Public emergency alert - being sent to your phone
Discussion
MYOB said:
surveyor said:
After all, why would you want to know about an emergency situation developing that might affect you? It's a single text message, not a tax return!
If this system was live during covid, how many “emergency” warnings would we have received?I have nothing against warnings for true emergencies, but my opinion is that the Govt will misuse it and send daft stuff such as “Wash hands, mask up and keep your distance” and other silly messages.
Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
Sway said:
Except that's not how it's used anywhere else with a comparable system - nor is there any indication it'll be used that way here.
Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
On the other hand, assuming that they know how many people have opted out it will be a good indication of how many are not interested in their panic messages. Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
In the sixty odd years I have been on this earth I cannot think of a single situation where a message from the government would have helped me in any way.
Sway said:
Except that's not how it's used anywhere else with a comparable system - nor is there any indication it'll be used that way here.
Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
I’ve managed 50 years without any emergency text alerts. I think I’ll manage. And yes, I’ve been around some of the bombs set off by the IRA and a few of the later terrorism acts in London without the alerts. Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
As for weather warnings, we don’t need text alerts as the media tends to warn us.
I have opted out and look forward to hearing of the alerts you will get in the next “pandemic”.
Vanden Saab said:
Sway said:
Except that's not how it's used anywhere else with a comparable system - nor is there any indication it'll be used that way here.
Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
On the other hand, assuming that they know how many people have opted out it will be a good indication of how many are not interested in their panic messages. Of course, by opting out now, you'll also lose the chance to say 'I told you so' (and then opting out).
In the sixty odd years I have been on this earth I cannot think of a single situation where a message from the government would have helped me in any way.
surveyor said:
Hill92 said:
V1nce Fox said:
surveyor said:
V1nce Fox said:
Great, many thanks for clearing that up. Really not a fan of the government sending me stuff via my phone.
After all, why would you want to know about an emergency situation developing that might affect you? It's a single text message, not a tax return!I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
Getragdogleg said:
Actual peril, rather than "some rain" or "some wind we named".
I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
Yes, that's exactly why it's a broadly successful scheme in the US...I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
You really do have to laugh, the nation that still maintains pretty much open access to guns due to a view that someday the citizenry might have to rise up against a tyrannical government is more accepting of this scheme than some Brits who are concerned that being told about 'some rain' is a massive imposition.
Sway said:
Getragdogleg said:
Actual peril, rather than "some rain" or "some wind we named".
I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
Yes, that's exactly why it's a broadly successful scheme in the US...I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
You really do have to laugh, the nation that still maintains pretty much open access to guns due to a view that someday the citizenry might have to rise up against a tyrannical government is more accepting of this scheme than some Brits who are concerned that being told about 'some rain' is a massive imposition.
Click:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-to-unders...
Prof Pielke said:
it is simply incorrect to claim that on climate time scales the frequency or intensity of extreme weather and climate events has increased ... surprised?
That's using data from IPCC reporting.Data:
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1900 to 1989 = 216,819
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1990 to 2010 = 34,330
Source is OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Université de Louvain, Brussels.
This assumes all wildfires are weather related, which isn't the case by a long way, but best to err on the 'wrong' side.
Overall conclusion: weather isn't getting more extreme but is getting safer. Despite the intense and increasing media attention to weather events, extreme weather events have a relatively minor impact on global public health at 0.07% of all global deaths//
Long-term (1900–2010) cumulative data show that death rates from extreme weather events declined by 98% overall across the time interval
This decline occurred despite a large increase in the populations at risk. as illustrated by di Caprio and Obama buying/selling beachfront property, and more complete scientific/media coverage of weather events over that time period.
It's almost guaranteed that a lot of folk will continue to believe media parroting of belief systems rather than data, partly because the data isn't widely available. It's what TPTB want, and the alerts are there too if wanted.
turbobloke said:
Sway said:
Getragdogleg said:
Actual peril, rather than "some rain" or "some wind we named".
I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
Yes, that's exactly why it's a broadly successful scheme in the US...I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
You really do have to laugh, the nation that still maintains pretty much open access to guns due to a view that someday the citizenry might have to rise up against a tyrannical government is more accepting of this scheme than some Brits who are concerned that being told about 'some rain' is a massive imposition.
Click:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-to-unders...
Prof Pielke said:
it is simply incorrect to claim that on climate time scales the frequency or intensity of extreme weather and climate events has increased ... surprised?
That's using data from IPCC reporting.Data:
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1900 to 1989 = 216,819
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1990 to 2010 = 34,330
Source is OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Université de Louvain, Brussels.
This assumes all wildfires are weather related, which isn't the case by a long way, but best to err on the 'wrong' side.
Overall conclusion: weather isn't getting more extreme but is getting safer. Despite the intense and increasing media attention to weather events, extreme weather events have a relatively minor impact on global public health at 0.07% of all global deaths//
Long-term (1900–2010) cumulative data show that death rates from extreme weather events declined by 98% overall across the time interval
This decline occurred despite a large increase in the populations at risk. as illustrated by di Caprio and Obama buying/selling beachfront property, and more complete scientific/media coverage of weather events over that time period.
It's almost guaranteed that a lot of folk will continue to believe media parroting of belief systems rather than data, partly because the data isn't widely available. It's what TPTB want, and the alerts are there too if wanted.
To pick up on some bits though:
A small tornado can still cause a lot of damage. A significant part of the village I lived in was ripped apart from a 'small' tornado. They're also so localised in effects that one could be ripping roofs off whilst a block away people are enjoying a bbq in the garden - quick notification of the potential risk could well be handy.
I've been caught out a few times and had to shelter from lightning walking the dog. Heavy rain neither I nor he are bothered by - walking across fields in lightning is different. Having a quick and localised notification of lightning coming my way is useful.
Weather isn't the only reason this could be triggered. Even in my leafy part of Sussex, there's been a couple of events in the last few years where the social media driven requests to keep clear of an area would have been far more effective being delivered directly to phones.
It really is a very simple system, one that doesn't 'impact' in any way other than a potentially unnecessary glance and a button press - and one that can be switched off at will.
Sway said:
turbobloke said:
Sway said:
Getragdogleg said:
Actual peril, rather than "some rain" or "some wind we named".
I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
Yes, that's exactly why it's a broadly successful scheme in the US...I wouldn't trust the government to run a bath and I can't see the next lot being any better so I'd rather they had a go at solving all the actual problems out rather than wasting money to try and trick us into thinking that they are actually doing something.
What actual action will happen after we've been warned about storm Norma or whatever is broadcast? Nothing, because thanks to years of underinvestment this place is all shop window and no stock.
This panders to those who like being told what to do.
You really do have to laugh, the nation that still maintains pretty much open access to guns due to a view that someday the citizenry might have to rise up against a tyrannical government is more accepting of this scheme than some Brits who are concerned that being told about 'some rain' is a massive imposition.
Click:
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/how-to-unders...
Prof Pielke said:
it is simply incorrect to claim that on climate time scales the frequency or intensity of extreme weather and climate events has increased ... surprised?
That's using data from IPCC reporting.Data:
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1900 to 1989 = 216,819
global deaths per year from extreme weather (droughts, floods, storms/hurricanes, extreme cold and heatwaves, wildfires) 1990 to 2010 = 34,330
Source is OFDA/CRED International Disaster Database, Université de Louvain, Brussels.
This assumes all wildfires are weather related, which isn't the case by a long way, but best to err on the 'wrong' side.
Overall conclusion: weather isn't getting more extreme but is getting safer. Despite the intense and increasing media attention to weather events, extreme weather events have a relatively minor impact on global public health at 0.07% of all global deaths//
Long-term (1900–2010) cumulative data show that death rates from extreme weather events declined by 98% overall across the time interval
This decline occurred despite a large increase in the populations at risk. as illustrated by di Caprio and Obama buying/selling beachfront property, and more complete scientific/media coverage of weather events over that time period.
It's almost guaranteed that a lot of folk will continue to believe media parroting of belief systems rather than data, partly because the data isn't widely available. It's what TPTB want, and the alerts are there too if wanted.
To pick up on some bits though:
A small tornado can still cause a lot of damage. A significant part of the village I lived in was ripped apart from a 'small' tornado. They're also so localised in effects that one could be ripping roofs off whilst a block away people are enjoying a bbq in the garden - quick notification of the potential risk could well be handy.
I've been caught out a few times and had to shelter from lightning walking the dog. Heavy rain neither I nor he are bothered by - walking across fields in lightning is different. Having a quick and localised notification of lightning coming my way is useful.
Weather isn't the only reason this could be triggered. Even in my leafy part of Sussex, there's been a couple of events in the last few years where the social media driven requests to keep clear of an area would have been far more effective being delivered directly to phones.
It really is a very simple system, one that doesn't 'impact' in any way other than a potentially unnecessary glance and a button press - and one that can be switched off at will.
That did not seem particularly imposing, threatening, or upsetting. What a good idea was my primary thought.
surveyor said:
I have also seen it used in Florida in a child abduction asking the public to call 911 if they see a certain type of car and numberplate.
That did not seem particularly imposing, threatening, or upsetting. What a good idea was my primary thought.
Yup, works pretty well too.That did not seem particularly imposing, threatening, or upsetting. What a good idea was my primary thought.
As above, not sure where the army of straw men came from.
H L Mencken said:
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.
The hobgoblins are allegedly over there, sharing time between Whitehall and Mystic Met ----------------------> for those with magical sight.
surveyor said:
I have also seen it used in Florida in a child abduction asking the public to call 911 if they see a certain type of car and numberplate.
That did not seem particularly imposing, threatening, or upsetting. What a good idea was my primary thought.
I've not had a mobile alert for that sort of thing (I spend at least a fortnight every quarter in FL) - but have seen a plethora of dot matrix signs over the major highways with different 'alerts' based on colour for specific cars/licence plates.That did not seem particularly imposing, threatening, or upsetting. What a good idea was my primary thought.
Obviously a form of control by the government. How could I not see it.
The cucks are going to love it.
Can you imagine the s
t we would have had to put up with during covid? Hancock would have been frantically firing texts out whilst simultaneously fking his intern.
Thankfully it was straight forward to disable and I won't be spending another second thinking about it.
Can you imagine the s
t we would have had to put up with during covid? Hancock would have been frantically firing texts out whilst simultaneously fking his intern. Thankfully it was straight forward to disable and I won't be spending another second thinking about it.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff