General British Politics Thread.

[Stacy]

Should of done this ages ago we have a Australian and American politics thread so why not a British politics thread? This where British users can rant about how crap the government is and where foreign users can find that the British government can be just as shite as their government is. 

 

Also feel to post about British privacy laws in here too.

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/30/internet-service-providers-piracy_n_4176607.html?utm_hp_ref=uk-tech&ir=UK+Tech

 

Okay I'll start with some bad news UK Court has ordered to block 21 torrent and file search sites. 

 

I honestly don't see the point people can easily proxy that shit. But annoying to know corporations have Government and Courts by the balls.

 

Now for more slightly positive news:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/ruling-back-schemes-054215684

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/30/poundland-case-government-defeated-work-schemes-duncan-smith

 

Basically UK courts have said that scheme is legally flawed and accused it of being "shamefully" rushed through parliament. Kinda like the bedroom tax though that slipped through quickly with no thought to consequences which is typical of Tory attitude. Though the court hasn't gone as far to call it forced labour.

 

More bad news though on the back to work scheme:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/01/iain-duncan-smith-jobseeker_n_4022018.html

 

As part of this scheme Ian "Nazi" Duncan Smith wants Job Seekers to go to a Job Center 35 hours a week and be supervised when looking for a job. I am the only who thinks he's dreaming? With what staff and with what Job Centres? They closed loads of them down. Oh the irony.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYphUhK-zEY

Another brilliant swear filled rant about Ian Duncan Smith by the Arist Taxi Driver. I call him the Angry Taxi Driver.

Edited October 31, 2013 by BW199148

[Tani Coyote]

I'm not really seeing a problem with blocking known avenues of piracy, an illegal activity. This is nowhere near as bad as privacy-invading laws that would report everything you search to the ISP and state. I much prefer the idea of site blocking to monitoring every individual, and the best part is it's a lot more efficient at curbing piracy since it kills the problem at the root.

With regards to the back to work thing being invalidated, that is good; forced labor puts paid laborers out of jobs, leading to gradual economic contraction as a lot of wages are taken out of the economy. The only person who benefits from unpaid labor in this day and age are the very wealthy and foreign markets that can absorb the cheaper goods (and any money that comes from said imports probably won't trickle down as well as simply paying the common worker wages). Even if they were paid it would still be a dumb idea, as that would create inflation; the "everyone should work" mentality is obsolete and reflects lacking knowledge of economics.

[Stacy]

I'm not really seeing a problem with blocking known avenues of piracy, an illegal activity. This is nowhere near as bad as privacy-invading laws that would report everything you search to the ISP and state. I much prefer the idea of site blocking to monitoring every individual, and the best part is it's a lot more efficient at curbing piracy since it kills the problem at the root.

 

I find it hypocritical they spend more time blocking these websites when they do little to stop scam sites and other illegal activities on the net.

 

The UK and US monitor everybody anyway so our "freedoms" are already violated. Did you know UK and US government hack Yahoo and Google to monitor peoples searches?

[MamboCat]

Good topic. Given how many Brits we have on here, it's about time we had a thread to discuss our politics too!

 

My stance on UK politics is pretty bleak, but only because I see the present government doing nothing but damage. As an expat looking at news from home, I often find myself angry or depressed at their latest hare-brained schemes.

Edited October 31, 2013 by MamBOO!Cat

[Tani Coyote]

I find it hypocritical they spend more time blocking these websites when they do little to stop scam sites and other illegal activities on the net.

A government does ultimately exist to serve the interest of an elite, no matter where it is. There's money to be had (or lost) in piracy, so businesses find it easy to get the government to crack down on it.

Lots of money is lost to viruses and identity fraud and the like as well, but even if more money is lost that way, wealthy people find it easier to get the state's attention since their resources are more concentrated. It's the same reason protectionism continues to enjoy any validity - it's a lot easier for a person who lost his job to outsourcing to make a point about the subject than the millions of people who benefit from the lower prices.

[Patticus]

Surely the best solution to piracy, Ogilvie, is to provide a better service than the pirates, rather than defend in vain old business models which are fast becoming obsolete??

[Tani Coyote]

Surely the best solution to piracy, Ogilvie, is to provide a better service than the pirates, rather than defend in vain old business models which are fast becoming obsolete??

