Particularly fascinating are the two reports by the BBC on the feasibility of Science Fiction on the BBC, written a year or so before Doctor Who first aired.
Once again, BBC content will only be available to machines inside the UK.
Buy a clue people! There are many people, worldwide, like myself, who would gladly pay the license fee (and not even whinge about it) to get live BBC content. The system of international rights and royalties is obsolete in the 21st century. Someone’s got to be the pioneer and start to break down those walls.
However, If I don’t go searching, not much Doctor Who news comes my way, today I ran across this article, (at ComicMix News) which purports to be “what we know” about the upcoming specials – although, from the comments, I see a healthy dose of skepticism, which I’m more than pleased to to echo.
I’m skeptical, but it’s fun to speculate.
Read on if you want to hear things that sound like rumors, but might actually be spoilers…
My original iPhone has a flaw. (Gasp! Don’t tell Steve)
The cheap plastic lens on the back of the phone is flush meaning that any sliding, even in and out of a case, can scuff the lens.
Recently, my photos from the iPhone have been getting blurrier and blurrier. I thought there was no hope.
I read online that some people were have success repolishing their scuffed iPhone lens with a product called Meguiar’s PlastX, which us for car headlights.
It took me three tries, using different buffing techniques, but on the third try my lens shows not a single scuff.
Last night during, on BBC America, the BBC broadcast all evening what I believe to be the same election coverage that was shown on BBC 1. That was an interesting different perspective, even though most of the commentators in studio were from the US. (Which seems fair since they would be the most knowledgeable on the subject.)
I was surprised at the rather disorganized nature of the broadcast. Quite often the host David Dimbleby never knew what was on screen, people were regularly cut off in mid-sentence as things popped up. It wasn’t the by-the-numbers production I would have expected from the BBC.
A couple of highlights: The Gore Vidal Interview in which Gore Vidal appeared to be, simultaneously, unable to hear Dimbleby, stoned, senile and belligerent… but mostly just incoherent.
And then (actually they occurred in reverse order) John Bolton, George W. Bush’s embarrassing one-time choice for US-UN Ambassador, was a talking head on the program at times. (Bolton was embarrassing because instead of being a “straight shooter” he’s always just an ass, and gives the impression he dislikes the UN and foreigners. – Good thinking when you made that choice, George.)
Anyway, Bolton was, typically, combative.
At one point, an in-the-field reporter was interviewing (If I recall correctly) the head of the Colorado Republican Party. He asked him if it was a surprise that a state that typically votes Republican was voting for a Democrat. The party official responded by stating the reporter doesn’t know what he’s talking about. The report asks, something like, “What do you mean, Colorado has voted for a Republican president the last 9 out of 10 times?” The party official proceeded to aggressively argue they elect lots of Democrats, talking about congressmen and governors. The BBC reporter kept trying to bring it back to the presidential election, which is what he was talking about. The party official just kept accusing him of being ignorant of the facts.
When they returned, Dimbleby turned it over to Bolton, who in his best asshole form said,
I’ve been waiting for just the right moment to blog this one for a couple of months now. I think in keeping with my earlier post about the Out-Of-Office notice, that we should be reminded that it isn’t just the English and the Welsh that don’t always get their translations sorted out.
No, not a dirty swimming pool – I couldn’t care less about that. It’s dirty tricks.
It’s been known for many years that the Republicans don’t like high voter turnouts. Little old ladies in Sun City, high paid executives who can take time off whenever they want and crazy religious fanatics make up a sizable portion of their core voting block. These are people who are either strongly motivated by self-interest or just have nothing better to do.
Typically, poorer people vote less often. Further, poorer people tend to vote against the Republicans. Ergo, the fewer voters deciding our future, the better – or so their logic goes.
Now, I may be opinionated and downright arrogant at times, but I try not to be a hypocrite, so in the interest of disclosure, I’m going to say that I’m not 100% onboard with the whole notion of 100% voting. We need an informed voting population more than we need a large voting population. Let’s face it – many people (dare I say, most?) are not informed. They don’t have time or inclination to be informed. If they do, few have the the critical thinking skills to divorce dogma from reality. (Nor do they have the desire to do so.) Our system elects unqualified morons to do a job that, at its core, should be one requiring the highest levels of critical thinking and fair-minded judgement not the skill of being a populist.
I believe that electoral reform is the single greatest issue that needs to be addressed by this country. It is at least 50 years overdue.
That’s for another post… someday.
That’s not the system we’ve got. Right now, the voters in this country are a self-selected population. That population is not, in any way, tied to the notion of being better informed. So, given the system we’ve got, I’d rather see a larger voter turnout than a self-selected smaller turnout of people motivated to vote conservative. (I intentionally avoided the word “Republican” at that point.) The only way to break that self-selecting bias is to get everyone possible to vote.
The Democrats (of which I am not one – neither am I a Republican) often make great efforts to get voters registered and motivated to vote – the Republicans fight them.
I remember years ago when Arizona adopted a motor-voter law – that is, you could get registered to vote at the same time you got your drivers’ license. The Republicans fought it tooth and nail. At the time I naively didn’t understand. Didn’t they want to get a mandate from as large a population as possible? (Short answer: No) The Republicans also tend to dislike absentee ballot (except from the military), early voting, extended voting and registering and voting on the same day. All of which make it just a bit more convenient for someone with a job they need to keep to get out and vote.
This election has seen record numbers of voter registrations, absentee ballots and early voting. Several states now have had to extend early voting hours to accommodate the people wishing to vote. The Democrats are rejoicing, the Republicans are bring out the dirty tricks.
This video, put out by the Obama campaign, outlines some of the dirty tricks being pulled, and how to avoid them. If you’re a borderline voter, don’t be fooled. If you’re an adult citizen of the US and you haven’t had your rights lawfully taken away (such as by felony conviction) you’re entitled to register and to vote. (Although in many states, including Arizona, it is too late to register for this election.) You cannot be deprived of government benefits, student aide, or hauled off to jail for late traffic fines. (Although, if you haven’t paid your traffic fines, they can haul you off to jail, but not because you are voting. Either way, pay them or fight them in court, you deadbeat.)
While I was out at lunch today, I got a text message from a friend informing me of something truly amazing, the text read: “England vs Stanford Superstars is on ESPN2 (20v20 cricket).”
Could that be true? Could Stanford and his millions have enough pull that a cricket match would be shown on American television?!
I rushed home, arriving about 15-20 minutes into the 2 hour highlights program just in time to see England lose their second, third and fourth wickets, including the mighty Kevin Peterson, before I got the TV warmed up and myself comfortable on the sofa.
What followed was the second most embarrassing display of cricket I’ve ever seen, England were all out for 99.
What followed was both opening batsmen for Standford’s Superstars carrying their bats to an easy victory in about 10 overs. The Superstars won by 10 wickets.
If the England team were Japanese, they’d have to commit suicide.
All-in-all, not the best introduction to cricket for American audiences. I wonder if they’ll ever repeat the experiment.
It would seem everyone in the US with a legit iPhone and contract received a message from AT&T this week telling us we’ve got free WiFi at of if their hotspots around the country.
Friday I decided to try it. At lunch we went to Borders Book (Barnes & Noble in disguise) with has an AT&T hotspot.
I immediately tried to connect. It detected my phone as an iPhone and asked for my number. After which I repeatedly got a failure notice. After several tries, I gave up.
10 minutes later, I tried again. This time it worked and I was told I’d receive an SMS message with a link to activate.
After several minutes the message arrived. Too late, of course, as we’d already left the book store.
I tried again today at a Barnes & Noble on the other side of town. Again, I got the repeated failure. Later, as I was leaving, it worked. This time I stuck around long enough to test it.
It does, indeed, work but the initial failure is very problematic and inconvenient.
I wonder if they knew I was planning to use the wifi to look up books on amazon.com to see if I could get a better price?
