Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
|
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
dennis@home wrote
http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote:
dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. We need to be protected from bad government. The EU could do that and now it will be gone. So we aren't taking back control, we are just handing it to someone else. TW |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 02:29, TimW wrote:
On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. We need to be protected from bad government. The EU could do that and now it will be gone. So we aren't taking back control, we are just handing it to someone else. TW The government is not your friend. We need to be protected from bad government. The EU was exactly that and so we left. So we are taking back control, and handing it to someone else. Someone we can vote out next election. TFTFY |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
"TimW" wrote in message news On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. Dont need friends, got plenty of those. What we all need is sensible legislation. We need to be protected from bad government. That is what the constitution is there for. The EU could do that Like hell it could. It was in fact the worst approach to govt, policy decided by unelected bureaucrats who can't even be sacked when they **** up badly enough. Merkel can be given the bums rush at the ballot box now that she ****ed up so spectacularly encouraging more than a million illegals to move to Germany. Nothing can be done now that the EU has been stupid enough to allow them to pour in in much larger numbers to the EU. and now it will be gone. And so that completely stupid approach to govt should be. So we aren't taking back control, Even sillier than you usually manage with who gets to decide that sort of government policy. The British parliament gets to do that, again. we are just handing it to someone else. Even sillier than you usually manage, remoaner. |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 23/12/2016 15:32, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection The terrorists must be delighted. It should make no difference! The ruling is that it is unlawful to collect this data for EVERY person in the country and for the authorities to have 'free' access as a matter of routine. If someone is suspected of being involved in crime/terrorism then the authorities can still obtain a court order and get the information, as they have always been able to do. -- mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 08:40:12 UTC, alan_m wrote:
On 23/12/2016 15:32, Chris Hogg wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection The terrorists must be delighted. It should make no difference! The ruling is that it is unlawful to collect this data for EVERY person in the country and for the authorities to have 'free' access as a matter of routine. If someone is suspected of being involved in crime/terrorism then the authorities can still obtain a court order and get the information, as they have always been able to do. They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote:
They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... |
#9
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/2016 08:47, harry wrote:
They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? The authorities first have to identify from the 100s of millions of daily calls or internet accesses which are the destination/source for this suspicious traffic. Do you not think that once identified the authorities do not already (legally or illegally) monitor this traffic? Do you believe that these days with all the publicity that terrorists still set up accounts in their own name and address in order to communicate with each other? For £15 you can buy a basic mobile phone, put in an untraceable PAYG SIM and make a few calls before tossing it away. Certain legislation will only work if everyone is law abiding. It does nothing to stop criminal activities. -- mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 11:17, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , TimW wrote: On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ow-for-snooper s-charter-as-eu-court-bans-mass-data-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. We need to be protected from bad government. The EU could do that and now it will be gone. So we aren't taking back control, we are just handing it to someone else. Someone else that we have some ability to vote out of office. Unlike the EU Commissioners who can't be voted out (but perhaps you hadn't noticed that), or the EU Parliament where, yes, there are elections, but they don't make any substantial difference to the make up of the Parliament. You need to understand that, in those European countries that use PR, the notion of a permanent political *class* is much more embedded than it is here. Yes, and they naively believe that makes them better at running stuff, whereas we can see that it actually makes them worse. |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data
nobody can sift through. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Brian -- ----- - This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from... The Sofa of Brian Gaff... Blind user, so no pictures please! "dennis@home" wrote in message eb.com... http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/2016 09:51, Brian Gaff wrote:
In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Brian If you collect it and then identify someone of interest you can then sift through the data looking for others to be interested in. |
#13
