and not claim underpayments. Not one customer noticed the error. Some errors were over 6 years old so could have been ignored but were not.
Last edited by: zippy on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 19:21
|
"don't paint all hundreds of thousands with the same brush"
You did when you said "The only saving grace is that I think they are too incompetent as a whole." which I'm not sure was all civil servants, or MPs, or spooks or the whole!!!
Another smiley though :-)
|
>>I know they track ownership of "burner" phones by seeing what registered phones they travel with.
Even CSI stopped using the term "burner phone" once they realised that nobody actually knows what one is.
How do they track these phones by association? Do you mean registered at the same cell at the same time? So that'll be to the nearest 100 metres at absolute best, then.
Or do you mean that one phone will announce all the other phones that it is close to? How's that done? NFC? Bluetooth?
I think you've been watching too much of the wrong sort of cop show.
|
|
If you have a cell phone in Southampton pinging an antenna there along with another at the same time and they end up both pinging an antenna in Newcastle later that day at the same time, it wouldn't take too much of a leap to suggest they were associated in some way.
|
As a general course of action that would be quite impractical. And even if you did find that two phones had pinged the same two towers, so what? Every passenger on the same train out of Southampton will do that. Lots. OR every car on the M27 / M3 etc. etc.
So associated in what way?
And anyway, that's not quite what you said the first time.
As I said, wrong type of cop show.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 23 Sep 20 at 19:19
|
There are apparently over 70m mobile phones in the UK - more than one for each person alive. This may be an overestimate although some have two - let's say there are around 50m.
There are 66m people in the UK, each with individual DNA.
We ridicule the government (somewhat unfairly but not completely IMHO) because they seem unable to operate an effective test, track and trace system for a few thousand positive tests a day.
Does anyone seriously believe they have the brainpower or time to systematically track and correlate mobile phones with location to identify burners. If they have access to live feeds, they may be able to track key words and phrases- eg: bomb, mein fuhrer, don't tell Vladimir, etc
DNA could be different - they only need to record it once on a database - the location doesn'y change every few minutes!
|
I think you'll find it's 70m+ active SIM cards rather than cell phones. Actually I thought it was 80m.
Roughly cell phone penetration amongst adults (16+) is 80%.
20% of the UK is under 16 so I guess that means 53m adults. 80% of that would be 42m cell phone owners.
The remainder is SIM cards in additional phones, tablets and other devices, including cars.
|
>> Does anyone seriously believe they have the brainpower or time to systematically track and correlate
>> mobile phones with location to identify burners.
Yes if they have to. If you mean surveilling all phones and co-locations continuously of course no.
|
>> As I said, wrong type of cop show.
It is is possible. Putting together all the movements of the two Russian Salisbury cathedral spire enthusiasts is an example of what can be done IF the need is considered serious enough. Nothing short of a chemical warfare attack can justify the time, effort, cost and manpower required tho.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 11:16
|
This woman talks sense. This is a proper conspiracy theory - none of your half-baked, wishy washy, namby pamby ideas.
She knows a vaccine with do stuff to your brain. I am so grateful.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anti-vaccine-protest-leader-mum-22713562
|
>> This woman talks sense. This is a proper conspiracy theory - none of your half-baked,
>> wishy washy, namby pamby ideas.
>>
>> She knows a vaccine with do stuff to your brain. I am so grateful.
>>
>> www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/anti-vaccine-protest-leader-mum-22713562
Full on fruitcake. Report says the Nursing and Midwifery Council suspended her registration in July. I wonder if she was working in health until then?
I recall from when I was working with the Court of Protection in the nineties we had a client with a set of serious delusions including being part of the Royal Family. She also had a thing about Jews and refused to speak to a colleague with a surname that sounded like, but was not, Cohen. Early on in her time with us she was still working as a midwife in a big London hospital.
|
And another thing!
Why do we only get 5 minutes after posting to make amendments?
The world won't come a stop, you know! Good job I don't get grumpy.
|
>> Why do we only get 5 minutes after posting to make amendments?
Been saying that for ages. Can understand there needs to be a limit but I think most of us only spot the mistake, or come up with a better form of words after we've read the actual post.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 13:01
|
124 students at Glasgow University have tested positive for Covid.
I wonder how that could possibly have happened?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-54268780
|
So, if we don't all install this instantly:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54270334
We can be legally murdered, yes?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54274605
Anyone installed it?
|
>We can be legally murdered, yes?
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54274605
>>
>>
Not sure why all these departments need this to apply to them,
Competition and Markets Authority, Environment Agency, Financial Conduct Authority, Food Standards Agency, Gambling Commission and Medicines and Healthcare Regulation Authority.
I wonder how many informants the HRA have that need to commit a crime?
|
>> Anyone installed it?
Yes, About half an hour ago. Mrs B needs it for the gym and got in a flap because she initially downloaded the NHS app which needs much more detail. I went to the Google PLay Store and downloaded it myself to prove it was easy.....
If you do install it it becomes evident that the fears set out yesterday about 'big brother' are, to put it mildly, misplaced. It's wholly anonymous, and marries up your locations with alerts about people who've reported symptoms/tested positive.
You disclose far more signing say a hotel register.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 10:33
|
|
"Needs it for the gym"? You mean they wont let her in without it?
|
>> "Needs it for the gym"? You mean they wont let her in without it?
I've not seen the regulations but it looks as though hospitality and entertainment venues have obligations towards track and trace.
|
>> >> "Needs it for the gym"? You mean they wont let her in without it?
>>
>> I've not seen the regulations but it looks as though hospitality and entertainment venues have
>> obligations towards track and trace.
>>
Indeed, it seems they now must provide the QR poster, but I've not seen they can't use pen and paper as before as an alternative for non app users.
Be interested if that's wrong, or more likely some venues interpret it to be app or nothing.
|
>> Indeed, it seems they now must provide the QR poster, but I've not seen they
>> can't use pen and paper as before as an alternative for non app users.
>>
>> Be interested if that's wrong, or more likely some venues interpret it to be app
>> or nothing.
>>
I referred to this somewhere above.
Since the debate originated from Copeland, here is an extract from the Council's info on this:
Information for businesses
Venues in hospitality, the tourism and leisure industry, close contact services and local authority facilities must:
- ask at least one member of every party of customers or visitors (up to six people) to provide their name and contact details
- keep a record of all staff working on their premises and shift times on a given day and their contact details
- keep these records of customers, visitors and staff for 21 days and provide data to NHS Test and Trace if requested
- display an official NHS QR code poster from September 24, so that customers and visitors can ‘check in’ using this option as an alternative to providing their contact details
|
>> visitors can ‘check in’ using this option as an alternative to providing their contact details
>>
Well that didn't take long. Little Cornish village this afternoon, tiny greengrocer, Mrs C wanted to nip in for some apples. Sign on door with QR code. Do Not Enter Unless You Have Scanned.
She went elsewhere and had to skip the apples.
|
>> She went elsewhere and had to skip the apples.
We peel and eat ours.
|
|
Oh come on. Who peels an apple?
|
>> Oh come on. Who peels an apple?
Sometimes not brilliant with stomas tho Zero had reversal I think.
|
|
Mushrooms were the real issue,
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 17:52
|
|
... and you're such a fungi :-)
Last edited by: smokie on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 18:34
|
>> You disclose far more signing say a hotel register.
little misleading, the very act of allowing it access to your phone, provides far more information than a hotel register, because few people realise how much information about you your phone is gathering.
|
>> little misleading, the very act of allowing it access to your phone, provides far
>> more information than a hotel register, because few people realise how much information about you
>> your phone is gathering.
But in the context of this app how much of that data accessible to 'Big Brother'?
|
>> >> little misleading, the very act of allowing it access to your phone, provides far
>> >> more information than a hotel register, because few people realise how much information about
>> you
>> >> your phone is gathering.
>>
>> But in the context of this app how much of that data accessible to 'Big
>> Brother'?
All of it, once you allow the phone to access it, Anyway I downloaded it because frankly I don't think Big Brother gives a farting monkey about what I am up to.
|
>> All of it, once you allow the phone to access it, Anyway I downloaded it
>> because frankly I don't think Big Brother gives a farting monkey about what I am
>> up to.
Pretty much my view too. Even if I was going for what used to be called a dirty weekend and we signed the hotel register as Mr and Mrs Smith I don't think I'd be too bothered about using the QR code to enter the restaurant.
Anyway, they'd be none the wiser if I pointed the phone at the QR code and jabbed randomly at the screen.
|
The APP
Just wait until a number of phones report their location and someone realised they can issue fines automatically based on phone locations.
"Look, the APP reported that 6+x (x>=1) phones were in the same house". Have a £200 fine. Next time it will be £400, £800 etc."
Ohh, just thought of a con.... Text some granny with "The NHS has just detected you have been in a group of more than 6. Please call 01234 567890 to pay the £100 fine."
|
>> The APP
>>
>> Just wait until a number of phones report their location and someone realised they can
>> issue fines automatically based on phone locations.
Only if your name is Zippy. The ole bill leave the rest of us alone.
|
>>Please call 01234 567890 to pay the £100 fine.
OI! I know someone in Bedford who jumped through hoops to get that number. They got peed off with 543210 and kids telling them to 'blast off'.
|
>> Anyway, they'd be none the wiser if I pointed the phone at the QR code
>> and jabbed randomly at the screen.
Yesterday was MoT and service day for the Fabia at the local Skoda franchise. Upon arrival I was given the opportunity to scan the code. Unfortunately I'm not very au fait with these things, the only previous time I used one was off my computer at work as part of setting up my phone for two part authentication of my login. Apparently to point the phone at the code and wait for it to be recognised; I thought it was like a photo and needed a button press. Failed to register but was nonetheless sent off round the one way system to drop of keys etc.
Did manage it successfully when returning to pick the car up.
Monday is service day for the Berlingo, I'll see how the Citroen garage does......
|
Popped into my VW garage while passing to ask a question about new car and was temp scanned at reception, must be a new thing as I was only in there 2 weeks ago and they didn't do it then.
Temp scans are so uninformative and shouldn't be the one and only source of decision making, I often have high temps due to my arthritis flare-ups plus as many of the female nurses at work have pointed out it could 'rule out' a big section of the female staff at a certain age!
Isn't the issue with the QR code is that you don't sign-out when you leave but are registered in that location for several hours after you have left meaning you 'could' be contacted falsely.
Interestingly at the Trust I work in we have been told not to use the T&T app while on duty and should disable it until we leave the site.
|
|
It was on google news a day or so ago that the Police have been ordered not to download the app, citing security issues!
|
>> It was on google news a day or so ago that the Police have been
>> ordered not to download the app, citing security issues!
You conveniently forgot the follow up news article that said they could and should.
|
>> You conveniently forgot the follow up news article that said they could and should.
Got a link, I remember the first story but not the second.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 20:45
|
>> Temp scans are so uninformative and shouldn't be the one and only source of decision
>> making, I often have high temps due to my arthritis flare-ups plus as many of
>> the female nurses at work have pointed out it could 'rule out' a big section
>> of the female staff at a certain age!
A similar scan is part of the process/protocols under which a limited return to the office might soon begin. The margin between 'normal' and being barred and asked to take a test is very small. Most of us will be in winter 'togs' from now on and have walked from the car park, I usually cycle the last couple of miles.
I'd not though of women of a certain age; one of my immediate colleagues is proudly and vocally menopausal....
|
"I often have high temps due to my arthritis flare-ups plus as many of the female nurses at work have pointed out it could 'rule out' a big section of the female staff at a certain age!"
The nurses who have said such things need to revisit their training.
It is a myth that the hot flushes of the menopause are associated with raised core body temperature. The mechanism of hot flushes, which are localised, short-lived hot skin temperatures, is separate from the body's regulation of its core temperature.
Last edited by: James Loveless on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 17:13
|
>> It is a myth that the hot flushes of the menopause are associated with raised
>> core body temperature. The mechanism of hot flushes, which are localised, short-lived hot skin temperatures
>> is separate from the body's regulation of its core temperature.
I cannot see how the devices pointed at the forehead measure 'core' temperature. That would surely require a thermometer at least in the ear if not where the sun don't shine. Much more likely to pick up localised , short lived hot skin temperature due to flushes or cycling two miles at a brisk pace.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 17:17
|
>> I cannot see how the devices pointed at the forehead measure 'core' temperature. That would
>> surely require a thermometer at least in the ear if not where the sun don't
>> shine. Much more likely to pick up localised , short lived hot skin temperature due
>> to flushes or cycling two miles at a brisk pace.
Thats the point, menopausal women might feel hot, with flushed skin, but they aint hot, forehead or anywhere else.
|
The whole thermometer pointing thing seems dodgy to me anyway.
Not everybody develops a temperature, anybody taking paracetamol etc. will have their fever suppressed, people seem to be infectious before symptoms develop and after they stop, and measuring temperature on the fly is surely inaccurate.
Just a placebo to make people feel better and appear responsible.
|
>The whole thermometer pointing thing seems dodgy to me anyway.
It is very, very dodgy. They are not taking your temperature, they are wiping your memory.
My sister went to get some dog food from the supermarket in Spain where she lives. They pointed that thing at her and she completely forgot the dog food and came out with 6 bottles of wine.
|
|
So *that's* what happened. I *knew* it wasn't the vodka.
|
|
Just downloaded it. Nothing to get concerned about.
|
SQ.
>> You disclose far more signing say a hotel register.
I try and avoid tin hattery wherever possible, but when I installed the app and looked at the settings it accessed Siri. And given Siri can access pretty much anything I imagine I’m sure it’s not as anonymous as all that... :)
Anyway, it’s installed but won’t work - I get a message saying I can’t run it due to a restriction in my settings, for example if it’s a company phone (which it isn’t) or another app is using the same technology and stopping it working. Perhaps the NHS Responder app? Oh well, I’ve tried ;)
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 25 Sep 20 at 12:48
|
Police forces are one of the "allowed" perpetrators - this seems to be going along the same lines as the American Police force's Guaranteed Immunity, whereby they can literally get away with murder, as seen today in the murdered nurse Breonna Taylor case.
In reply to the article link above!
Last edited by: devonite on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 13:23
|
I hate to sound dissenting as I believe someone should have been done for something based on what I've read, but a to be fair policemen was shot and injured before Breonna was shot.
I know I'm not a policemen and I often admire their patience but if I knew someone had shot at me and I had a drawn weapon and had called out warnings then I would feel somewhat justified to fire back, given all I really knew was that I was involved in a fairly dangerous raid on a known drug dealers flat. I doubt the officer really intended to kill but I don't know either way.
Maybe an unpopular view which I would likely change if my facts are wrong.
|
>> I hate to sound dissenting as I believe someone should have been done for something
>> based on what I've read, but a to be fair policemen was shot and injured
>> before Breonna was shot.
Hmmm not sure that's the whole story. Appears the police battered their way into her apartment on a warrant to search for drugs. It's certainly not clear there is any evidence the either Breonna or her boyfriend were involved in that trade.
He fired believing it was an armed break in.
The police fired 20 shots. Five hit Breonna but none hit the guy who fired.
A massive sum has been paid in compensation.
Looks like a typical situation with (a) armed citizens and (b) Cops who wouldn't get past first base training in the UK never mind carry firearms.
|
I think it was more than that, something like 30 rounds, nevertheless it went before a grand jury and they felt there was no case to answer.
Her ex was a dealer, who they suspected still used the place to store drugs.
|
>> Her ex was a dealer, who they suspected still used the place to store drugs.
Is there a source for that? Not saying it's wrong but accounts I've seen don't mention it.
One of the problems trying to analyse various US BLM cases from the UK is that there are multiple differing accounts. Some are just perspective but there's also fake news; some of the pictures around George Floyd's past for example.
|
|
It was from the BBC report I read this morning.
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 25 Sep 20 at 12:49
|
A judge had granted a warrant to search Ms Taylor's home because investigators suspected her ex-boyfriend, a convicted drug dealer, was using the address to receive packages. Ms Taylor had no criminal record.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54275346
|
>> A judge had granted a warrant to search Ms Taylor's home because investigators suspected her
>> ex-boyfriend, a convicted drug dealer, was using the address to receive packages. Ms Taylor had
>> no criminal record.
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54275346
>
Ahh right. Putting that together with other reported facts it may be that the ex was under arrest elsewhere by the time the raid took place.
|
>> Cops who wouldn't get
>> past first base training in the UK never mind carry firearms.
>>
I am not so sure.
There are some excellent cops in the UK.
Then there are others:
youtu.be/iY8TlKKV8nE?t=18 (now ex constable Savage trying to live up to his name?)
youtu.be/4w2TeTaEU1I?t=17
youtu.be/0gQ8lAepctg?t=62 (apparently the cop got £400k compensation for hurt feelings after his colleagues mocked him!!!)
youtu.be/FJIewIKW-DE?t=37
youtu.be/u6YeJBQLhi0?t=22
(But then I am just a teeny bit biased.)
Last edited by: zippy on Thu 24 Sep 20 at 15:49
|
The police had a warrant, they knew it was a dangerous situation and they didn't shoot first.
I suppose you could have a huddle with your fellow officers to decide who is going politely ask "would you mind telling me which of you shot my fellow officer, why you thought it necessary and will you be shooting any more?" before deciding your course of action.
But I don't personally think front-line policing (or drug dealing for that matter) is for the lily livered or indecisive.
Having said that, their discipline and training, both with and without firearms, does seem spectacularly lacking at times, and the couple were really unfortunate to get caught up in it.
|
een paid in compensation.
>>
>> Looks like a typical situation with (a) armed citizens and (b) Cops who wouldn't get
>> past first base training in the UK never mind carry firearms.
Its a natural consequence of a nation obsessed with firearms.
|
>> We can be legally murdered, yes?
>>
>> www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-54274605
>>
It is a crap piece of legislation. These organisations will literally be able to set people up and that may well include fantasists who have no real intention of committing a crime.
To quote the BBC "But the legislation stresses agencies must not breach the Human Rights Act, which requires the government to protect life."
The Govt. have just recently stated that they want to repeal the act - so truly no safeguards then.
Imagine a FCA official ordering someone to process an illegal transaction at a bank. Its share price could plummet overnight.
Immigration and Border Officers authorising a lorry driver to take a consignment of people through Essex to catch a ring leader - we all know how badly that could turn out.
|
found this little gem whilst random browsing:
published 11/9/20
BMJ 2020; 370 doi: doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3558 (Published 11 September 2020)
Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3558
seems like " they" (Gov) are going to try and enforce us to have a digital passport proving we've been tested or they will sanction our freedom of movement!
|
interesting! - how do you interpret the info in the two graphs shown? - considering that the daily infection rate is now higher than it ever has been? - regarding death rate.
tinyurl.com/y6g47n2e
I assume that the tests are useless! - picking up too many false positives.
Last edited by: devonite on Sun 27 Sep 20 at 11:11
|
I don't think you can make a valid comparison between infections detected in Spring and those now. Early on testing was focussed on those admitted to hospital and displaying significant symptoms. If I remember rightly there was a massive issue with people discharged to Care Homes untested; nothing like enough tests to go around.
Getting the tests to Matt Handcock's target of 100k/day involved statistical manipulation on an epic scale.
There still are not enough tests to go around but there are many, many more being done on people with only minor symptoms or wholly asymptomatic but possibly exposed.
To get any sort of comparison you need to know how many tests are administered and what proportion are positive.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 27 Sep 20 at 11:24
|
>> interesting! - how do you interpret the info in the two graphs shown? - considering
>> that the daily infection rate is now higher than it ever has been? - regarding
>> death rate.
>>
>> tinyurl.com/y6g47n2e
>>
>> I assume that the tests are useless! - picking up too many false positives.
Stop at the Coop.
The daily infection rate is not "higher than it has ever been". The daily positive test count might be.
False positive are not, apparently, a material issue.
Seriously, listen to this if you want the story on false positives - BBC "More or Less". Up to about 8:50 is about the rise in the rate of infection, inferred not from the number of positive tests but from hospiital admissions: from about 8:50 on there is an analysis of the false positive story, including Julia Hartley Brewer's mistaken assertion that 9 out of 10 positive results are false.
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000mr42
|
mobile.twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1309849958993063936
An interesting article from a professor in Edinburgh. I've seen more of this type of thing from various scientists recently. When the government say that they are following the science, there appears to be no settled science view on how best to proceed.
|
The decisions have to be taken by the elected government, based on advice as to what is happening and best estimates of what would happen in various scenarios.
I don't think it is for the medical and epidemiological experts to make the decisions.
|
>>I don't think it is for the medical and epidemiological experts to make the decisions.
Agreed.
Most especially since when one is dealing with uncertainties different experts will use different assumptions and therefore have different outlooks. Obvious really, that's what they are supposed to do.
But with different out looks and scenarios comes different recommended actions. And only hindsight will know which is correct.
It is sad that simply telling people to be careful is not sufficient. I don't know which I find more pitiful, making masks compulsory or demonstrating against them.
If you catch this disease you may die, you may get very ill, you may clog up the hospitals or you may give it to someone else who will then die, get ill or clog up hospitals. So take precautions and avoid it.
Pretend you're trying to dodge the common cold when everybody else in the pub has already got it.
S'not b***** difficult to understand.
Trying to set rules which say 6 people is ok and 7 is not, and then having people argue that either 6 or 8 would be better, FFS.
Truly pathetic behaviour by the general public, at least insofar as it is presented by the BBC, and others no doubt.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 27 Sep 20 at 16:21
|
>> The decisions have to be taken by the elected government, based on advice as to
>> what is happening and best estimates of what would happen in various scenarios.
>>
>> I don't think it is for the medical and epidemiological experts to make the decisions.
>>
I didn't suggest that they should.
|
>> I didn't suggest that they should.
No you didn't but it raised the question in my mind, and the prof. whose article you linked did propose a scenario - which is fair enough I think.
It's a tricky area because the experts will propose what they consider to be good solutions - so what does following the advice/science mean? If it always ends up with the political leaders going with the SAGE suggestions, are they really deciding? Of course SAGE aren't experts on the cost side of the argument.
|
so what does following the advice/science mean?
I think the article, and others, raise the point that there isn't a settled view on what is the best scientific suggestion.
When the government say they are following the science, it gives the impression that there is one broad concensus.
|
>> The decisions have to be taken by the elected government, based on advice as to
>> what is happening and best estimates of what would happen in various scenarios.
>>
>> I don't think it is for the medical and epidemiological experts to make the decisions.
>>
As Mrs T said, it is for advisors to advise, ministers to decide.
|
In one of Adlai Stevenson's speeches from the forties or fifties, I don't recall exactly, he says something like
..my opponent's view seems to be "quick, tell me where the mob has gone - I must follow them. For I am their leader".
Which I quite like.
|
>> ..my opponent's view seems to be "quick, tell me where the mob has gone
>> - I must follow them. For I am their leader".
I heard or read some commentary a couple of weeks ago attributing that motive to Enoch Powell, Farage and more than one of the current cabinet.
Mention of Powell reminds me of a rather good line from a recent News Quiz:
Priti Patel's memoirs to be titled The Female Enoch....
|
Also attributed to Alexandre Auguste Ledru-Rollin in the mid 1800s.
There's even doubt about that though.
|
Interesting, thanks. I'm going to track down Adlai's speech and see if he attributes it anywhere.
It's possibly the one where he starts by saying "Twenty years ago General Somebody gave here a much better speech than I am about to. I know. I wrote them both".
|
>>I heard or read some commentary a couple of weeks ago attributing that motive to Enoch Powell, Farage and more than one of the current cabinet.
Like Farage has that level of ability for clear and concise thought.
|
"seems like " they" (Gov) are going to try and enforce us to have a digital passport proving we've been tested or they will sanction our freedom of movement!"
What a good idea!
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 27 Sep 20 at 11:30
|
>>What a good idea!
complete joke! - you could be tested clear, get your passport
, be infected 30mins later and be allowed to spread it around freely!
|
|
Lets just lock all those old fogeys of 70 and over up, and the rest of us can get on with our lives.
|
|
easy enough to do!! - just lock the doors of the houses of Parliament ! ;-)
|
|
Well done. You are hereby awarded the split infinitive of the year award.
|
What split infinitive?
You mean dangling preposition?
|
|
Yep. You are right. Well and truly dangled. The award Is hereby withdrawn.
|
>complete joke! - you could be tested clear, get your passport
>, be infected 30mins later and be allowed to spread it around freely!
Slightly less chance that you got infected in the last 30 minutes compared to the last two weeks though. Any chance you just don't want it to be a valid approach?
I have to go visit a beneficiary in a nursing home this week. They will expect me to present a current test or I won't be allowed through the door.
FYI, to get a test here you have to be 'authorised'. Pretty much that means a doctor or law enforcement saying you should have one. One goes along, there's typically a 20 minute queue for a 30 second test and your test result is available online later the same day.
The test result is logged against your ID number and can be checked by the authorities and various institutions. "checked" means scanning the QR code on your ID card with their cell phone. If they catch you out and about with a positive test against your ID the penalties are eye watering.
There are many places you can't get it in unless there is a negative test against your ID Number within the last 24 hours. Nursing homes, hospitals, and the like.
That would no doubt get your tin hat vibrating should the same be adopted in the UK.
Yet another advantage of a compulsory ID system.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sun 27 Sep 20 at 16:43
|
>> found this little gem whilst random browsing:
>>
>> published 11/9/20
>>
>> BMJ 2020; 370 doi: doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3558 (Published 11 September 2020)
>> Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3558
>>
>> seems like " they" (Gov) are going to try and enforce us to have a
>> digital passport proving we've been tested or they will sanction our freedom of movement!
>>
I presume you meant this bit....
"Testing for access to certain spaces features heavily in the documents, with reference to “immunity/virus free passports,” likely to be available through an app. The plans say that testing could be used to “give people assurance that, at least for a limited time, they are unlikely to have the virus and are at low risk of transmitting it to others.”
They say, “A negative test result (or potentially a positive antibody result) may inform not just whether you could attend an in-patient appointment, but if you go to work that day, access a venue, get on a flight or visit an elderly relative.” The documents also point to a “significant expansion” of testing funded and delivered by the private sector, such as in football stadiums to allow access.""
What is your problem with that?
i had surgery last week. In order to be admitted I had to present an approved negative result taken within the previous 24 hours.
Not because it meant 100% certainty that I was negative, but that I was unlikely to have it and thus was a low risk to others".
