Try as I might, I didn't go out for lots of bracing walks over the Christmas period. In fact, the most exercise I took was when I went to watch boxing day rugby match and ended up running the line.
Instead, most of the time seems to have been spent watching as much TV in four days as I normally watch in an entire year.
Highlight to date was probably the Gavin and Stacey special which was completely nuts and very funny. The Royle Family was a welcome return - especially for the 'Cup a Soup in a bowl' line.
Most ill-advised viewing was the double bill of Eastenders. Partly because I thought I had successfully kicked the 'stenders habit and partly because I was persuaded by my brother into taking part in an Eastenders Drinking Game. The rules are simple - each time one of the characters wishes another a 'merry christmas' you have to have a drink. The Nick Cotton pay off line at the end required us to finish up.
Worst viewing was the thing on last night about the celebrity chef who spent close on a million pounds on a car and then raced it in the Mille Miglia in Italy only for it to break down only 150 miles in. The bloke at the focus of the film was somebody I completely turned off from. He is a podgy Yorkshireman who has made a mint as a chef and lives with his model girlfriend and his collection of historic cars in a gorgeous house. I ended up actually wishing for the outcome that happened - his car broke down and instead of being worth a mint it was worth far less than he spent on it. He then threw his toys and consoled himself by buying motoring books at £1000 a pop. So clearly he still has a few quid left.
Various DVD presents have successfully filled in the weak points in the TV schedule including the wonderful Mad Men.
Senin, 29 Desember 2008
Senin, 22 Desember 2008
A bit gay
Iain Dale has a post about having to deal with some thirteen year olds who were trying to disrupt a TV interview he was recording in a park in Tunbridge Wells.
Iain says that the reporter told the kids to go away because they were a disgrace for burping while he was trying to record. As Iain says, perhaps not the wisest move.
But what really struck me about the blog were two things:
- Iain felt that because the 13 year olds were happy to engage in a shouting match with the reporter (reporter called them a disgrace, they called him a fucking prick) that they would naturally gravitate to stealing his phone or 'very expensive' Christmas present.
- Iain felt it appropriate to abuse a 13 year old by telling him that his clothes looked 'a bit gay'. Let's forget completely about Iain's sexuality here. Does any serious political operator want to pander to homophobic abuse by using it himself. On a thirteen year old.
Iain says that the reporter told the kids to go away because they were a disgrace for burping while he was trying to record. As Iain says, perhaps not the wisest move.
But what really struck me about the blog were two things:
- Iain felt that because the 13 year olds were happy to engage in a shouting match with the reporter (reporter called them a disgrace, they called him a fucking prick) that they would naturally gravitate to stealing his phone or 'very expensive' Christmas present.
- Iain felt it appropriate to abuse a 13 year old by telling him that his clothes looked 'a bit gay'. Let's forget completely about Iain's sexuality here. Does any serious political operator want to pander to homophobic abuse by using it himself. On a thirteen year old.
Sabtu, 20 Desember 2008
Not in his job description
Since when was it Gordon Brown's job to appoint football managers?
No, seriously. Amidst all the talk about a GB football team to compete in the 2012 Olympics, when did it become the job of the Prime Minister to decide who should be the manager?
No, seriously. Amidst all the talk about a GB football team to compete in the 2012 Olympics, when did it become the job of the Prime Minister to decide who should be the manager?
Jumat, 19 Desember 2008
Government proposals on blogger libel
Iain Dale has a story about possible Government proposals to change the law with regard to bloggers and libel. Bridget Prentice apparently wants to make it easier to sue bloggers for what they say and, crucially, what commenters to their site say.
To my mind, libel law should be the same whatever the medium. If something defamatory is published online, it should be as actionable as if it is written in, say, Private Eye. The difference comes in assessing damages and small scale bloggers should not be punished too heavily - especially if the defamation came in the form of a comment which they removed as soon as it was pointed out to them.
I can't be the only one who gets a bit fed up with Guido's comments section. I would heartily recommend some form of registration for the big sites. My site allows free comments because I get so few. I remove the defamatory ones asap and also those advertising dodgy financial services. If I started getting more then I should think I would move to a registration system fairly quickly.
Perhaps as soon as they get a serious libel suit the bloggers might stop their willy waving over the number of site visits they get. Proving you get more readers than a national newspaper will only up your damages.
At first sight, the proposal to introduce a small claims style system for libel can only be good news. Libel actions at the moment are not the even contest they should be. A Russian oligarch, for example, can bully many small publishers and bloggers into submission. For very small instances of possible libel, it should be possible to resolve matters in front of a judge for little or no costs and without specialist libel lawyers leeching every penny from both sides.
To my mind, libel law should be the same whatever the medium. If something defamatory is published online, it should be as actionable as if it is written in, say, Private Eye. The difference comes in assessing damages and small scale bloggers should not be punished too heavily - especially if the defamation came in the form of a comment which they removed as soon as it was pointed out to them.
I can't be the only one who gets a bit fed up with Guido's comments section. I would heartily recommend some form of registration for the big sites. My site allows free comments because I get so few. I remove the defamatory ones asap and also those advertising dodgy financial services. If I started getting more then I should think I would move to a registration system fairly quickly.
Perhaps as soon as they get a serious libel suit the bloggers might stop their willy waving over the number of site visits they get. Proving you get more readers than a national newspaper will only up your damages.
At first sight, the proposal to introduce a small claims style system for libel can only be good news. Libel actions at the moment are not the even contest they should be. A Russian oligarch, for example, can bully many small publishers and bloggers into submission. For very small instances of possible libel, it should be possible to resolve matters in front of a judge for little or no costs and without specialist libel lawyers leeching every penny from both sides.
A day at the races
Yesterday
I was at Exeter races to take photos for the Racing Post. I managed to get through the day without having a bet (good decision - the two horses I thought about backng both lost).
Not
the most prestigious day's racing in the calendar, but good to blow the cobwebs away (trans. it was a bit chilly)
I was at Exeter races to take photos for the Racing Post. I managed to get through the day without having a bet (good decision - the two horses I thought about backng both lost).Not
the most prestigious day's racing in the calendar, but good to blow the cobwebs away (trans. it was a bit chilly)
Boris manages biggest waste of cash yet
The Mayor of London has managed to waste a ton of taxpayers' money on a competition to design a new version of the Routemaster bus.
We all love the Routemaster. It is the iconic image of London. But it was gloriously unsafe and impractical. I don't know how many people were killed or injured getting off the back, but it must have been a load. The seats were too narrow for today's well-bodied types and the ceilings upstairs were so low as to cause serious damage to anyone over oompa loompa height.
But, having decided to get rid of the horrible bendy buses (although with an ever-slipping timetable), Boris has gone one further and decided to seek a 'new' Routemaster.
All the winning designs remind me of BMW's 'new' Mini. They have something of the original about them but are clearly not the real thing. And I say that as someone who drives one.
But, whilst the new Mini is a very good car in its own right, I have doubts about whether any new Routemaster will be Most of the designs seem to have the old style open access at the rear and have some form of wheelchair ramp in new centre doors. Most have the front engine and scalloped nose so that the driver's cab sits alone in the lead. But they simply look like a design student has fed the old Routemaster drawings into a computer and pressed 'update' (disclaimer - I'm sure a lot more work has gone into the designs than this, but it is not apparent from the competition website). None appear to have realistically solved the problems of the old bus.
The winners of this design competition got £25000. They probably spent this and more on the project, but how valuable is it if there is little or no chance of the designs ever being built. I don't want to decry fun for kids, but offering thousands of pounds in prizes to children to draw 'new' Routemasters hardly seems like value for money either.
With no real chance of getting new Routemasters designed and built, it seems to me that the only option is to keep the old ones on the road on a few select routes and to acknowledge the fact that they are cramped and dangerous - but also very lovely. Perhaps that is why Ken Livingstone decided to do exactly that...
We all love the Routemaster. It is the iconic image of London. But it was gloriously unsafe and impractical. I don't know how many people were killed or injured getting off the back, but it must have been a load. The seats were too narrow for today's well-bodied types and the ceilings upstairs were so low as to cause serious damage to anyone over oompa loompa height.
But, having decided to get rid of the horrible bendy buses (although with an ever-slipping timetable), Boris has gone one further and decided to seek a 'new' Routemaster.
All the winning designs remind me of BMW's 'new' Mini. They have something of the original about them but are clearly not the real thing. And I say that as someone who drives one.
But, whilst the new Mini is a very good car in its own right, I have doubts about whether any new Routemaster will be Most of the designs seem to have the old style open access at the rear and have some form of wheelchair ramp in new centre doors. Most have the front engine and scalloped nose so that the driver's cab sits alone in the lead. But they simply look like a design student has fed the old Routemaster drawings into a computer and pressed 'update' (disclaimer - I'm sure a lot more work has gone into the designs than this, but it is not apparent from the competition website). None appear to have realistically solved the problems of the old bus.
The winners of this design competition got £25000. They probably spent this and more on the project, but how valuable is it if there is little or no chance of the designs ever being built. I don't want to decry fun for kids, but offering thousands of pounds in prizes to children to draw 'new' Routemasters hardly seems like value for money either.
With no real chance of getting new Routemasters designed and built, it seems to me that the only option is to keep the old ones on the road on a few select routes and to acknowledge the fact that they are cramped and dangerous - but also very lovely. Perhaps that is why Ken Livingstone decided to do exactly that...
Befuddled Brown Battered by El-Badri
Gordon Brown gave a speech this morning where he said that oil price volatility would continue to be a problem for the coming year. Rapicly changing oil prices hit motorists in the summer and continues to affect people in the form of their utility bills. Electricity and gas companies seem to have a bewildering way of pricing their products and failing to pass on oil price cuts claiming that they have had to pre-buy at earlier prices (which didn't seem to stop them hoiking the price up as soon as it started rising).
Now the Secretary General of OPEC - the fluffy people who rule the world - has hit back. Abdalla Salem El-Badri has said that Gordon Brown is 'confused' over the issue and ought to look to his own country and Government first. Mr El Badri reckons that Brown made billions out of the high oil prices through the huge government petrol taxes and should be looking to cut petrol prices here before he starts having a go at OPEC.
Brown and OPEC have previous, as they say. Brown slagged off the oil producers back when prices started to fall when they said that they might cut production to 'stabilise' prices (ie keep them high).
It's one of those spats where you have little sympathy for either side. Clearly lower oil prices are in the interest of most people and both OPEC and the UK Government have a responsibility in this area. Long term, of course, we need to reduce our reliance on oil and that means:
- more investment in home insulation (see my budget post last March for my response to the Government's efforts in this area);
- more investment and better conditions for non oil based motoring;
- significant investment in renewable enrgy sources (and I don't mean nuclear)
Now the Secretary General of OPEC - the fluffy people who rule the world - has hit back. Abdalla Salem El-Badri has said that Gordon Brown is 'confused' over the issue and ought to look to his own country and Government first. Mr El Badri reckons that Brown made billions out of the high oil prices through the huge government petrol taxes and should be looking to cut petrol prices here before he starts having a go at OPEC.
Brown and OPEC have previous, as they say. Brown slagged off the oil producers back when prices started to fall when they said that they might cut production to 'stabilise' prices (ie keep them high).
It's one of those spats where you have little sympathy for either side. Clearly lower oil prices are in the interest of most people and both OPEC and the UK Government have a responsibility in this area. Long term, of course, we need to reduce our reliance on oil and that means:
- more investment in home insulation (see my budget post last March for my response to the Government's efforts in this area);
- more investment and better conditions for non oil based motoring;
- significant investment in renewable enrgy sources (and I don't mean nuclear)
Langganan:
Postingan
(
Atom
)