Monthly Archives: October 2009

A good time to upgrade WordPress!

Posted on by
Reply

Wordpress LogoI’ve just upgraded various blogs I look after – including my own – to WordPress 2.8.5.  This release is regarded as a ‘hardening’ release by WordPress themselves, and if you’re reasonably up to date the upgrade is a piece of cake – the automatic installer does it all for you.

It might also be a good time to take a look at your WordPress setup in general.  Good practice with any website installation tehse days states that the less you have on a website, the less places there are for malware to hide, so one thing to do immediately is to remove any unused themes or plugins – use your FTP client to back them up if you can’t lay your hands on your originals.  If you do decide to change theme or use the Plugins again, just install them.  Whilst there are some nasties that lurk in the ‘Default’ theme, it’s probably best to leave that installed because it gives you a fallback position if a Plugin breaks your custom theme.

If you have statistics running, take a good look at any ‘spikes’ in the page views.   I use the WordPress stats package and find it perfectly adequate for my needs – which is basically stroking my ego to see if people are reading what I write.  Looking at my page view, I noticed a spike over 3 days early last week – twice as many hits on the site as usual.  Unless you’ve recently done a push for readership, or have blogged on a matter of wide interest, this can indicate a compromise of your site – as I found.

The stats package provides a list of search terns that are used Looking at things in more detail I noticed that whilst the pages accessed were familiar to me, the search terms that were used to get there were most certainly not.  ‘Girlfriends boobs’ is not something I tend to write about on this site!!  Now, given that those terms must have been on the site somewhere to get the hit.  I took a look at the logs provided by my hosting company, and also wandered around my site with FTP.  I DID find evidence of some dodgy looking links, buried in a sub-directory inside teh WordPress installation being accessed by looking at the logs.  However, checking with FTP revealed noting – I realsied that my upgrade to 2.8.5 had wiped out the evidence.  I’ve not had any similar strange search terms showing up since then.

So – summing up:

  1. Keep upgraded.
  2. Remove anything you don’t need.
  3. Install some simple stats and watch Page Views for unexpected spikes.  Get a ‘feel’ for the normal sort of readership levels of your site.
  4. Keep an eye on search terms used to get to your blog.  If ‘odd’ search expressions turn up then start ferreting around. If you have a Google account, register your site with Google and keep an eye on unfollowable links, etc.  Learn what logs are available from your hosting provider and use them.

That’s my lesson for today on WordPress!  As for the upgrade – 2.8.5 works like a charm and has no bad habits that I can find!

BNP support increase – why the surprise?

Posted on by
Reply

For anyone who’s been asleep or under a particularly soundproofed rock for the last few weeks, here’s a quick ‘catch up’.  Nick Griffin, leader of the UK’s Far Right British National Party, was invited on to BBC Television’s flagship political debate programme, ‘Question Time’.  This generated a great deal of fuss and bother.  Anti-Fascist groups demonstrated, Griffin himself objected about the format of the show, and it was one of the least edifying sights I’ve seen on TV for some years.   A survey today reveals that after Griffin’s appearance on the show, support for the party has increased.  Peter Hain is saying that this was exactly the sort of thing that led to Nazi Germany…sorry…that was Basil Fawlty…Peter Hain is saying that this was exactly the sort of thing he was afraid of.  And even insiders at the BBC are stating that the way the program was handled was a farce and that Griffin was subjected to ‘attack dogs’.

Woooo…..serious stuff.  Let’s just stop for a moment shall we?  First of all, let’s make it clear to all and sundry that I’m no BNP supporter or fellow traveller.  I say that now because I know from experience on certain Internet Forums any attempt to look at the phenomena that is the BNP or any aspect of multicultural politics in Britain tends to result in you being called a Nazi, racist, sympathiser, etc.  So let’s nail that one first and now discuss the issue like grown-ups. 

In terms of voting intention for an election tomorrow, the proportion who said they’d vote BNP was 3%.  Last month, it was 2%.  So, oodles of free publicity, massive TV coverage, the sort of profile that Griffin might have only gotten by leading a Wetherspoons Putsch and all that happens is an extra 1% of firm vote support.  Pardon me, Peter, if I don’t get too panicky just yet?  Yes, 22% of voters suggested that they might seriously consider voting BNP, but there’s many a slip between poll and ballot box.

What was obvious from the furore surrounding this edition of ‘Question Time’ is that :

  1. A large number of protesters attempted to prevent the leader of a legal UK political party – how represehensible we might find  the opinions of that party is irrelevant – from taking part in a debate on UK television.
  2. Various high ranking political figures appeared to apply pressure to the BBC to not allow the broadcast to take place.
  3. The format of the broadcast DID appear to be different to usual – it had all the hallmarks of a bear baiting session and I venture to suggest that the chairing of the programme could have been better.

The overall result of this has been to allow Griffin to be able to call ‘foul’ and play the ‘Martyr’ card – that well beloved ploy of all political extremists who know that their chances at the ballot box are pretty slim in any other circumstances.  Griffin performed incredibly poorly on QT – despite the possibly loaded deck, which to be honest he and his advisers might have expected – his answers were not brilliant and he made teh error of getting a few cheap shots in at his political opponents.  But, the overall impression that his supporters will take away and propagate through their publicity machine is that ‘We were censored and muzzled by the political establishment, the BBC and the far left’ – the very last impression that this appearance SHOULD have been allowed to give.  The UAF, Government and BBC have managed by their total cack-handed handling of this issue to give the BNP the origin of their very own ‘stab in the back’ myth.

The ‘No Platform’ issue is a well worn one.  Basically, it’s a policy by the left to attempt to remove any possible platform for Far Right parties in the media – or on Internet Forums, discussion groups, public venues, etc.  Short for ‘No platform for Fascists’ it is supposed to starve the Far Right of the ability to publicise themselves and gain recruits.  There’s one problem with this approach – it doesn’t work.  It simply allows the sort of nonsense we’ve encountered over the last week to play out, gaining the Far Right more recruits and support than if they’d been allowed to quietly get on with making total arses of themselves in public.

To me, ‘No platform’ is simply a censorship operation by the Left, in the style that Stalin and Mao would recognise.  Totalitarianism is alive and well on both sides of the political fence.  But it is counter productive and dangerous in a wider sense than that of stifling political debate.  By permitting teh right to say that they are being censored, their words are heard by more and more people.  The British people are not getting more racist; but many are now perceiving that the country is changing it’s cultural make up in a way that doesn’t benefit them:

  1. The Government and main political parties are thought by many people – particularly working class and those in the poorer economic groups – to be totally out of touch with people’s fears and concerns about immigration.  Until very recently it’s been difficult to discuss these issues without being howled down in ‘Islington Circles’ as a racist monster who eats babies for breakfast and kicks small dogs.
  2. People have seen the economy got to hell in a basket, and in many cases are now experiencing real pain.  They also start noticing immigration – note I said NOTICING – for the first time.  Even with no proven factual, causal link between their decrease in standard in living and the number of immigrants that they feel are coming in to the country, they irrationally believe and fear that there IS a causal link.
  3. When the Government produces statistics that disprove any link between immigration and economic well being, or even suggest that there is a positive link, people are not believing it.  This is partially because there are often other reports and statistics that prove the other point of view.  Debating the issue then turns in to a game of ‘URL Tennis’ as participants fling references around like intellectual hand-grenades, attempting to trip up the logic or mathematics in the report and, if that fails, the credentials of the authors.
  4. The Government is seen as being a bunch of lying bastards.  The Government have been seen to lie on numerous issues – the 2003 Iraq War being a biggie, for example.  If they’ll lie to take us to war, folks quite rightly believe they’ll lie on other policies.  And as if by magic…in today’s Daily Mail there is a story of how Jack Straw and Tony Blair  planned to pull an immigration ‘fast one’ on the people of Britain. 
  5. People wonder why the main parties are unwilling to discuss immigration and multiculturalism.  People perceive an ‘elephant in the living room’ event taking place.  The lack of debate or willingness to debate makes people fear the worst.
  6. Media stories and programs bolster peopel’s fear of immigration and multiculturalism, especially in the absence of open, factual debate.  For example, we get the ongoing ‘No Christmas Decorations’ sort of bollocks every year, programs like UK Border Patrol that show the efforts of the UK’s Border Agencies to keep undesirables out, etc.

In other words, there is an overwhelming perception for many people that this country is changing – no, is BEING changed by the Government – to a multicultural wonderland in which the views of the indiginous majority are being ignored.   And the only people who’re paying attention to this is the BNP.  And when these folks feel and fear that the BNP is being censored – and the BNP themselves can point to violent demonstrations to attempt to stop their leader speaking on TV – then people may well start thinking ‘What are these bastards trying to hide from me?‘

So, what’s to be done? 

  1. First of all, there needs to be an open discussion on all aspects of immigration and multicularal policies in the UK.  It needs to be wideranging and it will involve engaging with very unplesant people on all sides of the argument.  there can be no ‘No Platform’ nonsesne.
  2. It must be possible for people to think and say the currently unthinkable in discourse without being howled down.  You don’t destroy ideas by stopping them being expressed.  You destroy them by exposing them to teh light of reasoned and factual analysis. 
  3. Government, opposition and opinion formers MUST realise that they are first of all dealing with perception and belief – in other words, irrational feelings that must be addressed before people can engage in this sort of debate.  This will not be easy but is essential.  The first stage is to simply say to people ‘We appreciate you’re a bit worried; we’re hear to listen.  And then feckin’ LISTEN and don’t hear just what you want to hear.

Put bluntly, we have a fine campaigining season ahead for the bigots, the true racists, the thugs and the idealogues of both political extremes; economic recession, out of touch and dishonest Government, a few instances of corrupt and dishonest politicians stealing public money in their expenses, bankers bonuses getting stupidly high again, increasing unemployment, unpopular wars.

It’s time for Government and the political and media establishments of the UK to do soemthing before it all goes pear shaped.  Censoring and demonstrating is not enough – it’s time to engage and defeat the ideas of extremists of both political colours.

Thanks for reading – go forth and get defeating.

The Duke, The Bankers and let them eat cake..

Posted on by
Reply

There’s a line in Blackadder that sprang to mind today as I read the headlines on the BBC website:

“If a Cannibal opened your head he wouldn’t have enough brain to cover a water biscuit”

The headline was this – “Banker bonuses minute, says duke“, the Duke in question being Andrew, Duke of York.   My immediate comment to Twitter was ‘kind of like the Duke’s brain is minute in the scheme of things’, and certainly on the grounds of this comment at this time, not enough to cover that water biscuit. 

I’m rarely personally abusive about people in the public eye, but this was one of those public utterances that suggests a number of thoughts.

  1. That Andrew is very much the son of the Duke of Edinburgh; such an ability to put one’s foot in one’s mouth must surely be inherited.
  2. That people with a republican sentiment might just have something going for them.
  3. That people in the public eye should employ a good PR person.
  4. And that playboys who wander around the world playing golf for Britain should perhaps belt up about such things.

OK…rant over.  Maybe scope for a ‘Downfall Mashup’ later.  But for now, back on topic.   Let’s look at what Andrew did, in fact, say:

“I don’t want to demonise the banking and financial sector. Bonuses, in the scheme of things, are minute. They are easy to target.  A number will have abused their privilege of a bonus, so get rid of the excesses, but don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.”

According to this article, banker’s bonuses for 2009 will be around £6 billions – yes, billions – due to increased bank profits in 2009 to date.  This is up on 2008, when bonuses were a paltry £4 billions.

The word ‘minute’ clearly means different things to people in the commanding heights of the British establishment.  The average income for all households in the UK for 2009 is about £30,000.  That 6 billion could pay the household income for a year for 200,000 households in the UK.  Goldman Sachs have recently said they’re putting aside about 600,000,000 for bonuses for it’s near 30,000 staff.  This will result in average bonuses, assuming everyone got teh same, of £20,000.  Of course, what this really means is that some of the GS people will get humongous bonuses again.   Again, even with that average, ‘minute’ is not a word that I would apply to even a £20,000 bonus, when it’s two-thirds of the average income.

Vince Cable also makes this observation:

“The investment banks more than any other institutions created the culture of excessive leverage, excessive risk and excessive bonuses that led to the downfall of the financial system. Now they are cashing in and the same bonus culture has returned. The result must be that we are being pushed to the edge of another crash.”

Given that he’s been more on the nose than most politicians about recent financial crises, I’m getting worried.

tumbril

Whether Andrew intended his comments to come over as a ‘let them eat cake’ sort of speech is a moot point.  That’s how it does come over.  And I for one am increasingly sick of being told by people at the top of the heap that things are OK, really, and the guys who broke our economy really do deserve these bonuses, and, hey, it’s great to spend all day gadding about…ah, what the Hell.

Andrew – and the rest of you out there with lots of money, safe sinecures and no other worries in the morning than whether to take the Rolls, the Bentley or the Helicopter – think before you speak. 

Think hard, listen to your advisers, look at what is happening in this country.  We’re figuratively dying out here. 

Where are the bloody tumbrils when you need them?

Dubbed Hitler – why is it funny?

Posted on by
Reply

After the last post on here, ‘Gazing in to the abyss’, I concluded that I needed to take off the Old Testament ‘Prophet of Doom’ robes for a little while and take a slightly lighter view of something.  Which is why, at first glance, the title of this piece may raise the odd eyebrow.

Some months ago, a clip from the film ‘Downfall’ appeared online.  The film is about the final days in the Berlin Bunker at the end of World War 2.  The scene features Hitler and his Generals studing a map, discussing a counter-attack that will never come.  Hitler goes off on a serious rant at his military commanders, eventually settling down in to an admission that it’s all over.

 So far, no great bundle of screaming laughs. But the 4 minute piece of video was then dubbed with whole new story lines – ‘Hitler discovers Michael Jackson is dead’, for example (left) is one of the funnier mashups on this theme on the Web.There are lots of others – Hitler finds out Oasis have split, that he’s been thrown off Xbox Live, that twitter is down again, that Liverpool have lost a soccer match. The list goes on.  There’s even one where Hitler rants abouyt being subtitled…

The quality varies – some are just plain nasty, others mildly amusing, some I find laugh out loud funny.What this says about my sense of humour and the sense of humour of the people who put the mashups together is what I want to look at in this post.I guess now would be a good time to put in the usual justification that seems to be required these days….no, I don’t find Hitler amusing per se. No, I’m not a Nazi sympathiser, Yes, I do appreciate that World War 2 was not funny. 

On a more practical basis, if you have even ‘schoolboy German’ the whole illusion is destroyed, so winding the sound down is quite helpful! 

And having got that out of the way…

I guess we’ve always used humour to poke fun at evil. In the 1930s George Orwell (I believe) commented that the goose-step was a ludicrous way to walk, but as the marchers had guns it was best not to laugh too loudly.

 Even during the Second World War, various rude comic songs were sung by the allied soldiers remarking on the rumour about Hitler’s single testicle – although the sentiment was expressed in less polite words – and various satires and comedies emerged from the War taking the mickey from the so-called Master Race – To Be or Not To Be and ‘The Great Dictator’ being the two most famous.  However, it’s worth remembering that both of these films were made before the sheer scale and nature of the atrocities committed by the Nazis became known; after news came out about the Concentration Camps and the extermination policies of the Nazis, it took until Mel Brooks’s ‘The Producers’ in 1968 before it became possible to laugh at the Nazis again.

It’s worth noting that this sort of humour always picks fun at the Nazis, never their actions.  There are invariably some very dark and usually unfunny attempts at humour that pick up on the cruelty of the Nazis, and occasionally even the death camps, but they’re uncommon.

The Downfall Mashups all have one thing in common; they feature Hitler ranting and raving on the behalf of the mashup creator about something that matters to them.  Hitler’s been subverted to any number of things that cause people to ‘lose it’.  Maybe he provides us with that excuse we need to really lose our rag to the degree of what might be called a ‘towering fury’.  I had one of those years ago – it was kicked off by soemthing really stupid and I went ballistic.  About 30 seconds in I KNEW I was in the wrong but what the heck, I was enjoying it so much that I genuinely didn’t want to stop – I knew I was going to have problems looking my colleagues in the eye for days afterwards, but it just felt so worth it.  I literally did feel that I was towering above the situation!

Maybe the Downfall Mashup allows us to project our feelings on to a character well known for his rants – a sort of scapegoat for acting out in public.  We can script our ‘actor’, wind him up and let him go.  We vent our spleen, and as a side benefit reduce one of history’s most evil men to the part of an actor in one of our own rants against society.  I wonder how long it will be before there’s a ‘personally abusive’ version where someone takes it out on a real, named individual that they dislike? 

 Is there a down side to the Downfall Mashup phenomenenon?  I’m not sure – there’s one school of thought that says that this actually humanises Hitler and gives young people today a view of the Fuhrer as a comic spectacle, a foil for our own humour.  This might be so, but the solution there is to ensure that we don’t forget the original evil committed by a bunch of very ordinary men with glasses, bad haircuts and bad breath who were allowed to get to where they did in life because no one stopped them.

 Or, just maybe, no one laughed at them long and hard and sent them off with their tails between their legs before they got the illusion that they were something special.  Who knows.

Gazing in to the abyss

Posted on by
Reply

Looking-Into-The-CraterYesterday’s exploration of  ‘What would George say?’ led me to following up a few points of research and whilst browsing around I came across this quote of Orwell’s:

Here is a saying of Nietzche which I have quoted before, but which is worth quoting again:

He who fights too long against dragons becomes a dragon himself;
and if you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you.

’Too long’, in this context, should perhaps be taken as meaning ‘after the dragon is beaten’.

The line that struck a chord with me here, and has done for some years now, is ‘the abyss will gaze in to you’.  My topic for today – have we all spent rather too long staring in to the abyss and what have we bought back with us from there?

I guess a good place to start is with exactly what I mean by ‘the abyss’.  For me it’s that spiritual dark place where your personal and our cultural demons lie.  The trick is that whilst we need to be aware of the fact it’s there, we shouldn’t get ourselves too engrossed in it’s finer geography.   I look at it in the way that CS Lewis spoke of the Devil in ‘The Screwtape Letters’:

‘There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors.’

Over the years I’ve wandered to the edge of my personal abyss a few times and stepped back.  We all have our personal demons – what matters is whether we give them the freedom to do anything.  Show me somone who claims to have no personal demons and I’ll show you a liar.  And then there are those people whose demons are, shall we say, rather more unpleasant than those that most of us have; the criminal, the depraved, the insane.   The problem that we have today, I believe, is twofold – the abyss is now much wider and deeper than it was even 20 years ago, and it impinges more than ever in to our daily lives.

In 1984, Frankie Goes to Hollywood asked the question “Are we living in a land where sex and horror are the new gods?’  Back then I think the answer was still ‘yes’, but we didn’t really know what was around the corner. Twenty-five years down the line the abyss comes in to our house courtesy of the Internet.  Without sounding too much like Mary Whitehouse on a Sunday Evening,  the Internet, cinema and TV have increasingly bought the baser instincts of human beings to the forefront of our consideration.  I’m not dumb enough to believe that, in the words of Philip Larkin ‘Sexual intercourse began in 1963 (which was rather late for me)‘.  Interest in the more extreme edges of pornography – whether that pornography is the pornography of sex or that of violence – has always been with us and was usually squirrelled away in the far recesses of most people’s minds for a number of reasons:

Society was more ‘up tight’ – certain forms of behaviour or artistic expression were simply regarded as wrong and tended to be either illegalor seriously frowned upon by society.  Sometimes this was right (IMO) and othertimes it was ridiculous.  But there were boundaries set.

  1. There seemed to be less moral relativism – there seemed to be much more of a concensus view in society as to what was ‘right’ and ‘wrong’.
  2. Extremely violent pornography of graphical violence was difficult to get hold of.
  3. Anyone who DID have extreme interests was typically on their own; they were in no position to talk about it with friends who might be horrified at their interest.

In these circusmtances, if you went to your abyss, and peered in, and did dwell there a while the risk was pretty minimal for society as a whole.  Your trip was a private one, one not to be shared with anyone.  And for most of us there was the knowldge that certain things were, to put it bluntly, totally wrong.

The Internet has brought a lot of good in to people’s lives, but it has also amplified the potential for people to gaze deeper and for longer in to the abyss.  It’s had two main impacts:

  1. Extreme sexual and violent imagery is available to everyone more easily than ever before in history.
  2. The sheer scope of the Internet means that it’s inevitable that no matter how extreme a person’s ‘interests’ are, it’s almost inevitable that somewhere in the 1.7 billion Internet users there is someone else with the same interests, and a web site delivering up media to accomodate those interests.

The impact of these two facts is that people with particularly unpleasant demons in their abyss now find, to their mind, their beliefs and views  validated by the existence of those websites and users.  This permits these individuals to look in to their personal abyss and see nothing wrong with what they see there, and hence feel encouragement to express their views in to the world.  It’s not trendy to be in favour of censorship, but the validation of perversity that seems to be increasingly common surely cannot be healthy for society as a whole.

The phrase ‘People of the Abyss’ was used by Jack London as the title of a book he wrote in the early 1900s about the poverty of the East End of London;  I believe wholeheartedly that we’re now generating a new breed of people of the abyss – those who’ve started hard and long in to the depths of their abyss, and have bought back their personal demons with them in to the workaday-world.   This new breed of Abyss Dwellers are to be feared and shunned; their moral compass seems to be dictated by ‘it works for me and is no one else’s business what I do’ and they exhibit a lack of respect for the social codes of the society in which they live.

It’s not just extreme sex and violence that is an issue; I’ve just spent some time watching scenes of anti-fascist demonstrators protesting outside the BBC about the appearance of Nick Griffin of the BNP on BBC’s Question Time.  There is soemthing ironic about a group allegedly demonstrating to preserve democracy by attempting to censor a TV programme.  Perhaps these anti-fascists who’ve ‘fought the dragon’ are in danger of becoming that which they fight?  In George Steiner’s novella ‘The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H.’ – written in 1981 – a trial in teh South American jungle allows the 90 year old Hitler, who in this novella survived the fall of Berlin, to explain himself.  One comment made is that those who fought agaisnt him have taken on board many of the characteristics of his regime – in other words, by peering in to teh Nazi abyss and fighting the dragon, they’ve fought for too long and brought parts of the abyss back with them, and have now become the dragon which they once fought.  Defending democracy is a delicate balancing act; you should not get so involved in the way of the enemy that you forget that you fight against that you forget the positive characteristics of what you’re fighting for.

In his novella, Steiner has a character say:

“There shall come a man who […] will know the grammar of hell and teach it to others. He will know the sounds of madness and loathing and make them seem music.”

He was, obviously, referring to Hitler in the book but today there are many such people in the public eye and those who we personally may be aware of who might be described in the same way.  Modern people of the abyss who’ve been there and returned with a little more than they bargained for, and who’re determined to further expand their view of the world, and widen the abyss further, expanding the geography of Hell further in to our daily lives.

I’m a Christian – I think that colours my opinions on a number of topics, and makes me address them from a particular moral and ethical standpoint.  Whether you have an religious beliefs or not I’d simply suggest that you at least become aware of the place of the abyss in your own life; what you choose to do with it when you find it’s location is up to you.  Just remember that having gazed a little too long and deep, you may find that even if you leave the abyss, it may not entirely leave you.

Garden Party…

Posted on by
Reply

I’ve always been one of the world’s great hoarders…one of those folks who hangs on to things because they may one day be useful, one who starts something and then has to sweat cobs to get it finished.

I guess it’s when I noticed I had 3 pages of accounts, user names and passwords that I thought I might have some issues of spreading msyelf a little thin around the online world!  A few more minutes of checking some of the accounts out – and finding that I’d last used them constructively maybe 3 or 4 years ago – made me realise that dragging behind you a load of digital deadwood is similar to having an attic, cellar, garage or study full of physical junk.  And the nature of the online world is that it’s really difficult to get back to where you left off – even if the site’s still up and running. 🙂 

We’ve recently been spending a lot of time tidying up around the Towers here – sorting out books, clearing out old stuff, and it struck me over the weekend that maybe I need to get some online tidiness and focus as well.  And the relevance of the blog item title?  I’ll get there eventually….

So…what to keep, what to throw, or is it what parts of me to keep, what parts of me to throw away?  Ironically, especially considering my previous posts on the subject, top of the keep list are Facebook and Twitter, followed by this August publication that you’re reading right now.  My plan is to:

  1. Suspend my accounts on various discussion forums, and focus on stroking my ego through my Twitter and Facebook accounts and this blog. 🙂  Seriously – I think I am spread waaaay too thin out in cyberspace and really want to be in a position to publish some ‘words with weight’ when I want to.
  2. Close the shutters on a few hobby sites I’ve run for a few years.  They’ve never attracted much traffic and I’d rather take them ‘off the grid’ rather than leave them looking forlorn.  Good backups will ensure nothing is lost, and who knows, one day they may return – alternatively they may simply be allowed to disappear forever.  My last shot at an Online Community – Coffeehouse Chat – is already mothballed.  Shame on you who offered support and never came… 😉
  3. There should also be a commensurate loss of email accounts.  I don’t know abouyt you but I find that whenever a new web site gets set up you almost always set a new email address up to go with it….
  4. Kill off the accounts on any number of sites that I’ve tried before buying and found wanting – The well, LastFM, Ecademy, etc.  Probably even Linked In and other business networking sites.  I don’t believe that my brand is, as yet, ‘hot’ enough to warrant being on these sites.  I get buried under all the other software developers, wannabe entrepreneurs, etc. 

I suppose my bottom line realisation in the last 12 months is that a lot of my current online (and offline) world is of greater relevance to the Joe Pritchard of 5 or 6 years ago than the Joe Pritchard I live with today.  It can’t possibly be healthy to live in the past – there’s not going to be room or even inclination to move forward to fresh fields and pastures new if your world is already full.  Various things have conspired to chop off quite important anchors to my past, and I’ve become increasingly aware that people have impressions of me that are no longer true, but are like looking at some image of me in some sort of Dorian Gray style painting of how I was some years back.  Hopefully, by clearing out the crud I’ll give my self space to move on to new things, whilst still keeping in touch with the people who really matter to me in the here and now.

And the title of this piece?  Rick Nelson bought it all home to me in these lyrics:

I went to a garden party to reminisce with my old friends
A chance to share old memories and play our songs again
When I got to the garden party they all knew my name
But no one recognized me I didn’t look the same

But it’s all right now
I learned my lesson well
You see you can’t please ev’ryone so
You got to please yourself

Smart bloke.  Time to re-invent.

The end of an era…

Posted on by
Reply
Joe's old Nokia...an excellent phone!

Joe's old Nokia...an excellent phone!

Well, the end of a personal era for me.  A number of years ago – I think 2003 or thereabouts – I needed a new phone.  I honestly can’t remember what I had before the trusty Nokia shown on the left.  I think it was a Motorola of some sort – similar sort of functionality, though – phone, SMS, Breakout game.  I remember walking in to one of the phone shops on Fargate and ogling the more modern phones, gaining the attention of a salesman and then immediately asking him for the cheapest PAYG handset he could offer me.  A few minutes later I left with the Nokia 3410 that cost me £25.  I stayed with T-Mobile so I coudl keep my existing phone number and started my relationship with the most reliable and bombproof phone I’ve had to date.

The 3410 supported Java and apparently could connect to the Internet – quite what I’d be able to do with a small green screen I have no idea, and I never managed to get the Internet connectivity working.  I don’t think I really spent a lot of time on it – after all, all I wanted from the phone was the ability to talk to people when I couldn’t be with them – something that Alexander Graham Bell would definitely approve of.  Even texting for me was something done in extremis – there was a time when the only time I sent text messages was from noisy pubs where I didn’t want to go outside in to teh ferezing cold and lose my seat to make a call!

The Nokia was a brilliant little phone.  Not long after I got it I dropped it and cracked the fascia.  Fortunately my wife (who changes phones with greater frequency than I do) had a 3310 in the cupboard so I ended up with the front and back fascias not matching – a sort of two tone case.  Soon the vase was getting adorned with little stickers – charity stickers after I’d given money, little stick-on ticks from my niece, etc.  It was beginning to look like the guitar case of a particularly well travelled pub-rocker. The only think I couldn’t do with it was open the darn case – it seemed to be put together in such a way that precluded access to nail biting forty-somethings.  However, it could be coerced in to opening up by my sticking it in my breast pocket and running for a bus – the phone would fly out, hit the pavement and then explode in to 4 pieces – two halves of the case, the battery and the gubbins of the phone.  Opportunities like this were excellent for cleaning out cat hairs and other crud that had accumulated inside the phone.

After a while I began to realise that people remembered my phone – it was pretty much old fashioned when I bought it new.  As the new, all singing, all dancing handsets with more brains than your average X-Factor contestant hit the market, my magnificent machine was recognised amongst my friends as a steam powered anachronism that fitted the personality of it’s owner.  You see, despite my professional engagement with technology, I’ve always been something of a Luddite in some ways.  I don’t like being on the bleeding edge of things, or for that matter the leading edge.  God created ‘early adopters’ to experience the bugs and foul ups that normal people shouldn’t have to.  I was writing web services and partaking in ‘meeja’ projects with a phone that was appropriate for an operative from Warehouse 13 or a character in a Steampunk novel. I had one client who came in to the office one day holding an old 3410 and offering it to me for ‘spares’ – I think that rumours started that I actually planned to hand maintain the phone, and that in years to come whilst the rest of the world revelled in smart phones with a higher IQ than their owners, I’d still be chattering away in to my green-screen, steam-powered telephone.

Well, sure enough, all good things had to come to an end.  Earlier on this year I noticed that somehow some cat-fur had managed to get in to the display, and a couple of the keys were starting to get rather ‘sticky’.  I also had increasing numbers of people wanting to text me (and expecting a text message back – a process which with my inability to text through a numeric keyboard tenedd to drive me to the closer edges of insanity!)  And I was also getting increasing amounts of spam.  Some time ago I rather stupidly used the number for a contact number on the WHOIS registry of web domains – it escaped from there and seems to now be doing the rounds of insurance companies and other financial services organisations, generating lots of people trying to ring me to sell me financial services…. 

In June of this year I received a phone call from BT – my Broadband supplier – asking me whether I had a mobile phone contracA Crackberry similar to mine!t, and if not would I be interested in a smartphone of some sort.  The price was not much more expensive than what I paid on PAYG, and it included more than enough minutes and text messages…and whichever one I went for a real (if small) QWERTY keyboard…and other gadgets like MP3 players and Internet connections!  And so I’ve ended up with a Crackberry…OK…a Blackberry, just in case the manufacturers are reading!

And I’m delighted.  Actually, I think that some who know me may well think I’m besotted with the darn thing.  It’s a very capable and well equipped piece of kit, and is the only phone that I’ve ever had that I ‘fondle’ when I’m not actually using it.  It’s got a nice little facebook application, a Twitter application, I stuck a memory card in and put my music on, I can take photos with it, it has a great contacts book and diary AND I can make phone calls and send text messages at a rate that satisfies my texting friends! 

AND – I can receive photos of my dear God-daughter when she’s out on travels with mum and dad!

So…I wonder how long teh new phone will last me?  The 3410 was with me for 5 or so years; I’d like to give the Crackberry at least that long – the last thing I want to do is to get in the habit of regularly changing phones!!

Wolfram Alpha – how not to make friends and influence people!

Posted on by
Reply

Hmmm…this is becoming WA corner recently – take a look at my previous piece here.  I was less than impressed with the technology and considered it either over-hyped or released too early in to the world.  However, I did hope that as time progressed there might be improvements in the results set returned and, more importantly from a developer point of view, an API published that would allow developers to build new applications to stretch and maybe improve WA.

So, this week an API was announced for Wolfram Alpha on the company’s Blog and I was pretty excited about the prospect of trying out a few things.  Despite my grumbles about the results returned, I was hopeful that with a suitable API encouraging third party developments, the underlying technology and data sets at WA might see an improvement.  My hopes survived for as long as it took me to start reading the small print – in particular this little document, the price list.  Now, I’m aware that WA has cost money to develop but to charge for developers to make use of teh API seems to be one of the dumbest and most counter-productive things they could do.  There are some ‘pioneer grants’ available for the developers, but I get the impression that these are still likely to involve shelling out money.

Google do not charge developers for use of the API until you start using the API in ‘closed’ systems and with a large number of calls.  They certainly don’t charge you during the development cycle – they have more sense.

Now, let’s assume I wanted to develop an API based application for WA – what we in the trade call a ‘proof of concept’ model – i.e. something that proves whether or not the bright idea that we sketched out on the back of a beer-mat in the pub will actually work.  How many requests might I get through to develop such an application?  Well, the other day I wrote some code to retrieve data from a Postcode / Geocode system’s API.  Now, this was a VERY simple application – send a Postcode, retrieve a list of addresses, send a code number, retrieve a full street address with map reference.  Let’s say 2 calls to the remote API for something very straight forward.  During code development and ‘in house’ testing I made about 30 or 40 API calls.  Now, during more formal testing on the client site that’s going to increase somewhat – probably in to the low-hundreds.  And this is for a problem with a well defined structure, with a finite returnable answer set – i.e lists of addresses, a single address or nothing at all, all in a set, predictable format. 

By the very nature of the sort of problem that WA has been set up to deal with, the problems passed up via an API are unlikley to be as well defined and the results set returned is also unlikely to be as simple to deal with as my addresses.  When I did some API work with Google for a client I found I was generating hundreds of API calls and responses during development, let alone testing.  For WA, I’m looking at $60 for 1000 API requests, and $0.08 for each additional request beyond the thousand I initially pay for.  Obviously, I can buy a bigger bundle, but the inference is clear – it ain’t gonnna be cheap developing for the WA API. 

API developments typically involve a learning curve for the API syntax and methods of use.  This is par for the course and to be expected.  However, when the API is interfacing to a curated data set like WA, we have an additional problem of whether the data set will actually contain the sort of data that we’re wanting to get back.  And whether it will be available in the sort of format we’re interested in.  And whether the curated data is timely compared to the data that is being made available through non-curated data sets like those available via Google – or other APIs, for that matter.  Clearly, if your problem space IS covered by WA and the data set WA has available contains what you want in the format in which you want it, then perhaps the API fee is worthwhile.  But for those developers wanting to try something new out, they’re most likely to look to free APIs to test their ideas, and spend time and energy working the wrinkles out in an environment that isn’t costing them pennies for the simplest query.

I’m afraid WA have dropped the ball big time here; by charging for ALL development use of the API they’ve alienated a large source of free development and critical expertise.  Look at how Google has benefited from the sheer number of developers doing ‘stuff’ with their various APIs.  Can you imagine that happening had they charged all the way?  Hardly likely. 

If WA were to make a limited  ‘sandbox’ set of data available for developers via a free of charge API, that would at least allow the developers to get the wrinkles out of their code.  The company could then charge for use of the ‘live’ WA datasets, and would have the additional advantage of the code being run against the live system being reasonably bug free.  By charging from the first line of code written, they’re restricting the development of their own product and driving people in to the arms of Google, Amazon, Bing and the like.  WA doesn’t appear to be offering a lot that is truly revolutionary; so-so natural language query interface against a curated data set.  I doubt it will be long before third party developers start producing the same from Google.

Book Review – ‘Mere Christianity’

Posted on by
Reply
Mere Christianity cover from Wikipaedia

Mere Christianity cover from Wikipaedia

When I used to commute between work and office I used to do a regular(ish) item on here called ‘The Bus Book’ in which I reveiwed the book I’d been reading whilst on the commute.  One book I intended to review as part of that series, but never managed it because the commuting finished, was C. S. Lewis’s ‘Mere Christianity’.

C. S. Lewis is probably best known for his children’s classic ‘The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe’, part of the ‘Narnia’ series of stories about a fantastic land in which magic has true power.  The books are also deep Christian allegory, reflecting Lewis’s great abilities as a writer on the topic of Christianity and Christian apologetics.

‘Mere Christianity’ grew out of a series of radio lectures that Lewis was asked to do in the Second World War.  The BBC approached a large number of writers and artists to develop radio programmes in the war – Orwell and Priestley were amongst Lewis’s fellow contributors to the literary war effort – and Lewis contributed a series of programmes describing the ‘guts’ of Christianity – the common issues that the Christian Faith of all denominations has to deal with.  And these programmes, after the war, became the basis of ‘Mere Christianity’.

I’ve often commented that the mental processes that led to my eventual Confirmation in to the Church of England were started by two men – Johnny Cash and C.S. Lewis – both of whom came to their belief via what’s best described as a ‘non-standard’ route – Cash through feeling the presence of God when he’d decided to give up and die in a cave, and Lewis coming back to belief after many years as an Atheist.

‘Mere Christianity’ is a relatively slim book, but heavily laden with ideas.  Stylistically it hasn’t aged well in the 60 years since the material was originally written, but that’s not necessarily a bad thing.  The style is best described as ‘no-nonsense’ and the book approaches Christianity from, in my opinion, a very Anglican perspective, although the theses within are applicable to all Christian denominations.  The Anglican faith is often said to be based on three cornerstones – Faith, Tradition and Reason – and it is this statement that Lewis uses as the basis of his ideas in the book.

The book is split in to 4 sections –

  1. Right and Wrong as a clue to the meaning of the universe
  2. What Christians believe
  3. Christian behaviour
  4. First steps in the doctrine of the Trinity

Central to the arguments of the first part of the book, where Lewis puts the case for Christianity, is the idea that there exists a general ‘law of morality’ – a rule about right and wrong known almost implicitly by all humans.  Whatever our beliefs, most people would argue that the Holocaust was wrong at any number of levels, that child-murder is abhorrent, etc.  (This was written 60 years ago – I guess it says a lot about the changes in morality in the last 60 years that I had to think hard when writing that last sentence!)  Lewis argues that for such a universal rule of right and wrong to be known to people irrespective of culture, there must be something above and beyond us to impose such a rule.

Lewis then posits what is now known in theological circles as the ‘Lewis Trilemma’ – an argument that is now a little dented by modern theological studies but that stated that Jesus was either divine, lying, or insane.  As His behaviour didn’t seem to indicate insanity, and his works did not indicate the moral turpitude associated with lying, Lewis was left with the conclusion that Christ was indeed divine.

He explores the virtues and the sins – I have to say that on reading this book for the first time the idea of  ‘pride’ being a sin – maybe THE sin -came as something of a shock to the system but when Lewis explores the idea that extreme pride is often at the back of the other sins, such as gluttony and lust – then perhaps it’s not such a long shot.  He then points out that Pride was what separated the Devil from God in the first place, so that rather put the hat on it!

Lewis’s exploration of virtue, sin and morality from a Christian perspective are interesting and well grounded.   He states very clearly that his intention with the book is to bring people who might be intrested in becoming Christians in to a sort of spiritual ‘waiting room’ where they can determine which particular branch of Christianity their calling will be for.  And it works very well on that level.  he does not intend the book and the ideas within it to be a doctrine of their own.

I think the only issue I woudl take with the book is the language and general style – it’s a little ‘stuffy’ and in a couple of places distinctly politically incorrect – and whilst that doesn’t bother me one jot I can see some people being put off.  My advice would be to persevere – the book was written 60 years ago by an upper-middle class male academic, but the issues it deals with are eternal.

I agree wholeheartedly with Anthony Burgess’s comment about the book : “…the idea persuader for the half-convinced, for the good man who woudl like to be a Christian but finds his intellect getting in the way.”  It’s a great and useful book – I wish I’d come across it earlier in my personal spiritual journey.  An excellent companion for Lewis’s religious novel in ‘letter’ form, ‘The Screwtape Letters’.