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote: In article , Chris Hogg wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...-for-snoopers- charter-as-eu-court-bans-mass-data-collection The terrorists must be delighted. They will be delighted with what the EU has achieved for them: weakening Greece and Italy (front line states against immigration) And you really think a strong economy will stop immigrants trying to get to that country? because of that currency flop, the Euro, and opening borders making terrorist travel a lot easier (as we have just seen). We'll be building a wall between Eire and Ulster, then? And hadn't you noticed that the recent German tragedy was carried out by someone not from an EU country? -- *If I worked as much as others, I would do as little as they * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#14
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article ,
alan_m wrote: On 24/12/2016 08:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? The authorities first have to identify from the 100s of millions of daily calls or internet accesses which are the destination/source for this suspicious traffic. Do you not think that once identified the authorities do not already (legally or illegally) monitor this traffic? Do you believe that these days with all the publicity that terrorists still set up accounts in their own name and address in order to communicate with each other? For £15 you can buy a basic mobile phone, put in an untraceable PAYG SIM and make a few calls before tossing it away. Certain legislation will only work if everyone is law abiding. It does nothing to stop criminal activities. Very true. Allowing the state free access to everything might be fine if you think that information could only be used against terrorism, etc. But in practice it will get used for any purpose 'the state' thinks is OK. - -- *A 'jiffy' is an actual unit of time for 1/100th of a second. Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#15
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article ,
Tim Streater wrote: Someone else that we have some ability to vote out of office. Unlike the EU Commissioners who can't be voted out (but perhaps you hadn't noticed that), or the EU Parliament where, yes, there are elections, but they don't make any substantial difference to the make up of the Parliament. Remind us again of how many votes UKIP got at the last election, but have effectively no voice in the UK parliament with only one seat? I'll give you a clue. They got almost three times as many votes as the SNP who have 56 seats in the UK parliament. It appears you only support the sort of democracy that works for you. -- *Verbs HAS to agree with their subjects * Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#16
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:51:19 -0000, Brian Gaff wrote:
In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Isn't it great that we have these data management experts contributing to a d-i-y group? |
#17
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 11:51, Brian Gaff wrote:
In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Software can. Google does this routinely. To present you with ads about products you looked at last week.... Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. I guess that's why Google has spent billions on it. Brian |
#18
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 00:56, Rod Speed wrote:
"TimW" wrote in message news On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. Dont need friends, got plenty of those. What we all need is sensible legislation. We need to be protected from bad government. That is what the constitution is there for. The EU could do that Like hell it could. It was in fact the worst approach to govt, policy decided by unelected bureaucrats who can't even be sacked when they **** up badly enough. Merkel can be given the bums rush at the ballot box now that she ****ed up so spectacularly encouraging more than a million illegals to move to Germany. Nothing can be done now that the EU has been stupid enough to allow them to pour in in much larger numbers to the EU. and now it will be gone. And so that completely stupid approach to govt should be. So we aren't taking back control, Even sillier than you usually manage with who gets to decide that sort of government policy. The British parliament gets to do that, again. we are just handing it to someone else. Even sillier than you usually manage, remoaner. Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. Of course ukippers have spent years complaining bitterly that the EU protects the Human Rights of its citizens. Now it suits you to say that they can't and never could. It's also the ukip way. Tim W |
#19
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 12:18, mechanic wrote:
On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:51:19 -0000, Brian Gaff wrote: In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Isn't it great that we have these data management experts contributing to a d-i-y group? It is hilarious. Brian knows better than all the CIA and MI5 put together. Or maybe he has just been taken in by the government telling him that their data collection program is really harmless and meaningless. TW |
#20
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/2016 13:31, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/16 11:51, Brian Gaff wrote: In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Software can. Google does this routinely. To present you with ads about products you looked at last week.... But its not too intelligent - it presents ads for items already purchased and unlikely to be purchased again for many years. -- mailto: news {at} admac {dot] myzen {dot} co {dot} uk |
#22
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article , alan_m
