So the BBC is going to take the recipes down off its website

[Burney]

:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:

Oh, no! Where will I be able to find recipes online for free now? There aren't any other websites with free recipes on the entire interne...oh, no hang on there's absolutely ****ing millions of them, aren't there?

Phew. No need to panic, then, eh? Calm down, everyone.

[Pat Vegas]

Yeah you'll find one start cooking away.

Then find out it's American and it will say you need a 2 cups of flour and a stick of butter.

[Rich]

:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:

Oh, no! Where will I be able to find recipes online for free now? There aren't any other websites with free recipes on the entire interne...oh, no hang on there's absolutely ****ing millions of them, aren't there?

Phew. No need to panic, then, eh? Calm down, everyone.

Ah yes, but I trust the BBC, you see?!

[The Jorge]

:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:

Oh, no! Where will I be able to find recipes online for free now? There aren't any other websites with free recipes on the entire interne...oh, no hang on there's absolutely ****ing millions of them, aren't there?

Phew. No need to panic, then, eh? Calm down, everyone.

To be fair we do own them, you know, collectively and stuff. The idea they are competing with newspapers and magazines is cack handed at best. Also, and I do feel that this is a point missed/ignored/misunderstood in the internet age, the BBC means we're quite the cultural force on a global scale, limiting that will do nobody any good.

[Pat Vegas]

Does anybody watch BBC Three now it's online?

I can't see anybody going to the effort of doing so.

[The Jorge]

Does anybody watch BBC Three now it's online?

I can't see anybody going to the effort of doing so.

No, much to the chagrin of my theatre director friend who is constantly emploring everyone to watch his new thing which was commissioned when it was a TV channel rather than a **** youtube.

They'll come for BBC4 next, then there'll be trouble. Nobody is taking my Andrew Graham-Dixon from me!!!

[Pat Vegas]

They should just put them on youtube.

Though to be honest the only show that I ever saw on BBC three seemed to be family guy.

Though when the channel started I liked it. Real hustle and stuff like that was on there.

[Burney]

To be fair we do own them, you know, collectively and stuff. The idea they are competing with newspapers and magazines is cack handed at best. Also, and I do feel that this is a point missed/ignored/misunderstood in the internet age, the BBC means we're quite the cultural force on a global scale, limiting that will do nobody any good.

The BBC has been wetting its beak in an awful lot of areas beyond its remit in recent years and has had a stultifying effect in a number of markets as a consequence. It really needs to have its wings clipped. As to its ownership, the idea that we 'own' it in any meaningful sense is laughable, since we have absolutely no control or say over it. We most certainly don't own its content, whose copyright is shared between it and the various individuals and production companies who create it. The idea that we 'own' the BBC is just the lie we're told to justify taxing us to pay for it.

[Burney]

Ah yes, but I trust the BBC, you see?!

Communist.

[The Jorge]

The BBC has been wetting its beak in an awful lot of areas beyond its remit in recent years and has had a stultifying effect in a number of markets as a consequence. It really needs to have its wings clipped. As to its ownership, the idea that we 'own' it in any meaningful sense is laughable, since we have absolutely no control or say over it. We most certainly don't own its content, whose copyright is shared between it and the various individuals and production companies who create it. The idea that we 'own' the BBC is just the lie we're told to justify taxing us to pay for it.

This is sounding very Govean, I'll be very interested to hear what markets the bbc is harming. We mustnt ever anger the markets!

I'm all for public domaining as much BBC content as possible, myself. It's the only way to bypass a lot of the silly, outdated copyright laws than just end up hiding everything in a walled garden that gets no sunlight.

[Burney]

This is sounding very Govean, I'll be very interested to hear what markets the bbc is harming. We mustnt ever anger the markets!

I'm all for public domaining as much BBC content as possible, myself. It's the only way to bypass a lot of the silly, outdated copyright laws than just end up hiding everything in a walled garden that gets no sunlight.

Well here's just one example of a market they waded into with taxpayers' money and absolutely destroyed by providing the content for free.

https://www.tes.com/article.aspx?storycode=359338

[The Jorge]

Well here's just one example of a market they waded into with taxpayers' money and absolutely destroyed by providing the content for free.

https://www.tes.com/article.aspx?storycode=359338

:hehe: You do know that the CFS's only role is to cheerlead for bringing a more marketised approach to education, dont you?

So, just so we're clear here, by commissioning a curriculum wide suite of educational resources for free they're doing a bad thing? It would be so much better if schools had to pay for these resources? It doesnt make much sense to me.

[IUFG]

What are they actually going to save by doing this?

A bit of bandwidth? RAID space?

Not that I give a ****, of course.

[Sir C]

:yikes: :yikes: :yikes:

Oh, no! Where will I be able to find recipes online for free now? There aren't any other websites with free recipes on the entire interne...oh, no hang on there's absolutely ****ing millions of them, aren't there?

Phew. No need to panic, then, eh? Calm down, everyone.

I wouldn't eat a meal prepared from a BBC recipe anyway. I'd be a-feared that it would infect me with leftism.

No, communist food has no place in my kitchen, comrade.

[Burney]

:hehe: You do know that the CFS's only role is to cheerlead for bringing a more marketised approach to education, dont you?

So, just so we're clear here, by commissioning a curriculum wide suite of educational resources for free they're doing a bad thing? It would be so much better if schools had to pay for these resources? It doesnt make much sense to me.

They're doing a thing that has nothing whatsoever to do with their remit as a broadcaster and are essentially taking it upon themselves to reallocate publicly-funded money paid for broadcasting and using it to subsidise public education - which we as taxpayers already pay for in our taxes! It had no business doing it and it was simply an example of how arrogant the BBC had become.

[Burney]

I wouldn't eat a meal prepared from a BBC recipe anyway. I'd be a-feared that it would infect me with leftism.

No, communist food has no place in my kitchen, comrade.

Wise words. Although we have been known to use Guardian recipes. :-\

[The Jorge]

They're doing a thing that has nothing whatsoever to do with their remit as a broadcaster and are essentially taking it upon themselves to reallocate publicly-funded money paid for broadcasting and using it to subsidise public education - which we as taxpayers already pay for in our taxes! It had no business doing it and it was simply an example of how arrogant the BBC had become.

They have a remit for Education, they always have. Their online stuff is excellent and mixes really, really well with their video output, a massive proportion of which is now consumed by kids via iPlayer.

I work in the web industry and find the idea that the BBC doing stuff online is a bad thing is ridiculous. We developed a schools social network to help kids with online safety etc last year, we filled it all with freely available BBC content and it worked beautifully.

[Burney]

They have a remit for Education, they always have. Their online stuff is excellent and mixes really, really well with their video output, a massive proportion of which is now consumed by kids via iPlayer.

I work in the web industry and find the idea that the BBC doing stuff online is a bad thing is ridiculous. We developed a schools social network to help kids with online safety etc last year, we filled it all with freely available BBC content and it worked beautifully.

Well I'm glad to hear they're still good at nanny-state propaganda and that you're making money out of publicly-funded material. Cracking.

Their remit for education is via their broadcasting. They were never meant to be a supplier of key teaching materials.

[The Jorge]

Well I'm glad to hear they're still good at nanny-state propaganda and that you're making money out of publicly-funded material. Cracking.

Their remit for education is via their broadcasting. They were never meant to be a supplier of key teaching materials.

I'm not making money out of it, I built the container and the teachers populated it with the excellent content they produced.

I get why the government hate the BBC, it's a lovely, cosy little quid pro quo for the support of their friends in the murdoch media, I'm just not sure why you do. Flimsy links to some mild griping by a very low rent think tank/pressure group aside, of course.

[Burney]

I'm not making money out of it, I built the container and the teachers populated it with the excellent content they produced.

I get why the government hate the BBC, it's a lovely, cosy little quid pro quo for the support of their friends in the murdoch media, I'm just not sure why you do. Flimsy links to some mild griping by a very low rent think tank/pressure group aside, of course.

It's not hard to understand. I have a simple and principled distaste for being coerced by law into paying for something that it should be my right as a consumer to choose or reject as I see fit. We're not talking about infrastructure like roads or streetlights or even education or healthcare here, we're talking about telly and radio - most of it supposed entertainment. That ought not to be the stuff of taxation.

[Luis Anaconda]

I'm not making money out of it, I built the container and the teachers populated it with the excellent content they produced.

I get why the government hate the BBC, it's a lovely, cosy little quid pro quo for the support of their friends in the murdoch media, I'm just not sure why you do. Flimsy links to some mild griping by a very low rent think tank/pressure group aside, of course.

I don't think you have to hate the BBC to see that what they are doing in some areas is wrong

[The Jorge]

But your example, the only one so far, was about education. Also, good luck untangling entertainment and education from eachother.

[The Jorge]

I don't think you have to hate the BBC to see that what they are doing in some areas is wrong

I still dont really see what they are doing wrong and where though.

I mean, barring their frankly awful and ridiculously biased news coverage.

[Luis Anaconda]

But your example, the only one so far, was about education. Also, good luck untangling entertainment and education from eachother.

Most of my teachers seemed to manage that

[Burney]

But your example, the only one so far, was about education. Also, good luck untangling entertainment and education from eachother.

Hang on, you asked me why I hated the BBC and I told you. The fact that they piss away money in markets like education where they have no business is merely another example of their overweaning arrogance and dangerously monolithic cultural dominance of the UK.

[The Jorge]

Most of my teachers seemed to manage that

Heh, touche.

Personally I miss the COI to tell us that rugs were a mortal threat.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt016gTNp_k

[The Jorge]

Hang on, you asked me why I hated the BBC and I told you. The fact that they piss away money in markets like education where they have no business is merely another example of their overweaning arrogance and dangerously monolithic cultural dominance of the UK.

Education isnt a market, unless youre trying to make it one. This doesnt serve the learners though, it serves the people who fund the party and want to make millions from dodgy land deals, setting up dodgy academies and paying themselves through secret companies.

Once more, the BBC has a very specific educational remit.

[SWv2]

Line of Duty was very good.

Well done the BBC.

[Burney]

Education isnt a market, unless youre trying to make it one. This doesnt serve the learners though, it serves the people who fund the party and want to make millions from dodgy land deals, setting up dodgy academies and paying themselves through secret companies.

Once more, the BBC has a very specific educational remit.

And now you're changing the subject in a classic bit of sleight of hand. You're also talking rubbish. The supply of teaching materials is and always has been a market - one in which the BBC has no place. You going on a rant about Toby Young and Michael Gove doesn't actually have anything at all to do with the matter in hand. Nothing. So stop it. We see what you're doing.

You have thus far failed utterly - we must assume on purpose - to explain why I as a consumer ought to be forced to pay for state-funded entertainment?

[The Jorge]

And now you're changing the subject in a classic bit of sleight of hand. You're also talking rubbish. The supply of teaching materials is and always has been a market - one in which the BBC has no place. You going on a rant about Toby Young and Michael Gove doesn't actually have anything at all to do with the matter in hand. Nothing. So stop it. We see what you're doing.

You have thus far failed utterly - we must assume on purpose - to explain why I as a consumer ought to be forced to pay for state-funded entertainment?

But it's not just entertainment, it's news (global, national and local), current affairs, education, sport. I dont agree with all of it but, on balance, it does some bloody good stuff. Good luck in finding a market solution that would provide you with anything like what the bbc does.

I'm objecting to the idea that education is some sort of marketplace, it isnt, and it's too important to be one.

[SWv2]

Anti-poverty campaigner Jack Monroe announced plans earlier this month to publish the chef’s recipes from the website on the blog cookingonabootstrap.com, saying: “I learned to cook on the dole using free recipes online and for the BBC to reduce this vital service is an abomination.”

[Burney]

But it's not just entertainment, it's news (global, national and local), current affairs, education, sport. I dont agree with all of it but, on balance, it does some bloody good stuff. Good luck in finding a market solution that would provide you with anything like what the bbc does.

I'm objecting to the idea that education is some sort of marketplace, it isnt, and it's too important to be one.

None of those things is vital (indeed some are frivolous) and all are provided by commercial companies (much better in most instances). There is still no justification there for enforcing it on the public by use of legal sanction. None whatsoever.

The mindset of you and the BBC is that the public must be told what's good for them and, since they can't be trusted to buy it themselves, must be coerced into paying for it. That is a fundamentally humiliating and infantilising idea, but sadly all too typical of the socialist outlook whence the BBC sprang.

And everything where things have to be bought and paid for is a market. You may not like it and may like to pretend otherwise, but that doesn't change the fact.

[Burney]

Anti-poverty campaigner Jack Monroe announced plans earlier this month to publish the chef’s recipes from the website on the blog cookingonabootstrap.com, saying: “I learned to cook on the dole using free recipes online and for the BBC to reduce this vital service is an abomination.”

Yes. Apparently, Jack hasn't noticed the 10 million or so other recipes free on the internet and believes that, unless Auntie is there to hold our hands, vast swathes of Britain will succumb to malnutrition.

Stupid tart.

[Sir C]

Yes. Apparently, Jack hasn't noticed the 10 million or so other recipes free on the internet and believes that, unless Auntie is there to hold our hands, vast swathes of Britain will succumb to malnutrition.

Stupid tart.

Point of order: I don't think you can call xe a tart because xe doesn't identify as a woman. Or, indeed, a man.

I see that today she has managed to jump on yet another victim bandwagon, claiming to be clinically depressed.

****ing mental, more like.

[Burney]

Point of order: I don't think you can call xe a tart because xe doesn't identify as a woman. Or, indeed, a man.

I see that today she has managed to jump on yet another victim bandwagon, claiming to be clinically depressed.

****ing mental, more like.

:hehe: She really is a big bucket of crazy, that girl. I think we can surely guarantee a suicide attempt, can't we?

Mind you, she should get on the shrooms, apparently.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/may/17/magic-mushrooms-lift-severe-depression-in-clinical-trial

[Ash]

I'm objecting to the idea that education is some sort of marketplace, it isnt, and it's too important to be one.

It is a marketplace, though. It certainly was when I worked in that sector. Schools compete for pupils and funding. Teachers compete for positions. Suppliers compete to, erm, supply stuff.

Collective provision of ultimate funding doesn't make the whole industry suddenly not a market, and saying it is "too important to be one" might be a nice soundbite but it doesn't really make sense in areas where genuine competition can raise standards, such as educational resources. Is the supply of food too important to be a marketplace?