CornwallFox

Interesting. BDCR at 10? Well we've all been asking for something different and we've certainly got that.

Any evidence that a contract is being awarded for a scheme that hasn't been debated or enacted?

Please do 🤣

It's not though is it? A digital ID is not remotely related to combined government data.

'government' can already get every detail of information about you if they really wanted to. What information exists that you don't think it's already accessible? And I can't help but reflect that this 'fear' is being stoked. Mass opposition to ID cards by the same media and political parties that have spent months shouting about asylum seekers illegally working. They don't want to fix the migration issue, they want to use it to divide and conquer. THAT is the fear you should have imo.

Cyclists. I don't cycle myself but I'm usually an ally of cyclists against the sort of constant nonsense they have to put up with online from the usual suspects that like attacking anybody that isn't them: cyclists, vegans, female footballers, teachers..... You know who I mean. But one weekend in London and I can see why they annoy Londoners. Literally none of them stop at red lights (yes, they mean you too), flying across junctions or in front of cars. Great seeing so many in use across the capital but jeez realise it's you that's gonna be the one with the regrets of you get hit.

Something like what? What are the specific concerns that would be enabled by a digital ID that aren't already possible?

You think they think nobody will notice a budget? Might it just be that they are trying to govern?

Kinda irrelevant given the government already has all your data. This is simply about using our to create a digital ID.

The first part is more relevant to cookies and private companies than a digital ID. The government already holds your ID details from when you got a passport/driving licence etc. It doesn't fundamentally change that. The second bit, tbh I'm not sure I have the energy for it. I see no reason to believe the government or any government intends to create some dystopian fictional world as you describe. Simply having a digital ID in place of a paper or plastic ID makes next to no difference in terms of what the government holds, just how you hold it.

You can't seriously expect the government to not govern just because of internet conspiracies?

Don't understand your 'on paper' comment. We've got a squad full of crap that got relegated with a pitiful number of points. 'on paper' we're not very good.

Key for me is a proper number 10 and another striker, so we don't have to have Daka in the squad and Ayew doesn't have to play every game.

2 or 3 forward players would make a world of difference

Can't see any reason for anybody to oppose digital ID, beyond conspiracy theorists. Concerns about the government being able to access data are misplaced, as all of your data is very readily available to them anyway if they really wanted it (they don't). You give away more data simply by allowing cookies on the websites you visit. A cookie essentially tracks your physically and digitally, and in virtually every case websites share your information with hundreds, or even thousands of organisations, often with no idea what their intentions are. A properly joined up digital ID linked to public services, benefits and taxation would be fantastic. It would make life a lot easier. Honestly think it's opposition for opposition's sake with non government politicians.

I think they absolutely intended for him to be number one but then an unexpected opportunity arrived to sign donnarumma. There was zero talk of them looking at keepers until psg dropped him.

Man city have properly done him dirty with the donnarumma signing

We do seem to keep lads hanging around for years after it's obvious they're not going to make it here

True, TBF there's lots of positions that aren't really traditional any more. Brexit itself should have been a left wing idea but the reasons for it ended up being traditionally right wing immigration/Johnny foruner concerns instead of left wing free market concerns. Everything since is upside down.

This is the weird thing. It's never been right wing/conservative to not believe in science, but somehow here and in the US this has become a core tenant of right wing popular thought. Crazy how easy it was to brainwash the masses against science.

That is the only bit he was right about though, right? I'm prepared to accept there's discussions to be had around mass immigration also. But the anti climate change stuff was bona fide bonkers.

Doo lally in which way? It's another outlet certain parts of the political spectrum don't seem to like, despite the fact pretty key figures from that part of the spectrum have been effectively promoted over all others. Bit bizarre to me. The only doo lally thing about them is they seem to be trying to keep everybody happy while keeping nobody happy, but I don't think that's because of bias tbh.

Fair enough, I just know a lot of right leaning people don't like it and the things I've read from you previously lead me to think you're probably right wing. C4 tended (I say tended as I have no idea if it still airs in the same way now) to go into much more detail on subjects it covered, giving much more factful and inciteful coverage than other networks, which isn't to everybody's taste these days.

The only media that's ever really covered the world properly has been channel 4 news, but I'm guessing you probably aren't a fan of C4.

Ok that's cheating, she is just insanely hot