UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

Destacado
https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.
Presiona para expandir...

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Última edición por un moderador:
Presiona para expandir...
FallingUpwards dijo:
I don't even understand it? Why do they need it to call for help? We don't have a firewall where we block the internet from the outside world. Obviously, they are lying. But how does the government eat this excuse up?
Presiona para expandir...
Otherwise they'd have to do a proper U turn, which would undermine their already shaky sense of authority.
 
I am already so tired of the Binface vs. Farage election. Binface comes across as a Banksy style "artist" whose persona and acting are 30 years out of date while Farage is a moron who spent 30 years being controlled opposition and now finds himself at the obvious end point of his career where the government no longer needs or wants him around because any opposition no matter how controlled is no longer tolerable.

It really comes across as fiddling while Rome burns, a total clown show while the rest of the UK just goes down the shitter.
 
Computer Guardian dijo:
"We're dailing back our vpn ban because the minorities we've been catering to for the past decade and beyond kept saying they used it to cry for help :("

Imagine how much the brits would walk back if thier policies if thier native people did something like that.
Presiona para expandir...
I'm really wondering how hard it would be to "blackface" so to say, to get those same minorities to suddenly say "holy shit the uk is fucking awful and an orweillen hellhole"? all it would take is them doing the usual song and dance of "yes im durka jurka of binbagaistan here" and then get in front of the cameras and actually spit some actual truth.
 
Some things from a few pages back that I wish to elaborate on. First of all, Mauritiaus' claim to the islands are fucked and they are basically selectively using terminology. Secondly, it was common in the past for colonies to be frequently split up, and rearranged. I shall elaborate on the latter first because I am odd like that.

In the past, it was common for territory to be sold and transferred between territories. Let's look at the US for example, the US probably the best example of this. The Louisiana purchase. If we are to look at the historical context of the sale, it was not that France wanted to sell the land out of the goodness of their heart. No, France had felt pressured because of being at war with Britain, where Britain would easily be able to prevent access to the territory and also needed money to fund their war. Whilst at the same time, the United States was a trade partner and closer to France than Britain and so it was essentially compelled to sell the territory to the Americans under the threats of Britain. I mean, this sale is awfully similar to how the Chagos Islands were originally apart of the Mauritius colonial administration, until they sold the islands to Britain [as Britain wanted to keep them for a base given their strategic relevance].

We can also apply the same to Alaska as well, where the Russians felt they could not hold onto the territory, and that Britain would eventually want to come annex it because of Canada and so they sold it off to the US. So, going off of the precedent from those seeking to give away the Chagos Islands they are fucking over the international world order.

And what about Canada? Canada was not originally stretching from coast politically, and it did not gain its modern borders until Newfoundland joined them in 1948. The state that would come to be Canada did not originally include everything that it has, and was created in response of the Durham report and trying to stop future rebellion. It was a means of giving political autonomy in the hopes of fostering closer bonds. The Hudson Bay Company, or Rupert's Land, was not originally part of what we would come to know as the political apparatus of Canada. No that was primarily focused on New Brunswick, Quebec and Ontario. Other colonies existed in the same way, with Australia being the combination of 6 colonies. Are we to use this to break up Australia, Canada or the US? Or how about the transfer of Antioch from French Syria to Turkey?

And how about exhibit A: Indian independence. The independence of India saw the Princly States forced to join either Pakistan or India. They had little choice, and were actually autonomous and under local rule. The process of independence however saw the last Princly state, Hyperbad, invaded after not wishing to join India as it had Muslim rulers.

There are other cases that I could bring up like how only part of Hong Kong was actually under the 99 year lease, but Britain was pressured to give the whole thing up, or how Crimea was given to Ukraine because of a Ukrainian leader wanting to build closer bonds, back when the Soviet leadership thought the Union would live forever. Or how Bessarabia was split off from Romania by the Soviets, with it going to both the Ukrainian SSR and Moldovan SSR. I could go on and on, but Mauritius got a good deal in being actually paid for land being swapped around. Most places do not get that luxury. Especially with Maritius being new to human contact, with it only being settled as a plantation colony in the early 1700s. France has a better claim to both the Chagos Islands and Mauritius than the Mauritian government as slaves were brought over to settle the islands.

Britain loved splitting up, combining and rearranging colonies. But then again, everyone did,

And when we look at what comprised the Mauritian administration throughout history? It was Mauritius, the Chagos Islands and the Seychelles [they were split off in 1904 and became an independent crown colony]. The thing is, Mauritius doesn't claim the Seychelles despite it previously being apart of the same colonial administration as them. This essentially means they are being selective about their claim, and are trying to use it to garner favourability and a means of free land that they will be able to collect returns on.

Third Worldism, gotta love the selective application of laws and principles. Granted, a rules based order is a farce but even still.

