The UK Babe Channels Forum

Called it :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/...net-users/

"Detection vans". Utter bullshit.

No-one was fooled back in the 70s and they won't be fooled now. Scare tactics. The vans don't exist.

Idiot question : surely if they just make their i-player site or whatever it is a compulsory log-in with address details needed to have an account to watch anything, then it's easily checkable ?

^ Tin foil hat answer: How easy and prevalent do you want it to be for big organisations to record exactly who you are and what you do online. Where is the thin end of the wedge with this stuff?

^ Plenty companies require log-in details for websites, especially commercial ones where you are buying something ?
Sounds like if you are that much of a refusenik you'd just have to take that advert's advice and become a full time spoon wibbler.

I believe they were talking about having some kind of pin number access for the iPlayer on the web. This pin number would be issued with your tv license. The main reason for this was to allow legitimate license payers to access iPlayer while overseas since they have now blocked it from outside the UK.
The difficulty may be in getting a similar system working with all the various apps and platforms currently being used to access iPlayer, and without completely losing those customers/viewers.

Anyhow, simple workaround to beat these supposed detector vans. Since they supposedly work by packet sniffing the wifi traffic, don't use wifi to connect your viewing device, hard wire it to the router

(06-08-2016 11:23 )M-L-L Wrote: [ -> ]^ Plenty companies require log-in details for websites, especially commercial ones where you are buying something ?
Sounds like if you are that much of a refusenik you'd just have to take that advert's advice and become a full time spoon wibbler.

But for purchases it is a necessary part of the process. In this case I consider it potentially more problematic.

My point is just that every restriction of services like the BBC's sets a precedent for the control of access online - as munch pointed out on the 1st. M-L-L, you and I both, presumably, consider the BBC a benign organisation that will use such information in a proper way. Can likewise be said of the next source that requires the same of us? Then what happens when a greater and greater portion of sites effect to better monetise the access to hard news and information following on from a curtailed and controlled BBC online? I'd argue the usefulness, representation and sheer openness of the web would be diminished by this possible, if still speculative, scenario.

^ But this the Government's plan all along : they have made a deal with Sky and the Murdoch press to hamstring the BBC by a slow process of salami slicing, making it more and more difficult for it to compete with commercial organisations and interfering with its governance process and independence of decision making ; so that less and less people will watch/use its services, thereby taking away the justification for a licence fee in the first place, and then forcing everybody to use Sky and the Murdoch press as their main sources of news - there is of course no requirement for the likes of these to be "unbiased" like the BBC, see Fox News - and of course they will be keeping access to these completely free and not monetised at all, because they are charitable organisations obviously.

Its a ridiculous scheme, just like its predecessor
So will every single wifi hotshot require a TV license too?
And what of people using moblie data?
You could argue someone had hacked into your router and it wasn't you.
Its just another scare tactic, as Rake said, to enforce people to continue buying a license.
In some respects the desperation of it makes me feel like trying my luck if this is the best they've got they aint got much!
Im not liking the privacy intrusion either

(06-08-2016 07:25 )munch1917 Wrote: [ -> ]Called it :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/...net-users/

this is illegal...
it amounts to an illegal wire tap.
and an intrusion on your basic privacy.
its already been proven in the U.S that an ip cant be used to identify an individual. so i dont hold up much hope for the bbc trying the same.