# You guys must be heavy drinkers...



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

..I saw on American news this morning (well, internet - I don't watch the overproduced rubbish on TV) that France's wine sector has been hit hard by Brexit. 

It's 2021, and England is still beating the French. 

(also saw that someone in the UK proposed increasing the BBC license fee to 400 pounds figuring that the BBC is losing out on revenue based on what folks are willing (as in voluntarily) to pay or the streaming service of their choice). 

That's a giggle. For us here in the states where there is no obligation to pay anything, that's still an odd concept to me - entitlement of an entity via self-designated eminence.


----------



## John Brown (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> ..I saw on American news this morning (well, internet - I don't watch the overproduced rubbish on TV) that France's wine sector has been hit hard by Brexit.
> 
> It's 2021, and England is still beating the French.
> 
> ...


You have television in America?


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

I think it's still here (of course, it was invented here in what's typical of earlier american type individualism stories - by a mormon kid on a farm who was obsessed with einstein and electrical physics). But as far as what's left, you would hardly notice it, though. Most people are streaming now. Live TV high ratings is about 1/3rd of what it used to be despite the population increasing by 50% in the last several decades.

Almost humorous when you see a live TV show struggling for ratings (with arrogant stars complaining that the lack of success is because the audience isn't sophisticated enough to understand the show), and you see they are getting 1 to 2 million viewers when something like Roseanne drew the equivalent of 40-50 million viewers against today's population size (they drew 33 million average over the first 6 years).


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

I should say most would hardly notice it - but I'm sure there's a large elderly contingent that still subscribes to the newspaper, listens to the radio and watches TV (and talks on phones connected to the wall). 

10% of the population here doesn't have a computer or internet, never did and has no interest in it (mostly older folks).


----------



## danst96 (9 Feb 2021)

Yeh we are heavy drinkers, got to sanitize the insides. I think alcohol sales are at a record high in the UK. Not sure whats going on with French wine though. Blame Brexit.


----------



## flying haggis (9 Feb 2021)

NO not really..........................................


----------



## Doug B (9 Feb 2021)

It’ll definitely be Brexit’s fault as is all this snow we’ve had & why my porridge was runny this morning, everything’s brexits fault it says so on Facebook


----------



## Cabinetman (9 Feb 2021)

And all the fear mongering that the shops would be empty and we would all starve to death because of Brexit, I think the only thing that I noticed a bit short for one day only was bags of lettuce leaves.


----------



## Doug B (9 Feb 2021)

So true @Cabinetman though to be fair I’ve not heard anyone whining on about Brexit & how well their vaccine roll out has been going.


----------



## artie (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> (also saw that someone in the UK proposed increasing the BBC license fee to 400 pounds figuring that the BBC is losing out on revenue based on what folks are willing (as in voluntarily) to pay or the streaming service of their choice).


Unfortunately this is what our news is becoming and the main reason I stopped listening to it.
In my opinion the news should consist of , well, news, you know, things that have happened and have had an impact on someone or something.

Last time I listened , a good number of years ago.. it was full of.
It is thought that the chancellor will......

The PM will announce this evening....

etc, etc, etc.

Speculation and fortune telling.

O and why do they have to go out and stand in a storm and shout about it.

That's not news that's melodrama


----------



## Doug B (9 Feb 2021)

artie said:


> O any why do they have to go out and stand in a storm and shout about it.


Isn’t that simply because there’s so much fake news out there that unless folks can see the storm with their own eyes they don’t believe it’s happening.


----------



## gregmcateer (9 Feb 2021)

Not supporting nor denigrating the BBC or any mainstream media, but if we're going to be reliant on the whims of eg fb, yt or whatever streaming service or social media outlet comes along next, I think we'd better improve our cognitive processing to filter out the extremist anonymous dung that is and will continue to be spewed withiut any form of journalistic answerability.


----------



## Rorschach (9 Feb 2021)

Just to point out, we are not obliged to have a TV license. I haven't had one for well over 10 years.


----------



## clogs (9 Feb 2021)

French wine is good.....
but
due to foreign Johny's over the water being complete A holes we should just buy Ozz n S African etc etc wines....
play the same game as them.....let em drown in it I say...........
besides we have our own wines now.....(that keep winning awards).... hahaha.......


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

danst96 said:


> Yeh we are heavy drinkers, got to sanitize the insides. I think alcohol sales are at a record high in the UK. Not sure whats going on with French wine though. Blame Brexit.



The statistics here suggest the overall alcoholism rate is only slightly behind the UK. On a day to day level, if college international exchange students are any indication, it does seem like post-dinner pub time is much more common there (or evening drinking) at a level that doesn't affect daily functioning. 

We had a few exchange students in mathematics who thought that it was completely unreasonable that you could have assignments that may prevent you from drinking for a week or two. They attempted to ignore the workload (sloshing around after dinner no matter what) and went back to England early. I'm sure if you go up the ladder from the low first tier schools into the ivies, there would be more serious English students who don't drink during the week. 

My spouse went to England for a semester (East Anglia? I can't remember the exact name of the school) and mid-week evening drinking was much more common. 

The universities here have a lot of virtue signaling rubbish about drinking and often overreach their authority. One of the dumbest things here is sending kids off to college, having a drinking age 3 years later (though I understand the outcomes are better with the drinking age, I don't think it's worth limiting individual freedoms) than the starting college age, and then causing absurd trouble for college students who drink under age and never got remotely close to a car.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> Just to point out, we are not obliged to have a TV license. I haven't had one for well over 10 years.



The interesting part to us as americans is that you can be subject to inspection to see if you are watching any live TV and then fined if it's discovered you are. At this point, it sounds like even if you watch live events on the internet, even foreign sporting events or something, you are violating the license terms. 

I do remember from that discussion that you can opt out, but to say the very least, the terms are extremely absurd. You don't want any BBC products? Fine. You can't watch anything from halfway around the world on the internet, either, unless it was taped earlier. Very soviet.


----------



## Rorschach (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> The interesting part to us as americans is that you can be subject to inspection to see if you are watching any live TV and then fined if it's discovered you are. At this point, it sounds like even if you watch live events on the internet, even foreign sporting events or something, you are violating the license terms.
> 
> I do remember from that discussion that you can opt out, but to say the very least, the terms are extremely absurd. You don't want any BBC products? Fine. You can't watch anything from halfway around the world on the internet, either, unless it was taped earlier. Very soviet.



It's complicated and rather stupid I agree.
As for the inspection, they don't actually have the power to enter your property, it's inspection by consent. Needless to say they aren't ever coming through my door!


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

clogs said:


> French wine is good.....
> but
> due to foreign Johny's over the water being complete A holes we should just buy Ozz n S African etc etc wines....
> play the same game as them.....let em drown in it I say...........
> besides we have our own wines now.....(that keep winning awards).... hahaha.......


I'm guessing that in greece, you have enough heat to make wines. We used to make jokes about the US wines, because they were really terrible (some still are), but cheap to make up for it. 

I don't think I ever saw my parents drink a wine that wasn't on a TV commercial in prime time (yuck). But we've got some wonderful wine and port making on the west coast here. There are local wineries even where I am, and state specific stores (pennsylvania). I don't know if they get favorable liquor tax treatment, but I've never had anything that seemed particularly good - at all. Not into that "support local by drinking something that tastes worse for the same price. Yay!" thing. 

Presume for the UK folks here that there may be a lack of climatological heat to make good wine?

No shortage of hard liquor making in the US, though (especially whiskey and the moonshine varieties - now commercially available).


----------



## Trainee neophyte (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> of course, it was invented here in what's typical of earlier american type individualism stories - by a mormon kid on a farm who was obsessed with einstein and electrical physics)


Are you absolutely sure? I've not heard of your Mormon, but that may well be my lack of education.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> It's complicated and rather stupid I agree.
> As for the inspection, they don't actually have the power to enter your property, it's inspection by consent. Needless to say they aren't ever coming through my door!



That last part is at least good. Police can request to come into properties here, too, but every piece of legal advice I've ever seen is to tell them "if you want to come in, go get a warrant", as it looks no worse to a judge that someone got a warrant than it would if they didn't. And police usually ask to look around when they're not sure if they can get a warrant or wouldn't go to the effort. 

Even if you feel like you've followed every law ever, there is likely something that could be found worth investigation or referral to another agency.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Are you absolutely sure? I've not heard of your Mormon, but that may well be my lack of education.



I guess some of the "who invented it" is determined based on what's deemed as "TV" vs something far away from being viable. 

Philo Farnsworth was the first to transmit electronic images (electronic on both ends - early television as we know it rather than a combination mechanical/electronic process that really had no potential). 









Philo Farnsworth - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Garno (9 Feb 2021)

I am very proud to say I am tea total and I have been for almost 20 years now.
I don't even bother with a small sherry at Christmas (actually when I did partake in drinking I would never have a Sherry).
I don't drink through choice and not because I had a problem and have not missed it one little bit


----------



## Droogs (9 Feb 2021)

About Brits being heavy drinkers, I remember seeing a card that was given to US troops in Germany and in the gulf, on which it said "Do not: fight, gamble or enter drinking competions with allied UK forces" and on the other side it said "You will lose" I think mainly due to US beer having about the same strength as a pint of shandy at the time


----------



## artie (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> The interesting part to us as americans is that you can be subject to inspection to see if you are watching any live TV and then fined if it's discovered you are.


Not subject to inspection at all. Except that some people will push their luck.

Much like a city cop who demands your ID when you are strolling down the street.
He has no right, but most people show it anyway.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

artie said:


> Not subject to inspection at all. Except that some people will push their luck.
> 
> Much like a city cop who demands your ID when you are strolling down the street.
> He has no right, but most people show it anyway.



They do that here, too. There are a couple of very clear federal laws here - you can video a public official in a public space any time as long as you'd like (there's insufficient punishment for officers who physically take your equipment away, though, and return it later - but that can be partially remedied by having several devices recording) - having one elsewhere recording footage or audio that conflicts with an official report becomes very unflattering for public officials. 

The officers here generally have to write an ID of an individual in their reports, so it creates a problem for them to not have it, but you're not required to provide it.

I have never been arrested, nor remotely close, but had a friend whose brother was convicted of murder after hanging around with a group of drug dealers that included a local judge's son. That's a bad policy - if the judges son does something and it becomes public, the judge's son will leave the country (and never return) and the friends will suddenly find out "they did it". 

Most attorneys (and police investigators) talking to the public will say "limit your contact in situations where you don't need the police - even honest misunderstandings can lead to charges and convictions with no intent of wrongdoing on either side". 

That said, the police here don't usually start to hassle anyone who hasn't been a constant problem for them in the first place. 

Not that these kinds of things are unique to law enforcement in the states. (guy living in my neighborhood moved to russia after college to take a job and got beaten up by russian police a few times because they knew he was american and assumed he was up to no good. He moved to a former soviet bloc to work for another company and got beaten up by their police because they assumed that since they hadn't seen him before and he was white, he must be russian and lying when saying he wasn't).


----------



## selectortone (9 Feb 2021)

And ..


Droogs said:


> I think mainly due to US beer having about the same strength as a pint of shandy at the time


Yep. I remember going over to the US in the early 90s for a conference and drinking bottle after bottle of Budweiser and wondering why I was still sober as a judge. It was a very boring conference, I could have done with a little buzz. They don't put the ABV on the label like they do here, or they didn't back then anyway. I think the beers, at least the craft ones, are a bit more like we're used to there now.

Mind you, to put the shoe on the other foot, I went to a conference in Belgium at around the same time and was plied with a few bottles of Leffe Tripel (abv 8.8%). That stuff is lethal


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

artie said:


> Unfortunately this is what our news is becoming and the main reason I stopped listening to it.
> In my opinion the news should consist of , well, news, you know, things that have happened and have had an impact on someone or something.



There is a pro wrestling promoter here (now retired) who says the following:

If you have a news channel and you are constantly telling me things that I've hear before and offering your opinion or commentary, that's not news. The nature of news in general, by definition, has the burden of being something that you didn't know or the broadcaster would have reason to believe you don't know. If they are telling you thinks you already know, *it's not news, it's promotion or manipulation". 

News and commentary used to be something like 50/50 here, perhaps more skewed than that toward news. When my grandparents tuned in to watch the news, it was sacred. No VCR, no internet, you got one shot at it and it may not be repeated later. The news has lost the ability to be news because their medium is outdated, so they've turned to commentary both because it costs less to create and is far easier to continue to generate than news coverage, an because instantaneous feedback shows more or less that people like to torture themselves (mostly choosing to watch repetition of something they already know they despise).


----------



## Sandyn (9 Feb 2021)

I stopped drinking last March when challenged by someone to stop for a few days. I also reduced my sugar intake by stopping snacking on biscuits.
I didn't drink a lot and I really don't miss it. I did eat a lot of sugary snacks after retiring.
I will have a beer when I can meet up with my friends again, but not a chocolate biscuit!


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> And ..
> 
> Yep. I remember going over to the US in the early 90s for a conference and drinking bottle after bottle of Budweiser and wondering why I was still sober as a judge. It was a very boring conference, I could have done with a little buzz. They don't put the ABV on the label like they do here, or they didn't back then anyway. I think the beers, at least the craft ones, are a bit more like we're used to there now.
> 
> Mind you, to put the shoe on the other foot, I went to a conference in Belgium at around the same time and was plied with a few bottles of Leffe Tripel (abv 8.8%). That stuff is lethal



I'm not sure if it's a law, but they generally do it now. Our alcohol is sneaky and sometimes not. That is, nearly flavorless peewater is common here. But peewater with a faint aftertaste of stale beer (intended to be easy to drink) could be anywhere from 3.5% to 7%, and the labeling is almost unintelligible in telling you which is which unless you look for the numbers. 

Most of the large brewery beer here is like pop music. Pop music is for people who want the edges taken off of real music so that it doesn't require thought or appreciation - or standards. The large commercial beers here are generally overly sweet or simplified "beerish" tasting stuff. A few like sam adams and yuengling and a bunch of older regional breweries have real beers, but the way the alcohol system is here in most places, the distributors of the major brands give priority to the major brands (that is, the distributors are independent, but they tend to favor a given brewery by choice). 

What happens is if you have a unique smaller brewery, the larger breweries create something that looks like your beer (and they may even push the limits and name it almost the same) and then demand that the distributors (who stock store shelves while delivering product) move the smaller breweries to the high or low shelves so that the eye level shelves all have the copycat product. 

it's more effective than it should be.


----------



## Rorschach (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> Most attorneys (and police investigators) talking to the public will say "limit your contact in situations where you don't need the police - even honest misunderstandings can lead to charges and convictions with no intent of wrongdoing on either side".



Similar situation here. Don't call the Police or talk to the Police unless you really need them. While the vast majority of officers are good people trying to do their best, there is a small number of well protected and power mad cops who will not only push things to limit but will actively break the law in the knowledge that the system protects its own. Their first reaction upon meeting anyone is "how can I get them for something" and someone who knows the law and stands up for their rights is irresistible to them and that attitude becomes toxic to the good officers around them, a corrupting influence.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

There's no legitimate investigation system here - you have to make (Depending on the local rules) a complaint either to the station's review board or to a prosecutor's office. 

The prosecutor needs motivated police to bring them criminals or they'll be elected out. The police themselves obviously aren't going to do anything unless they find the behavior beyond offensive. Bad system. 

I had a bad ticket written on a bicycle once here and a county policeman wrote me a ticket for it (I ran a stop sign on a bike). He wrote a ticket using code section numbers for cars and filed the ticket with the DMV (or his station did). I got notification that I had an infraction of "falling asleep behind the wheel of a car", which instantly goes out to insurers. It took a lot of work to get it fixed. If I file a complaint, what's going to happen? Every time I ride my bike at the county park where the officer works, I'll be getting an escort. No thanks. 

From time to time there are issues with folks who were previously married to someone an officer marries later (officer harasses former spouse, etc, to please new spouse), but that's just infrequent stuff that makes for fluffy news stories.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

Sandyn said:


> I stopped drinking last March when challenged by someone to stop for a few days. I also reduced my sugar intake by stopping snacking on biscuits.
> I didn't drink a lot and I really don't miss it. I did eat a lot of sugary snacks after retiring.
> I will have a beer when I can meet up with my friends again, but not a chocolate biscuit!



Your comment reminds me of John Daly saying that he ate four large M&M bags per day (not little ones, but the kind you get in a bulk bag) when he quit drinking due to the lack of alcohol being converted to sugar.


----------



## Sandyn (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> he ate four large M&M bags per day


M&M's, mm&mm's, mmm&mmm's, mmmm&mmmm's, mmmmm&mmmmm's. Once I start, I can't stop!


----------



## doctor Bob (9 Feb 2021)

I’ve only ever been drunk once just happened to last from 1980 to 1999


----------



## Trainee neophyte (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> I guess some of the "who invented it" is determined based on what's deemed as "TV" vs something far away from being viable.
> 
> Philo Farnsworth was the first to transmit electronic images (electronic on both ends - early television as we know it rather than a combination mechanical/electronic process that really had no potential).
> 
> ...


It's one of those times where everyone had a go, so pinning the tail on who was really responsible is down to culture and nationality. Most Brits would recognise John Logi Baird, who also sent moving pictures by radio waves in the 1920s. 

Another fun one is who invented the telephone? Alexander Graham Bell (another Scot), obviously, unless you are Italian. There was a bit of a furore many years ago when Microsoft gave "alternative facts" on their Encarta encyclopedia: How Encarta sees it


----------



## JohnPW (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> That last part is at least good. Police can request to come into properties here, too, but every piece of legal advice I've ever seen is to tell them "if you want to come in, go get a warrant", as it looks no worse to a judge that someone got a warrant than it would if they didn't. And police usually ask to look around when they're not sure if they can get a warrant or wouldn't go to the effort.
> 
> Even if you feel like you've followed every law ever, there is likely something that could be found worth investigation or referral to another agency.



The BBC inspection people are not police. They're just ordinary citizens.


----------



## Cabinetman (9 Feb 2021)

Selectotone and DW. That Budweiser effect was the old US as I’m sure DW knows, craft breweries are really going for it. In an effort to find a beer I liked that wasn’t going to knock me over I spent quite a long time looking at ABV ‘s (alcohol by volume) as so many of the beers were above 5%. And it really surprised me that not all of them had the strength printed on them. this photo shows the beers available in an old Liverpudlian pub dismantled and taken over to a town called Lititz in Pennsylvania, I bet Doug knows it! The first column of numbers is the ABV and as you can see most of them are about 5–6–8 %and then there are two at 15and16 % Thank goodness you can only buy those in a half pints, so not altogether true anymore that American beer is like dishwater. I decided Yuengling was my favourite tipple, about 4%. Ian


----------



## Cabinetman (9 Feb 2021)

JohnPW said:


> The BBC inspection people are not police. They're just ordinary citizens.


 And they are a real pain, you have a building without a TV licence ? You get non-stop letters reminding you that you need one, you tell them that you haven’t got a tv in your workshop, and then the pressure is put on, it’s like talking to a brick wall, and eventually they threaten to inspect and do they ever turn up? Not in my experience.

I always thought they had a way of checking if you were watching television in your home, from a van on the road outside, or was that just a story put out to scare people?


----------



## Linus (9 Feb 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> It's one of those times where everyone had a go, so pinning the tail on who was really responsible is down to culture and nationality. Most Brits would recognise John Logi Baird, who also sent moving pictures by radio waves in the 1920s.
> 
> Another fun one is who invented the telephone? Alexander Graham Bell (another Scot), obviously, unless you are Italian. There was a bit of a furore many years ago when Microsoft gave "alternative facts" on their Encarta encyclopedia: How Encarta sees it


Actually , I believe that Leonardo Da Vinci invented the telephone. It wasn't until Bell came along with his device that he had anyone to call. 

I'll get my coat!


----------



## eribaMotters (9 Feb 2021)

Getting back to French wine industry being hard hit by Brexit. The UK was [is?] the 2nd largest consumer of French wine in the world.
What is so attractive about French wine, red in particular, is the drinkability in that it generally not so heavy as new world wines and has lower alcohol levels.
We have trailer tented and taken a caravan to France since about 1999. At one time we would bring back up to 60 x 3L wine boxes in the days we had large get togethers. In 2019 we were still only paying 9 Euro a box for very drinkable stuff that in UK supermarkets was then selling at £18 for the same box.
When we finally get over to France again we will only be allowed to bring back 12 boxes between the two of us. It does not take a mathematician to work out the French are going to loose a lot of sales because I can assure those of you who do not venture abroad that I'm not unusual.

Colin


----------



## Phil Pascoe (9 Feb 2021)

At least now beer is marked with the ABV not the OSG it used to be. It was taxed on the sugar content not the alcohol content, so we had e.g. Guinness at 4.2% and Mackeson at 2.8% carrying the same tax, one being dry, one sweet. It is still I believe technically illegal to keep sugar on licenced premises as it could be added to draught beer to increase the (untaxed) proof. One of thousands of laws never repealed, another is that it still illegal to buy a round (WW1)

I had an Licenced Victuallers Annual from 1900 and the average proofs for ales and beers (using the normal modern distinction - ale being light beer being dark - rather than the more proper one - ale is hopped, beer isn't (iirc) were 8% and 6% respectively. Watney's Starlight use to be 2.1% ............ very nearly legal to sell to children. Making love in a punt. F***ing near water. Carling - formerly Carling Black Label was advertised as the Country's No.1 lager .......... when it wasn't lager at all, it was a beer - it was top fermented.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (9 Feb 2021)

eribaMotters said:


> Getting back to French wine industry being hard hit by Brexit. The UK was [is?] the 2nd largest consumer of French wine in the world.
> What is so attractive about French wine, red in particular, is the drinkability in that it generally not so heavy as new world wines and has lower alcohol levels.



On 2018 figures both Australia and the US export more to us than France. If the attraction of French wine is that it's weaker I'm sure the Australians would have noticed and made wine to suit. The figures are probably skewed by the proximity of France, rather than the quality of the lower end of the spectrum of French wine. The US produces huge bulk - I read some years ago that E&J Gallo turned out more "wine" than the whole of New Zealand.


----------



## danst96 (9 Feb 2021)

Doug B said:


> It’ll definitely be Brexit’s fault as is all this snow we’ve had & why my porridge was runny this morning, everything’s brexits fault it says so on Facebook


Oh absolutely,


D_W said:


> The statistics here suggest the overall alcoholism rate is only slightly behind the UK. On a day to day level, if college international exchange students are any indication, it does seem like post-dinner pub time is much more common there (or evening drinking) at a level that doesn't affect daily functioning.
> 
> We had a few exchange students in mathematics who thought that it was completely unreasonable that you could have assignments that may prevent you from drinking for a week or two. They attempted to ignore the workload (sloshing around after dinner no matter what) and went back to England early. I'm sure if you go up the ladder from the low first tier schools into the ivies, there would be more serious English students who don't drink during the week.
> 
> ...



Speaking of, I had a Jack Daniels this evening  point proved I guess


----------



## selectortone (9 Feb 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> I always thought they had a way of checking if you were watching television in your home, from a van on the road outside, or was that just a story put out to scare people?


That was in the old days when TVs had CRTs (cathode ray tubes). Detector vans detected the radiation put out by the scan coils that were part of the circuitry, which ran in that part of the circuit at 10kV or more. No more CRTs, no more detector vans.


----------



## Rorschach (9 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> That was in the old days when TVs had CRTs (cathode ray tubes). Detector vans detected the radiation put out by the scan coils that were part of the circuitry, which ran in that part of the circuit at 10kV or more. No more CRTs, no more detector vans.



Nope, detector vans were a PR campaign, they never had the technology to see if you were watching TV without a license, it was all made up.

EDIT: The BBC themselves admit that "detector vans" were not used in a single prosecution.


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

danst96 said:


> Oh absolutely,
> 
> 
> Speaking of, I had a Jack Daniels this evening  point proved I guess



I didn't know anyone in the UK would stoop to drinking American booze!!


----------



## D_W (9 Feb 2021)

Phil Pascoe said:


> At least now beer is marked with the ABV not the OSG it used to be. It was taxed on the sugar content not the alcohol content, so we had e.g. Guinness at 4.2% and Mackeson at 2.8% carrying the same tax, one being dry, one sweet. It is still I believe technically illegal to keep sugar on licenced premises as it could be added to draught beer to increase the (untaxed) proof. One of thousands of laws never repealed, another is that it still illegal to buy a round (WW1)
> 
> I had an Licenced Victuallers Annual from 1900 and the average proofs for ales and beers (using the normal modern distinction - ale being light beer being dark - rather than the more proper one - ale is hopped, beer isn't (iirc) were 8% and 6% respectively. Watney's Starlight use to be 2.1% ............ very nearly legal to sell to children. Making love in a punt. F***ing near water. Carling - formerly Carling Black Label was advertised as the Country's No.1 lager .......... when it wasn't lager at all, it was a beer - it was top fermented.



Guinness was always referred to here (while I was in college) as the beer that tastes like it should really make you loaded, but doesn't have that much alcohol in it. 

My neighbor drinks bud light platinum - 6% in a light beer. I don't know what their moto is, but it should be "we took the last wee remaining amount of flavor out and replaced it with a little bit more alcohol". 

He drinks several cases a week, though, so I get why he drinks what he drinks.


----------



## Rorschach (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> Guinness was always referred to here (while I was in college) as the beer that tastes like it should really make you loaded, but doesn't have that much alcohol in it.
> 
> My neighbor drinks bud light platinum - 6% in a light beer. I don't know what their moto is, but it should be "we took the last wee remaining amount of flavor out and replaced it with a little bit more alcohol".
> 
> He drinks several cases a week, though, so I get why he drinks what he drinks.



It's shame you can't get a good quality beer that isn't too strong. I really enjoy beer but even one pint is basically enough to put you over the limit for driving and I wouldn't want to take the risk anyway even if I was technically legal. I'd love to be able to have a pint of beer with dinner and not have to worry if I need to use the car later or in an emergency.


----------



## artie (9 Feb 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> And they are a real pain, you have a building without a TV licence ? You get non-stop letters reminding you that you need one, you tell them that you haven’t got a tv in your workshop, and then the pressure is put on,


I told them that I don't need a licence and they thanked me very much for letting them know and that they will check back with me in two years.


----------



## selectortone (9 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> Nope, detector vans were a PR campaign, they never had the technology to see if you were watching TV without a license, it was all made up.
> 
> EDIT: The BBC themselves admit that "detector vans" were not used in a single prosecution.


The technology definitely worked. I trained as a TV engineer in the 70s and I know that for a fact.


----------



## danst96 (9 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> I didn't know anyone in the UK would stoop to drinking American booze!!


Oh no Jack Daniels is good for the money and nice to mix where you wouldn't mix a decent scotch.


----------



## Cabinetman (9 Feb 2021)

I was in Pennsylvania last year up untill July, and like on previous trips I was quite shocked at how much a bottle of wine costs, of course the state imposes taxes, but still from memory it was about $10 a bottle and up – they were the cheap ones. And as was said America produces a vast quantity of wine.


----------



## PetePontoValentino (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> <SNIP> I don't watch the overproduced rubbish on TV</SNIP>



That says quite a lot about your opinion of American TV.

The idea behind a license fee is that production is funded without the need for advertising so viewers do not spend half of their time watching promotions for toilet brushes and carpet cleaners. 

That's the idea, whether you like it or not is another story. Personally, I don't mind as the fee's are not so much money anyway.


----------



## PetePontoValentino (10 Feb 2021)

Cabinetman said:


> I was in Pennsylvania last year up untill July, and like on previous trips I was quite shocked at how much a bottle of wine costs, of course the state imposes taxes, but still from memory it was about $10 a bottle and up – they were the cheap ones. And as was said America produces a vast quantity of wine.



A bottle of the Glenmorangie limited edition "A Tale of Cake" arrived here yesterday. I am not a big whiskey drinker, perhaps having a small glass every few months. I found this one stunning with three glasses yesterday evening. It's not cheap but I am already considering ordering more so I have a decent supply


----------



## Trainee neophyte (10 Feb 2021)

I quite like the Mediterranean approach to alcohol - it is all about the food. Your drink is either an aperitif to get the digestive juices flowing, an important part of the meal itself, or an aid to digestion after the big event. Getting drunk is not the aim of the game, unlike in the UK where " eating is cheating".

Drinking every day is considered perfectly normal, because you eat every day. Drinking without eating is forbidden (it will do colossal damage to your system, and you may even die, I have been informed.)


----------



## Rorschach (10 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> The technology definitely worked. I trained as a TV engineer in the 70s and I know that for a fact.



No it didn't.

Is it possible to see whether a TV is on, certainly you can scan for the frequencies emitted. Is it possible to pinpoint a TV in use to a precision sufficient to secure a prosecution? Absolutely not, which is why a prosecution was never made using detector van evidence. It was a scare tactic, nothing more.


----------



## Rorschach (10 Feb 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> I quite like the Mediterranean approach to alcohol - it is all about the food. Your drink is either an aperitif to get the digestive juices flowing, an important part of the meal itself, or an aid to digestion after the big event. Getting drunk is not the aim of the game, unlike in the UK where " eating is cheating".
> 
> Drinking every day is considered perfectly normal, because you eat every day. Drinking without eating is forbidden (it will do colossal damage to your system, and you may even die, I have been informed.)



The Spanish, or certainly the Catalans have a similar attitude. When visiting a friend there he would always produce some food when we had a drink, even if it was just some crisps, cheese, sausage etc. He never had drink unless it was with food or while waiting for food to be ready.


----------



## alex_heney (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> The interesting part to us as americans is that you can be subject to inspection to see if you are watching any live TV and then fined if it's discovered you are. At this point, it sounds like even if you watch live events on the internet, even foreign sporting events or something, you are violating the license terms.
> 
> I do remember from that discussion that you can opt out, but to say the very least, the terms are extremely absurd. You don't want any BBC products? Fine. You can't watch anything from halfway around the world on the internet, either, unless it was taped earlier. Very soviet.


And very not true.

You need a licence if you want to watch anything broadcast over the air or streamed at the same time as it is broadcast. Or if you want to watch anything on iPlayer (the BBC's own streaming service). But you can watch anything else streaming, whether live or not, without any requirement for a licence.

And they can only enter your house to inspect if they get a warrant, for which they have to provide sufficient eveidence for a judge to believe it probable you are watching without a licence.

There are no terms for opting out. You just don't buy a licence if you don't need one. They will occasionally send you letters, to which you don't have to respond, but if you do, and tell them you don't need a licence, then they will leave it a year or two before sending another.


----------



## artie (10 Feb 2021)

alex_heney said:


> And they can only enter your house to inspect if they get a warrant, for which they have to provide sufficient eveidence for a judge to believe it probable you are watching without a licence.


Even if they have, and I don't know what possible evidence they could show a judge to obtain one, a warrant to enter your premises what good is it going to do them.
Is anyone going to be daft enough to watch TV in their presence.


----------



## Rorschach (10 Feb 2021)

artie said:


> Even if they have, and I don't know what possible evidence they could show a judge to obtain one, a warrant to enter your premises what good is it going to do them.
> Is anyone going to be daft enough to watch TV in their presence.



Hundreds of thousands every year are daft enough to incriminate themselves unfortunately.


----------



## artie (10 Feb 2021)

A workmate of mine years ago liked to go to town on a Sat morning, place a few bets and bring a few beers home to consume while watching the racing on TV
One Monday morning he related to me how he had followed his usual routine and was watching a particularly close race involving a sum of his hard earned, when there was a knock at the door.
He ran backwards to the door and opened it saying hold on a minute I've got a quid on this race and watched the remaining few mins of the race.
I don't recall the outcome of the race but he told me the first few words from the visitor were. I must warn you that you do not have to say anything but anything you do say etc, etc.
Turned out the guy didn't prosecute on condition that he get a licence first thing Monday,


----------



## John Brown (10 Feb 2021)

alex_heney said:


> And very not true.
> 
> You need a licence if you want to watch anything broadcast over the air or streamed at the same time as it is broadcast. Or if you want to watch anything on iPlayer (the BBC's own streaming service). But you can watch anything else streaming, whether live or not, without any requirement for a licence.
> 
> ...


Interesting phrase, "at the same time". There's a noticeable delay between analogue and digital reception of the same program. It's an unavoidable consequence of the compression and error detection/correction. Streaming over the web likewise. 
Not that I'm endorsing licence dodging. You may think the law is wrong, but I don't believe that automatically gives you the right to ignore it.


----------



## Chris70 (10 Feb 2021)

Trainee neophyte said:


> Are you absolutely sure? I've not heard of your Mormon, but that may well be my lack of education.


Evidently, there were a number of people who ‘invented’ the TV. Wikipedia has an interesting article, quoting Baird and Jenkins as well as Farnsworth. Have a read


Trainee neophyte said:


> Are you absolutely sure? I've not heard of your Mormon, but that may well be my lack of education.


Let’s not forget John Logie Baird John Logie Baird - Wikipedia


----------



## JohnPW (10 Feb 2021)

This thread is 2-in-1. Anyhow, the BBC does not use detection (if it exists) as evidence in court because they would have to reveal how it works! I gather the usual evidence is a signed confession otherwise it's the inspector's word against yours.

The detector vans might have worked in theory with one isolated TV set but I read there were only something like six vans for the whole country, the rest were all dummies.

It needs to be repeated, if you don't need a licence, just ignore the letters, they just get sent out automatically.


----------



## PhilTilson (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> Presume for the UK folks here that there may be a lack of climatological heat to make good wine?



Perhaps surprisingly, the climate here (UK) is proving to be very favourable for white wines, especially the sparkling ones. There are several companies that beat the traditional Champagne makers in international competitions year after year. The only reason I don't drink more of it is that it's too expensive! Can't quite work out why, but I settle for New World wines these days, especially New Zealand whites which are fantastic!


----------



## Wildman (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> I'm guessing that in greece, you have enough heat to make wines. We used to make jokes about the US wines, because they were really terrible (some still are), but cheap to make up for it.
> 
> I don't think I ever saw my parents drink a wine that wasn't on a TV commercial in prime time (yuck). But we've got some wonderful wine and port making on the west coast here. There are local wineries even where I am, and state specific stores (pennsylvania). I don't know if they get favorable liquor tax treatment, but I've never had anything that seemed particularly good - at all. Not into that "support local by drinking something that tastes worse for the same price. Yay!" thing.
> 
> ...


I am in the UK Devon to be precise and have made excellent wines for over 20 years, English wines are taking over in the shops.


----------



## D_W (10 Feb 2021)

Thanks for the info on the wines. 30 years ago here, there were local wines - mostly made by individuals, but a few commercial places. They were terrible. 

These days, I hear they're fine, but they're no cheaper than wine from california or europe, so i'm out. I guess they got serious about what grapes actually match the climate here and made some better wines.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (10 Feb 2021)

Yes, everywhere has a grape that suits best - malbec for Argentina, pinotage for S. Africa and also on. The English one is Bacchus - it makes some stunning wines in this Country.


----------



## D_W (10 Feb 2021)

So, for the BBC license, let's say laguna seca has a road race in California and you stream it live. It's broadcast in the US but not in the UK (let's not argue about whether or not it maybe, let's assume it's something broadcast live in the US and you can only see it streaming in the UK, but it's live). 

This requires a BBC license or no? The whole idea is idiotic, If it needs to be funded, then just add it as a general expense and spread the tax out over everyone. 

As far as commercials go, we have PBS here - PBS has fewer commercials, but still some, and then breaks where they toot their horn about their station and talk about how much better it is than over the air TV. I end up watching it rarely because it's no better than network TV, cable or streaming at least 90% of the time and when they do have something good, the horn tooting and interruptions for promotion of the distribution method (PBS in general) is totally intolerable.


----------



## D_W (10 Feb 2021)

re: the comment above about expensive wines in PA - yes, in general, anything lower than $10 isn't worth having unless you like fruity wines. The alcohol laws have some nuance by state, and here in PA, wines are sold at wine stores, liquor and wine stores, and in some grocery stores that have a special license. It probably adds about $1 a bottle. There will be $7 or so bottles dotted here in the main wine areas, but most of the cheap wines are in the back of the store near a fridge (where they have wines that are refrigerated), or in the middle where the wine is in boxes. 

If you want a good middle of the road wine for a decent price, the black and bota box type stuff in the middle is usually about as good as a $10-$15 wine but for about half the price ($20-$30 for 3 liters). My spouse buys that way, but I think the convenience just doubles the intake. 

I'm not a real bit wine drinker. The redder and the drier, the better to me....if it's going to be wine-ish, I'd rather sip brandy.


----------



## highwood122 (10 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> It's complicated and rather stupid I agree.
> As for the inspection, they don't actually have the power to enter your property, it's inspection by consent. Needless to say they aren't ever coming through my door!


they can go get a warrant


----------



## John Brown (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> So, for the BBC license, let's say laguna seca has a road race in California and you stream it live. It's broadcast in the US but not in the UK (let's not argue about whether or not it maybe, let's assume it's something broadcast live in the US and you can only see it streaming in the UK, but it's live).
> 
> This requires a BBC license or no? The whole idea is idiotic, If it needs to be funded, then just add it as a general expense and spread the tax out over everyone.
> 
> As far as commercials go, we have PBS here - PBS has fewer commercials, but still some, and then breaks where they toot their horn about their station and talk about how much better it is than over the air TV. I end up watching it rarely because it's no better than network TV, cable or streaming at least 90% of the time and when they do have something good, the horn tooting and interruptions for promotion of the distribution method (PBS in general) is totally intolerable.


No. I think for the scenario you describe, a licence would not be required. Unless it was being broadcast by the BBC at the same time as you were streaming it.

Edit: I think I'm wrong about that. 

It is a crazy system. It doesn't bother me, as I do have a licence.


----------



## D_W (10 Feb 2021)

OK, that's what I gathered from other people. First, I assumed it would be as you say (only material owned or licensed and broadcasted by BBC, but it sounds like *any* live events anywhere and you're supposed to pay the BBC. If that's the case, it's very stupid). 

PBS has attempted to get mandatory dedicated funding as a "public utility" here, but they've had greater challenges than that. There is money given to them, but it's comparatively little.


----------



## richard.selwyn (10 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> I guess some of the "who invented it" is determined based on what's deemed as "TV" vs something far away from being viable.
> 
> Philo Farnsworth was the first to transmit electronic images (electronic on both ends - early television as we know it rather than a combination mechanical/electronic process that really had no potential).
> 
> ...



If you have nothing better to do, this is an interesting read:




__





Who Really Invented Television?


Revisionist history says RCA, but in truth it was a Mormon farm boy named Farnsworth. His struggles presaged the battle between Bill Gates and Netscape.




www.technologyreview.com


----------



## Rorschach (10 Feb 2021)

highwood122 said:


> they can go get a warrant



They can, but incredibly difficult for them to get one, they have never managed to get one to inspect my property.


----------



## D_W (10 Feb 2021)

richard.selwyn said:


> If you have nothing better to do, this is an interesting read:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Interesting - I found a similar article yesterday. I've never asked the rhetorical question "who invented it" in the first place, so I wasn't aware that RCA claimed it. As a relative of a Zenith dealer, I understood RCA TVs generally to be a second tier brand, and remembered the dog better than anything other than the RCA "Roundies". 

But the fact that a dreamer would come up with the method and then the crowd of conscientious society members would take credit is just the way it goes.

That is, I once listened to a psychologist talking about the dynamic between the creative and the conscientious. Business generally values conscientious employees, and likes to steal ideas from the creative. But the creative folks are generally the ones who move society forward in huge steps, while the conscientious tend to run with other peoples' ideas and either make them cheaper or fill in the dots. 

Without the dreamers, the conscientious have nothing to work on. 

A case of this is the established understanding that landing a launch vehicle descending backwards so that it can be used is too hard of a problem to solve. This becomes accepted fact until someone like Musk comes along, and generates money due to influence and ideas. He has to be reigned in by executives when he gets too far afield, but his ideas push the conscientious. Luckily in his case, he's the public figure, so he won't be lost to history. His idea of sending a craft to mars with freight, but having it be able to generate its own fuel and then return is way out there, to say the least. 

The dreamers also tend to be a little crazy and neurotic (not good front runners) - I see Farnsworth lost his marbles from the stress. He got a bead on developing electronic TV and ran with it after that, but his mental tool set was to find something and show it's possible, not to run with it after the fact. 

I find this stuff fascinating, but maybe most others don't. It's fairly uncommon for someone to generate the ideas that move society in huge leaps and also be stable and detail oriented conscientious types who can do repetitive things without throwing tantrums or becoming neurotic. 

(when you combine an idea guy with greed and aggressiveness - cough--bill gates--cough. You can get far, I guess. Mixing things you lift with things that you came up with. I remember having a PC that ran on MS-DOS and being advised that microsoft got sued and that the pre-suit dos was the one to have because their own after the fact wasn't so great. I think it had to do with compression or some such thing that we never talk about these days).


----------



## selectortone (10 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> No it didn't.
> 
> Is it possible to see whether a TV is on, certainly you can scan for the frequencies emitted. Is it possible to pinpoint a TV in use to a precision sufficient to secure a prosecution? Absolutely not, which is why a prosecution was never made using detector van evidence. It was a scare tactic, nothing more.


So, you're a TV engineer too are you (as well as an eminent epidemiologist)?

The technology did work. The later systems could detect a working TV within an arc of about 5 degrees, with a range of 50-100 yards, and with the database of TV licences the vans carried, the engineers were able to determine the location of unlicenced sets in many instances (despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe).

As to prosecutions, you're not looking at the big picture. How many people do you think went out and bought a TV licence when it was publicised that the vans were in their area? I remember the TV ads they ran for many years. Those vans wouldn't have been around for over 50 years if they weren't paying for themselves.


----------



## Rorschach (10 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> So, you're a TV engineer too are you?
> 
> The technology did work. The later systems could detect a working TV within an arc of about 5 degrees, with a range of 50-100 yards, and with the database of TV licences the vans carried, the engineers were able to determine the location of unlicenced sets in many instances (despite what the Daily Mail would have you believe).
> 
> As to prosecutions, you're not looking at the big picture. How many people do you think went out and bought a TV licence when it was publicised that the vans were in their area? I remember the ads they ran for many years. Those vans wouldn't have been around for over 50 years if they weren't paying for themselves.



Absolute nonsense. It was PR and nothing else. If it did work then it would have only been possible in the very early days when hardly anyone had a TV, once every house has one the interference alone would be enough to make the evidence useless in court. Hundreds of thousands of prosecutions every year and you tell me they never once needed to use the "evidence" from a detector van. If it was so good and "paying for itself" then they would have been raking it in and showing to the whole country how good the vans were. Also if the vans worked, they wouldn't need to apply for those very tricky to get warrants would they? Use your common sense man, it's a scam, you were duped as were millions more, nothing to be ashamed of.


----------



## selectortone (10 Feb 2021)




----------



## Concizat (10 Feb 2021)

danst96 said:


> Oh absolutely,
> 
> 
> Speaking of, I had a Jack Daniels this evening  point proved I guess


Mine was a Makers Mark.


----------



## Robbo60 (11 Feb 2021)

Personally I think £3-4 a week is well worth it. Especially with i-player.


----------



## NickWelford (11 Feb 2021)

Can we just get something clear. 
UK
Licence. Noun
License. Verb.

US
License. Anything. 


Thank you.


----------



## alex_heney (11 Feb 2021)

John Brown said:


> Interesting phrase, "at the same time". There's a noticeable delay between analogue and digital reception of the same program. It's an unavoidable consequence of the compression and error detection/correction. Streaming over the web likewise.
> Not that I'm endorsing licence dodging. You may think the law is wrong, but I don't believe that automatically gives you the right to ignore it.


The law does take account of that.

What the actual legislation says is (my bold):
" In this regulation, any reference to receiving a television programme service includes a reference to receiving by any means any programme included in that service, where that programme is received at the same time (*or virtually the same time*) as it is received by members of the public by virtue of its being broadcast or distributed as part of that service. "






The Communications (Television Licensing) Regulations 2004


These Regulations prescribe the fees payable for TV licences; define “television receiver” for the purposes of Part 4 of the Communications Act 2003 (licensing of TV reception); and define terms used for the purposes of Part 1 of the Wireless Telegraphy Act 1967 (information as to sale and hire...




www.legislation.gov.uk


----------



## AJS2018 (11 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> ..I saw on American news this morning (well, internet - I don't watch the overproduced rubbish on TV) that France's wine sector has been hit hard by Brexit.


Having spent many years living in the USA I couldn’t agree more about US tv news, but I’m even more sceptical about what I read on the internet. However you’ve right, France’s wine sector has been hit hard of late, some of it is due to Brexit but most of it is self inflicted, there is so many other countries producing great wine at a more reasonable price - of course the French disagree.


----------



## alex_heney (11 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> Absolute nonsense. It was PR and nothing else. If it did work then it would have only been possible in the very early days when hardly anyone had a TV, once every house has one the interference alone would be enough to make the evidence useless in court. Hundreds of thousands of prosecutions every year and you tell me they never once needed to use the "evidence" from a detector van. If it was so good and "paying for itself" then they would have been raking it in and showing to the whole country how good the vans were. Also if the vans worked, they wouldn't need to apply for those very tricky to get warrants would they? Use your common sense man, it's a scam, you were duped as were millions more, nothing to be ashamed of.


So you are saying that he, as somebody who actually used the equipment, was duped into believing it worked, because you, as somebody who knows nothing about it beyond what he has read on the internet don't think it worked.

Why doesn't that surprise me?


----------



## Rorschach (11 Feb 2021)

alex_heney said:


> So you are saying that he, as somebody who actually used the equipment, was duped into believing it worked, because you, as somebody who knows nothing about it beyond what he has read on the internet don't think it worked.
> 
> Why doesn't that surprise me?



Did he say he used it? Did he confirm he worked for TV licensing and went around gathering evidence for prosecution?
No, he said there was equipment that could show a TV was on, well whoopdy do, I have instruments that show when TV is working, they are called eyes. I am sure that technology exists to scan the frequencies output by a running television, what did not happen is box vans going around scanning for Mrs Miggins in number 22 who is watching song's of praise in her kitchen without a licence. There is a reason that no prosecution has ever used detector van evidence, it doesn't exist.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (11 Feb 2021)

Robbo60 said:


> Personally I think £3-4 a week is well worth it. Especially with i-player.


Which of course is totally irrelevant to the argument, which is whether it should be compulsory when you don't watch the BBC.


----------



## PetePontoValentino (11 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> No it didn't.
> 
> Is it possible to see whether a TV is on, certainly you can scan for the frequencies emitted. Is it possible to pinpoint a TV in use to a precision sufficient to secure a prosecution? Absolutely not, which is why a prosecution was never made using detector van evidence. It was a scare tactic, nothing more.



Not if the TV is made of wood (which would be the obvious link to this group)


----------



## ComberSpud (11 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> Absolute nonsense. It was PR and nothing else. If it did work then it would have only been possible in the very early days when hardly anyone had a TV, once every house has one the interference alone would be enough to make the evidence useless in court. Hundreds of thousands of prosecutions every year and you tell me they never once needed to use the "evidence" from a detector van. If it was so good and "paying for itself" then they would have been raking it in and showing to the whole country how good the vans were. Also if the vans worked, they wouldn't need to apply for those very tricky to get warrants would they? Use your common sense man, it's a scam, you were duped as were millions more, nothing to be ashamed of.


It’s not nonsense. I’m a former BBC engineer and the technology did work and was used extensively in the past. Let’s keep to facts rather than opinion. It was more effective as a deterrent, as that was simpler and cheaper than the legal route.


----------



## Phil Pascoe (11 Feb 2021)

The TVs in nice wooden cabinets used to be quite common among some of the low life I knew in the '70s - they had worked out that a TV in a cabinet was classed as a piece of furniture and the social security would pay for it. I knew one chap who was the Major Major Major Major of the unemployment world - he was so good at being unemployed he gave others lessons in it.


----------



## Rorschach (11 Feb 2021)

ComberSpud said:


> It’s not nonsense. I’m a former BBC engineer and the technology did work and was used extensively in the past. Let’s keep to facts rather than opinion. It was more effective as a deterrent, as that was simpler and cheaper than the legal route.



So good it was never needed. Like a nuclear deterrent then.


----------



## MikeJhn (11 Feb 2021)

Good Grief, its no wonder I only look at the "Tool Revues" section, must get in touch and get admin to stop sending me links.


----------



## Jelly (11 Feb 2021)

D_W said:


> We had a few exchange students in mathematics who thought that it was completely unreasonable that you could have assignments that may prevent you from drinking for a week or two. They attempted to ignore the workload (sloshing around after dinner no matter what) and went back to England early.




Some of that is probably around cultural expectations as well.

As a British student I would probably have found an assignment which effectively stopped me from having a social life for two weeks to be unreasonable too! (I would have made sure it got done... Because you know, it's notionally why you're there, but would not have been impressed).

There again you could probably raise valid questions about how healthy "Social Life" and "going to the pub" being almost synonymous is... But that goes much wider than just students.




D_W said:


> I'm sure if you go up the ladder from the low first tier schools into the ivies, there would be more serious English students who don't drink during the week.



I'm not sure that the caliber of students makes much of a difference either, from my friendships with a bunch of medical students, and experiences working on projects with both Oxford and Cambridge Uni's, the "top flight" students are just as bad if not worse... PhD students being particularly bad due to a combination of a work-hard play-hard mentality and being seasoned drinkers by that point.




D_W said:


> My spouse went to England for a semester (East Anglia? I can't remember the exact name of the school) and mid-week evening drinking was much more common.



Living in a university city, Wednesday afternoons/evenings remains (or did until the last year) the biggest night of the week for student drinking...

Most university sports fixtures are scheduled on a Wednesday afternoon, and many courses without a major practical component have the afternoon free of teaching to allow for it, plus there's less town vs. gown bother and cheap drink deals from pubs and bars who know the club's will be out and want to drum up midweek trade.


----------



## selectortone (11 Feb 2021)

Rorschach said:


> So good it was never needed. Like a nuclear deterrent then.


You're hilarious. You really think that the Post Office and the BBC maintained a group of engineers and a fleet of vans with expensive equipment that was regularly updated for continuously changing technology - 405 to 625 lines, colour, valve to transistor to solid state etc., etc - for over 50 years, that was ineffective? What were they for then? A vanity project? Quite an expensive one.

I'm done with this, so I'll let you have the last word, which seems to be the most important thing here (and to hell with actual facts from people with actual first hand experience}


----------



## Droogs (11 Feb 2021)

Just to inform people about the technology around the detector vans. In the late 80's i went to an Infosec demo, where they had equipment that was able to recreate the image on computer monitor from outside the building and without line of sight. It was apparently based upon known BBC equipment and had been manufactured not here in the west but was from a Stasi depot.

Now no idea if it was from detector vans but it certainly made the communications security arm of G6 a bit nervous about the adoption of digital tech in our embassies, i remember that much.


----------



## Woody2Shoes (11 Feb 2021)

As a youngster I used to be able to hear if a CRT screen was switched on anywhere in the house simply from the audible whistle produced by the line output transformer








Flyback transformer - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org




Such transformers also produce a very distinctive radio signal which is easy to triangulate with one or more directional antennas. Similar techniques were used in WW2 and later to identify the distinctive emissions from clandestine radio receivers.





Operation RAFTER - Wikipedia







en.m.wikipedia.org





I have no doubt that such equipment could have been used, and see no reason why it might not have been used, to find "unlicenced" users of TV sets.


----------



## Rorschach (11 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> You're hilarious. You really think that the Post Office and the BBC maintained a group of engineers and a fleet of vans with expensive equipment that was regularly updated for continuously changing technology - 405 to 625 lines, colour, valve to transistor to solid state etc., etc - for over 50 years, that was ineffective? What were they for then? A vanity project? Quite an expensive one.
> 
> I'm done with this, so I'll let you have the last word, which seems to be the most important thing here (and to hell with actual facts from people with actual first hand experience}



No I think they painted up a few vans and drove them around a bit when they were doing one of their regular shakedowns. Cheap and effective PR. I am sure at the beginning they tried things but once they realised any evidence they might get was useless in court they just drove around empty vans.


----------



## artie (11 Feb 2021)

selectortone said:


> You're hilarious. You really think that the Post Office and the BBC maintained a group of engineers and a fleet of vans with expensive equipment that was regularly updated for continuously changing technology - 405 to 625 lines, colour, valve to transistor to solid state etc., etc - for over 50 years, that was ineffective? What were they for then? A vanity project? Quite an expensive one.



I can relate one instance where they were effective.
I bought a new house in a new development in 1984 and binned every letter re tv licences.
In 87/88 can't quite remember, I was parked in town when I saw a tv detector van drive past.
I had a think to my self, decided I had saved myself a few quid and walked over to the post office and purchased a colour licence.

Back then her indoors and the kids watched non stop so arguably it was worth it.

Nowadays it wouldn't be used at all so I don't need a licence.


----------



## D_W (12 Feb 2021)

we have something over here called the stingray may parallel the vans. For a long time, the stingray was never used in court, and it still may not be, but despite the stupid name, the thing worked. You'd have to look it up online to find out exactly what it does, but it certainly lifts at least location and possibly other things from cell phones and supposedly with secret warrants (as if it wouldn't be done otherwise). 

What the stingray does isn't provide evidence of something in court, it gives the police and feds the ability to collect information that nobody thinks they're able to collect and then use that to triangulate into a legitimate warrant. 

What the police and feds absolutely didn't want was for this stingray device to be named in warrants so that it would become public knowledge, but it eventually got out. 

(OK, I looked it up - the things bearing that name can do all kinds of BS, including mocking a cell point so that they can intercept a cell signal and then pass it along to another point - the user has no idea they're being sniffed). 









Stingray phone tracker - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org


----------



## D_W (12 Feb 2021)

My point wasn't well made above - aside from the vans saying they're detecting something, they may have been actually detecting common radiation or whatever other electronic signals were typically given off by a tube TV or solid state devices (I don't know much about electronic rubbish) to both get people to pay up out of fear upon appearance, and to find the next target for legitimate investigations. 

If the truck doesn't show up being used in court, it's hard for someone to have legal standing to challenge it as an unreasonable search method.


----------



## D_W (12 Feb 2021)

If you read about the stingray above, it's pretty easy to see why law enforcement wouldn't want it to be known - it should require a warrant. The fact that someone can intercept your cell signal without a warrant is garbage in my opinion. As the article says, it comes out "because terrorism!!" and then you find out that a given department (and probably all) are just using it all over the place for stuff that has nothing to do with terrorism. Presumably whatever things allow the department to seize property and money.


----------



## thetyreman (13 Feb 2021)

there is some truth in that we're all drinking a bit more, it's been a really tough year, I've ordered some mead to try out just out of curiosity.


----------



## Just4Fun (13 Feb 2021)

thetyreman said:


> I've ordered some mead to try out just out of curiosity.


I tried some at Christmas. Far too sweet for my taste. To be expected I suppose.


----------

