Too often, I feel an overwhelming need to ask 'why?' when something happens. Increasingly, I'm asking this about the developments in surveillance that we are subject to. So it's hats off to Dan Gillmore who also asked 'why?' here. Unfortunately, even though he was unable to get an answer, Dan felt he had to give way and accept things. When I do this, I usually hope it has caused someone on the other end of the question to also start asking 'why?'. I get the feeling from Dan's writeup that this won't have happened in the particular case he reports - someone who gets given power to force others to do as they say is unlikely to start questioning the source of that power.
Why are we all bending over and letting the various states we live in do this? Remember, it's the state that owes its existence to the people, not the other way around.
20060429
20060423
Best biking day of the year!
And I spent it in the car...
Seeing the range and number of bikers out, mainly passing me as I struggled up the A9 en route to Crieff and then again on the way back, made me itch to get back out myself. If past experience is anything to go by, a good weekend when I've not been able to get any two-wheeled miles done is invariably trailed by bad weather during the week and into the following weekend.
There was a pride of BMW GS machines that cruised past at one point - looked very tasty indeed. I only hope they didn't get picked up by the 'safety' camera van: the proliferation of these, especially parked at places almost guaranteed to make revenue without having the slightest impact on safety, is getting on my nerves. Long straight stretches, clear visibility, no side turnings - is it really necessary to police our roads in this way? I challenge anyone who seriously believes that these scams are related to safety to support their use without the funneling of fines to interested parties. If caught speeding, I'll put my hands up to it without a problem, but I really object to the cash incentive to trap people. There are more important concepts in crime or accident prevention, but little that's easier to impose.
There's a serious trend towards 'defensive' driving being forced by the cameras. And I don't mean that in the normal, good sense. Instead, people are concentrating too much on the possibility of being flashed and are no longer giving real conditions the attention they deserve. What happens when some drivers spot a scamera? They slam the brakes on regardless of conditions and crawl past, usually 10-15 mph below the limit. This causes problems for other traffic which was making normal progress until Mr Cautious panics. Result - increased danger, not decreased.
Bad move, guys. I hope that one day the powers that be will see sense, but I suspect that the country as a whole will be cowed into submission, and we'll eventually lose the right to make our own decisons.
Seeing the range and number of bikers out, mainly passing me as I struggled up the A9 en route to Crieff and then again on the way back, made me itch to get back out myself. If past experience is anything to go by, a good weekend when I've not been able to get any two-wheeled miles done is invariably trailed by bad weather during the week and into the following weekend.
There was a pride of BMW GS machines that cruised past at one point - looked very tasty indeed. I only hope they didn't get picked up by the 'safety' camera van: the proliferation of these, especially parked at places almost guaranteed to make revenue without having the slightest impact on safety, is getting on my nerves. Long straight stretches, clear visibility, no side turnings - is it really necessary to police our roads in this way? I challenge anyone who seriously believes that these scams are related to safety to support their use without the funneling of fines to interested parties. If caught speeding, I'll put my hands up to it without a problem, but I really object to the cash incentive to trap people. There are more important concepts in crime or accident prevention, but little that's easier to impose.
There's a serious trend towards 'defensive' driving being forced by the cameras. And I don't mean that in the normal, good sense. Instead, people are concentrating too much on the possibility of being flashed and are no longer giving real conditions the attention they deserve. What happens when some drivers spot a scamera? They slam the brakes on regardless of conditions and crawl past, usually 10-15 mph below the limit. This causes problems for other traffic which was making normal progress until Mr Cautious panics. Result - increased danger, not decreased.
Bad move, guys. I hope that one day the powers that be will see sense, but I suspect that the country as a whole will be cowed into submission, and we'll eventually lose the right to make our own decisons.
20060416
How much is that...?
Over the past couple of days, Joyce and I have had cause to do more than our usual share of web browsing. Basically, we're looking for a comfortable gite somewhere in the Languedoc-Roussillion region of France, partly for a rest, and partly for a recce of the area with a view to retirement.
Why do people not make proper use of technology nowadays? For instance, far too many sites have very poor photos of the place they are meant to be selling - or even worse, many have no photos at all. It's as though the owners either never thought of what the buyers might really want to see (hint - pictures of the property, not the local village or river or scenery), or even as though they don't want to risk putting people off with an interior that isn't to everyone's taste. Well, wake up and smell the coffee - if I can't see it, I'm certainly not buying it.
Then there's the question of pricing and availability. I did a search on one site based on availability over certain dates. The best gites presented were then researched further - and two out of three were not available on the dates I'd specified. Granted, I might be flexible in my approach to dates, but this isn't going to persuade me to trust the info given.
Finally, prices. No, I'm not going to indulge in email table tennis while we sort out whether somewhere is available, only to find that it's priced out of my comfort zone. If you must use low, mid and high season prices then define the ranges - it may surprise you to know that my interpretation differs from yours, especially when mid and high season prices seem to extend much further than I'd expect. Much better however to be up front and honest - if it costs £x for dates such-and-such then say so.
This is a story of disappointing results. It seems that owners are often willfully not providing the info I require or even need to make an informed choice.
Without that info I'll simply go elsewhere.
Why do people not make proper use of technology nowadays? For instance, far too many sites have very poor photos of the place they are meant to be selling - or even worse, many have no photos at all. It's as though the owners either never thought of what the buyers might really want to see (hint - pictures of the property, not the local village or river or scenery), or even as though they don't want to risk putting people off with an interior that isn't to everyone's taste. Well, wake up and smell the coffee - if I can't see it, I'm certainly not buying it.
Then there's the question of pricing and availability. I did a search on one site based on availability over certain dates. The best gites presented were then researched further - and two out of three were not available on the dates I'd specified. Granted, I might be flexible in my approach to dates, but this isn't going to persuade me to trust the info given.
Finally, prices. No, I'm not going to indulge in email table tennis while we sort out whether somewhere is available, only to find that it's priced out of my comfort zone. If you must use low, mid and high season prices then define the ranges - it may surprise you to know that my interpretation differs from yours, especially when mid and high season prices seem to extend much further than I'd expect. Much better however to be up front and honest - if it costs £x for dates such-and-such then say so.
This is a story of disappointing results. It seems that owners are often willfully not providing the info I require or even need to make an informed choice.
Without that info I'll simply go elsewhere.
20060414
Exclusive offer!
You may have seen the hype about millionaires24.com - an email account within the domain is yours for only $399 per month. You could be one of only 10,000 people with such an account, according to the hype.
Well, I'm going to better that offer - for only £100 per month, you can have a unique "@pemur.com" email address, and this offer is restricted to just the first 100 people to apply. Yes, that's ONE HUNDRED TIMES MORE EXCLUSIVE THAN MILLIONAIRES24.COM; only the top 1% of the top need apply. You'll prove how business-savvy you are by getting a far more exclusive email address for much less than the rest are paying!
Applications to made to exclusive@pemur.com...and hurry, the best addresses are going fast!
Well, I'm going to better that offer - for only £100 per month, you can have a unique "@pemur.com" email address, and this offer is restricted to just the first 100 people to apply. Yes, that's ONE HUNDRED TIMES MORE EXCLUSIVE THAN MILLIONAIRES24.COM; only the top 1% of the top need apply. You'll prove how business-savvy you are by getting a far more exclusive email address for much less than the rest are paying!
Applications to made to exclusive@pemur.com...and hurry, the best addresses are going fast!
20060409
Season's opener
First blast out on the bike for a long while!
Given the excuse of the broken hand, I haven't really missed riding for the past few months. After all, the Scottish winter isn't the most appealing weather for riding. Although it has to be said, there is little better for blowing the cobwebs out - along with every last joule of body heat if you're nor careful.
Having kept the bike reasonably clean in the garage, with occasional five or ten minute runs to get it turned over, I wasn't unduly surprised when it started first time. I let it warm up, rolled it back and forward to check that brakes, tyres and chain were OK, then set off for Edinburgh.
Two miles down the road, I knew this was going to be painful. I'd elected to take the country roads, rather than the motorway, and was keeping the speed down - despite rumours to the contrary, I do have enough self-preservation sense not to act the hooligan - but the left hand was really giving me gyp. Seems like I have a bit more exercise to do yet to bring it back to the usual state of health and strength, since every clutch change hurts. And I could feel the little finger pulling over to the middle of the hand as I bent the fingers. This is going to take some getting used to.
So the return trip was motorway, easy on the gear changes, just getting back into the swing of watching traffic and surroundings generally. It was a beautiful day, cold, but sunshine and a light breeze. Until I started home, when it turned a bit nasty... So I didn't get through the winter without riding in the snow, after all!
Given the excuse of the broken hand, I haven't really missed riding for the past few months. After all, the Scottish winter isn't the most appealing weather for riding. Although it has to be said, there is little better for blowing the cobwebs out - along with every last joule of body heat if you're nor careful.
Having kept the bike reasonably clean in the garage, with occasional five or ten minute runs to get it turned over, I wasn't unduly surprised when it started first time. I let it warm up, rolled it back and forward to check that brakes, tyres and chain were OK, then set off for Edinburgh.
Two miles down the road, I knew this was going to be painful. I'd elected to take the country roads, rather than the motorway, and was keeping the speed down - despite rumours to the contrary, I do have enough self-preservation sense not to act the hooligan - but the left hand was really giving me gyp. Seems like I have a bit more exercise to do yet to bring it back to the usual state of health and strength, since every clutch change hurts. And I could feel the little finger pulling over to the middle of the hand as I bent the fingers. This is going to take some getting used to.
So the return trip was motorway, easy on the gear changes, just getting back into the swing of watching traffic and surroundings generally. It was a beautiful day, cold, but sunshine and a light breeze. Until I started home, when it turned a bit nasty... So I didn't get through the winter without riding in the snow, after all!
20060406
On the crest of a wave
One of the things I've noticed over the past few years is that spam seems to have some form of cycle when it comes to its prevalence.
Right now, my guess is that we've just passed something of a trough in the cycle and it's heading for the crest again. I base this on the number of mails trapped in my ISP's spam filter - a week or so back, it was quite low, only 60 or 70 over a 24 hour period. However, we're on the way back up now, to around 100 per day. At it's peak, I'd guess the deluge amounts to between 160 and 180 - it's been a month or two since I saw that, but it definitely took a dive from there and is only now recovering. This pattern isn't new - I've observed it over quite some time.
Why this might be is something that puzzles me. It's been fairly well established that the majority of spam comes from relatively few players in the field, but what affects them all simultaneously to give rise to this cyclical effect? We can disregard issues such as the US' CAN-SPAM act, which never seemed to affect the quantity of junk email one bit., or the hurricane season (takes out all those Florida-based spammers temporarily), because these haven't been functional over the past few months. But something out there is having a depressive effect on spammers' activities, and it's acting across the field. Now, if I could only catch whatever it is, bottle it and label it, I might be able to sell it - probably via email marketing.
Right now, my guess is that we've just passed something of a trough in the cycle and it's heading for the crest again. I base this on the number of mails trapped in my ISP's spam filter - a week or so back, it was quite low, only 60 or 70 over a 24 hour period. However, we're on the way back up now, to around 100 per day. At it's peak, I'd guess the deluge amounts to between 160 and 180 - it's been a month or two since I saw that, but it definitely took a dive from there and is only now recovering. This pattern isn't new - I've observed it over quite some time.
Why this might be is something that puzzles me. It's been fairly well established that the majority of spam comes from relatively few players in the field, but what affects them all simultaneously to give rise to this cyclical effect? We can disregard issues such as the US' CAN-SPAM act, which never seemed to affect the quantity of junk email one bit., or the hurricane season (takes out all those Florida-based spammers temporarily), because these haven't been functional over the past few months. But something out there is having a depressive effect on spammers' activities, and it's acting across the field. Now, if I could only catch whatever it is, bottle it and label it, I might be able to sell it - probably via email marketing.
20060404
Marketing guru
This eBay stuff can get a bit too addictive - I'm trying to get a photo of the cat to put on the site - reckon a starting bid of a tenner or so for one fully functional cat should do (or I can sell a pair for only £18). Posting and packaging may be a nightmare, though - better mark it "urgent, livestock" and warn the recipient to take great care when opening.
So here are my hints for successful selling, internet-style:
So here are my hints for successful selling, internet-style:
- Sell everything - if it exists, it probably has value. I was surprised to see an offer for outdated film on the site, so immediately added some rolls that I've held on to for five years beyond the best-before date. No offers yet, but they'll come.
- Make sure you actually have whatever you are selling - OK, you may be able to source it elsewhere if there is any interest, but it makes getting the gallery photo a lot easier.
- Put it on the site at a ridiculously low value - the reality of auctions means that a desirable item will inevitably reach its market value, but an overpriced article won't even get a bid.
20060401
The cost of a movie ticket
Bruce Schneier has announced an April Fool's competition with a semi-serious point. He's asking for 'movie-plot' terrorist threats with which to frighten the unsuspecting public, mainly as a way of pointing out the ridiculous waste of time, money and resources currently being thrown away tackling such 'threats'.
I have to admit to a small-scale imagination when it comes to disaster scenarios, although whatever anyone comes up with, I can always find a way to make it worse. The point of Bruce's competition is to find how a small, relatively cheaply funded group can sow the maximum amount of disruption and upset. Note that this does not necessarily mean killing large numbers of victims (though that does serve as a good way of getting attention), but it may be directed at economic disruption instead. The general consensus of opinion seems to be that poison is a good tactic, being invisible and simple to spread when you don't even care who the victim is. But I think this lacks the direct impact of a bomb blast, as well as meaning larger numbers of individuals need to be involved over time - and it further lessens the impact if the perpetrators are caught, much better to leave them in the shadows for a future attack.
Plots tend to congregate around choke points, so defending these seems fair enough. But it only takes a little thought to realise that there are too many to defend properly - if we concentrate on the airports, the attackers move towards rail or road transport. If we protect the tunnels, they hit the bridges. Bruce's argument is the the money and resources spent on making people feel better by having visible checks would be more effective at fighting terrorism if it were spent on intelligence and identifying the instigators before they act. Just how many terrorists have been stopped at airports by the added security? Then think about how many inocent people have been harrassed or inconvenienced by the same security...
I have to admit to a small-scale imagination when it comes to disaster scenarios, although whatever anyone comes up with, I can always find a way to make it worse. The point of Bruce's competition is to find how a small, relatively cheaply funded group can sow the maximum amount of disruption and upset. Note that this does not necessarily mean killing large numbers of victims (though that does serve as a good way of getting attention), but it may be directed at economic disruption instead. The general consensus of opinion seems to be that poison is a good tactic, being invisible and simple to spread when you don't even care who the victim is. But I think this lacks the direct impact of a bomb blast, as well as meaning larger numbers of individuals need to be involved over time - and it further lessens the impact if the perpetrators are caught, much better to leave them in the shadows for a future attack.
Plots tend to congregate around choke points, so defending these seems fair enough. But it only takes a little thought to realise that there are too many to defend properly - if we concentrate on the airports, the attackers move towards rail or road transport. If we protect the tunnels, they hit the bridges. Bruce's argument is the the money and resources spent on making people feel better by having visible checks would be more effective at fighting terrorism if it were spent on intelligence and identifying the instigators before they act. Just how many terrorists have been stopped at airports by the added security? Then think about how many inocent people have been harrassed or inconvenienced by the same security...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)