Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As we start another lockdown week a Marf cartoon, some site ne

124678

Comments

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited May 2020
    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
    Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
    Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
    Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
    Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
    Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
    Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
    You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?

    On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.

    I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?

    Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    kamski said:

    On testing:
    Last week Cologne university hospital put out a public appeal for people to come and get tested, you don't need a referral just come by. They said they can do 700 swabs a day but were now only doing 120.
    Another Cologne lab was doing 4000 tests a day a few weeks back, I don't know how many they are doing now, but I'm assuming the numbers of tests is generally falling.

    Obviously, there are a lot more new cases happening in the UK compared to Germany, but it might be that the UK finally has enough capacity when it no longer needs it (it would certainly have helped a few weeks ago). If there is spare capacity I would be testing everyone - residents, staff, anyone else - in care homes.

    At this point if the number of positive tests continues to fall, it's probably more important to get new kinds of blood tests working (and a contact tracing app!), than worrying too much about the numbers of PCR tests happening.

    We're reportedly going to use some of the spare capacity to conduct a randomised population test across the entire country:
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/30/randomised-coronavirus-test-of-100000-will-determine-end-date-of-uk-lockdown
    Should help determine how she it is to ease lockdown, and the scale of track and trace required to keep things under control in particular regions.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,317
    edited May 2020
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Really genuinely bemused that people are still obsessing about Brexit when you see the economic challenges we are facing in the next 12-24 months. To call any alleged effects a rounding error would be to massively overstate its significance.

    This government will be measured in how it faces those horrendous challenges. So far Rishi has done well but the road ahead is the most difficult any government has faced since WW2.

    Brexit is a state of mind. It's a state of mind that says insularity is to be preferred to cooperation, that blind certainty is to be preferred to nuance, that prejudice is to be pandered to rather than confronted.

    The government is going to add yet more disruption and chaos at the end of a terrible year because there are more votes in fomenting the worst instincts of the public rather than in bringing it together. It may result in further hardship, economic disorder and even deaths, but that's ok because Leavers have this visceral hatred of the EU, which means that even a pandemic cannot be allowed to deny them this gratifcation.

    Brexit will have a much longer lasting chronic effect on Britain than Covid-19 for as long as Leavers keep progressively self-radicalising.
    People will always find reasons for distrusting or opposing the government. I suspect that your obsession is very much a minority interest but no doubt there are more who feel that way too. I also expect that our ongoing relationship with the EU will be far, far less apocalyptic than you seem to believe. I just regret the displacement activity that is still being engaged in about Brexit when we have far more important things to worry about.

    In July, or whenever the furlough scheme is wound up we may well have 1m redundancies. In addition to that at least another million who did not have employment rights will lose their work. My guess is that roughly half of our cafes, bars and restaurants will not reopen under their current management. More than a couple of million will find themselves unable to repay their mortgage or car loan. There is going to be an overwhelming wave of insolvency both corporate and personal. The default rate on the government guaranteed loans is going to be very high. The tax base is going to fall by many tens of billions. Get a grip.
    And yet, despite the parlous state our economy could be in by this winter, as described by you (and you may very well be right), you think that the hardest of exits from the transition period - with all the economic shocks that will impose on an already weakened economy - is somehow not something to worry about unduly.

    Okkkaaaay.......
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370

    stodge said:

    Morning all :)

    It was the Coalition which repealed the odious Identity Card Act in 2010. It was another Conservative or perhaps a Liberal Unionist called Winston Churchill who repealed the National Registration Act in 1952.

    Clarence Harry Willcock's story is inspiring. He famously said "I am a Liberal and I am against that sort of thing" when challenged to produce his Identity Card. This was in December 1950, more than five years after the war ended.

    IF we are going to advocate a law which will force individuals to make their movements (over missus) available to the Government let's be certain this won't be abused by this or any future Government in the name of "national security".

    It's wrong - it's another step in the erosion of our civil liberties and while it may be implemented with the best of intentions, I fear the temptation to retain the power after the emergency has passed will be too strong for a centralising Government and Prime Minister.

    I've always been against ID cards but I'm beginning to feel the difficulty in proving ID is becoming discriminatory for certain sections of society. Windrush was, in part, down to an inability of people to demonstrate they were someone who had the right to remain in the UK. It's easy for me. I travel and drive so I have a passport and driving licence. I live in my own house and have done so for nearly 15 years, I have bank accounts, utility bills, a mortgage, credit cards etc. Plenty of people have none of these and they're mostly from the most disadvantaged part of society.

    I'm still worried about compulsion though. As a freeborn Englishman I can go as I please. So I'm conflicted.
    The problem isn't ID cards per se. In theory your NI number on a piece of plastic is an ID card.

    It's the databases behind the card and the Minority Report style desires of a chunk of the "system" at the Home Office.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999

    This is a great quote from the NYT article:

    "Thailand reported the first confirmed case of coronavirus outside of China in mid-January, from a traveler from Wuhan, the Chinese city where the pandemic is thought to have begun. In those critical weeks, Thailand continued to welcome an influx of Chinese visitors. For some reason, these tourists did not set off exponential local transmission.

    And when countries do all the wrong things and still end up seemingly not as battered by the virus as one would expect, go figure."

    This shows all the "this country did well" guff is nonsense at the moment. Thailand should have had a mass outbreak. They had loads of infected people travelling there from Wuhan and did nothing, no social distancing no lockdowns yet they have had less than 3000 cases and just 54 deaths. There is no logic to this virus and no definitive reason why some countries have been battered and some that should have had a bad outbreak have not.

    Yeah, just how unlucky has the USA been? Must be all those Indian burial grounds they've built on.
    I realise that you just want to dismiss this report but perhaps you could address why Thailand did not get a mass outbreak. They did nothing to prevent one and had loads of infected people from Wuhan go there.
    Actually I think I was dismissing you and your half baked theory that 'there is no logic to this virus' and it's all down to luck.
    Why is it my theory? It was a factually based article in the New York Times.
    There's plenty we don't know about this virus but also plenty we know. To say 'there is no logic to this virus' and reduce it to some kind of pandemical lottery is the doctrine of the idiot, with the implicit outcome that we shouldn't bother trying to know more about it.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    Pagan2 said:

    rkrkrk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    I can think of no measure more calculated to bring a law into disrepute than its rigid enforcement.

    I'm not going to give over vast amounts of data to the government about my every movement. I expect there are quite enough people who feel the same way as me to make the whole idea a complete non-starter.
    Don't know about this. I think people will see an app they download as a small price to pay.

    All the evidence so far is that people are okay with restrictions on freedom if they think it saves lives.
    People are ok with temporary restrictions most people also believe from past experience you give them an inch they take a mile and wont believe this is temporary while they can see lockdown has to be
    So once this app on your phone - do people think you can't just uninstall it when the pandemic is over?

    "Ha ha! Now we know what they are doing at all - oh bugger, they've uninstalled it..."
    Yup, with my data privacy hawk hat on I prefer something you can opt out of at the end to bulk collection from mobile providers etc, which you can't do much about and is unlikely to end when the crisis does.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,259
    MaxPB said:

    I haven't come across anyone who will install the app. I'm certainly not going to.

    I think the solution is mandatory testing at supermarkets and other venue and then separation using a Chinese style funnel system. It means we need capacity to do more than 5x the tests we can do today.

    Yes you have*. I will download it and use it at the earliest opportunity.

    *Well, virtually. But it's the only way you are allowed to meet people these days
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    Emergency bog roll?

    It why I own all the Twilight books.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992

    MaxPB said:

    I haven't come across anyone who will install the app. I'm certainly not going to.

    I think the solution is mandatory testing at supermarkets and other venue and then separation using a Chinese style funnel system. It means we need capacity to do more than 5x the tests we can do today.

    Yes you have*. I will download it and use it at the earliest opportunity.

    *Well, virtually. But it's the only way you are allowed to meet people these days
    Time for you to change your ID/avatar.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370

    Pagan2 said:

    rkrkrk said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    I can think of no measure more calculated to bring a law into disrepute than its rigid enforcement.

    I'm not going to give over vast amounts of data to the government about my every movement. I expect there are quite enough people who feel the same way as me to make the whole idea a complete non-starter.
    Don't know about this. I think people will see an app they download as a small price to pay.

    All the evidence so far is that people are okay with restrictions on freedom if they think it saves lives.
    People are ok with temporary restrictions most people also believe from past experience you give them an inch they take a mile and wont believe this is temporary while they can see lockdown has to be
    So once this app on your phone - do people think you can't just uninstall it when the pandemic is over?

    "Ha ha! Now we know what they are doing at all - oh bugger, they've uninstalled it..."
    Yup, with my data privacy hawk hat on I prefer something you can opt out of at the end to bulk collection from mobile providers etc, which you can't do much about and is unlikely to end when the crisis does.
    To prevent uninstallation on an iOS device requires either the device owner to signing over control of the device to the app owner (see installing company data access apps) or requires Apple to enforce it.

    The former requires everyone to click yes on installation to hand over control.

    The later won't be implemented by Apple, since this would mean allowing governments around the world to control installation of surveillance apps - which would break Apples commitment to user privacy. Which is worth many billions to them.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    That would be entirely different 'cos reasons.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    edited May 2020

    FF43 said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    Which is why it has to be made compulsory. ie you don't legally leave your house without it. Track and trace is either effective in controlling infections or it's not. By effective, I mean avoiding both permanent lockdown and mass death. If it's not effective, ditch it and accept death or lockdown. If it is effective everyone needs to be using it.
    I have no idea if the app is going to be useful but as far as compulsion is concerned there's a middle way something like:
    - End the lockdown a couple of days early for people with the app
    - Offer to send law enforcement to do spot-checks at private venues like shopping centres that make a policy of requiring the app.

    In practice strong enforcement may not be very practical, but people won't really be sure in advance that it won't be, so what this does is to flip the least-bother default from "don't install" to "install", while still allowing people who are worried about it to opt out.

    Too much compulsion is probably a bad idea, as if you get people really annoyed they can probably mess with it and spam it with bad data, but if you can get the apathetic as well as the tracking enthusiasts that's almost the entire population. It's a game of averages, you don't have to get *everyone*.
    Thinking about this, I think entry points into buildings and buses are where you would control this. People would use the app for the convenience, like they are happy to show ID to get on an easyJet flight.

    Also people need time to warm up to what the app is trying to achieve and to understand the alternatives. If they agree (a) this is the only way to avoid permanent lockdown or mass death and (b) the app works, they are likely to come round without heavy-handed compulsion.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    I note that both Remainers and Leavers on here think Hard Brexit is coming on 1st Jan 2021. I disagree. Replacing frictionless trade with a Burkino Faso barebones WTO arrangement does not become less insane on account of our economy being in the shit anyway due to Covid-19. Quite the opposite in fact. It becomes not so much insane as utterly stark raving bonkers. And IMO Johnson is not that. He would still do it, of course, if it worked politically for him. Or if he had to to save his skin. But it wouldn't and he doesn't. He has the political capital to do what is quite obviously the sensible thing - extend the Transition. Which I believe he will.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Really genuinely bemused that people are still obsessing about Brexit when you see the economic challenges we are facing in the next 12-24 months. To call any alleged effects a rounding error would be to massively overstate its significance.

    This government will be measured in how it faces those horrendous challenges. So far Rishi has done well but the road ahead is the most difficult any government has faced since WW2.

    Brexit is a state of mind. It's a state of mind that says insularity is to be preferred to cooperation, that blind certainty is to be preferred to nuance, that prejudice is to be pandered to rather than confronted.

    The government is going to add yet more disruption and chaos at the end of a terrible year because there are more votes in fomenting the worst instincts of the public rather than in bringing it together. It may result in further hardship, economic disorder and even deaths, but that's ok because Leavers have this visceral hatred of the EU, which means that even a pandemic cannot be allowed to deny them this gratifcation.

    Brexit will have a much longer lasting chronic effect on Britain than Covid-19 for as long as Leavers keep progressively self-radicalising.
    People will always find reasons for distrusting or opposing the government. I suspect that your obsession is very much a minority interest but no doubt there are more who feel that way too. I also expect that our ongoing relationship with the EU will be far, far less apocalyptic than you seem to believe. I just regret the displacement activity that is still being engaged in about Brexit when we have far more important things to worry about.

