|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Mon 16 Feb 22:24
The great leader in an attempt to bring in Blair`s digital id by the back door has declared he wishes to age restrict VPNs. This requires everyone to submit Digital ID to use a VPN to prove they are over 16.
He claims this is to "protect children"....the Labour Party protecting kids is almost hilarious at this point.
He also wants to ban infinite scrolling, which is a bit of a misnomer but certainly dafc.net seems to fit the bill.
A man in 1915 could go his whole life without any contact with the state with the exception of the Post Office, it seems every government since then has aimed to end this utopia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Tue 3 Mar 10:53
"A man in 1915 could go his whole life without any contact with the state with the exception of the Post Office, it seems every government since then has aimed to end this utopia."
Not sure that statement stands scrutiny ?
The state obliged citizens to register in national census returns from 1841 onwards - and children were legally obliged to attend school starting from 1870.
Scotland obliged parents to register a child`s birth from 1855, England & Wales from 1875.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Tue 3 Mar 12:09
I just love factual takedowns.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: DBP
Date: Tue 3 Mar 14:27
There is no way I’m giving my most personal data, an image of my likeness or official id documents to third parties to prove my age…
I’ve already unsubscribed from several subscriptions when asked for this, including discord (who’s users have just experienced a large data breach)
I will never get a digital id - we’re not a permission based society and I’m not having all my disparate data collated to be trawled over by more and more powerful AI - and the now facial recognition cameras that are put up, the more I’ll put on my covid face mask when walking about. To quote our Home Secretary, I refuse to have the eyes of the state on me at all times, and I dread to think of the implications on is all of that happens.
I refuse to put thinks like banking on my phone, apart from my ‘jam jar’ mobile bank which never has anything more than what I need that weekend - if I lost my phone or it’s stolen, no one will be able to even know where my savings, main account are!
I also never use internet services especially on mobile without vpn, so if that’s banned then I’ll be going back to dumb phone
Post Edited (Tue 03 Mar 14:28)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Tue 3 Mar 19:17
Quote:
DBP, Tue 3 Mar 14:27
There is no way I’m giving my most personal data, an image of my likeness or official id documents to third parties to prove my age…
I’ve already unsubscribed from several subscriptions when asked for this, including discord (who’s users have just experienced a large data breach)
I will never get a digital id - we’re not a permission based society and I’m not having all my disparate data collated to be trawled over by more and more powerful AI - and the now facial recognition cameras that are put up, the more I’ll put on my covid face mask when walking about. To quote our Home Secretary, I refuse to have the eyes of the state on me at all times, and I dread to think of the implications on is all of that happens.
I refuse to put thinks like banking on my phone, apart from my ‘jam jar’ mobile bank which never has anything more than what I need that weekend - if I lost my phone or it’s stolen, no one will be able to even know where my savings, main account are!
I also never use internet services especially on mobile without vpn, so if that’s banned then I’ll be going back to dumb phone
I also don`t want Starmer knowing my porno preferences.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Wed 4 Mar 22:04
Quote:
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Tue 3 Mar 10:53
Not sure that statement stands scrutiny ?
The state obliged citizens to register in national census returns from 1841 onwards - and children were legally obliged to attend school starting from 1870.
Scotland obliged parents to register a child`s birth from 1855, England & Wales from 1875.
The census registration only became compulsory in.....yep 1915, due to the war and the National register in August of that year.
State education is not compulsory today, never mind in 1915.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Wed 4 Mar 22:38
And yes parents had to register their children.
The child has no contact with the GRO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Thu 5 Mar 17:54
"State education is not compulsory today, never mind in 1915."
I sat on a School Board for a few years which (amongst other things) interviewed truanting pupils and their parents.
At least one father ended up in Sheriff Court and was fined - he apparently didn`t take heed and made a second appearance where the Sheriff "advised" him that a further visit would most likely result in a short custodial sentence.
Post Edited (Thu 05 Mar 17:55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 5 Mar 23:04
The man in 1915 went to Slough Grammar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Fri 6 Mar 08:59
Which would be a state school ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Fri 6 Mar 09:42
No, it`s an old nickname of Eton College.
So are you done VEE?
He went to a private or independent school, he never had children or if he did the mother registered the birth, worked in a private business and he died in 1915 before the August national register.
If you wish to be really pedantic he never voted and he never, ever said even a "good morning" to the local village Bobby.
The axiom holds up to your scrutiny.
Post Edited (Fri 06 Mar 10:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Fri 6 Mar 17:44
An awful lot of ifs and maybes in this scenario.
Perhaps he died 1915 in military service - which would be the ultimate contact with the state and entirely consistent with being an Old Etonian ?
If in business he would have been paying Income Tax.
It`s more than reasonable that he would wish to vote - and that required owning a certain amount of property and being on the valuation roll.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Fri 6 Mar 18:00
I only need one man for the axiom to hold.
The axiom is "a man could" not "any man can".
Look where you are now, fumbling about discussing his property price and claiming to know his politics.
A couple of posts ago you were telling us a baby of less than 42 days could have contact with the GRO, he must have been on the census and claiming state mandated education was actually mandated state education.
You are where many have been with the 1915 axiom, you know it holds but are now arguing over process.
Post Edited (Fri 06 Mar 18:03)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 6 Mar 18:30
So you`re saying 111 years ago, under a very particular and incredibly unlikely set of circumstances, a man could live his whole life without coming into contact with the state?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Fri 6 Mar 18:34
This mythical one of a kind man seems to have been able to bodyswerve every facet of contact with the state from birth to death.
It doesn`t need much imagination to assume how an Old Etonian would vote...... and you can`t find much more of an establishment figure given that background.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Fri 6 Mar 18:56
So now you are just arguing over my random pick of Eton and running with that being the only non-state school in 1915?
He didn`t vote, I told you that.
You seem to be trying to put yourself in his shoes VEE, with all your preferences and assumptions.
Just like school thing you have changed my words. I never said he was in business I said he worked in a private business as in not any kind of civil servant.
Let`s see what would be a suitable occupation for an old Etonian in 1915?
A trapeze artist or something like that.
Go on then VEE, go search for government circus regulations 1915, I genuinely no idea myself.
Oh an his younger brother, who attended Mr. Valentine`s school in Blackheath, worked as a butcher`s assistant in Whitechapel, stayed in common lodgings, unmarried with no issue and not into politics died a couple of days before him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 6 Mar 19:08
If the internet and VPNs had been about in 1915 then this man and his brother could also have continued to avoid any contact with the state by simply not using either.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Fri 6 Mar 19:23
Well he could use the post office, I guess a telegram is the internet of it`s day?
Post Edited (Sat 07 Mar 01:34)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Sat 7 Mar 09:07
"Just like school thing you have changed my words. I never said he was in business I said he worked in a private business as in not any kind of civil servant."
Regardless of his educational background - I never alluded to his being a civil servant - if he worked in a private business he would have had to pay Income Tax surely ?
Birth not registered - not recorded on a census etc., etc.
I`m intrigued by this "Man Who Never Was" scenario, possible in theory perhaps - maybe (?) - but back in the real world..................
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Sat 7 Mar 11:01
Very few people paid tax in 1915.
His birth was registered, we`ve already gone over all this.
And him being on the census is fine as long as he didn`t declare it....just like his birth, someone putting his name on a form is not contact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: veteraneastender
Date: Sat 7 Mar 16:58
Sounds like the plot for an "invisible" man book - did Frederick Forsyth not go there in 1970 with his first novel ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 18:44
You picked your year poorly. 1915 was the year that the governemnt lowered the tax threshold and hugely expanded the tax base to fund WWI.
Do you want to change your year to 1914?
Whether you do or not, your most recent caveat seem to be saying that contact with government needs to be conscious and cosensual contact, and with that you are also ruling out most of the contact we have with the government today, no?
Is receiving a speeding fine through the post more or less contact than having your birth registered or appearing on a census? What about being recorded by CCTV on your way to Tesco?
You could also move to a remote community in the Highlands and live off grid free of government interference if you feel the need, or you could buy a van with dodgy registration off some travellers and either join them or become like a modern day David Banner and go alone, hopefully without the anger issues.
Mind you, even that`s becoming even more difficult due to cash in hand work being demonised since it is popular with folk who don`t have the government`s permission to work in the UK.
Actually, most of the government over-reach we`ve endured of late has been enacted as a result of right wing hysteria over foreign people: whenever they are panicking and/or raging about terrorists or migrants, they gladly open the door to the sort of legislation that trades individual freedom for the illusion of security.
Post Edited (Thu 12 Mar 18:45)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 12 Mar 18:50
Quote:
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 18:44
Also, you picked your year poorly, 1915 was the exact year that the governemnt lowered the tax threshold and hugely expanded the tax base to fund WWI.
Do you want to change your year to 1914?
I never picked the year.
The tax threshold was lowered in September 1915, after his death.
So no, the year was chosen by the author wisely I see no reason to change it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:17
Quote:
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 18:44
Whether you do or not, your most recent caveat seem to be saying that contact with government needs to be conscious and cosensual contact, and with that you are also ruling out most of the contact we have with the government today, no?
My understanding is the Post office is there to represent the "acceptable level" of state involvement, an undisputed good and pragmatic agreement between citizen and state.