writes On 23/12/2016 15:32, Chris Hogg wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...819/blow-for-s noopers-charter-as-eu-court-bans-mass-data-collection The terrorists must be delighted. It should make no difference! The ruling is that it is unlawful to collect this data for EVERY person in the country and for the authorities to have 'free' access as a matter of routine. If someone is suspected of being involved in crime/terrorism then the authorities can still obtain a court order and get the information, as they have always been able to do. By which time it will be too late. -- bert |
#23
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
Brian Gaff wrote
In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. It isnt done manually. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Nope, with the current system, after some obscenity like the very recent obscenity in Berlin with the truck, its possible to see who he has communicated with in the recent past one you have worked out who was the driver and hopefully then be able to find at least some of his associates if there are any. That has to be better than nothing. Particularly with fools like that that are actually stupid enough to leave his wallet behind in the truck. We have recently seen a rapist/murderer caught in days after the murder because he didn't realise that the victim had a phone. Her phone was tracked moving over the same route as his from the crime scene and so it wasn’t hard to work out who did it. "dennis@home" wrote in message eb.com... http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection |
#24
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article ,
harry writes On Saturday, 24 December 2016 08:40:12 UTC, alan_m wrote: On 23/12/2016 15:32, Chris Hogg wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection The terrorists must be delighted. It should make no difference! The ruling is that it is unlawful to collect this data for EVERY person in the country and for the authorities to have 'free' access as a matter of routine. If someone is suspected of being involved in crime/terrorism then the authorities can still obtain a court order and get the information, as they have always been able to do. They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? No they don't. Having found a suspect they need top know with whom they are communicating to identify the scale of the threat. The vast majority of the retained data will never be looked at, certainly not by human eyes. -- bert |
#25
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes In article , Tim Streater wrote: Someone else that we have some ability to vote out of office. Unlike the EU Commissioners who can't be voted out (but perhaps you hadn't noticed that), or the EU Parliament where, yes, there are elections, but they don't make any substantial difference to the make up of the Parliament. Remind us again of how many votes UKIP got at the last election, but have effectively no voice in the UK parliament with only one seat? I'll give you a clue. They got almost three times as many votes as the SNP who have 56 seats in the UK parliament. It appears you only support the sort of democracy that works for you. I support the form of democracy that has served us reasonably well for the last 300 years or more. I accept that from time to time anomalies arise but I can live with them as the system on the whole is better than any other currently in action elsewhere in the world. -- bert |
#26
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On 24/12/16 17:30, TimW wrote:
Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. You can always tell when a remoaner runs out f valid arguments by the way he starts to mount personal attacks against ukip members by ascribing attributes to them that are actually attributes of remoaners. And the utter inability to spell English words, like bureaucrat. |
#27
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
... In article , Tim Streater wrote: In article , Chris Hogg wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2016 14:33:02 +0000, dennis@home wrote: http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...-for-snoopers- charter-as-eu-court-bans-mass-data-collection The terrorists must be delighted. They will be delighted with what the EU has achieved for them: weakening Greece and Italy (front line states against immigration) And you really think a strong economy will stop immigrants trying to get to that country? because of that currency flop, the Euro, and opening borders making terrorist travel a lot easier (as we have just seen). We'll be building a wall between Eire and Ulster, then? And hadn't you noticed that the recent German tragedy was carried out by someone not from an EU country? WTF?! Was he one of those rabid white swivel-eyed right wing bigots? |
#28
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
"TimW" wrote in message news On 24/12/16 00:56, Rod Speed wrote: "TimW" wrote in message news On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. Dont need friends, got plenty of those. What we all need is sensible legislation. We need to be protected from bad government. That is what the constitution is there for. The EU could do that Like hell it could. It was in fact the worst approach to govt, policy decided by unelected bureaucrats who can't even be sacked when they **** up badly enough. Merkel can be given the bums rush at the ballot box now that she ****ed up so spectacularly encouraging more than a million illegals to move to Germany. Nothing can be done now that the EU has been stupid enough to allow them to pour in in much larger numbers to the EU. and now it will be gone. And so that completely stupid approach to govt should be. So we aren't taking back control, Even sillier than you usually manage with who gets to decide that sort of government policy. The British parliament gets to do that, again. we are just handing it to someone else. Even sillier than you usually manage, remoaner. Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. Even sillier than you usually manage. Even you should have noticed that it was a british court that has just ruled that the parliament and not just the govt that gets to decide when Article 50 gets invoked. Didnt need any EU for that. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension Everyone can see that is more of your remoaner lies. and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' Everyone can see that is more of your remoaner lies. Nothing meaningless about that. plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. More of your remoaner lies. I have absolutely NOTHING to do with ukip and have always considered that they are completely ****ing irrelevant given that they couldnt even manage to get Farage a seat in parliament and could only manage the one MP, who would have remained an MP regardless of which party he preferred to be part of. UKIP didnt even manage to produce the referendum, Cameron had one because he had decided that it was the best way to shut up Tory MPs who wanted BRexit. Of course ukippers have spent years complaining bitterly that the EU protects the Human Rights of its citizens. More of your remoaner lies. Now it suits you to say that they can't and never could. More of your remoaner lies. It's also the ukip way. More of your remoaner lies. You lot lost. You get to like that or lump it, remoaner. Thats what real democracy is about, remoaner. |
#29
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
"TimW" wrote in message news On 24/12/16 12:18, mechanic wrote: On Sat, 24 Dec 2016 09:51:19 -0000, Brian Gaff wrote: In my view,non targeted data collection only leads to a mountain of data nobody can sift through. Without at least collecting it as needed it seems to be a total waste of everyone's time in the current state of the art. Isn't it great that we have these data management experts contributing to a d-i-y group? It is hilarious. Brian knows better than all the CIA and MI5 put together. Or maybe he has just been taken in by the government telling him that their data collection program is really harmless and meaningless. Or he has enough of a clue to realise that if you arent doing anything illegal, that data collection is harmless and meaningless and that it is useful when arseholes do stuff like the recent Berlin atrocity. |
#30
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
"bert" wrote in message ... In article om, lid writes http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...9/blow-for-sno opers-charter-as-eu-court-bans-mass-data-collection How is this a cost arising from Brexit? The EU gets no say on that post BRexit. Whether that is a cost or a benefit tho... |
#31
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. 'I've got nothing to hide' may be true, but it's a naive way to deal with the realities of modern life. NT |
#32
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 11:44:49 UTC, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , alan_m wrote: On 24/12/2016 08:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? The authorities first have to identify from the 100s of millions of daily calls or internet accesses which are the destination/source for this suspicious traffic. Do you not think that once identified the authorities do not already (legally or illegally) monitor this traffic? GCHQ Do you believe that these days with all the publicity that terrorists still set up accounts in their own name and address in order to communicate with each other? For £15 you can buy a basic mobile phone, put in an untraceable PAYG SIM and make a few calls before tossing it away. Certain legislation will only work if everyone is law abiding. It does nothing to stop criminal activities. Very true. Allowing the state free access to everything might be fine if you think that information could only be used against terrorism, etc. But in practice it will get used for any purpose 'the state' thinks is OK. or a purpose some prat thinks they can get away with putting under the umbrella of a legitimate state activity, no matter how unrealistic that is. NT |
#33
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Saturday, 24 December 2016 15:31:00 UTC, TimW wrote:
On 24/12/16 00:56, Rod Speed wrote: "TimW" wrote in message news On 23/12/16 18:12, Rod Speed wrote: dennis@home wrote http://www.itpro.co.uk/public-sector...ata-collection That isnt a cost, its a benefit. Makes no sense that the UK parliament can't do what it decides should be done. The government is not your friend. Dont need friends, got plenty of those. What we all need is sensible legislation. We need to be protected from bad government. That is what the constitution is there for. The EU could do that Like hell it could. It was in fact the worst approach to govt, policy decided by unelected bureaucrats who can't even be sacked when they **** up badly enough. Merkel can be given the bums rush at the ballot box now that she ****ed up so spectacularly encouraging more than a million illegals to move to Germany. Nothing can be done now that the EU has been stupid enough to allow them to pour in in much larger numbers to the EU. and now it will be gone. And so that completely stupid approach to govt should be. So we aren't taking back control, Even sillier than you usually manage with who gets to decide that sort of government policy. The British parliament gets to do that, again. we are just handing it to someone else. Even sillier than you usually manage, remoaner. Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. Of course ukippers have spent years complaining bitterly that the EU protects the Human Rights of its citizens. Now it suits you to say that they can't and never could. It's also the ukip way. Tim W I find such failure to comprehend odd. |
#34
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
In article ,
TimW wrote: Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. Of course ukippers have spent years complaining bitterly that the EU protects the Human Rights of its citizens. Now it suits you to say that they can't and never could. It's also the ukip way. It's very odd, isn't it? Taking back control will involve removing many rights that somehow the kippers think will never effect them. I could quite understand that if there weren't, apparently, so many 'working class' that seem to support UKIP. Basically turkeys voting for Xmas. Exactly the same as in the US. It's certainly a lesson to others that some people will believe anything they're promised. I suppose it's the same sort of person who plays the lottery each week. -- *Why is the third hand on the watch called a second hand? Dave Plowman London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. |
#35
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article , TimW wrote: Here we have a single, simple, clear example of how we will lose important safeguards of our rights and freedoms when we lose our membership of the EU. You stare at it and blink and scratch your head with complete incomprehension and then give it a bit of swearing and rant out a few meaningless phrases like 'unelected beurocrats' plus a bit of gratuitous abuse and that's your response. That's the ukip way. Of course ukippers have spent years complaining bitterly that the EU protects the Human Rights of its citizens. Now it suits you to say that they can't and never could. It's also the ukip way. It's very odd, isn't it? Taking back control will involve removing many rights that somehow the kippers think will never effect them. I could quite understand that if there weren't, apparently, so many 'working class' that seem to support UKIP. Basically turkeys voting for Xmas. Exactly the same as in the US. It's certainly a lesson to others that some people will believe anything they're promised. I suppose it's the same sort of person who plays the lottery each week. I see the Remoaners are back in full crying mode! |
#36
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
wrote in message ... On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. How odd that none of us get any inappropriate hostile responses. 'I've got nothing to hide' may be true, but it's a naive way to deal with the realities of modern life. Bull****. |
#37
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Monday, 26 December 2016 18:08:20 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. How odd that none of us get any inappropriate hostile responses. Oh, I didn't know that all bs from authorities had just ceased. Great news. That or you've never heard of a court case in which the defendant was found innocent. Or you're just ****ed. |
#38
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
wrote in message ... On Monday, 26 December 2016 18:08:20 UTC, Rod Speed wrote: tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. How odd that none of us get any inappropriate hostile responses. Oh, I didn't know that all bs from authorities had just ceased. Great news. That or you've never heard of a court case in which the defendant was found innocent. Or you're just ****ed. You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag. |
#39
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
On Tuesday, 27 December 2016 01:23:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote:
tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Monday, 26 December 2016 18:08:20 UTC, Rod Speed wrote: tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. How odd that none of us get any inappropriate hostile responses. Oh, I didn't know that all bs from authorities had just ceased. Great news. That or you've never heard of a court case in which the defendant was found innocent. Or you're just ****ed. You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag. unlike you I don't need to. |
#40
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
Something else brexit will cost us?
wrote in message ... On Tuesday, 27 December 2016 01:23:31 UTC, Rod Speed wrote: tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Monday, 26 December 2016 18:08:20 UTC, Rod Speed wrote: tabbypurr wrote in message ... On Saturday, 24 December 2016 09:04:57 UTC, The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 24/12/16 10:47, harry wrote: They need to be able to identify suspects from suspicious traffic, not vice versa. Have you got something to hide? Who hasn't, from someone? Cf Hillary Clinton.... the point is once the data is held somewhere, the potential exists for someone else to get hold of it... If you've ever watched the mechanics of data trawling you find that the 'reasoning' used is routinely idiotic, that the differentiation between fact & fiction is largely nonexistent, and the conlcusions drawn are thus complete nonsense a substantial amount of the time. Thus any data is liable to result in inappropriate hostile responses. How odd that none of us get any inappropriate hostile responses. Oh, I didn't know that all bs from authorities had just ceased. Great news. That or you've never heard of a court case in which the defendant was found innocent. Or you're just ****ed. You never could bull**** your way out of a wet paper bag. unlike you I don't need to. Everyone can see for themselves that that is just another of your bare faced lies. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Brexit vs DIY | UK diy | |||
OT Brexit myths | UK diy | |||
Brexit | UK diy | |||
Brexit | Woodworking | |||
OT. EU and Brexit | UK diy |