Skip to content

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Irish General Election 2020 : Predictions & Review, Part 2

SystemSystem Posts: 12,651
edited January 2020 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Irish General Election 2020 : Predictions & Review, Part 2

With the Irish general election taking place a week on Saturday the pressure is mounting on Leo Varadkar & the Fine Gael members.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,578
    1st.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    Latest Irish poll has Fianna Fail on 27%, Fine Gael on 22% and Sinn Fein on 20%
    https://extra.ie/2020/01/26/news/politics/fianna-fail-lead-election-poll
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    edited January 2020
    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of obsessed, vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    edited January 2020
    Too late for the last, more appropriate thread.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871376111054848?s=20
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    edited January 2020
    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    Its because he didn't cover his racism via quotes from great works of art...
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    edited January 2020
    I've backed both Lawless and O'Rourke (Tipped up to me by GreenMachine) to retain their seats for Fianna Fáil in Kildare North after reviewing the polling and past results in the constituency at between 1-5 and 4-9.
    Boylesports, Ladbrokes and Paddy Power have lots of markets up.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 25,665
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    Its because he didn't cover his racism via quotes from great works of art...
    So you think he's unpretentiously racist?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Too late for the last, more appropriate thread.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871376111054848?s=20

    Irrelevant as Boris has made clear he will block indyref2 for his full 5 year term.

    (Of course a Yougov poll had Yes ahead in 2014 too anyway)

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    The restrictions on Huawei apparently have teeth:
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jan/30/huawei-ruling-will-cost-us-500m-says-bt
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Thank you for taking the time to give us such a detailed survey, @GreenMachine.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Too late for the last, more appropriate thread.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871376111054848?s=20

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871398516916224
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of obsessed, vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    He’s not presenting the news, though...
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    edited January 2020
    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of obsessed, vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    He’s not presenting the news, though...
    Hardly the comparison to make, the newsreader didn’t say anything about race!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    FPT:
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Geofencing as a campaign tool (I'm guessing this would not be legal in the UK ?) :

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/01/29/trumps-geofencing-could-be-a-potent-political-issue/
    If you attend an evangelical or a Catholic Church, a women’s rights march or a political rally of any kind, especially in a seriously contested state, the odds are that your cellphone ID number, home address, partisan affiliation and the identifying information of the people around you will be provided by geofencing marketers to campaigns, lobbyists and other interest groups…

    …The data generally provides information about individual users’ day-to-day activities and preferences: Where they shop; What they do for fun; What other apps they use, for how long, and what they do in those apps; Where they live; Where they work; With whom they associate.

    You might think that Donald Trump holds political rallies simply because he enjoys the adulation, but that’s not the real purpose. His campaign manager Brad Pascale recently boasted about the information he harvests from MAGA rallies:

    Out of more than 20,000 identified voters who came to a recent Trump rally in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 57.9 percent did not have a history of voting for Republicans. Remarkably, 4,413 attendees didn’t even vote in the last election — a clear indication that President Trump is energizing Americans who were previously not engaged in politics…

    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Too late for the last, more appropriate thread.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871376111054848?s=20

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871398516916224
    So Scots oppose indyref2 even if the SNP won a majority in 2021, they do not want another one until at least 2025
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    edited January 2020
    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222844180923387909
    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222850856346845189
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Too late for the last, more appropriate thread.

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1222871376111054848?s=20

    Irrelevant as Boris has made clear he will block indyref2 for his full 5 year term.

    (Of course a Yougov poll had Yes ahead in 2014 too anyway)

    Yah boo sucks, you're not getting a referendum so who cares - check
    Cast half arsed aspersions on the pollster - check
    No one wants more disruptive uncertainty from the SNP, that's the Tories' job - ?
    Once in a generation promise - ?
    Send in the troops - ?

    Just setting up some more options for the HYUFD rapid rebuttal team.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    edited January 2020
    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Geofencing as a campaign tool (I'm guessing this would not be legal in the UK ?) :

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/01/29/trumps-geofencing-could-be-a-potent-political-issue/
    If you attend an evangelical or a Catholic Church, a women’s rights march or a political rally of any kind, especially in a seriously contested state, the odds are that your cellphone ID number, home address, partisan affiliation and the identifying information of the people around you will be provided by geofencing marketers to campaigns, lobbyists and other interest groups…

    …The data generally provides information about individual users’ day-to-day activities and preferences: Where they shop; What they do for fun; What other apps they use, for how long, and what they do in those apps; Where they live; Where they work; With whom they associate.

    You might think that Donald Trump holds political rallies simply because he enjoys the adulation, but that’s not the real purpose. His campaign manager Brad Pascale recently boasted about the information he harvests from MAGA rallies:

    Out of more than 20,000 identified voters who came to a recent Trump rally in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 57.9 percent did not have a history of voting for Republicans. Remarkably, 4,413 attendees didn’t even vote in the last election — a clear indication that President Trump is energizing Americans who were previously not engaged in politics…

    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    isam said:

    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of obsessed, vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    He’s not presenting the news, though...
    Hardly the comparison to make, the newsreader didn’t say anything about race!
    I was questioning why anyone might be sufficiently interested to trawl through his past tweets.
    And, FWIW...
    https://twitter.com/MShapland/status/1222851578132148224
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Thank you for taking the time to give us such a detailed survey, @GreenMachine.

    Seconded, and apologies for all the OT posting.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    https://twitter.com/jarvisdupont/status/1222876129322815492?s=21
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    edited January 2020
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,258
    isam said:

    Nigelb said:

    isam said:

    If we replace ‘white’ with ‘black’ , ‘muslim’ or ‘gay’ here I think most people would consider the author of the tweets some kind of obsessed, vile, far right nutter. Yet it seems he is worthy of sympathetic consideration, and his words are able to be read in a way that makes the thought that he might hate white people to be absurd.


    He’s not presenting the news, though...
    Hardly the comparison to make, the newsreader didn’t say anything about race!
    He's "punching up" not "punching down" and hence in today's world that is deemed less unacceptable.

    I don't think Alastair Stewart was being racist in the slightest btw.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222844180923387909
    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222850856346845189

    Mine got suspended, seemingly for life, in September 2019 for retweeting a Footballs Coming Home meme in June 2018
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    Surely wrong the more folk see of BJ the more they rate him, that's how it works isn't it?

    https://twitter.com/jamiedmaxwell/status/1222876159358197760?s=20
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,258
    edited January 2020
    isam said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222844180923387909
    https://twitter.com/lizziedearden/status/1222850856346845189

    Mine got suspended, seemingly for life, in September 2019 for retweeting a Footballs Coming Home meme in June 2018
    No. That was because anyone who invoked anything about Football's Coming Home and England winning the World Cup is evidently suffering from a severe delusional disconnect from reality and needs to be kept away from the wider public.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 67,578
    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,258
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Surely wrong the more folk see of BJ the more they rate him, that's how it works isn't it?

    https://twitter.com/jamiedmaxwell/status/1222876159358197760?s=20

    The critical numbers there of course being: Boris Johnson -71, Jeremy Corbyn -73.

    Let's see what the new Lab leader scores.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    edited January 2020
    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398

    Everyone's a critic.

    https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1222880096270409733?s=20
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    Theuniondivvie said:

    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398

    Everyone's a critic.

    https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1222880096270409733?s=20
    Jim’ll Brexit
  • RandallFlaggRandallFlagg Posts: 1,418
    edited January 2020
    Yes typically gets poll leads when something bad happens to the left of centre in Britain (Ed loses, leave wins the EU referendum, Boris becomes PM etc...), before the soft No's eventually switch back. I think we'll need to wait a few months before we can judge whether Brexit has created a more permanent shift.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,484
    edited January 2020
    TOPPING said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Surely wrong the more folk see of BJ the more they rate him, that's how it works isn't it?

    https://twitter.com/jamiedmaxwell/status/1222876159358197760?s=20

    The critical numbers there of course being: Boris Johnson -71, Jeremy Corbyn -73.

    Let's see what the new Lab leader scores.
    The critical numbers for Indyref might have been those for Ruth Davidson and Gordon Brown who were the two making a positive case for the union rather than the too wee, too poor, too stupid negativity of Bitter Together.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    edited January 2020
    On topic, off topic - What might a Soldiers of Destiny led Government mean for Brexit and our relationship with Ireland going forward ?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Pulpstar said:

    On topic, off topic - What might a Soldiers of Destiny led Government mean for Brexit and our relationship with Ireland going forward ?

    No change.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
  • mattmatt Posts: 3,789
    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    Even free stuff has a price. That people don’t realise that by now...

  • eekeek Posts: 31,053
    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    There are entire areas where you can do things in the USA that you can't do in the rest of the world.

    Linking devices together to get a complete view of a customer is one of those, in the USA you can use third party data to do that, in europe you can't.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    Even free stuff has a price. That people don’t realise that by now...

    'if you're not paying for the product, you are the product'
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    edited January 2020
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
  • Animal_pbAnimal_pb Posts: 608
    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    No arguments, but depending on what the data's going to be used for the collector could potentially be sailing very close to the wind.

    FWIW, I tend to think GDPR is a sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut kind of approach; I'm not convinced that the marginal protection it affords justifies the enormous compliance cost and infrastructure.
  • XtrainXtrain Posts: 341
    isam said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398

    Everyone's a critic.

    https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1222880096270409733?s=20
    Jim’ll Brexit
    Looks like Jim painted it!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    There's an interesting commentary here:
    http://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2020/01/29/the-deeper-issue/

    Which links to an embryonic, but excellent idea:
    http://customercommons.org/home/tools/terms/
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,492
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Wrong.

    That’s comparing apples with oranges.

    In 2014 about 38% of the total Scottish electorate voted for Independence, so it is a 5% increase since 2014.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 47,017
    Thanks for very good header. Feel a strong urge now to get swinging it large on the Irish election but I am fighting this.

    PS: Who knew that that nice gentle Alistair Stewart was such an active and edgy Twitter warrior? Not me.

    Wondering about Mary Nightingale now.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 10,283
    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    No, 'less' is okay as your value need not be an integer.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    Xtrain said:

    isam said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/1222864870695227398

    Everyone's a critic.

    https://twitter.com/arthistorynews/status/1222880096270409733?s=20
    Jim’ll Brexit
    Looks like Jim painted it!
    Haha Maybe!

    https://twitter.com/jimllpaintit/status/1217155678554533889?s=21
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    matt said:

    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    Even free stuff has a price. That people don’t realise that by now...

    Sadly, it appears that my one-man mission to preach the evils of social media for the past few years has mostly fallen on deaf ears (although hopefully educated many parents and teenagers along the way).

    A third of the world’s population now have a Facebook account used in the past month, although their stock did drop 7% yesterday on the back of their lowest ever growth figures - maybe a small glimpse of light at the end of the long tunnel, but I doubt it.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 47,017
    Is Jim Davidson a Leaver then?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    No arguments, but depending on what the data's going to be used for the collector could potentially be sailing very close to the wind.

    FWIW, I tend to think GDPR is a sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut kind of approach; I'm not convinced that the marginal protection it affords justifies the enormous compliance cost and infrastructure.
    Agreed, but I’m happy to benefit from the consultancy fees in the meantime!
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,484
    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    Geofencing as a campaign tool (I'm guessing this would not be legal in the UK ?) :

    https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/01/29/trumps-geofencing-could-be-a-potent-political-issue/
    If you attend an evangelical or a Catholic Church, a women’s rights march or a political rally of any kind, especially in a seriously contested state, the odds are that your cellphone ID number, home address, partisan affiliation and the identifying information of the people around you will be provided by geofencing marketers to campaigns, lobbyists and other interest groups…

    …The data generally provides information about individual users’ day-to-day activities and preferences: Where they shop; What they do for fun; What other apps they use, for how long, and what they do in those apps; Where they live; Where they work; With whom they associate.

    You might think that Donald Trump holds political rallies simply because he enjoys the adulation, but that’s not the real purpose. His campaign manager Brad Pascale recently boasted about the information he harvests from MAGA rallies:

    Out of more than 20,000 identified voters who came to a recent Trump rally in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 57.9 percent did not have a history of voting for Republicans. Remarkably, 4,413 attendees didn’t even vote in the last election — a clear indication that President Trump is energizing Americans who were previously not engaged in politics…

    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    IANAL but at first glance, none of it is illegal (and we all click through GDPR popups). Some and perhaps all these are in use here, and I'm not sure Boris will be rushing to ban techniques that helped him win, and other parties will not want to ban techniques they use. There is probably also a reason the Russian interference report is locked in the Number 10 safe when it should normally have been published last autumn.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Wrong.

    That’s comparing apples with oranges.

    In 2014 about 38% of the total Scottish electorate voted for Independence, so it is a 5% increase since 2014.
    Non voters are also included in the poll
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
  • eekeek Posts: 31,053
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 47,017
    Stark_Dawning said:

    No, 'less' is okay as your value need not be an integer.

    In fact it's better there IMO.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
    There’s clearly an awful lot gone on behind the scenes with this decision - the majority of which is going to be classified for many decades.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
    If they had any sense they would be calling the likes of Trump's best mate Jeff Bezos and tell them to stop wasting their time making those crap Amazon exclusive shows and get on making network gear.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    edited January 2020
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    Yet curators average only £37 500 in London.

