FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Social Analytics for Brexit victory
Social Analytics for Brexit victory
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please?" Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber." Ban Facebook and Twitter then? If people should be free of influence as you say should the posting of campaign material through letterboxes also be banned? | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber. Ban Facebook and Twitter then? If people should be free of influence as you say should the posting of campaign material through letterboxes also be banned? " Probably, until they fix the problem of who has access to UK residents data and how that data is being used. I did not say people should be free of influence, I asked the question is it justifiable that American political interests should be employed to influence the political will of a sovereign nation. In the same respect I would argue the same if any other country did the same thing. Posting Campaign material from UK parties, there are rules and regulations on the publishing of those materials, so it would be fine. As with progression they can always be improved. It is quite naive to think that free technology is anything but that, yours and everyone else, mine included data is probably the most valuable commodity on the planet these days, and as a result we give it away without a care in the world. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber. Ban Facebook and Twitter then? If people should be free of influence as you say should the posting of campaign material through letterboxes also be banned? " No not ban them. However, creating an echochamber on social media requires coding and programming. The key would be to find and work with the company to bar that coding. And campaign material is one of two things, either ban it outright, or let everyone do it. So long as the figures and stats published are referenced and the reference is provided, so those who wish, can find the figure and ensure it is not taken out of context. | |||
"Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please?" Actually it is a British company that did this. Their name is Cambridge Analytica, and they set up a subsidiary in New York to help the Republican right wing, first Senator Cruz and finally Trump. It is believed that the ultra right wing US software billionaire Robert Mercer is the main investor in Cambridge Analytica and the driving force behind its use of OCEAN data to influence the direction of politics in the UK and USA. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber. Ban Facebook and Twitter then? If people should be free of influence as you say should the posting of campaign material through letterboxes also be banned? No not ban them. However, creating an echochamber on social media requires coding and programming. The key would be to find and work with the company to bar that coding. And campaign material is one of two things, either ban it outright, or let everyone do it. So long as the figures and stats published are referenced and the reference is provided, so those who wish, can find the figure and ensure it is not taken out of context." Sounds reasonable, the better question is now ethical coding and ethical programming?. If we are entertaining the possibility about what should be considered ethical, should it be better to create social platforms which are ethically programmed. Which do use your data, in order to assure that data is not being sold yet the company needs revenue still, would it be right to charge those people a small fee. Personally, if it meant media free from external influence using your data and manipulating to it being used against you then yes. | |||
| |||
"^^^^ Here is a link to a youtube clip that you may find interesting: https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc" Thanks. more on the company seems bannon is board member https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Analytica | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please?" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Grey area but i don't think its right by any political group to do or use. The public should be free of influence as much as possible when making democratic decisions, they should not be incoporated into an ideological echo chamber. Ban Facebook and Twitter then? If people should be free of influence as you say should the posting of campaign material through letterboxes also be banned? " it's funny I remember when Obama came to the UK and said we should stay in the EU people like you said he has no right to intervene now someone else did the same thing you're defending them? | |||
| |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people." Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people." I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? | |||
"^^^^ Here is a link to a youtube clip that you may find interesting: https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc" Ted Cruz used it. Employing that technique Didn't lead to Ted Cruz winning though did it. | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? " Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. " It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. | |||
"^^^^ Here is a link to a youtube clip that you may find interesting: https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc Ted Cruz used it. Employing that technique Didn't lead to Ted Cruz winning though did it." But he did go from a 5% bottom of the pile popularity to over 30% popularity and in second place to Trump thus knocking out all the other candidates. And then CA openly took over the Trump campaign. I would not be surprised to find out that CA was covertly running at the Trump campaign a lot earlier and that Cruz was the far rights stalking horse. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? " Why don't you start banning printing presses and burning books whilst you are at it. -Matt | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. " And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt" So you suggest i want to ban printing presses and burn books  in one post and then you post about banning companies who collect data, very sensible.  | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Why don't you start banning printing presses and burning books whilst you are at it. -Matt" I'm actually making the case on this thread that these things should not be banned, neither should Twitter, Facebook or data collection companies. | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt So you suggest i want to ban printing presses and burn books in one post and then you post about banning companies who collect data, very sensible. "Where have I posted about banning companies who collect data? -Matt | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Why don't you start banning printing presses and burning books whilst you are at it. -Matt I'm actually making the case on this thread that these things should not be banned, neither should Twitter, Facebook or data collection companies. " I must have missed your sarcasm then, very sorry. Based on your general right wing stance and what you had said I didn't realise you were being sarcastic about banning twitter, facebook, election posters etc. -Matt | |||
"^^^^ Here is a link to a youtube clip that you may find interesting: https://youtu.be/n8Dd5aVXLCc Ted Cruz used it. Employing that technique Didn't lead to Ted Cruz winning though did it. But he did go from a 5% bottom of the pile popularity to over 30% popularity and in second place to Trump thus knocking out all the other candidates. And then CA openly took over the Trump campaign. I would not be surprised to find out that CA was covertly running at the Trump campaign a lot earlier and that Cruz was the far rights stalking horse." Of course he went from a 5% base at the start to 30% when he finished 2nd to Trump. Its obvious that Ted Cruz's percentage would increase over time through the primaries as other candidates were eliminated he would pick up some of their support. I don't need a data analytics company to explain that to me, its as obvious as saying "water is wet". A lot of candidates at the start means a wider spread of percentage support and as the primaries progress fewer candidates means higher percentage support as others are eliminated. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Why don't you start banning printing presses and burning books whilst you are at it. -Matt I'm actually making the case on this thread that these things should not be banned, neither should Twitter, Facebook or data collection companies. I must have missed your sarcasm then, very sorry. Based on your general right wing stance and what you had said I didn't realise you were being sarcastic about banning twitter, facebook, election posters etc. -Matt" I very clearly said "if they ban" not "i would ban". | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Why don't you start banning printing presses and burning books whilst you are at it. -Matt I'm actually making the case on this thread that these things should not be banned, neither should Twitter, Facebook or data collection companies. I must have missed your sarcasm then, very sorry. Based on your general right wing stance and what you had said I didn't realise you were being sarcastic about banning twitter, facebook, election posters etc. -Matt I very clearly said "if they ban" not "i would ban". " Fair enough, so where did I mention banning companies collecting data? -Matt | |||
"I don't need a data analytics company to explain that to me, its as obvious as saying "water is wet". A lot of candidates at the start means a wider spread of percentage support and as the primaries progress fewer candidates means higher percentage support as others are eliminated. " Of course you don't, your totally immune to any manipulation... Now how did that John Lennon song go... Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV And you think you're so clever and classless and free But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt So you suggest i want to ban printing presses and burn books in one post and then you post about banning companies who collect data, very sensible.
Where have I posted about banning companies who collect data?
-Matt"Everything about your post said you are against the collection of data. | |||
"I don't need a data analytics company to explain that to me, its as obvious as saying "water is wet". A lot of candidates at the start means a wider spread of percentage support and as the primaries progress fewer candidates means higher percentage support as others are eliminated. Of course you don't, your totally immune to any manipulation... Now how did that John Lennon song go... Keep you doped with religion and sex and TV And you think you're so clever and classless and free But you're still fucking peasants as far as I can see" How is it manipulation for a candidate to increase his support from a wide base when other candidates are eliminated. As other candidates are eliminated then their support has to go somewhere and it will go to the remaining candidates still left in the race. Sorry but its bleedin obvious. | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt So you suggest i want to ban printing presses and burn books in one post and then you post about banning companies who collect data, very sensible.
Where have I posted about banning companies who collect data?
-Matt
Everything about your post said you are against the collection of data. "Ahhh right. So you missed the whole fucking point of it then? Yes, I am against the collection of data in general. But I was not advocating the 'ban of companies collecting data'. Companies can be banned. Consumers can choose to interact with most (not all) companies if they want to. My whole point was about the two bills, the DE Bill and the IP Bill brought in by Teresa May that mandate the *government* collection of data. Centralised collection of citizen data, regardless of their consent or what companies they chose to be a customer of. That is a very different thing. That is something that the EU deem to be illegal, but that May is hell-bent on bringing in regardless. All under the guise of 'snooping on the bad guys'. Despite the 'bad guys' being able to side-step around it very simply. And as a side effect, now the general populations entire browsing habits will be collated and accessible by the likes of the Food Standards agency etc. -Matt | |||
| |||
| |||
"They won by fake news lol." It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? " Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. | |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. " Let's face it,As a marketing strategy, it's long past breaking news. . Some seem indignant,that personal data, was made available to the leave campaign, And yet the same people are quite happy to accept,that the same data,is quite freely available to companies that sell,phones,shoes,cars etc etc In fact,if they're selling, they've got that data. So C'mon,grow up,it's hardly a scandal, More the age we live in. . It's also a bit rich,Remainers questioning any strategy used by the leave campaign. When their own campaign was run on a strategy of,fear and intimidation. Full of false,doom laden prophecies, Half truths,and downright lies. . I'm thinking,it's not really the strategy that's the problem. The real problem for the, young,graduate rich Remainers is, they didn't have the brains, too utilize it themselves. | |||
| |||
" My whole point was about the two bills, the DE Bill and the IP Bill brought in by Teresa May that mandate the *government* collection of data. Centralised collection of citizen data, regardless of their consent or what companies they chose to be a customer of. That is a very different thing. That is something that the EU deem to be illegal, but that May is hell-bent on bringing in regardless. All under the guise of 'snooping on the bad guys'. Despite the 'bad guys' being able to side-step around it very simply. And as a side effect, now the general populations entire browsing habits will be collated and accessible by the likes of the Food Standards agency etc. -Matt" What a bitch. People act like this is a small thing yet if it wasn't such a powerful tool for corruption you'd imagine it wouldn't have been top of her agenda. | |||
"There needs to be an alternative to the main players like Google suite, Facebook or Twitter where people pay a little in return for not having their information manhandled and their thoughts bought. " True there should be. The issue being that technically those systems would be breaking the law. The government is mandating the installation of back doors into the security of many online systems. Despite repeated demonstrations that these backdoors are going to be mis-used -Matt | |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. Let's face it,As a marketing strategy, it's long past breaking news. . Some seem indignant,that personal data, was made available to the leave campaign, And yet the same people are quite happy to accept,that the same data,is quite freely available to companies that sell,phones,shoes,cars etc etc In fact,if they're selling, they've got that data. So C'mon,grow up,it's hardly a scandal, More the age we live in. . It's also a bit rich,Remainers questioning any strategy used by the leave campaign. When their own campaign was run on a strategy of,fear and intimidation. Full of false,doom laden prophecies, Half truths,and downright lies. . I'm thinking,it's not really the strategy that's the problem. The real problem for the, young,graduate rich Remainers is, they didn't have the brains, too utilize it themselves. " A well worded post.  | |||
"There needs to be an alternative to the main players like Google suite, Facebook or Twitter where people pay a little in return for not having their information manhandled and their thoughts bought. True there should be. The issue being that technically those systems would be breaking the law. The government is mandating the installation of back doors into the security of many online systems. Despite repeated demonstrations that these backdoors are going to be mis-used -Matt" Can I reiterate... WHAT THE FUCK
Hopefully the people will rise against that. | |||
"I do wonder if they ban Facebook and Twitter and all social media and the delivering of leaflets through letterboxes, let's ban campaign posters too while we're at it, and they still lose elections, what excuse will they come up with then? Calls to ban social media are just your usual knee-jerk reactions from those who have suddenly become aware of part of a problem and rather than finding out what the problem is just shout 'ban it'. The clickbait posts on social media are an insignificant addition to the masses of data being collected and processed about each and every one of us. Regardless of social media or even internet access unless you deal purely in cash do not have a mobile phone and live totally off grid you are in their data databases and are being targeted. The only true defence there is against this is to know and understand how you are being manipulated and make a conscious effort to avoid being conditioned. Unfortunately most either don't see the need, can't be bothered and worst of all are not even interested so this problem will continue to expand as more and more of the power hungry and acquisitive become aware of its potential for behavioural control. It actually true what you are saying, we have become the instruments of our own demise. Until greater scrutiny on the usage of data is exposed, I think many on all sides of the politcal spectrum who want to take back control will be inadvertently be handing back control. And then you have Teresa May finally getting her 'snoopers charter' in in the form of the IP Bill and DE Bill. They are bringing in the centralised collection of mass information about people's online habits, ripe for exploitation. Hopefully exposing this latest manipulation will help persuade the 'I've done nothing wrong, I've got nothing to hide' people to understand what the actual issues at stake are here. These being bills that have been deemed illegal by the EU, but our own government is trying to impose on it's people. A very good example of a check we are going to lose when we leave the EU. -Matt" Actually the snoopers charter is in force now, came in end of last year, quietly. For those who do not get it, imagine if everybody were asked to give your home address and time you visited your local shop also every shop, pub, club you went to, now that information is held for a year, and can be accessed by the government anytime without a specific reason. Now four questions are posed? a. what can the government assume about you when you visit a certain shop? b. would knowledge of you going to that shop have influence on how people perceive you? c. could this information be used against you? for example blackmail. d. Is it fair that you have not done anything, yet the government treats you already like a potencial criminal? | |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. Let's face it,As a marketing strategy, it's long past breaking news. . Some seem indignant,that personal data, was made available to the leave campaign, And yet the same people are quite happy to accept,that the same data,is quite freely available to companies that sell,phones,shoes,cars etc etc In fact,if they're selling, they've got that data. So C'mon,grow up,it's hardly a scandal, More the age we live in. . It's also a bit rich,Remainers questioning any strategy used by the leave campaign. When their own campaign was run on a strategy of,fear and intimidation. Full of false,doom laden prophecies, Half truths,and downright lies. . I'm thinking,it's not really the strategy that's the problem. The real problem for the, young,graduate rich Remainers is, they didn't have the brains, too utilize it themselves. " Yes but if marketing lie about the product. We can return it. | |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. Let's face it,As a marketing strategy, it's long past breaking news. . Some seem indignant,that personal data, was made available to the leave campaign, And yet the same people are quite happy to accept,that the same data,is quite freely available to companies that sell,phones,shoes,cars etc etc In fact,if they're selling, they've got that data. So C'mon,grow up,it's hardly a scandal, More the age we live in. . It's also a bit rich,Remainers questioning any strategy used by the leave campaign. When their own campaign was run on a strategy of,fear and intimidation. Full of false,doom laden prophecies, Half truths,and downright lies. . I'm thinking,it's not really the strategy that's the problem. The real problem for the, young,graduate rich Remainers is, they didn't have the brains, too utilize it themselves. " ...or it just didn't occur to them to behave that way. They may also just have been out being, er, young | |||
" Rather than identify social media,as the reason for recent shock poll outcomes. Maybe it would be be more appropriate to ask, Why did the message conveyed, Resonate with so many people. Maybe if you watched the youtube clip I posted a link to you would have your answer from the man whose company designed the messages. You may like to pay very close attention to his very last statement about messages sent to a husband and wife in the same household. Let's face it,As a marketing strategy, it's long past breaking news. . Some seem indignant,that personal data, was made available to the leave campaign, And yet the same people are quite happy to accept,that the same data,is quite freely available to companies that sell,phones,shoes,cars etc etc In fact,if they're selling, they've got that data. So C'mon,grow up,it's hardly a scandal, More the age we live in. . It's also a bit rich,Remainers questioning any strategy used by the leave campaign. When their own campaign was run on a strategy of,fear and intimidation. Full of false,doom laden prophecies, Half truths,and downright lies. . I'm thinking,it's not really the strategy that's the problem. The real problem for the, young,graduate rich Remainers is, they didn't have the brains, too utilize it themselves. ...or it just didn't occur to them to behave that way. They may also just have been out being, er, young "She's talking about the rich 1%. The rest are in 50k+ debts can't get into the property ladder, lives with their parents or have little opportunity. Bloody plastic Tories (new Labour) and Tories! | |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs." They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree | |||
