There's been much debate about the costs, so, fair play to him, David Miliband has detailed them. It is stunning that he sees nothing odd about a blog costing £6K to set up - but then, like most of the government, he knows zero about technology. He claims to write it himself, but then he needs a lackey to "post the entries" - why? - if he writes it why can't he post it?
What raised a wry smile from me was comments like this:
This rumpus over the blog costs and alleged party political bias is incredibly tedious. The fact that a Cabinet minister has a blog and is willing to engage with all of us through it is a cause for celebration.
Celebration? Oh yeah, let's have a street party! This would be "engage" redefined as "use our own money to preach at us and not listen to a word we say" would it?
Government costs a lot, it cost a lot even under Mrs. Thatcher. Politicians are political, they were even when the Tories are in power.
Who mentioned Thatcher? and in any case, what a pathetic justification "we cost lots but so did Thatcher" - to be clear, are you saying Thatcher was better, worse, or the same as Miliband? For my part I'm struggling to see why I should like Miliband any more than Thatcher, and I hate her!
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
So Now I'm a Paranoid Luddite....
Charles Clarke called me the "chattering classes". I'm not sure which is worse, but frankly, I'm a bit disappointed (if not at all surprised) that people who don't agree with intrusive and authoritarian State Licensing of their identity are being characterised in this way.
Thankfully, I'm not alone, and amongst the virtual community I have been lucky to encounter some thoughtful and incisive protagonists.
I have tried to see some good in the idea that the State no longer works for me, but that in future I will be obliged to prove to it (and various other people) who I am using an expensive and dangerous system imposed on me, but I can't.
I have tried to see the positive side in the reversal of the "innocent until proven guilty" principle that means that unless I sign up and pay for the State control and management of my identity, The State (and many others like Neil) will assume I must be a lying bastard with something to hide; but I can't.
Does this make me a Paranoid Luddite? No, it doesn't.
At least I'm not some starry-eyed idiot with misplaced vague faith in "new technologies". Our Prime Minister admits he can barely send an email, relies on his daughter to operate his iPod, and sometimes has to watch TV at Number 10 with the sound off because he doesn't know how to turn the volume up.
David Miliband claims to write his own blog, but oddly, he needs a civil servant to post the entries and vet the feedback comments.
Neil once told me he could find out my postal address using my current IP address.
These leviathans of computing and biometric technology assure us that our data will be safe with them - excuse my scepticism, but frankly there is fuck all chance they know what they are talking about.
Who are the real Luddites in this picture?
Thankfully, I'm not alone, and amongst the virtual community I have been lucky to encounter some thoughtful and incisive protagonists.
I have tried to see some good in the idea that the State no longer works for me, but that in future I will be obliged to prove to it (and various other people) who I am using an expensive and dangerous system imposed on me, but I can't.
I have tried to see the positive side in the reversal of the "innocent until proven guilty" principle that means that unless I sign up and pay for the State control and management of my identity, The State (and many others like Neil) will assume I must be a lying bastard with something to hide; but I can't.
Does this make me a Paranoid Luddite? No, it doesn't.
At least I'm not some starry-eyed idiot with misplaced vague faith in "new technologies". Our Prime Minister admits he can barely send an email, relies on his daughter to operate his iPod, and sometimes has to watch TV at Number 10 with the sound off because he doesn't know how to turn the volume up.
David Miliband claims to write his own blog, but oddly, he needs a civil servant to post the entries and vet the feedback comments.
Neil once told me he could find out my postal address using my current IP address.
These leviathans of computing and biometric technology assure us that our data will be safe with them - excuse my scepticism, but frankly there is fuck all chance they know what they are talking about.
Who are the real Luddites in this picture?
Monday, March 26, 2007
Neil and Longrider
I am starting to think Neil is doing it on purpose - he can't be serious - can he?
Neil can't do logic - so full marks to Longrider for persistence - I am about a nanosecond from the torrent of personal abuse against Neil that would just let us all down - but I feel he brings out the worst in otherwise reasonable people with his insane theories, random logic, reverse psychology and apparent use of English as a second (or maybe third) language.
Neil can't do logic - so full marks to Longrider for persistence - I am about a nanosecond from the torrent of personal abuse against Neil that would just let us all down - but I feel he brings out the worst in otherwise reasonable people with his insane theories, random logic, reverse psychology and apparent use of English as a second (or maybe third) language.
Thatcher Told a Lie in the Commons - Shock
To listen to the apologists for the hideous amoral piece of dog excrement that is Mrs Thatcher, you'd think such a thing was inconceivable. However, I suspect when faced with the evidence they'd probably just say "oh well she did it for the good of Britain". Of course it didn't do Britain any good in this case, but why let the truth get in the way of a good bit of warmongering: a principle our current PM seems keen to follow.
Thatcher was asked about BA 149 by Tony Banks shortly after it had been allowed to land in Kuwait. She answered in her usual robust style that the plane had landed and refuelled and had a change of crew, and that it had all taken place prior to the invasion (this is all amtter of record in Hansard and the TV coverage). In my opinion, Thatcher must have known that wasn't true -or if she didn't she damn well shouldn't have opened her condescending nasty horrible mouth. The invasion had in fact begun several hours before the plane landed as several hundred innocent passengers found to their cost when they were rounded up by Saddam's troops and held in extremely unpleasant conditions. Not all of them lived to tell the tale.
Thatcher may not (or indeed may) have been responsible for the actions of BA management in this case (there is speculation that the plane was made to land because there were special forces on board), but she could have either kept quiet or told the truth in the House Of Commons.
It seems contempt for the House isn't as new as some would like to suggest.
Thatcher was asked about BA 149 by Tony Banks shortly after it had been allowed to land in Kuwait. She answered in her usual robust style that the plane had landed and refuelled and had a change of crew, and that it had all taken place prior to the invasion (this is all amtter of record in Hansard and the TV coverage). In my opinion, Thatcher must have known that wasn't true -or if she didn't she damn well shouldn't have opened her condescending nasty horrible mouth. The invasion had in fact begun several hours before the plane landed as several hundred innocent passengers found to their cost when they were rounded up by Saddam's troops and held in extremely unpleasant conditions. Not all of them lived to tell the tale.
Thatcher may not (or indeed may) have been responsible for the actions of BA management in this case (there is speculation that the plane was made to land because there were special forces on board), but she could have either kept quiet or told the truth in the House Of Commons.
It seems contempt for the House isn't as new as some would like to suggest.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Neil's at it again
Neil at Brighton Regency Labour Supporter has posted on ID cards again. Either he's doing it to be annoying, or he really doesn't understand the difference between the words voluntary and compulsory.
He also seems to think that a good argument in favour of bad things is that someone can do them already - as in someone can steal your identity right now - so why are you complaining about the government trying to help them?
He also makes a untrue allegation about the NO2ID campaign and repeats his use of Luddite as derogatory term in spite of the historical context.
Laughably, he can't tell the difference between privacy and paranoia, either.
All of this is a shame, because I still agree with him about Thatcher and PR.
He also seems to think that a good argument in favour of bad things is that someone can do them already - as in someone can steal your identity right now - so why are you complaining about the government trying to help them?
He also makes a untrue allegation about the NO2ID campaign and repeats his use of Luddite as derogatory term in spite of the historical context.
Laughably, he can't tell the difference between privacy and paranoia, either.
All of this is a shame, because I still agree with him about Thatcher and PR.
Low Energy Light Bulbs
I have some of these - they work well in some places.
Some of my fittings can't accept them, and some rooms have dimmers so they can't be used in those.
When they are banned, my old fittings will have to be replaced and so will my dimmer switches.
Carbon emissions to manufacture new fittings - landfill for the old ones. How green is that?
Some of my fittings can't accept them, and some rooms have dimmers so they can't be used in those.
When they are banned, my old fittings will have to be replaced and so will my dimmer switches.
Carbon emissions to manufacture new fittings - landfill for the old ones. How green is that?
Charles Clarke - The Insider
Charlie did a programme on C4 advocating ID cards and DNA databases. He called me the chattering classes (or should that be class). He is a nasty, sneering man with limited understanding of the facts about ID databases (see what I did there?).
As an aside, I couldn't do a better job of having a go at Charles Clarke (even if it is a bit like shooting fish in barrel for such a prize berk) than this.
I suspect the programme had less to do with any real ideological support for tracking the whole population and keeping tabs on everyone (which he seems to think would be great for us all) than it has to do with him jumping around shouting "don't forget about me! Me, over here, the fat one, you remember!" in the run up to the post-Blair Prezza scramble for power in the Labour Party.
As an aside, I couldn't do a better job of having a go at Charles Clarke (even if it is a bit like shooting fish in barrel for such a prize berk) than this.
I suspect the programme had less to do with any real ideological support for tracking the whole population and keeping tabs on everyone (which he seems to think would be great for us all) than it has to do with him jumping around shouting "don't forget about me! Me, over here, the fat one, you remember!" in the run up to the post-Blair Prezza scramble for power in the Labour Party.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