    The average London salary is £700 a month ie £36 400

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/economy-business/work-incomes/constituency-data-wages/
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
    There’s clearly an awful lot gone on behind the scenes with this decision - the majority of which is going to be classified for many decades.
    It was clear that was the case, when even the biggest kid in the room Trumpy mcTrumpy face didn't go on the twitter machine and say anything.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    You seem awfy concerned about how voters are going to break in a referendum that's not going to happen.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 32,484
    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:


    The other campaign employing this technique on an extensive basis - Bernie Sanders.
    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.
    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    Never mind free wifi, how many PBers do anything other than click through GDPR popups simply to read some article linked from a pb comment?

    How many pbers have adjusted apps' access to location data on their phones?

    And religiously log out of Twitter, FB and the rest before surfing the web?

    And do their shopping in 93 different trips to stop supermarkets aggregating data on what they buy (and never mind credit cards and loyalty cards)?

    And refused to vote for Boris after CCHQ was caught faking videos?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,752
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    They'll be getting replies from barristers at those salary rates.....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    You seem awfy concerned about how voters are going to break in a referendum that's not going to happen.
    For at least 5 years and the full Boris term yes, in 10 years maybe.

    Quebec's 2nd referendum was 15 years after the first
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    The job role is likely to be more of a food and beverage director, in charge of all the coffee shops at the galleries. In which case the salary’s about right.

    It’s an art gallery, of course they use fancy-pants titles - and they just got better publicity and reach for their vacancy than a load of paid adverts would have done. Marketing 101.
  • eekeek Posts: 31,053
    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
    There’s clearly an awful lot gone on behind the scenes with this decision - the majority of which is going to be classified for many decades.
    I think the fact BT has to remove equipment to meet the 33% rule tells you everything you need to know about how the decision was reached.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    Sandpit said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    The job role is likely to be more of a food and beverage director, in charge of all the coffee shops at the galleries. In which case the salary’s about right.

    It’s an art gallery, of course they use fancy-pants titles - and they just got better publicity and reach for their vacancy than a load of paid adverts would have done. Marketing 101.
    Well they couldn't call it head of tea...

    PG Tips could be sold by Unilever as cuppa goes out of fashion

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-51309566
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    HYUFD said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Wrong.

    That’s comparing apples with oranges.

    In 2014 about 38% of the total Scottish electorate voted for Independence, so it is a 5% increase since 2014.
    Non voters are also included in the poll
    This is only a good point if you think a 95% turnout at a future referendum is remotely plausible.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Animal_pb said:

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Sandpit said:


    Every politician is doing this now - every engagement is all about the data.

    As I've said on here ad nauseam, the 2020 US election is going to be an absolute sh!t-show of fake news, fake adverts, fake photos, fake videos and total untruths on all sides - with Facebook and Google in the middle of it all, profiting massively from all the fakery and polarisation.

    Whoever wins, there's going to be a huge call to regulate or break up those two companies in particular.

    Two things... reportedly the Trump campaign and that of Sanders have made a mulch more extensive use of the technique than others - which is perhaps of significance for the outcome of close races, and therefore of interest to us.
    Secondly, to what extent is this particular use of data legal in the UK ?
    I assume that the collection of data comes from the user proactively saying they're attending the rally on Facebook, have 'liked' the politician on social media, are sharing their location publicly, or are connecting via WiFi or Bluetooth to a network set up at the event specifically for this purpose. A large number of people do this all the time, without realising the implications of it.

    I'm not an expert in this aspect of UK electoral law, but would have thought that targeting of people who have specifically opted in was fair game.

    (Also see comment on previous thread about Boris speech being on Facebook only. There's a reason for this, and again it's all about the data collection.)
    I'd have thought it would be more likely to infringe GDPR than electoral law, tbh. Clearly, not a US concern.
    The issue with the GDPR angle is that people still don’t read stuff that they’re agreeing to when there’s free WiFi to be had, or if they’re signing up to a politician’s mailing list. There’s never an option to take the free WiFi but opt out of the data collection.
    Never mind free wifi, how many PBers do anything other than click through GDPR popups simply to read some article linked from a pb comment?

    How many pbers have adjusted apps' access to location data on their phones?

    And religiously log out of Twitter, FB and the rest before surfing the web?

    And do their shopping in 93 different trips to stop supermarkets aggregating data on what they buy (and never mind credit cards and loyalty cards)?

    And refused to vote for Boris after CCHQ was caught faking videos?
    Good question.
    A possible solution which I already posted below:
    http://customercommons.org/home/tools/terms/

    A liberty minded government would fund, and/or legislate to produce, something along these lines.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,943
    MarqueeMark said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    They'll be getting replies from barristers at those salary rates.....
    Certainly if they do legal aid, if they are million pounds a year commercial QCs maybe not
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    MarqueeMark said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    They'll be getting replies from barristers at those salary rates.....
    It’s spelled ‘baristas’. ;)

    My coat...

    (It’s always happy hour somewhere, and right now it’s where I am!)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 80,686
    eek said:

    Sandpit said:

    RobD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has said his country will help the UK reduce risks associated with involving Huawei in its 5G network.

    He said officials would work together to "get this right" after the UK's decision to give the Chinese firm a limited role in building its system.

    Mr Pompeo added that intelligence-sharing arrangements between the two countries would continue.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51313481

    So a lot of bluff then? :D
    There’s clearly an awful lot gone on behind the scenes with this decision - the majority of which is going to be classified for many decades.
    I think the fact BT has to remove equipment to meet the 33% rule tells you everything you need to know about how the decision was reached.
    That it was a negotiated balancing of commercial, security and future trade interests ?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
    Perhaps "Leave the United Kingdom" and "Remain in the European Union"?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
    Perhaps "Leave the United Kingdom" and "Remain in the European Union"?
    Unless the referendum is in the next 24 hours, I don't think so. ;)
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    The U.K. government accepted the SNP Scottish Government’s form of the referendum question in 2014, whereas the Electoral Commission wrote the question for the 2016 EU referendum to be as impartial as possible.

    There’s a substantial body of evidence that suggests there’s an inbuilt bias towards the option seen as positive.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 61,257
    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    Eh?

    So who are the non-voters?
  • eekeek Posts: 31,053
    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
    Perhaps "Leave the United Kingdom" and "Remain in the European Union"?
    Unless the referendum is in the next 24 hours, I don't think so. ;)
    "Leave the United Kingdom" or "Join the European Union". For Scotland that probably adds a very % to the Leave vote.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    This morning I went into an independent coffee shop and was confronted with a menu with a string of items that I hadn't heard of. Am I pig ignorant for not knowing what a "half and half" or a "Lawson" is?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    edited January 2020
    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
    Perhaps "Leave the United Kingdom" and "Remain in the European Union"?
    Unless the referendum is in the next 24 hours, I don't think so. ;)
    How about, "How many Unions do you think Scotland should be part of?"

    Needs rephrasing to avoid ending on a preposition.

    Sturgeon and Johnson can co-lead the One campaign.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,678
    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    RobD said:

    Endillion said:

    eek said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    HYUFD said:

    Theuniondivvie said:

    Actually, the size of the swing in less than 2 months might be the most interesting thing about this poll.

    Edit: apols to Green Machine for hijacking, it's a rough old game on PB.

    https://twitter.com/BallotBoxScot/status/1222876741246603264?s=20

    So including Don't Knows only 43% back Yes, even less than the 45% who voted Yes in 2014
    Why you persist with this auld bollox is a mystery.

    So including Don't Knows only 42% back No, 17% points less than the 55% who voted No in 2014, etc.

    Edit: sorry, FEWER
    As Quebec 1995 showed Don't Knows go No, Yes to independence from Canada led most final polls but No won 51% to 49%
    On that basis the reason we are living on Friday is because the question was "Do you wish to remain in the EU" rather than "Do you wish to leave the EU"
    That wasn't the question.

    In fact, the reason that wasn't the question was precisely because it's well known that Yes/No type questions skew the results. Hence the Leave/Remain dichotomy.

    ISTR a discussion back in 2014 about SNP supposedly trying to gerrymander the result by framing the Scottish Independence referendum question in the most beneficial way (to them, obviously). My memory claims that having "Yes" as a vote for independence was supposed to help their campaign feel more positive, although it may be playing tricks on me.
    Next time perhaps it'll be "remain" and "leave". :D
    Perhaps "Leave the United Kingdom" and "Remain in the European Union"?
    Unless the referendum is in the next 24 hours, I don't think so. ;)
    How about, "How many Unions do you think Scotland should be part of?"

    Needs rephrasing to avoid ending on a preposition.

    Sturgeon and Farage can co-lead the One campaign.
    One, the universal postal union. :p
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,621
    O/T, for anyone betting on F1 points totals this year - Chinese Grand Prix looking increasingly likely to be canned, for the obvious reason.

    https://www.motorsportweek.com/news/id/25976
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 47,017
    HYUFD said:

    For at least 5 years and the full Boris term yes, in 10 years maybe.

    Oh so a Boris Term is 10 years, is it? The usual not good enough for some reason.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,097
    AlastairMeeks said:

    Thank you for taking the time to give us such a detailed survey, @GreenMachine.

    Thanks @AlastairMeeks.

    Glad you like it.

    It's always good to cover stuff that is very useful to the website.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 87,038
    AlastairMeeks said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    This morning I went into an independent coffee shop and was confronted with a menu with a string of items that I hadn't heard of. Am I pig ignorant for not knowing what a "half and half" or a "Lawson" is?
    AFAIK, Half and half is half cream / half milk, a Lawson no idea, a line of coke to go with your coffee i.e Nigella style?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 23,304
    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    Yet curators average only £37 500 in London.

    The average London salary is £700 a month ie £36 400

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/economy-business/work-incomes/constituency-data-wages/
    And yet the Daily Mail tells us that folk on £100k are "Middle Class".
  • llefllef Posts: 301
    good news for the UK's electric van maker Arrival

    "UPS announced Wednesday investments in electric trucks, the testing of self-driving vans and the construction of a new “super hub” as part of its efforts to capitalize on the growth of e-commerce.

    UPS, which sees electric vehicles as a key part of its sustainability efforts, will purchase 10,000 electric vehicles from U.K.-based startup Arrival and take a minority stake in the company. The financial details were not disclosed."

    https://www.cnbc.com/2020/01/29/ups-is-eyeing-a-driverless-and-electric-future-for-its-fleet.html?__source=twitter|main
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    SandyRentool said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    Yet curators average only £37 500 in London.

    The average London salary is £700 a month ie £36 400

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/economy-business/work-incomes/constituency-data-wages/
    And yet the Daily Mail tells us that folk on £100k are "Middle Class".
    Well, as opposed to what?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 80,027
    AlastairMeeks said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    This morning I went into an independent coffee shop and was confronted with a menu with a string of items that I hadn't heard of. Am I pig ignorant for not knowing what a "half and half" or a "Lawson" is?
    I'm afraid you're out of step with the cool kids, now you're living out in deepest Brexitshire.
    FPT re the Essex-Suffolk border, I once went out with a girl from Nayland.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    Pulpstar said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    This morning I went into an independent coffee shop and was confronted with a menu with a string of items that I hadn't heard of. Am I pig ignorant for not knowing what a "half and half" or a "Lawson" is?
    I'm afraid you're out of step with the cool kids, now you're living out in deepest Brexitshire.
    FPT re the Essex-Suffolk border, I once went out with a girl from Nayland.
    That sounds like the start of a limerick. Nayland is very nice, but since it is in Suffolk, it is clearly not in the Suffolk-Essex borders, which is only found in north Essex. Everything north of the border is south Suffolk.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,399
    AlastairMeeks said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    This morning I went into an independent coffee shop and was confronted with a menu with a string of items that I hadn't heard of. Am I pig ignorant for not knowing what a "half and half" or a "Lawson" is?
    A leavers shopping basket


  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1222903975885725696

    Ignoring the snark, this doesn't sound like a group ready to play nice just yet.
  • ManchesterKurtManchesterKurt Posts: 931
    Endillion said:

    SandyRentool said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    Yet curators average only £37 500 in London.

    The average London salary is £700 a month ie £36 400

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/economy-business/work-incomes/constituency-data-wages/
    And yet the Daily Mail tells us that folk on £100k are "Middle Class".
    Well, as opposed to what?
    Where the 'middle' is ?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,976
    ManchesterKurt said:

    Endillion said:

    SandyRentool said:

    HYUFD said:

    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Tate Britain defends job ad for £40k 'head of coffee'

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-51310516

    Seems rather low paid for London to me....

    Yet curators average only £37 500 in London.

    The average London salary is £700 a month ie £36 400

    https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/economy-business/work-incomes/constituency-data-wages/
    And yet the Daily Mail tells us that folk on £100k are "Middle Class".
    Well, as opposed to what?
    Where the 'middle' is ?
    I wouldn't say people on £100k are the epitome of middle class, but how else would you classify them, other than middle class?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,898
    I believe Morris Dancer likes a coin? Better snap up a gold 50p piece before the sovvy ring brigade snaffle them all.

    https://twitter.com/Feorlean/status/1222806123935346692?s=20
This discussion has been closed.

© Vanilla Keystone Theme 2025