Friday, 23 June 2017

Trust in the News

Sussed out the RyanAir booking thing. We couldn't check-in without booking a seat as we'd selected to check-in for the return flight simultaneously, and the return flight is more than 7 days away, hence the mandatory seat booking. Checked in for the outward flight only and we managed to get the free seats, but while I was in 30B, Hay was placed in 05A. They punish you by separating you for not booking the seats. Bastards.

Is it me, or were Melvyn Bragg and Michael Palin separated at birth?

Trust in news media has been making headlines, especially in the wake of fake news in newspapers before and since the EU referendum.

Claims of BBC bias abound from both the left and the right (which I treat with equal scepticism for reasons articulated several times in the past), but what the BBC does report is at least factual, unlike the utter drivel published in many daily newspapers. I can, however, accept it's slightly left of centre, as expected from an organisation that employs university graduates.

I always listen to Today on Radio 4 in the morning and I predominantly use Flipboard for my daily e-news source - it collates numerous news sources covering whatever subjects I'm interested in, filtering out the more partizan and disreputable stuff; although, when this do slip through, the opposing viewpoint is also shown. Flipboard also has a more international view, publishing stories from other countries on a variety of subjects. It helps in seeing what other countries think about the UK, which is not flattering at present.

I use the Reuters website quite a bit too, as it regularly comes out as staunchly centrist and international.

I often quickly peruse the on-line versions of the Daily Mail and the Guardian, just to see opposing views and have a laugh at some of the more rabid Daily Mail comments (the Guardian comments seem much more intelligent and measured, although they too can be quite extreme and bizarre at times).

Facebook is perhaps the least trustworthy news source in the world and, if anything does attract my attention, I will invariably seek corroboration elsewhere.

Thursday, 22 June 2017

Thought for the Day While Sunbathing in a Hat

Thought for the day: is the free movement of capital as problematic as, or indeed more problematic than free movement of people?

OK, I'll get it out of the way and say the nights are drawing in.

Loved Mrs Queen's European hat yesterday - it couldn't possibly be accidental and I would suggest Prince Philip, with his usual mischievousness, was behind the choice. With complete and typical neutrality, it could be taken two ways - five stars for what it may end up as, or as a snub to the government, which has stupidly risked the breakup of her once United Kingdom.

RyanAir is trying to pressure us into buying a seat now for anything from £4 to £16 before we can check in. I strongly object, as I've paid the fare already and I'll bloody well stand all the way if necessary.

One of the questions in my YouGov daily poll yesterday was "Have you suffered from sunburn over the last few days," to which my answer is no. As a teenager, and well into my mid 30s, I wouldn't miss a chance to do some bronzying, especially when at sea in the tropics. It was the unspoken rule that a seafarer had to return home as brown as a nut. The desire to get a suntan tailed off from then on, to the extent that, since my 50s, I tend to shun sunlight, if at all possible. There again, it may have had something to do with me selling my soul to Satan and these long cuspids that appeared.

Wednesday, 21 June 2017

Phoenix RyanAir Kefir

What's this in the news about Phoenix Nights being cancelled? Didn't realise there was another series.

We're preparing for our holiday in Ireland, leaving the house in the care of my two teenage sons, Hay's dad and Hay's sister. Anyone who cares to attempt a robbery with that lot looking after the house is either very brave or plain foolhardy. 

We're flying to Knock and then driving over to Murrisk in Mayo. However, the fly in the ointment is RyanAir. They try to extract money from you at every conceivable opportunity. You have to pay 20 Euros to manually book in at the airport, which is fine, as we could book on-line for free. The problem is that you can only book in online two hours before your flight departure, and you have to print out your boarding card. That's obviously not possible if you're using a normal computer, as the availability of printing facilities is somewhat scarce in airports. The only solution is the use a mobile app and get an e-boarding card on your phone - but I'm fully expecting something to go squonk with the system when we attempt an app-based check-in at the airport with 2 hours to go, resulting in us having to check in manually for 20 Euros.

I've perfected the kefir making. I put the kefir grains in a one litre Kilner jar (actually one of IKEA's lookalikes) with the milk (semi-skimmed or whole), seal it so it's airtight and leave it in the fridge for a week. The conversion takes place slowly and under increasing pressure, resulting in the perfect, fizzy kefit drink by the end of the week. That's then decanted into plastic bottles for use during the next week while I'm making the next batch. One litre a week is about the right amount, added to which it is happy fermenting away while you're on a week's holiday. Being left a few days longer isn't a problem, and I dare say I could get away with leaving it to ferment in the fridge for 2 weeks without any problems.

Tuesday, 20 June 2017

Varifocal Formations

Cloud formations in the shape of the UK/GB are all the rage at present. I snapped my own yesterday morning in the sky over Chipping Sodbury:

For some time now I thought I had scratches on my varifocals - either that or some smudge that I couldn't remove. Got Hay to have a look as, without my glasses, I can't see things close up. It transpires that my lens prescription is etched into the lenses. Apparently it's common practise with varifocals.

Why this should be done only with varifocals is a mystery.

Monday, 19 June 2017

Bloody Foreigners

During what started as a reasonably good-natured argument with several people on a Facebook group in support of Brexit (I'd gone into the lion's den), one person got a bit frustrated and called me a 'foreign piece of shit' on the basis of my surname. I have to admit, it was the only instance of someone using logic, albeit faulty, in the entire argument. It was more a use of assumption than formal logic and a case of adding two and two to get five.

I'd spent several sporadic hours throughout the day trying to get some Brexit supporters to articulate a single reason for their support of Brexit that wasn't based on a demonstrable fallacy, a misunderstanding of the areas under the influence of the EU, couldn't be immediately be demolished with a bit of simple logic or wasn't based on simple, naked xenophobia. Needless to say, there was not a single argument that could hold water and make me think; "Hang on, you have a point there." The argument, for what it is, is manifestly visceral and therefore immune to reason.

David Davies will today boldly go into Europe for what will inevitably be his Dunkirk moment. It will be interesting to watch events unfold, especially now that support for Brexit is crumbling in both the country as a whole and the government in particular.

Sunday, 18 June 2017

Age Related Conservatism

a few weeks ago I received an invitation to join YouGov, the polling firm, to provide input to many of their polls. No idea why I was selected, but I thought it a good idea. YouGov has daily polls on some three subjects that are in the news and the result of the polls are fed back to those who participate. The results are broken down by gender, political leanings, UK region and age group, and they show some interesting trends, the most obvious one being that people move to the right of the political spectrum as they get older.

Psychologists have studied this age related conservatism (with a small c) and have identified a number of factors.

  1. As we grow older our thinking slows down, and intellectual curiosity stagnates. This leads to us becoming less inclined to seek out new experiences, which are proven to open us up to alternative views.
  2. After the age of about 40, and accelerating as we enter into our 60s, this slower thinking tends to make us see things as either black or white and we dismiss views that conflict with preconceptions, shutting out new knowledge.
  3. As we age we prefer to navigate life on autopilot, feeling more comfortable with the perceived certainty of our isolated views. Remaining open-minded causes uncertainty, leading to insecurity and self-doubt. Older people are less willing to admit they've made a mistake and cling tenaciously to old, discredited mantras.
Time after time, the daily YouGov poll feedback shows those over 50 generally have more reactionary views, while those at the other end of the age continuum are more progressive.

The strange thing is that the older I get, the more I seem to be moving to the left. It could be a lot to do with the fact that the older I get, the more frugally I tend to live life, meaning I've become less acquisitive and much happier in my skin, which makes me think a bit more about those less fortunate than me.

Having said that, like most people, I inherited my politics from my father - a Conservative - and voted that way for decades, not really questioning why. In my 40s I moved a tad left of centre and remained there, having developed a more analytical approach to politics and a social conscience. To be honest, I've not moved further left; the left seems to have moved closer to me. I'm constantly horrified by the number of people who never read a manifesto and vote on the basis of either blind, tribal allegiance (as in the parental example above), or the presidential attributes of the party leaders.

Saturday, 17 June 2017


Some one has spotted a cloud formation that looks like post-Brexit UK:

This image is concerned with symbols of the oppression of women. When I hear people having a go at the burqa, whether it be for genuine reasons or just masking something else (and it's usually the latter), I'm reminded of the quote; "First take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

Friday, 16 June 2017

Cat & Fox Game

This one's called Fight or Flight.

And this one's called Pincer Movement.

Thursday, 15 June 2017


I think I've figured out the Covfefe thing. It's his Twitter account password.

As I mentioned last week, I've been reading a very interesting couple of books; Sapiens and Homo Deus, by Noah Yuval Harari.

Consider the following:

Artificial Intelligence is progressing at such a pace with billions being invested it it,, with that it could easily replace many areas of work within a decade or two - even areas we've always considered safe from computers, such as lawyers and doctors. Anything we can do, with only a few exceptions, probably around values, ethics and morals, can be performed by AI algorithms. Anything that involves pushing buttons, pulling levers, analysing vast amounts of data, can all be performed more efficiently by algorithms. This could lead to mass unemployment on a truly industrial scale. Costly training of professionals would disappear too, leading to huge savings. True, new jobs would appear, but nowhere near as many as those lost, and they would only be for the well educated in engineering and research.

Now, universal suffrage was itself a direct consequence of fears following on from the French Revolution, which showed that the proletariat could become a serious threat to the established order if they massed - and the Industrial Revolution itself massed them in towns. Agricultural workers on farms were not much of a threat, as they were usually fully occupied and dispersed, whereas poverty and unemployment in cities could politicise the new hives of industrial workers. Giving the new proletariat workers a say in the running of the country, on a gradually increasing basis, stopped the revolution spreading to the UK.

The voter is seen by the elite as a unit of production. The elite will therefore go some way to ensuring the unit of production remains productive through political bribes. If mass unemployment results from AI taking over from humans in various jobs, the human unit of production is no longer of value, and his or her vote is of no value either, leading to disenfranchisement.

The only way of stemming a potential revolution on the part of the disenfranchised is to give them free money - a universal wage - paid for out of the vast profits generated by the use of AI to replace humans. The mass unemployed have to have money in order to provide fees to the AI machine, or else the whole system collapses anyway, as there are fewer people with money to buy the newly developed and massively efficient AI services and products. However, it would be a minimum necessary to keep the system working.

A Doomsday scenario? Finland is already trialling it, and for the above reasons.

Wednesday, 14 June 2017

Foxy Well Politicians

The inevitable happened last night - Foxy came for his dinner only to run into Kitty. There was a bit of a scuffle and Kitty saw him off. As soon as Kitty came off guard duty he came back though.

Hay had an appointment yesterday at something called a Well Woman Clinic. Bloody oxymoron, if you ask me. A bloke doesn't even go to see his GP when he's ill, never mind about when he's well.

Apparently a team of scientists have used algebraic topology, a branch of mathematics used to describe the properties of objects and spaces regardless of how they change shape, to analyse the brain. They found that groups of neurons connect into 'cliques', and that the number of neurons in a clique would lead to its size as a high-dimensional geometric object. "We found a world that we had never imagined," says lead researcher, neuroscientist Henry Markram from the EPFL institute in Switzerland. "There are tens of millions of these objects even in a small speck of the brain, up through seven dimensions. In some networks, we even found structures with up to 11 dimensions." 

Human brains are estimated to have a staggering 86 billion neurons, with multiple connections from each cell webbing in every possible direction, forming the vast cellular network that somehow makes us capable of thought and consciousness. With such a huge number of connections to work with, it's no wonder we still don't have a thorough understanding of how the brain's neural network operates.

In order to simplify the study, I'm led to believe that the team will be working on Brexit supporting Conservative politicians' brains. They'll move on to something more complex at a later stage.

Tuesday, 13 June 2017

Having Your Cake by Semaphore

I find it rather strange that Tories are claiming Jeremy Corbyn's manifesto tax rises would make rich people and businesses move out of the UK while simultaneously claiming that a hard Brexit and leaving the Single Market would not do the same.

There's nothing like like ideology for showing up inconsistencies and cognitive dissonance.

Does anyone remember Monty Python's semaphore version of Wuthering Heights? I can't seem to remember that one...

Monday, 12 June 2017

Village Day Lessons

Each year we run the Village Day we come away with some lessons to make improvements on the numbers for next year's event:
  1. If there's something for kids, then that will attract the parents. This year, as well as the 'make yourself a funny hat' stall (run by Hay and her sister), we had the local primary school field a choir and, naturally, all the parents HAD to attend, albeit under protest in many cases. On the basis of that, I'm going to suggest that next year we kidnap the kids from all the local primary school on the Friday afternoon and hold them to ransom in exchange for raffle tickets on the Saturday event. It could prove an expensive strategy though, and there's always the risk that some parents would allow us to keep their kids.
  2. While the pork sausages and bacon baps went down well, we should have widened the demographic by offering halal bacon and pork sausages.
  3. I will also suggest we dress someone up as a traffic policeman (we have a semi-retired policeman on the committee anyway) and get him to divert traffic from the road, with the aid of a mock-up radar gun, into the Village Day venue car park on the pretext of catching them speeding (which they will be guaranteed to be doing anyway). They could either go to the Village Day Speeding Re-education Stand or pay a 'fine' for a raffle ticket.
  4. The armoured vehicle and WWII weapons stand proved popular - next year we should have a mock battle between Brexiteers and Remainers.

Sunday, 11 June 2017

Tug of War

So BoJo denies he's going to try to unseat Mrs May. Can't say I'm surprised, as the position of PM is now a poisoned chalice until the Brexit bomb is defused one way of the other. As for requiring the DUP to prop up any leader, if there's one thing that can be guaranteed to elicit sympathy for N.I. Republicanism it's the DUP, never mind the fact the arrangement may be illegal under the Good Friday Agreement. The situation is like Mrs May saying a bad deal is better than no deal. One thing's certain, Brexit means Shambles.

The Annual Old Sodbury Tug of War between different lanes in the village was held yesterday. It always descends into farce as ringers are imported from miles away (he's staying with us for a few days, so he's entitled to join in, etc.)  and team numbers seem to have the fluidity of the lottery.

While the videos above are not of the finals, last year's Champions lost. However, if you look at the bloke at the end of the rope on the left, in the men's game, he's clearly an international rugby player...

Next year we're obviously going to have to hire a Tug of War tactician from TWIF to coach the teams - I ask you, is bare feet a winning tactic?

Saturday, 10 June 2017

Strong and Stable

Overheard while watching the fox in the garden:

Hay: "How do you make signs to a fox that you aren't a threat?"

Chairman: "I think it helps if you're not mounted on a horse with a pack of hounds."

So we have a minority Conservative government propped up by a bunch of homophobic, young earth creationist, anti-abortionist, climate change denyers. That'll work out well then. She promised certainty, but I didn't think it meant the certainty of hell on earth.

Not only that, but it looks increasingly likely we'll have that buffoon and serial liar, Boris Johnson, as PM within 6 months. We've just elected a PM who wasn't elected when she came to power, only to have another one foisted on us soon. The UK must be an international laughing stock.

It'll make the Brexit discussions quite interesting to have a UVF hit squad and some Semtex at the negotiating table. I wonder if Mrs May is thinking of targeting the Loyalist paramilitaries on ISIS sympathisers? The one saving grace is that the DUP favour a soft Brexit.

Too many issues have clouded this election - and the elephant in the room is Brexit. In order to allow the electorate to focus on party policies and elect a majority government, the boil of Brexit has to be lanced once and for all. The sane thing to do (but since when have the Conservative party been sane) would be to have another referendum, using the 60% majority marker, which is the case in every proper referendum, followed by another general election shortly afterwards. Accepting a simple majority in the referendum was simply bonkers and doesn't allow negotiation from a position of strength.

No, it's not what the Brexiteers want, but it's in the interests of political certainty - whether we head into Brexit negotiations or not. If we are to enter into Brexit negotiations, any government negotiating from a minority position is in a position of inherent weakness.

Either that, or stick with the original, stated intent that the referendum was advisory and ditch the whole sorry mess, leaving us to cope with 5 years of austerity and tax breaks for the rich, rather than a total disaster that Brexit will wreak.

Friday, 9 June 2017

Power is Truth

If there's one thing this UK election has highlighted, it's the utter folly of accepting a slim, simple majority in any referendum, as the resulting division is guaranteed to bring uncertainty and uncertainty is not good for the economic viability of any country. Strong and stable demands a large majority. Are the long knives about to be wielded? The Conservatives have now proven, in the referendum and this election, that political opportunism is the order of the day. For the 3rd time within a couple of weeks, I repeat that any endeavour having self-glorification as its endpoint is bound to end in disaster.

I was watching the James Comey testimony on TV yesterday and at one stage a Senator said something like; "It's always good when truth speaks to power." Speaking truth to power was a phrase allegedly coined by Quakers in the 1950s.

The problem in the USA, and now the UK, is that, increasingly, whatever power says is rapidly becoming truth, even if delivered by Twitter, and anyone who disagrees is labelled a traitor.

Trump is an arch proponent of the Orwellian power is truth ideology, along with a lot of news media outlets.

The problem is that if enough people believe the lie and the myth, it's as good as a reality. You only have to look at the paper money in your wallet - intrinsically worthless and backed by nothing more concrete than the market's confidence in the country, yet we can't live without it, so it's convenient to believe the lie.

Myths bind people together to achieve great things that can't be achieved by individuals. Binding myths are things like religion, nationality, cyber-currencies, trading blocs, corporations, political parties, even government itself - none are real and exist only in the minds of the believers for so long as it's convenient. For most, it's far come comfortable to live in the Matrix than to unplug themselves. The irony is that the myths are also the things that deeply divide people.

On reality; if a politician says; "The reality is....," the one thing you can guarantee is that the last thing they're talking about is an objective reality - they're talking about the myth.

I recommend reading a couple of books, both by Yuval Noah Harari; 'Sapiens' and 'Homo Deus'. The latter goes into great depth about convenient myths and where humanity is heading. I read Sapiens last week and am half way through Homo Deus.

Thursday, 8 June 2017

Reynard II

Reynard has visited us every evening this week except for one, when it was raining particularly hard. He (or she) doesn't have a set time, but it's anywhere between 8:30pm and 9:30pm,

The ritual is always the same - he come up to the tump outside our French doors and just sits there, staring into the house. I then get the day's scraps (possibly with a pouch of cat food added if there's not much in the way of scraps), go outside and the fox retreats to a safe distance until I've decanted the scraps on to the tump (a tump being local-speak for any hillock).

Sometimes he takes a mouthful and disappears for a few minutes before returning for another; at other times he snaffles the lot there and then. Once finished he hangs around for 10 minutes or so, hoping I'll take more out, but I never do.

Wednesday, 7 June 2017

Turing Test Bribery

So Banksy's planned give-away of posters for anyone who can prove they voted against the Tories has been declared illegal, as it constitutes a bribe. Call me old fashioned, but aren't bribes the very reason we have elections in the first place - what else is the promise of a tax cut if you vote for me, if not a bribe? There is also, however, the matter of taking a photo in a voting booth, which is frowned upon.

Do you think Diane Abbott has been decommissioned? She's certainly not been weaponised - not even sure if she'd pass the Turing Test for consciousness. Following yet another interview disaster where she showed she obviously hasn't mastered either her brief or the art of bluffing, she just has to go - she can't be trusted to run a playgroup, never mind a government department. She's even worse than BoJo and his puerile actions.

Talking of the Turing Test - will AI ever develop feelings? When you think about it, we are formed by feelings caused by experiences. Now AI could very well learn from experience, but feelings are a different matter. No computer could feel pain like organisms do. Sure, they could learn to react to stumuli to simulate a painful experience, but that would be for our benefit, not theirs. The same with empathy, love, fear, etc. These feelings are what make us human and enable us to have conscious morals, ethics and self-control (or the lack of it). You can't simulate the feeling of a toe being stubbed on a circuit board. A computer couldn't care less whether you switch it off or not - it certainly wouldn't exhibit anxiety, unless it developed self-consciousness, and as we don't know what that is ourselves, programming it must be a very long way off.

Tuesday, 6 June 2017

Arming the Police

There are calls for arming the police in the wake of Islamist terrorism; as always, there are two sides to the argument.

Would arming the police prevent an attack - highly unlikely given the terrorists are prepared to die. Would armed police prevent high numbers of of murders during an attack - possibly, even probably, if they were on site immediately, and that's only really possible in cities.

However, once police are armed as standard, what's to prevent a bunch of terrorists dressing as police and entering a venue with guns unchallenged? Once we become used to police carrying guns, we would not question people dressed as police carrying guns. That's a high risk.

Will arming the police lead to trigger-happy police? It's a risk and there are countless stories from the USA of trigger-happy cops making mistakes, although we don't seem to hear as many stories (if any) from the continent, where many police carry guns.

Do the number of attacks warrant arming the police? Probably not - despite recent attacks you're still far more likely to die of an obesity related disease than die in a terrorist attack.

The jury is out, but let's not be hasty and turn to a sledge-hammer solution in an attempt to solve an issue which still has a very low chance of happening, despite the perceived risk being understandably high among the public. Decisions made in haste usually come back to bite you in the bum. I remain to be convinced, and so too are many withing the police service.

Surely it's better to put more resources into intelligence led efforts to prevent attacks happening in the first place (for example, not ignoring warning calls from the public)? I do, however, believe the decision on arming bobbies should be left to the experts and not politicians bowing to popular pressure.

There's a lot of hoo-haa about Jeremy Corbyn's U-turn on shoot-to-kill following the recent attacks. No, he hasn't changed his mind on shoot-to-kill, because the action of the police in those cases was not shoot-to-kill. Shoot-to-kill is not taking out terrorists during an attack, it's taking them out on the mere suspicion they are going to conduct an attack. The shoot-to-kill policy was developed during The Troubles - they are extrajudicial killings. I don't believe he's changed his mind on that, which cost the UK government dearly at the ECHR (which is not a part of the EU, as Brexiteers seem to believe). It's arbitrary law, and that's a dangerous precedent within a western democracy.

As for the police numbers argument - and the public focus here is not counter terrorism, where funding has actually gone up, but visible, crime policing - numbers were cut due to falling crime rates, which, when you think about it, is a perfectly rational reaction to save money, can't really blame the Conservatives for that and the accusations doing the rounds smell more than a little of political opportunism. Would higher police numbers have prevented the attacks? There is a role for community police in gathering intelligence from the streets (but no more effective than the anti-terrorism hotline), but even if there was a police presence on every street corner, those perpetrating the attacks would still have gone ahead. Can't decide on this one, but there's always the question of public perception.

The main problem is that, in a western democracy, you can't lock up people for thought crime unless you want to enter a dark, Orwellian world. Some freedoms come with a price, a price we have to pay if we're not going to sleep-walk into a totalitarian, police state future - the very thing anti-terrorism fights.

Monday, 5 June 2017

Election Placard Cars

I can't think why politicians put up election placards. They comprise nothing more than a reminder that a particular candidate is standing for election. It's not even as if they contain any particular message - it's usually an image of the candidate and his or her party, and that's already known - or if it's not, then you get a reminder at the voting booth. Seems an awful waste of electoral expenses to me.

I came down on Saturday morning to find our freezer had packed up - we got it on Freecycle when we moved into the house some 5 years ago, so it's served us well for a freebie. Hurriedly bought a 2nd had replacement on eBay for £45 and went with my trailer to collect it in Bristol. When I arrived to collect it, I spotted this in the owner's garage.

Some 60 years old and not a scratch on it. Beautiful.

Yesterday we went to Avebury for a gander at the stone circles and the local manor, which is owned by the National Trust, and then took in Marlborough High Street. It's not often you see two Lamborghinis in one day.

Sunday, 4 June 2017


I've been thinking a bit more about the nuclear option in light of the question to Jeremy Corbyn on Question Time. Let's start with a few postulates:

  • A government's first duty in exchange for leadership is the defence of its citizens.
  • It follows that a government must defend against the possibility of nuclear aggression.
  • Nuclear weapons have only ever been used against non-nuclear states.

Global nuclear disarmament is an ideal - almost all nations have declared chemical weapons illegal (I think there are only 3 countries that haven's signed up), yet they're still in use in some parts of the world - as are other internationally banned armaments. They can't be uninvented and all it takes is a change of government - whether democratically or via a coup - for an ally or treaty signatory to become a rogue state.

I know this is pure semantics, but a retaliatory weapon, used when you're already dead, is not a defence. Defence is prevention, not something you do post mortem in revenge. It's a deterrent against a first strike, or a defence only if your opponent doesn't have nukes in the first place - as in the case of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and nearly, if reports are to be believed, as a last resort by Israel against Egypt in 1967. Nukes can be first strike weapons only in the instance of your enemy not being nuclear capable.

Using a first strike against a nuclear armed opponent without expecting a retaliatory strike is naive. So why launch one, unless you're 100% certain of eliminating the retaliatory strike with your first strike, which is impossible given nuclear armed submarines. Ergo, no-one in their right mind would launch a first strike against a nuclear capable enemy - it's like you both taking a suicide pill. History, thus far, has proven nuclear weapons to be an effective deterrent against nuclear armed states.

Given a government's first duty is one of protection, unless there's a non-nuclear defence against nuclear attack, nuclear arms are the most pragmatic deterrent against geographically bound nation states. They are not, however, a defence against a dispersed ideology that has no territory to lose - other means have to be found for defence against such enemies, even if they have acquired nuclear arms themselves (which is not beyond the bounds of possibility).

A deterrent is only effective as a deterrent if it deters, and that means you have to do some posturing or, at the very least, leave your enemy wondering whether you'd use your nukes in retaliation. What you cannot do is to categorically state that you wouldn't use them. It's like advertising your front door is unlocked.

Next we come to the question of whether not having nuclear arms makes you less susceptible to being a nuclear target. Nagasaki and Hiroshima would indicate this not to be the case - so far - and as we have seen above, there's an argument that they're more likely to be used as a first strike weapon against a non-nuclear opponent.

Any war is a dreadful thing, but nuclear war is the worst.

I've always wondered whether the Hippy movement in the 60s and its associated anti-war stance was shaped by a generation having been brought up by their mothers while their fathers were away fighting wars - the lack of a father and the heavy influence of the mother shaping their view of war.

Feel free to critique and add something.

Saturday, 3 June 2017

Trump's Nuclear Climate Fox

Trump maintained he didn't want to be part of a climate deal that didn't penalise the world's largest polluters.

For a start, America comes 2nd to only China in the world rankings of polluters by country; however, when it comes to pollution per capita, it comes 7th, after Qatar, Kuwait, Australia, Turkmenistan and Oman - all of which are signatories to the Paris Climate Agreement. America has well over twice the emissions per capita of CO2 than China. The irony is that America is undoubtedly exactly what he rants against.

Trump said no-one would laugh at America again. Ha, ha, ha! It would appear this is a desperate attempt to enact at least one election promise, but as I said a few days ago, any endeavour having self-glorification as its endpoint is bound to end in disaster.

What the hell - let's all go and dig coal, climb into a large gas guzzler, grab our guns and go bomb the hell out of some other nation to secure the oil for our gas guzzlers. Better still, convert our cars to run on coal.

I watched some of the Question Time Leaders' Special programme on the BBC last night. It strikes me that if you press the nuclear button first or in retaliation - and we're talking here about two nations with nuclear capability - we might as well kiss our arses goodbye anyway. If you use the nuclear option in retaliation, then that presupposes you're not dead already after having been struck first; if you use it first, by the previous argument, that's not a final event and you're going to end up having a retaliatory attack levied against you anyway. In either case, few will survive. It's something called mutually assured destruction.

To be honest, if I were Jeremy Corbyn, I'd have refused point blank to answer the question about whether he'd press the nuclear button, as deterrence depends on your potential enemy not knowing whether you'd press the button or not. It can't be denied that not having a nuclear capability makes a country less likely to be nuked in the first place. To be fair, nukes are an anachronism in this data driven and electronic age.

Perhaps the answer is to have a nuclear capability and elect an unpredictable and mentally imbalanced imbecile to run the country - a bit like America. The ultimate deterrent?

Our fox has been every night this week to be fed, except last night, when it was raining. Fair weather fox?

Friday, 2 June 2017

Biased Expenses

Saw a Facebook post yesterday comparing Theresa May's 2016 expenses with that of Jeremy Corbyn's and the SNP bloke and, yes, at first glance it looks as if Mrs May, on something like £4k, was being very frugal with her expenses and Jeremy, on £18.5k, is somewhat more profligate.

That is until you actually inspect the itemised expense report and realise that, as Home Secretary, she had little to do with her constituency and that there was a separate expenses pot for cabinet ministers with offices in London. All that showed on her Maidenhead expenses list was printer cartridges, staffing costs and a few train journeys between London and Maidenhead - not even any office rental (which points to the Maidenhead Tory surgery office - which actually has a Reading postcode - being owned outright by the party, or the rent possibly being paid by a donor).

Look at Jeremy Corbyn's expenses (£18,500) and you see that there's a large sum of £1,800 per quarter for office rent in Islington, which is a damned sight more expensive than a leafy business park on the outskirts of Reading.

The moral is that you should never believe propaganda on Facebook, as it's rarely accurate, or even if it is, the interpretation is usually biased. Do some digging - it's relatively easy to find the truth and expose the myth promulgator.

Accusations of BBC bias are legion - from both sides of the political divide, which is what makes the accusations so ludicrous. It strikes me that the perception of BBC bias against your party is directly proportional to your bias toward your own party. One seeks out the any criticism of one's own party and calls it bias, while simultaneously ignoring any criticism of the opposing party - it's called confirmation bias, as well as what we experts call a cheap shot.

Thursday, 1 June 2017

Broken Politics

So Mrs May would rather be on the campaign trail than participating in a TV debate. While she can easily ignore or evade voters' questions in a carefully staged and heavily scripted visit to a factory or a bakery, it's a bit more difficult on a national TV debate. Then there is that little matter of the uncosted manifesto, not to mention answering accusations of Tory smear tactics against Corbyn.

There is an impressive body of data to suggest TV debates help to inform, educate and encourage the electorate to participate more in democracy - greater numbers watch the gladatorial election debates than any other form of campaigning. They can even get the electorate to more fully inspect manifestos, rather than relying on slanted propaganda from a partizan press - whether the Daily Telegraph (or Mail) or the Guardian. They also equalise party access to the mass media, giving parties with a smaller election budget a better chance to get their message across.

Increasingly, in Western democracies, campaigns have become dominated by the trustworthiness of the political leaders, who are candidates for the highest office in the land. The Leaders' TV Debate is basically a job interview with the board of directors. The Americans have been doing Presidential debates since the 60s and the Swedes since the 50s.

If Theresa May saw the debate as a distraction from the forthcoming Brexit negotiations, then why the hell call an election 11 days before they're due to start, unless it was pure, but misplaced opportunism. Nothing essentially wrong with opportunism, but the fact she said one thing and did another makes one doubt her every utterance. If I hear the words 'strong and stable' once more, I'll throw up. A reduction to a 5 (or 3, if today's stats are to be believed) point lead from the massive one at the start of the campaign is not strong, nor are several policy U turns during the campaign an indication of either strength or stability, nor indeed principle.

No-one seemed to mention the absence of Nicola Sturgeon, who has always struck me as quite strong and fearless. It'll be an interesting election.

The winner? I'd say Caroline Lucas gave the best, most sincere performance on the night. Corbyn had the best policies and is also cam across as sincere.

The loser? Either Rudd or Nuttall. Hard to choose between them - Rudd was trying hard to defend the indefensible and I just can't take Nuttall seriously as a political force, or indeed a human being.

We watched Jimmy McGovern's 'Broken' last night. Utterly believable and a salient reminder to all about how hard it can be to live on the breadline.

Wednesday, 31 May 2017


Asking a politician how a certain manifesto pledge is going to be funded is the easiest shot from an interviewer, and the one you'd think for which each and every politician standing for election would have a crib sheet available. However, amazingly, it's the one question politicians of all sides trip up on. The Conservatives dodge the question completely by not providing any costings.

It also annoys me no end that rather than telling the listener what their party will do, politicians immediately rip into the policies of other parties. The first rule of sales is not to slag off the opposition, but highlight the benefits of your own product. The media will find the chinks in the armour ot the other parties.

As for Mrs May banging on about her being best to lead the negotiations with the EU, I don't believe for a minute she (or Corbyn) will even be near the negotiating room - it'll be left to trade negotiation experts who understand these things. If it isn't, then God help us.

Trump is getting even more annoying by the day. Someone once said that any endeavour that has self-glorification as its end point is bound to end in disaster - nothing can demonstrate this as succinctly than that strutting, orange peacock, Trump,

Tuesday, 30 May 2017


What on earth was the Manchester suicide bomber doing buying scourers and tins of Glade the day before he was intending to blow himself and others to kingdom come? It suggests some forethought and expectation of need at some future time, unless he was buying these items for his mum. Inexplicable.

Talking of time, I'm one of those people who would, if possible, rather be half an hour early for a meeting than five minutes late. Something I inherited from my father (certainly not my mother). It may also come from my seafaring career, where knowing the exact time is critical to knowing your position and when to relieve the previous watch.

However, I rarely know accurately what the time is in our house. I sport an old, 1960s, self-winding Omega watch that was my father's, which loses anything from 1 minute to 5 minutes in a day, depending on the temperature, phase of the moon and day of the week. I also have an old art deco spring driven clock on my desk which, in addition to the foregoing criteria, seems to be affected by the season.

