Re: 1950s obscenity law
That the damned silly Obscenity Act is still on the statute books shows that Britain is not a civilised country. The think should have been taken out and shot, along with any of its supporters, at least 40 years ago.
4159 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
I don't usually like to do the "you don't know how lucky you are" bit, but what you are describing is my usual level of Orange/EE service in Dundee. Some days I'm lucky to get any reliable signal. I've been with Orange for years (last contract was entered into whilst in the Midlands, with a brilliant service all the time), but when renewal comes in October, I will be looking for another service unless I get some sort of satisfaction from them.
Edit: No 4G - never even see 3G unless I'm in a completely different area (Edinburgh seems to be the closest).
No, at the moment we seem to given the choice of remaining dependent on Westminster for everything, or being dependent on the EU for almost everything, and the Bank of England for the rest. No-one is actually putting forward a case for true independence - i.e. not being part of any bloc, and having an independent currency - which suggests to me that no-one in power thinks it is feasible. Personally, I'd vote for that scheme like a shot, and then wait and see where the strengths/weaknesses of an independent European country in the C21st lie.*
*Of course, my view can be regarded as suspect, since I can always go home to England or move to the Czech Republic if it all goes wrong!
Yes - several business-folk were on the flight. It seems likely that at least some of them had more than one mobile. I have difficulty thinking of a scenario in which people taking control of a plane could ensure that they have secured every mobile phone. (Though, didn't someone several pages back mention that the plane had a pico-cell? If so, would it be possible to set it so that mobiles connected to it (strongest signal), but didn't pass the calls off the plane? Genuine question.)
Overall, I'm starting to swing back towards unfortunate accident rather than malicious intent.
"So basically, it's mostly down to the UI, Microsoft's insistence on trying to prioritise Metro, and people not thinking to click on the "desktop" tile when their PC first boots?"
Well, it may be me that is unusual, but I rarely, if ever, see my desktop from boot to boot. I actively tell new installs not to put shortcuts on the desktop (I'm on Win7 now). When I want a program that isn't pinned to the taskbar, I pull up the statr menu and find the program in the list (either in the favourites list, or the "All programs" menu). That Win 8 wants me change that way of working put me off. With regard to maximised windows, it depends which computer/screen combo I'm using. On the laptop, maximised is the default, on the desktop with 24" screen, I can't think of many programs I'd use in full-screen. I haven't tried Win 8 on the desktop, but I'd assumed that it would have the same function as previous versions, in which the window would open in the same format you last opened it. If Win 8 doesn't, then that is another reason to dislike it!
Don't think that plan isn't already in some Westminster scrote's computer at the moment. Self-determination for the person with the biggest stick.
The coverage of the Ukraine situation makes me ill. It is the equivalent of people in London scaring off the government elected by the rest of the country (under the shitty voting system we have) because it doesn't match what they voted - and the rest of Europe and the USA supporting it! This is a new form of capitalism - the people in the capital decide the government ...
" ... the unknown ones we need people like the GCHQ and MI5 and Police to find) pose no threat"
Essentially, yes, they pose no threat. They are a tiny number threatening a tiny number for a tiny amount of time. They effectively do not exist in any sensible way. The security and spying services are spending way too much time and far, far too much money on dealing with the equivalent of a molecule of fart smell in an aircraft hangar.
Maybe that is so, but to argue that means that you have give the phone-mast and electric pylon loons a good argument: "I'm sure if I had a phone-mast/pylon running 24/7 at the bottom of my garden, I have no doubt I would be annoyed, my sleep would be disturbed and the quality of my life would be poorer. But if these things did happen, could I categorically prove they were caused by the phone-mast/pylon?"
I don't know where some people live that put Volvo drivers in the same category as BMW, VW and Audi drivers. Most Volvos I've encountered on the roads are driven well and courteously. I don't think I've ever been tailgated by one at 70+mph on a motorway, nor had one accelerate from one lane to another leaving just enough room for an anorectic flea between my front bumper and their rear. Volvo driver generally know that the ticking noise when the stalk on the steering column is moved up or down actually means something useful is happening outside the car. The number of drivers of German cars that know this can be counted on the fingers of a fish.
I sit on a Research Ethics Committee in Scotland, and there are a lot of places up here that are one post code=one house. We regularly have applications for approval where the identifier is going to be "anonymised to a code, being initials and post code"! They don't get very far with that up to now, but a worry is researchers saying "Well, this is what the care.data information gives, so where is your problem?". I know of one NHS data safe haven with very robust privacy and anonymising protocols that is extremely unhappy about care.data.
I also have a Jolla, and regretfully have to agree with msknight - it isn't anything like ready for mainstream use. Whilst I haven't experienced any of the specific problems mentioned, it is a quirky bastard, and the app ecosystem is lacking, even with the Android apps available. As yet, I haven't worked out how to make it connect to Google Drive, and for some reason it won't let me get at downloads from emails. Just making the thing able to access Google Play (the only really reliable store to my mind) requires developer access and command-line jiggery-pokery!
I have no doubt that it will be a great phone eventually (the silly gestures notwithstanding), and some of the apps coming out written specifically for Sailfish are great - Webcat is one of the best browsers I've ever used.
"If I can choose between an arrogant rocket scientist and an agreeable guy that I love to work with - that isn't quite as talented yet, I choose the latter."
So, discrimination against people with e.g. Asperger's Syndrome, huh?
I have a bit of a game I like to play with people. I ask them whether they would rather deal with someone who is lacking in interpersonal skills, but who gets the job done properly, on time, every time, or someone who has all the interpersonal skills going, but fails the "getting the job done" test say, 25% of the time. The answer tells me a lot about the person, and it worries me that so many people would prefer the inefficient but pleasant person over the grumpy but efficient one, especially in roles where "niceness" is completely irrelevant - e.g. someone to fix the car.
The Comodo Security app for Android claims* to let you set individual permissions for apps (Allow/Deny/Ask).**
*I have no way of testing other than setting all permissions to Ask and then seeing what requests come up. So far, it seems to do what it says on the tin in terms of requesting what I would expect from apps I use, though some odd requests have come up that I have denied.
** I have no connection with Comodo except using their software on my phone and laptop.
"I like the Health & Safety analogy. Corporate H&S works pretty well because senior managers become responsible in law."
Yes, it is a nice thought, but look at the ridiculous over-reach of H&S in the workplace and everywhere else, much of it because people are taking a "no way anyone is going to get me for anything" attitude. The creation of the offense of Corporate Manslaughter has fuelled the rise of the H&S monster to the point where personal responsibility for large chunks of one's own life is a mere fading memory, costing billions of £s each year, and making things stupidly inefficient.
Applying the same principles to DP will lead to nothing new being done, just lots of tweaks to address the merest possibility of maybe sometime happening, and systems becoming effectively impossible to use. How often are you told (wrongly) that something can't be done "because of Data Protection", which means your life just got more difficult? The cost of this attitude is externalised to you and me, and will get worse with serious penalties at the board level.
I want an effective Data Protection watchdog, and I love the idea of making commercial organisations *really* hurt when they are in breach, but I have a horrible feeling that the public sector is effectively invulnerable.
The sooner someone finds something to arrest Blair on, and then has the balls to do it, the happier I'll be. Thatcher got away lightly by sliding into dementia* - we shouldn't let that happen to a PM worse than her.
*I'm sorry if I offend anyone with that - I almost offend myself with it - but my dislike of her makes me regard being able to forget what she did as a lucky escape.
Since this decision was made by Lord Justice (not Mr Justice as it says in the article) Laws, it is probably wrong, The man is a judicial activist of the highest order. Hopefully there will be enough money for Greenwald to go to higher court to get a more reliable decision.
There are number of completely legitimate reasons not to have any sound when taking photographs. I generally have sounds turned off when taking pictures because I don't want to be one of those arseholes announcing to the world that they are taking a photo. As Spleen mentioned - a digital camera doesn't have a shutter, and so we have been freed from another source of sound pollution (though there were film cameras essentially silent in operation without all this fuss). Anyone that thinks the reason people didn't take upskirt shots (or whatever it is you have decided society is falling apart over this week) before digital cameras is because they made a noise is deluded. Clue: it has more to do with cost, availability and size.
I carry two smartphones, and rarely, if ever, use them for looking up details online, especially if I'm out of the house. I have a measly data-bundle on both (I think it is less than 200MB per month), but most months I'm paying for nothing, since I don't even switch the data connection on. I will use either phone for picking up emails or looking up some sites if I have wifi, but since I usually have my laptop nearby it is either because I'm saving that battery on the laptop by turning the radios off, or I'm in a room where the laptop isn't. I would never, ever, use the data-gathering function when out in a social situation - in fact, I rarely answer the phone when out with people - there is nothing that urgent that it can't wait (and what are you doing in a pub with wifi,or even a mobile signal anyway? The purpose of a pub is to get some peace and quiet).
So, some may be asking why I have a smartphone (or even two) anyway? Well, I find I'm better at using an electronic calendar and contact list than a paper one, and I like the synch with other calendars. I also like the fact that my diary and phone (on which I still dial some numbers from my own memory) is also an ebook reader, alarm clock, good-enough camera for emergencies, atlas, satnav (while the battery lasts), and file store. These, for me, are good enough reasons to have a chunky smartphone.
I'm sure this is all, true, but isn't it a response to what must be the most panicky set of creatures this side of a herd of antelope unfortunately dropped off in the lion enclosure at Longleat - investors and market analysts? It seems that the slightest whiff of truth and clarity will send this bunch running for the hills at a rate only previously seen in paranoid cheetahs on crack. They are about as stable as a pyramid balanced on an apex, and the the only consistency they show is the ability to blindly panic when shown anything that doesn't match the impossible dream of endless growth.
Seriously, given that companies have to work within this ecosystem, do you blame them for adapting so as to maximise survival?
Basically what I was going to say. The BBC should stop funding race-to-the-bottom programmes aimed to compete with the brain-dead drivel on ITV, and go back to producing stuff that actually challenges the viewer to think. These days, I never voluntarily watch BBC1 (though Mrs IP likes "Sherlock", for some unfathomable reason, and I tend to sit in the same room and get my own back by occasionally sticking my head up from the computer screen and asking what's happening ...) Left to my own devices for a while, the only time I have the TV on is for "University Challenge", a new episode of "Big Bang Theory", coverage of sport that interests me (WRC, F1, cycling), and some of the excellent documentaries on BBC4 (the one about British architects last night was brilliant, for instance, as are some of the music documentaries on at the weekend. Rather than getting rid of one of the BBC2/4 channels, I'd make them the backbone of an intelligent BBC aimed at people like me who would rather rip out someone's throat than watch a shitty talent contest or cooking show. Let ITV/Channel 5 deal with crap like that, whilst BBC caters for people that want to think and learn.
Until about a year ago, I lived in a quiet street in a small town just south of Coventry. It was a delight to be able to walk into town (about 10 minutes pleasant stroll), and choose from several local shops, a Co-op, Waitrose, or Sainbury. Less than five minutes away was a brilliant baker who, though only open 3 mornings a week, always had a shop full of people. There were three or four pleasant pubs in walking distance, and a range of eating places from small independent cafes and restaurants to a Loch Fyne. Parking was available in sensible places that did not interfere with the pedestrian access, and reasonably priced. People *did* walk into town at all times of the day because it was possible and pleasant to do so, and there were reasons to do so. Part of the reason was because the town centre was not far from (and indeed included) residential properties, so the two were part of the same entity.
However, this is definitely unusual in this day and age, and trying to find the same here in Scotland (at least in the bit I'm tied to for now) is almost impossible, and certainly so for the prices we can afford.
My point? It is possible to make town centres pleasant and useable, but the key seems to be integrating living and business properties.
Let me guess - you have an i-gadget. The clue is that you think appearance is more important than protecting the thing you just bought.
Me, I have my Note in an Otterbox Defender on my belt, my Jolla in a padded case (because I haven't found a decent belt holster yet), my camera in a case, my Kobo in a case, and my laptop lives in a laptop bag whenever it isn't being used. In addition, my car lives in a garage when it is at home, as is my bike. My sofa, on the other hand, is covered in cat-scratches.
I was just going to post something similar. Having the right tool for *your* use-case is not a sign of superiority (unless you count being able to assess what tools you need as a some sort of superiority). If you can manage without a smart-phone, fine - but for me the correct tool for me is my Galaxy Note. It has no social media apps on it, but it does have an ebook reader, and a flashlight app, and access to Dropbox for those times a work computer won't read a USB stick. It also has a really good alarm - better than anything I've seen anywhere else. The always-on aspect means that sometimes when I *choose* to connect to my email (no push for me - data and wifi switched off until I want them) it is more convenient than waiting for the laptop to boot. And then there is the most used function - note-taking with the stylus. However, I keep some dumb-phones in the car because they do pull in a better signal, and I want that if I, or Mrs IP, get into a situation where comms become important.
So, again - choosing the correct tool is not a sign of superiority. Feature-phones work for some, but I'd rather lose a finger than go back to one for day to day use.
"'Nigel Farage will lead us out of the darkness! Viva il Duce!' What options are there?"
Well, personally, I'm probably going to vote "Yes" in the Scottish independence referendum if only because it will mean there will be no significant Tory influence in the running of the country I'll be living in for the foreseeable future (and longer than that if the Yes vote is successful, so that I don't have to worry about what the Tories are going to take away next, unless Yorkshire decides to go for it next).
"Let's not pretend the Workers ever won, because we haven't."
You are right. The British Establishment have been experts at giving just enough to avoid things boiling over into rebellion since ... well, let's say fifty years into the Industrial Revolution. Every improvement in social and welfare provision came because there were clear signs of discontent spilling on to the streets and into the houses of the rich. The last major round of welfare improvements - the Welfare State - came about because there was serious worry about lots of skilled, armed men coming home to find a country not fit for heroes to return to (like after the First World War), and a marked approval of Soviet solidarity.
Any apparent victory for the Workers was merely a side-effect of keeping the Establishment in power.
"...who found the rest of the place pretty boring and "just like every other museum". What morons like Standon never understand is that aping all of the other trash is a surefire road to oblivion."
I agree with the sentiment about them all being the same - Mrs IP and I no longer visit National Trust properties because of the sheen of corporate sameness over them. We only go to independent places, which are far more interesting and will often have someone from the family who owns the place showing us round. However, there is no shortage of people who go to NT places *because* they know what they are going to get - just like people who go to foreign places and want McDonalds ...
I worry that more and more people like us are becoming a smaller minority.
"But nostalgia for the days when Bletchley Park was for the geek alone and senior volunteers could carry the full weight of the educational program is misguided."
Why? What the hell is wrong with having something that requires intelligence, imagination, and a modicum of education to enjoy it? Why in the name of all that is good should everything be dumbed down to the level of the stupidest, attention-challenged, spoiled spawn of a mumsnet blogger?? Have some ambition!!