Public emergency alert - being sent to your phone

[768]

bhstewie said:

Honestly just switch them off and get on with life.

But also, after you switch them off, please will all the over 50s come out of retirement so the taxes are there to pay for this fluff.

[mac96]

Rob_125 said:

The cynic in me thinks this isn't really for weather events (generally they are predicted, although this may be a secondary tool). Primary driver is for incoming ICBM, in my opinion. If you arnt in the blast zone, shut all windows ectect.

In the event of nuclear attack I want to be right under the aurburst. Better gone quickly than hanging about dying of radiation sickness! So I will be standing outside, not hiding under a heap of mattresses.
No Protect and Survive for me!

[Starfighter]

bearman68 said:

Think they would have announced the death of the Queen like this? I suspect it would happen.

I am fairly sUre that is common knowledge now.

I will leave it in and see what it gets used for.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

It would be a shame not to have an emergency once it's all up and running.

[Halmyre]

Starfighter said:

bearman68 said:

Think they would have announced the death of the Queen like this? I suspect it would happen.

I am fairly sUre that is common knowledge now.

I will leave it in and see what it gets used for.

Waitrose has run out of heritage tomatoes again.

[chemistry]

Turned off.

No doubt such alerts could be a good idea of used properly.

In reality the government will just use it as another tool with which to modify the behaviour of the general public (just like Matt Hancock choosing when to “deploy” the new covid variant). Regular tests/alerts will no doubt keep the masses fearful and more easily controlled.

[dvs_dave]

This system is commonplace and has been in service for many years in many countries. You can turn it off if your selective outrage can’t handle it.

[Biggy Stardust]

bhstewie said:

Biggy Stardust said:

An opt-in system would be less intrusive. I would prefer 'do not disturb' as a defult setting for goverment/official intrusion into my life. I feel the same about Jehovah's witnesses & similar.

And I can see that point of view but I think by definition if you want an emergency alert to go to as many people as possible it makes sense to start from a position of "you get the alert unless you've gone out of your way to say you don't want to".

It look Turbobloke longer to write all that rubbish about nipples (seriously?) than it would take to switch them off.

Honestly just switch them off and get on with life.

They are not trusted to use it in a sensible manner. It's a pity they don't realise this and perhaps act in a manner to earn trust & respect.

[Getragdogleg]

dvs_dave said:

This system is commonplace and has been in service for many years in many countries. You can turn it off if your selective outrage can’t handle it.

So commonplace that the public in these places almost totally ignore it because they are so used to it going off for random stuff that doesn't affect them.

How much does this all cost us, the taxpayers, this extra layer of protection from monsters under the bed?

[over_the_hill]

I'm sure scammers will be all over this.
Supposed message from Government. Then "just so we know this has arrived and it's you, click this link and supply a few details."

[turbobloke]

Getragdogleg said:

dvs_dave said:

This system is commonplace and has been in service for many years in many countries. You can turn it off if your selective outrage can’t handle it.

So commonplace that the public in these places almost totally ignore it because they are so used to it going off for random stuff that doesn't affect them.

How much does this all cost us, the taxpayers, this extra layer of protection from monsters under the bed?

Exactly, more wasting of other people's money. Not unusual, so no faeces lost. Mencken with mobile phone tech subtracted was bad enough.

The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H. L. Mencken

[dvs_dave]

Getragdogleg said:

dvs_dave said:

This system is commonplace and has been in service for many years in many countries. You can turn it off if your selective outrage can’t handle it.

So commonplace that the public in these places almost totally ignore it because they are so used to it going off for random stuff that doesn't affect them.

How much does this all cost us, the taxpayers, this extra layer of protection from monsters under the bed?

The man, the taxpayer, the nanny state, grrrrrr! It’s ok petal, you can just turn it off.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

This will be manna from heaven for the 4X4 Emergency Response guy.

[Getragdogleg]

dvs_dave said:

The man, the taxpayer, the nanny state, grrrrrr! It’s ok petal, you can just turn it off.

I have, and guess what chicken licken, the sky won't fall because I have.

[Thats What She Said]

I think it's a great idea!. I mean what could go wrong?

Oh yeah... a few people got a bit nervous when sent this one in 2018, but no biggie. It's not like it was anything to be worried about.

[turbobloke]

Getragdogleg said:

dvs_dave said:

The man, the taxpayer, the nanny state, grrrrrr! It’s ok petal, you can just turn it off.

I have, and guess what chicken licken, the sky won't fall because I have.

[ridds]

I've turned it off as I don't want some alert restricting usage of my phone until it's accepted/read or whatever.

There's no information about how your device usage is stopped or what happens if it goes wrong.

This is speaking from someone who had his phone bricked by my employer because someone in IT selected a tick-box in their settings by accident once.

Another situation, you're driving, using your sat nav on your phone. message arrives and your sat nav no longer works. SO you now have to stop and accept said message before being able to continue using your device? That will be useful on a motorway.

There is absolutely no reason to impose usage restrictions without accepting the message. Particularly when you can just opt out of the whole thing. Daft in my eyes.

[Last Visit]

bhstewie said:

Countdown said:

bhstewie said:

Is there anything some people on NP&E won't lose their st about?

Fixed that for you. Possibly there's some overlap with the CBDC and CT brigade.

For most people it's a "meh....."

I imagine it would make for some interesting venn diagrams

Just switch them off if you don't want to receive them.

Exactly that. The ability to do so has been in phones for ages.
I'll leave it on for now, seems a reasonable idea and too soon to make an informed opinion on how it will actually be used in practice.

I don't see the whole thing as life changing.

[Bill]

Last Visit said:

Exactly that. The ability to do so has been in phones for ages.
I'll leave it on for now, seems a reasonable idea and too soon to make an informed opinion on how it will actually be used in practice.

I don't see the whole thing as life changing.

You realise where you've posted this??!!?

[Biggy Stardust]

bhstewie said:

t I think by definition if you want an emergency alert to go to as many people as possible it makes sense to start from a position of "you get the alert unless you've gone out of your way to say you don't want to".

I believe spammers & MLM schemes have a similar ethical viewpoint.