    In July, or whenever the furlough scheme is wound up we may well have 1m redundancies. In addition to that at least another million who did not have employment rights will lose their work. My guess is that roughly half of our cafes, bars and restaurants will not reopen under their current management. More than a couple of million will find themselves unable to repay their mortgage or car loan. There is going to be an overwhelming wave of insolvency both corporate and personal. The default rate on the government guaranteed loans is going to be very high. The tax base is going to fall by many tens of billions. Get a grip.
    The obsession is of Leavers, who constantly are looking for new ways to hate the EU. Until they get past that - they even took the opportunity in the middle of a pandemic to refuse to cooperate with the EU, because dead bodies were a small price to pay to indulge that hatred - things are not going to improve.
    I don't have any such obsession. I don't know anyone who has. I am not saying that this is just in your own mind but the idea that people who think like this, if they exist, control the government is absurd.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    That would be entirely different 'cos reasons.
    I doubt Corbyn would have this book on his shelves though


    https://twitter.com/robertshrimsley/status/1257073737549086720?s=21
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298

    rkrkrk said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    Understand that instinctive reaction, but wouldn't you rather know if you've been exposed? If the app can warn you to isolate from a partner earlier, I think a lot of people will take it up.
    No, I will not accept giving so much power to the government. This would be a completely unconscionable power grab.
    Really?
    Frankly if there's an app that warns me, you need to self isolate because when you went to Sainsbury's the checkout lady has tested positive... I would want it to protect people in my household.

  • OllyTOllyT Posts: 5,006

    We need an echo chamber possibly PB 2 for remainers to whine their heads off in perpetuity.
    I voted remain but i get it that we are leaving/have left. Whining about brexit achieves nothing.

    I'll let you into a wee secret, neither does whining about whining about Brexit.
    Its not a wee secret. Its remainers who lost whining about it. Brexiteers are very happy with the outcome.

    I know that leavers would prefer us to stop talking about Brexit now that it's "done" but it's not going to happen. Discussing the consequences of what we have done is not "whining" even though some would love there to be no further scrutiny of the consequences.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,259
    Andy_JS said:

    IMO serious health conditions should be the determining factor in whether or not someone is expected to stay at home, not age per se.

    Two points. At the moment the definition of "serious health problem" is a bit of a catch-all, plenty of people are in the higher risk category on a precautionary basis. More work needs to be done in helping people assess their risk. And secondly, however fit and healthy you are, apparently your immune response declines with age. As I understand it, the evidence is that risk starts to rise at 60 and significantly over 70 independent of medical conditions. Oh, and a third point. You presumably feel you
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    kinabalu said:

    I note that both Remainers and Leavers on here think Hard Brexit is coming on 1st Jan 2021. I disagree. Replacing frictionless trade with a Burkino Faso barebones WTO arrangement does not become less insane on account of our economy being in the shit anyway due to Covid-19. Quite the opposite in fact. It becomes not so much insane as utterly stark raving bonkers. And IMO Johnson is not that. He would still do it, of course, if it worked politically for him. Or if he had to to save his skin. But it wouldn't and he doesn't. He has the political capital to do what is quite obviously the sensible thing - extend the Transition. Which I believe he will.

    He could extend for a year I suppose but we will have to have ended the transition period by the next general election or he risks Leavers going from the Tories back to the Brexit Party again
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Really genuinely bemused that people are still obsessing about Brexit when you see the economic challenges we are facing in the next 12-24 months. To call any alleged effects a rounding error would be to massively overstate its significance.

    This government will be measured in how it faces those horrendous challenges. So far Rishi has done well but the road ahead is the most difficult any government has faced since WW2.

    Brexit is a state of mind. It's a state of mind that says insularity is to be preferred to cooperation, that blind certainty is to be preferred to nuance, that prejudice is to be pandered to rather than confronted.

    The government is going to add yet more disruption and chaos at the end of a terrible year because there are more votes in fomenting the worst instincts of the public rather than in bringing it together. It may result in further hardship, economic disorder and even deaths, but that's ok because Leavers have this visceral hatred of the EU, which means that even a pandemic cannot be allowed to deny them this gratifcation.

    Brexit will have a much longer lasting chronic effect on Britain than Covid-19 for as long as Leavers keep progressively self-radicalising.
    People will always find reasons for distrusting or opposing the government. I suspect that your obsession is very much a minority interest but no doubt there are more who feel that way too. I also expect that our ongoing relationship with the EU will be far, far less apocalyptic than you seem to believe. I just regret the displacement activity that is still being engaged in about Brexit when we have far more important things to worry about.

    In July, or whenever the furlough scheme is wound up we may well have 1m redundancies. In addition to that at least another million who did not have employment rights will lose their work. My guess is that roughly half of our cafes, bars and restaurants will not reopen under their current management. More than a couple of million will find themselves unable to repay their mortgage or car loan. There is going to be an overwhelming wave of insolvency both corporate and personal. The default rate on the government guaranteed loans is going to be very high. The tax base is going to fall by many tens of billions. Get a grip.
    And yet, despite the parlous state our economy could be in by this winter, as described by you (and you may very well be right), you think that the hardest of exits from the transition period - with all the economic shocks that will impose on an already weakened economy - is somehow not something to worry about unduly.

    Okkkaaaay.......
    Why would it be something to worry about unduly?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.

    Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.

    What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?

    This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures
    who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
    I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
    The issues with such an app are these:-

    1. What is done with the information collected?
    2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain.
    3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them?
    4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed?
    5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.

    Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
    Details are sketchy, but apparently the data is anonymised:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/coronavirus/coronavirus-nhs-contact-tracing-app-uk-covid/
    ...It will be downloaded on to smartphones and use bluetooth technology to work out when other app users are in close enough proximity to potentially spread the virus.

    The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.

    If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.

    The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....


  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,259

    Andy_JS said:

    IMO serious health conditions should be the determining factor in whether or not someone is expected to stay at home, not age per se.

    Two points. At the moment the definition of "serious health problem" is a bit of a catch-all, plenty of people are in the higher risk category on a precautionary basis. More work needs to be done in helping people assess their risk. And secondly, however fit and healthy you are, apparently your immune response declines with age. As I understand it, the evidence is that risk starts to rise at 60 and significantly over 70 independent of medical conditions. Oh, and a third point. You presumably feel you
    ... are young and/or healthy enough to be let out and are happy for others to he confined to house arrest to facilitate that. Fuck off.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370
    edited May 2020
    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    I own a copy of Mein Kamf. Also some of Stalins screeds and some of Mao's stuff as well.

    I keep the Radiohead album locked in a safe, hidden behind a sliding panel in the secret study, though.

    Just because you possess something doesn't mean you agree with it.

    One of my projects, for when I retire, might be to write a proper history of PQ17.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    Which is why it has to be made compulsory. ie you don't legally leave your house without it. Track and trace is either effective in controlling infections or it's not. By effective, I mean avoiding both permanent lockdown and mass death. If it's not effective, ditch it and accept death or lockdown. If it is effective everyone needs to be using it.
    I have no idea if the app is going to be useful but as far as compulsion is concerned there's a middle way something like:
    - End the lockdown a couple of days early for people with the app
    - Offer to send law enforcement to do spot-checks at private venues like shopping centres that make a policy of requiring the app.

    In practice strong enforcement may not be very practical, but people won't really be sure in advance that it won't be, so what this does is to flip the least-bother default from "don't install" to "install", while still allowing people who are worried about it to opt out.

    Too much compulsion is probably a bad idea, as if you get people really annoyed they can probably mess with it and spam it with bad data, but if you can get the apathetic as well as the tracking enthusiasts that's almost the entire population. It's a game of averages, you don't have to get *everyone*.
    Thinking about this, I think entry points into buildings and buses are where you would control this. People would use the app for the convenience, like they are happy to show ID to get on an easyJet flight.

    Also people need time to warm up to what the app is trying to achieve and to understand the alternatives. If they agree (a) this is the only way to avoid permanent lockdown or mass death and (b) the app works, they are likely to come round without heavy-handed compulsion.
    So you get to Tesco's find your mobile battery is dead or you left it at home. Sorry sir you can't come in. As I pointed out only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone. When people are told they can't shop because of the three reasons above the grumbling will start and continue to grow
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    eristdoof said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    What happens if you can’t afford a smartphone?
    The government could provide you with one temporarily e.g. if on benefits
    The Daily Mail/Express will love that one.

    "Boris to hand out smart phones to scroungers"
    They are already handing out laptops and free internet.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:


    The obsession is of Leavers, who constantly are looking for new ways to hate the EU. Until they get past that - they even took the opportunity in the middle of a pandemic to refuse to cooperate with the EU, because dead bodies were a small price to pay to indulge that hatred - things are not going to improve.

    I don't have any such obsession. I don't know anyone who has. I am not saying that this is just in your own mind but the idea that people who think like this, if they exist, control the government is absurd.
    In what way is it absurd? The government and those running it have, at every opportunity, taken the path of hostility to the EU over the path of compromise. It and they have sought at every stage to foment division for electoral gain and, it seems, by personal preference. They do so wildly cheered on by Leavers, heedless of any economic cost or indeed the risk of pain or even death caused by a disorderly separation.

    All the actions of Leavers are most easily explained by taking at face value the extensive polling that shows that they would rather see the immiseration of the country so long as Brexit is secured in an acceptable form.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862
    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Really genuinely bemused that people are still obsessing about Brexit when you see the economic challenges we are facing in the next 12-24 months. To call any alleged effects a rounding error would be to massively overstate its significance.

    This government will be measured in how it faces those horrendous challenges. So far Rishi has done well but the road ahead is the most difficult any government has faced since WW2.

    Brexit is a state of mind. It's a state of mind that says insularity is to be preferred to cooperation, that blind certainty is to be preferred to nuance, that prejudice is to be pandered to rather than confronted.

    The government is going to add yet more disruption and chaos at the end of a terrible year because there are more votes in fomenting the worst instincts of the public rather than in bringing it together. It may result in further hardship, economic disorder and even deaths, but that's ok because Leavers have this visceral hatred of the EU, which means that even a pandemic cannot be allowed to deny them this gratifcation.

    Brexit will have a much longer lasting chronic effect on Britain than Covid-19 for as long as Leavers keep progressively self-radicalising.
    People will always find reasons for distrusting or opposing the government. I suspect that your obsession is very much a minority interest but no doubt there are more who feel that way too. I also expect that our ongoing relationship with the EU will be far, far less apocalyptic than you seem to believe. I just regret the displacement activity that is still being engaged in about Brexit when we have far more important things to worry about.

    In July, or whenever the furlough scheme is wound up we may well have 1m redundancies. In addition to that at least another million who did not have employment rights will lose their work. My guess is that roughly half of our cafes, bars and restaurants will not reopen under their current management. More than a couple of million will find themselves unable to repay their mortgage or car loan. There is going to be an overwhelming wave of insolvency both corporate and personal. The default rate on the government guaranteed loans is going to be very high. The tax base is going to fall by many tens of billions. Get a grip.
    And yet, despite the parlous state our economy could be in by this winter, as described by you (and you may very well be right), you think that the hardest of exits from the transition period - with all the economic shocks that will impose on an already weakened economy - is somehow not something to worry about unduly.

    Okkkaaaay.......
    I don't think that at all. I think that we will end up with a sensible trading relationship with the EU. But we cannot tie ourselves to complying with their state aid rules, for example, at a time when they are (quite correctly) ripping them up. We cannot restrict our government's ability to take drastic and unprecedented action to deal with an unprecedented crisis.
    If the EU will not accept that then we will end up with a harder Brexit than is desirable. That would be unfortunate but also relatively trivial compared with the other issues we have to deal with. With respect, there is an issue of scale here. The models (which were completely false because they assumed no changes in policy etc) indicated that in 10-15 years our economy might be 3-4% smaller because of a hard Brexit. We are, according to the OBR looking at a 35% reduction in GDP this quarter. How we recover from that is all that the government should be thinking about. It really is.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.

    Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.

    What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?

    This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures
    who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
    I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
    The issues with such an app are these:-

    1. What is done with the information collected?
    2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain.
    3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them?
    4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed?
    5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.

    Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
    Details are sketchy, but apparently the data is anonymised:
    https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/coronavirus/coronavirus-nhs-contact-tracing-app-uk-covid/
    ...It will be downloaded on to smartphones and use bluetooth technology to work out when other app users are in close enough proximity to potentially spread the virus.

    The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.

    If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.

    The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....


    There is no such thing as anonymised data that cannot be easily deanonymised this has been shown time and time again by researchers
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    1) Another reason to not shop in Lidl

    2) Another reason not to go to Middlesbrough

    3) This article correctly places Middlesbrough in the North East and not Yorkshire. Paging @SandyRentool

    This weekend, a Lidl branch in the North East became the first UK supermarket to close due to the coronavirus pandemic.


    After an unknown member of staff tested positive for covid-19, the store closed its doors to the public.

    Acording to the Mirror, shoppers said the Middlesbrough branch on Cargo Fleet Lane closed its doors on Friday, and remained closed over the weekend due to a shortage of staff amid the outbreak.

    https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/lidl-statement-staff-positive-coronavirus-18194240
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    Foxy said:

    Andy_JS said:

    IMO serious health conditions should be the determining factor in whether or not someone is expected to stay at home, not age per se.

    In the regression analysis of Britain's first 16 000 deaths, age was the principal risk even when allowing for diabetes, heart conditions, blood pressure etc.

    We may not like how Sickle Cell affects Black populations or Cystic Fibrosis white people, but I am afraid disease doesn't abide by equalities legislation.
    According to NHS England official statistics, published 30 April, out of 19,740 deaths where people tested positive for Covid-19 18,720 (95%) had pre-existing health conditions.

    As for age, 18,000 were over 60 (91%).
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    This is how these apps work and how the UK approach is different....

    https://youtu.be/EgIg90cFRVw
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,601
    edited May 2020
    The best thing would be if lots of people take this antibody test and it turns out that a significant percentage of the population are already immune.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282929/Antibody-tests-tell-millions-coronavirus-rolled-two-weeks.html
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    Well it is not total surveillance being proposed, either.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    If lockdown wasn't depressing enough....new season of Billions is about on par with Westworld Season 3, which itself makes Season 2 look like a masterpiece....
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Pagan2 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    Which is why it has to be made compulsory. ie you don't legally leave your house without it. Track and trace is either effective in controlling infections or it's not. By effective, I mean avoiding both permanent lockdown and mass death. If it's not effective, ditch it and accept death or lockdown. If it is effective everyone needs to be using it.
    I have no idea if the app is going to be useful but as far as compulsion is concerned there's a middle way something like:
    - End the lockdown a couple of days early for people with the app
    - Offer to send law enforcement to do spot-checks at private venues like shopping centres that make a policy of requiring the app.

    In practice strong enforcement may not be very practical, but people won't really be sure in advance that it won't be, so what this does is to flip the least-bother default from "don't install" to "install", while still allowing people who are worried about it to opt out.

    Too much compulsion is probably a bad idea, as if you get people really annoyed they can probably mess with it and spam it with bad data, but if you can get the apathetic as well as the tracking enthusiasts that's almost the entire population. It's a game of averages, you don't have to get *everyone*.
    Thinking about this, I think entry points into buildings and buses are where you would control this. People would use the app for the convenience, like they are happy to show ID to get on an easyJet flight.

    Also people need time to warm up to what the app is trying to achieve and to understand the alternatives. If they agree (a) this is the only way to avoid permanent lockdown or mass death and (b) the app works, they are likely to come round without heavy-handed compulsion.
    So you get to Tesco's find your mobile battery is dead or you left it at home. Sorry sir you can't come in. As I pointed out only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone. When people are told they can't shop because of the three reasons above the grumbling will start and continue to grow
    That's roughly what Tesco will say. The other point, which hasn't been discussed here so far, is that the majority using the app won't be at all happy with possibly infected non-app users breathing into their faces at the checkouts.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675

    If lockdown wasn't depressing enough....new season of Billions is about on par with Westworld Season 3, which itself makes Season 2 look like a masterpiece....

    Bugger.

    That is the worst news to come out in 2020.

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
    I really don't care what the logic is. It is not enforceable as a law
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    Andy_JS said:

    The attempt to contain the virus is doomed to failure. We have to allow it to spread through the healthy population in order to achieve herd immunity. People with serious health conditions should stay at home while that process is ongoing.

    Out of interest do you think containment is doomed to failure in South Korea and Taiwan and places that currently look like they're succeeding without destroying their economies, or just in Britain?
    Korea
    From 1 April, all arrivals – regardless of their nationality and length of stay – will be required to undergo quarantine for a period of 14 days. Alien Registration Card holders with a residence in Korea may self-quarantine there. Those without a residence or Alien Registration Card will be quarantined at government-arranged facilities at their expense – likely to be around 100,000KRW (approximately £66) per day.

    https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/south-korea/entry-requirements

    Taiwan
    - there is currently a ban on air travellers transiting Taiwan, you should adjust your travel plans accordingly
    - foreign nationals are no longer permitted to enter Taiwan with the exception of holders of a valid Alien Resident Certificate (ARC) or Alien Permanent Resident Certificate(APRC). These measures apply to those eligible for visa-free treatment, landing visas, and e-visas, as well as those carrying valid visas


    https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/taiwan/coronavirus
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    1) Another reason to not shop in Lidl

    2) Another reason not to go to Middlesbrough

    3) This article correctly places Middlesbrough in the North East and not Yorkshire. Paging @SandyRentool

    This weekend, a Lidl branch in the North East became the first UK supermarket to close due to the coronavirus pandemic.


    After an unknown member of staff tested positive for covid-19, the store closed its doors to the public.

    Acording to the Mirror, shoppers said the Middlesbrough branch on Cargo Fleet Lane closed its doors on Friday, and remained closed over the weekend due to a shortage of staff amid the outbreak.

    https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/uk-news/lidl-statement-staff-positive-coronavirus-18194240

    As I posted earlier today Boro has about the highest rate of cases in the country and it's spreading there faster than anywhere else at the moment.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    Nigelb said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    Well it is not total surveillance being proposed, either.
    Yes and Ripa was only to fight serious crime and terrorism.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,999
    On that basis Lord Longford would have had editions of Razzle and Wet & Willing proudly displayed on his bookshelf. Which of course he might have done.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    I own a copy of Mein Kamf. Also some of Stalins screeds and some of Mao's stuff as well.

    I keep the Radiohead album locked in a safe, hidden behind a sliding panel in the secret study, though.

    Just because you possess something doesn't mean you agree with it.

    One of my projects, for when I retire, might be to write a proper history of PQ17.
    Owning primary sources is fine, necessary even. Owning revisionist hagiographies is dodgy as fuck.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    FF43 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    Which is why it has to be made compulsory. ie you don't legally leave your house without it. Track and trace is either effective in controlling infections or it's not. By effective, I mean avoiding both permanent lockdown and mass death. If it's not effective, ditch it and accept death or lockdown. If it is effective everyone needs to be using it.
    I have no idea if the app is going to be useful but as far as compulsion is concerned there's a middle way something like:
    - End the lockdown a couple of days early for people with the app
    - Offer to send law enforcement to do spot-checks at private venues like shopping centres that make a policy of requiring the app.

    In practice strong enforcement may not be very practical, but people won't really be sure in advance that it won't be, so what this does is to flip the least-bother default from "don't install" to "install", while still allowing people who are worried about it to opt out.

    Too much compulsion is probably a bad idea, as if you get people really annoyed they can probably mess with it and spam it with bad data, but if you can get the apathetic as well as the tracking enthusiasts that's almost the entire population. It's a game of averages, you don't have to get *everyone*.
    Thinking about this, I think entry points into buildings and buses are where you would control this. People would use the app for the convenience, like they are happy to show ID to get on an easyJet flight.

    Also people need time to warm up to what the app is trying to achieve and to understand the alternatives. If they agree (a) this is the only way to avoid permanent lockdown or mass death and (b) the app works, they are likely to come round without heavy-handed compulsion.
    So you get to Tesco's find your mobile battery is dead or you left it at home. Sorry sir you can't come in. As I pointed out only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone. When people are told they can't shop because of the three reasons above the grumbling will start and continue to grow
    That's roughly what Tesco will say. The other point, which hasn't been discussed here so far, is that the majority using the app won't be at all happy with possibly infected non-app users breathing into their faces at the checkouts.
    Nothing makes an app user non infected they merely don't update their status
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222
    kinabalu said:

    I note that both Remainers and Leavers on here think Hard Brexit is coming on 1st Jan 2021. I disagree. Replacing frictionless trade with a Burkino Faso barebones WTO arrangement does not become less insane on account of our economy being in the shit anyway due to Covid-19. Quite the opposite in fact. It becomes not so much insane as utterly stark raving bonkers. And IMO Johnson is not that. He would still do it, of course, if it worked politically for him. Or if he had to to save his skin. But it wouldn't and he doesn't. He has the political capital to do what is quite obviously the sensible thing - extend the Transition. Which I believe he will.

    What will it cost the UK to extend the transition? Without knowing this cost neither you nor anyone else can come to a conclusion of what is best to do because a cost-benefit analysis cannot be run.

    For me, I`d support a longer transition only if it involves no (or only minor) further costs to the exchequer. I`d especially oppose it if extension could put us on the hook for the financial bailouts that Spain and Italy are currently hankering for.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    In the future, all these grads from Oxford wont even know these books exist, let alone what they say.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/03/oxford-university-students-vote-block-ableist-classist-misogynistic
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    I own a copy of Mein Kamf. Also some of Stalins screeds and some of Mao's stuff as well.

    I keep the Radiohead album locked in a safe, hidden behind a sliding panel in the secret study, though.

    Just because you possess something doesn't mean you agree with it.

    One of my projects, for when I retire, might be to write a proper history of PQ17.
    Owning primary sources is fine, necessary even. Owning revisionist hagiographies is dodgy as fuck.
    Not when you have worked on rebutting those hagiographies. Know your enemy.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,226
    edited May 2020

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
    Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
    Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
    Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
    Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
    Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
    Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
    You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?

    On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.

    I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?

    Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
    Here is what you need to ponder. "Boris" is popular with a great many people who are decidedly not "socially liberal". It leaves 3 possibilities.

    (i) He IS a social liberal and is fooling his Get Brexit Done base.
    (ii) He is NOT a social liberal and is fooling you (and those like you).
    (iii) He is devoid of core belief and is fooling EVERYONE who supports him.

    You will be interested to hear that the most likely answer is (i) with a generous helping of (iii).
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Some positive news resulting from Covid-19.

    Love Island cancels upcoming summer 2020 series over coronavirus pandemic

    ITV2 bosses couldn't figure out a way of keeping contestants and crew safe.

    https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/reality-tv/a32360740/love-island-itv2-cancelled-coronavirus/
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    MaxPB said:

    I haven't come across anyone who will install the app. I'm certainly not going to.

    I think the solution is mandatory testing at supermarkets and other venue and then separation using a Chinese style funnel system. It means we need capacity to do more than 5x the tests we can do today.

    I’d install the app immediately. I don’t care if the Government tracks me, I just want to be able to get out of the house and socialise.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.

    For this discussion you need to distinguish between known-contagious people and everyone else. The rest of this conversation was about everyone else - IIUC the Korean app is opt-in, although there's also bulk data collection that you can't opt out of.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 5,288

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    Emergency bog roll?

    It why I own all the Twilight books.

    That decision will come back to bite you on bum one day.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    HYUFD said:

    FF43 said:

    Pulpstar said:

    HYUFD said:
    Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
    Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
    Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
    Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
    Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
    Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
    Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
    You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?

    On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.

    I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?

    Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
    Here is what you need to ponder. "Boris" is popular with a great many people who are decidedly not "socially liberal". It leaves 3 possibilities.

    (i) He IS a social liberal and is fooling his Get Brexit Done base.
    (ii) He is NOT a social liberal and is fooling you (and those like you).
    (iii) He is devoid of core belief and is fooling EVERYONE who supports him.

    You will be interested to hear that the most likely answer is a (i) with a generous helping of (iii).
    What makes you think "Get Brexit Done" is socially illiberal?

    What fills me with confidence is decades of listening to him speak. He has consistently been liberal - including during the referendum campaign. He isn't some Farage/IDS/HYUFD social conservative headbanger.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675

    In the future, all these grads from Oxford wont even know these books exist, let alone what they say.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/05/03/oxford-university-students-vote-block-ableist-classist-misogynistic

    What a dump and even more scarily this is the place the government is hoping that comes up with a vaccine?

    We’re more fecked than a Stepmom on pornhub.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    Pro_Rata said:

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    Emergency bog roll?

    It why I own all the Twilight books.

    That decision will come back to bite you on bum one day.
    Ha.

    Bella doesn’t deserve Edward.

    Poor Jacob.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216

    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.

    Curious how some who praise South Korea's handling of this and castigate Britain's scream bloody murder when it is suggested the Tory British government might do something even less intrusive...
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,862

    DavidL said:


    The obsession is of Leavers, who constantly are looking for new ways to hate the EU. Until they get past that - they even took the opportunity in the middle of a pandemic to refuse to cooperate with the EU, because dead bodies were a small price to pay to indulge that hatred - things are not going to improve.

    I don't have any such obsession. I don't know anyone who has. I am not saying that this is just in your own mind but the idea that people who think like this, if they exist, control the government is absurd.
    In what way is it absurd? The government and those running it have, at every opportunity, taken the path of hostility to the EU over the path of compromise. It and they have sought at every stage to foment division for electoral gain and, it seems, by personal preference. They do so wildly cheered on by Leavers, heedless of any economic cost or indeed the risk of pain or even death caused by a disorderly separation.

    All the actions of Leavers are most easily explained by taking at face value the extensive polling that shows that they would rather see the immiseration of the country so long as Brexit is secured in an acceptable form.
    Do you remember when you were so convinced that those raving leavers were going to have no deal and no transition period? This is a similar fantasy.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    Some positive news resulting from Covid-19.

    Love Island cancels upcoming summer 2020 series over coronavirus pandemic

    ITV2 bosses couldn't figure out a way of keeping contestants and crew safe.

    https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/reality-tv/a32360740/love-island-itv2-cancelled-coronavirus/

    Surely locking them away some where self contained would work. Just bring back Big Brother.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    1) No where in the bbc article does it mention 80%
    2) I don't believe they will get anywhere near 80% and of those that do install it a lot will not realise they need to have bluetooth on
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
    You're bonkers, as always.

    You can't mandate an app. Its pathetic to suggest otherwise. For one thing what would stop someone from turning Bluetooth off thus breaking the app from working?

    Anything like this will need buy in from the public. Which it will get, precisely because it will be voluntary not compulsory.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    Andy_JS said:

    The best thing would be if lots of people take this antibody test and it turns out that a significant percentage of the population are already immune.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8282929/Antibody-tests-tell-millions-coronavirus-rolled-two-weeks.html

    Yep. The Oxford hypothesis.

    But I am sceptical about this test being available any time soon.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    1) No where in the bbc article does it mention 80%
    2) I don't believe they will get anywhere near 80% and of those that do install it a lot will not realise they need to have bluetooth on
    I think they will get close to 80% and that the app will prompt those that do install it to turn on Bluetooth if it is off. Apps already do that and its not rocket science to get an app to check if Bluetooth is off and tell you to turn it on.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119

    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.

    Curious how some who praise South Korea's handling of this and castigate Britain's scream bloody murder when it is suggested the Tory British government might do something even less intrusive...
    I am only imagine the outcry if the UK government suggested tracking bracelets say for those arriving from abroad....RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, etc
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    1) No where in the bbc article does it mention 80%
    2) I don't believe they will get anywhere near 80% and of those that do install it a lot will not realise they need to have bluetooth on
    I think they will get close to 80% and that the app will prompt those that do install it to turn on Bluetooth if it is off. Apps already do that and its not rocket science to get an app to check if Bluetooth is off and tell you to turn it on.
    and then they will turn it back off when they realise it eats their battery
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:


    The obsession is of Leavers, who constantly are looking for new ways to hate the EU. Until they get past that - they even took the opportunity in the middle of a pandemic to refuse to cooperate with the EU, because dead bodies were a small price to pay to indulge that hatred - things are not going to improve.

    I don't have any such obsession. I don't know anyone who has. I am not saying that this is just in your own mind but the idea that people who think like this, if they exist, control the government is absurd.
    In what way is it absurd? The government and those running it have, at every opportunity, taken the path of hostility to the EU over the path of compromise. It and they have sought at every stage to foment division for electoral gain and, it seems, by personal preference. They do so wildly cheered on by Leavers, heedless of any economic cost or indeed the risk of pain or even death caused by a disorderly separation.

    All the actions of Leavers are most easily explained by taking at face value the extensive polling that shows that they would rather see the immiseration of the country so long as Brexit is secured in an acceptable form.
    Do you remember when you were so convinced that those raving leavers were going to have no deal and no transition period? This is a similar fantasy.
    Leavers were cornered into agreeing any deal by those determined to have a deal in the last Parliament. Or have you forgotten? Which is why Boris Johnson signed up to an off-the-peg deal from the EU that was markedly worse than the one Theresa May agreed.

    Now that the Conservatives have untrammelled power, they are ratting on their own deal, unsurprisingly since they have no wish to account for a compromise they signed up to.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,139
    edited May 2020
    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
    I really don't care what the logic is. It is not enforceable as a law
    Anything is enforceable as the law if the police enforce it and a majority support it.

    The majority would accept the use of apps to end lockdown and ensure those with symptoms and who they have been in contact with can be traced and forced to isolate whatever a libertarian minority might think
  • StockyStocky Posts: 10,222

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
    You're bonkers, as always.

    You can't mandate an app. Its pathetic to suggest otherwise. For one thing what would stop someone from turning Bluetooth off thus breaking the app from working?

    Anything like this will need buy in from the public. Which it will get, precisely because it will be voluntary not compulsory.
    It will be a useless waste of money. That doesn`t mean that the government won`t do it, of course. And it will be good for the I.T. company that gets the contract.

    It will end up being a device for some folk to display their peacock-feathers to others and hector those that don`t have it. A virtue-signalling device if you like.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    .

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    Four out of five smartphone users ?
    Given the reaction on here, I doubt it.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    dr_spyn said:
    Bloody hell - I hate that sort of behaviour
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    1) No where in the bbc article does it mention 80%
    2) I don't believe they will get anywhere near 80% and of those that do install it a lot will not realise they need to have bluetooth on
    I think they will get close to 80% and that the app will prompt those that do install it to turn on Bluetooth if it is off. Apps already do that and its not rocket science to get an app to check if Bluetooth is off and tell you to turn it on.
    and then they will turn it back off when they realise it eats their battery
    I doubt it. If people are bothered enough to install the app then I doubt they'll be that extremely concerned about the battery. Especially if you think they "will not realise" they need bluetooth on then they may not realise the bluetooth affects their battery.

    You're expecting them to simultaneously be tech literate and tech illiterate. Bizarre.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,908

    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.

    Curious how some who praise South Korea's handling of this and castigate Britain's scream bloody murder when it is suggested the Tory British government might do something even less intrusive...
    I am only imagine the outcry if the UK government suggested tracking bracelets say for those arriving from abroad....RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, etc
    Tracking? I want them locked away for 14-21 days first.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,720

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    That would be entirely different 'cos reasons.
    I doubt Corbyn would have this book on his shelves though


    https://twitter.com/robertshrimsley/status/1257073737549086720?s=21
    He also has "On The Eve" a few away from David Irving.

    It is an excellent book on Jewish politics and culture in Europe in the decades before WW2. Well worth reading, and very evocative for that vibrant and contradictory culture that we lost.

    The book on the bottom shelf "How Michael Gove Saved the World" I hope is satirical.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.

    Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,528
    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Mmm ...... giving the police more stop’n’search powers. What could possibly go wrong? If you think such a measure is (a) enforceable and (b) won’t lead to even greater problems I have a bridge to sell to you.
    There would be a certain irony if Police "profiling" led to disproportionately older, white and middle class people being stopped and searched.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878
    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pagan2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Having wet dreams again? If they put in such a law it would be be subject to mass disobedience. You cannot lock people up for not possessing a piece of consumer electronics. Only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone only 18% of over 65's

    source
    https://www.statista.com/statistics/271851/smartphone-owners-in-the-united-kingdom-uk-by-age/
    If it is the best way to reduce the spread of Covid you can, enforced by the police.

    Over 65s can stay in if they refuse to have one or only go out with permits
    Yeah like you will lock up 45% of over 55's who will be off out as soon as lockdown lifts. You want to ensure there is never another tory government and foster a complete disrespect of the police then by all means try it
    As the polling shows more people are concerned about the death rate rising again post lockdown than pursuing extreme libertarianism
    It is not extreme libertarianism not to have total government surviellance apparatus put in place it is sensible. Or maybe you think mr Meeks and Cyclefree are both libertarians too
    They are both social democrat liberals not conservatives.

    At the end of the day for a tracing app to be effective most people have to wear it, if they do not we cannot end enforced quarantine with all the economic damage resulting.

    If too few people wear the app some element of enforcement is therefore inevitable if the lockdown is to be lifted
    I really don't care what the logic is. It is not enforceable as a law
    Anything is enforceable as the law if the police enforce it and a majority support it.

    The majority would accept the use of apps to end lockdown and ensure those with symptoms and who they have been in contact with can be traced and forced to isolate whatever a libertarian minority might think
    Doesnt matter if the majority support it, merely takes enough to ignore it and plenty will. Never pass a law you can't enforce.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    Four out of five smartphone users ?
    Given the reaction on here, I doubt it.
    Do you think on here is representative?

    Given that approximately 4 out of 5 UK adults are concerned about the lockdown ending it doesn't seem a major stretch to get 4 out of 5 smartphone users engaged in this.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    glw said:

    South Korea take non-compliance very seriously. They are looking to move to tracking bracelets for all those who are positive and should be isolating...this is after a few people deliberately left their phones at home and went out.

    Curious how some who praise South Korea's handling of this and castigate Britain's scream bloody murder when it is suggested the Tory British government might do something even less intrusive...
    I am only imagine the outcry if the UK government suggested tracking bracelets say for those arriving from abroad....RACIST, XENOPHOBIC, etc
    Tracking? I want them locked away for 14-21 days first.
    I meant as in tracking bracelet to ensure they dont leave isolation. Not to follow them round Sainsbury's.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
    edited May 2020
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.

    Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.

    Which is a red flag in itself. Why do they want a centralised system. I wonder what extra abilities that might give them.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,370

    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    Why does Gove have one of holocaust denier David Irving's heavily criticised poorly sourced West bashing Hitler praising 'history' books on display?

    I don't want to pull a "but what if Corbyn did that" but what if Corbyn did that?

    I own a copy of Mein Kamf. Also some of Stalins screeds and some of Mao's stuff as well.

    I keep the Radiohead album locked in a safe, hidden behind a sliding panel in the secret study, though.

    Just because you possess something doesn't mean you agree with it.

    One of my projects, for when I retire, might be to write a proper history of PQ17.
    Owning primary sources is fine, necessary even. Owning revisionist hagiographies is dodgy as fuck.
    Not when you have worked on rebutting those hagiographies. Know your enemy.
    I don't currently own a copy of Irving's PQ17 - think I gave it to my father.

    It's worth reading, sceptically, because it is a classic (once you know what he is doing) of how to twist the facts/lie using the standard methodology of holocaust deniers.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 14,207
    I also see a bunch of reports about various unions resisting returns to work - including rail and teaching Unions

  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    Cyclefree said:

    HYUFD said:

    Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.

    In which case it is possible the government could require the police to conduct stop and search with arrest for those not carrying the mobile phone with tracing app
    Mmm ...... giving the police more stop’n’search powers. What could possibly go wrong? If you think such a measure is (a) enforceable and (b) won’t lead to even greater problems I have a bridge to sell to you.
    There would be a certain irony if Police "profiling" led to disproportionately older, white and middle class people being stopped and searched.
    You think that is how they would use their powers? How sweet.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225
    Pagan2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    1) No where in the bbc article does it mention 80%
    No, there was another article which you were too lazy to look for yourself.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52294896
    As someone so disturbed by the whole idea, I'd have though you might want to know what you're opposing...
  • eekeek Posts: 28,405

    The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.

    Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.

    And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.

    I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,464

    Cyclefree said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.

    Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.

    What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?

    This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures
    who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
    I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
    The issues with such an app are these:-

    1. What is done with the information collected?
    2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain.
    3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them?
    4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed?
    5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.

    Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
    It might help if we didn't have an executive which is able to amend old laws without parliament having a say. According to David Allen Green, as this was an amendment to some 1984 regulations parliament didn't have to be consulted. He's also concerned about the executive subssequently re-wording this law without consulting parliament ('mission creep'.)

    I'm content with tracking if it has to be passed by both houses and is only valid for 3 months. Parliament must renew it every 3 months if an emergency lasts.

    However, as I don't travel around with a mobile I'm not a candidate for this app. I'd rather have an antibody test, please.

    Maybe the authorities will try to present this as an NHS initiative. I still don't trust them.
    Rather as we discussed a few days ago about the FTPA.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,878

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    Four out of five smartphone users ?
    Given the reaction on here, I doubt it.
    Do you think on here is representative?

    Given that approximately 4 out of 5 UK adults are concerned about the lockdown ending it doesn't seem a major stretch to get 4 out of 5 smartphone users engaged in this.
    All the people objecting here also want lockdown ending. They merely see the potential long term impacts on civil liberties as a price too far
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,675
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,119
    edited May 2020
    Pagan2 said:

    The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.

    Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.

    Which is a red flag in itself. Why do they want a centralised system. I wonder what extra abilities that might give them.
    In the video I posted they explained some of the weakness with the Apple / Google approach, and why a centralized system does have advantages when it comes to tackling a pandemic. But that obviously comes with less privacy.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,225

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Nigelb said:

    Bit more detail here:
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52003984

    Apparently the epidemiologists reckon it would need 80% take-up by smartphone users (which would equate to just over half the population) to effectively suppress the virus post lockdown.

    A legislated, and watertight sunset clause is surely required if it's going to get anything near that figure.

    I doubt it, I think a marketing campaign saying to download this to keep you safe and "protect the NHS" along with co-operation from social media etc would surely be sufficient to get that percentage take up.

    Advertise it across Facebook, Youtube, Snapchat, Instagram etc and on TV etc and quite quickly the takeup will be up there.
    Four out of five smartphone users ?
    Given the reaction on here, I doubt it.
    Do you think on here is representative?

    Given that approximately 4 out of 5 UK adults are concerned about the lockdown ending it doesn't seem a major stretch to get 4 out of 5 smartphone users engaged in this.
    No, I don't (and I'd download it myself, despite my reservations), but I still think 80% is a stretch.
    Of course even a lower level of take-up ought to have some utility.
This discussion has been closed.