"Bloody hell mate you want to pick the direction the UK chooses to go in and you never ever live here. You can't decide if your in Madrid London or Amsterdam. What are you going to say about when the Dutch elect Girt Wildeers and vote to Leave the corrupt bust and defunct EU" Umm. Assumptions. Assumptions. Assumptions. I live in the Netherlands. But work in London and Madrid for long periods too. Geert could get the popular vote. But will he get the coalition? If not he'd be as powerless as he was before. You see politics is more complicated here. If you can name the 8 parties and define their ideologies then I'm willing to discuss it with you. | |||
| |||
"Bloody hell mate you want to pick the direction the UK chooses to go in and you never ever live here. You can't decide if your in Madrid London or Amsterdam. What are you going to say about when the Dutch elect Girt Wildeers and vote to Leave the corrupt bust and defunct EU Umm. Assumptions. Assumptions. Assumptions. I live in the Netherlands. But work in London and Madrid for long periods too. Geert could get the popular vote. But will he get the coalition? If not he'd be as powerless as he was before. You see politics is more complicated here. If you can name the 8 parties and define their ideologies then I'm willing to discuss it with you. " Oh I'm British too. Born and raised. I am eligible to vote. Do you want to stop democracy? | |||
| |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree" What shackles? You think that the only value of paying money into the EU was how much cash we got back? Can you really not name anything that we got in return for the net cash contribution? Voting to leave is, of course, perfectly fine, but please don't proclaim it based on a half-truth and a jingoistic catch-phrase. | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree" You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. " Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt" Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. " Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt" Matt,you should re-read your own post. Otherwise you could look like a bit of a tit, Oops!too late.  | |||
" The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt Matt,you should re-read your own post. Otherwise you could look like a bit of a tit, Oops!too late. "Laws need regulating. We use a number of European agencies to regulate industries. These will now need to be replicated. The research projects have funding on a much, much larger scale as part of the EU. More money can be invested than we could alone. Look up JET. This research attracts high quality academics, scientists and engineers. Jobs are created in building and fitting out facilities. Spin off companies set up in local business parks. Money goes into the local economy. The UK has attracted proportionally more. funding out out of this than would be expected the results of which are multiplied by related jobs, New companies and spending the local area. Is that clear now? | |||
"They won by fake news lol. It's nothing to do with fake news, its about the collection of data. You support Donald Trump don't you Shag? So you are against Vote Leave employing data collection methods to achieve Brexit, but you are in favour of Donald Trump employing it to win the Presidency? Isn't that a tad contradictory? Yes, bu I meant more with their campaign you know with the £350mill to the nhs. They said it would be more money regardless of the amount, the important thing is freedom of choice. To loose the shackles applied by the EU political leaders which we are forc d to wear And let's be honest the only money we actually get from the EU, is our own money which is given back to us with strings and rules attached to it It never was some magical EU money from the magical EU money tree You took the words of of my mouth. It seems pointless paying money in only to get some back. The grants and projects to which people refer that are referred to as being EU funded are simply funded by the UK taxpayer. There is no such thing as a free meal. Exactly there is no such thing as a free meal. So all those services of the EU we use now... who is going to have to pay for their replacements? Us. They won't just suddenly be free. But they will be more expensive as we'll have to replicate what already exists after we have extricated ourselves from the current services. Just to take ONE example... the EASA, the European Aviation Safety Agency... the agency that does all the safety certification on our airlines and aircraft currently for us. Will we be leaving that? Hopefully not, and leaving the EU doesn't automatically mean we leave that. But we will no doubt need to negotiate our membership once we leave the EU. Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt Matt,you should re-read your own post. Otherwise you could look like a bit of a tit, Oops!too late. "Why? You think that mentioning the word 'law' in the post means that it is about laws? No... you see, understanding requires actually comprehending the squggles on the screen in context. Re-read what I wrote. I said we would need to replace all the *services* that we would lose access to leaving the EU. Your reply was "the law remains the same unless we change it". Which is a total non-sequitur. You look at my post, saw the word 'law' and decided that is what you would reply about. You didn't actually read or comprehend what I'd written, did you? Or if you want me to break it down simpler... let's try this: What bit of discussing our contribution to the EU financially and Pat's "There is no such thing as a free lunch" comment, and my example of (one of very many) services we use that we will have to replace when we leave the EU... do you see your response "every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it." pertaining to? -Matt | |||
| |||
" Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt Matt,you should re-read your own post. Otherwise you could look like a bit of a tit, Oops!too late.
Why? You think that mentioning the word 'law' in the post means that it is about laws? No... you see, understanding requires actually comprehending the squggles on the screen in context. Re-read what I wrote. I said we would need to replace all the *services* that we would lose access to leaving the EU. Your reply was "the law remains the same unless we change it". Which is a total non-sequitur. You look at my post, saw the word 'law' and decided that is what you would reply about. You didn't actually read or comprehend what I'd written, did you?
Or if you want me to break it down simpler... let's try this: What bit of discussing our contribution to the EU financially and Pat's "There is no such thing as a free lunch" comment, and my example of (one of very many) services we use that we will have to replace when we leave the EU... do you see your response "every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it." pertaining to?
-Matt"Did you forget those squiggles. Let's face it Matt,you introduced law into the conversation. Suggesting it would have to be transcribed into UK law. Making it sound like some kind of long,laborious,expensive task, leaving us in some kind of lawless limbo,until complete. . Where as,in reality,all that would be required,is a steady hand,and tippex This would enable us,to remove the U in EU,and replace it with a K,as in UK. . Like you said,as part of the great Repeal Bill. | |||
"EASA has taken over a lot of the regulatory issues that the CAA used to deal with and as a consequence, flying in and around Europe has never been safer or better controlled. EASA is very much an EU function and leaving the EU without any kind of deal, as is being mooted will mean that EASA jobs will have to be duplicated at the CAA. More cost and more bureaucracy," THATS IT I HAD BETTER DTOP FLYING ONCE WE LEAVE, AS I WILL BE VERY WORRIED ABOUT MY PLSNE SUDDENLY FALLING OUT OF THE SKY BECAUSE WE HAVE EASA, EHAT UTTER CRAP | |||
" Currently EASA regulation are EU law and would need to be transcribed into UK law (I guess along with everything else as part of the 'Great Repeal Bill'). But take that one aspect and multiply it up by the thousands of other services we use that have been based in the fact we are an EU member. -Matt Matt,that is the biggest load of scaremongering bullshit I have ever encountered. As you know,every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it. I know the Remainers are becoming a bit desperate, But try to keep it real. Laws.... laws... laws... hrmm... *re-reads*... nope. I was talking about services. Try again. -Matt Matt,you should re-read your own post. Otherwise you could look like a bit of a tit, Oops!too late.
Why? You think that mentioning the word 'law' in the post means that it is about laws? No... you see, understanding requires actually comprehending the squggles on the screen in context. Re-read what I wrote. I said we would need to replace all the *services* that we would lose access to leaving the EU. Your reply was "the law remains the same unless we change it". Which is a total non-sequitur. You look at my post, saw the word 'law' and decided that is what you would reply about. You didn't actually read or comprehend what I'd written, did you?
Or if you want me to break it down simpler... let's try this: What bit of discussing our contribution to the EU financially and Pat's "There is no such thing as a free lunch" comment, and my example of (one of very many) services we use that we will have to replace when we leave the EU... do you see your response "every law will remain the same, Until we chose to change it." pertaining to?
-Matt
Did you forget those squiggles.
Let's face it Matt,you introduced law into the conversation.
Suggesting it would have to be transcribed into UK law.
Making it sound like some kind of long,laborious,expensive task,
leaving us in some kind of lawless limbo,until complete.
.
Where as,in reality,all that would be required,is a steady hand,and tippex
This would enable us,to remove the U in EU,and replace it with a K,as in UK.
.
Like you said,as part of the great Repeal Bill.
"I have a tipped mouse in my bag, I'm working in London a lot this year so don't mind popping in to Whitehall and will gladly alter a few Docs for free  | |||
"EASA has taken over a lot of the regulatory issues that the CAA used to deal with and as a consequence, flying in and around Europe has never been safer or better controlled. EASA is very much an EU function and leaving the EU without any kind of deal, as is being mooted will mean that EASA jobs will have to be duplicated at the CAA. More cost and more bureaucracy, THATS IT I HAD BETTER DTOP FLYING ONCE WE LEAVE, AS I WILL BE VERY WORRIED ABOUT MY PLSNE SUDDENLY FALLING OUT OF THE SKY BECAUSE WE HAVE EASA, EHAT UTTER CRAP" Trying to type with out eye correction is also crap | |||
| |||
"EASA has taken over a lot of the regulatory issues that the CAA used to deal with and as a consequence, flying in and around Europe has never been safer or better controlled. EASA is very much an EU function and leaving the EU without any kind of deal, as is being mooted will mean that EASA jobs will have to be duplicated at the CAA. More cost and more bureaucracy, THATS IT I HAD BETTER DTOP FLYING ONCE WE LEAVE, AS I WILL BE VERY WORRIED ABOUT MY PLSNE SUDDENLY FALLING OUT OF THE SKY BECAUSE WE HAVE EASA, EHAT UTTER CRAP Trying to type with out eye correction is also crap"  | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please?" Social Media can only spy on people gullible enough to allow themselves to be spied on | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Social Media can only spy on people gullible enough to allow themselves to be spied on " That means not joining it. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Social Media can only spy on people gullible enough to allow themselves to be spied on That means not joining it. " I wish it was that simple. Just because you don't have an FB profile doesn't mean than FB doesn't track your web browsing. The like this on FB button on every web page also serves to track your browsing. If you have friends that use FB and you don't, rest assured that FB has a profile of you already. | |||
| |||
"EASA has taken over a lot of the regulatory issues that the CAA used to deal with and as a consequence, flying in and around Europe has never been safer or better controlled. EASA is very much an EU function and leaving the EU without any kind of deal, as is being mooted will mean that EASA jobs will have to be duplicated at the CAA. More cost and more bureaucracy, THATS IT I HAD BETTER DTOP FLYING ONCE WE LEAVE, AS I WILL BE VERY WORRIED ABOUT MY PLSNE SUDDENLY FALLING OUT OF THE SKY BECAUSE WE HAVE EASA, EHAT UTTER CRAP" What is utter crap? Why don't you read what the post says instead of dreaming up something that it doesn't say. | |||
"The remain campaign did exactly the same.....and they had the power of the government behind them! And £14m to shove leaflets through every door in the country...... the OP doesn't hold water as an argument. Both sides did it." The government also used official government websites during the EU referendum to campaign for Remain. They even put Remain campaign material on the DVLA website. | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Social Media can only spy on people gullible enough to allow themselves to be spied on That means not joining it. I wish it was that simple. Just because you don't have an FB profile doesn't mean than FB doesn't track your web browsing. The like this on FB button on every web page also serves to track your browsing. If you have friends that use FB and you don't, rest assured that FB has a profile of you already." Can you tell us more about this please bbd? | |||
"So the big scandal now is how the brexit campaign used social media analytics services from your facebook and twitter accounts, supplied for free by a trump donor to create a psychological profile of voters which then allowed the leave campaign to target their message to voter who were more susceptible to voting out. Considering this revalation, do you think that social media analytics as a method to spy on peoples habits by non british companies to influence british people decision is justfiable? if not explain if you can please? Social Media can only spy on people gullible enough to allow themselves to be spied on That means not joining it. I wish it was that simple. Just because you don't have an FB profile doesn't mean than FB doesn't track your web browsing. The like this on FB button on every web page also serves to track your browsing. If you have friends that use FB and you don't, rest assured that FB has a profile of you already. Can you tell us more about this please bbd? " I'll try and explain it in a nutshell if I can. In general terms, when on the web, data from a website to your computer just travels between those two places. Website A doesn't know that you visited Website B. Your web browser has various security mechanisms built in to attempt to only send data back to the website that sent it to it. You may have heard of 'cookies' these are small pieces of information send from a website that your browser stores and then sends back to the website later on. So on Fab, the website send your browser a cookie with some information in that your browser send back to the server later so that the server knows it is still you (and you don't have to log in again each time). But your web browser will generally only send cookies from Fab back to Fab. Not to the BBC website you later visit. And vice versa. Where it then gets tricky is that a website can embed content from another server or website in it's pages. Often things like adverts or comments sections, or 'i like this page'-type Facebook functions are handled this way. So, if for example, Fab decided (unwisely) to have a 'Like this fab profile on Facebook' button under each profile then whenever that page is loaded it would send some data used to display that functionality to/from Facebook. So even if you don't actually use facebook, or have an account on Facebook, the 'like' button on that webpage would mean that Facebook know you have been there. It is very similar with Adverts. Go to Halford's website and look at some spanners... now when you browse around the web you will see Halfords adverts for spanners everywhere (very annoying if you've actually gone about bought the fucking spanners!). Each little bit of information is then pieced together to build up a profile of you. Even if they don't know exactly who you are or what your name is. They know you like spanners, and read the BBC website, and have occasionally been to the Cbeebies website, so likely have a small child. There are various EU directives to try and limit this. There have been several (badly worded) bits of legislation about cookies, but the intent was there to try and protect people against this. Then you scale this up further to the likes of May's 'Snoopers Charter' in the form of the IP Bill. This then is an attempt to collect even more data about you and your browsing habits. All under the guise of 'there are bad people out there'. Again, the Govt say that they won't collect the actual data, just the 'metadata' ie. not the content of what you are looking at, but just the address of the websites you are visiting. So they won't know anything specific about you, only that you read the BBC, you have been to the Cbeebies website, oh and you spend a lot of time on a site reading about HIV transmission, and you've visited your GUM clinic website, and that you've attempted to buy private health insurance from five different suppliers, and that you have been surfing Monster looking for jobs all last week. So, no, they know nothing personal about you. The current government is wanting to collect all the data centrally so that they can 'look for bad guys'. But what they are doing, is creating a massive central data store of information about you. Now... when was the last time you read in the paper about a government website accidentally divulging personal data? Or being hacked? Probably pretty recently. So we are entrusting the government to store all of this data about us and our online habits, and trusting the to keep it safe. This massive, very valuable pile of data of the citizens of the country. But don't worry, as it won't just be central government accessing it... no, no... there is a list of several dozen agencies that can access this data too. Such as the Food Standards Agency. They will be allowed to 'look for bad guys' in the data. Maybe check you are eating your 5 a day? And of course, there is no chance that they might accidentally export a bunch of data and leave it on a CDROM on the train, is there? Now, you want to know what the punchline is? David Davis... our own secretary for cliff-jumping, took Theresa May to the EU Court of Justice over this (The Investigatory Powers Bill) ... and won. So to recap... our guy in charge of leaving the EU, took our PM to court, an EU court, over her illegal collection of citizen data. -Matt | |||
| |||
