I thought I was heading faster towards 12, but I'm disappointed to see I had only achieved 3. But there is another one that occurred to me this morning, so the list is now up to 4:
1. Always carry a clean, ironed handkerchief in your pocket. Always.
2. Never buy into timeshare apartments or holiday schemes.
3. If you have a choice, buy the washing machine with a 15 minute "fast wash" option.
and, ta-dah:
4. Always buy reverseable belts. (You know, usually black on one side and brown on the other.)
Friday, June 28, 2019
Thursday, June 27, 2019
Comics knowledge expanded
Hey, I don't think I knew this before:
and now I see Cracked did have an article in 2013 that listed him as one of the 5 most absurd superheros, with this quote noted:
As for cringe-y dialogue:
and this:
I am, verily, amused.
The Gay Ghost (later renamed the Grim Ghost, not to be confused with Grim Ghost) is a fictional superhero in the DC Comics universe whose first appearance was in Sensation Comics #1 (Jan. 1942), published by one DC's predecessor companies, All-American Publications. He was created by writer Gardner Fox and artist Howard Purcell.A little further Googling in image search brings up some amusing, hardly gay at all, results:
and now I see Cracked did have an article in 2013 that listed him as one of the 5 most absurd superheros, with this quote noted:
As for cringe-y dialogue:
I am, verily, amused.
Frankenstein disappoints
The second series of The Frankenstein Chronicles was really quite bad. Very badly written with nothing explained clearly; too many protagonists with sideburns who looked so alike it was hard to remember who was who; a very silly conspiracy; overly gruesome in some of its violence; and things hinted at still left unexplained at the end. In fact, I wondered if there was a budget problem that meant a longer series that was originally written had to be compressed down into 6 episodes, abandoning much needed exposition.
Quite disappointing after the pretty pleasing first season.
Quite disappointing after the pretty pleasing first season.
Not encouraging from Boeing
From the BBC:
US regulators have uncovered a possible new flaw in Boeing's troubled 737 Max aircraft that is likely to push back test flights.The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) said it identified the "potential risk" during simulator tests, but did not reveal specific details.
Another very stable genius
Gee, Boris is very, very Trump like in his inconsistency:
Boris Johnson has said the chances of a no-deal Brexit are a “million-to-one against”, despite promising to leave on 31 October whether or not he has managed to strike a new agreement with the European Union.I also saw on TV last night his interview in which he explained his alleged hobby of making buses from cartons - it was very, very bizarre. Many people on twitter think he was making it up (for what possible motivation, though?) and one wit said that some flunky who works for him was probably working all night creating some to prove it's not a weird jape.
Johnson, the frontrunner to be prime minister, told a hustings that the chances of a no-deal Brexit were vanishingly small, as he believed there was a mood in the EU and among MPs to pass a new Brexit deal.
“It is absolutely vital that we prepare for a no-deal Brexit if we are going to get a deal,” he said. “But I don’t think that is where we are going to end up – I think it is a million-to-one against – but it is vital that we prepare.”
A detailed look at whether perovskite solar cells will really make a difference
Interesting article at Nature about this - seems remarkably uncertain whether the boosters of this new form of solar cell will win out.
Wednesday, June 26, 2019
A perfectly normal hobby for a politician
The only explanation I can see for disclosing this is that Boris really believes that the more eccentric he paints himself, the more people will overlook his lies and inadequacies:
Boris Johnson revealed that he makes buses out of old wine crates to relax.
He says he likes to unwind by painting passengers enjoying themselves on his model vehicles.
The former mayor of London, whose term in office included the introduction of a new 'Boris' bus to the capital's streets, was speaking to TalkRadio.
When no one answers an argument
What with Gillian Triggs coming out and (apparently - I have only seen extracts) making some dubious broad brush statements yesterday about religious beliefs and employment, I note that no one in my last thread about the Folau controversy has answered this point. So let's bump it up to a post.
Who really thinks that those who are painting this as a right to religious expression would be donating money if it were this: an Islamic sportsman with a high profile and social media accounts who used them to support things that he argues as a conservative Muslim are genuinely, religiously justified positions with plenty of tradition behind them, such as: it would be fair enough for the law to allow for gays to be stoned to death - such a scare would help some save their souls from Hell; that the death penalty for Muslim apostasy is warranted; that physical chastisement of a wife can be warranted and reasonable; child marriage isn't a big deal.
The obvious point is this: some religiously justified beliefs are readily capable of holding reasonable offence for small or large parts of a modern Western society. A company engaged in a business which wants broad support from its society should generally not have the right to discriminate on the grounds of an employees personal beliefs expressed in the private sphere, but are culture war warriors really trying to tell me that they think my hypothetical Muslim sportsman should also be free to express all his religiously justified beliefs in the public sphere via social media and it would not risk tarnishing the image of the sport that is employing him?
Those who are defending Folau on this are simply drawing the line, as it suits their prejudice and background, as to where offensiveness in relation to religious statements about homosexuality should lie.
And yes, I know there are plenty of gay folk who go out of their way to find offence, in an irritating manner too, and most are not concerned that conservative Christians are right about their destination in the afterlife. But nor do I dismiss the fact that Christian (indeed, even Catholic) statements about the inherently disordered nature of homosexuality can cause some angst to the self image of people (mainly young people) worried about their sexuality, especially if they come from a conservative background.
I therefore do not consider it unreasonable that, in these circumstances, a sporting body require that its generously paid players not engage in religiously motivated conservative commentary about the nature of homosexuality in the public sphere. As I understand it, Folau had been warned along those lines too before signing his current contract, but he chose to do so anyway.
This means it is a contractual matter, and he may or may not win on the contractual merits. He should not win on the wrong headed grounds that it should be open slather for any sportsman to be able to express any view under cloak of religious freedom.
PS: I also think quite a few sports and companies are over-compensating on the matter of support for gay folk. I would really like it if we could move past gay pride weeks and events, and find much of the public demonstration that is "pro diversity" to be an embarrassment, with gay pride parades frequently featuring fetishes, for example. I am in no way "all in" with support for the state of gay social politics as it is currently in society. But none of that changes my view on the Folau matter.
Who really thinks that those who are painting this as a right to religious expression would be donating money if it were this: an Islamic sportsman with a high profile and social media accounts who used them to support things that he argues as a conservative Muslim are genuinely, religiously justified positions with plenty of tradition behind them, such as: it would be fair enough for the law to allow for gays to be stoned to death - such a scare would help some save their souls from Hell; that the death penalty for Muslim apostasy is warranted; that physical chastisement of a wife can be warranted and reasonable; child marriage isn't a big deal.
The obvious point is this: some religiously justified beliefs are readily capable of holding reasonable offence for small or large parts of a modern Western society. A company engaged in a business which wants broad support from its society should generally not have the right to discriminate on the grounds of an employees personal beliefs expressed in the private sphere, but are culture war warriors really trying to tell me that they think my hypothetical Muslim sportsman should also be free to express all his religiously justified beliefs in the public sphere via social media and it would not risk tarnishing the image of the sport that is employing him?
Those who are defending Folau on this are simply drawing the line, as it suits their prejudice and background, as to where offensiveness in relation to religious statements about homosexuality should lie.
And yes, I know there are plenty of gay folk who go out of their way to find offence, in an irritating manner too, and most are not concerned that conservative Christians are right about their destination in the afterlife. But nor do I dismiss the fact that Christian (indeed, even Catholic) statements about the inherently disordered nature of homosexuality can cause some angst to the self image of people (mainly young people) worried about their sexuality, especially if they come from a conservative background.
I therefore do not consider it unreasonable that, in these circumstances, a sporting body require that its generously paid players not engage in religiously motivated conservative commentary about the nature of homosexuality in the public sphere. As I understand it, Folau had been warned along those lines too before signing his current contract, but he chose to do so anyway.
This means it is a contractual matter, and he may or may not win on the contractual merits. He should not win on the wrong headed grounds that it should be open slather for any sportsman to be able to express any view under cloak of religious freedom.
PS: I also think quite a few sports and companies are over-compensating on the matter of support for gay folk. I would really like it if we could move past gay pride weeks and events, and find much of the public demonstration that is "pro diversity" to be an embarrassment, with gay pride parades frequently featuring fetishes, for example. I am in no way "all in" with support for the state of gay social politics as it is currently in society. But none of that changes my view on the Folau matter.
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
A funny Creighton column
Adam Creighton has decided that the big tech companies (Google, Facebook etc) companies have too much power. He's particularly concerned that they have drained traditional news media of advertising money (true), so much so that he's willing to contemplate direct government subsidy of the news.
Well, you might think, isn't that what we get with the ABC? No, that's not enough:
Creighton appears in The Australian - a paper for which the content over the course of a year is about 95% pure ideologically driven right wing opinion to 1% investigative journalism. (And some of the latter is just true crime stuff - hardly matters of national political consequence.) If he would actually come out and note that about Rupert's pet paper - as well as make some kind of observation about the heightened propaganda machine that is the money making machine known as Fox News - he might have a skerrick of credibility.
How much "investigative journalism" does Fox News engage in so as to be bring in the big money, Adam? You know the answer - nil. Your boss has monetised ludicrously biased spin as the way a "news" network can thrive, and you have the hide to argue that private media is better at investigative journalism.
His column goes on to complain that the big tech companies real danger is to democracy - because of the way their search filters sought out the news. It doesn't take too much to read between the lines that his problem is that he thinks that filtering has a "left wing" bias he doesn't like - Right wingers have been complaining about search engines conspiring against them for years now. (Because they have trouble understanding that, with the awful "we don't care about the evidence" path the Right has taken over the last 30 years, facts now have a clear Left wing bias.)
Nor does he not mention the true and clear danger from IT companies, which is via the spread of deliberate misinformation and lies (masquerading as news), sometimes via foreign governments interested in seeding political disunity, via social media.
As usual, Adam's a just a silly lightweight who attacks all the wrong targets.
He's dumbing you down, Jason.
Well, you might think, isn't that what we get with the ABC? No, that's not enough:
Publicly funded media organisations can’t do as good a job. Private media companies have a powerful incentive to dig out bad news, even if it upsets governments, because it sells.Huh? I thought Adam's paper has been complaining about the ABC "digging out bad news" (when it is about a Coalition government in power, anyway) for decades, which kinda proves public broadcasters don't have to be in the "selling" business to be interested in "bad news".
Creighton appears in The Australian - a paper for which the content over the course of a year is about 95% pure ideologically driven right wing opinion to 1% investigative journalism. (And some of the latter is just true crime stuff - hardly matters of national political consequence.) If he would actually come out and note that about Rupert's pet paper - as well as make some kind of observation about the heightened propaganda machine that is the money making machine known as Fox News - he might have a skerrick of credibility.
How much "investigative journalism" does Fox News engage in so as to be bring in the big money, Adam? You know the answer - nil. Your boss has monetised ludicrously biased spin as the way a "news" network can thrive, and you have the hide to argue that private media is better at investigative journalism.
His column goes on to complain that the big tech companies real danger is to democracy - because of the way their search filters sought out the news. It doesn't take too much to read between the lines that his problem is that he thinks that filtering has a "left wing" bias he doesn't like - Right wingers have been complaining about search engines conspiring against them for years now. (Because they have trouble understanding that, with the awful "we don't care about the evidence" path the Right has taken over the last 30 years, facts now have a clear Left wing bias.)
Nor does he not mention the true and clear danger from IT companies, which is via the spread of deliberate misinformation and lies (masquerading as news), sometimes via foreign governments interested in seeding political disunity, via social media.
As usual, Adam's a just a silly lightweight who attacks all the wrong targets.
He's dumbing you down, Jason.
More anti Boris
A pretty savage, and somewhat amusing, attack on Boris Johnson by his old boss, Max Hastings. I liked this line:
Like many showy personalities, he is of weak character. I recently suggested to a radio audience that he supposes himself to be Winston Churchill, while in reality being closer to Alan Partridge.and this:
Johnson would not recognise truth, whether about his private or political life, if confronted by it in an identity parade. In a commonplace book the other day, I came across an observation made in 1750 by a contemporary savant, Bishop Berkeley: “It is impossible that a man who is false to his friends and neighbours should be true to the public.” Almost the only people who think Johnson a nice guy are those who do not know him.
Monday, June 24, 2019
Rugby culture wars
I'm pretty amused at the Right wing culture war outrage about GoFundMe deciding after a few days that it doesn't want to be the conduit for wingnutty people with too much money to fund the legal fees for a guy who has been earning millions for running around a football field.
They now want Folau to sue GoFundMe!
As with donations to the IPA, this latest story is another example of how wingnutty people are very easily parted from their money. They don't care how much money the donee may already have, if they think they are getting to be part of a great and glorious culture war it's a case of "shut up and take my money".
Update: here's Mark Latham getting uptight -
This from the man who was wandering around Western Sydney with a microphone in 2017 fretting about Muslim views on hitting women, Sharia law and wearing the burqa.
They now want Folau to sue GoFundMe!
As with donations to the IPA, this latest story is another example of how wingnutty people are very easily parted from their money. They don't care how much money the donee may already have, if they think they are getting to be part of a great and glorious culture war it's a case of "shut up and take my money".
Update: here's Mark Latham getting uptight -
This from the man who was wandering around Western Sydney with a microphone in 2017 fretting about Muslim views on hitting women, Sharia law and wearing the burqa.
Maybe Boris is in trouble?
I opined yesterday that Boris Johnson was probably still assured of the Prime Minister job because he is like Trump - the focus of culture war hopes that overcome any consideration of character and past performance.
But I see on Twitter this morning that lots of people are calling out his comments about how Brexit could proceed was based on a fundamental error/lie; he is also being called a liar about his past association with Steve Bannon; and now the Mirror is running a story that his argument with his girlfriend was because he actually wants to get back with his estranged wife.(!)
It's hard to know which of those, if any, might turn out to be more important. But it seems his path to the leadership might be more in doubt than I expected.
But I see on Twitter this morning that lots of people are calling out his comments about how Brexit could proceed was based on a fundamental error/lie; he is also being called a liar about his past association with Steve Bannon; and now the Mirror is running a story that his argument with his girlfriend was because he actually wants to get back with his estranged wife.(!)
It's hard to know which of those, if any, might turn out to be more important. But it seems his path to the leadership might be more in doubt than I expected.
A bridge made of grass
If you want to see a photo essay about this:
Every year the last remaining Inca rope bridge still in use is cast down and a new one erected across the Apurimac river in the Cusco region of Peru.you can hop over to the BBC.
The Q'eswachaka bridge is woven by hand and has been in place for at least 600 years. Once part of the network that linked the most important cities and towns of the Inca empire, it was declared a World Heritage Site by Unesco in 2013.
Libra scepticism
Axios reckons that everyone may be in a panic (or being prematurely enthusiastic - like the troika of RMIT blockchain conference attendees) about Libra for nothing - because it's likely to never get off the ground.
The reasons they give do sound pretty convincing.
The reasons they give do sound pretty convincing.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)