But hey, remember that India wants to build a satellite tracking station there, and all the other military infrastructure that comes with it. Perhaps it is both Modi and the Chinese pushing for it.
 
KeeKeeCooch dijo:
Perhaps they had businesses moan at them about the VPN ban? They can't really say that on TV because it'd make them look even weaker, so the "minorities need them" excuse is weak, but makes them look less pathetic. He also said "whistleblowers"what does that fucking mean? Because this just makes no fucking sense in any context.
Presiona para expandir...
This is pretty much what I think is most likely going on behind the scenes.

The British parliament is filled with double-digit IQ retards who have either never had a job (not even hyperbole, most Labour MPs came from the charity "sector"), or they had one 20 or so years ago, meaning that almost all of them will have never engaged with a business vpn, nor with any modern corporate back end system for that matter. Thus as far as they were concerned, a vpn is just a nefarious tool used by bad actors to undermine their magnanimous efforts to fight evil by putting you in prison for criticising them and their policies.

The fact that vpn's are now as ubiquitous in large corporations as Outlook for many basic functions, like remote work, is something I suspect the majority of them didn't even have an inkling of, let alone an actual understanding. It would not surprise me that after months of pushing it, the amount of reeing from the private sector got too much for even Labour to ignore. They may also have faced push back from the Civil Service as well, as I imagine they must make use of vpn's themselves, given the amount that have blended work or WFH. And trying to carve out legal distinctions between what the state bodies can do, vs what private enterprise and the public can do would have proven far too complex and open to challenge.

So this whole thing of meekly dropping it because of "muh nig-nogs" is just an excuse to try and quickly and quietly shelve the matter, as the real reason of "We're genuine mouth-breathing retards who can't comprehend the most basic fundamentals of how businesses function" would be even more embarrassing for them to admit, especially with how far they've let this nonsense go on for.
 
Última edición:
AssignedEva dijo:
It's not just here, it's practically every Western country in the last few years at the same time. One concerted push. You can thank Peter Thiel and his ilk for that.
Presiona para expandir...
Supposedly it's actually Meta, the Facebook guys funding all of it, which was surprisingly affordable, as far as government bribes go, only 2 billion USD or so. The logic chain I heard is:
  • Meta does advertisements on Facebook, IG, and elsewhere, but Google dominates that space beyond anything else Google does to the point literally almost every other big player is gone.
  • Meta lost a lawsuit about advertiser numbers in which they had to admit they have no idea how much of their ad views are real people.
  • This brings Dead Internet Theory into the corporate zeitgeist. To wit: Advertisers now demand to know who is real and who isn't.
  • AI and LLMs are already to the point it's quite literally impossible to, at a quick glance, detect who is real and who isn't. The ad data is inherently and forever fucked, and it's still the worst the tech will ever be, it only gets better from here.
  • The only possible way to do fix this is to basically low level dox every single user online forever.
  • As a bonus to doxing to prove they have "real" viewers on Meta's ad data, they could provide down to the minute metrics (e.g. "32% of your viewers were male zoomers," "19% of females canceled the ad halfway through") which would give them a bonus over Google AdSense.
  • Thus, Meta needs/wants to push digital ID to clean up the ad data their business runs on.
  • Bonus: If the device makers are forced to be the ones that ID kids, that means Google, Meta's competitor in the advertiser data space, is the one who has to pay for that, not Meta.
It's important to note they already do this to a certain extent. If you check your twitter account, you'll find a section about "inferred identity." I've talked about this before but this is them figuring out who you are based on advertiser data. This includes things they aren't allowed to ask you, like if you're homosexual or have a medical condition. But the important thing to realize is despite this being EXTREMELY yummy data for the advertisers, it's illegal as all hell in the US, EU, and I imagine the UK as well. They aren't allowed to treat you, as a user, differently because you're gay or female or white. They sure as shit aren't allowed to do so if they figure it out without asking.

Heck, we know a lot about one of the attempted Trump assassins' activity because people realized they could pull advertiser data on who is very obviously him and his phone and track his movements -- and discovered a ton of activity which makes no sense (unless he had handlers helping him). And there was some criminal recently who was caught despite doing everything "right" because Microsoft (and Google) can track users via the GDID, a serial number assigned to your OS install when you install Windows that you can't opt out of, can't delete, can't do anything about. (Now you know why they mandate a Microsoft account sign in whenever you install Windows nowadays.)

But if it's all part of "Digital ID?" Then it's not illegal anymore. There's no scandal about Microsoft already doing this to people, or Google/Meta/X doing it on the sly to figure out "hey this user's homosexual but conservative, keep him away from the other homosexuals" or what have you. They're just using the government approved (legally mandated) paper trail to figure you out, even if you don't want them to. No more pesky EU privacy laws, no more pesky users creating multiple personas online, no people using interesting scripts to try and delete Microsoft's OS (and hardware, TPM chip) level tracking, no more political dissidents causing trouble for the Yookay's Fabian Great Replacement Genocide, etc etc.

Remember the techbros are all either Jeets that scammed their way in power (Google, Microsoft), or are white dudes with SERIOUS martyr complexes (Former guy in charge of X, Meta's Robot Lizardman CEO). They think they're gonna save the world by taking away your right to property, privacy, free association, etc. Becuase they know how to live your life better than you do.
 
Blackstar dijo:
vrVCeJvu-AhkNAg7.mp4
Local Archive
Presiona para expandir...
Translation:

"We realised it was impossible to enforce, and loads of people gave us shit for trying to implement it."
Sir Baz the Intolerant dijo:
The British parliament is filled with double-digit IQ retards who have either never had a job (not even hyperbole, most Labour MPs came from the charity "sector"), or they had one 20 or so years ago, meaning that almost all of them will never have engaged with a business vpn, nor with any modern corporate back end system for that matter. As far as they were concerned, a vpn is just a nefarious tool used by bad actors to undermine their magnanimous efforts to fight evil by putting you in prison for criticising them and their policies.
Presiona para expandir...
From what I understand the computer systems they use are antiquated in Number 10.

Your average nerd that has a homelab in his cupboard made out of old corporate equipment pulled out of a bin has a more sophiticated setup.
Sir Baz the Intolerant dijo:
The fact that vpn's are now as ubiquitous in large corporations as Outlook to many basic functions, like remote work, was something I suspect the majority of them didn't even have an inkling of, let alone an actual understanding. It would not surprise me that after months of pushing it, the amount of reeing from the private sector got too much for even Labour to ignore. They may also have face push back from the Civil Service as well, I imagine they must make use of vpn's themselves, given the amount that have blended work or WFH. And trying to carve out legal distinctions between what the state bodies can do vs what private enterprise and the public can do would have proven far too complex and open to challenge.
Presiona para expandir...
The fundamental problem is that it was always impossible to enforce. To effectively enforce it, you would have to effectively block most of the internet, which would break a huge amount of stuff for everyone.

BTW Spanish court blocked Cloudflare (because it was used for restreaming La Liga matches). e.g. No one in Spain can docker pull. For those unaware, Docker is used heavily in cloud services, development, self-hosting, AI, etc.

Trying to block VPNs would be a similar level of breakage on the internet.
 
Última edición:
Heinrich Maneuver dijo:
SNP members have reportedly come out in support of Argentina
Presiona para expandir...
So politicians can publicly support military opponents that expressly desire to kill our civilians and annex our land? But you can be arrested for sharing an article from russian media because what? They do the same thing?

In any other time in history these people would be rightfully hung for treason.
 
HTTP Error 404 dijo:
Supposedly it's actually Meta, the Facebook guys funding all of it,
Presiona para expandir...
At risk of sounding a bit dickish, this is one of those no-shit moments. Meta, back before the rename, was heavily involved in the last digital ID push, though the government at the time eventually refused their involvement, citing facebooks terrible data handling policy even then. They've been trying to worm their way into these schemes even before they opened access to non-students (if I remember correctly, they made overtures to several British universities to take over their student ID systems). Zuck's entire thing has been conning people into giving him private information.

I fully believe every part of your timeline, because Zuckerborg is a disgusting pervert who gets off on prying into peoples personal lives. I bet he sneaks his way into everyone's photographs and measures their dicks.
 
teriyakiburns dijo:
Zuckerborg is a disgusting pervert
Presiona para expandir...
Zuck is one of those people that seem harmless to the average person but is fucking comically evil. He is just yet one more of these people who's continued existence is nothing more than a satanic negative on humanity. Meta doesn't just collect data from you, they scrape the entire fucking internet and will still make as complex profiles on you even if you never touch their site. They will track everyone's ip and form profiles around what that ip connects to and does. Even with a vpn they just harvest data from third parties too. They will knowingly trying to piss you off and give you mental issues for their own profit. Meta tracks your period cycles to advertise things to you harder when you are in more of an emotional and vulnerable state. They will track your wifi strength and timing to figure out the rough layout of your house and where your toilet or bed is so they can force ads harder on you while you are shitting and have nothing else to do other than look at the ads or when you are in bed and may be half asleep and more inclined to make purchases without thinking as much as you otherwise would. It is a fucking vile company.

Zuck is also a moralless coward who cannot stick to anything. When biden was in power they would heavily restrict anything right leaning, when it was trump suddenly he's massively pro free speech and all that stuff. The platform just goes with whatever is the popular opinion regardless of legality or morality. The only thing they care about is harvesting as much data as possible and pushing through laws that aid them in that.
 
I hope England get absolutely destroyed tonight. I want them defeated,and the spastics who are so invested in this,they're not seeing how shit things are going to get,and fast, demoralised, miserable, and finally focussing on the shitshow the country will become in the next few months.
 
Destacado
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo