Suspect Device Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Being as I already allow Google incredible access to my life that is passed around willy nilly, it would be churlish not to. It's one thing allowing an evil corporation complete access to your life, it's quite another to allow an evil government complete access to your life. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 My cousin in New Zealand sent me this. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Distant Doonhamer Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 During the lockdown, ive started doing more running. Been enjoying doing 5km at a time and trying to get my time down. One of my mates started following me on strava and then suddenly i have been nominated to run a 5k via social media (sent to my wife as i dont have social media). I have to run a 5k, donate to the NHS and then nominate 5 other people to do the same. What is this pish? I just want to run on my ownTell them to f**k off. You don’t have to do anything. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 Before easing the lockdown rules I think they should allow one weekend the safest sector of the population to do what they want, and force everyone else to stay indoors. That's everyone on the shielded list who haven't been in contact with anyone for at least a month. One weekend of beaches, beer gardens and sun before we're back in lockup for the foreseeable while everyone else goes out to play. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, Suspect Device said: It's one thing allowing an evil corporation complete access to your life, it's quite another to allow an evil government complete access to your life. As if they don't already.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, welshbairn said: That's everyone on the shielded list who haven't been in contact with anyone for at least a month. How is proof of this going to be submitted? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, Dele said: How is proof of this going to be submitted? Not an issue as it will never happen, sadly. Hypothetically though, the letter from the Government informing us we're on the shielded list would cover most, and if that wasn't trusted mobile phone data could back it up a bit. No way of proving anything 100% though, there's always chancers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derry Alli Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 (edited) I don't think it's sad it won't happen. I certainly wouldn't want to be at the highest risk of catching the disease and then being told to go out and play because people were given a letter and told to stay at home and definitely didn't just leave their phone at home when they did go out. Edited May 3, 2020 by Dele 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 38 minutes ago, Wee Willie said: Is it not better that decisions are taken in Scotland (for good or for ill) than the decisions taken in another country? Your entirely misunderstanding my point. Yes, decisions about Scotland should be made in Scotland. Not all decisions about Scotland should be made entirely by Nicola Sturgeon acting on the narrow advice of the UK civil service. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aufc Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 Tell them to f**k off. You don’t have to do anything.Just ignored it tbh. Im not on social media so cant even nominate anyone. Also i am not really a great believer in donating to the NHS. This should be down to the government. It also means actual charities are struggling because everyone is raising for the NHS. I do think the whole captain tom thing is amazing though. Not because it is for the NHS but it is a bit of positivity amongst the shite. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 hour ago, welshbairn said: The lockdown was never about saving lives per se, it's about keeping the infection rate down enough for the NHS to cope. Otherwise we'd close the economy down every winter. 1 hour ago, renton said: One of the things to remember here in any conversation of trading off deaths vs. The economy is that the lockdown is not really about stopping people dying from this illness. The primary function of the lockdown is to stop lots of people dying all at once. That's why the government built those pop up hospitals in a hurry, that's why the aerospace industry got co-opted into delivering thousands of new ventilators. To build up ICU capacity not just for the immediate crisis but so that there was slack in the system to cope with higher hospitalization rates after lockdown is eased off. The government has transitioned to focus on the r0 transmission rate as it's lodestar. Well and good, by focusing on that as an output in a contact-trace-isolate strategy they can make sure that infection rates never get to the point where hospitals breakdown under the strain. If the r0 value drops to such a level that the virus is smothered out of existence like SARS was, then that's a happy accident. So long as the government can provide proper facilities for anyone contracting the illness, then that is their exit strategy. Not a cessation of deaths. The point about the nhs coping and fatalities being spread out was and is to save lives though. It seems to be accepted that a %, whether it's 0.5% or 2.5% of people can't be saved. The point is to make sure that those who can be saved, medically speaking, don't die because they can't get into hospital or get oxygen. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, coprolite said: The point about the nhs coping and fatalities being spread out was and is to save lives though. It seems to be accepted that a %, whether it's 0.5% or 2.5% of people can't be saved. The point is to make sure that those who can be saved, medically speaking, don't die because they can't get into hospital or get oxygen. And so those who die get looked after rather than left on a corridor unable to breathe. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 I see Germany are reopening their churches. That’s a great idea. If we want to test the possibility of a second spike caused by a relaxation of people gathering together then places of worship are the ideal venues to trial it. If it proves a causal effect we should still encourage it until we can determine the level of fatality. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coprolite Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 54 minutes ago, Dunfermline Don said: I take it we are all happy to sign up to a track and trace app on our phones in order to get the lockdown lifted? 51 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said: It wouldn't bother me. I'd be uncomfortable about it and it would bother me but i'd be prepared to do it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 minute ago, Granny Danger said: I see Germany are reopening their churches. That’s a great idea. If we want to test the possibility of a second spike caused by a relaxation of people gathering together then places of worship are the ideal venues to trial it. If it proves a causal effect we should still encourage it until we can determine the level of fatality. I thought Richard Dawkins was a bit quiet at the moment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, renton said: Your entirely misunderstanding my point. Yes, decisions about Scotland should be made in Scotland. Not all decisions about Scotland should be made entirely by Nicola Sturgeon acting on the narrow advice of the UK civil service. Fair do's but IF we were independent then ALL decisions about Scotland would be made here by whatever person was the First Minister. They would be listening to advice from all sorts of people then they would act accordingly (for good or for ill). Again it would be decisions taken in Scotland and no by another country. But I see your point. Edited May 3, 2020 by Wee Willie -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wee Willie Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, Granny Danger said: I see Germany are reopening their churches. That’s a great idea. If we want to test the possibility of a second spike caused by a relaxation of people gathering together then places of worship are the ideal venues to trial it. If it proves a causal effect we should still encourage it until we can determine the level of fatality. Amen tae that! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 Do they not already do track and trace surreptitiously anyway. They are always tracing cell phones in criminal investigations. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 5 minutes ago, Wee Willie said: Fair do's but IF we were independent then ALL decisions about Scotland would be made here by whatever person was the First Minister. They would be listening to advice from all sorts of people then they would act accordingly (for good or for ill). Again it would be decisions taken in Scotland and no by another country. But I see your point. The point is less about systems and more about the character of the incumbent that no system of regulation, no matter how restrictive, can entirely obliterate. An unimaginative incumbent who has not surrounded themselves with strong personalities and who only trust a narrow flow of information will likely make different decisions than someone who maybe had a stronger collective around them, and was more secure in their own confidence, for example. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.