RED FLAG  -  LOCOMOTIVE ACT 1865 红旗法案 - 1865年机车法案

PLEASE USE OUR A-Z TO NAVIGATE THIS SITE 请使用我们的 A-Z 索引 来浏览本网站

POLITICAL BLOCKERS - In Britain in 1865, the legislative response to the increasing introduction of self-propelled vehicles on our roads was the Locomotive Act (sometimes known as the Red Flag Act). Amongst a number of provisions, it stipulated that self-propelled vehicles needed to be proceeded with a man walking 60 yards ahead carrying a red flag to warn other road users of the vehicles approach. The objective of powerful stakeholders was to hinder progress to protect their investments in horses, carriages and trains.政治阻碍者 - 1865年的英国，针对道路上日益增多的自行驱动车辆，立法做出的回应是《机车法案》（有时被称为《红旗法案》）。该法案包含多项条款，其中规定自行驱动车辆前方必须有一名步行者，手持红旗，以提醒其他道路使用者车辆即将到来。 既得利益者的目的是阻碍进步， 以保护他们在马匹、马车和火车上的投资。

155 YEARS AGO

155 years ago, Lord Palmerston's Liberal government passed a law that, according to one writer, "effectively stopped innovation in powered road transport in Britain for over a quarter of a century". The Locomotive Act 1865 became known as the Red Flag Act, thanks to its extraordinary stipulation that any self-propelled road vehicle had to be preceded by a person walking at least 60 yards ahead, carrying a red flag.

The Act followed intense lobbying from horse-drawn carriage operators and the public railway industry. And in a rather severe response to the dangers posed by road vehicles, the Red Flag Act also brought into force the world's first road speed limit: 4mph in the country, 2mph in towns, and a £10 fine for "speeding".

As motoring innovation gathered pace, the Act – originally passed with hefty traction engines in mind – looked increasingly absurd, and many campaigned against it. It was finally repealed on 14 November 1896, when the Locomotives on Highways Act scrapped the flag and raised the speed limit to 14mph.

Motor car fans rejoiced. In celebration, a London to Brighton rally, billed as "The Emancipation Run", began with a breakfast at the Charing Cross Hotel, where Tory politician Lord Winchelsea symbolically ripped a red flag in half. (That rally still takes place each November.)

But maybe we had it lucky in Britain. That same year, 1896, a law was proposed in Pennsylvania requiring all drivers of horseless carriages, "upon chance encounters with cattle or livestock to:155年前 155年前，帕默斯顿勋爵（Lord Palmerston）的自由党政府通过了一项法律，据一位作家称，该法律“实际上使英国动力道路交通的创新停滞了超过四分之一个世纪”。1865年的《机车法案》之所以被称为《红旗法案》，是因为它有一项非同寻常的规定：任何自行驱动的道路车辆前方都必须有一名步行者，且需保持至少60码（约55米）的距离，并手持一面红旗。 该法案是在马车运营商和公共铁路行业的强烈游说下出台的。作为对道路车辆所造成危险的严厉回应，《红旗法案》还实施了世界上第一个道路限速：乡村限速4英里/小时（约6.4公里/小时），城镇限速2英里/小时（约3.2公里/小时），“超速”罚款10英镑。 随着汽车创新的加快，该法案——最初是针对笨重的牵引机而制定的——显得越来越荒谬，许多人对此进行了抗议。它最终于1896年11月14日被废除，当时的《公路机车法案》取消了红旗规定，并将限速提高到14英里/小时（约22.5公里/小时）。 汽车爱好者们欢欣鼓舞。为了庆祝，一场从伦敦到布莱顿的拉力赛（被称为“解放之旅”）以在查令十字酒店举行的早餐会拉开帷幕，保守党政治家温切尔西勋爵（Lord Winchelsea）在会上象征性地将一面红旗撕成两半。（该拉力赛至今仍于每年11月举行。） 但也许我们在英国还算幸运。同在1896年，宾夕法尼亚州提出了一项法律，要求所有无马马车的驾驶员，“在偶然遇到牛或牲畜时必须：

(1) immediately stop the vehicle, (1) 立即停止车辆；

(2) immediately and as rapidly as possible disassemble the automobile, and (2) 立即且尽可能快地拆卸汽车；以及

(3) conceal the various components out of sight behind nearby bushes until equestrian or livestock is sufficiently pacified." (3) 将各种部件隐藏在附近的灌木丛中，直到马匹或牲畜完全平静下来。”

PUBLIC INTEREST?

When incumbent industries are threatened by a new and disruptive technology, they will use any justification imaginable to kill it in its infancy, trying to convince legislators that their particular special interest is a public interest. It always ends badly.

In the second half of the 1800s, cars started appearing in Western Europe. At first, they were powered by steam engines, and later by various liquid fuels. We’re currently seeing a rerun of the political game surrounding zero emission vehicle development.

As industries become threatened by new technology, they typically embrace it in public and talk passionately about its potential, but only in terms of how the new technology can support the existing industries. Under absolutely no circumstances must the new technology be allowed to come into a position to replace the existing industries.

A famous example of this is the Locomotives Act of 1865 in the United Kingdom, better known as the Red Flag Act. It was a law that limited the speed of the new so-called automobile to 2 miles per hour in urban areas, and required them to always have a crew of three: a driver, a stoker (!), and a man who would walk before the automobile waving a red flag (!!).

The car was fantastic, but only as long as it didn’t threaten the railroad or stagecoach industries.

These industries, it turned out much later, were behind the lobbying that led to the Red Flag Act. The fledgling automobile industry stood to make the older industries obsolete, or at least significantly smaller, which could not be permitted. Therefore, they went to Parliament and argued how tremendously important their industries were, and claimed that their special interest was a public interest.

Essentially, the stagecoach and railroad industries tried to limit the permissible use of the automobile to carry people and goods the last mile to and from the stagecoach and railroad stations. That wouldn’t threaten the existing industries, and they could pretend to embrace its usefulness.

Parliament agreed in its time that the stagecoach and railroad industries were important. But Parliament made the mistake of seeing yesterday as the present time and eternal: those industries were only important before the technology shift that the car brought, a shift which was already underway. The special laws that these industries pushed through — with emphasis on the Red Flag Act — caused the inevitable technology shift to delay in United Kingdom, and therefore, the car industry of the United Kingdom lost considerable competitive edge against its foreign competition, being ten to fifteen years late into the game.

The moral of the story is that an industry troubled by technological advances should neither be allowed special laws nor be confused with the public interest, but instead be permitted to die as swiftly as possible, so that new industries and new jobs can take its place. If you do the opposite and keep that industry alive with artificial respiration and repressive legislation, you not only hurt respect for the law, but also the future economy and competitive capability. Extract of an article by Rick Falkvinge

UNITED STATES RED FLAG LAW

In the United States, the state of Vermont passed a similar Red Flag Law in 1894, only to repeal it two years later. The most infamous of the Red Flag Laws was enacted in Pennsylvania circa 1896, when legislators unanimously passed a bill through both houses of the state legislature, which would require all motorists piloting their "horseless carriages", upon chance encounters with cattle or livestock to:美国红旗法案 在美国，佛蒙特州于1894年通过了类似的《红旗法案》，但两年后就废除了。最臭名昭著的《红旗法案》是在1896年左右在宾夕法尼亚州制定的，当时立法者一致通过了一项法案，要求所有驾驶“无马马车”的驾车者在偶然遇到牛或牲畜时必须：

(1) immediately stop the vehicle, 

(2) "immediately and as rapidly as possible ... disassemble the automobile", and (2) “立即且尽可能快地……拆卸汽车”，以及

(3) "conceal the various components out of sight, behind nearby bushes" until equestrian or livestock is sufficiently pacified.(3) “将各种部件隐藏在附近的灌木丛中”，直到马匹或牲畜完全平静下来。

The law never took effect, due to a veto by the state’s governor, Daniel H. Hastings.由于州长丹尼尔·H·黑斯廷斯（Daniel H. Hastings）的否决，该法律从未生效。

THE REVEREND TOM FAIREY

"God of all creatures, both great and small, if Isabel was a tiny demonstration of your power and might, then we stand in awe. But frankly, such demonstrations are getting very boring. If you truly hear our prayers, then we pray for you to re-evaluate your own priorities. Unleash your fury on polluters who poison your oceans instead of your lovely coastlines. Visit your wrath on profiteers who would make a buck by any means possible, even to the detriment of this tiny dust speck we call home. Strike down politicians bought by the highest bidder whose vote to clean the environment is silenced by big money.

In a similar manner, O God, infuse into us a mighty dose of your indignation and courage. As we ask you to get your priorities straight, so, too, do we pray that you will help us to get our priorities in order. Give us the might and the fury of Isabel to attack polluters, profiteers, and crooked politicians at every opportunity. Let them know that because of us, by comparison, Isabel was nothing but a puff. Let them learn to fear us more than they fear a hurricane, and give us the courage or our resolve to act as your agents. Help us to be your hurricanes for good.

Once again, we ask you to pay attention to a handful of sea turtles. Keep them out of polluted waters, and away from all our gadgets that cut them or drown them. But most importantly, keep them away from our kind who attacks them for money or sport. And may the calm that follows a hurricane become the peace we have in our hearts because we have done your work, and have done it well. Amen."汤姆·费里（Tom Fairey）牧师 “万物之主，无论大小，如果伊莎贝尔（Isabel）只是你威能的微小展示，那么我们深感敬畏。但坦率地说，这样的展示正变得非常乏味。如果你真的听到了我们的祈祷，那么我们祈求你重新评估自己的优先事项。请将你的愤怒倾泻在毒害海洋的污染者身上，而不是倾泻在你美丽的海岸线上。让你的愤怒降临在那些不择手段谋取利益的投机者身上，哪怕是以牺牲我们称之为家的这颗微小尘埃为代价。击倒那些被最高出价者收买的政客，他们支持清洁环境的选票被金钱所噤声。 同样，噢上帝，请注入我们强大的愤怒和勇气。正如我们祈求你理清优先事项一样，我们也祈求你帮助我们理清自己的优先事项。赐予我们伊莎贝尔般的威能和愤怒，去攻击每一个污染者、投机者和腐败政客。让他们知道，相比之下，伊莎贝尔只不过是一阵微风。让他们学会比畏惧飓风更畏惧我们，并赐予我们勇气或决心，作为你的代理人采取行动。帮助我们成为你为善而生的飓风。 再一次，我们祈求你关注那几只海龟。让它们远离被污染的水域，远离所有会伤害或淹死它们的装置。但最重要的是，让它们远离那些为了金钱或运动而攻击它们的人类。愿飓风过后的平静成为我们心中的安宁，因为我们已经完成了你的工作，并且完成得很好。阿门。”

THE LOCOMOTIVE ACT 1865, also known as the RED FLAG ACT, required:

1. Self-propelled vehicles to have a speed limit of 4 mph(6 Km/h) in country roads and 2 mph (3 Km/h) in city roads.1865年的《机车法案》，又称《红旗法案》，要求： 1. 自行驱动车辆在乡村道路上的限速为4英里/小时（6公里/小时），在城市道路上为2英里/小时（3公里/小时）。

2. It should have a crew of 3 – a driver, a stoker and flag man.2. 必须配备3名机组人员——一名司机、一名司炉工和一名执旗手。

3. The flag man need to carry a Red flag and walk 60 yards (55 m) ahead of the vehicle.

This effectively restricted the speed of the vehicle to the walking speed of the man carrying the Red flag. He has to warn the horse carriages about the self-propelled vehicle ahead and ensure that the driver stops the vehicle till the horse or the horse carriage passes by.

The amended Highway & Locomotive act of 1878 reduced the distance of the Red flag man to 20 yards but all the other conditions remained same.

These restrictive rules and regulations choked the development of the British Motor Industry , helped by the Railway and Horse carriage lobbies.

Finally, on 14 November 1896 , the new Locomotives on Highways Act 1896 was passed with the following changes and was applicable to vehicles less than 3 tons in weight.

1. Speed limit was increased to 14 mph (22 Km/h)3. 执旗手需要携带一面红旗，并在车辆前方60码（55米）处步行。 这实际上将车辆的速度限制在执旗手的步行速度。他必须警告马车注意前方有自行驱动车辆，并确保司机在马匹或马车经过前停车。 1878年修订的《公路与机车法案》将执旗手的距离缩短至20码，但其他所有条件保持不变。 这些限制性的法规阻碍了英国汽车工业的发展，铁路和马车游说团体对此起到了推波助澜的作用。 最终，1896年11月14日，新的《1896年公路机车法案》获得通过，并做出了以下变更，适用于重量小于3吨的车辆： 1. 限速提高到14英里/小时（22公里/小时）

2. Was exempted from the 3 member crew as well as the Red flag

To celebrate this event, Harry Lawson of Daimler (England) and his friends organised for the London to Brighton “Emancipation” run. The London – Brighton run starts off with the symbolic tearing of the RED flag. The London – Brighton run has bee a regular event from 1927 to modern times.

By 1903, the speed limits were increased to 20 mph and later on the laws were repealed.2. 免除了3人机组人员和红旗的要求。 为了庆祝这一事件，戴姆勒（英国）的哈里·劳森（Harry Lawson）和他的朋友们组织了伦敦至布莱顿的“解放”之旅。伦敦至布莱顿的比赛以象征性地撕毁红旗开始。伦敦至布莱顿的比赛自1927年以来一直是一项定期活动，并延续至今。 到1903年，限速提高到20英里/小时，后来这些法律被废除。

38 YEARS OF DENIAL38年的拒绝

From 1865, through 1896 through to 1903 and beyond, politicians in the UK used their positions of trust to hinder progress. That is 38 years and more of blocking technology, by the very people who should have been looking to advance technology.从1865年起，经过1896年，一直到1903年及以后，英国的政客们利用他们受托的职位阻碍进步。这长达38年甚至更久的时间里，本应致力于推动技术进步的人，却在阻碍技术发展。

The modern cars we rely on today are the product of the Collective Human Brain. We stand on the shoulders of giants and take our conveniences for granted.我们今天所依赖的现代汽车是人类集体智慧的结晶。我们站在巨人的肩膀上，却将这些便利视为理所当然。

If it took 38 years for our (then) leaders to recognise the advantages of the motor car, what chance have we got to halt Global Warming?如果我们的（当时）领导人花了38年才认识到汽车的优势，那么我们还有什么机会去阻止全球变暖？

Yup, not much!没错，机会不大！

In the words of Winston Churchill. "Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst." Get ready then for World War Three. WWIII will be about food and water.用温斯顿·丘吉尔的话说：“抱最好的希望，做最坏的打算。”那么，为第三次世界大战做好准备吧。第三次世界大战将是关于食物和水的战争。

Warming of the planet reduces agricultural land to grow crops and raise livestock and fish harvests.地球变暖减少了用于种植农作物、饲养牲畜和捕捞鱼类的农业用地。

As the population grows, we will be unable to feed the billions of humans on the planet.随着人口增长，我们将无法养活地球上的数十亿人类。

The military in every G20 country know this. They know we are headed to war, and that is why they keep spending buckets of tax dollars on submarines, nuclear missiles, fighter planes, drones and aircraft carriers.每个G20国家的军方都知道这一点。他们知道我们正走向战争，这就是为什么他们不断投入巨额税款用于潜艇、核导弹、战斗机、无人机和航空母舰。

You don't have to be  mind reader to see the signs. These are the real life Hunger Games.你不需要成为读心者就能看到这些迹象。这就是现实生活中的《饥饿游戏》。

TECHNOLOGY CURVE技术曲线

You may realize from this brief history that politicians and policies follow technology. Politicians and policy makers do not create the technology. The rule makers simply make it harder for the advancement of the human race, as they build their part to justify their existence.你可能从这段简短的历史中意识到，政客和政策总是滞后于技术。政客和政策制定者并不创造技术。规则制定者只是为了证明自身存在而设置障碍，从而增加了人类进步的难度。

Progress depends on inventors and engineers, biologists and researchers. One way to limit the braking effect of all the Red Tape generated by the rule makers, is to force them to Tell The Truth. We need Green Flag politicians who stand for the honesty and decency that is missing from politics today.进步依赖于发明家、工程师、生物学家和研究人员。限制规则制定者所产生的繁文缛节所带来的制动效应的一种方法，是强迫他们说真话。我们需要“绿旗”政客，他们代表当今政治中所缺失的诚实和正派。

INSTITUTIONALIZATION - Study of the British Board of Longitude reveals more than just the story of an institution. It shows how economic interests influenced the political and scientific activities of a state. 

The Board of Longitude can be equated with the process of ever-increasing institutionalization, the aim of which was to steer knowledge production. In this way, the production of knowledge was closely linked to the state.制度化 - 对英国经度委员会的研究揭示的不仅仅是一个机构的故事。它展示了经济利益如何影响国家的政治和科学活动。 经度委员会可以与不断增长的制度化过程相提并论，其目的是引导知识生产。通过这种方式，知识的生产与国家紧密联系在一起。

The reasons for this were changes within the "scientific landscape" of the United Kingdom and the concomitant struggle for supremacy in influencing the distribution of state support for the science of astronomy and other related scientific projects, the proof of which is that all the surviving papers come from the archives of the Royal Astronomers and their successors, as if John Harrison's solution was perceived as a threat to their dominance of science. John Harrison was thought of as a maverick, who was grudgingly provided financial support, instead of being generously funded to accelerate development.其原因在于英国“科学版图”的变化，以及随之而来的在影响天文学及其他相关科学项目国家支持分配方面的霸权之争。证据在于，所有幸存的文件都来自皇家天文学家及其继任者的档案，就好像约翰·哈里森（John Harrison）的解决方案被视为对他们科学统治地位的威胁。约翰·哈里森被视为一个特立独行的人，他得到的只是勉强的财政支持，而不是为了加速发展而给予的慷慨资助。

We should always then look at the appointment of committees and the interests of their members, that should perhaps be recorded in a book declaring such interests such as to avoid potential conflicts. But there is no point in having such a book if there is no effective policing of the corruption that is inevitable where many can be made from technology for those in positions of trust.因此，我们应该始终关注委员会的任命及其成员的利益，也许应该记录在一本声明此类利益的书中，以避免潜在的利益冲突。但是，如果不能有效监管腐败，那么拥有这样一本书毫无意义，因为对于身居要职的人来说，技术带来的巨额利益必然会导致腐败。

Poor old John Harrison was caught up in this mire of subterfuge. But do not think for one minute, that it is any different today.可怜的老约翰·哈里森陷入了这个诡计的泥潭。但千万不要以为今天的情况有什么不同。

305 YEARS AGO - THE BOARD OF LONGITUDE 1714305年前 - 1714年经度委员会

This is a wonderful story about an ordinary clockmaker from the country who took on the scientific experts in the City of London, the military and the political community and beat them to a standstill.这是一个关于一位普通的乡村钟表匠的故事，他挑战了伦敦金融城、军方和政治界的科学专家，并最终让他们陷入僵局。

The bad news for our hero John Harrison, is that it took him all of his life to do so. The good news for millions of sailors is that navigation was improved saving lives, and that John's name will forever be associated with state sanctioned discrimination and political obstruction that became institutionalised.对我们的英雄约翰·哈里森来说，坏消息是他用尽了一生才做到这一点。对数百万水手来说，好消息是航海技术得到了改善，挽救了生命，而约翰的名字将永远与制度化的国家认可的歧视和政治阻挠联系在一起。

We would thus urge the United Nations, European Union and G20 members to put in place the necessary policing to prevent contributing members of society from being sidelined. It is a sad fact that many of the great creators of this world are not conformists. People who don't conform are not understood and so become targets of derision, rather than receive the support that would make them more productive.因此，我们敦促联合国、欧盟和G20成员国建立必要的监管机制，防止社会中有贡献的成员被边缘化。一个可悲的事实是，这个世界上许多伟大的创造者都不是墨守成规的人。不墨守成规的人不被理解，因此成为了嘲笑的目标，而不是获得让他们更具生产力的支持。

THE GOALS目标

There is little point having such objectives if member nations only pay lip service to the aims.如果成员国只是口头上支持这些目标，那么设立这些目标就没有什么意义。

OUR (SUGGESTED) SIX STEPS TOWARD A COOLER PLANET我们（建议的）迈向更凉爽地球的六个步骤

1. TRANSPORT: Phase out polluting vehicles. Governments aim to end the sale of new petrol, and diesel vehicles by 2040 but have no infrastructure plan to support such ambition. Such infrastructure should exceed the performance of fossil fuel filling stations, prolong EV battery life and provide power grids with a measure of load leveling. Any such system should seek to obviate the provision of millions of fast charge points where implementation could prove to be a logistical nightmare. This may involve international agreement as to energy storage format and statute to steer car makers to collaborate in part in a world of competition.1. 交通：逐步淘汰污染车辆。各国政府的目标是到2040年停止销售新的汽油和柴油车辆，但没有支持这一雄心壮志的基础设施计划。此类基础设施应超过化石燃料加油站的性能，延长电动汽车电池寿命，并为电网提供负载平衡措施。任何此类系统都应设法避免提供数百万个快速充电点，因为其实施可能被证明是一场后勤噩梦。这可能涉及在能源存储格式方面达成国际协议，并制定法规引导汽车制造商在竞争世界中部分协作。

Marine transport can be carbon neutral given the right policies, with phased transition in specific stages such as not to unduly penalize present investment in LNG shipping and other recent MARPOL compliant IC powered vessels. Future cargo vessel should be at least in part powered by renewable energy, on the road to zero carbon, making allowances for technology catchup.在正确的政策下，海洋运输可以实现碳中和，通过特定阶段的逐步过渡，不至于过度惩罚目前在液化天然气（LNG）航运和其他最近符合《国际防止船舶造成污染公约》（MARPOL）的内燃机动力船舶上的投资。未来的货船应至少部分由可再生能源驱动，在通往零碳的道路上，为技术追赶留出空间。

Air travel powered by kerosene should attract hefty mitigation offset, where low carbon alternatives should be encouraged.以煤油为动力的航空旅行应承担高额的减排抵消费用，并应鼓励低碳替代方案。

2. RENEWABLES:  Renewable energy should replace carbon-based fuels (coal, oil and gas) in our electricity for homes, factories, heating and transport. Coal and nuclear power plants should be phased out.2. 可再生能源：可再生能源应取代我们用于家庭、工厂、供暖和交通的电力中的碳基燃料（煤、石油和天然气）。煤炭和核电站应逐步淘汰。

3. HOUSING: On site micro or macro generation is the best option, starting with new build homes that are both affordable and sustainable by design to replace crumbling housing stocks. Encourage building in timber to provide carbon lock from a renewable natural resource.3. 住房：现场微型或宏观发电是最佳选择，从既经济又可持续的新建住宅开始，以取代摇摇欲坠的住房存量。鼓励使用木材建造，以利用可再生自然资源实现碳封存。

4. AGRICULTURE: We need to grow more trees to absorb carbon emissions from a growing population, air travel, and to build new homes. We should promote reductions in food waste and eating of foods that use less energy to produce. Educate children on these matters in schools and via campaigns such as no meat Mondays, should be part of ordinary study.4. 农业：我们需要种植更多的树木，以吸收人口增长、航空旅行产生的碳排放，并用于建造新房。我们应促进减少食物浪费和食用生产能耗较低的食物。在学校通过教育，以及通过“无肉星期一”等活动来教育儿童，应成为常规学习的一部分。

5. INDUSTRY: Factories should be aiming for solar heating and onsite renewable energy generation. EV parking and even service facilities should be part of new industrial estates as part of any building permissions.5. 工业：工厂应以太阳能供暖和现场可再生能源发电为目标。电动汽车停车甚至服务设施应作为任何建筑许可的一部分，纳入新的工业园区。

6. POLITICS: - National governing bodies need to adopt rules to eliminate administrative wastages, to include scaling down spending on war machines, increasing spend on educating the public and supporting sustainable social policies that mesh with other cultures. This includes fostering policies and making funds available to close links in the technology chain to make up for lost time. Kleptocratic empire building must cease in the search for natural equilibrium.6. 政治：国家管理机构需要采取规则来消除行政浪费，包括缩减战争机器的支出，增加对公众教育的投入，并支持与其它文化相融合的可持续社会政策。这包括制定政策并提供资金，以弥补技术链中的缺失环节，从而弥补失去的时间。在寻求自然平衡的过程中，必须停止盗贼统治式的帝国扩张。

SUSTAINABILITY BEGINS AT HOME可持续性始于家庭

What happens on your doorstep is what is happening all over the world. Everyone is empire building, over fishing and dumping waste in our oceans in the belief that a little bit more indulgence won't matter. Yes it will!!发生在你家门口的事情就是全世界正在发生的事情。每个人都在进行帝国扩张、过度捕捞和向海洋倾倒废物，认为多一点放纵没关系。不，这很有关系！！

PATENTS & DISCRIMINATION专利与歧视

The present patent system discriminates against the ordinary inventor. It works against promoting new technology, where only rich companies and already wealthy persons can afford to take a gamble on developing technology, that the ordinary man in the street simply cannot entertain with an empty bank balance.当前的专利制度歧视普通发明家。它不利于促进新技术，只有富有的公司和已经富有的人才有能力冒险开发技术，而普通民众根本无法承担，因为他们银行账户里空空如也。

Yet, mankind depends on advances to become sustainable and create a circular economy.然而，人类依赖进步来实现可持续发展并创造循环经济。

Big companies like it the way it is because it means they control the rate of development. That is one reason we have plastics in the oceans and global warming that is changing our climate.大公司喜欢现状，因为这意味着他们控制着发展的速度。这就是为什么我们的海洋中有塑料，全球变暖正在改变我们的气候的原因之一。

We would urge the United Nations to level the playing field. Patents should be as open an arena as copyright, or design protection. Fees should be at a level where an ordinary working person on an ordinary wage, can apply and compete to be able to develop their contribution to survival of the human race, including protection mother earth and all life on it.我们敦促联合国创造公平的竞争环境。专利应像版权或设计保护一样成为一个开放的领域。费用应设定在普通工薪阶层能够申请并竞争的水平，以便他们能够开发出对人类生存的贡献，包括保护地球母亲及其上的一切生命。

The Sustainable Development Goals are the blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. They address the global challenges we face, including those related to poverty, inequality, climate, environmental degradation, prosperity, and peace and justice. The Goals interconnect and in order to leave no one behind, it is important that we achieve each Goal and target by 2030. Click on any specific Goal below to learn more about each issue.可持续发展目标是为所有人实现更美好、更可持续未来的蓝图。它们解决了我们面临的全球挑战，包括与贫困、不平等、气候、环境退化、繁荣、和平与正义相关的挑战。这些目标相互关联，为了不让任何人掉队，我们必须在2030年前实现每一个目标和具体指标。点击下方任何特定目标以了解有关每个问题的更多信息。

UK RULES FOR FLAG FLYING

The rules on flying flags in the United Kingdom fall subject to some standard conditions. As such, all flags flown must:英国旗帜悬挂规则 在英国悬挂旗帜的规则受到一些标准条件的约束。因此，所有悬挂的旗帜必须：

- Be properly maintained and kept in a safe condition.- 妥善维护并保持在安全状态。

- They should not impair the overall visual appearance of the site. Flags should be removed with due care when required to do so by local planning authorities.- 不得损害场地的整体视觉外观。当当地规划部门要求时，应小心移除旗帜。

- Have permission from the owner of any site on which they are displayed. That includes the Highway Authority if it is flown on highway land.- 获得任何展示旗帜的场地所有者的许可。如果是在公路用地上悬挂，则包括公路管理部门。

- Not obscure (or hinder) the interpretation of official road, rail, waterway, or aircraft signs.- 不得遮挡（或妨碍）对官方道路、铁路、水道或飞机标志的解读。

- Flags must not create any hazardous situation in relation to the use of these types of transport.- 旗帜不得造成与使用这些交通工具相关的任何危险情况。

Following the compliance of these standard conditions is law. Even so, there are three (3) different categories of consent for flying flags in the UK:遵守这些标准条件是法律要求。尽管如此，英国悬挂旗帜的许可分为三（3）种不同类别：

1. Flags which can be flown without consent of the local planning authority.1. 无需当地规划部门许可即可悬挂的旗帜。

2. Flags which do not need consent provided they comply with further restrictions (deemed consent).2. 只要符合进一步限制（视为同意），则无需许可的旗帜。

3. Flags which require consent (termed express consent).3. 需要许可（称为明确同意）的旗帜。

FLAGS THAT DO NOT NEED PLANNING CONSENT

Previous law amendments and new regulations now allow for a wider range of national, sub-national, community, and international flags. The full list of flags that do not require consent includes:无需规划许可的旗帜 之前的法律修订和新法规现在允许使用更广泛的国家、次国家、社区和国际旗帜。无需许可的旗帜的完整列表包括：

- The national flag, civil ensign, or the civil air ensign of any country.- 任何国家的国旗、民用旗或民用航空旗。

- The flag of Saint David or Saint Patrick.- 圣大卫旗或圣帕特里克旗。

- The flag of any administrative area within any country outside the United Kingdom.- 英国以外任何国家内任何行政区域的旗帜。

- Any flag of Her Majesty's forces.- 女王陛下军队的任何旗帜。

- The Armed Forces Day flag.- 武装部队日旗。

- The flag of the Commonwealth, the European Union, the United Nations, or any other international organisation of which the United Kingdom is a member.- 英联邦、欧盟、联合国或英国作为成员国的任何其他国际组织的旗帜。

- A flag of any island, county, district, borough, burgh, parish, city, town or village within the United Kingdom.- 英国境内任何岛屿、县、区、市镇、自治市、教区、城市、城镇或村庄的旗帜。

- The flag of the Black Country, East Anglia, Wessex, any Part of Lincolnshire, any Riding of Yorkshire, or any historic county within the United Kingdom.- 黑乡（Black Country）、东安格利亚、威塞克斯、林肯郡的任何部分、约克郡的任何骑区（Riding），或英国境内任何历史县的旗帜。

Note: Flying the British flag (the Union Jack Flag) is not illegal in 2020. The flag institute recognises the flags of St George and St Andrew as the national flags of England and Scotland respectively. But, they list those of St David and St Patrick 'separately' because they do not fall into the usual category of a country's national flag.注：在2020年悬挂英国国旗（联合杰克旗）并不违法。旗帜协会承认圣乔治旗和圣安德鲁旗分别是英格兰和苏格兰的国旗。但是，他们将圣大卫旗和圣帕特里克旗“单独”列出，因为它们不属于通常的国家国旗类别。

The flags (or their flagpoles) must not display any advertisement or subject matter in addition to the actual design of the flag.旗帜（或其旗杆）不得展示除旗帜实际设计之外的任何广告或主题内容。

New regulations allow the attachment of a black mourning ribbon to either the flag or the flagpole. This applies to those flown at half-mast or those projecting outward at an angle from the side of a building.
Use of the word 'country' in the list includes any of the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, and any British Overseas Territory.新法规允许在旗帜或旗杆上系上黑色哀悼丝带。这适用于半旗或从建筑物侧面以一定角度向外伸出的旗帜。 列表中“国家”一词的使用包括任何海峡群岛、马恩岛和任何英国海外领土。

Can I Fly the English Flag (St George's Cross)?我可以悬挂英格兰国旗（圣乔治十字旗）吗？

Many people asked whether it is illegal to fly the St George Flag in England. They felt discouraged to express their pride during the FIFA World Cup and other sporting events.许多人询问在英格兰悬挂圣乔治旗是否违法。他们在国际足联世界杯和其他体育赛事期间感到无法表达自己的自豪感。

In fact, it is legal to fly the flag of St George under UK flag laws. But, the person who flies the English flag must have permission from the owner of the site. It must be flown in a safe condition and not cause any danger (e.g. obscuring official road traffic signs).事实上，根据英国旗帜法，悬挂圣乔治旗是合法的。但是，悬挂英格兰国旗的人必须获得场地所有者的许可。它必须在安全状态下悬挂，并且不得造成任何危险（例如遮挡官方道路交通标志）。

As a flag flier you would need the permission of the site owner to display any flags (e.g. public houses). Property owners have the right to disallow flags in their buildings or on any vehicles that they own.
作为旗帜悬挂者，你需要场地所有者的许可才能展示任何旗帜（例如酒吧）。业主有权禁止在其建筑物或他们拥有的任何车辆上悬挂旗帜。

LINKS & REFERENCE链接与参考

https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/index/2015/02/#faa-releases-proposed-drone-regulationshttps://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/index/2015/02/#faa-releases-proposed-drone-regulations

https://mmitii.mattballantine.com/2014/01/07/the-red-flag-man/https://mmitii.mattballantine.com/2014/01/07/the-red-flag-man/

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/features/rhodri-marsdens-interesting-objects-lord-winchelseas-red-flag-10358534.htmlhttps://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/features/rhodri-marsdens-interesting-objects-lord-winchelseas-red-flag-10358534.html

https://torrentfreak.com/the-red-flag-act-of-1865-110626/https://torrentfreak.com/the-red-flag-act-of-1865-110626/

 This website is provided on a free basis as a public information service. copyright © Cleaner Oceans Foundation Ltd (COFL) (Company No: 4674774) 2022. Solar Studios, BN271RF, United Kingdom. COFL is a company without share capital.本网站作为公共信息服务免费提供。版权所有 © Cleaner Oceans Foundation Ltd (COFL)（公司编号：4674774）2022。 Solar Studios, BN271RF, United Kingdom。 COFL 是一家无股本公司。