Face coverings worn in retail premises have been mandatory in Scotland for nearly a fortnight. All you need to do is to put a face covering in when entering a retail premises then removing it after exiting from it. It's only a temporary measure that is needed to eliminate the virus by stopping people from spreading the virus in enclosed spaces. Once that happens they are no longer needed. Maybe the relevant US authorities should revert to traditional methods and not rely so much on technology until the pandemic is other?

Link doesn't seem to have worked in previous post. https://www.gov.scot/publicati...

Health is devolved to the home nations of the UK and they have taken different approaches to the virus outbreak. The Scottish government did not plan to use the NHS app as part of their strategy.

21. In addition to the digital platform being developed by DHI, NHSX is developing an app which intends to support contact tracing through proximity tracking. This app uses Bluetooth technology to identify close contacts among other app users, and may be particularly useful for identifying people who have been in close physical proximity but who are unknown, such as a stranger on public transport. This is a UK Government led project – which we understand will be trialled soon – and we are seeking to ensure greater involvement for the Scottish Government in its development. In particular, we need to understand how data from this app will interface with the Scottish approach to contact tracing. We do consider that an app of this type can be an important enhancement to contact tracing, but it is also important not to see it as a substitute for the approach to contact tracing we describe here. It is also important that the public have confidence in the use of such technology and in the use of data.

IMHO, Artificial intelligence in the real world at the moment can only involved automating repetitive tasks. Once that is achieved, enough data will be collected to allow the next stage where decision based made of these repetitive tasks can be automated. It is coming but again IMHO, the first part will be quickened by the current virus outbreak as more investment is directed towards it than it would normally be.

The Scottish Government has made a case for UBI: https://www.independent.co.uk/... Of course, if not done properly UBI will be abused and cause further problems to the ones they are trying to solve but if done properly, it could be a stepping stone that allows people to grasp opportunities that they would not have otherwise be allowed under the present economic system?

In the Philippines, Dutuerte become president partly due to lack of US support of that countries territorial claims for Islands in the area against China. Using your example, maybe it is beneficial for the US to allow China to carve out a sphere of influence Asia? It does sound like we in another era of the 'Great game' where geo-politics reigns but this time, conflict it restricted to economic rather than military means.

Hopefully I'm allowed to post link: https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/...

How is (BBC) TV Licensing funded and what is the cost of collecting the TV Licence fee?

The revenue source for TV Licensing is the TV Licence fee settlement by the Government to the BBC. More information on this is contained in the BBC Annual Report and Accounts and in the TV Licensing Annual Reviews. The TV Licensing Costs of Collection chart, below, sets out the total licence fee revenue collected and collection costs over the last nine financial years. Section 365 of the Communications Act 2003 (opens in a new window) requires the BBC to pay all licence fee revenue it collects (via TV Licensing), less any sums required for making refunds, into the Government’s Consolidated Fund. TV Licensing doesn’t retain any of the licence fee revenue it collects; all monies are passed to the Government, and then the revenue collected is passed back to the BBC as Grant-in-Aid from the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (opens in a new window). The Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport may retain a proportion of the licence fee revenue for other purposes (refer to the BBC’s Royal Charter and Agreement with Secretary of State).

The NY times articles presents an example of toxic behaviour based on title placed on individual by society. I like the way it is presented in the RDM version of Battlestar Galactica:

In the Colonial military, the honorific "sir" is used for both female and male superiors; in civilian usage, "ma'am" is used for women and "sir" for men. This is highlighted when Captain Lee Adama addresses President Laura Roslin as "sir" and her aide Billy Keikeya addresses her as "ma'am" at the same meeting (TRS: "Bastille Day")

As somebody who has just signed up to comment, not sure if I can post links at the moment but if you search for 'Sexuality in the Twelve Colonies (RDM)' you will find source of the above comment.

Russia is an independent country free to follow it's own course in order to serve the best interests of it's people. It's a bit hypocritical to allow Western countries to follow that course but not expect other nations of the world to do the same thing. Of course that means Russia will become a rival/competitor/enemy of the US. If, as an independent country, they are free to choose their own course then why shouldn't they be? Despite the gradual loosening of the global economy as recently seen with China/US trade war and Brexit amongst other recent developments, there is still a level of economic dependence that won't allow us to go back to the situation of the last century that resulted in two world wars. That means there will be a increasing level of tension betweens the worlds leading nations but not to the extent like there was last century. Of course that doesn't mean that the US and it's allies can't co-operate with Russia on matters like the current pandemic and global terrorism. Is it wrong for countries to have both shared and competing goals?