The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

Leroy42 · 04-05-2020 09:55AM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I think this will place a lot of people in a very deep dilemma. The instinct to want to participate in any scheme that helps fight the crisis against the lack of trust many of them will have in the government when it comes to sharing data, no matter what reassurance they are given. I'd bet this will manifest itself in a lower than desired take up.

Doesn't have to be a disaster as long as the manual tracing system proves up to scratch.

Wasn't the Brexit campaign, led by Johnson and Gove and Cummings, found to have used data gathered by Cambridge Analytica which illegally obtained data?

But Cummings and Johnson now want people to trust them with their data.?

And how are the UK government going to possibly use this data since it took them six weeks to work out how to collect data from care homes. Although, as we were told, that was complicated and using mobile apps or website to allow quick data collection was apparently far too difficult.

Why would anyone willingly sign up that?

Trust them? You earn trust, and you don't do it by the above

Joe_ Public · 04-05-2020 10:05AM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Wasn't the Brexit campaign, led by Johnson and Gove and Cummings, found to have used data gathered by Cambridge Analytica which illegally obtained data?

But Cummings and Johnson now want people to trust them with their data.?

And how are the UK government going to possibly use this data since it took them six weeks to work out how to collect data from care homes. Although, as we were told, that was complicated and using mobile apps or website to allow quick data collection was apparently far too difficult.

Why would anyone willingly sign up that?

Trust them? You earn trust, and you don't do it by the above

Precisely. When you see some of the individuals who are involved in rolling out this app, I'm not sure you could blame anyone from running a mile from it. First warnings about this were flagged up in the guardian several weeks back.

https://twitter.com/carolecadwalla/status/1256235025193975810?s=20

ancapailldorcha · 04-05-2020 10:17AM

S.M.B. wrote: »

I really am struggling with it, everything is just steeped in tribalism at this stage. It's just another layer of bullsh*t on top of what's already an incredibly difficult situation. Genuinely thinking of resorting to the "bury my head in sand" strategy at this stage.

I'm just used to it at this stage but in fairness, I do live in the UK.

I've been following politics here for a while and after a while, I just stopped being surprised by anyone or anything here. The pandemic is a matter which requires a technical solution so the political infrastructure that has been developed around enraging people has largely been ineffective but of course in the press there are the libertarian ideologue types who were agitating for Brexit fantasising about being freedom fighters or something similar who are now more than happy to endanger the health of others but are fortunately not finding fertile ground.

Professor Moriarty · 04-05-2020 10:32AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm just used to it at this stage but in fairness, I do live in the UK.

I've been following politics here for a while and after a while, I just stopped being surprised by anyone or anything here. The pandemic is a matter which requires a technical solution so the political infrastructure that has been developed around enraging people has largely been ineffective but of course in the press there are the libertarian ideologue types who were agitating for Brexit fantasising about being freedom fighters or something similar who are now more than happy to endanger the health of others but are fortunately not finding fertile ground.

And yet, in the midst of appalling ineptitude and deceit throughout this pandemic, and having got just 44% in the GE, the Tories are averaging 51% in the polls today.

Zubeneschamali · 04-05-2020 10:41AM

theological wrote: »

I don't know why people can't keep the thread to reasonable arguments

Whereas I can't see why no-one is demanding that the entire Government resigns and exiles themselves to the Falklands. I think it is the sheer scale of is hard to grasp.

The Grenfell Tower fire killed 72 people. Now picture 694 identical towers on fire, and hundreds more downwind and liable to catch fire anytime. No, I can't picture a whole city of Grenfell Towers on fire, it's too big.

Wait, we are all familiar with the image of Grenfell Tower from the news. Rough numbers below, but a quick visual for 50000 coffins would be a stack the same size and shape as Grenfell Tower itself.

Imagine that on the evening news.

(The tower looks to be 27m a side, 729 sq m in area. A coffin is about 1.6 square meters, so a single layer that size would be 455 coffins. 50000 coffins stacked there would be 109 coffins high, about 70 meters.)

ancapailldorcha · 04-05-2020 10:42AM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

And yet, in the midst of appalling ineptitude and deceit throughout this pandemic, and having got just 44% in the GE, the Tories are averaging 51% in the polls today.

I think most people think they are handling things reasonably well. They've wisely decided to hide people who are blatantly there for loyalty to Brexit rather than competence like Priti Patel after they've made gaffes. I think people also sympathise with Johnson as he's actually had the virus as well.

Labour needs to build itself up and create its new narrative. The end of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership is a good first step towards that goal.

Seth Brundle · 04-05-2020 10:45AM

Gogglebox reviews Johnson's recent speech...

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1256898073328041984?s=19

munsterlegend · 04-05-2020 10:46AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think most people think they are handling things reasonably well. They've wisely decided to hide people who are blatantly there for loyalty to Brexit rather than competence like Priti Patel after they've made gaffes. I think people also sympathise with Johnson as he's actually had the virus as well.

Labour needs to build itself up and create its new narrative. The end of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership is a good first step towards that goal.

It’s not unusual at all. Ratings of a govt can go up in a national crisis. FG have gone up to 35% here in ratings. What will happen after is what is key. Churchill got booted out of office after WW2.

Professor Moriarty · 04-05-2020 11:00AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I think most people think they are handling things reasonably well. They've wisely decided to hide people who are blatantly there for loyalty to Brexit rather than competence like Priti Patel after they've made gaffes. I think people also sympathise with Johnson as he's actually had the virus as well.

Labour needs to build itself up and create its new narrative. The end of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership is a good first step towards that goal.

And that's the problem. When you are spoonfed lies for decades, lies become truths. Labour has no hope of overtaking the Tories anymore. The UK will have the largest number of deaths pro rata in Europe and the Tories will see their popularity increase. When people blindly support a a cohort of lying populists, you know there is no longer any place for reality or principle.

S.M.B. · 04-05-2020 11:05AM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm just used to it at this stage but in fairness, I do live in the UK.

I do too, the past 10 years, which is why I was asking if it is a recent phenomenon or if it's ingrained in the UK psyche. I'm finding it really difficult to just accept it, 'pick my side' and jump into melee.

robinph · 04-05-2020 11:51AM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

And that's the problem. When you are spoonfed lies for decades, lies become truths. Labour has no hope of overtaking the Tories anymore. The UK will have the largest number of deaths pro rata in Europe and the Tories will see their popularity increase. When people blindly support a a cohort of lying populists, you know there is no longer any place for reality or principle.

There is a difference between accepting that the government in power at the time is the one that needs to deal with the current situation and hoping that they don't screw things up too badly, and thinking that they are not lying to us.

Perfectly possible to not trust them as far as you have to socially distance from them, but to also accept that not everything they are doing at the moment is part of some major conspiracy or think that they are for reasons unknown trying to kill off the population.

Also no reason to think that whatever outcome happens for the UK from this that it will be considered a party political position at the end of it. Even if Johnson performs some miracle and brings everyone back to life that's not going to have much influence on the next election when it will come down to schools, jobs, transport, hospitals... just like every other election (except for the stupid brexit one). Whatever the party in power is doing with schools, jobs, transport, hospitals now makes no difference in 4 years time at the next election.

Professor Moriarty · 04-05-2020 12:12PM

robinph wrote: »

There is a difference between accepting that the government in power at the time is the one that needs to deal with the current situation and hoping that they don't screw things up too badly, and thinking that they are not lying to us.

Perfectly possible to not trust them as far as you have to socially distance from them, but to also accept that not everything they are doing at the moment is part of some major conspiracy or think that they are for reasons unknown trying to kill off the population.

Also no reason to think that whatever outcome happens for the UK from this that it will be considered a party political position at the end of it. Even if Johnson performs some miracle and brings everyone back to life that's not going to have much influence on the next election when it will come down to schools, jobs, transport, hospitals... just like every other election (except for the stupid brexit one). Whatever the party in power is doing with schools, jobs, transport, hospitals now makes no difference in 4 years time at the next election.

Indeed. I agree with you that their abysmal performance in the pandemic may not have long term electoral impact. But my essential point remains. The Tory press, over decades, has conditioned people so much that the UK Tory government's appalling response to the pandemic has not made any difference to public perception of them. In fact their popularity has increased since December. This lets you know that it doesn't matter what Starmer does. There was little if any bounce when he was elected which speaks volumes for Labour's prospects.

The Tories did it with Brexit, they're doing it with Coronavirus and they'll do it with schools, jobs and transport. They have the electorate mesmerised with lies and that won't change.

Joe_ Public · 04-05-2020 12:22PM

I think they have got the message out to their base pretty well, that's what they're good at. They were able to hide behind the official figures for weeks and now they're not just hiding behind ons figures but presenting it as some great noble act of transparency which, you have to say, takes some chutzpah, but plenty will buy it.

I note too the stock line in briefings about not being able to compare and need to wait for excess death patterns etc. They know of course that this will only show them in a much worse light but, as with the suppression of the virus itself, it helps buy them time and avoid having to address the full impact of their earlier decisions for now.

PommieBast · 04-05-2020 12:38PM

Enzokk wrote: »

I wonder what the opinion of our UK contributors are to the proposed NHS contact tracing app?

I would not install it. I trust neither the quality of NHS IT projects nor the UK government's commitment to privacy.

Harry Palmr · 04-05-2020 12:39PM

I always imagine Nicola Sturgeon as a glove puppet at that lectern

A Dub in Glasgo · 04-05-2020 12:51PM

Scotland:
In hospital: 1,720 (+54)
In ICU: 99 (n/c)
Total confirmed positive cases: 12,226 (+169)
Total deaths with confirmed positive COVID-19: 1,576 (+5)

Therefore as it stands, there are a minimum of 2,586 (1,576+1,010) deaths in Scotland (confirmed positive and suspected)

devnull · 04-05-2020 01:31PM

The UK Government has now published a list of most of those who are on the SAGE committee in what it calls another so called act of transparency with the public.

However they have stated that two of the members o the committee cannot be published because of the fact that they didn't agree to have their names published, which sounds like a convenient excuse for not publishing the names of people who probably shouldn't be there.

The whole thing is not very transparent when the two who refuse permission to be named are likely to be the ones pulling the strings and are happy to do so behind the scenes but are not brave enough to have their name associated with it.

Donald Trump · 04-05-2020 01:48PM

devnull wrote: »

The UK Government has now published a list of most of those who are on the SAGE committee in what it calls another so called act of transparency with the public.

However they have stated that two of the members o the committee cannot be published because of the fact that they didn't agree to have their names published, which sounds like a convenient excuse for not publishing the names of people who probably shouldn't be there.

The whole thing is not very transparent when the two who refuse permission to be named are likely to be the ones pulling the strings and are happy to do so behind the scenes but are not brave enough to have their name associated with it.

The members who did not agree to have their names published are listed by group. It is only the first group that had two. Other groups have more.

RobMc59 · 04-05-2020 02:55PM

With the BBC reporting 6 more fatalities in Northern Ireland with a total of 387 their handling of this crisis has been admirable so far.

theological · 04-05-2020 03:06PM

devnull wrote: »

The UK Government has now published a list of most of those who are on the SAGE committee in what it calls another so called act of transparency with the public.

However they have stated that two of the members o the committee cannot be published because of the fact that they didn't agree to have their names published, which sounds like a convenient excuse for not publishing the names of people who probably shouldn't be there.

The whole thing is not very transparent when the two who refuse permission to be named are likely to be the ones pulling the strings and are happy to do so behind the scenes but are not brave enough to have their name associated with it.

You do realise that people have to give consent before their personal information is public?

These rights aren't just for individuals who work outside of government.

Dressing this up as a deep conspiracy by the government without anything other than speculation is unhelpful.

Beasty · 04-05-2020 03:09PM

theological wrote: »

I would have thought moderators were meant to be an example to us as to how to post on here.

Firstly you were not responding to a mod

Secondly, even if you were if you have a problem with any post report it and leave the modding to the mods

Do not respond to this post in-thread

Christy42 · 04-05-2020 03:10PM

theological wrote: »

You do realise that people have to give consent before their personal information is public?

These rights aren't just for individuals who work outside of government.

Dressing this up as a deep conspiracy by the government without anything other than speculation is unhelpful.

That seriously depends on the piece of information and the job. For instance if you rang my company and asked to confirm if I worked there they would say yes. Names of employees is rarely protected information.

Brussels Sprout · 04-05-2020 03:28PM

theological wrote: »

That's no excuse for calling people "professional pricks" in the place of a reasoned argument.

It seems like increasingly name calling is being used as a substitute for argument here. I would have thought moderators were meant to be an example to us as to how to post on here.

Well personally I'm more offended by the content and intent behind the average article written by either of those two gentlemen. Sometimes the use of vulgar language to describe someone can hit the spot in a manner that more cultured adjectives just don't. Of course, you can't throw out any old 4-letter word. There's an art to it and I think that "professional pricks" scores well in being alliterative, succinct and wholly accurate.

Perhaps that's a product of the environment that I grew up in. I'm a big fan of the way that creator of The Wire, David Simon, dispenses with his trolls on twitter using the most wonderful profanities.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 03:33PM

RobMc59 wrote: »

With the BBC reporting 6 more fatalities in Northern Ireland with a total of 387 their handling of this crisis has been admirable so far.

It could have been so much better as well. Imagine that.

Good thing the natural hinterland was a bit more "with it" than the mainland.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 03:44PM

RobMc59 wrote: »

I agree over the 'professional pricks'post and have noticed since that was posted it appears to have encouraged some pretty horrendous,distasteful comments.

I don't think that post encouraged anything.

The sensitive disposition of our resident Brits is really something to behold.

Calling Toby Young and Brendan O'Neill "professional pricks" has elicited the most jaw dropping amount of Helen Lovejoy-esque responses.

Care to comment on the 100000 target being missed within a day or so of the profusion of praise they got for "reaching" it*?

Or anything else for that matter?

Like how you would be mad to allow this UK government to have your location data given their history and the fact that GNSS is unreliable (for this task) by design, at the level of a smartphone at the level they want to use it for? How multipath signals, especially in London will ruin whatever data they have anyway and also, how they're leaving Galileo so what would the point be?

Edit: I see they're using Bluetooth for the spatial ranging and location. Need to read more so. Still a terrifying vista for this government to have the data.

*reaching it only because they doctored the numbers.

ancapailldorcha · 04-05-2020 03:54PM

PommieBast wrote: »

I would not install it. I trust neither the quality of NHS IT projects nor the UK government's commitment to privacy.

I have no intention whatsoever of installing it. I do not trust the Conservative party one bit and it's odd that so many people here are trying to shut down criticism of it by various means.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 04:01PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I have no intention whatsoever of installing it. I do not trust the Conservative party one bit and it's odd that so many people here are trying to shut down criticism of it by various means.

Complaints about this are valid alright and I can't wait to see the "if you've nothing to hide" brigade come out in force being critical of those who are against it and praising the government for implementing it.

robinph · 04-05-2020 04:09PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I have no intention whatsoever of installing it. I do not trust the Conservative party one bit and it's odd that so many people here are trying to shut down criticism of it by various means.

Being a non public transport user, non office worker, non shopping centre visiting person I'm not sure it would be of much use to me. The one common situation I'd find myself in crowds (running races) would be one where people would often not be carrying their mobile on them anyway, it's also a situation where despite being in close proximity to others there is limited risk of transmission from looking at someones elses back or from someone else looking at mine. Need to see more details about how they are actually doing it yet though, as it's all a bit vague so far.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 04:17PM

robinph wrote: »

Being a non public transport user, non office worker, non shopping centre visiting person I'm not sure it would be of much use to me. The one common situation I'd find myself in crowds (running races) would be one where people would often not be carrying their mobile on them anyway, it's also a situation where despite being in close proximity to others there is limited risk of transmission from looking at someones elses back or from someone else looking at mine. Need to see more details about how they are actually doing it yet though, as it's all a bit vague so far.

In fact it has been found that there is quite a risk of running behind people as there remains a "plume" in their wake.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/fitness/for-runners-is-4-5m-the-new-2m-for-social-distancing-1.4235266?mode=amp

There have been a few contrary articles too.

Worth an investigation from your pov anyway given your post.

robinph · 04-05-2020 04:24PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

In fact it has been found that there is quite a risk of running behind people as there remains a "plume" in their wake.

https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/health-family/fitness/for-runners-is-4-5m-the-new-2m-for-social-distancing-1.4235266?mode=amp

There have been a few contrary articles too.

Worth an investigation from your pov anyway given your post.

It took The Irish Times two weeks after that "study" initially came out before they wrote an article about it, and in the meantime it have been found it wasn't anything like what the initial Medium article had claimed, the people who ran the "study" denied it was what the Medium article claimed and there are far more articles explaining why it's nonsence out there now:

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/4/24/21233226/coronavirus-runners-cyclists-airborne-infectious-dose?fbclid=IwAR0jepQdeGSOQchlRirZZhSpsjD-haB3UY_XWgdI7R8xLz8sWHcdJYvbd5M

Unfortunately, the article got out and now people think they will die from being on the opposite side of the street from someone who is breathing slightly heavily.

The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

Comments