Thursday, November 04, 2004
Good God. What has happened to the world.
Electing him the first time was dumb.
Letting him back in the SECOND time was stupid.
As for winning him the popular vote, and increasing his share of control in the capitol, I don't quite know what to say.
Just as Bush cracks open victory champagne, our own Black Watch troops are being slaughtered in the war he based upon lies...
They are now, of course, fighting a totally different enemy from the one they started with. Whoever heard of a war where you suddenly start fighting someone else right in the middle of it? Saddam Hussein, the "major threat to the world", is gone. Who is it exactly we're waging war with now?
Bush claims the war was justified and the world is a safer place now. Americans amazingly believed him and gave him free rein over the world for another four years. When we find no weapons there... when he sends more and more soldiers even after Saddam is in a cell... when civilians are beheaded weekly... when casualty figures on our side alone rise above one thousand... when we get Osama threatening to attack again... surely someone over there must be at least raising an eyebrow, let alone thinking "this isn't really working, is it".
Electing him the first time was dumb.
Letting him back in the SECOND time was stupid.
As for winning him the popular vote, and increasing his share of control in the capitol, I don't quite know what to say.
Just as Bush cracks open victory champagne, our own Black Watch troops are being slaughtered in the war he based upon lies...
They are now, of course, fighting a totally different enemy from the one they started with. Whoever heard of a war where you suddenly start fighting someone else right in the middle of it? Saddam Hussein, the "major threat to the world", is gone. Who is it exactly we're waging war with now?
Bush claims the war was justified and the world is a safer place now. Americans amazingly believed him and gave him free rein over the world for another four years. When we find no weapons there... when he sends more and more soldiers even after Saddam is in a cell... when civilians are beheaded weekly... when casualty figures on our side alone rise above one thousand... when we get Osama threatening to attack again... surely someone over there must be at least raising an eyebrow, let alone thinking "this isn't really working, is it".
Tuesday, June 08, 2004
Newsgroups seem to be dying. Doing searches for anything on Google Groups yields fewer and fewer results from recent months; most results point to posts that are at least 2 years old. A lot of newsgroups that were once probably thriving hubs of conversation have been reduced to spamtraps.
The fact that the popularity of newsgroups as a medium is waning isn't the issue. People don't just "stop talking", obviously - conversation is moving elsewhere; in particular, most conversation seems to be moving toward web-based discussion forums. This isn't a problem in itself either, the technology isn't so bad at all and allows for posting of images, post counts, etc, more of a community spirit if you will. The 2 big problems I have with discussion forums are:
1) There is no centralised way of searching all forums, everywhere, regardless of forum software used, like Google Groups allows you to do with Newsgroups,
2) Whenever you feel you want to reply to a posting on a forum you haven't used before, you have to REGISTER EVERY SINGLE BLOODY TIME.
Number 1 is a pretty bad thing. I LOVE the ability to search Google groups for answers to questions, reviews of hardware/software, discussion of hobbies, meeting people with similar interests... the list is endless. Now I see the amounts of new postings going down for Newsgroups and I'm thinking "OK, fair enough, Newsgroups are on their way out, now where do I have to go to search all the world's forums for answers?" There is NO WAY, yet, that you can do it. Google staff - if you're reading this - why not set up a way to search forums worldwide just as you can search the Newsgroup archive? Is the time not right?
Number 2 is the WORST problem with forums. With almost all newsgroups, the system is simple: you go there, find a thread you want to reply to and reply to it, or just start one up yourself. No faffing with verifying your identity or email address. Engaging in the conversations was EASY and made spontaneous expression possible. Now look at most web forums. Before you can add even a small reply to a topic you've seen (for example if you think there's a little something you can add to it), you have to go through the same TEDIOUS registration process - pick a username (probably taken so several retries needed), enter email address (twice), enter password (twice), full name, date of birth, ICQ number, MSN, AOL, interests, location, secret question, mother's maiden name, cat's middle name, number of toes on left foot...
PLEASE!!!
Can we PLEASE have a central forum registration system at least? Like MSN Passport? Sign up at one place and then you can post anywhere. Your info gets sent to any forum you post to so they can ban you if they want to. If this doesn't get done, people are going to be put off engaging in conversation by having to register to each and every sodding forum they want to use. I don't want to have to sign up to 500 forums just to post in 500 different topics. This is a definite step backwards from the unhindered, universal accessibility of newsgroups and I hope someone addresses it soon, before people give up trying to discuss anything over the internet any more.
The fact that the popularity of newsgroups as a medium is waning isn't the issue. People don't just "stop talking", obviously - conversation is moving elsewhere; in particular, most conversation seems to be moving toward web-based discussion forums. This isn't a problem in itself either, the technology isn't so bad at all and allows for posting of images, post counts, etc, more of a community spirit if you will. The 2 big problems I have with discussion forums are:
1) There is no centralised way of searching all forums, everywhere, regardless of forum software used, like Google Groups allows you to do with Newsgroups,
2) Whenever you feel you want to reply to a posting on a forum you haven't used before, you have to REGISTER EVERY SINGLE BLOODY TIME.
Number 1 is a pretty bad thing. I LOVE the ability to search Google groups for answers to questions, reviews of hardware/software, discussion of hobbies, meeting people with similar interests... the list is endless. Now I see the amounts of new postings going down for Newsgroups and I'm thinking "OK, fair enough, Newsgroups are on their way out, now where do I have to go to search all the world's forums for answers?" There is NO WAY, yet, that you can do it. Google staff - if you're reading this - why not set up a way to search forums worldwide just as you can search the Newsgroup archive? Is the time not right?
Number 2 is the WORST problem with forums. With almost all newsgroups, the system is simple: you go there, find a thread you want to reply to and reply to it, or just start one up yourself. No faffing with verifying your identity or email address. Engaging in the conversations was EASY and made spontaneous expression possible. Now look at most web forums. Before you can add even a small reply to a topic you've seen (for example if you think there's a little something you can add to it), you have to go through the same TEDIOUS registration process - pick a username (probably taken so several retries needed), enter email address (twice), enter password (twice), full name, date of birth, ICQ number, MSN, AOL, interests, location, secret question, mother's maiden name, cat's middle name, number of toes on left foot...
PLEASE!!!
Can we PLEASE have a central forum registration system at least? Like MSN Passport? Sign up at one place and then you can post anywhere. Your info gets sent to any forum you post to so they can ban you if they want to. If this doesn't get done, people are going to be put off engaging in conversation by having to register to each and every sodding forum they want to use. I don't want to have to sign up to 500 forums just to post in 500 different topics. This is a definite step backwards from the unhindered, universal accessibility of newsgroups and I hope someone addresses it soon, before people give up trying to discuss anything over the internet any more.
Friday, May 28, 2004
Just another random thought today as I look at my computer keyboard (yes, here comes yet another another moan). Why is the keyboard layout we use so stupid? I'm not talking about the A-Z alphabetic keys - I mean all the other extra letters.
Look at some of the stupid pointless symbols you can enter. What the hell is ^ (shift+6) supposed to be? I've never ever used it in typing and can't think of any reason anyone would want to. Likewise '~' - apparently this on early US typewriters so that spanish people could put the tilde over the 'n' (like in España), but why it needs to be on modern computer keyboards is beyond me. The character | (shift+\ next to Z) hardly ever gets used either. The worst, though, has to be the letter to the left of '1' - `¬¦. What on god's earth are those unrecognisable and (surely) never used symbols (backwards quote thingy, backwards sideways L thingy, two lines on top of each other thingy) doing taking up one whole valuable key on a PC keyboard?
Think about it - getting rid of that key could free up space on the board for more valuable letters that we can't type right now without using Character Map. How do you enter the degree sign, °? How do you properly type the temperature as 50°C? How do you enter the half sign, ½? How do you enter the copyright sign, trademark sign, plus minus, all reasonably useful characters that people at some point scratch their heads wondering how to get at. Instead, PC keyboards give us a key devoted to `, ¬ and ¦. Wow.
I'm also wondering why British and American keyboards have to be different. They have their @ symbol over the 2 key, the " symbol over the ' key, their # symbol over the 3 key and the (useless) ~ symbol over the (useless) ` key. They don't have a £ symbol at all. Having the quotes over the apostrophe seems to make much more sense to me, but it's a shame they don't have a £ symbol. Can't some compromise be reached so that the same keyboards can be produced sold on both sides of the atlantic without modification? Surely this would drive down prices? I'm not an economist but I think I can guess that much.
Grumble grumble... rant over.
Look at some of the stupid pointless symbols you can enter. What the hell is ^ (shift+6) supposed to be? I've never ever used it in typing and can't think of any reason anyone would want to. Likewise '~' - apparently this on early US typewriters so that spanish people could put the tilde over the 'n' (like in España), but why it needs to be on modern computer keyboards is beyond me. The character | (shift+\ next to Z) hardly ever gets used either. The worst, though, has to be the letter to the left of '1' - `¬¦. What on god's earth are those unrecognisable and (surely) never used symbols (backwards quote thingy, backwards sideways L thingy, two lines on top of each other thingy) doing taking up one whole valuable key on a PC keyboard?
Think about it - getting rid of that key could free up space on the board for more valuable letters that we can't type right now without using Character Map. How do you enter the degree sign, °? How do you properly type the temperature as 50°C? How do you enter the half sign, ½? How do you enter the copyright sign, trademark sign, plus minus, all reasonably useful characters that people at some point scratch their heads wondering how to get at. Instead, PC keyboards give us a key devoted to `, ¬ and ¦. Wow.
I'm also wondering why British and American keyboards have to be different. They have their @ symbol over the 2 key, the " symbol over the ' key, their # symbol over the 3 key and the (useless) ~ symbol over the (useless) ` key. They don't have a £ symbol at all. Having the quotes over the apostrophe seems to make much more sense to me, but it's a shame they don't have a £ symbol. Can't some compromise be reached so that the same keyboards can be produced sold on both sides of the atlantic without modification? Surely this would drive down prices? I'm not an economist but I think I can guess that much.
Grumble grumble... rant over.
Friday, April 23, 2004
Damn Microsoft. Just got stressed over another computery thing...
Windows Media Player 9 crossfading wasn't working - it just went into the next track without fading at all. Very annoying. Eventually, the thing that fixed it was uninstalling the K-Lite Codec Pack that I had on there already - miraculously fixed it!
Anyone who's reading this and is having trouble with their WMP9 crossfading, uninstall the K-Lite codec pack. Worked for me.
Windows Media Player 9 crossfading wasn't working - it just went into the next track without fading at all. Very annoying. Eventually, the thing that fixed it was uninstalling the K-Lite Codec Pack that I had on there already - miraculously fixed it!
Anyone who's reading this and is having trouble with their WMP9 crossfading, uninstall the K-Lite codec pack. Worked for me.
Tuesday, April 20, 2004
I don't often moan about things in public. I normally keep them to myself. I guess this blog will never be viewed by anyone so I can safely moan here...
Today I want to moan about Hip Hop music. It's all over the place right now and anything that wants to be 'cool' has to look or sound Hip Hop. I didn't mind it at first because it kept out of the way and I could safely turn on the radio without getting a load of it in my face. But now it's been turning mainstream and I can't get away from the bloody stuff. What's worse is that even the formerly bubbly/normal acts like Kylie Minogue and Britney Spears have tried to be more hip hop now. Everyone's going Hip Hop. AAAARGH!
I'm quite glad that some helpful person invented the genre "urban" to describe all music that sounds like Hip Hop - it means I can at least try to avoid it. It's just a shame that in between great rocky tracks on the radio, they stick some Jay Z shite on and I have to change stations.
I'm sure I was never this bitter about a musical genre before. I'm not sure why I'm so repulsed by it. Maybe it's just that it's so pretentious... dressed in stupid basketball vests and two dozen gold chains mumbling about killin' niggaz, bling, da hood or da homeez - i.e. diverse topics like shooting each other, money, the block where they live and the people there. Wow.
There is some good underground Hip-Hop behind the scenes though - the best stuff. It's the commercial nonsense that doesn't even have a decent beat behind it that I can't stand. Everyone's just jumped on yet another bandwagon and... well... why couldn't it have been something GOOD?
Something else is that the non-hip-hop pop music that's still left is all covers now. Look at all this stuff by the pop idols. Covers of covers of covers. Not even very original now. I heard some girl has done a cover of "I Wish I Knew" - like that hasn't been done ten thousand times before?!?
On the upside, superb Jazz artists like Jamie Cullum, Joss Stone and Amy Winehouse are coming out of the woodwork now... and they have genuine talent. Everyone should realise there is actually some good music out there, buried underneath the pop fluff. I hope it lasts.
Today I want to moan about Hip Hop music. It's all over the place right now and anything that wants to be 'cool' has to look or sound Hip Hop. I didn't mind it at first because it kept out of the way and I could safely turn on the radio without getting a load of it in my face. But now it's been turning mainstream and I can't get away from the bloody stuff. What's worse is that even the formerly bubbly/normal acts like Kylie Minogue and Britney Spears have tried to be more hip hop now. Everyone's going Hip Hop. AAAARGH!
I'm quite glad that some helpful person invented the genre "urban" to describe all music that sounds like Hip Hop - it means I can at least try to avoid it. It's just a shame that in between great rocky tracks on the radio, they stick some Jay Z shite on and I have to change stations.
I'm sure I was never this bitter about a musical genre before. I'm not sure why I'm so repulsed by it. Maybe it's just that it's so pretentious... dressed in stupid basketball vests and two dozen gold chains mumbling about killin' niggaz, bling, da hood or da homeez - i.e. diverse topics like shooting each other, money, the block where they live and the people there. Wow.
There is some good underground Hip-Hop behind the scenes though - the best stuff. It's the commercial nonsense that doesn't even have a decent beat behind it that I can't stand. Everyone's just jumped on yet another bandwagon and... well... why couldn't it have been something GOOD?
Something else is that the non-hip-hop pop music that's still left is all covers now. Look at all this stuff by the pop idols. Covers of covers of covers. Not even very original now. I heard some girl has done a cover of "I Wish I Knew" - like that hasn't been done ten thousand times before?!?
On the upside, superb Jazz artists like Jamie Cullum, Joss Stone and Amy Winehouse are coming out of the woodwork now... and they have genuine talent. Everyone should realise there is actually some good music out there, buried underneath the pop fluff. I hope it lasts.
Friday, April 09, 2004
Virtual Bostonian
This man has some seriously good stuff on his site. Especially the bit marked "Howard Stern Shocks the Vote". Scary stuff - maybe the land of the free isn't so free after all. Take a lookie.
This man has some seriously good stuff on his site. Especially the bit marked "Howard Stern Shocks the Vote". Scary stuff - maybe the land of the free isn't so free after all. Take a lookie.
LOL @ this:
Pingu Extreme
Oh, just something funny I came across. Bit gory though. I hope no animal freaks are reading.
Pingu Extreme
Oh, just something funny I came across. Bit gory though. I hope no animal freaks are reading.