If it could be done quickly enough then test results which are treated as current for 24 hours seem like a damned good idea to me.
In any case, it appears that there is no intention to make it compulsory, you don't have to have the test, you just won't be able to take advantage of any value that people and organisations attach to it.
Do you also believe that the entire thing is a plot so that you can be chipped under the guise of a vaccination?
|
Covid testing is a little like an MoT test - only valid at the time it is done. Two minutes, two days, or two months later it is proof only that the test was passed previously.
Controlling the virus is about reducing risk (like checking MoT history before buying a car). It is very simple - social interaction spreads the virus. Reducing interaction and the probability of an individual carrying the virus will reduce the spread.
So the only real questions are (a) whether the benefit from a test is more or less than the risk, and (b) is the proposal feasible.
Testing all who visit a care home may be proportional and feasible. Testing all who to Tescos may be feasible (testing capacity aside) but most would regard as an over-reaction.
Assuming a 24 hour validity for a test is far better than no test. With no test (simplistically) one may have contracted the virus at any time in the preceding 14 days and be infectious.
A negative test within the previous 24 hours means that you may have contracted the cirus only in the preceding day.
What this means in terms of risk reduction depends (I assume) on whether infectivity varies within the 14 day period. At a guess a 24 hour test validity would reduce the probability of infection by 13/14th - approx 93%.
|
Groups of 6 - England (South East)
Is there any rule to say that the group of 6 need to be from the same family?
84 year old MIL has had a bad fall and wants some friends to visit to cheer her up.
Was thinking of setting a chair for each of them in corners of her large garden and getting an UBER eats takeaway for them.
MIL would be mortified if she broke any rules.
|
>> Groups of 6 - England (South East)
>>
>> Is there any rule to say that the group of 6 need to be from
>> the same family?
You really don't need rules. By now you know the problem, the risks and the mitigation strategies. So do what you feel is required in the current situation.
Me? given the old dears current predicament and the infection rate, I would be going for a known restricted bubble. Rules dont come into it, doing what's best does.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 30 Sep 20 at 10:00
|
Wearing a mask could give you some immunity to Covid-19 by exposing you to a limited quantity of virus - not enough to make you ill, but enough to trigger the production of antibodies.
The authors won't say it's proof but there does seem to be a bit of evidence.
www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2026913 (New England Journal of Medicine)
|
Miss B* is a resident of Flintshire and therefore on lock down as of tomorrow. With us from today so body swerved its immediate effect and can get various things planned round here done.
Last weekend she signed up for a Peugeot e208 on PCP which she was due to pick up on Saturday. Under the lockdown she's not permitted to leave Flintshire without 'lawful excuse' and the dealer is over the border in Chester.
Collecting a new car, or more generally complying with contractual obligations, is not amongst the specific examples of lawful excuse in the rules. They are though not exhaustive.
If she were to pick it up as planned would that be argued as lawful excuse?
What does the panel think?
*As she's been Mrs H for two years now I'm not sure that's the right way to describe her but will do for now
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 30 Sep 20 at 13:19
|
Interesting conundrum, in which I would be interested.
My New pup is in the Aberystwyth hills, Ceredigion which is not in lockdown, AND I have a caravan site booked in Tenby which is Pembroke, which is not in lockdown. To get to either I have to cross lockdown areas.*
Apparently rules state I can drive across lockdown areas fro non lockdown to non lockdown, but can't stop for anything other than fuel or emergencies.
I think the welsh rules dont apply when leaving a lockdown area - non stop - to England or vice versa.
*I can drive from Pembroke to Ceredigion, as neither is in lockdown. That trip is only to chose the pup, I will have to do an overnighter the week after from suburban Surrey to Aberystwyth to pick up pup. It hasn't got this complex since Foot and Mouth.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 30 Sep 20 at 13:42
|
|
Not strictly relevant (at all!!) a mate of a mate had to leave Portugal back in March with his camper, when Spain was just about to shut up shop and you could only travel through France if you had a ferry booking. He said they HAD to use the motorways and there were police at each exit making sure you didn't turn off. They could stop at the Aires overnight but only other stops were at the services for food and fuel.
|
Re Bromp’s problem. This is the problem with rules rather than us all abiding by sensible principles. Rules aside it would be easy to do a Covid secure handover. As long as she went non-stop both ways she is not a risk to anyone.
Trouble is much of the population can’t be trusted with sensible principles.
Today, for example, my neighbour has just rung. She and her son have Covid symptoms and she has booked tests. As they can’t leave the house meantime would I mind coming in and picking up their dog for a walk? I guess this is not contrary to any rules but I declined the opportunity to interact with a dog from a potential Covid household. I may be over-cautious but, at 65, I think it’s a sensible principle to take.
By the way their daughter was employed by the track and trace system as a tracer and they still have their NHS rainbow sign in the window............
|
|
I don't see an issue with walking their dog, it wouldn't bother me. But I think people have very different perceptions of the risk during this whole thing.
Last edited by: VxFan on Thu 1 Oct 20 at 11:46
|
I don't see any problem with them walking their own dog, surely it doesn't necessitate going near anyone else, but the PDSA says this - presumably based on the rules -
Can I walk my dog if I’m self-isolating? Is it safe for someone else to walk my dog for me?
You shouldn’t leave your home while self-isolating, which means you shouldn’t take your dog for a walk. However, daily walks are really important for your dog’s physical and mental health, so if possible, ask a friend, family member or professional dog walker to take your dog out for you. They will need know in advance that you are self-isolating, so they can take the proper precautions to keep everyone safe.
They won’t be able to come into your house, they’ll need to use their own lead, and should wipe the dog over with a clean damp cloth or disposable wipe before they touch them. Keep the handover as brief as possible and make sure you both wash your hands before and after handling the dog. It’s important to maintain a minimum two metre distance at all times. Take a look at our advice on walking someone else's dog during the pandemic.
So if you did walk their dog, you need to use your own lead (the one your spouse puts on you for walkies presumably) and wipe the dog down.
|
|
There is, of course, the possibility that your name will be removed from their Christmas card list...
|
|
Does that 2m gap include the dog? ;-) eg a 6ft 6" lead!
|
|
Looks trump and his other half have tested positive.
|
|
the worse thing, the very worse thing that can happen now is if Trump turns out to have no symptoms. Imagine the statements "I TOLD YOU IT WAS FAKE"
|
>> the worse thing, the very worse thing that can happen now is if Trump turns
>> out to have no symptoms. Imagine the statements "I TOLD YOU IT WAS FAKE"
>>
If he does not have COVID, and is simply pretending, then he can play it how he wishes.
Loads of symptoms for sympathy, seriously ill to delay the election, no symptoms to justify earlier statements etc. etc.
I should think that there is a very high probability that he does not have it.
My money is on a miracle recovery.
|
Quite a staggering development. Difficult to get your head around how it will play, especially if Trump were to die or be so ill he is unable to stand for election.
Hope he’s got plenty of bleach available
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Fri 2 Oct 20 at 08:39
|
|
He's not really got age or good health on his side, seems to affect people similar people in very different ways.
|
|
Hope you got rid of your shares in chloroquine manufacturers..
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 2 Oct 20 at 08:46
|
|
Markets set to plunge. They hate uncertainty
|
>> Markets set to plunge. They hate uncertainty
So why did they rise during the Trump term?
|
Wasn't much of a plunge and recovered a lot of it.
"All three main indexes - the Dow Jones, the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq - fell between 1% and 2.2% in early trade.
"But hopes of aid for the airline industry helped lift shares at mid-day. The Dow closed down just 0.48%."
That's not an unusual amount for it to vary by.
Maybe th markets didn't care...
|
>>Maybe the markets didn't care.
It is a common misconception that members of the market buy and sell depending on what they think the market is going to do.
In fact, members of the market buy and sell depending on what they think other people think the market is going to do.
It's not so much predicting that the market will go up or down, it is predicting what other people think the market will do
Mostly they only lose money when the market doesn't move.
|
>> Looks trump and his other half have tested positive.
>>
There is a god after all.
Last edited by: James Loveless on Fri 2 Oct 20 at 08:45
|
>> >> Looks trump and his other half have tested positive.
>> >>
>> There is a god after all.
>>
Bad news for COVID; it’s caught Trump... ;)
|
>>
>> Bad news for COVID; it’s caught Trump... ;)
>>
...my sympathy is with the virus at this difficult time.....
|
His first thought will have been "how can I use this to win the election". Probably Biden's too.
Will he try to delay the election? Perhaps he thinks he'll get the sympathy vote. At least it's a distraction from tax returns.
As far as I'm concerned he gets the schadenfreude vote. He's certainly worked for it.
|
|
reminds me of a quote from I think HG Wells, - The mightiest felled by the smallest!
|
He may end up seriously ill or dead.
Or it may simply be an attempt to:
- get the sympathy vote
- avoid another debate where he performed so inadequately
- delay the election
- he may not even have Covid - avoids other damaging public appearances
- find reasons to blame the Chinese again
He is completely untrustworthy. It is difficult to accept anything he says at face value - he will clearly try anythig to cling on to power.
He has no problem with voicing a policy one day, changing the next, and denying he said anything on the third, and blaming fake news on the fourth.
he sooner he is gone from politics the safer the world will likely become.
|
>>He has no problem with voicing a policy one day, changing the next, and denying he said anything on the third, and blaming fake news on the fourth.
And he believes every word of it. Despite presumably being aware somewhere in his compartmentalised brain that he knows he has altered the truth, that we know that, that we know he knows, and he knows we know he knows.
Only in a thoroughly decadent society could he have reached the position he has. I most despise the Republican senators who could have taken him down, and didn't.
|
You can always tell when Trump is lying
It's when he opens his mouth.
Unfortunatly millions of Americans will still vote for him on November 3rd.
|
It’s perhaps comforting to think a Trump could only get to power in a decadent society but in fact he got fairly elected by the rules in one of the most democratic countries on earth. It says something I guess about those that voted for him but he was the people’s choice and it has to be said a large proportion of the electorate would vote for him again.
If we want a democracy we have to accept what it sometimes turns up.
|
>> If we want a democracy we have to accept what it sometimes turns up.
I suspect we have seen the beginning of the end of the USA, as a leading global power and as a union of states. Not in our lifetimes of course, but the roots of its demise were sewn in the last 4 years.
|
>> I suspect we have seen the beginning of the end of the USA, as a
>> leading global power and as a union of states. Not in our lifetimes of course,
>> but the roots of its demise were sewn in the last 4 years.
I think you are correct. Except the lifetimes bit, I expect to see the beginning of that demise become quite obvious within the next few years. And even sooner if Trump returns.
Of course, if someone decent gets in they could simply unpick it, but nobody will ever trust the US in quite the same way again. Not tat trust is quite the right word, believe in its longevity perhaps.
For the rest of the world, other than the US itself, I don't think that is an entirely bad thing. The US as the world's policemen and the arbiter of acceptable morality was not only become tiresome it was becoming harmful. It was also giving the resentful and bitter a far too easy target to blame for all their ills.
For example, 4 years ago all the worlds cell phone mobile operating systems were US, that is no longer the case. And the two nascent approaches are coming from the two largest cell phone manufacturers in the world, neither of whom are American. A fledgling beginning for sure, but a beginning nonetheless.
It can only be so long before Microsoft, Oracle and Amazon face what Google/Android is facing now.
Ditto chip manufacturers. Ditto so many other areas.
The US as a safe haven for a global business is no longer the view. In fact, if you want to protect your ability to trade freely Trump seems to be proving that it's the last place you should be.
Trump with a second term will be deeply annoying for us all, and very damaging for the US itself. But I'm not sure how bad it is for the world as a whole.
|
I suspect there is some truth here.
I wonder what would happen if some of the "rich" states seceded.
I imaging a West Coast state of California, Oregon and Washington and perhaps Texas round to Florida.
Perhaps even New York and New England?
I think the mistake we make is that because they speak a similar language we think they are like us. They are very different.
They are natural isolationists and bullies. It's their way or the highway.
|
>>It's perhaps comforting to think a Trump could only get to power in a decadent society but in fact he got fairly elected by the rules in one of the most democratic countries on earth
I don't think decadence and democracy are mutually exclusive. Or even related, for that matter.
>>he was the people's choice
Ah, but he wasn't, was he - 46 and a bit% to 48 and a bit% or something like that. He was elected because of where people voted for him, not because more people voted for him.
Mind you, 63 million* people is still a b***** lot.
I do think that Trump may be the only elected leader in history being attacked for behaving and acting exactly as he said he was going to.
And given that is how 63 million people wanted him to act, I don't see the Democrats doing much to address the point.
They seem to be relying on him falling out of favour rather than making any particular positive strides themselves.
*ref: 63 million. I don't remember, it was something like that.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 00:03
|
Population of the USA. 328 million, Trumps vote 63 million.
Lets face it, the USA is not a democracy, not by a very long way. The whole democratic system both federal and state and county is bought and therefore fundamentally corrupt.
|
>> Population of the USA. 328 million, Trumps vote 63 million.
>>
>> Lets face it, the USA is not a democracy, not by a very long way.
>> The whole democratic system both federal and state and county is bought and therefore fundamentally
>> corrupt.
>>
I don't think it was ever set up as a direct democracy, more an indirect one.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 12:35
|
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54396670
Trump moved to hospital due to a low grade fever.
|
From the BBC....
"White House has some explaining to do
Anthony Zurcher
BBC North America reporter
One would imagine the purpose of the White House medical team’s Saturday morning press conference was to reassure the public that the president is doing well and that the nation’s top medical experts are on top of the situation.
Instead, they created more confusion.
Sean Conley, the president’s physician, said Trump was diagnosed “72 hours ago” – which would be Wednesday morning. That’s before the president travelled to Minnesota for a campaign rally that night, before he flew to New Jersey for a fund-raiser on Thursday and more than 36 hours before the president revealed his coronavirus diagnosis to the world in a late-night tweet.
The timeline is further muddied by the revelation that the president was given an antiviral treatment sometime on Thursday – also before his announcement.
Conley tried to paint a positive picture of the president’s current medical condition, although he was evasive about whether Trump had ever been given oxygen to assist his breathing.
And then, just minutes after the press conference concluded, an official struck a very different tone, telling the gathered press “the president’s vitals over the last 24 hours were very concerning and the next 48 hours will be critical in terms of his care”.
The White House and the president’s medical team have some explaining to do. They have since said the physicians misspoke, but that is unlikely to put concerns to rest that the president may have knowingly put more people at risk by travelling when he knew he might have Covid-19.
In situations like this, trust is an invaluable commodity – and with every misstep or misdirection, it can be squandered."
Last edited by: No FM2R on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 18:19
|
>>
>> The White House and the president’s medical team have some explaining to do. They have
>> since said the physicians misspoke, but that is unlikely to put concerns to rest that
>> the president may have knowingly put more people at risk by travelling when he knew
>> he might have Covid-19.
>>
>>
Anybody who uses the term "Misspoke" to cover up for saying something that is not true ought to get six months in the can and a lifetime ban from public office.
|
"... the physicians misspoke, but that is unlikely to put concerns to rest that the president may have knowingly put more people at risk by travelling when he knew he might have Covid-19.
In situations like this, trust is an invaluable commodity – and with every misstep..."
"Misstep" is just as bad.
|
I'm surprised anyone is surprised. Thee only reliable fact of the last 4 years of Trump, is that you cant trust anything that comes out of the White House.
The hard truth is that the man needs to die. The world would be a better place with his passing,
|
"The hard truth is that the man needs to die."
Not yet - it would just compound the current confusion and uncertainty. After an election in which, hopefully, he's voted out, would be much better. He would then be history and an irrelevance.
"The world would be a better place with his passing." The world would be better if he suffered the humiliation of failing to be re-elected and everyone could draw a line. That would be far more definitive ending for everything he stands for.
Last edited by: James Loveless on Sat 3 Oct 20 at 21:57
|
Coronavirus - Volume 23 - devonite