Quote:
Is receiving a speeding fine through the post more or less contact than having your birth registered or appearing on a census? What about being recorded by CCTV on your way to Tesco?
Quid pro quo Wosit, what conclusions have you reached on those examples?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:19
Fair enough, I stand corrected on my least relevant point.
To address how this relates to the more pertinent point, I wonder how the government of the time justified raising the tax threshold?
Mind you, the vast majority of the few people who were allowed to vote before 1918 wouldn`t have been impacted by it. Are we counting the increased votrer base as further government imposition on people by the way?
I`m also concerned about your increasingly narrow definition of a man from 1915 (who died before september) who had a top class education but didn`t ever earn enough to reach the tax threshold when it was a mere £160 pa - not even a decent middle-class salary - with the average doctor earning around ten times that in 1914, and the Bank of England inflation calculator says it is £16,110.68 in today`s money. Presumably your guy never voted because he didn`t have enough means to qualify?
By the way, how old was he when he died?
“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:41
Quote:
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:19
Fair enough, I stand corrected on my least relevant point.
To address how this relates to the more pertinent point, I wonder how the government of the time justified raising the tax threshold?
Probably something along the lines of "save the empire from the abominable Boche." or some other cunning hook.
Quote:
I`m also concerned about your increasingly narrow definition of a man from 1915 (who died before september) who had a top class education but didn`t ever earn enough to reach the tax threshold when it was a mere £160 pa - not even a decent middle-class salary - with the average doctor earning around ten times that in 1914, and the Bank of England inflation calculator says it is £16,110.68 in today`s money. Presumably your guy never voted because he didn`t have enough means to qualify?
Oh Wotsit don`t take on so, no need to fret.
As was established earlier in the thread the man actually had to die before August 1915 to avoid the compulsory national register. The tax threshold is somewhat irrelevant although probably adds to the ethos of 1915 being the year "everything changed" and also cited as some as the height of the British Empire (argue to the wall over that one).
He did not have to have a "top level education", he just had to attend a non-state school. Only 20-30% of schools from 1880-1915 were state schools, vast majority were voluntary or church schools, less than 10% "public fee paying" schools.
So plenty of scope for our man to have a number of possible educational backgrounds.
Quote:
By the way, how old was he when he died?
Well that`s the thing Wotsit and your not gonna believe this but he was 69 years 364 days old when he died....just one day short of the 1912 over 70s pension, can you believe it?
*EDIT The percentages are not the number of state/public/indy schools but the percentage of pupils attending them.
Post Edited (Thu 12 Mar 19:48)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:42
Quote:
Is receiving a speeding fine through the post more or less contact than having your birth registered or appearing on a census? What about being recorded by CCTV on your way to Tesco?
Quid pro quo Wosit, what conclusions have you reached on those examples?
I don`t like any state over-reach, or any state at all for that matter so it is a moot issue for me. I`d bring the lot down in an ideal world, but I have accept that this position has some work to do before it is even close to being a real option so I have to have a somewhat more pragmatic outlook day to day.
To answer your question though, I think they are fairly equal and, as a person who doesn`t enjoy the state imposing on me, and given the lack of conscription during my lifetime, I would much rather live now than in 1915.
My point for you is that, since at least 2001, it has been manufactured hysteria against foreign people that has fueled the over-reach.
Even the increased tax threshold in 1915 was justified by folk being hysterical about Germans.
It goes back further than that too: for example income tax is only a thing in the first place because of manufactured hysteria against the French.
Edit: this guy is getting ever more unique. There maybe was a guy like that in 1915, but there were probaly more travellers (who didn`t even register their births) who had literally zero contact with the state, just as there are today (albeit fewer than there were due to right wing hysteria against travellers.)
Post Edited (Thu 12 Mar 20:01)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Bletchley_Par
Date: Thu 12 Mar 20:04
Quote:
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 12 Mar 19:42
My point for you is that, since at least 2001, it has been manufactured hysteria against foreign people that has fueled the over-reach.
Even the increased tax threshold in 1915 was justified by folk being hysterical about Germans.
It goes back further than that too: for example income tax is only a thing in the first place because of manufactured hysteria against the French.
I don`t think we are having any great reveal that war is used to curb freedoms. I like your 2001 as a pivotal year and would add fear of crime also added to any safety hysteria that was used to curb freedoms.
Post Edited (Thu 12 Mar 20:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Dave_1885
Date: Thu 12 Mar 20:38
Anyway, back on topic about Mr Kier…….how on earth does he get past the latest scandal in the Mandelson mess?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: MikeyLeonard
Date: Thu 12 Mar 23:53
After reading the above, is it one nil to Wotsit or one nil to Bletchley ? Fecked if I know. . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
