|
Post by Jim on Sept 23, 2019 16:45:43 GMT
I rarely watch tv these days, Noreen falls asleep. We still pay our dues. I get my moneysworth from the radio, despite it being free. But I have always appreciated the BBC, as an independent producer, ad free, making quality programmes, of course not everything is to everyones taste, that gives the grumblers summat to grumble about so they are happy too.
|
|
|
Post by deadly on Sept 24, 2019 10:03:02 GMT
Does the supermarket act like it has the right to search your home for sugar? does it insist you must be a sugar user and treat you like a liar if you're not? does it send you hate mail and repeatedly harass you at home ignoring all requests to stop?
I'm pretty sure this supermarket sugar analogy is broken. Sugar does none of those things, and its vendor lets you opt completely out of its use without expecting a right to periodically harass you. If TV License did likewise, you'd have a point.
If you get a bag of sugar from the supermarket and try to leave without paying for it, they can detain you and you can be prosecuted. Seems pretty indistinguishable from watching tv without paying, except that the crime occurs in your own home, not as you try to leave the supermarket. As you say, the private company that has the enforcement contract do push their luck, but that is nothing to do with the concept of having a tv licence, only a bit of detail about how it is enforced. If you don't buy sugar at all, they can't investigate you under the totally bogus assumption that you must be stealing it instead, which is what happens currently for your TV license.
|
|
|
Post by deadly on Sept 24, 2019 10:12:36 GMT
Anyway, all I can say is thank fuck it isn’t up to anyone on here. Either get a licence or go to prison or don’t have means to receive broadcast Tv. It’s not that hard a concept. But don’t wish to fuck up one of Britain’s greatest assets. If you don’t like it move to a country where tv is funded by advertising, ie virtually any other country in the world. I went for the third option, no TV in this house, so the result should be that I'm left alone and not hassled, but that's not the case.
Unrepentant serial offenders Capita need to cease this course of behaviour they know or should know amounts to criminal harassment, and stop hiding their own criminal behaviour behind a clause that's supposed to be for catching criminals.
|
|
|
Post by deadly on Sept 24, 2019 10:43:24 GMT
Strangely enough the position on a boat is that you don't need a TV licence if you have one for a land-based address, although both televisions can not be switched on at the same time. I don't know how they could check this. Haven’t you heard of TV detector vans? Not sure if anyone saw one in real life come to think about it? TV Detector vans would be highly illegal to use if they existed at all, unauthorised interception of radio transmissions is a far more serious offence than TV license evasion, an indictable offence with a long custodial sentence behind it if I recall correctly. The technology exists to detect a screen and show what's on it, but Capita don't have that tech, and if they did you would be well within your rights to perform a citizens arrest to prevent them using it. The likes of GCHQ or MI5 definitely have that technology available, they could see what's on your screen from outside your dwelling just as easily as they could from stood behind your chair, but they still aren't going to know if that screen is a tv, phone, camera, computer, or game until they actually look at what they intercepted.
Back when detectors were real, they simply detected the presence of some of the circuitry used to make a screen work, valid enough in a day and age when a screen was 99.999% certain to be a television. We aren't in the "one screen per household" age anymore, that pretty much ended when home computers started having their own monitors and then got completely obliterated when the smartphone came along.
Anyone who knows anything about antenna design will find the ridiculous in the photos of "detector vans" with their fantasy antennas, apparently the beeb don't let little things like science get in the way of their oppressive sales techniques. I realised they were bogus after reading a book on antenna design while I was still at uni doing my engineering, antenna design is a fairly well defined science and the antennas on a detector van don't conform to it at all.
I'm told the real detector vans carry a television, nothing more, and the detection technique consists of timing the door knock to coincide with the theme tune from a popular soap opera, the real detector is the capita guy's ears.
|
|
|
Post by Clinton Cool on Sept 24, 2019 11:00:14 GMT
The only reason the licence system still exists is that the population have allowed it to. What's needed is poll tax style defiance, massed refusal to pay the fee together with protests and efforts to disrupt the activities of the organisation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2019 11:08:40 GMT
Haven’t you heard of TV detector vans? Not sure if anyone saw one in real life come to think about it? TV Detector vans would be highly illegal to use if they existed at all,
etc etc
TV Detector vans used to work, I drove/operated one quite a few years ago. Most of the rest of your post was just bollocks I'm sad to say. Yes I'm sure the digital age has meant the old technology used in the vans has become worthless but so is your bullshite!
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Sept 24, 2019 11:50:49 GMT
...and antenna design is not a fairly well defined science, it's always been very much trial and error. It's very broadly split between directional and omni, but nobody really understands or you wouldn't have the huge variance in antennas all doing the same job.* *20 years in the radio/phone transmission site business.
|
|
|
Post by deadly on Sept 25, 2019 0:48:38 GMT
TV Detector vans would be highly illegal to use if they existed at all,
etc etc
TV Detector vans used to work, I drove/operated one quite a few years ago. Most of the rest of your post was just bollocks I'm sad to say. Yes I'm sure the digital age has meant the old technology used in the vans has become worthless but so is your bullshite! Sure they used to work, like I said, back when all you had to do was detect a line oscillator, but how long ago was that?
You're talking out of your arse and trying to cover it up with ad hominems, interesting.
Ok, you explain how you establish that the screen operating in someone's home is receiving broadcast material and not pre-recorded, computer etc, without breaching their privacy by seeing what is on that screen (because seeing what's on the screen would be a violation of S48 Wireless Telegraphy Act 2006 as well as a HUGE breach of privacy). Feel free to get technical if necessary, I'm reasonably competent with electronics and radio propagation / antenna design has been a hobby of mine since I was a kid.
Also have a go at explaining why your alleged radio direction finding antennae on every picture of a so-called detector van ever published doesn't resemble any known antenna design. I hold that it's because they don't function and were built for appearances only, prove me wrong, tell me why I'm wrong rather than falling straight to fallacious argument.
|
|