A post about Windows 7
I've been an ardent user of Debian, a linux distribution, for a long while. This decision was backed up quite well when I was greeted at a job with a Windows Vista desktop. Back to that in a little while, first - why the hell would I use linux in the first place?
Well, the main reason was that I'd been using Windows XP for a long while before that and had become fed up of the niggles that crept into annoyances, the annoyances that crept to unworkables, and the unworkables that crept to why the hell doesn't this pile of shit works. I'd had a reasonable history with Debian, a linux distribution I'd had experience with from jobs at web-development companies; I discovered it was a snap to install and on the whole, it did what I was after.
I installed it permanently on my netbook (EeePC 1000) to replace a very hobbled XP install it came with - longer battery life, better security (somewhat through obscurity, I suspect) and free software were obvious advantages. It did take some command-line jiggery-pokery to get all the features working as expected, but by jove, I got it all working and working it did, well. Almost. You see it had a few crazy oddities thrown in to keep me on my toes, like the fact it crashed randomly while connected to UCLan (my University) wireless access. When I say crashed, it either threw a Kernel Panic, or locked up totally, running 100% CPU. No rhyme or reason why, but I pretty much avoided being connected to the university network while working - kind of annoying, but made it that I could type up some lecture notes or do a bit of essay writing between lectures without entering the open access PC mêleé that happens here, so useful. I put up with that situation because I hadn't paid for Debian - you expect mileage to vary in free, open source software.
Similarly, I installed Debian on my desktop, a dual core, dual screen set-up that ran like a dream - and while I got wireless working (wireless network adapters are almost always Windows-only devices) via some more aforementioned command-line jiggery-pokery, it all worked stunningly. Except it was absolutely abysmal at playing full-screen video. And online-banking was impractical as the nazi programmers at banks seem to check what operating system you are using and refuse you access. Why it matters, I have no idea. Anyway, I started using Windows 7 on the university machines and it was quite nippy, in comparison to my experience of Vista. So I took the plunge and installed it on my desktop.
It took a while getting used to, it is now (almost) second-nature to double click an executable in order to install software, even though the first few attempts saw me open a command-line and type "su" followed by a return, my root password, with a return and "apt-get install.." before looking at the screen. I liked the fact I can now use the BBC iPlayer App, to watch programmes when the TV is in use and I've rediscovered the joy of computer games. Nothing eye-gouging HD, mainly games I last played back when I fell out with Windows XP: SimCity 4, Command And Conquer Generals to name two. However, time-vampires these are, and I can't blame Windows 7 enough for making me take forever to complete essays over the Christmas break.
So, earlier this week, I installed Windows 7 Home Basic on my netbook, to see how it would run. It was simple to install, all necessary devices worked "out-of-the-box" and I'm now connected to the UCLan wireless network without a single spazz-out. Similarly, it's nippy, light-weight feeling and manages "power-saving" better than I could get linux to do. My extra function keys appear to be a lost cause, while I managed to get them to react, Windows 7 doesn't quite do what I expect them to. Maybe a couple of hours forum-searching could solve this. I'm avoiding installing too much as I don't need anything much on it, plus the after-market installed solid-state disk isn't epic.
Therefore, I, a former linux zealot and full-time Microsoft basher likes Windows 7. I feel ashamed and dirty about it, so I presume I feel the same emotions as Nick Clegg et al should have experienced these last few months, but I'm convinced it's a good product. I still remain to be convinced about Windows as a server platform, I'm out of the loop with all things system-administration, but as a desktop or netbook platform, Windows 7 works.
I'll go bleach myself now.
Tuesday, 11 January 2011
Monday, 29 November 2010
I'm in exile in my home country
I was meeting a friend in Preston City Centre, just after the EDL/UAF demonstrations ended. I managed by accident to be swept along in a mass of EDL supporters, as I tried to walk up Church Street to meet a friend. The abhorrent racist shouting, the all-surrounding threatening behaviour, the sea of balaclavas and the abject hooliganism can't be described in enough realism to anyone who hasn't witnessed it first-hand.
At first, I was a little scared - they were your typical football hooligan look-a-likes, some wearing hoodies proudly describing them members of a "division"; which was interesting as surely a movement with such belief in "English Defence" shouldn't need to be divided? There was a massive Lancashire Constabulary presence and my fears, once I got out of the thick of it were abated. Then I wanted to feel angry, wanted to vent and rage and make them see they were wrong. But that didn't arrive; sadness did. I felt deflated.
In that moment I started to feel ashamed that I was born in the same country as these people. The Britain I grew up believing in was fair, just and welcoming. The England I grew up in was tolerant, liberal and secular. These people weren't from my Britain, my England. They singled out a large portion of English society for hatred under the guise that they were protecting English Christian values. Moreover, it was thinly veiled under a wash of political demands for protection of the Justice System, but hatred was there all the same - I saw two men have chanted at them "Fuck off Pakis" and "Burn a Mosque".
That's the key here, the right wing groups like the English Defence League and British National Party have a knack, no matter how "fair" they wish to appear, to attract those in society who wish hatred on others. In essence, these parties raise a patriotic emblem and ask that the traditional way of life is adhered to; which I'm sure Americans, with their Constitution, would have no problem with. However, there are those in these parties who use their banner - borrowed from the nation - to spout abuse, hatred and violence on others; which isn't very patriotic at all.
Given the example I witnessed in Preston on Saturday, I'm not English. I'm not British. I'm in exile in my home country. That's why I felt so sad.
At first, I was a little scared - they were your typical football hooligan look-a-likes, some wearing hoodies proudly describing them members of a "division"; which was interesting as surely a movement with such belief in "English Defence" shouldn't need to be divided? There was a massive Lancashire Constabulary presence and my fears, once I got out of the thick of it were abated. Then I wanted to feel angry, wanted to vent and rage and make them see they were wrong. But that didn't arrive; sadness did. I felt deflated.
In that moment I started to feel ashamed that I was born in the same country as these people. The Britain I grew up believing in was fair, just and welcoming. The England I grew up in was tolerant, liberal and secular. These people weren't from my Britain, my England. They singled out a large portion of English society for hatred under the guise that they were protecting English Christian values. Moreover, it was thinly veiled under a wash of political demands for protection of the Justice System, but hatred was there all the same - I saw two men have chanted at them "Fuck off Pakis" and "Burn a Mosque".
That's the key here, the right wing groups like the English Defence League and British National Party have a knack, no matter how "fair" they wish to appear, to attract those in society who wish hatred on others. In essence, these parties raise a patriotic emblem and ask that the traditional way of life is adhered to; which I'm sure Americans, with their Constitution, would have no problem with. However, there are those in these parties who use their banner - borrowed from the nation - to spout abuse, hatred and violence on others; which isn't very patriotic at all.
Given the example I witnessed in Preston on Saturday, I'm not English. I'm not British. I'm in exile in my home country. That's why I felt so sad.
Monday, 15 November 2010
taking the piss out of public sector employees' job titles
I watched the Channel Four documentary, Britain's Trillion Pound Horror Story, this morning via 4OD. It's made by the same chap (Martin Durkin) who made the similarly polemic The Great Global Warming Swindle, which ended up with criticism from OfCom. It's sill available for a while if you fancy watching it and it's one of the first things on 4OD I've watched - I was impressed by the service, although split by adverts at an arbitrary point.
In short, I found it rather dubiously one sided, making repeated reference to a figure of '£4.8 trillion' as the national debt, while not stating precisely where this figure was measured from - whereas the Office for National Statistics measures it as £1000.4 billion. Agreed, it did show some of the other things that made up the discrepency, but not clear enough to warrant this figure to be totally beleivable. The general theme throughout the show was that in the United Kingdom economy, most regions are 'overly' reliant on the public sector, which is something we all know of course. In one segment, hand picked inumerate volunteers are asked to identify the figure of £4,800,000,000,000 on the side of an articulated lorry parked acorss a busy road. This is of course to illustrate we can't comprehend the figure, but actually serves to show us that his real plan is to round up thick people in his lorry to sell on eBay.
[The following few paragraphs discuss the economics involved, skip ahead if you like to stay awake]
There was some good explanations of theory, albeit only shown from the perspective of the neoclassical camp, without any reference to the fact all theories in economics are assumptions based on very simple models - so while I'd encourage you to watch some of the 'science bits', I'd advise you to avoid them until there's a good source to counter argue the way they're portrayed here. For instance, in one demonstration, a tax man visits a restauranteur and demands fifty pounds, which is then given as wages to the staff member who administers the tax return for the restaurant, who subsequently returns to the restaurant to buy lunch, spending fifty pounds. Essentially, the point being made is that while the restauranteur has earned his money back, he's lost out because he's paid for the raw materials in the food and chef's time, for example. However, this totally misses the point as taxation isn't taken as a one-off, it's measured against profits and while companies employ various techniques to reduce their tax burden, they pay it based on an annual figure.
The film at various points makes references to the public sector as akin to leeches, that they don't serve any purpose. They're embodied in the graphics as faceless bowler hat wearing smartly dressed people, while front line staff - like nurses, doctors and police - are shown in different uniforms, albeit sexist as nurses always appear to be female or transvestites. These faceless leeches are then shown to take money and spend in local services, like hairdressers, garages or electricians; which we are reminded are services impossible to export and should be considered as stealth employed by the public sector as they'd not have any custom if the public sector didn't employ as many people. We are taken then to Newcastle, where our presenter informs us has a very high dependency on the public sector for employment: we are not informed why this is so and instead we're shown around Beamish Open Air Museum to show how it all used to be in the good old days of the Industrial Revolution.
That was when I lost all respect for the programme; the north-east of England is so dependent on public sector jobs because the Thatcher government closed the nationalised industries like coal mining. So, a few years later when looking to expand your facilities, do you choose a relatively expensive to hire supply of labour where jobs are plentiful such as London or site your new offices where there's a lot of spare labour who you can pay less? That's right, you'd site them in areas where lots of labour exists - it's two fold in effect, wages are lower reducing labour cost and also people in work would be on the dole otherwise. It went on to say how terrible this situation is and then succintly offered no solution to a way out for these areas other than "it'll be hard for a bit, painful, but has to be done".
floating turd
OK, so yes, it is useful as an opinion piece to get you thinking - but there's a turd in the water. That turd is in the form of Kelvin MacKenzie in a triumvirate alongside Lionel Blair and Vanessa Feltz taking the piss out of public sector employees' job titles. This is almost as Daily Mail television as you can get unless they themselves were to launch a channel streaming live deportations, police brutality of youths wearing hoodies and a regular update of the BBC Television Centre burning to the ground. These people are employed, they're not on the dole and they probably didn't invent their jobs in the first place. What exactly are the trio doing for lowering taxes?
Overall, I wish I hadn't watched it, but you can make your own mind up. I did plan to write about the nasty horrible things they said about the NHS - but I fear that the inclusion of Mr. MacKenzie stopped me dead. His face shows up throughout as a sort of modern day oracle, spoon feeding us his vast knowledge of economic theory via the medium of shouting at the camera about how there's no money. If this show were a contestant on ITV's XFactor, its singing voice would start like a distant high-pitched alarm, then grow louder and louder while Simon Cowell told us how marvellous it was and rigged the result so it stayed in until we all killed each other.
 |
| Our intrepid reporter asks inumerate people to identify a large number for our amusement |
[The following few paragraphs discuss the economics involved, skip ahead if you like to stay awake]
There was some good explanations of theory, albeit only shown from the perspective of the neoclassical camp, without any reference to the fact all theories in economics are assumptions based on very simple models - so while I'd encourage you to watch some of the 'science bits', I'd advise you to avoid them until there's a good source to counter argue the way they're portrayed here. For instance, in one demonstration, a tax man visits a restauranteur and demands fifty pounds, which is then given as wages to the staff member who administers the tax return for the restaurant, who subsequently returns to the restaurant to buy lunch, spending fifty pounds. Essentially, the point being made is that while the restauranteur has earned his money back, he's lost out because he's paid for the raw materials in the food and chef's time, for example. However, this totally misses the point as taxation isn't taken as a one-off, it's measured against profits and while companies employ various techniques to reduce their tax burden, they pay it based on an annual figure.
 |
| Clearly only mechanics exist in the private sector nowadays |
That was when I lost all respect for the programme; the north-east of England is so dependent on public sector jobs because the Thatcher government closed the nationalised industries like coal mining. So, a few years later when looking to expand your facilities, do you choose a relatively expensive to hire supply of labour where jobs are plentiful such as London or site your new offices where there's a lot of spare labour who you can pay less? That's right, you'd site them in areas where lots of labour exists - it's two fold in effect, wages are lower reducing labour cost and also people in work would be on the dole otherwise. It went on to say how terrible this situation is and then succintly offered no solution to a way out for these areas other than "it'll be hard for a bit, painful, but has to be done".
floating turd
 |
| Daily Mail readers will be in heaven |
Overall, I wish I hadn't watched it, but you can make your own mind up. I did plan to write about the nasty horrible things they said about the NHS - but I fear that the inclusion of Mr. MacKenzie stopped me dead. His face shows up throughout as a sort of modern day oracle, spoon feeding us his vast knowledge of economic theory via the medium of shouting at the camera about how there's no money. If this show were a contestant on ITV's XFactor, its singing voice would start like a distant high-pitched alarm, then grow louder and louder while Simon Cowell told us how marvellous it was and rigged the result so it stayed in until we all killed each other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)