Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Please do not write below the line

bbctvlicence.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 337 posts

Re: Please do not write below the line

#251

Post by enasterosophes »

cal85 wrote: post #102
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #61

The most baffling thing here is how the hell did the author get the organisation to respond , on topic, multiple times? In my experience conversing with various entities that are supposed to provide customer support, absolutely anything outside of an extremely narrow set of vetted topics with prepared answers and especially anything technical gets ignored and receives an irrelevant response at best.

On-topic? Every reply seemed evasive to me. (Regarding how he got them to reply at all, this is required by law of public authorities.)

To me, it didn't come across as deliberately evasive. It came across like tier 1 helpdesk not really understanding how a query fits into their pre-defined categories, and trying to be helpful anyway without really understanding the problem.

The later reply about it being because OCR does use what's below the line and it shouldn't be obscured looks like the ticket was escalated to someone who understood what was really being asked for.

Obligatory xkcd: https://xkcd.com/806/

Re: Please do not write below the line

#252

Post by [deleted] »

hypeatei wrote: post #225
renjimen wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only an offense if you watch live TV [1]. They could have just lumped it in with your taxes, like they do in many other countries with state TV, but this approach in theory lets you opt out, even if they like to check up on you all too regularly. I suppose one downside of the BBC approach is tax is usually proportional to your income, while the TV license fee is not, and in fact you need to pay it even if you ha…

> hiding our TV in the closet as students whenever the license people came down the street There are people going door-to-door to check TV licenses? Are they cops, what kind of power do they have? Seems extremely annoying and dystopian.

[deleted]

Re: Please do not write below the line

#253

Post by voussoir »

deskr wrote: post #99

He also collects and displays all the previous letters he's got from the BBC: http://www.bbctvlicence.com/ They get increasingly threatening and aggressive. I'd guess that the OCR code scanning is to confirm that he's read the letter and adjust the hostility in the next letter appropriately.

Wow, these letters are extremely pathetic and unbecoming for a government agency. I would have expected the BBC to have more self respect than this mafia LARP.

Re: Please do not write below the line

#254

Post by manarth »

ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #61

The most baffling thing here is how the hell did the author get the organisation to respond , on topic, multiple times? In my experience conversing with various entities that are supposed to provide customer support, absolutely anything outside of an extremely narrow set of vetted topics with prepared answers and especially anything technical gets ignored and receives an irrelevant response at best.

TV licencing in the UK is administered by Capita.

Their contract is unlikely to allow queries to be ignored, and the people receiving the queries are likely to have targets to resolve "tickets" (queries) within a particular time / to a particular satisfaction.

If the query doesn't tick a particular easy-to-answer box, they'll use the best form answer available in order to "resolve" the ticket and meet their targets.

Re: Please do not write below the line

#255

Post by manarth »

csomar wrote: post #248
ZoomZoomZoom wrote: post #61

The most baffling thing here is how the hell did the author get the organisation to respond , on topic, multiple times? In my experience conversing with various entities that are supposed to provide customer support, absolutely anything outside of an extremely narrow set of vetted topics with prepared answers and especially anything technical gets ignored and receives an irrelevant response at best.

I am assuming because the BBC is a government organization? I am not sure about the UK but where I come from the government is legally required to answer your request. They have to. Doesn't mean they'll answer your question but they'll answer something. (plus they have to confirm reception/delivery and stuff like that)

The BBC is independent, and funded by the TV licence.

The TV licence scheme is _administered_ by Capita on behalf of the BBC. Those responses are coming from Capita.

Re: Please do not write below the line

#256

Post by manarth »

Xophmeister wrote: post #198
gs17 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds weirder than that to me: > colour TV: £169.50 per year; monochrome TV: £57.00 per year; blind people: 50% discount People who can't see their color TV at all pay more than people who can but have an old black-and-white one?

Since the switch to digital, presumably there’s no longer and signal for B&W TVs.

There has rarely (if ever) been a separate broadcast signal for B&W vs colour. Broadcasts began in B&W, over time upgraded to colour, but there wasn't a need to broadcast Channel in B&W and broadcast the same channel in colour on a different frequency.

One single broadcast signal, and different capabilities of receivers.

Re: Please do not write below the line

#257

Post by shrikant »

Nition wrote: post #96
Nition wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could have told him that though if it's the case, and the mystery would be solved. But there obviously wasn't any desire (or more charitably - time) on their end to really look into the reasoning or even understand the question. ---- Edit: I will share what I think is a nice a little counterpoint story here, from a business that is clearly still interested in understanding. I sent Lego an email a while ago: I'm…

While we're here, does anyone happen to recognize the camel's tune? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKpD-KkaBHc We never worked it out.

Google's audio search tells me that it's a stock sound effect: https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=2wLKlWPkcOM&si=Sle4B04wAoV...

https://secure.dewolfemusic.com/page/digiffects_sound_effect....

It appears to be used or sampled in a couple of songs (by Anna Maria Jopek and Boozehounds), but these date in the 2000s so can't have come into the camel from then I suppose!

Re: Please do not write below the line

#258

Post by hoseja »

mr_toad wrote: post #245
cardiffspaceman wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happened to the vans with antennae that scanned for operating TVs (there’s an IF oscillator in there I guess) to find unlicensed receivers?

The BBC has never offered any proof or explanation of how they worked, and there is some suspicion that they are fakes used for their psychological effect.

You can absolutely listen for the TV heterodyne leakage.

Re: Please do not write below the line

#259

Post by xp84 »

donatj wrote: post #108
duxup wrote: post #95

I worked for an old company that had a lot of old processes and paperwork. Many bits of paperwork had a "do not write below the line" type areas. I always wrote something ... nothing ever happened. I once hand delivered some paperwork (I was running late) to HR rather than using the inter office mail service. I asked them about it, they told me "Oh you must be Mathew..." I was HR famous. They didn't actually mind, th…

In a similar vein, I put an ill fitting jacket on a coat rack when I started my current job in 2012. We have moved offices twice, and the coat rack and jacket have followed me across both moves at no effort of my own. We've been working remote now since the beginning of covid, but our office is still open for anyone who wants to use it. I visited earlier this summer and my jacket was gone. I asked our office assistan…

Coat rack story: I once bought a cheap wood coat rack at the drugstore for $5 or so and brought it into the office to place at our "pod" of desks as only a few coatracks had existed in that office.

Later that office was being closed down to move into a smaller building and all or most of the office furniture besides the desks (cubes would imply actual walls) was priced to be sold to anyone who wanted it. I found my coatrack moved to that sale area and marked $20. (I just stole it back.)

Re: Please do not write below the line

#260

Post by kleiba »

echoangle wrote: post #41
kleiba wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Germany, you cannot even legally listen to the radio without such a license (GEZ). It's also slightly more expensive than the UK TV License, coming in just under Netflix' premium plan (while offering mostly shite in return).

To clarify: currently, it doesn’t matter what you actually do (listen to radio, own a radio, own a TV…), everyone has to pay, unless they are exempt (due to low income, other social security, or being deaf and blind at the same time). So it doesn’t matter if you listen to radio or not. You (or the household you live in to be exact) has to pay.

That's correct. It's sufficient that you in theory could listen to the radio, and it is assumed that pretty much everyone could.
Post reply on HN