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

kinabalu said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

HYUFD said:

FF43 said:

Pulpstar said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/StandUp4Brexit/status/1257201707777429505?s=20

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.

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

JohnLilburne said:

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.

MarqueeMark said:

Pagan2 said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks 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..."

JohnLilburne said:

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

edmundintokyo said:

MarqueeMark said:

Pagan2 said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks said:

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

edmundintokyo said:

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks 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*.

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

AlastairMeeks said:

rkrkrk said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

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.

Cyclefree said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.......

JohnLilburne 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.

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

FF43 said:

edmundintokyo said:

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

Nigelb said:

Cyclefree said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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....

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.

FrancisUrquhart said:

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....

edmundintokyo said:

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?

TheScreamingEagles said:

https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1257203431871315969?s=21
https://twitter.com/rcolvile/status/1257203887599222790?s=21

FF43 said:

Pagan2 said:

FF43 said:

edmundintokyo said:

FF43 said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

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.

Alistair said:

Malmesbury 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.

FrancisUrquhart 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.

kinabalu said:

Philip_Thompson said:

kinabalu said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

HYUFD said:

FF43 said:

Pulpstar said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

HYUFD said:

https://twitter.com/StandUp4Brexit/status/1257201707777429505?s=20

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).

Pro_Rata said:

TheScreamingEagles 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.

AlastairMeeks said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

Philip_Thompson 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.

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

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson 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

Philip_Thompson said:

Pagan2 said:

Philip_Thompson 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.

Philip_Thompson said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

dr_spyn said:

Conor Burns in a spot of bother.

https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1257251528559165440

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart 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

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

Pagan2 said:

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks 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

glw said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

CarlottaVance said:

FrancisUrquhart 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.

Philip_Thompson said:

Alistair said:

Malmesbury 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.

No_Offence_Alan said:

Cyclefree said:

HYUFD said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

FrancisUrquhart 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.

rural_voter said:

Cyclefree said:

DavidL said:

AlastairMeeks 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.

AlastairMeeks said:

https://twitter.com/PickardJE/status/1257254543919890433?s=20