How do you do that, though?

The entire appeal of piracy is that it's free. Businesses are run for profit. By definition a legitimate purchase will always be the least appealing of the two options (as price is the prime determinant of purchasing decisions barring quality and brand loyalty; the quality doesn't fluctuate and if you're pirating you obviously aren't loyal), which is why you need the hand of government to prevent such theft in the first place. We could try to drive prices down, but piracy will always exist in a digital medium for the simple fact it allows one to take goods for free.

Ad-based revenue isn't viable either. It pales in comparison to sales, and a lot of irresponsible people make indiscriminate use of adblocking, thus cutting into revenues.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Ogil.exe Maurice

[Tornado]

Surely the best solution to piracy, Ogilvie, is to provide a better service than the pirates, rather than defend in vain old business models which are fast becoming obsolete??

 

How do you compete with "The exact same product, except it's free with very little risk of getting caught?"

 

 

Let's be serious for a minute. Even the most user friendly and modern of business models isn't going to deter most pirates, who pirate things simply because they don't want to pay for them; and many of those modern content delivery platforms are already completely unsustainable in the long term because they only compliment the existing, older ones. Steam is by far the most convenient content delivery system ever made for video games, and people still pirate games that launch on the service within hours (even though it's only games that "deserve" to be pirated, like Sim City V, that get media attention). Netflix, Amazon Video (or whatever the hell it is called) and Hulu and the like make getting television and movies far easier and cheaper than could ever possibly exist on traditional mediums (which is why they are completely unsustainable, as mentioned above), and any movie or show that is on the service will still have a half dozen uploads on Pirate Bay. More often then not, pirates don't care about convenience; and the "down with DRM" justifications are just excuses for things that they would be doing regardless. They care about not actually paying for the things they use.

 

And while I don't at all agree with the incredibly heavy handed ways European governments (and, repeatedly attempted, the US government) have tried to stop it, not doing anything isn't really an option.

[Autosaver]

How do you compete with "The exact same product, except it's free with very little risk of getting caught?"

Steam has reduced piracy by a lot as it's DRM done right.

Same with Netflix. People are streaming their shows at an affordable cost instead of just torrenting them.

 

I don't think anyone expects the issue of pirating to disappear, but you can cut it by giving better options to customers. Windows Live with 5 layers of DRM is just going to lead with piracy. Why bother when that person can deal with a frustration-free experience by torrenting?

 

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/why-young-people-pirate-pssst-its-not-just-about-money/7581

 

I think the music industry needs to have a similar service down the line.

[Tornado]

Steam has reduced piracy by a lot as it's DRM done right.

For all the ballyhooing about how Origin is an awful service and blah blah blah, it's not really terribly different from Steam in the long run. It's mostly just kind of annoying to have two different services rather than running everything through one.

Which makes this all the more curious:

 

Same with Netflix. People are streaming their shows at an affordable cost instead of just torrenting them.

Netflix is going to be so hilariously fucked within the next 5 years or so that I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't even around by the end of the decade. In terms of "convenient ways to get content," it is literally the most triumphant example of an unsustainable long term business model.

 

I don't think anyone expects the issue of pirating to disappear, but you can cut it by giving better options to customers. Windows Live with 5 layers of DRM is just going to lead with piracy. Why bother when that person can deal with a frustration-free experience by torrenting?

Not every piece of media content is a SimCity 5 disaster, yet I've never seen much of a direct relationship between the two. More often than not, it's things that are anticipated that get cracked and downloaded to shit, with DRM that is annoying to put up with being the far distant second factor. Certainly, an always online requirement that the developer lied and said was required by the game is certain to drive some to pirate the game on principle alone, but it's also overstating the case to say that any majority of the people who are pirating a highly anticipated game are doing so because of its DRM.

I install No CD cracks on every game (well, every non-Steam game) I own or just hack out the CD check myself because it is far more convenient since I've always used gaming laptops; but I also always take the time to actually buy the game first. That's not the typical case, I'd have to imagine.

 

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/igeneration/why-young-people-pirate-pssst-its-not-just-about-money/7581

You know, an awful lot of those "not-money-related" reasons are... in fact money related. And most of them certainly don't apply to the neckbeard living in Silicon Valley downloading shows he could easily have access to anyway. Sure, it sucks that Due to the Unique Way The BBC is Funded, it is impossible for someone living in Britain to have access to the genre variety that someone living in the United States has (or the same exact shows, either), but that sounds more like something that should be taken up with the government rather than the American media companies.

[Autosaver]

For all the ballyhooing about how Origin is an awful service and blah blah blah, it's not really terribly different from Steam in the long run. It's mostly just kind of annoying to have two different services rather than running everything through one.

 

 

Origin is not that bad of a service, and I completely agree with you that it's not that different than Steam. In fact, it has some benefits such as getting 24 hour refunds.

 

Netflix is going to be so hilariously fucked within the next 5 years or so that I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't even around by the end of the decade. In terms of "convenient ways to get content," it is literally the most triumphant example of an unsustainable long term business model.

 

One of the most profitable businesses in the world is going to go in the gutter in 5 years? That's probably what Blockbuster said.

 

Netflix isn't going to die. In fact, it's growing into worldwide markets.

 

 

Not every piece of media content is a SimCity 5 disaster

 

There were other options before Steam which is what I'm referencing - Windows Games. A lot of them had silly restrictions and tons of layers of DRM.

[Tornado]

One of the most profitable businesses in the world is going to go in the gutter in 5 years?

Yeah. Because the costs of licencing content to provide with a streaming service are going to skyrocket (and that's merely a question of when, not if) as more and more people turn to online to actually get it rather than watch it in the outlet that actually pays to produce it (the reason Netflix hit on what they did so big is because they were able to start off with very small licencing fees); there will be more and more competition as the industry grows (and more content pulled from Netflix outright to bolster those services, many of them being provided by the same Telecom companies that actually make the content in the first place); and most importantly, Netflix is in an extremely vulnerable position because the only way they can increase revenue is by getting new subscribers rather than raising prices, since every time there is even a rumor of them raising prices to counteract the two above things, there are open riots and boycotts against the service and massive dumps of their share prices.

 

Movies aren't cheap to make, but television is even more expensive and is much more aggressive in how it sources funding because it is even more risky. $8 a month isn't going to pay for all of the content that television networks produce every week (especially not $8 provided well after the content is already made), which is why the major media outlets were willing to let Netflix have all of the stuff it does for so cheap. Because it was supplemental income to the money they already get from when they air their TV shows regularly, with support by ads and cable packages and whatnot. If people start cancelling cable subscriptions and dumping out on antenna TV, the money that those things provide is going to have to come from somewhere, and Netflix doesn't have it.

[Autosaver]

I disagree.

 

I'm saving this thread somewhere and I'll come back in 5 years.

[Kevin]

I'm not really seeing a problem with blocking known avenues of piracy, an illegal activity. This is nowhere near as bad as privacy-invading laws that would report everything you search to the ISP and state. I much prefer the idea of site blocking to monitoring every individual, and the best part is it's a lot more efficient at curbing piracy since it kills the problem at the root.

The problem with it is that it's a slippery slope. David Cameron want to block porn by default and I can guarantee you it won't be just porn that will be blocked. Piracy would go down if better services were out there. Plus, these blocks will be easy to get around anyway.

[MamboCat]

"Blocking porn to protect children" is the spin-way of saying it; selling it to the masses in a way they will find palatable. Most people like children, a lot of people probably don't approve of porn, so this is a sure-fire way to get the job done.

 

I suspect what they are really doing is finding a way to control the Internet.

[Stacy]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10423252/340-MPs-claim-200000-on-expenses-for-energy-bills.html

 

Here is today's shit sandwich 340 MPs claim expenses for their energy bills some of them have second homes.

 

Yet some of them call people on benefits scroungers. Hypocritical bastards.

 

Angry dome time:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCYRmGLWav0

Angry Taxi Driver strikes again.

Edited November 3, 2013 by BW199148

[Tornado]

Is a constituency home like what Hilary Clinton did for the 2000 Senate race, where she bought a house in New York so she could technically say she was a resident (and thus run for office)?

[Patticus]

Is a constituency home like what Hilary Clinton did for the 2000 Senate race, where she bought a house in New York so she could technically say she was a resident (and thus run for office)?

 

I believe so, but some MPs don't even do that, preferring to live in a plush house someplace else, seldom deigning to visit the constituency which they're supposed to represent.

[Candescence]

How do you do that, though?

The entire appeal of piracy is that it's free. Businesses are run for profit. By definition a legitimate purchase will always be the least appealing of the two options (as price is the prime determinant of purchasing decisions barring quality and brand loyalty; the quality doesn't fluctuate and if you're pirating you obviously aren't loyal), which is why you need the hand of government to prevent such theft in the first place. We could try to drive prices down, but piracy will always exist in a digital medium for the simple fact it allows one to take goods for free.

Ad-based revenue isn't viable either. It pales in comparison to sales, and a lot of irresponsible people make indiscriminate use of adblocking, thus cutting into revenues.

How about citing the most obvious prime example: Steam?

 

Valve is making an absolute truckload of cash off the platform, and with good reason, as far as digital distribution services go, it is leagues ahead of any competition, except for GoG, which benefits from having an entirely unique library consisting of a ton of games that not even Steam has, and a no-DRM policy in good faith that seems to be working out for them quite well, considering the Witcher 2 sold a ton of copies despite piracy.

 

Steam provides features and convenience that pirated copies simply can't provide - cloud saves, automatic updates, an entire social network infrastructure integrated into the games themselves via Steamworks, achievements, Steam Workshop (enabling the creation of in-game content by the community as well as a system for easy discovery and installation of community-created addons and mods), Steam Market, a goddamn trading card system that gets you neat goodies for collecting card sets, and probably other things I've missed. And that's not even mentioning stuff on the Steam store such as the goddamn sales, which Valve has said multiplies revenue exponentially. Steam isn't perfect, but it's pretty much ironed out nearly all of its issues by now.

 

There's a reason why people threw a shit-fit about Origin, aside from having to bother with another digital distribution client (Ubisoft has uPlay, but they still sell games on Steam, for pete's sake), but also because Origin, while it has marginally improved a bit, simply can't hold a candle to Steam's numerous features, and knowing EA, it probably never will.

 

Going by Tornado's logic above, gaming is probably among the most suited mediums to digital distribution, partly due to the fact that digital distribution clients don't work on a subscription model. Digital distribution has also been an absolute boon for independent gaming and keeping older games alive and well, as shown by GoG.

[MamboCat]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10423252/340-MPs-claim-200000-on-expenses-for-energy-bills.html

 

Here is today's shit sandwich 340 MPs claim expenses for their energy bills some of them have second homes.

 

Yet some of them call people on benefits scroungers. Hypocritical bastards.

 

Angry dome time:

 

 

I am in two minds about this.

 

One is that the cost of providing energy to homes is ridiculously high and its fundamentally the fault of privatisation. Heating homes and providing energy to cook meals are basic needs; no-one should be profiting from these services.

 

Second, the fact that these people can get these bills paid for them when many people are having to make the choice between food and heating, makes me angry. Any space in the Angry Dome for one more?

Edited November 3, 2013 by MamboCat

[Patticus]

MPs from non-London areas should all be put up in a reasonably nice, well-situated hotel just for MPs. That way they won't ever need to own a property in London, thus won't have an excuse to go flipping homes or claim exorbitant sums in expenses.

[Stacy]

MPs from non-London areas should all be put up in a reasonably nice, well-situated hotel just for MPs. That way they won't ever need to own a property in London, thus won't have an excuse to go flipping homes or claim exorbitant sums in expenses.

 

Just imagine giving them Bedroom Tax when their house has 5 bedrooms plus other house they'd shit themselves with fear. If only.

[Brad]

I was looking for a thread like this a while back and couldn't find one, so I'm glad this is here. I'm sure a few of you might of seen this already, but there's an interview BBC Newsnight did with Russell Brand on his new political magazine, where he discussed quite a lot of his views on the current state of our government. Now I'm not a fan of Brand but I really enjoyed this interview and agree with what he had to say for the most part. What say you?

 

Edited November 5, 2013 by Symbotic

[pooshoes]

Brand would make an ideal politician; he can talk for hours without actually saying anything.

[Stacy]

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/sky-sources-portsmouth-shipbuilding-end-093359307.html

 

Its like Westminster is giving Scotland even more reasons to hate them.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron has our aircraft carriers built by China like everything else that seems to be outsourced there.