[HN Gopher] TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England
___________________________________________________________________
TV detector vans once prowled the streets of England
Author : szczys
Score : 33 points
Date : 2021-01-18 16:42 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (hackaday.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (hackaday.com)
| rock_artist wrote:
| Israel had similar fee for many years. (The public television was
| deeply inspired by the bbc).
|
| But here they solved it by a much easier way.
|
| * once you got married, you were automatically assumed to have a
| TV set.
|
| * any tv that was sold were reported to the communication
| ministry.
|
| * a car owner would pay by default. Assumption was all cars would
| have and use a radio.
|
| * to show you don't have a TV set or it's not receiving any over-
| the-air broadcasts you were suppose to wait for random check ups.
| Once finally someone came, they can decide if you don't need to
| pay.
|
| But the most interesting story any Israeli know is the "mehikon"
| (Eraser in Hebrew) and its counterpart (anti-mehikon).
|
| Back in the days, the countrie's manifest at least was socialism.
| It wasn't "fair" someone would have a color tv while others
| can't. So the communication ministry required the broadcasters to
| wipe colors. So even color tv was shown as b&w. in order to "fix"
| that, The anti-mehikon was made. A device to "restore" the faulty
| tv signal and get the colors back.
| hwestiii wrote:
| I think this is the basis of the "Cat Detector Van" skit on Monty
| Python's Flying Circus
| lqet wrote:
| > The United Kingdom is somewhat unique in the world for
| requiring those households which view broadcast television to
| purchase a licence for the privilege.
|
| I know at least three countries (Germany, Austria and
| Switzerland) which do the same (edit: according the Wikipedia
| [0], such a fee exists in basically every European country,
| Japan, Israel, South Korea and Namibia). In Germany, the
| situation changed a few years ago, every household has to pay
| now, even if they don't own a television or radio. When I was a
| freshman student 10 years ago, things were a little bit
| different: an inspector (the "GEZ man") came by my apartment a
| few months after I moved in. He wanted to have a look inside. I
| declined. He came back a few times, but I didn't open the door. I
| never paid the fee (and I didn't have to, because I received
| BAfoG [1]). Even if I would have had to, there was just no way
| for them to prove I was actually owning a television. Here, those
| "detector vans" have been an urban legend for 60 years. I am
| pretty sure I read somewhere that they never existed and where
| basically "created" to fear people into paying the fees.
|
| [0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rundfunkabgabe
|
| [1]
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundesausbildungsf%C3%B6rderun...
| glandium wrote:
| You can add France and Japan to the list. In France, they don't
| go door to door, though, it's only a check box on some tax
| returns forms. In Japan they do come door to door. I've never
| heard about "detection vans" in either, though.
| comprev wrote:
| Ireland also requires a TV license for each home. If you have any
| device _capable_ of receiving a signal you're required to pay....
| even if you only use the TV for games consoles or Netflix.
| zapdrive wrote:
| Wouldn't it make sense to just add the license fee/tax at the
| source of sale, just like electronic waste recycling fee etc.
| orange_tee wrote:
| No because it should be per household or per person, not per
| device.
| rtkwe wrote:
| Only for one time fees, most TV Licenses style taxes are
| recurring. If you try to base it off an 'expected lifetime'
| you're just guessing how often people will replace the TV and
| either get under or over charged based on how long they keep
| devices.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| In the UK, the fee is PS157.50 a year, EUR160 in Ireland. Any
| workaround to try and tie it to the point of sale would make
| buying a TV cost a fortune.
| azornathogron wrote:
| It might. But currently you pay the license fee each year,
| and it's one license per household. So if it gets bundled in
| the price of the receiver then you're changing the price
| model - now if you buy a TV for a spare room you're paying
| the license fee again, and if you replace your TV earlier
| than the average you lose out, if you keep your TV for longer
| than average you win.
|
| I expect it could be made to work, but I have no doubt people
| would complain about it. And the license fee is not a pure
| private contract - there is government involvement (hence all
| the political arguing about whether the BBC should be allowed
| to increase the fee or get rid of the exemption for senior
| citizens). So if there's a big change that lots of people
| complain about then it might be blocked for political reasons
| even if it actually makes sense over all.
| secondcoming wrote:
| The UK only requires you to have a TV licence if you watch BBC
| iPlayer, or watch _any_ live TV / stream, even if that content
| is not produced by the BBC. Also, recording something live in
| order to watch it later requires a TV licence.
|
| So, if you watch something live on Amazon Prime or YouTube, you
| need a TV licence. I don't know if the BBC define what 'live'
| actually means, there's always a delay.
|
| I have a TV but don't have a TV licence. I don't own an aerial
| cable and it's been factory reset to detune all the channels (I
| used live in a house that had a TV licence). I use it with a
| Chromecast.
|
| I have one of the 'threatening letters' next to me right now.
| They're all addressed to 'The Legal Occupier'. That's not my
| name. They can go **** themselves.
|
| Live TV is awful.
|
| https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ95
| Osiris wrote:
| Maybe that's one reason some TV manufactures have started
| removing OTA tuners. My Visio is not actually labeled as a
| Television, I believe it's a home theater display, because it
| has no TV tuner.
| Aachen wrote:
| Same in Germany, or at least it used to be that way and
| somewhat recently they just got rid of the requirement to have
| a TV.
|
| It's just yet another tax. Moving to Germany feels a bit like
| they pretend to keep "tax rates" low by splitting out various
| things and making it "not a tax". In the Netherlands I had
| income tax and that was it, from that the govt just pays
| development aid and old age money (AOW) as needed. Here, you
| have church tax (if your parents signed you up for that party),
| new states support, broadcast fee, pension contribution, and
| probably more I'm forgetting.
| ktpsns wrote:
| The situation was (is) the same in Germany: There is a fee of
| about 20EUR/month per household in order to fund the public
| service broadcasting. And in the last century, these "TV detector
| vans" also have been a thing in Germany.
|
| While the detecting technology can work in theory, it will
| perform poorly in practice. Think of any dense settling, such as
| apartment blocks. It will be kind of impossible to determine the
| exact source of radio signals from the street, at least in the
| frequency domain and signal strength in question.
| IshKebab wrote:
| > To encourage compliance, TV Licencing regularly sends sternly
| worded letters to those who have let their licence lapse or have
| not purchased one.
|
| This is an understatement. It would be fairer to say they
| constantly spam you with scare mail.
|
| > In the event this fails, they may arrange a visit from
| enforcement officers.
|
| That's what they want you to think. In practice it never really
| happens. Too expensive. Hence the spam.
|
| > These officers aren't empowered to forcibly enter homes, so in
| the event a homeowner declines to cooperate with an
| investigation, TV Licencing will apply for a search warrant.
|
| I would be quite surprised if this has actually ever happened.
|
| It's pretty obvious they don't do any fancy detection these days
| (if they ever really did). It's just way too expensive.
| Veen wrote:
| > That's what they want you to think. In practice it never
| really happens. Too expensive. Hence the spam.
|
| It happened to me. A very nice man knocked on the door and
| delivered a speech about the licence fee. I told him we just
| use the TV to watch Netflix and Amazon Prime. He filled in a
| form and we haven't had one of those annoying letters since.
| offtop5 wrote:
| Pretty sure this was outted as fake.
|
| The idea of a van watching you is enough for many to change their
| behavior
| joezydeco wrote:
| I've done some work with Buckman Hardy in the UK, they
| developed and sold a handheld detector to the BBC. They're a
| legitimate engineering company, I doubt they would admit to
| being in on the gag if this was fake.
|
| http://www.buckman-hardy.co.uk/portfolio/television-detectio...
| rkachowski wrote:
| I remember as recently as the mid 90s there were intimidating
| advertisements on UK tv about how tv license vans were going to
| find you and kick your doors down if you hadn't paid.
|
| I had assumed it was complete scare tactics, I never once
| thought that they had existed in some previous era.
| dtech wrote:
| Yeah, this reminded me of the dutch broadcastings association
| 1969's april fools joke. In which they said to have developed a
| device that detects "zwartkijkers" (blackwatchers), for use by
| mailmen [1].
|
| Funny detail, the reporter asked "Can this devise detect all
| televisions?" to which the fake interviewee answered, "well if
| you wrap your set in aluminum foil no, but otherwise yes". The
| next day aluminum foil was sold out nation-wide.
|
| [1] https://www.facebook.com/AndereTijden/videos/1-aprilgrap-
| jou...
| superrad wrote:
| Yeah I thought it was just a scare tactic and something the
| licence 'enforcers' could say (i.e. 'our detector van says you
| have a tv') to try and catch people out.
|
| They surely can't get too much of a return paying people to
| check up on only potential licence 'evaders' so investing in a
| fleet of actual vans with drivers and operators would further
| reduce any return.
| mhh__ wrote:
| > Pretty sure this was outted as fake.
|
| The technology is completely sound, MI5 invented the rough idea
| for hunting spies (Operation RAFTER), but whether it was
| widespread or not? Seems unlikely.
| scrooched_moose wrote:
| I believe the current theory is they simply look for light
| leakage. If they see a "flash - 200ms - flash - 400ms - flash -
| 350ms - flash" pattern leaking through your curtains precisely
| at the moment the same pattern occurs in a live broadcast they
| know you're watching.
| hprotagonist wrote:
| _"Ministry of Ousinge?!"
|
| "Ministry of what?"
|
| "Ousinge. It were spelt like that on t' van"
|
| "Van? What van?"
|
| "The Cat Detector Van."
|
| "... You _are_ a loony."_
| unixhero wrote:
| In Norway too.
| myrandomcomment wrote:
| I have said this before and I will say it again...Dear BBC,
| please allow the rest of the world to pay for a subscription to
| the iPlayer. Just take my money, really, please?
| robertlagrant wrote:
| It's astonishing this doesn't happen.
| nisa wrote:
| Not really. There are probably ton's of licence boilerplate
| that requires extra money for the possibility that someone
| might watch from a different country.
|
| Even content that appears to be directly from the BBC is
| probably created by some firm that and gave it under some
| licence terms to the BBC.
|
| There was a stalled imitative to end this bullshit at least
| inside the EU but the content-lobby was stronger.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| Geniune question: what is on the BBC that you would want to
| watch that you can't get elsewhere?
| mhh__ wrote:
| The BBC's peak output isn't all that different from anywhere
| else, but the professionalism and quality of median BBC show
| exceeds pretty much anywhere else I find - History
| documentaries that aren't about Ancient Aliens (low-hanging
| fruit, but still).
| bitcharmer wrote:
| BBC has awesome content in areas such as nature, science,
| history. For example go check out BBC Earth or BBC knowledge
| series.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| Check out History Hit TV [1] - a lot of stuff by Dan Snow
| who is a great presenter IMHO.
|
| [1] https://tv.historyhit.com/
| bitcharmer wrote:
| This is great; very valuable content. Thanks for sharing!
| aurea wrote:
| Antiques Roadshow, Gardeners' World, University Challenge,
| Mastermind... yes I'm a British grandpa at heart. I would pay
| for iPlayer to watch these.
| bitcharmer wrote:
| Unfortunately this is common across many countries. I'm an
| expat in UK and would love to get (paid) access to content from
| my home country (in UE) but it's simply not possible.
|
| Seems like state TV still has a long way to go.
| londons_explore wrote:
| They think they'll make more money by selling exclusive
| geographic rights to each show to some local TV station or
| streaming site in each country.
|
| It makes a bit of sense - a local outfit probably has far more
| marketing reach, a bigger local audience, can schedule release
| at the optimal moment not during some local sport match, and
| can tailor the content locally (translations, censorship).
| mhh__ wrote:
| Britbox is supposed to be that, I think, but I wouldn't be at
| all surprised if the BBC cannot legally sell iPlayer
| subscriptions as easily as you'd think because the BBC's
| copyright library (especially music) is _unbelievable_ [1]
| compared to most other organizations, so they'd have to make
| multiple versions of everything on their books to deal with
| licencing issues. Lots of British shows get their soundtracks
| neutered because of this when they are sold abroad.
|
| [1] Example: Sky Sports F1 is pretty big budget, but they're
| still stuck using [knock-off version of The Chain] rather than
| the real thing, whereas the BBC can break out a really
| expensive song (e.g. Money for nothing by Dire Straits) for a
| throwaway segment.
| jeremycarter wrote:
| Is this because they operate radio stations or some other
| licensing deal?
| rtkwe wrote:
| Benefits of being a quasi-governmental media agency I bet,
| the laws get written to give you access to most things at
| very low or zero cost.
| tobylane wrote:
| I'm surprised to hear that, because my understanding is that
| all the major broadcasters have a blanket licence to play all
| music (from major record labels). They can just stick a top
| 40 hit in the background of a soap without planning for it.
| Maybe that doesn't apply to something as primary as the shows
| theme song.
| ortusdux wrote:
| I would imagine a majority of the issue is music licensing
| rights, as those are usually only purchased for the destination
| country.
| mhh__ wrote:
| As I've mentioned in my bigger comment down the thread, the
| BBC's music (and other material, even things like Album
| Covers) library is genuinely gargantuan.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| With Netflix, Amazon Prime, Disney+, YouTube, etc. the BBC have a
| hard time justifying the license these days. The only exception
| would be live sporting events, which is something I don't watch.
| Given I only watch about 1 hour of "TV" a day I was very glad to
| stop my license last year. It will not be missed.
| LatteLazy wrote:
| Respectfully, you're not just wrong, you're wrongly wrong.
|
| The nature coverage on BBC is an order of magnitude better than
| anything else on TV.
|
| The science coverage on BBC is better than anyone else on TV.
|
| The news coverage on BBC is better than anything else on TV.
|
| And that's just the starters.
|
| The podcast revolution were in right now? Brits have had that
| since the 70s with radio 4 producing great audio programs.
| Everything from science to history to drama to comedy. Their
| programming makes up a big chunk of the best podcasts and
| another chunk are ripoffs of BBC shows.
|
| Streaming? BBC iPlayer was the trailblazer in that space.
|
| And we're still not done.
|
| The UK has a similar problem to US media: its mostly owned by
| crazy right wingers and what isn't spends a lot of time navel
| gazing and sharing cat in tree stories. Not the BBC, they keep
| breaking big stories. They don't care or have to care about the
| editorial line or commercial interests of their advertisers or
| even their viewers prejudices. And educated, informed voters
| are one reason we have maintained (just) decent healthcare and
| a semi working benefit system. They actually force other media
| to be better. That's why we don't have Foxx news and our
| antivaxx movement is smaller than the US or Frances.
|
| I'm not saying they're perfect. I'm not saying they're always
| right or they couldn't do better.
|
| I'm just saying, we need more than just the commercial model,
| be it ads or subscription based. There are 1001 things it
| doesn't do well. It does other things great. But it can't give
| you everything. Why not keep both?
|
| Thanks for reading my rant.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| Thanks for your response - feel free to rant.
|
| I agree with what you said, but given there's only so many
| hours in the day, and I only watch TV to "switch my brain
| off", I didn't feel it worth the cost given that Netflix et
| al fills that hole just fine- for far less.
|
| To get my science / nature / news I turn to podcasts.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| It's called a 'TV licence' but know that it also pays for all
| your radio. I don't watch much TV but I do listen to a lot of
| radio every day, like many British people.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| I've not listened to the radio in 10+ years - my audio
| consumption is all from Podcasts, which IMHO blows any radio
| out of the water. It's not live but I don't need it to be.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > Podcasts, which IMHO blows any radio out of the water
|
| Can you please share which breathtaking podcasts you're
| listening to, because I've never found anything even close
| to as good as landmark BBC radio shows like Today, PM,
| Today in Parliament, In Our Time, The Moral Maze, Blood,
| Sex, and Money, From Our Own Correspondent, The Essay, and
| Night Tracks.
| Veen wrote:
| I listen to most of those too, but as podcasts. The BBC
| has a very good selection of Radio 4 podcasts.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > I listen to most of those too, but as podcasts
|
| I don't understand what practical difference you think
| that makes... it's the same shows, made by the same
| people, how you listen to it doesn't make any difference.
| pm215 wrote:
| I listen to In Our Time as a podcast :-) It's actually
| better than the radio-broadcast version because it
| includes 10-15 minutes of extra time with the guests
| where they have a bit more discussion.
|
| (rss feed:
| https://podcasts.files.bbci.co.uk/b006qykl.rss)
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Right but that's still paid for by the 'TV licence' and
| it's made by the same people.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| No idea what any of those shows you listed are. My
| interests are science, history, computing, polictics -
| and there are numerous podcasts covering these subjects.
| To name just a few in case anyone is intersted:
|
| * Dan Snow's History Hits
|
| * Triggernometry
|
| * Lex Fridman Podcast
|
| * Atomic Hobo
|
| * Jason Scott Talks his way out of it
|
| * Darknet Diaries
|
| * Omega Tau
|
| * Rob Reid After On
|
| * Anatomy of Next
|
| * page 94 - Private Eye Podcast
|
| * Command line heroes
|
| * Full Fact
|
| * Guido Talks
|
| * Dan Carlin's Hardcore History
|
| * The Bellingcat Podcast
|
| * On The Metal
|
| Some of these podcasts have won awards (See Bellingcat,
| Page94). My point being that given the shear number of
| high-quality content out there, I felt it wasn't worth
| paying PS120 to the BBC every year.
| Veen wrote:
| > No idea what any of those shows you listed are.
|
| They are almost exclusively BBC Radio 4 programs, many of
| which are available as podcasts. I can heartily recommend
| The Moral Maze and In Our Time.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > No idea what any of those shows you listed are ... My
| interests are science, history, computing, polictics
|
| Well I don't know what to say apart from that absolutely
| astounds me. They're the background noise of many British
| homes and you're severely missing out if these are your
| interests.
|
| For example, In Our Time alone is _900_ 45-minute
| episodes each about an individual topic of science,
| history, maths, politics, art, culture, religion, etc,
| sometimes even computing, with genuine experts coming to
| discuss and debate it starting with a basic introduction
| anyone can follow and then going into the details.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_In_Our_Time_program
| mes
|
| I think literally nobody else in the world produces this
| kind of super-high-quality and enduring intelligent
| spoken-word content. Even the NPR in the US is very poor
| in comparison.
|
| And have you really never heard of the Today Programme or
| are you exaggerating for effect? It really sets the
| national daily political agenda in the UK like nothing
| else. I can't practically understand how you can follow
| politics and never had heard anyone say 'they said on the
| Today Programme...'
|
| > I felt it wasn't worth paying PS120 to the BBC every
| year
|
| ...but you don't have to, for radio.
| CodeGlitch wrote:
| In Our Time does indeed sound very good - I'll have to
| check it out - thanks.
|
| > And have you really never heard of the Today Programme
| or are you exaggerating for effect?
|
| I've heard of it - never seen an episode so couldn't say
| what it was about (although the name probably gives it
| away). Traditionally I've not really watched much
| "broadcast" TV, even as a kid. I spent most my childhood
| in front of a computer...
|
| > ...but you don't have to, for radio.
|
| True, but does feel like free-loading a little?
| chrisseaton wrote:
| I would very strongly recommend you invest a day or two
| in trying Radio 4 - just put it on in the background all
| day, and see what you find.
| andyjohnson0 wrote:
| I haven't seen a marked TV detector van for for over 25 years.
| I'd kind of assumed that digitisation of the TV licence records
| some time before that, as as well as migration away from CRTs,
| meant that sending reminders/demands was simply more effective.
|
| And I'm really not sure I believe that they correlate room light
| fluctuations with broadcast programming, or even that this is
| technically/economically feasible. Sounds more like
| disinformation to me.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-01-18 23:03 UTC)