The only reliable timepieces in my possession are my mobile phone (and I rarely view it to determine the time) and a battery driven clock on the wall in the living room. The microwave keeps good time, but cooking times are based on time elapsed and not absolute time, so the actual time it displays is not important and can be wildly wrong, as I can't be certain it was set correctly after the last power failure and never really bother to ensure it's correct.

Knowing the exact time is rarely an issue though, as it's only crucial for teleconferences, where my phone calendar keeps me appraised of when to call in. For meetings I rely on Waze, which I've never found to be out by more than a couple of minutes in its prediction of my ETA - I set my destination well before leaving and then head for the door when I have 15 minutes to spare (by the phone's clock). Barring unexpected accidents en route, I have yet to arrive late at meetings.

Having worked from home for many years means I'm not subject to the clock-watching mentality that makes so many office workers anxious. The freedom from having to catch a bus or train at a specific time, or to be potentially delayed by traffic jams, is so liberating.

Monday, 29 May 2017

Cycling Albums

I detest inconsiderate cyclists - these two were the 3rd lot we came across on the same stretch of country roads near us yesterday. Two abreast on undulating roads with frequent blind bends. They just wouldn't go in single file. Tractors at least pull over once in a while to let traffic through.

When we did finally manage to overtake them in a safe spot, we saw they were just casually chatting away to each other, totally oblivious to the hold-up they were causing.

When there's nothing decent on the TV, we've taken to selecting one album we haven't listened to in a while and playing it all the way through with no distractions. Over the last 3 nights we've done Delicate Sound of Thunder (Pink Floyd), Foxtrot (Genesis) and The Sensual World (Kate Bush). Tonight it's In the Court of the Crimson King (King Crimson).

Sunday, 28 May 2017

Let Sleeping Badgers Lie

Overheard during TV programme on sleep:

Dr Michael Moseley: "Alcohol before sleeping relaxes the throat muscles and makes you snore."

Hay: "There you go, Badger - you mustn't drink alcohol in the evening if I'm to get a decent night's rest."

Chairman: "But that would be very bad for me, as I'd have to drink in the morning."

Hay took this cruel video of me last year during my meditation exercises.

Overheard this morning:

Chairman: "Greg Allman has died."

Hay: "He was married to Cher once."

Chairman: "Everyone's been married to Cher. I think I was married to her once."

Reynard came a little earlier last night for his dinner and I managed to get a decent video of him.

I was having a read of the Sunday Times this morning and alighted on the British Airways computer failure story. A whole 3/4 page spread, along with the usual graphics that are designed to use up lots of space and yet add bugger all to the story. Anyway, as an observer, the focus of my interest from a news perspective is the cause of the IT failure and what was done to restore operations, but what are we presented with? interviews with disgruntled travelers who spent £5k on a flight and are understandably a bit miffed. That's not of the slightest interest to me - I'd expect there to be hordes of complaining passengers following the cancellation of all flights - it's not news.

The media today seems to engage not in asking crucial, newsworthy questions, but in interviewing Joe Bloggs and hearing his complaint. The human interest angle trounces real news, but it's the kind of human interest that totally uninteresting, except to the person being interviewed.

Saturday, 27 May 2017

Jimmy Sweep's Paths of Glory

Hay's dad had had the chimney sweep round yesterday for the once yearly brush out. I do like his advert on his van.

I'm making good progress with the paths mown through the lawn. It's turning out better than I thought it would, but next year I'll be trying to add more than just buttercups, daisies and the odd poppy.

This is the area I'm still trying to reclaim from the spoil of the house and cabin footings. I'm going over sections of it on the ride-on mower on the highest setting, but still shredding cutting deck drive belts like they're going out of fashion. I bought a small harrow to drag behind the mower, which works well, but additionally drags thousands of buried stones to the surface - large ones from buried, Cotswold stone walls and scalpings from the car park we made.

Here's what's been reclaimed so far from all over the filed/garden. Enough to make a decent wall or two.

We planted a pear tree a quince and a plum tree last weekend and intend adding to them to create a fruit orchard. We already have two large and old apple trees and a couple of plum trees on the other side of the garden.

Friday, 26 May 2017


Yesterday evening, at about 9.30, I managed to take a couple of poor quality, low-light snaps of our local fox snaffling the bones from No.1 Son's dinner of pork spare ribs.

It looks to be a youngster and is very sleek and healthy, unlike the one we've had visiting us for several years in the past, which was somewhat mangy and had a slight limp. This could be the older fox's offspring.

He, or she, has been a regular visitor at dusk since about a month ago, sometimes sat just the other side of the retaining wall in the photos, staring into our living room and observing us quizzically and a bit miffed if we haven't left the kitchen scraps out for it.

It was nearly dark, although the photos don't show that fact. A few minutes later Blackie, one of the neighbour's cats, crept into the scene this side of the wall, each animal being totally oblivious of the other until the fox crept past the house. Had a fight ensued, I'm uncertain which would have come off best, but I believe both seemed as scared as the other.

Thursday, 25 May 2017

Pining for the Fijords

I really don't know what they're putting in potting compost these days. Last year we holidayed at Lee Bay in North Devon and I collected some cones from some pine trees I particularly admired in the photo below, which was taken from our holiday rental.

I kept them in the fridge over the winter to scarify and sowed them a couple of weeks ago - some in potting compost and some in plain, garden soil. The ones in the garden soil have sprouted and are well on their way, whereas the ones in the potting compost just aren't doing anything yet and I'm fearing for their survival. I wonder if they've rotted.

We also have a Christmas tree in our garden which was planted perhaps some 20 years ago - it was one of those Christmas trees with a root ball. when that kind of thing was all the rage, and Hay's dad decided to plant it out after Christmas. It's now well over 40 feet tall.

I planted some seeds from it last year and they are progressing nicely.

A couple of years ago, on a business trip to Rome, I also collected some cones from an Italian Stone Pine tree - pineus pinea - the ones that are typical of Italian country scenes with the bare trunks and massive, spreading canopies. One seed sprouted, survived and is thriving.

Hay's dad has had a Monkey Puzzle tree for years. It was confined in a rather small pot and not thriving at all. We planted it out last autumn and that seems to be doing quite well now.

I started on mowing simple paths through the lawn last weekend and the result looks good, although not yet sufficiently visible on photos. It will certainly cut down on the mowing, as well as providing cover for birds and small mammals and wind flowers for insects. 

Wednesday, 24 May 2017


Terrorist is a word that's increasingly on people's lips these days, especially after Monday's attack in Manchester, but what exactly is terrorism? People believe it's incredibly difficult to define - like beauty, or quality. There's the old adage that says one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter, so the conclusion is that it all depends on your perspective.

The dictionary definition is the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. Were the French Resistance terrorists? By that definition, yes - they targeted the Vichy as much as the Germans. To quote another well-worn phrase, history is invariably written by the victors and victors never portray themselves as terrorists. However, the French Resistance were actually freedom fighters using the weapons of terrorism - they were objectively both and it's not actually a matter of perspective. Any use of terror tactics makes one a terrorist, irrespective of motive. Regular armies can and have used terrorist tactics.

As always, there are differences between dictionary definitions and legal definitions - here are various legal definitions of terrorism which eliminate states from the equation:

  1. It can only be conducted by non-state actors operating undercover,
  2. It reaches more than the target victims (indiscriminate),
  3. It is legally illegal.
The following conditions fall outside some legal, definitions of terrorism:
  1. In war (and sometimes peacetime) when committed by a nation state,
  2. In self-defence,
  3. Against enemy materiel in times of war,
  4. Collateral damage.

That, bizarrely, gives a state carte blanche to commit terrorist acts against minorities.

Is terrorism ever successful - again, yes - there are many examples from the Yugoslavian Partizans through Israeli Irgun against the British in Palestine to Vietnam. You could even say that the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was a success in its intent, as it brought about the liberation of Balkans and the destruction of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, albeit at massive cost.

Terrorism's aim is to inspire terror - to terrify - and every candlelight vigil, every public tear, every emotional speech in response to a terrorist act is a win in the terrorist's book. They hurt us and hope to have scared us. What they don't like is popular indifference.

Perhaps this time they've picked the wrong target, as we have a history of dealing with IRA violence to the extent that we have a generation who are bit more stoic about it than most. However, the problem is that IRA violence never really impinged on those born after say 1987, who now range into their late 20s and early 30s, form a sizeable proportion of the population and are very prone to emotional outbursts, especially on social media - millenials, as they are termed. That emotional proclivity has, in many cases, spread into the older generation through the same vehicle - or, perhaps, it was always there, but social media has given it a platform.

The usual response from politicians is to call suicide bombers cowardly, but this is no more than a knee-jerk, political reaction to vilify for political reasons, and thus not really grounded in reality. Barbaric, definitely, but cowardly?. Someone who commits an attack using terror tactics and then runs away can feasibly be called a coward, but someone who is willing to die in the execution of an attack can in no way be called a coward when they pay the ultimate price. Would you have the courage to be killed for your belief,` whether that belief is warped or high-minded?

Can a suicide bomber be called deranged? If they are, then it must be a form of selective derangement, as they can lead normal lives and are indistinguishable from fellow citizens in every other area of life, which is what makes them so dangerous. Admittedly, some are indeed deranged and suffering from mental health problems, but certainly not all, unless you call all religious belief a derangement (there are arguments in favour of that - a suspension of disbelief).

The response can only be the rejection of the terrorist's narrative of a pending clash of civilizations and, while it can be counterintuitive, particularly in the emotional wake of tragedy, psychologists generally agree that the most effective antidote to jihadist terrorism is to police them as criminals, rally round to provide useful help in the aftermath of an attack, assimilate minorities to defuse the problem at source and get back to business as soon as possible.

Marches by the EDL and the like play to the jihadist narrative by tarring all with the same brush, thus increasing tensions and ramping up considerably the sense of oppression such that it actually increases attacks that can be viewed as justified by the newly converted perpetrators. The EDL is just as much a tool of the jihadist as the suicide bomber - they are the recruiters to the cause and certainly no solution.

The news media don't exactly help with their interminable analyses and endless human interest stories that play on the emotions of the viewers and makes them feel more scared than they ought to be - even with the latest attack you're still far more likely to die in a road accident and fewer are being killed by terrorism now than in the 1980s, although you wouldn't think it.

There is one crucial difference between the IRA and ISIS - not that ISIS has been identified as being responsible in this case. The political aim of a united Ireland is something that can be the subject of negotiation and compromise, whereas a caliphate isn't exactly negotiable.

Just carry on!

Tuesday, 23 May 2017

The End of the Pier Show

Following my redundancy I've decided to join forces as an associate with an old friend (we were at the same school, but I was 2 years senior), something I've dallied with previously but, at age 62, I think the time is right. People don't like employing anyone over 60.

I went to the UK head office yesterday in Hythe - it was a pleasant surprise. It's located on the end of a pier belonging to Solent Refit, a yacht refitting business. The photos below are the initial approach, a couple of shots of the office itself and the view in each direction. Given it's a marine focused business, the office is rather apt.

I won't actually be based there, as I'll be working from home, but what a great view. Here's a short video that shows the locale: