Is this a joke? — 13 Comments

  1. We recently got a taste of this here in The US. Back in early October, we all got a “Presidential Alert”, I assume via the same “Amber Alert System” that is used here in The US for missing children. No warning, no nothing, just an ominous “Presidential Alert” suddenly appearing on our phones under the guise of “the is just a test”.

    What made this “Presidential Alert” even more strange, is that I got an alert on a cellphone that is disconnected/has no service. I keep it charged because it’s a smartphone that I use for other stuff, and it still got an alert. Granted that here in America, 911 emergency services will still work on a disconnected phone, but that’s outbound…not inbound.


  2. “Will I be obliged by law to register my phone number”.

    You did that yesterday in that rebate scam.

  3. Official thinking. They make it YOUR responsibility to receive their ‘alerts’ not just their responsibility to send them, it’s just another way to make sure the population (ie us lot) is kept in check by (albeit in a trivial way) adding to the number of things which must be done.

  4. Sorry GD,  with this one they’re doing good. Reason I say this is they’ve had exactly this type of alert in Japan fo yonks now.

    Of course they have very frequent seismic activity and some of it is miles offshore, but will result in high waves. They can give a good 15 minute warning now, meaning people have time to get to higher ground.

    If the proposed system is used correctly, it can warn of impending flooding, snow drifts,  road closures and so on. Mostly these are issues in mainland Europe.

    Of course they know some people don’t have mobiles and some will be switched off, however it’s a straight across the board; doesn’t matter which network, the warning goes to every mobile in that area, or nationwide.

    No they will not need your phone number,  you do nothing. And you’re free to ignore any warning, but my gut tells me it’s got to do with these hellish floods they’ve been getting. It gives people downstream the chance to get the hell out.

    • Smoking Scot – I fear you are missing a point? To create an alert system for emergencies could obviously be a good thing. It’s the wording – making it mandatory for people to receive it – that opens up a can of worms. We live in a society where commerce and the authorities have an appalling  reputation for finding loopholes in the rules and for misusing their powers in ways unforseen and unintendedwhen the powers were granted.  That ‘mandatory receive’ could easily grow over time to mean you must always carry a phone so you can be bombarded with state nannying propaganda.

      • That is precisely my point.  If they made it mandatory for emergency services to send texts then that’s one thing, but to make it mandatory to receive them is a different kettle of stingrays altogether.  By implication they are saying I have to have my phone powered up and with me at all times otherwise I will be breaking their law.

  5. During large emergencies? What about not-so-large emergencies? Just another reason for me not to ever purchase a so-called “smart” phone. I’ll just stick with my old dumb (non-text-enabled) cell phone until I’m forced to give it up.

  6. Some are old enough to remember the air-raid warning sirens – you didn’t get a choice whether you ‘received’ that broadcast message, but you had a choice whether you heeded it or not.   Using broadcast SMS is simply a smarter way of doing the same thing – if only those in charge of it were smarter too.

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting