I didn't quite catch that...

Kav hits the nail on the head:

Attention: Bloggers who truncate their feeds

It’s annoying. Don’t do it. It doesn’t attract me to your blog, it just pisses me off. I’ve got time to scroll down through my feed reader, but (usually) I do not have time to click over to your site. I know you probably think truncating your post is a good incentive to attract readers to your site and increase hits, but I’m busy, so it doesn’t work. It just irks me slightly and then I skip on to the next post, and, sadly, yours goes unread.

Recently I’ve been reading most blogs through Google Reader, and there’s very little that pisses me off as much as people truncating their posts. I can see why some do it (Guido, being a mercenary sort, would be expected to want as many clicks as possible to charge higher ad rates), but for the majority there isn’t anything to be gained by it.

Unless your aim is to annoy your readers. Which seems self defeating in the long run.

Anyway, why just annoy your readers when you can go all out and insult them. by calling them French, for example.

I’m quite looking forward to the film of Stardust. The book was good, and from what I’d heard Neil Gaiman is happy with it; if it meets with his approval, then it should be mighty good. And, for the most part, the cast looks good.

I’ve had one minor concern all along, though, and the trailer has done nothing to put my mind at ease.

That one concern can best be summed up with a single image:

Yes, it’s that twat Gervais. He was OK on The 11 O’Clock Show, but since then he’s been much more annoying than anything else. And now I suspect that he’ll be gurning his way through this and ruining my enjoyment of it.

‘course, the lovely Ms Danes will probably go some way to making up for it, but that’s as maybe…

I’ve spent a little bit of time today upgrading to the latest version of wordpress. Boring technical reasons behind it, but there are also a couple of interesting new things that 2.1.3 has that 2.0 didn’t. Like a spell checker, for one.

What I didn’t know, or expect, was that there would be several dozen themes bundled in with the new version. Which sounds like a nice thing, really, allows people to change their site with little or no effort. Unfortunately, I have a theme switching plugin installed, which allows me to have all my themes available to switch in between. Because I get bored easily. With the new massive amounts of themes available, there are now issues.

Long story short: not all of the themes have an easy way of allowing you to switch away from them. If you find yourself stuck on a theme, there’s now a link on the sidebar to the generic Default Theme, which has the full list on it.

For the geeky among you, there’s now a rather nice command line interface blog. Stupid but fun, methinks.

Tony Blair is now at the stage where he is looking back over his decade in office and realising that not everything went well; that history will probably not look kindly on a few of his exploits. So he’s been busy over the last few months redefining the terms of the game.

In Blair-world, his grandiose ideas didn’t fail because they were bad ideas, but because they were spectacular ideas poorly implemented. Or because he had damn good ideas but didn’t make them big enough.

Such as his wondrous plans to eradicate anti-social behaviour¹. He’s now saying that they didn’t work because he didn’t shit on people enough

“Instead of years with social services trying and failing to persuade them to change, those families… need to be made to change,” he wrote.

“It is very tough. It is intrusive…but, for some of these families and their children, a nanny state is what they need – for their sake as much as for ours.”

Those families need to be made to change.

Because that concept doesn’t sound sinister at all, does it?

–
¹ – You know, when I was growing up, ‘anti-social’ meant ‘didn’t want to go out tonight’. Then came NuLabour, and all of a sudden the same word meant ‘likes pushing grannies off cliffs and pissing through letterboxes’. Why the sudden change?

Tonight marked a couple of big lasts for me. It was the last night I would be working a smoking venue, and it was the last I would be in a smoky bar in my homeland.

The first is actually quite a big one: I’ve either lived above or worked in a smoking establishment for all of my life (bar about six months at the very start). Nigh on twenty six years of it. And in all honesty, I don’t think I minded that much. When I lived above a bar, I quite enjoyed the smoky atmosphere, because it was an essential part of the atmosphere. Especially the pipe smoke; the smell of a lit pipe is brilliant. And when the involvement became work based, I didn’t mind it either. Sure, I’d grown up with worse.

As to the being in a smoky bar, that’s more of the same. I’ll confess to not liking the feel of clothing in the morning after, and I’m not fond of people deliberately blowing smoke in my face, but the smoke is part of the atmosphere. A lot of pubs/clubs have no-smoking areas, and I’ve been known to frequent them if I was feeling any ill effects, so it all worked out quite nicely.

From Sunday, however, it won’t be the same. No more smoking in bars, no more swirling drifts casting shadows. Because the nannies won this one, and decided that they knew far better than the rest of us; that they could and should limit the property rights of people; and that they should be using this sledgehammer to crack anything vaguely nut like.

I’ve been against the smoking ban from the start. Governments are saying that they’re making the hard decisions in the interest of public health, but they’re not. They’re balancing the needs of the Treasury against public health, and ignoring the civil liberty aspect of their decisions altogether. If they banned tobacco sales entirely, they’d be acting in the interests of public health, but they won’t because they’re addicted to the income as much as a smoker is addicted to the nicotine. Instead, they’re dictating what can be done in private homes¹, they’re saying truck drivers can’t smoke in their own trucks² and they’re saying that perfectly legal activities cannot be carried out in licensed premises.

All that annoys me. But it’s not what annoys me the most. What annoys, and scares, me the most is this:

I’m pretty sure I’ll quite like the outcome: less smoke in my clothes and my lungs.

Why does this annoy and scare me? Because of something best said by PJ O’Rourke:

Whenever I’m in the middle of conformity, surrounded by oneness of mind with people oozing concurrence on every side, I get scared. And when I find myself agreeing with everybody, too, I get terrified.

And, beyond that, because I’m still confident that the nannies won’t stop here. They’ve seen that they’ve won this one; it may have taken them twenty years, but they managed to make what was once an activity enjoyed by tens of millions of people and make it dirty; they’ve managed to take something that was enjoyed everywhere and limit it to a tiny fraction of people’s day; they’ve managed to bend the will of everyone in the land to their will.

It may take another twenty years, it may take longer, but their attention will move elsewhere. There will be something else that is perfectly acceptable now, and loved by all, that will, in time, become worse than killing children with piano string nooses.

They’ve started with alcohol. I don’t expect it to end there. Chocolate is bad for you; salt is bad for you, sugar is bad for you. I wouldn’t be surprised if any (or all) of these was subjected to the same constant pressure, resulting in banning.

In fact, life is bad for you: nobody has survived it yet. Maybe it will be the end target. Because this line in the sand has been crossed. And I can’t see any more where a fighting defence could be successful.

We’ve caved in; where now do we stop the nannies from destroying our lives in the cause of keeping us alive³?

–
¹ – A private home becomes a workplace any time two employees discuss their work in that home.

³ – Because living and staying alive are two very different things. Some in a PVS is staying alive, but I don’t know that you would call it living.

Dear internet: what does charity mean?

1. Provision of help or relief to the poor; almsgiving.
2. Something given to help the needy; alms.
3. An institution, organization, or fund established to help the needy.
4. Benevolence or generosity toward others or toward humanity.
5. Indulgence or forbearance in judging others. See synonyms at mercy.
6. often Charity Christianity. The theological virtue defined as love directed first toward God but also toward oneself and one’s neighbors as objects of God’s love.

Ain’t t’internet grand? Look at that, six handy definitions for the word. And not one of them is exhibited by this ‘charitable’ idea.

Parents who give alcohol to children aged under 15 should be prosecuted, a charity has said.
…
Alcohol Concern also wants a 16% rise in alcohol taxes, a ban on brewers selling to retailers at a loss, and a crackdown on under-age alcohol sales.

Hng on, let’s revisit those definitions… Items four and five in that list being the particular interest at this point:

4. Benevolence or generosity toward others or toward humanity.
5. Indulgence or forbearance in judging others. See synonyms at mercy.

And how does calling for harmess activities to be made illegal fit in with those? How does calling for the prosecution of parents mesh with the forbearance mentioned? How does being a chariy equate to being in a position to make totally unrealistic demands of everyone in the land, just because you don’t like the Demon Drink?

You know, Spinal Tap used to be cool.

They they seemed to make a critical mistake, and listen to yer muppet Gore, what used to be Vice President.

So they’re going to play at that bloody stupid Live Earth thing. So the people behind the band are going to disappear right up their own sanctimonious arses.

Much like the band itself, really. But still disappointing to see.

In response to a specific request, I’m keeping fingers crossed.

But, being a silly sort of fella, I felt that it would be wise to get all interweb2.something and show this in graphical form.

Therefore, I consulted an un-named search engine, which, as the first result, supplied the following image:

Given some of the previous tales of woe from the blog in question, I can’t help but think that this suits.

Anyway, good luck with the thesis. And the ensuing marking of said thesis. And the frantic bladework that you call a job.

Many years ago, I found myself quite taken with 28 Days Later. The concept and execution of the film was fantastic; the acting was all spot on; the methods used to create a dead London captured my interest.

And thusly, I was mighty interesting in the news of a sequel. Since there were many, many good ways in which the film could develop that would be pleasing to me.

Then I saw Sunshine. And realised that, perhaps, Mr Boyle could fuck it up. Big budget, let the critical acclaim go to his head, etc, and what do you get? You get the dodgy trailer I just saw.

This does not bode well.

Recently, two ideas that I thought were dead have floated up into my notice. First: SF clinging to the average industrial wage, when the entire rest of the world has realised that the idea is bonkers.

And the second example was found in an Economist article:

Transdniestria, as it is called, is a black hole. It makes weapons, ranging from cheap submachineguns to high-tech missile parts. The customers are unknown. It also has lucratively porous borders: one common scam is to smuggle American chicken-meat in and out of Ukraine’s protected home market, at a profit of some €700 ($950) per tonne.

In a declaration to be signed jointly with the Transdniestrian leader, Igor Smirnov, Moldova will for the first time recognise Transdniestria’s government and leadership as legitimate entities. Voters on both sides will elect a new Moldovan parliament. Transdniestria will keep its Supreme Soviet and have top deputy ministers in the national government. By 2009 Russia’s troops will be replaced by unarmed international monitors.

Yes, there is still a part of the world governed by a Supreme Soviet; an idea even more thoroughly discredited than the average industrial wage. A holdover from a system that kill countless millions of people, enslaved millions more and held some of the richest land in the world in poverty, killing the occasional sea along the way.

This was news to me; I knew that there was a semi-autonomous piece of land in Moldova, but only in the way I knew that there was something similiar in South Ossetia and Somaliland; I didn’t know that the folk there hadn’t realised that Lenin wasn’t actually the all round decent bloke he said he was…

So, shall we take bets on what the third such throwback shall be? What absurdly stupid concept will we discover hanging about, long after its time?

I was tempted to put in a long list of semi-sarcastic suggestions along the lines of liberty here, but that would be just too damn depressing. So I won’t, and will instead leave it all to the reader to devise such a list, should they feel the need.

I’m sure you’re all aware of the wonder that is Calvin and Hobbes. But are you aware of where they went?

One school of thought is that Calvin grew up, became a well paid song writer who mops up in school to pass the time. But, for various contractual reasons, everybody involved says that that’s not the case, and that Jef Mallett didn’t rip off Bill Watterson at all, in any way, nuh-uh.

Another school of thought is that Calvin merely grew up and faded from the public eye. But this solution bores me, and thus will receive no further consideration.

The third school of though, and probably the most likely, is that something along these lines happened. Go on, you know you’d believe it off the wee bastard…

In related news, may I suggest a quick viewing of Robot Chicken 8; the 8-mile sendup is much fun.

Surely this was common knowledge?

Gordon Brown, the man who has run the country’s economy for 10 years, says he was never any good at maths.
…
“I did maths at school and for one year at university but I don’t think I was ever very good at it – and some people would say it shows,” Mr Brown laughed.

Surely the entire world has noticed by now that Gordon isn’t very good at sums. Confidence tricks, scams, theft, bendings of truth, Machevillian schemes; these area what Gordon is good at.

Hence the way that’s he’s a pisspoor chancellor, and a less than stellar example of humanity. But he excels at politics.

Three reasons to mourn his presence in the gene pool, really.

It’s been a good few years since I put forth my considered opinion that Rooney was a bad investment. And it’s been nearly as long since I realised my mistake.

Just to rub it in, more evidence has presented itself. What with sheer guts from Rooney, massive amounts of inspiration from yer man Scholes, some deft footwork from Ronaldo and more than a little input from Giggs, a fantastic game of football was to be had.

Now, there’s merely the matte rof being down on defenders, the second leg, and then many away matches with Chelsea looming large standing between us an glory.

No, not nervous at all. Honest.

You know, the seahorse is one of the world’s great creatures. Amazing, mysterious, and of dubious worth on the ol’ Darwian scale.

And this picture of one is just amazing.
More »

It’s one of the clichés of modern life that everyone has a soundtrack. From the random shout-outs on the radio, to the songs that people return to at times of distress, everyone has a number of songs that they identify with. That’s the cliché, anyway, whether it’s the case is not certain.

Personally, I know that it holds for me. There are plenty of times when circumstance will trigger a tune in my mind that sums it up perfectly. Sometimes I’ll be driving down a road and suddenly I’m humming N17; sometimes there’s a total fish out of water scenario going on and Disco2000 is playing in my head; on occasion there’s a pretty girl about and a line from that twat Mika goes on¹.

Of course, there’s one song that crops up quite often. A song that perfectly sums up the last few days for me. And, since it’s a damn good song, I’ll quote a little bit again:

Oh, if I could only get some sleep,
Creaky noises make my skin creep,
I need to get some sleep,
I can’t get no sleep….

Yes, the world is once again conspiring to prevent me from getting a decent night’s kip. But at least this time I think I know what’s causing it.

It’s nothing serious. I’m not distraught over the state of the housing market; I’m quite content in the new job; I’m not on the verge of bankruptcy. Carbon footprints and the like don’t faze me; hell, I’m even past caring that people think I’m a fascist because I dinnae like the word socialist.

No, what’s disturbing me is a damn book.

When it comes to reading, I’ll happily admit I’m not a scholar; I have read approximately fuck all in the way of worthy books. I don’t particularly like reading books that make me work – I like books that make me think, but I don’t like having to struggle through them. But more than that, I don’t like leaving them unfinished.

Which leaves me in a difficult position. If I start a book, then I will finish it². But if it feels like I’m having to work at reading it, then I’ll just put if off. And the act of putting it off will upset the delicate balance that is my mind.

So, I’m blaming my current bout of sleeplessness on Dale Brown and his latest work.

Bastard that he is³.

Thankfully there’s an easy cure. And thusly my afternoon off will be spent killing the book so that I can move on and live a full and productive life.

–
¹ – “Why don’t you like me without making me try” would be the line in question, obviously.

³ – ‘course, he’s not that big a bastard. Seeing as how minimising the IRS’s take is an obvious duty of every citizen.

So, how’s your oragami? Because those of us who have skill with the folding of thin shapes of paper will do well in the brave new world envisioned by Sheryl Crow.

Crow has suggested using “only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where two to three could be required”.

I have heard dread tales from folk in the army of the lengths that they’ve had to go to to keep within the MoD’s paltry bog roll ration, but even it is three sheets per man. And there’s still an unfortunately high risk of tearage.

So, a Top Gear Top Tip: if Sheryl Crow offers to shake your hand, be wary. Or be gloved.

There have been two big stories in big scale politics today; first off, the bucket being kicked by Boris Yeltsin, and secondly the straight left/right race for the French presidency.

So, Boris Yeltsin then. He started well, didn’t he, what with the deconstruction of a communist state and the building of a democratic foundation for a country which had never encountered democracy before. He managed to keep the nukes under control, he managed to face down the hardliners, he managed to get the rest of the world to pay for a good bit of the work that needed doing. Then, of course, he done fucked up a bit, what with the somewhat shortsighted way in which the necessary privatisations were handled. And the little fracas in Chechnya, which is still ongoing thirteen years later (while the current Russian government calls Iraq a quagmire). And the handing over of power to a crazed paranoid with a background in the KGB, who promptly undid all the good work on the democracy front.

But, hey, despite all the fuckups, he still rates as one of the Bestest Russian Leaders ever. So well done Boris.

On the other side of Europe, the French have set themselves up for a simple fight between the left and the right. Except that it’s using French terms of reference, so what they call the right is actually quite lefty (with unfortunate nationalistic tendencies) and the left is actually so far beyond left that it makes NuLabour look small government.

So, put yourselves in the place of a French voter: which candidate do you go for?

• The one with fairly sensible economic policies; relatively sensible policies towards the EU; considerable experience in government and a nasty habit of blaming any and all problems on those of a browner hue than himself. Odds of economic and political improvements: quite good. Odds of massive civil unrest and ethnic difficulties: even better.
• The one with batshit insane economic policies; a habit of making even more batshit insane promises; limited executive experience and an outlook that would make Marx ashamed of his rightwingness. Odds of economic and political improvements: ha ha ha ha ha. Odds of massive civil unrest and ethnic difficulties: quite low, since the surrender option would likely be deployed in record time.

So, which would you choose? You’re absolutely right: run like hell for Sangatte and hope that you can make it through the Chunnel before the country implodes and the Sixth Republic becomes necessary…

Have a wee read of this story. It’s all nice and benign isn’t it?

The idea is that it’s quite easy to insert false information into GPS devices that monitor traffic jams and suggest alternative routes to the driver. But the people who came up with it don’t want to create massive traffic jams of their own, à la Italian Job. No, they want to do something much less sinister.

Like directing women into strange places and then scoring with them.

Riiiiiight. Because no jury in the world would think that was a bad idea…

What’s wrong with social responsibility?

This was asked in the comments at Nelly’s, in response to a comment I’d made about not liking how greenery had become a ‘social responsibility’.

Now, I don’t have any problem with being socially responsible. It’s only common sense (and properly selfish) to look after the world around you, unless there is a damn good reason not to. But that isn’t what I meant; I meant that greenery, recycling and all that had become one of the topics that politicians (and all those who feel that they know how we should live better than we do) address in terms of “It is our social responsibility to … “

Pretty much invariably, such topics sound very worthy, and things that nobody in their right mind would be against. And then you actually look at the details, and it’s something that, in the name of ‘social responsibility’, requires a massive violation of ‘personal liberty’. In the name of ‘social responsibility’, everyone who helps out at a scout group needs a full background check; everyone with a bin requires a chip in it to make sure they’re not throwing away too much; everyone who needs a 4×4 is vilified. ‘Social responsibility’ is behind a large number of the 266 ways in which agents of the state can enter your home.

So, that’s what I mean. I have no problem with being socially responsible. I have a big problem with the invasions of privacy, removals of liberty and bullshit bureaucracy involved when complying with a ‘social responsibility’ of dubious worth in the first place.

Here’s something that should make those of you from foreign shores laugh: one of the parties that is about to form a government in Northern Ireland still believes in that marvellous (and thoroughly discredited) notion: that nobody should earn more than the ‘average industrial wage’.

Next month, Northern Ireland’s assembly members will be working on full powers. And full pay.

All 108 are in line for at least another £10,000 per year. The basic pay on 8 May will rise from about £32,000 to just over £41,000.

Sinn Fein policy, however, is that its members receive no more than the average industrial wage and that apparently means everyone from assembly member to minister gets the same – about £15,000. The rest goes to the party.

Yes, you foreigners can laugh. Us Northerners will have to weep; firstly for the massive bonus that the AMs will be getting for finally turning up to work, and secondly because we’re about to be lorded over by people who think that Marx had a point.

Bugger.