Support NeoGAF

[Ding-Ding]

Yep, that's why we always got the Radio Times.

Deregulation opened up huge competition for TV listings mags - I spent a bit of time in that industry, it was really weird as every Tuesday (when the following weeks listings came out) was crunch day - some companies got around a third their turnover and half their profit out of listings mags, but everything happened on Tuesdays. Nobody gave a fuck about system reliability, processor capacity, number of people, how much free coffee so long as nothing went wrong anywhere with anything on Tuesdays.

Its amazing just how much you miss as a child. Every week, Radio Times & TV Times.

Just thinking back to them days and wondering how much of the internet (if not all) would have been regulated.

It scares the hell out of me...

 

[Number45]

Reading have said they will hold a minute silence for the anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster. I really don't think it would be smart to attach Thatchers name to the same silence. Going from their recent statement, it doesn't seem like they will:

http://www.readingfc.co.uk/news/article/silence-for-the-96-090413-763022.aspx

A small sick part of me would like to see that happen somewhere. Can you imagine how polarising it would be to have two causes - one that's so vehemently defended and one as vehemently vilified - tied to the same tribute? People would literally* explode.

* - not literally.

 

[Garjon]

Its amazing just how much you miss as a child. Every week, Radio Times & TV Times.

Just thinking back to them days and wondering how much of the internet (if not all) would have been regulated.

It scares the hell out of me...

Jesus Christ this is getting ridiculous; you cannot seriously think this would've actually happened. It's also ironic that I would consider the Tories far more synonymous with censorship.

 

[Ding-Ding]

Jesus Christ this is getting ridiculous; you cannot seriously think this would've actually happened. It's also ironic that I would consider the Tories far more synonymous with censorship.

You are aware that before Thatcher's free market that everything was either owned by the state or had to put up with being heavily regulated. Even every phone in peoples homes were not owned by them, it was owned by the post office.

So what exactly makes you so sure the internet would have got aware without massive regulation?

 

[Kurtofan]

Secure Beneath The Watchful Eyes.

 

[phisheep]

Jesus Christ this is getting ridiculous; you cannot seriously think this would've actually happened. It's also ironic that I would consider the Tories far more synonymous with censorship.

Well, yes, I can. I grew up at a time when this sort of regulation was the norm. That was the way it was. (I can't speak for Ding_Ding - and don't necessarily want to either, but it sounds like he/she/it can't be much more than ten years off me).

And yes it could seriously have happened. With the government owning the monopoly on telecommunications through BT (well nearly all, except for Kingston-upon-Hull which somehow escaped), it would have been very easy indeed to do that, and at some stage the temptation to exercise that power would have been triggered. Maybe now, maybe in the '80s, maybe in the '90s.

Given all the stuff that politicians keep spouting about the corrosiveness of the internet on youngsters surely they'd have done something about it by now? Well, yeah, maybe they would have if they had the power to, but luckily they do not. Not since Thatcher anyhow.

 

[Ding-Ding]

Well, yes, I can. I grew up at a time when this sort of regulation was the norm. That was the way it was. (I can't speak for Ding_Ding - and don't necessarily want to either, but it sounds like he/she/it can't be much more than ten years off me).

I'm 38. I guess the reason why i'm heavily in favour of Thatcher was through some of my earliest memories.

Candles
Calor Gas fires
My mother putting a hanky over my nose & mouth because of the piles of rubbish outside.

Of course it must have been the winter of discontent even though I obviously didn't have a clue at the time. It was certainly a rude introduction into the UK

 

[Xun]

Morrisey is a complete cock though. He's another overbearing prick who thinks he's far more important than he actually is.

Pretty much.

Why people adore him, I don't know.

 

[Garjon]

You are aware that before Thatcher's free market that everything was either owned by the state or had to put up with being heavily regulated. Even every phone in peoples homes were not owned by them, it was owned by the post office.

So what exactly makes you so sure the internet would have got aware without massive regulation?

And REhisheep, because that would be censorship, not regulation. Saying phones would be easily monitored is ridiculous, what makes you think 'they' couldn't do that anyway? It certainly didn't stop Rupert Murdoch.

 

[PJV3]

Pre 1960's Phi would have a point, it just doesn't match up with the history of freedom of expression in the country.

Censorship of all kinds have been reduced, from theatre to books, and mostly before the 80s

 

[Ding-Ding]

And REhisheep, because that would be censorship, not regulation. Saying phones would be easily monitored is ridiculous, what makes you think 'they' couldn't do that anyway? It certainly didn't stop Rupert Murdoch.

Sorry I didn't explain myself very well, my fault.

When I was talking about phones, I wasn't talking about censorship or monitoring of calls, it was the actually phone itself. You didn't own it, it belonged to the post office.

 

[PJV3]

Sorry I didn't explain myself very well, my fault.

When I was talking about phones, I wasn't talking about censorship or monitoring of calls, it was the actually phone itself. You didn't own it, it belonged to the post office.

It came with the line rental, and the wire to the outside pole,it's not like you could do anything else with it, weighed a tonne.

 

[Ding-Ding]

It came with the line rental, and the wire to the outside pole,it's not like you could do anything else with it, weighed a tonne.

Part of me though misses the old radial dials.

Maybe I need a retro phone.

 

[PJV3]

Part of me though misses the old radial dials.

Maybe I need a retro phone.

My parents attached a key lock to the dial(tightarses).
Yeah I miss them too in a way, we wouldn't have the patience for that dial to rotate back these days.

 

[Ding-Ding]

My parents attached a key lock to the dial(tightarses).
Yeah I miss them too in a way, we wouldn't have the patience for that dial to rotate back these days.

Yeah we had the lock too.

I think it was more frustrating though that you would find the lock on public telephone boxes.

 

[lazorexplosion]

Reminds me of these anecdotes from 1970s England:

We needed a telephone and a photo-copier. We were told by the Post Office, which ran the state monopoly telephone service, that there was a fourteen-month wait to have a line and phone installed. We somehow bargained them into doing it within six weeks by pointing out that our predecessors in the building had used a switchboard with four separate telephone numbers, one for each of the companies that had used the place, and all we wanted to do was to re-activate one line. Until the GPO engineers came, we had to conduct all the new Institute’s business from the public call box on the corner, and we ensured we kept a ready supply of coins for the purpose.

The Post Office would not let us buy a phone; we had to rent one from them. This was their standard practice. The instrument they graciously allowed us to rent was a black, Bakelite instrument with a rotary dial, designed in the 1930s. For this magnificent piece of equipment we had to pay a quarterly rental of £14.65, or just under £60 a year. We overcame the problem by rewiring the place ourselves with extensions, and buying US phones on our visits there, complete with conversion sockets. This was contrary to all the Post Office rules, but it worked. And it meant that we were among the first in Britain to use such gadgets as recall dialling, wireless remotes and one-button dialling of our most-used numbers.

One of our friends, telephoning family in South Africa, was surprised when a telephone engineer entered the conversation to say that because the call did not sound urgent, he was disconnecting it. The union had ‘blacked’ non-urgent calls to South Africa, and its members monitored private calls to enforce it.

 

[Durask]

Reminds me of these anecdotes from 1970s England:

B-b-b-butt....Social Justice! Equality!!!

 

[zero shift]

People actually believe that the content of the internet would have been regulated if it wasn't for Thatcher?

B-b-b-butt....Social Justice! Equality!!!

What does Social Justice and Equality have to do with state telephone monopolies?

 

[Ding-Ding]

People actually believe that the content of the internet would have been regulated if it wasn't for Thatcher?

Yes. Reason why is because everything else that people had to deal with was heavily regulated.

Why do you think it would go without though?

 

[Durask]

People actually believe that the content of the internet would have been regulated if it wasn't for Thatcher?



What does Social Justice and Equality have to do with state telephone monopolies?

Rhethorical question? I'll bite, it's usually part of the whole left-wing package.

Also, I assume that they were preventing people from calling South Africa because the union decided to fight against apartheid? Smells lefty to me.

 

[zero shift]

Yes. Reason why is because everything else that people had to deal with was heavily regulated.

Why do you think it would go without though?

Regulation = censorship?

 

[iapetus]

Sorry I didn't explain myself very well, my fault.

When I was talking about phones, I wasn't talking about censorship or monitoring of calls, it was the actually phone itself. You didn't own it, it belonged to the post office.

Damn. That's bad. You wouldn't get that with the private sector.

Except, say, Virgin Media's cable boxes. And virtually every piece of software you think you own. And plenty of other things.

 

[QuicheFontaine]

Damn. That's bad. You wouldn't get that with the private sector.

Except, say, Virgin Media's cable boxes. And virtually every piece of software you think you own. And plenty of other things.

A few years ago I moved out a flat and chucked my set-top box in the tip. Then I read some horror stories online about how I didn't actually own it, and a guy would be round to collect it (and charge me some extortionate amount if I didn't have it).

I sped back to that tip quick-smart and dug it back out. The guy who came to collect it didn't seem to care that it was completely battered, and he didn't charge me (whew!).

 

[kitch9]

Pretty much.

Why people adore him, I don't know.

Because he preaches his far left wing socialist bullshit from his massive house in Bowden maybe?

 

[War Peaceman]

I'm glad that the Guardian put out such a balanced leader article today. Far better and more balenced than I had expected.

The Guardian have had some of the best and most balanced articles on the whole event. Very impressed.

 

[Ding-Ding]

Damn. That's bad. You wouldn't get that with the private sector.

Except, say, Virgin Media's cable boxes. And virtually every piece of software you think you own. And plenty of other things.

Oh great, my favorite person. Yet why am I not surprised that you are missing a very important point.

Today, you can choose Virgin, Sky, BT and all the others, the choice is yours...

Back then, it was one choice. Any other option was banned as the unions didn't like competition.

When the time came when they wanted more money, simply stop the service till the government coughed up.

A good way to describe It is that it was more like an extortion racket.

 

[SKINNER!]

£8m for the funeral

Sigh

I wonder if that includes the expense bill that MPs can claim to pay tribute to her in parliament today.

 

[phisheep]

Oh great, my favorite person. Yet why am I not surprised that you are missing a very important point.

Today, you can choose Virgin, Sky, BT and all the others, the choice is yours...

Back then, it was one choice. Any other option was banned as the unions didn't like competition.

When the time came when they wanted more money, simply stop the service till the government coughed up.

A good way to describe It is that it was more like an extortion racket.

It's not a bad point Ding, but you didn't need to surround it by snipes at Iapetus (who is also a good guy). You can afford to calm down a bit and make the same points only more politely.

 

[CyclopsRock]

I think one thing that not everyone realises is that, Pre-Thatcher, public services were not simply services run by the public sector. Often their goals (and actions) ran contrary to the will of the government - that is to say, they were not necessarily enacting the will of then elected government of the day. Privatisation wasn't simply an exercise in reducing government control, it also forced these services to be accountable to someone other than their staff.

 

[Jackpot]

Australia's Foreign Minister reveals Thatcher's racist comments:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22087702

Australia's Foreign Minister Bob Carr has described comments made by Baroness Thatcher as "unabashedly racist".

In a conversation with her "in her retirement", Mr Carr said the former UK prime minister had warned Australia against Asian immigration.

She said "if we allowed too much of it we'd see the natives of the land, the European settlers, overtaken by migrants", he said.

He said he had been "astonished" at the comments by Lady Thatcher, which were made while his Malaysian-born wife Helena was "standing not far away" but was "fortunately out of earshot".

"On 100 other things I would pick arguments with her and I recall one conversation I had with her in her retirement where she said something that was unabashedly racist, where she warned Australia - talking to me with Helena standing not far away - against Asian immigration, saying that if we allowed too much of it we'd see the natives of the land, the European settlers, overtaken by migrants.

"I couldn't believe it. It reminded me that despite, yes, her greatness on those big questions, the role of the state, the evil nature of the Communist totalitarianism, there was an old-fashioned quality to her that was entirely out of touch and probably explained why her party removed her in the early 90s."

He went on to recall: "I remember one thing she said as part of that conversation, she said: 'You will end up like Fiji.' She said: 'I like Sydney but you can't allow the migrants' - and in context she meant Asian migration - 'to take over, otherwise you will end up like Fiji where the Indian migrants have taken over.'

"I was so astonished I don't think I could think of an appropriate reply."

 

[CyclopsRock]

This still doesn't make any sense. Outside of computer engineers (who get paid A LOT for their positions) nobody else reallly contributes overwhelmingly to these technologies. The richest of the rich merely just adopted these technologies while the bottom is involved in selling them. Its like arguing in the early 1900s that workers didn't lead to the rise in productivity but the invention of mass manufacturing did. They aren't necessarily working harder, if anything they are working easier.

And that's exactly true. For the most part, people's professions changed from highly skilled ones that took decades to hone, to being able to pump out ten times as much produce per day with hardly any training. It was the people that owned the machines that got richer, not the people working them (though of course the first countries to industrialise DID benefit, even the workers, because they suddenly had a much greater capacity to produce more cheaply and thus more customers. It then flopped the other way where, short of industrialising making your company more profitable, it was simply a case of it being infeasibly unprofitable if you did not).

Everyone pitches in society so everyone should get paid a near equal slice of the pie.

And if a private hospital wishes to pay it's brain surgeon the same as their receptionist, that's entirely up to them. I'd love it if they did. But as long as the population at large value a hospital with better brain surgeons than one with better receptionists, hospitals are almost always going to prefer to spend their money ensuring they have better brain surgeons rather than receptionists. Short of an enormous, bottom-up upheaval (which I think would come with its own set of problems, namely the distribution of resources), I'd rather companies be free to spend their money as they see fit to best fulfil the desire of their customers (something which, if they fail to do, a competitor will seize upon).

 

[Ding-Ding]

It's not a bad point Ding, but you didn't need to surround it by snipes at Iapetus (who is also a good guy). You can afford to calm down a bit and make the same points only more politely.

Maybe, it was just stupid the way this thread started. It wasn't a debate on Thatchers legacy, good or bad. it was just an orgy of self interest, generalisations & taking delight in someone else death. When I used the same medicine on them to point out the hypocrisy, Iapetus started name calling and I have little time for people like that.

Regulation = censorship?

There was censorship in the UK and it was something that Thatcher cannot be excused from. I must have been close to twenty years old before I knew what Gerry Adams real voice was like.

 

[travisbickle]

Rolling blackouts and the three day week were in the early 70s. You'd have to be well into your 40s to remember them.

 

[PJV3]

I'm pro nationalised industries, but it has downsides, and I'm not a fan of only having only one state owned company, there should have been competition and rewards etc for service improvements.

I think it's unfair on the GPO to compare its tech to the era of the microchip, but if you believe in something you have to be honest and accept where the system went wrong, and no doubt it isn't a perfect model, it definitely needed to evolve as a concept.

 

[phisheep]

I'm pro nationalised industries, but it has downsides, and I'm not a fan of only having only one state owned company, there should have been competition and rewards etc for service improvements.

I think it's unfair on the GPO to compare its tech to the era of the microchip, but if you believe in something you have to be honest and accept where the system went wrong, and no doubt it isn't a perfect model, it definitely needed to evolve as a concept.

Of course, but with telecomms we did have an outlier - everything was nationalised except Kingston-upon-Hull, and Kingston Communications ran rings round BT for years and years in terms of technology, customer service and general zippiness. For most of the nationalised industries we don't have that comparison, but the one place we do the nationalised industry came out a very bad second best.

 

[PJV3]

Of course, but with telecomms we did have an outlier - everything was nationalised except Kingston-upon-Hull, and Kingston Communications ran rings round BT for years and years in terms of technology, customer service and general zippiness. For most of the nationalised industries we don't have that comparison, but the one place we do the nationalised industry came out a very bad second best.

Kingston was still owned by the public though, just at a local level. It's all academic though, the industries are private now, so there's no way of proving if they could have changed under a different model of state ownership.

Socialism isn't perfect- scrap it.
Capitalism seems to be held to a lower standard, and if it fails there must be something wrong with the people, pay them less, work them harder and never let them retire.

That last para is me venting.

 

[jimi_dini]

£8m for the funeral

Sigh

That is against her wish.

https://twitter.com/BenjiWilliamson/status/321231302001041409

#nowthatchersdead We can have her funeral handled by the lowest bidder. It's what she would have wanted.

 

[OverBlood 3]

Pretty much.

Why people adore him, I don't know.

I'm my opinion he's the greatest British lyricist alive today, I'd gush more and say he's personally the greatest lyricist to have ever lived. I'll stress to ME he is.

He's mad though and talks out his arse sometimes but all the good musicians are mad.

 

[iapetus]

Maybe, it was just stupid the way this thread started. It wasn't a debate on Thatchers legacy, good or bad. it was just an orgy of self interest, generalisations & taking delight in someone else death. When I used the same medicine on them to point out the hypocrisy, Iapetus started name calling and I have little time for people like that.

No, when you used a shitty straw man argument of the sort that's exclusively used by the intellectually dishonest, I parodied it to point out how ridiculous it was. You didn't like the taste of your own medicine, unfortunately. The 'personal insults' only apply if your debating technique is valid.

Which it isn't.

 

[PJV3]

there's no money for the disabled, plenty for the dead it seems.

I'm not against her passing being marked, but this is well over the top. We've spent plenty on the royals recently, and it's money for nothing really, put her in a chapel where people can pay respects and then leave her to the family to sort out.

 

[Ding-Ding]

I'm pro nationalised industries, but it has downsides, and I'm not a fan of only having only one state owned company, there should have been competition and rewards etc for service improvements.

I think it's unfair on the GPO to compare its tech to the era of the microchip, but if you believe in something you have to be honest and accept where the system went wrong, and no doubt it isn't a perfect model, it definitely needed to evolve as a concept.

This is the thing, its only certain instances where a free market & a socialist model can meet. The NHS is an example. By and large, private & NHS care are the same, its just one is free and can involve waiting and the other you pay a premium and is fast.

When you get into the industries though, I just cant see it working. Two companies bidding for the same contract. One firm will bid based on their own private investors & loans against a company backed by every UK taxpayer.

 

[War Peaceman]

There was censorship in the UK and it was something that Thatcher cannot be excused from. I must have been close to twenty years old before I knew what Gerry Adams real voice was like.

Thatcher was one of our worst proponents of censorship. She was a highly authoritarian ruler.

 

[PJV3]

I'm my opinion he's the greatest British lyricist alive today, I'd gush more and say he's personally the greatest lyricist to have ever lived. I'll stress to ME he is.

He's mad though and talks out his arse sometimes but all the good musicians are mad.

People don't realise he's fucking with them

"all reggae is vile"

He's a big reggae fan, knows his stuff and reopened a dead Reggae label to put his music out.

He's still a plonker sometimes, but aren't we all.

 

[Ding-Ding]

No, when you used a shitty straw man argument of the sort that's exclusively used by the intellectually dishonest, I parodied it to point out how ridiculous it was. You didn't like the taste of your own medicine, unfortunately. The 'personal insults' only apply if your debating technique is valid.

Which it isn't.

Thats funny as I have been looking back on some of this thread and I have yet to see you engage in a single debate with anybody in regards to Thatchers legacy. Its like watching a 8 year old express their opinion before sticking their fingers in their ears saying "la la la, im not listening"

So come on then. Debate...

I replied to you before with points that you seem to completely miss. Why dont you debate them points and tell me where I am wrong.

If you cant, then take your straw and shove it!

 

[gutter_trash]

if only Americans would have the same reaction towards the bullshit of the Reagan years.
But eh, look at what they elect in Congress today

 

[PJV3]

This is the thing, its only certain instances where a free market & a socialist model can meet. The NHS is an example. By and large, private & NHS care are the same, its just one is free and can involve waiting and the other you pay a premium and is fast.

When you get into the industries though, I just cant see it working. Two companies bidding for the same contract. One firm will bid based on their own private investors & loans against a company backed by every UK taxpayer.

I was thinking in terms of having multiple state owned companies competing, rewards for staff for bettering the competition etc, that would create some room for innovative companies.

Like I say, pointless what ifs, they're privatised.

 

[phisheep]

Thats funny as I have been looking back on some of this thread and I have yet to see you engage in a single debate with anybody in regards to Thatchers legacy. Its like watching a 8 year old express their opinion before sticking their fingers in their ears saying "la la la, im not listening"

So come on then. Debate...

I replied to you before with points that you seem to completely miss. Why dont you debate them points and tell me where I am wrong.

If you cant, then take your straw and shove it!

Ding, this thread (or any other for that matter) isn't a place for a personal row between you and a mod. You've made some good points here, but this isn't one of them. Drop it.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

I wonder if that includes the expense bill that MPs can claim to pay tribute to her in parliament today.

3 grand ? Ffs

 

[PJV3]

3 grand ? Ffs

suddenly there's money found for windbags, they're back on monday, fucking wankers.

 

[digoutyoursoul]

suddenly there's money found for windbags, they're back on monday, fucking wankers.

Honestly, it's a piss take. Benefit cheats rightly get called out and so should some of these folks. Iain Duncan Smith, millionare, putting Bluetooth headsets and £39 breakfasts on the expenses. Getting tired of it. Like Jacqui Smith (I think that's her name) over £100k for a house and she couldn't see why she had to pay it back.