Who says I shouldn't do this?

The lure of Linux

2009-07-05T15:47:00.010+01:00

I've had my MacBook for just over three years. Its AppleCare has now expired, though in the last six months I've been glad I shelled out the extra £200 for the cover. I ordered the MacBook a mere two weeks after Apple announced it (you can read about that elsewhere on this blog), and once it arrived I used it heavily ever since - it has become my main machine.

The MacBook has not been without problems. The WiFi sensitivity was phenomenal when I first used it, but over the months it deteriorated to the point where it became a serious pain, and I resorted to using powerline adaptors at home, while at work I had to shift the laptop around my office in order to connect to the wireless router downstairs.

Early on the MacBook suffered from the well-documented random shutdown problem, though this was relatively shortlived, being cured by a firmware update. The battery became unreliable, shutting off at about 20% without warning. This sounds in retrospect like a catalogue of serious defects, but unlike other technologies I'm used to, the MacBook didn't fail catastrophically. Rather, it exhibited that preferable mode of failure known as "graceful degradation" - most of what happened to it could be got around (such as by using powerline adapters instead of WiFi as mentioned above, or use of the mains power supply instead of the battery).

The last straw, however, was a defective touch-pad, which admittedly could have been got around by using a mouse. But by that time the cumulative problems, and the fact that less than six months of my AppleCare cover remained, prompted me to take the laptop in to be fixed. This was relatively painless, although it required two trips to the local (20 miles away) Apple Store. Repairs took about three days, and included a new battery and new top plate (keyboard and touch-pad). Although when I took the laptop in I was unable to demonstrate the poor WiFi performance (which typically reduced when it had been in use for 30 minutes or more) the WiFi seemed much improved after I got it back.

On the whole I was pleased with my AppleCare experience, even when the MacBook's WiFi did fail catastrophically a few months later, leaving me only days to get it fixed under warranty. In fact the laptop was out of warranty by the time I picked it up after it was fitted with a new Airport card.

Now, more than a month later, I'm typing this on a fully functioning first-generation MacBook that I've enjoyed using for over three years. When I bought it I expected it to be trashed by now; I knew it would get heavy use, and a three-year life-span for a laptop computer in constant use is pretty good.

What, however, has any of this to do with the title of this post, "The lure of Linux"?

Even though three years ago I switched from being a PC user who occasionally used a Mac, to a Mac user who occasionally used a PC, I've never nailed my colours wholeheartedly to any single platform. I have a cheap desktop PC that I intended to use as a dedicated Linux box but truth be told, it's not had much use. The problems with my MacBook, however, prompted me to consider what I would do when I eventually had to get it fixed. How would I connect away from home? I've also been conscious that the MacBook is not a cheap item - I'm wary of taking it anywhere where its security might be in doubt. And that's how I came to investigate netbooks - cheap and small notebook computers that allow computing and connecting on the move. I thought one of these would be the ideal portable backup solution.

I read reviews, and settled on the Acer Aspire One, which came in several configurations: Windows XP, or Linux, both with either a 120 Gb hard disk or 8 Gb solid state disk. Fortunately the cheapest option was also my preferred option: Linux, with a 120 Gb hard disk. I resolved to try out the supplied operating system, Linpus Lite (a version of Fedora Linux), on the understanding that I could replace it with the latest version of Ubuntu if I didn't like the supplied OS, in the knowledge that other people had successfully installed Ubuntu on the Aspire One.

Linpus Lite was indeed not to my liking, not least because I couldn't get it to see any of my network shares, and was reduced to shuffling files using a USB thumb drive (or by emailing them to myself!) - the Aspire One has no removable drive. So I downloaded and installed the Ubuntu Netbook Remix, which worked well and allowed me to use the applications I'm used to: OpenOffice (I use NeoOffice on the MacBook), Firefox 3 with the indispensable Google Toolbar and the other Firefox plugins I'm used to, Thunderbird to access my Gmail using IMAP, Skype, VLC. I was even able to use iPlayer Downloader once I'd figured out how to install Ruby. This setup didn't work right away - there were some tweaks I had to perform in order to get the WiFi working in the first place, but these were documented in detail in the Ubuntu Wiki.

But the one thing I could not make work was YouTube. I tried all sorts of fixes, different plugins, but nothing worked, and I resigned myself to not having Flash Video working on my netbook.

So, it (mostly) worked - sufficiently for use as a mobile backup, though there are a couple of things that irk me about the Aspire One. A minor point is that the keyboard is small, so I tend to mistype frequently (though this may improve with extended use). The other is more critical, in that the battery life is poor - two hours if you're lucky. I understand that there is a higher capacity battery module available for the Aspire One, though I haven't seen it.

I read recently that there was a new version of Ubuntu available, and knowing that I would shortly be once again without my MacBook I decided to upgrade the OS on the Aspire One. The Netbook Remix version was available only from the Ubuntu site, rather than via BitTorrent, which I'd used in the past, so I had to wait a while for it to download (it was nearly a gigabyte), and the image was only available for booting from a USB memory drive, so I had to find out how to make a bootable USB drive, which, after several false starts, I did on the Mac mini using a Terminal window. A clean installation of Ubuntu Jaunty Jackalope went smoothly on the Aspire One (I'd already backed up the little data I kept on it) and I then set up the various apps. And this time I decided to use the Ubuntu Package Manager to install the Adobe Flash Plugin. This (version 10) went without a hitch, and I was not a little surprised to find that I was now able to view Flash Video. A quick check over at YouTube confirmed that all was in perfect working order.

Linux becomes more capable with each version, incorporating ideas from both Mac and PC. Ubuntu Linux will make PDFs of anything that can be printed, in much the same way as you can on any Mac. The previous version of Ubuntu on the Aspire One would not mount a USB drive partition if it was in Mac format, though unlike my Windows PC it could actually see it. The latest version of Ubuntu will not only mount the Mac partition but read it as well.

It may be true that Ubuntu is not suited to the computer novice - Linux seems to require a certain willingness to customise, to get down and dirty with the OS, that novices may be rightly reluctant to do. But it's no longer true (if it ever was) that Linux is a second class operating system. In principle it can do anything that Windows or OS X can do; the limitations are in the apps written for it, and many of the independent, open source and freeware software houses are increasingly including Linux versions. Linux is what most of the internet runs on, and it's the operating system running many digital video recorders and other consumer electronics devices.

Linux is a version of Unix - and what's underneath that silky smooth Macintosh OS X? Unix. All we need now is a Linux version of iTunes.

Iconoclasts - Andrew Keen - BBC Radio 4

2008-11-07T00:06:00.009+01:00

I didn't hear it live (I was watching a fireworks display at the time), but the programme mentioned on a previous post is available to stream for a few days more:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/radio4_aod.shtml?radio4/iconoclasts

Website here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/iconoclasts/

The debate was bit of a mess, and nothing much was resolved. None of the participants addressed the fundamental issue - that new media technology has rendered the old gatekeeper-style of publishing obsolete. We live in a different world now, and there's no going back.

When the audio streaming link above expires, download the mp3 from RapidShare:

http://rapidshare.com/files/258029640/Iconoclasts_AndrewKeen_BBCR4i-20081105.mp3

Andrew Keen and the end of new media

2008-10-29T08:43:00.005+01:00

Internet curmudgeon Andrew Keen is at it again, moaning about people creating stuff for free, and telling them that they've got it coming:

Andrew Keen predicts the end of "free labor" online - Boing Boing
...which links to this article at Internet Evolution:
Economy to Give Open-Source a Good Thumping

Keen continues to judge Web 2.0 by mid-twentieth-century standards, but new media technology is fundamentally different from what we had back then, and many of the old criteria have ceased to apply. In the UK we'll be getting more of his doomsaying next week. Here's an extract from RadioTimes.com:

Iconoclasts

Wednesday 05 November
8:00pm - 8:45pm
BBC Radio 4

Edward Stourton chairs a live discussion series in which guests set out their strong views on a subject, before being challenged by a panel of experts. 2: Andrew Keen, one of the pioneering entrepreneurs of the internet boom, argues that Web 2.0 is an anarchic movement that destroys culture of real value.

It will be interesting to learn who's on the panel of experts. It's a live show, and the producers are asking for listener input during the broadcast: iconoclasts@bbc.co.uk. Until then I offer this quote from Oscar Wilde's Lady Windermere's Fan: "What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."

Has blogging had its day?

2008-10-26T15:54:00.002+01:00

In general agreement with what these people were saying on the Today Programme recently, I think the answer is no.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7685000/7685883.stm

It is not worth starting a blog, and if you already have one you should think about closing it down, an article on the technology website Wired says. Robin Hamman, of computing consultancy Headshift, and Guardian writer and blogger Kate Bevan discuss whether shorter forms of communication, such as Twitter, are taking over.

They go on about Twitter - a service I've never seen the point of, even if whole swathes of savvy internet users seem to swear by it (though perhaps not literally).

I blog because I'm a writer, and because I frequently don't know what I really think until I've written it down. Whether anyone else reads the thing isn't necessarily an issue (though discourse is, as always, welcome).

(And just in case anyone scoffs at the idea of a monthly post here at WitteringOn being classed as actual blogging, I would refer them to my other blog, Notes from an Evil Burnee.)

If the audio stream isn't working, download the mp3 from RapidShare here:
http://rapidshare.com/files/341863325/Today_BloggingHadItsDay_BBCR4i-20081023.mp3

(5'50"; 1.4 Mb)

Will Eoin Colfer taint Douglas Adams' masterpiece?

2008-09-18T19:05:00.007+01:00

Eoin Colfer (pic) has been asked to write the sixth part of Douglas Adams' Hitch-Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy 'trilogy', and some people are expressing concern.

I'm linking to the repost on RichardDawkins.net as well as the original Guardian article, because the comments at RD.net highlight a common concern raised whenever some piece of literature is 'continued', or a classic film is remade.

People seem to be worried that an inferior sequel or continuation somehow taints the original work. It doesn't. The original work is still there. Look at modernisations of Shakespeare. You may like them or loathe them, but the original plays are still available, entirely unaltered by any reinterpretation. My great uncle, Herbert M. Jenkins, was adamant that Shakespeare should be played in one of only two ways: Elizabethan dress, or the dress of the period the play was portraying. (He had a point - there's a passage in Julius Caesar where Caesar is described by an onlooker as "throwing open his doublet". No mention of him wearing a toga, which seems more likely attire for ancient Rome.)

I think Uncle Bertie was wrong. Authors, dramatists, film-makers, indeed creators of any kind are free to draw on any sources for their inspiration, copyright permitting. They may or may not do a good job (though that's often a matter of opinion or artistic judgement). But whatever they do, they will not extinguish the original work, which is available for anyone to experience in its pristine original form.

Or even to make yet another adaptation.

Harlan Ellison: "Pay the Writer" - an outdated concept?

2008-09-10T20:12:00.005+01:00

Harlan Ellison is well known for being . . . forthright.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj5IV23g-fE

(via WritersWeekly)

His point of view is a valid one, but it's also a little dated in this age of new media. For all his maverick bluster Ellison is an established writer who got where he is today by traditional methods. Those methods have become less appropriate now that so much free stuff is available.

New writers ('underpublished' writers, as Evo Terra of Podiobooks.com calls them) would do well to explore the alternatives. Slavishly insisting that every word carries a price-tag can be counterproductive. In essence Ellison is right, but it's worth remembering that writers can receive 'value' for their work in other than money.

Muriel Gray on Graphic Novels

2008-08-25T10:09:00.009+01:00

In my previous post I casually mentioned my lack of knowledge of graphic novels. Serendipitously BBC Radio 4's Open Book, temporarily hosted by Muriel Gray, featured on Sunday a short discussion on that very subject. The programme will be repeated on Thursday at 4:00 pm, but you can stream the audio for seven days from the 'listen again' service* here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/arts/openbook/rams/openbook_20080824.ram

From the Open Book website:

Graphic Novels

Do you know the fastest growing sector in publishing? Perhaps surprisingly, it is the sector of graphic novels. Danny Fingeroth, author of The Rough Guide to Graphic Novels, and Naomi Alderman, author and graphic novel fan, talk about their favourites.

Details of The Rough Guide to Graphic Novels here.

*If the listen again service gives problems, an mp3 of the relevant excerpt can be downloaded from RapidShare:

http://rapidshare.com/files/341864480/OpenBook_BBCR4dtt-20080824.mp3

"I narrate podcast fiction," he said

2008-08-23T13:15:00.009+01:00

Regular readers of this blog will know that I've contributed my voice to various fiction podcasts. My latest is a reading for Transmissions from Beyond, the podcast of TTA Press, who are posting stories from their three main publications, Interzone, Black Static and Crimewave. I narrated "Lady of the Crows", a story by Tim Casson from the first issue of Black Static. (It may have been Black Static's inaugural issue, but the magazine has been going a long time under its previous title of The Third Alternative.)

Regular readers might also know that I've narrated my own short fiction on my podcast The Rev Up Review, and my own first novel The Plitone Revisionist, available for free at Podiobooks.com.

I've learned a few things over the past three years of narrating fiction. The main thing is that I never want to do it live. My raw audio is painful to listen to. For a 30-minute reading I typically record maybe 45 minutes, including pauses to turn pages, ~~cough up my guts~~ clear my throat, or for second, third and sixth retakes. Thankfully we have such applications as Audacity and GarageBand to allow meticulous editing of the raw source, which, with care, can turn something amateurishly halting into a smooth, professional-sounding production.

Audio fiction comes in several flavours. There's the straight reading, with no sound effects, minimal attempts at accents, and maybe some intro and outro music. This is the kind of production I favour, though I've experimented with special processing for telephone or computer/robot effects.

Next there's the enhanced reading, with more sound effects and perhaps some guest voices. This is a kind of half-way house, and requires careful judgement to get right, otherwise it can sound cheesy. Global decisions have to be made regarding sound effects, and stuck to:

"There was a knock at the door."

[FX: sound of door-knocking]

Should the sound-effect come before the words, or after, as above? Or should the words be omitted? Or the sound-effect? Tricky decisions, because getting it wrong can mean the listener is wrenched out of the fictional world, which is the last thing an author wants. Any enhancements to audio fiction should be aimed at increasing the listener's immersion in the story. Anything that draws the listener's attention to the production, the writing, the voice - in fact to anything that isn't the story itself - is to be avoided.

Enhanced audio fiction is also a great deal of work, requiring co-ordination of guest voices, unless your guests are all assembled together for recording (which would require considerable co-ordination in itself). If guests are recording separately and sending their audio files, there's the added complication of differing audio levels, background noise, pacing, etc. An excellent example of such a production is Tee Morris's podcast novel, Billibub Baddings and the Case of the Singing Sword, though I have to admit I don't feel my own contribution to it was particularly effective.

Finally there's full-cast audio drama. This not only takes a lot of work, it also requires total dedication from everyone participating, whether they're all together in a 'studio' or recording separately. It can be done successfully, and has been: Second Shift, Children of the Gods, Decoder Ring Theater, to mention just a few.

But even the simplest audio fiction requires important decisions at the outset. Just how expressive should the narrator be? How important are accents? My next question should reveal where I stand on these questions. Have you ever read a book written entirely in dialect?

In school our English teachers often read to the class during lessons. I remember one teacher who was extremely expressive, virtually acting his way through the text. It was good narration, in its way. But we had another English teacher who read to us with a very flat voice - practically no expression at all. For me, such a flat reading was much closer to reading the book myself. Straightforward fiction in print rarely has stage directions separate from the text; the 'action' of the story is conveyed in words, and words alone.

One aspect of podcast fiction that may have a bearing on why enhanced audio fiction is popular in the podosphere, is that much podcast fiction is science fiction, and many podcasters are fans of graphic novels. My comments in the previous paragraph do not, obviously, apply to graphic novels (which is a type of fiction I know very little about).

Even if my own preference is for unembellished readings, I acknowledge that audio fiction is not, and never can be, the same as printed fiction. There are clues on the page that cannot be transferred unaltered to the audio version. There are also aspects of printed fiction that go virtually unnoticed on the page, but stand out glaringly when read aloud. One example is speech- or dialogue-tags. Often the layout on the page will indicate who is speaking. "He said" and "she said" will reliably indicate who said what. When narrating, a slight change in voice will do the same, but usually the tags will still be needed. I've noticed several podcasters, however, leaving a lengthy gap between the speech itself and the tag, enough, even, to take a breath. Personally I find this detracts from the narration. Why I should find this distracting was a puzzle, until I reflected on how I normally read printed dialogue (other than when narrating). I realised that the speech tag is taken in by the eye at the same time as the speech itself. The 'who' is apprehended simultaneously with the 'what', not separately. That's why, in my own narration, I tend to close up the gaps between the dialogue and its tags as much as possible.

I've long been a fan of BBC Radio Drama, and of the BBC's fiction readings, many of which are virtually permanently available (if you count the unending repeats) on BBC7, and I've therefore modelled my own narrations on the BBC's output (and that of Oneword Radio, before its unfortunate demise earlier this year). While Martin Jarvis has many fans of his man-of-a-thousand-voices style of narration, I prefer to follow narrators like Alex Jennings, Paul Rhys and Nigel Anthony.

Who would you follow? Want to try? Stay tuned!

Top Ten seminal science-fiction films...

2008-08-12T22:12:00.005+01:00

...in no particular order - a personal list.

Forbidden Planet - Shakespeare's The Tempest given a science-fictional re-interpretation
Metropolis - imagination ahead of its time
2001: A Space Odyssey - the first SF religious movie, with special effects that even today have not been surpassed (equalled, but not surpassed)
Blade Runner - Ridley Scott's dystopian free-adaptation of Dick
The Matrix - awesome spectacle, shame about the sequels
Brazil - Gilliam's finest (in fact, anybody's)
Silent Running - greenhouses in space, with cute robots
Star Wars - Episode IV: A New Hope - strictly fantasy rather than SF, despite the space-ships, robots and futuristic weapons
ET - The Extra-Terrestrial - highly successful, but full of Spielberg schmaltz
Close Encounters of the Third Kind - another influential Spielberg flick, though my least favourite here

Remember: not in order. Also remember: this is my list.

Dark thoughts on The Dark Knight

2008-08-11T21:51:00.005+01:00

Having watched Batman Begins a few days previously, and found all the tedious double-revelations of the Liam Neeson ninja character fairly underwhelming, I wasn't holding out much hope for the sequel.

The technology in The Dark Knight was impressive, up to a point. The explosions (and there were lots of them) were impressive, up to a point. The plot was okay, up to point.

That point, for all the above, was reached when the film could have been expected to conclude. It didn't conclude, but went on to portray technology way beyond the realm of credibility, with more and bigger explosions that resembled a random fireworks display, while the plot descended into mephistophelian obfuscation, forsaking any semblance of coherence.

And it was too long. Half an hour of plot-knotting could have been cut without adversely affecting the story - other than to make it marginally clearer.

The film's one redeeming feature was Heath Ledger's career-defining performance as the Joker: manic, psychotic, remorseless - a truly terrifying villain.

Pictacule is changing!

2008-08-11T20:56:00.007+01:00

It was an interesting experiment, but now it's time to move on. Pictacule is moving to Flickr, specifically to this growing Flickr set.

The set will consist of new photographs, added as and when I decide to post them. There'll be no fixed schedule. (I do not need any more fixed schedules in my life.)

The Pictacules here have been copied over, but they'll also remain here. All new Pictacules will be posted to the new location.

Pictacule 028

2008-07-08T23:00:00.001+01:00

Another common view (a variation on Pictacule 024).

Pictacule 027

2008-07-07T23:00:00.002+01:00

I ate out this evening. This was dessert.

Pictacule 026

2008-07-06T23:00:00.000+01:00

Relative to yesterday's Pictacule, close by.

Pictacule 025

2008-07-05T23:00:00.000+01:00

Step this way....

Pictacule 024

2008-07-04T23:00:00.000+01:00

A passing view. One I see often.

Pictacule 023

2008-07-03T23:00:00.000+01:00

How to get pictures out of the camera - one of many (cameras? pictures? card readers?).

Well, um ... yes.

Pictacule 022

2008-07-02T23:00:00.000+01:00

This is an old one. It's how I listen to my iPod at work.

Pictacule 021

2008-07-01T23:00:00.000+01:00

And I didn't even get paid....

Pictacule 020

2008-06-30T23:00:00.000+01:00

It's that bit of glass again....

Pictacule 019

2008-06-29T19:00:00.000+01:00

Whatever it is, they're not going to let it get out.

Or....

Pictacule 018

2008-06-28T19:00:00.000+01:00

What's this? Scary alien, 'War of the Worlds' Martian tripod, or something even more terrible?

Pictacule 017

2008-06-27T19:00:00.000+01:00

I liked the banding effect here - stripes of sky, cloud, trees and crop (some kind of bean, by the look of it).

Pictacule 016

2008-06-26T23:00:00.001+01:00

Portsmouth on a summer evening, from Portsdown Hill

Pictacule 015

2008-06-25T23:00:00.000+01:00

More pretty purple.

Pictacule 014

2008-06-24T23:00:00.000+01:00

Pretty purple.

Pictacule 013

2008-06-23T23:00:00.000+01:00

Begonia againia.

Pictacule 012

2008-06-22T23:00:00.001+01:00

Pictacule 011

2008-06-21T23:00:00.000+01:00

Like the previous Pictacule, this was taken in my parents' garden.

Pictacule 010

2008-06-20T23:00:00.000+01:00

A view of a critter fairly determined not to be in a photograph.

Maybe I need a telephoto lens.

Or a bit more patience.

Pictacule 009

2008-06-19T22:13:00.000+01:00

Port Solent, about 6:30 pm

Pictacule 008

2008-06-18T11:24:00.000+01:00

Taken with on-camera pop-up flash (thanks to Shannon for lending a hand).

Oh, and by the way...

...it's glass.

Pictacule 007

2008-06-17T21:48:00.004+01:00

When all the highlights are burnt out of an image, you're left with something like physical typography.

The Number One?

Pictacule 006

2008-06-16T22:46:00.002+01:00

Portsdown Hill around 6 pm.

Pictacule 005

2008-06-15T21:22:00.004+01:00

This particular device (of which this is a picture of both sides) appears in various places online.

Such a place is here, but there are several others....

Pictacule 004

2008-06-14T19:32:00.004+01:00

My new camera arrived today, so naturally I couldn't wait to try it out. "Bosham at Low Tide" is at left. I've tricked up the RAW file from the camera using the supplied software. Probably overdone it (which was deliberate, just to see how it looked).

The other pics I took can be seen on the Flickr photostream here.

Pictacule 003

2008-06-13T22:00:00.000+01:00

This image I've posted is about as sharp as the object itself. Consider it an opener for what's to come....

Pictacule 002

2008-06-12T19:45:00.004+01:00

What the hell is this? (Whatever it is, it could do with a good scrub....)

Pictacule 001

2008-06-11T20:32:00.002+01:00

Welcome to Pictacule!

This is the start of an experiment - an image posted every day, with the pick of the week's images added to a Flickr photostream.

Blazing a trail for Podiobook authors: Scott Sigler & Seth Harwood

2008-04-10T18:47:00.006+01:00

Look what just arrived!

A package from Amazon.com outside my door yesterday evening contained these two new releases:

Infected by Scott Sigler, (hardcover) published by Crown
Jack Wakes Up by Seth Harwood (paperback) published by Breakneck Books

Congrats to both of them, and thanks for drawing the mainstream spotlight onto new media - both of these titles were originally released as free podcast novels.
.

Goodbye Sir Arthur, and thank you

2008-03-18T11:50:00.001+01:00

Sad news.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7304004.stm

Sir Arthur C. Clarke, the world's best science-fiction writer, died today, aged 90.

See also, here.
.

What is a blog?

2008-02-19T22:00:00.003+01:00

Not only a succinct explanation of what a blog is, but also what it's for:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN2I1pWXjXI

.

Sir Arthur at 90

2007-12-17T20:17:00.000+01:00

I'm occasionally asked why I write science fiction.

The answer is, because of this man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qLdeEjdbWE

Happy birthday Sir Arthur!
.

Covering all bases: trying out Linux - part 1

2007-12-09T23:15:00.000+01:00

How can I possibly hold my head up as a certified computer nerd without knowledge of the third most popular computer operating system (and incidentally the one that runs most of the internet)?

I've had goes with Linux before, but each time it was a half-hearted affair, and by no means entirely successful. Nevertheless, I decided it was time to give Linux a fair trial, and by 'fair' I'm referring to the the fact that my previous attempts were on redundant hardware that wasn't up to the job.

In recent years the computer marketplace has changed. It's now possible to buy a basic PC, without monitor or OS, for under £250. But 'basic' is a relative term. This £250 PC has a 64-bit dual-core processor, 2 GB of system RAM and a 250 GB serial ATA hard disk - computing power that would have cost between five and ten times as much a mere five years ago.

So, I bought one. I already had a suitable monitor (a 19" widescreen LCD), and I'd downloaded the operating system in readiness for the 'experiment'.

And the OS? The word is, apparently, 'Ubuntu'. You can go to the website and download a CD image file, which you then use to make a boot CD. There are comprehensive instructions on the site if you don't know how to do this - it's not difficult (and if you use a Mac it is ridiculously easy). You can then use the CD to try out Ubuntu Linux on any PC (or even an Intel Mac, apparently) without messing with your hard drive. Then, if you wish, you can install it. That's when the fun starts.

The process worked well enough. I had to be careful adjusting the display settings (several of my attempts resulted in the disappearance of the mouse cursor), but I found that ignoring the 'test' mode and rebooting worked fine. Next on the list was connecting to the internet. Firefox is pre-installed, but because of the way my home network is set up I had to adjust the network settings to a static IP address and enter DNS addresses to make it work.

I gave up on the printer. I've no doubt that connecting a USB or parallel printer would be a doddle, but I have a print-server on my network that was extremely difficult to set up for my Macs, so I wasn't surprised to find the Linux set-up a little opaque. That's something I'll need to come back to.

Ubuntu Linux also comes with OpenOffice 2.3 pre-installed, though I did notice that it wouldn't read some of my ancient StarWriter documents, despite the fact that my PC version of OpenOffice (version 2.0) has no trouble with them. It's probably a simple matter of installing the correct filters.

One important thing I discovered, pretty much by chance, is that Ubuntu Linux does not, by default, check for updates. There are preferences you have to change to allow it to update itself - once I did this, it downloaded and installed about 40 updates.

One last gem I'll mention in this initial part of the saga - I needed to copy a DVD (home produced - not copy-protected). I put the disc in the drive, and found that if I right-clicked on the desktop icon there was an option to copy the disc. This was a breeze - it made an image, then prompted for a blank disc, and burnt the copy. This will definitely be my preferred method for making DVD copies in the future. No third-party software required - not even any need to launch another app.

So far, I'm impressed.
.

What is it with spammers?

2007-09-28T23:04:00.000+01:00

Am I missing something here?

I get lots of spam. Most of it is efficiently filtered out by Gmail, but nonetheless I do check it regularly, just in case some false positives get caught.

But I'm at a loss to understand what the spammers are hoping to achieve. They appear to go to great lengths to defeat my spam filters. Why? Do they think I'll reward their ingenuity by buying stuff I don't need? Don't they realise why I have spam filters? Because I don't want their stuff!

Here's my advice. I offer it free, gratis, and for nothing.

Make your subject header actually relevant to the content of your email. Don't use obfuscation in the body of the email (such as peculiar graphics, or unconventional spelling). Use an honest email address.

This way I can easily trash your email if it's not relevant to me, my wants or needs. But it also makes it easy for me to identify if I may actually desire to do business with you - because your email will not have been consigned to my junk folder.

You never know - you might actually get more business this way.
.

My latest appearance...

2007-08-13T07:00:00.000+01:00

'Appearance' in the title of this post is metaphorical - you can't see me, but you can hear me reading Stephen Gaskell's story "Everyone Carries a Shadow" in the 50th episode of Pseudopod, the weekly horror podcast.

I enjoy reading for other people, especially short stories, but I appreciate that my voice is only appropriate for some. This is my third reading for Pseudopod, and I'll be interested in the reaction this story garners. My previous two readings were Michael Stone's "Sacred Skin" and Eugie Foster's "Oranges, Lemons and Thou Beside Me" - both of which were extremely creepy (the Foster was also highly disturbing).

I've also read in the past for Pseudopod's elder sibling Escape Pod, my first being Scott Janssens' flash story "Paradox", and subsequently a two-hander with Tee Morris, "Are You Ready For the End of the World?" by Danny Adams. But the story I had most fun with was Steve Eley's "The Malcontent" which he asked me to read for Escape Pod's 50th episode.

(I like stories that operate on more than one level, and "The Malcontent" was one of those - lots of fun, but with deeper meaning evident as the story progressed.)

I've also read for The Time Traveller Show, and for its offshoot Wonder Audio, whose stories are now available for purchase from Audible and iTunes.

And in a fit of enthusiasm I read three chapters of Jules Verne's A Journey to the Interior of the Earth and one chapter of Bram Stoker's Dracula, both for LibriVox.
.

Fizzle? It didn't!

2007-07-30T21:02:00.000+01:00

Last Saturday evening BBC1 aired the finale of Jekyll, and what was briefly hinted at in the penultimate of six instalments came to its complex conclusion. This clever, sophisticated and funny series must be a landmark for British speculative TV drama. Not since Channel Four's Ultraviolet, written by Joe Ahearne and broadcast in 1998 has the traditional horror genre been given serious science-fictional treatment on British TV.

Quite what happens next I've no idea. We have the Jackman twins - that could be another story, but it looks like this one is over.

Or is it?

(Previous witterings here and here.)
.

The Wikipedia Story

2007-07-27T22:10:00.004+01:00

Clive Anderson investigated Wikipedia earlier this week on BBC Radio 4: The Wikipedia Story

He dealt with the usual criticisms ("it can't be relied on; how do we know the expertise of those who edit pages; it's easily vandalised, etc") with the typically incisive mind of a lawyer, and at the same time engendered enthusiasm for what is undoubtedly a laudable project. He visited the UK branch of Britannica to get a view from the establishment side of the encyclopaedia business, and he even elicited a sound-bite or two from renowned internet doomsayer Andrew Keen, author of The Cult of the Amateur and whose broadcast comments reeked of sour grapes.

The radio programme is available as an audio stream here (I don't know for how long - but it will shortly be released as a podcast*):
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/ram/wikipediastory.ram

Download RealPlayer here

Anderson and his interviewees emphasised the essential point about Wikipedia and Web 2.0 - that there is no way this is going to be like a traditional encyclopaedia, nor should it be. We now live in a different information age. By all means trot down to your local library and heft a massive tome from the shelf in order to find out what you want to know. Meanwhile those of us with more pressing knowledge-needs can log on, check out, cross reference and be on to the next item before the traditional researchers have located their bicycle clips.

*UPDATE: The stream and podcast are no longer available, but you can download the mp3 from RapidShare here:

http://rapidshare.com/files/296133897/WikipediaStory_The_BBCR4-20070724.mp3

Saturday evenings are still fun

2007-07-15T22:23:00.001+01:00

Doctor Who has finished on BBC 1 for the time being (until the Christmas Special with Kylie Minogue), so Saturday evenings are now focussed on James Nesbitt's bravura performance in Jekyll. This series, now up to episode 4, has edged further from the surreal melodramatics of the opening episodes into out-and-out science fiction. And pretty good sci fi it's turning out to be, if you don't mind your suspension of disbelief being stretched spider-web thin.

Nesbitt, Gina Bellman and Denis Lawson are a joy to watch, as if they're fully aware this isn't meant to be classical drama and have decided to run with its absurdities for all they're worth. Some great lines too: "You have my husband in a box!" Stating the obvious, but said out loud it does emphasise the craziness of the whole premise.

This week we were treated to some sizeable chunks of flashback, when we saw how Dr Jackman first became aware of his peculiar disorder, at about the same time he first met his wife-to-be. It's greatly to writer Steven Moffat's credit that these scenes were convincing and sympathetic, despite being in a different style from the rest of the production so far.

Jekyll is huge fun, and not to be missed.
.

About time! Verbose Plitone continues at last

2007-07-09T00:21:00.000+01:00

It's been a long wait, but fans of the 'verbose' version of my podcast novel The Plitone Revisionist may be shocked to discover another episode in the feed. The 'lean-and-clean'* version at Podiobooks.com has been complete (all 23 episodes) for a few weeks now, but I promised to catch up the chatty version eventually, so there it goes.

(*You might need to click on 'Home' to see the notes for the latest episode, until I get the page sorted out properly.)
.

Spectacular effects, but....

2007-07-04T07:47:00.000+01:00

Sit back and enjoy this compilation of effects shots from Battlestar Galactica (turn up your speakers):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-gvgPEtv4g

(via Slice of SciFi)

It's all very impressive, but these spectacular effects are not why I watch BSG, which is primarily a show about personal relationships in a science-fictional setting.
.

Significant new media ... or pointless bloggery?

2007-06-26T07:34:00.003+01:00

Andrew Keen has published (using 'old media') a book about the evils of new media: The Cult of the Amateur. Naturally he wants to promote it on the Today Programme:

Click here for streaming audio
(the relevant piece is at 21'09" into this 26'22" clip)*

Download RealPlayer here

Sorry, Mr Keen, the new media is here to stay. It has its faults, just like old media, but your bleating about 'authority' and 'editors' won't make it go away. It's the lack of the old kind of regulation that makes the new media so attractive to its users.

(More later, when I've had time to collate my thoughts on this important subject.)
.
.
.
(Later...)

Now that I've listened to the clip again, and had time to consider, here's my take (note that I've not read Mr Keen's book):

Historically, people have been less likely to question the authority of the old media than they are to question the authority of the new media. Now, they are savvy enough to know that just because something is on a web page doesn't necessarily mean it's true.

When people read stuff on blogs, or MySpace, or wherever, they know it has no built-in authority and will interpret what they read accordingly. Youngsters growing up with the new media are fully aware that they are free to create stuff themselves, and they are also aware of how much authority they themselves have in doing so (that is, none at all) so they are naturally inclined to question what they read.

As a result of this default mode of questioning, they're likely to apply the same critical thinking to all media, new and old -- which can only be a good thing.

If you ask people whether they believe everything they read in a traditionally printed newspaper, they'll likely say, "No, of course not." But until recently if you questioned what someone was telling you about a reported event, they're likely to have told you, "It's true, I read it in the Daily Such-&-Such."

Wikipedia is often brought up as an example of how the internet shouldn't be trusted, but Wikipedia's self-correcting mechanism ensures that its information is mostly reliable. Not completely, but mostly reliable. Just like Britannica, as a December 2005 report has shown.

One of Andrew Keen's objections to the new media is that it has 'zero value'. By which I suspect he means it's free, and therefore worthless. Aside from any frustrations he might have with being unable to monetize his own internet-based efforts, this is a particularly blinkered view. Something is only worth what you pay for it? Hard cash or you're not interested? Tell that to Google. Tell that to Scott Sigler.

Web 2.0 is not, as Brian Appleyard incorrectly states in this clip, to do with interactivity -- we had that to some degree in Web 1.0 -- it's mainly to do with the separation of form from content, which is what makes the creation of web-content so easy for the non-technical user. Web 2.0 is facilitating a medium that allows people to make themselves heard -- to communicate, to create, to think. Long may it continue.

*UPDATE: If the streaming audio is unavailable, download the mp3 of the clip from RapidShare here:

http://rapidshare.com/files/296130093/Today_AndrewKeen_Amateur_BBCR4i-20070625.mp3

Only two episodes in and we're already way over the top

2007-06-24T13:22:00.000+01:00

James Nesbitt is having great fun on BBC 1 at 9 pm Saturdays, in a completely over-the-top performance as Dr. Jackman -- a modern day Dr. Jekyll. It's a case of split personality, with extra features. For instance, when the good doctor changes into Mr. Hyde (yes, the villain chooses that name) he has enormous, not to say superhuman strength and incredible agility. And being set in modern times, the story incorporates a good deal of modern technology. But just when you think something is about to be explained, something else occurs to let you know that nothing is even remotely simple. Secrets abound, concerning almost every character in the story, so you really don't know where you are.

This series has the advantage of being written by Steven Moffat, who wrote the recent, very spooky Doctor Who episode Blink, as well as previous Who episodes, notably last year's wonderful The Girl in the Fireplace.

We've seen two episodes of Jekyll out of six, and so far it's been a roller-coaster of manic, gory fun. I hope it doesn't just fizzle out.

(As a companion piece to Jekyll, BBC Four has shown a one-off documentary, Ian Rankin Investigates: Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, which relates how Robert Louis Stevenson came to write the original.)
.

I feel cheated

2007-06-15T19:59:00.000+01:00

This may or may not be fair, but nevertheless I feel cheated.

I have subscribed to "Locus: the magazine of the science fiction & fantasy field" for several years. The magazine is sent to me from beyond the pond, by sea mail. Consequently I get each issue weeks after its publication date, but at a reasonable rate -- a rate further reduced by subscribing for two years at a time.

And then this turns up in my inbox:

Dear International Subscriber,

We value you as a subscriber and hope you are enjoying your magazine subscription. Earlier this year, the US Postal Service announced they would be raising their rates. With this rate increase came major unannounced changes to their entire International rate structure. International surface mail (sea mail) and international periodicals mail were discontinued. Without those two mailing services, we can only fulfill subscriptions by airmail.

These changes affect your subscription and all of our other international surface mail subscribers. We will be converting all our surface mail subscriptions to airmail. Current Canadian and Mexican subscribers will lose one issue from their periodical rate subscriptions. Our current International surface mail subscribers will receive two airmail issues for every three remaining surface mail issues. If you have any questions, or would prefer to receive a refund of the remaining balance on your subscription, please let us know. Our rates will be going up for first class Canadian subscribers on July 1, 2007. If you renew before then, you will get the old rates.

We are sorry to have to make these changes, we hope you understand why the conversion is necessary, and we thank you for your continued support.

Best,
Locus

I don't know. I agreed to pay for two years in advance on the understanding that I was securing 24 issues at the then current rate. I appreciate that Locus could not have foreseen the end of sea mail. But suppose there's a hike in the cost of paper, or printing, or another increase in airmail postage -- will they feel able to charge me for those as well, on my current subscription? If so, what's the point of paying two years (or more) in advance?

I haven't done the sums, but I hope the offer of cancellation doesn't mean I'll have paid more for the issues I've already received than I originally agreed to.

Not that I will necessarily opt for cancellation. As I say, I haven't done the sums.
.

Who are the lucky ones?

2007-06-08T22:03:00.000+01:00

We are. That is, those of us lucky enough to be within broadcast reception range of BBC1 television at 7:10 on Saturday evening.

I've waxed ecstatic previously on this blog about the spin-off series Torchwood, and now I can do the same about its 'parent', Doctor Who.

Doctor Who? Kid's programme, innit? Maybe so, but it has all the ingredients of ideal family viewing -- something for the kids, something for the grown-ups. The latest series (number three of the 'reincarnated' version), with David Tennant really getting into his stride as the Doctor, and Freema Agyeman in her first series as his not-so-ditsy companion, has shown us some impressive spectacles, including the strangely art deco Daleks in a decidedly art deco New York, as well as the Bard of Avon in mischievous mode.

But the zenith of series three so far for me has been the two-parter that concluded last week: "Human Nature" and "The Family of Blood". Scripted by novelist Paul Cornell (who adapted his Doctor Who book Human Nature), these two episodes reveal characterization to a much greater depth than previously seen, and reinforce the notion that I've always felt about great science fiction -- that it tells us more about how we live our lives in the present, than how we might live in the future. Not that this particular story was about the future, despite the tantalizing glimpses of times that might have come to pass for some of the characters.

The Doctor is being pursued by the Family of Blood -- a group in search of a Time Lord for its own nefarious purposes -- and the only way he can evade detection is to become completely human. And he does so in a pre-First-World-War English public school, leaving Martha to look after not only herself, but his own Time-Lordly essence. When, at the beginning, he asks her if she trusts him, he's really asking himself if he trusts her.

Despite its historical setting, this story exhibits well-known SF tropes, such as an invisible space-ship, time travel (of course) and (hooray!) ray guns. (Or should that be hooray guns...?)

I'll not risk spoilers here, as I know that there are people not as lucky as those of us in the British Isles; impoverished souls who have yet to relish these episodes, condemned to wait until their local TV networks deign to show the latest series, and therefore reduced to squinting disjointedly at blocky YouTube fragments, or ploughing through online directories purporting not actually to host anything at all (apart from dubious thumbnail images that predominate in an excess of exposed skin).

For those less fortunate, but willing to search, may I suggest that entering such terms as "Doctor Who Human Nature Family of Blood" will harvest a veritable torrent of results.

Oh my, you have a treat in store.
.

Apple TV: useful at last?

2007-06-02T17:42:00.000+01:00

Steve Jobs gave tantalizing glimpses of some Apple related things, and remained tight-lipped about others, in this interview with Walt Mossberg at the Wall Street Journal's D Conference (via Podcasting News).

The stuff about Apple TV is what interests me. To date I've remained unconvinced that Apple TV would be useful to me (see my previous rant here). But now that Apple TV is offering YouTube browsing, I hope that this signals further developments that might make it more useful to me. Apple have announced a fatter version of Apple TV with a 160 GB hard disk, so this does seem likely.

But what I need to know, before even considering buying one of these, either fat or thin, is this: will the Apple TV work with a monitor rather than a widescreen TV? I can't justify the purchase of a widescreen TV, but I do have a 19" widescreen computer monitor with a DVI input. This works with my Panasonic DVR using an adapter cable (HDMI to DVI) and it works with my MacBook using the same cable plus Apple's adapter. It seems reasonable to suppose that this set-up would work with Apple TV, but I don't know.

Anyone?
.

My problem with God

2007-05-27T13:51:00.000+01:00

Maybe you don't want to read about my problems. Maybe you don't want to read, in particular, about My problem with God.

I appreciate that -- along with politics -- religion is something that should probably be given its own discussion space. So that's why I've started a new blog, called Notes from an Evil Burnee, where you can find my various musings on faith, rationality, religion and scepticism (or skepticism for those beyond the pond).

I've discussed matters of faith before, here at Who says I shouldn't do this?, but such discussions will henceforth be posted over at Evil Burnee.
.

Never thought I'd see the day...

2007-05-12T22:59:00.000+01:00

I've read the UK edition of Computer Shopper from the very first issue, when it came on saddle-stapled newsprint and cost only 50p. Since the passing of all those fondly remembered home computers such as the ubiquitous BBC Micro and Sinclair Spectrum, and the not-so-ubiquitous Oric, Memotech and (one for the uber-geeks) Jupiter Ace, Shopper became -- and has remained -- PC-centric.

So it was with surprise bordering on disbelief that I spied this page of buying advice in the latest (July 2007) issue:

Look at that recommended PC in the bottom right-hand corner. If you think your eyes are deceiving you, here's a blow-up:

Yes, it's a Mac.
.

This tech stuff is too hard

2007-04-23T18:41:00.000+01:00

I use three computers on a regular basis. My PC is a full-tower monster with two hard disk drives and two DVD rewriters. It's not new, and over the past few months it's been giving me grief (other than the usual...). But that didn't matter too much, as I've been enjoying using my MacBook since last June. I also have a G4 Mac mini, which was my introduction to OS X and the modern Mac. (I've had a second-hand MacPlus for a few years, complete with maxed-out RAM -- all four megabytes of it -- and the legendary programmer's switch, just to prove my genuine geekness.)

I have only one printer in use, an Epson Stylus Photo R300, and until last weekend it was connected to the PC. But as I said, the PC has been giving me grief -- refusing to boot until the box had been powered up for five minutes or so, and even then shutting down a second or two after turning on. Sometimes it didn't shut down, but just sat there shouting at me (yes, really, the damn thing actually spoke -- something about CPU test failure). Other times it would begin its boot-up sequence but then stop with an 'overclocking failure'. This I could cope with, simply going into the BIOS settings and immediately saving and exiting -- it would then boot up okay.

But as you can imagine, this was getting to be a pain, especially when I wanted to print something. The PC is on my home network, and that's how I printed stuff from the Macs. Recently the PC has refused to boot up at all, and I've had to wait until the next day. I had already done some research to establish what the problem was, and had decided that the most likely culprit was the power supply. My PC has a good ASUS motherboard and a decent graphics card, but the manufacturer really skimped on some other components. The keyboard and mouse were utterly repellent. I replaced the keyboard within a week and the mouse within a month. It seems the PSU was a similarly cheap unit, and replacing it with a Jeantech 600W unit completely solved the boot-up problems.

So I could again print relatively easily from anywhere on the network using the shared printer connected to the PC. But if the PC wasn't on, I had to wait for XP to start before anything appeared on paper. I had already looked at print servers some time ago, and nothing seemed suitable (or reasonably priced) until I noticed that Linksys made a USB Print Server with a 4-port Ethernet switch, which looked like a good deal. I read some reviews on Amazon and elsewhere that made me think twice -- especially the point about the status monitor not working, which would mean you could run out of ink and not know which one of the six cartridges to change. I then found the manual on the Linksys website, in which it was pointed out that it's in the nature of network printing that two-way communication with the printer is lost -- it's not specific to Linksys.

During the course of my deliberations the printer did run out of ink when I was printing from the MacBook, and I realised that because the R300 has a small LCD status screen, the software status monitor isn't strictly necessary.

I decided to risk the purchase of the print server, given its price. It installed okay, using the supplied setup CD on the PC, and it worked fine printing from the PC.

There's no Mac software provided, but how hard can it be? Answer: very hard.

Following Apple's guidelines for installing a network printer did not work. The best I could get was page after page of Postscript commands. Other times I ended up with page after page of garbage. Trawling various forum posts, and the aforementioned Amazon reviews again, led me to believe that very few users had managed to make this thing -- the Linksys PSUS4 USB PrintServer -- work with Macintosh.

However -- and this is the purpose of this post -- I did get it to work, from both the MacBook and the G4 Mac mini, and here's how to do it:

It shouldn't be necessary to use the Linksys setup CD, as the PrintServer has a web interface accessible from a browser, but I'm assuming your setup is similar to mine (Windows XP PC and Macintosh OS X Version 10.4.9 on a home network using a wireless ADSL router). Here's what to do:

Install the PrintServer according to the Linksys instructions, using the supplied setup CD on the PC.
Using the Linksys utility change the PrintServer to static IP addressing, choosing a suitable address within the subnet.
On the Mac, open the Print & Fax system preferences pane.
Click the '+' button to add a printer.
At the top of the Printer Browser window, click 'IP Printer'.
In Protocol, select 'Line Printer Daemon - LPD'.
In Address, type in the static IP address you chose for the PrintServer, such as '192.168.1.8'. While you type, the Printer Browser will verify that you have typed a valid address.
In Queue, type 'lpd'.
You'll find that the IP address has been entered into the Name field. You can change this to something more meaningful.
Location can be left blank.
In Print Using, select the make of your printer from the list, then select the actual model of your printer from the model list, and click 'Add'.
Close the Printer Setup Utility.

(I'm not certain all the above steps are absolutely necessary, but they worked for me.)

You should now have the network printer on the list when you next want to print something from the Mac. For me, this has worked on both the MacBook (Intel) and the Mac mini (G4 PowerPC). I can't vouch for any other set-up, but reading the tales of woe in the Amazon reviews has prompted me to make this post, to show that it can be done.
.

Tech, TV, Apple, DivX

2007-03-03T17:15:00.000+01:00

I was fascinated when Steve Jobs announced the Apple TV. I like the idea of watching on TV media that has so far been confined to my computer.

There appear, however, to be a number of snags.

First, my TV is an old Toshiba 4:3 CRT with SCART and phono sockets. No way would the Apple TV interface to it without an expensive conversion box of some kind. But what about a widescreen LCD computer monitor? -- these can be quite cheap, even with a DVI input, and Apple are already selling reasonably priced HDMI-to-DVI cables. That might work. Maybe.

Second, some of the media I'd like to watch on my TV is intended for Windows Media Player, and I've installed various codecs into QuickTime so that I can watch this stuff on my MacBook. Couldn't I install these codecs on the Apple TV's internal hard disk? Highly unlikely. (I could transcode the files so that they play in standard QuickTime, but the idea is to make them easier to watch, not more difficult.)

But I've found a way to watch .avi files on my old Tosh TV.

Last week I bought from a local Argos Extra store, for £29.99, a Bush DVD2054DIVX DVD-player. So far it's played every .avi file I've tried in it, and I also found on the web a remote-hack to convert it to multi-region. It not only plays all my region 1 and region 2 DVDs, and my .avi files (whether on CD-R or DVD-R), but also mp3s and jpegs.

The 2054 is not listed in the current Argos catalogue or on the website. I went to the store to buy the 2051, which has an entirely different, compact form-factor. The 2054, however, is the conventional width, and fits better with other equipment. They told me when I paid that it might have 'some cosmetic differences.'

"Fine," I said, "as long as it does DivX."
.

A theory with the intelligence designed out

2007-02-24T22:03:00.000+01:00

While many of us in Britain have looked on in horrified fascination at the Intelligent Design debate currently in full swing in America, we may have become a little complacent that something like it is unlikely to happen here. But slowly, insidiously, it is happening here. Supporters of Intelligent Design are attempting to have Intelligent Design taught in UK school science classes. Search around a bit and you'll find plenty of evidence for this (though none for the theory itself).

I maintain that Intelligent Design -- as promulgated by such organisations as the dishonestly-named Truth in Science -- isn't actually a theory. Any argument that attempts to 'explain' observed phenomena by invoking a supernatural entity, about which we can know nothing, isn't explaining anything.

The ID-ists' arguments, when challenged by those who back evolution as a science-based or evidence-based theory, seem to be a combination of the following:

"You say ID is based on faith, but so is evolution. Evolution is based on assumptions about 'the unobservable past', and is therefore not scientific -- not susceptible to observation and experiment."
"You say that ID cannot admit of evidence because a theory that is faith-based springs from the pre-supposition that there is a creator/designer. But evolution is based on the pre-supposition that there isn't a designer."

These arguments appear to be attempts to place ID on an equal footing with evolutionary theory. But is seems to me that in order to assess the equality of these views one must look at the reasons for the respective pre-suppositions (if you accept that they are pre-suppositions).

On what basis can one 'pre-suppose' that

there is a creator, or
there is no creator?

(Note that these are mutually exclusive.)

Even if you find no evidence for a creator, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But as Richard Dawkins lucidly demonstrates in The God Delusion, the existence of a creator is extremely improbable.

The ID-ists' tactics more often than not are to try to turn the evolutionist argument back on the evolutionists, without actually answering any of the evolutionists' criticisms. It's a tactic that can be effective -- until recognised, when it becomes obviously transparent.

This table-turning is likely to happen to the argument about 'Middle World' perceptions, which explains why so much of modern scientific thinking seems to go against common sense. An ID-ist's attempt at refutation might go something like this: "Just as our middle world perception cannot comprehend the very large or the very small, it also cannot comprehend the very transcendence of the other-worldly -- such as God. A rational approach to theism, therefore, is simply not valid."

The very large and the very small, however, are susceptible to rational analysis, whatever our common-sense perceptions tell us, whereas the transcendence of a creator is not, remaining an assertion of faith, without evidence.

Intelligent Design isn't a theory -- it's an intellectual cop-out.
.

Buying software for the wrong/right reasons

2006-12-30T21:26:00.000+01:00

The podcast Security Now has been on my 'must listen' list for quite a while. Some podcasts I subscribe to are downloaded by iTunes, copied to my iPod and when they turn up in my "Unplayed" Smart Playlist I'll make a snap decision as to whether I'll listen or skip (this decision is usually directly dependent on the total number of podcasts in the "Unplayed" list).

But I'll always listen to Security Now. Steve Gibson knows computers. Not like some people know computers -- people who have used lots of software on several different machines, people who may have done a little scripting, or even programmed in 'C' or Pascal. Steve Gibson is familiar with the PC on a hardware level. His website, www.grc.com has loads of free Windows software utilities available for download. These are not the kind of idle utilities that someone thought up as maybe possibly useful, for someone somewhere. They are essential utilities that solve (and I mean solve, not just mitigate) specific problems with Microsoft Windows. I first came across Steve's utilities without knowing it. After suffering persistent pop-up spam windows on a new XP PC, I did a Google search and came up with something called "Kill The Messenger". I downloaded it, ran it, and have not been troubled since. At the time I knew nothing about Gibson Research Corporation, and didn't actually give it any more thought. It was only after listening to early episodes of Security Now that I went to the website and discovered I had successfully used one of Steve's free utilities several years ago.

Steve Gibson's flagship product is SpinRite, now up to version 6, and by all accounts is the world's best hard-disk recovery and maintenance utility. It isn't cheap, at $89, and some might balk at such a price for a download of only 170 kb. (Yes, that's kilobytes.) Remember, however, that Steve Gibson is 'old school' -- he programs in assembler, for DOS, so his utilities are really tight, fast and efficient. This is the ultimate low-fat software.

The Security Now podcast, part of the TWIT network, features Leo Laporte and Steve Gibson talking about various aspects of computer security, whether this is a comprehensive primer on cryptographic technology (and I do mean comprehensive -- this isn't something that you can give less than your full attention to; it's geeky in the extreme), or discussions on the underlying technology of something in the news -- such as the recent Sony rootkit debacle. Every fourth episode (which with typical geekness they designate a MOD 4 episode) is devoted to answering listeners' queries.

I've been considering buying SpinRite for a while, partly because Steve is providing a useful free service, not only via Security Now, but also to all Windows computer users via his Shields Up! website, and partly because if it's as good as everyone says it is, SpinRite will be a useful utility have instantly available. So today I purchased it.

A few months ago I bought a Maxtor 300GB external USB drive for my MacBook, and it began to regularly misbehave after being powered up for an hour or more. Apparently SpinRite is undiscriminating as to operating systems and file formats, and the recommendation is to extract the external drive from its case and mount it inside a PC before running SpinRite on it. Alternatively, it's possible to run SpinRite on a USB drive if the USB drivers are accessible by SpinRite, although this likely to be much slower in operation.

Well, I couldn't open the case, so I connected the drive to a USB port on the PC, just to see what might happen. I was surprised to find that SpinRite found the drive, and is now -- as I type -- doing its stuff. It will apparently take about five hours.

Watch this space.

Progress and promises

2006-12-29T12:16:00.000+01:00

On the right-hand side of this blog you'll find some new additions (click here if you can't see them). I've added some word-counters for my novel-length works-in-progress. This is partly an incentive for me to keep the figures moving, and partly to let people know how I'm doing. (The names of the WIPs are in a sort of code, and don't necessarily relate to their actual, eventual titles.)

Stephen King's universal advice to writers is, "read a lot and write a lot," so I've also added a list of what I'm currently reading. Not that I'll be doing 'a lot' of either, given how much else I've got on, but at least I'll be able to track my progress.

Here's some of the 'else':

My podcast novel, The Plitone Revisionist, is up to Episode 13 (of about 23) at Podiobooks.com, and I have another two episodes to edit, assemble and post in the next couple of days. I also have the 'verbose' version to catch up with -- something that's proving more difficult than I expected, but which I am nevertheless determined to achieve. Listener response to TPR has been very gratifying -- via email, comments using the feedback form at paulsjenkins.net and comments on the Podiobooker blog.

And there's the podcast. The Rev Up Review has been sparse of late, but that too will be speeding up in the new year, and I hope to bring it back to something approaching its former regularity. I've plenty of content (it's been accumulating while I've not been producing regular shows), so there's lots to discuss, and I've some other ideas for RUR that I'll be floating in the new year.

I'd like to post more regularly to this blog, too....

Our own, our very own

2006-12-04T00:05:00.000+01:00

At last, an intelligent, stylish and hugely entertaining science-fiction series that is, for a change, home-grown.

I refer, of course, to the Doctor Who spin-off series, Torchwood, currently airing on BBC Three on Sunday nights, followed with a BBC Two prime-time showing on Wednesday evening, plus various re-runs on digital throughout the week. The plots are utterly fantastical, but believable, thanks to the solid cast and the tight scripts, which show a respect for the main theme and arc of the Torchwood story (as much as has so far been revealed) that has long been missing from serious British SF. And make no mistake, for all its speculative unreality, Torchwood is serious adult stuff, about real people caught up in a world they are still trying to understand.

In the face of such epics as the new Battlestar Galactica and other serious SF from across the pond, British TV now has something to hold up and say, 'See, we can do it too!'

Still here!

2006-11-07T22:46:00.000+01:00

Yikes, it's been a while. And I've thought guiltily about this blog on and off for several months -- without doing anything. I could bore you with excuses -- ahem! -- reasons, but you don't want to hear them.

Instead I'll post an update on the MacBook saga:

It's still looking good. So far I've suffered none of the so-called horror stories. No overheating, no discolouration of the plastic, and only occasional shutdowns, which appear to have been fixed by the latest SMC firmware update (if indeed it was a problem on this particular MacBook).

I'm now using the Aqua Beta Intel version of NeoOffice, and have standardized on the Open Document format for my wordprocessing files.

I bought Audio Hijack Pro to capture RealPlayer output direct to disk (and a whole lot of other useful features that I've hardly explored yet).

I use Cyberduck for FTP server access, and Blue Harvest to stop OS X dropping '.DS_Store' files all over my employers' network.

The latest software addition is something I had expected to see eventually, but the reality of it actually running on the McB is just too amazing for words. At the MacExpo in London a week or so ago I bought a copy of Parallels Desktop for Mac, which is virtualisation software, allowing you to run other operating systems inside a window in OS X.

My original intention was to run a version of DOS, just so I can continue to use a couple of very old (but useful) applications from years ago. As it happened I didn't have quite the right disks in order to install MSDOS 6.2, or Windows 98 SE, or Windows 95 (any of which would have been suitable). I should be able to make the right set of disks, given time, but to test the installation of Parallels on my MacBook I decided to install Windows XP.

Installing WinXP in Parallels is a completely transparent and seemingly foolproof operation. XP looks better on the MacBook than it does on my desktop PC, especially as it recognizes the McB's wide screen.

The best thing about XP on the Mac using Parallels is that OS X continues to run underneath, so even using full screen mode for XP, things like Skype and Google Notifier are still running. When new mail comes in, the black Notifier window appears over the top of the XP desktop, in what appears to be a totally seamless manner. In fact the whole experience of running XP in Parallels in utterly charming.

I admit there's a certain satisfaction in watching Microsoft Windows XP running on what it thinks is a bog-standard PC, when in fact it's totally owned by a Macintosh application. And although XP is kept safely away from the computer hardware (so no viruses or other malware can stray outside the Parallels window) there doesn't seem to be much of a performance hit.

You want to buy a computer? You have a choice:

That one over there, which runs Windows (or Linux, or DOS);
Or this one over here, which runs Mac OS X (or Windows, or Linux, or DOS, or all of them at once).

Your choice.

Patrick McLean's The Seanachai: "Blame Abraham"

2006-08-07T23:07:00.000+01:00

I've been a fan of The Seanachai for quite some time. Patrick McLean's short podcasts are little gems of mastery -- beautifully written, expertly delivered and flawlessly produced. Mostly he does serialized fiction; I particularly enjoyed his story about the man who shot his guitar.

But occasionally Patrick does a one-off commentary, and his latest, "Blame Abraham" cuts right through all the nonsense, spin and partisan hype surrounding the current Middle-Eastern crisis.

Listen to it. And then share it.

"Don't Buy a MacBook"

2006-07-15T18:39:00.000+01:00

Despite my long-time use of PCs running Windows of various flavours, I have recently evangelized Macintosh -- especially to computer novices.

Apple's switch to Intel, however, has complicated this. The current range of Macs, which all come with iLife '06, offer complete computing solutions -- in essence, a Mac should give you all you'll ever need for doing the stuff most people would want a computer to do. But the Intel switch has resulted in a number of applications that aren't available on new Macs.

There's also the inescapable Windows-compatibility issue. In the run-up to my purchase of a new MacBook, I was fairly forceful in my recommendations for the new Macs. Someone to whom my Mac-evangelism was taken to heart is now somewhat annoyed with me, because -- in her particular case -- I've recanted my unequivocal recommendation. Two circumstances have caused me to moderate my enthusiasm:

One of the main uses to which this person wishes to put her yet-to-be-purchased notebook computer is video-chat with relatives in Canada. Of course, if these relatives were Mac users, then iChat would be ideal. But they use Windows, and Skype is only now, I hear, beta-testing the Mac version of its video-capable VOIP application.
I had expected there to be some months' delay before this person actually got around to making a purchase, by which time the availability of Universal versions of established Mac applications should not be an issue. At present it is an issue. Therefore, if she wants to buy a computer now, I'm suggesting she gets a cheap Windows notebook. She'll need to put up with the Windows user interface, but that's what she's used to at work.

This does not in any way diminish my satisfaction with my shiny new MacBook. True, there are some things I find awkward or annoying, but that's inevitable with a new computer. Nothing's perfect, but the MacBook is doing the things for which I purchased it, and doing them well.

Taking stock

2006-06-25T21:40:00.000+01:00

I've spent far too much time this weekend in front of my computer(s) (ss) (sss) -- yes that's actually three computers that I use regularly, here at home. One of them is my shiny new MacBook, which is turning out to be one of the most pleasurable (if relatively expensive) purchases I've made in several years. But nevertheless my eyes have been fixed on one bright rectangle or another all weekend (and still are, as I type this).

Have I been wasting my time? I don't think so, but I did have some other stuff to do, which for one reason or another has proved not so easily doable, and I've ended up in front of the screen(s) again. The problem with computers is that they are so capable. You can do so much diverse stuff with them, it's sometimes hard to knuckle down and do the stuff you should be doing.

Such as writing.

I have a novel in progress, which I'm writing in a decidedly episodic manner. I don't have a plot, only a collection of characters plus a series of cool events that I want to incorporate into the narrative, so I'm writing several disconnected passages featuring one or more of the characters, hoping that I'll be able to pull it all together into a coherent and logical form later on. As a novice writer I believe this is a perfectly acceptable way to proceed. If there's one thing I've learned from reading a ton of writing-advice books, it's that there's no single correct way of writing fiction -- there are as many correct ways as there are successful authors.

My first novel, soon to be podcasted, was originally intended to be a series of linked short stories, the first of which I hoped to sell to a magazine and get a captive audience for the subsequent instalments. Eventually, after reading Muriel Gray's excellent first novel The Trickster, I decided to make it a novel from the outset, ditching the single-viewpoint perspective in favour of interwoven multiple viewpoints.

That novel (130,000 words) is finished, at least in a form that I'll be happy to release as a podcast, after spending more than two years messing about trying to interest agents, who seem to think it's acceptable to request three chapters and a synopsis and then sit on them for six months, only to reject them with an inane comment about 'not doing science fiction' -- despite my query letter being completely specific about the genre.

I didn't sit idle, in fiction-writing terms, after I completed the rewrites of my first novel. I now have 75,000 words (about three-quarters complete) of another novel written with a far more rigid structure -- alternate chapters told from alternate viewpoints. But that strict rigidity has been difficult, and I've yet to convince myself that it will work. Consequently I've reached a point when I'd rather be writing something else -- so that's what I'm doing.

The podcast novel will be in addition to The Rev Up Review, which even now is overdue for a new edition, but I'm determined that recording weekly episodes of the novel will not affect the (ir)regularity of The Rev Up Review. In fact, it's my intention that RUR will be a major asset in the promotion of the podcast novel.

Sometimes it worries me that I don't get RUR out as often as some other podcasters produce their shows, that I might be in danger of podfading. But I do it for fun, and to promote my writing, which I also do for fun. If it wasn't fun, I wouldn't do it.

And as far as this blog goes, I'll write it when I feel like it (such as, two posts in as many days, even after a year's break...).

Falling...

2006-06-24T19:11:00.000+01:00

I've had my MacBook for nearly two weeks, and I'm loving it more and more.

The latest thing I've discovered is with the digital audio out (otherwise known as the headphone socket). I've used the digital audio out on my PC for recording streaming audio (BBC radio's 'listen again' service, for example) onto Minidisc, but my PC has only a coaxial digital output, so I normally use a coax-to-optical converter. This works well, but the recordings have the Sony SCMS (Serial Copy Management System) enabled, and are treated as digital copies, which means I can't make further digital copies from them. This is annoying, and inevitably leads to an additional analogue stage if the recordings need to be copied off Minidisc onto CD, for instance.

The MacBook, however, has TosLink audio jacks, so I can connect an optical cable directly between the MacBook and the Minidisc, and it appears that the recordings have SCMS disabled, so they are entirely DRM-free! Not only that, but plugging in the TosLink cable disables the MacBook's volume control, setting it to maximum, so I don't even have to remember to turn it up.

Needless to say, I'll be using the MacBook for all my future 'streaming audio to Minidisc' recordings.

Phew...!

2006-06-14T23:21:00.000+01:00

Despite my previous concern over the unavailability of Universal versions of some of the software I'm used to, it seems that the problem is solved (after fashion, and for the time being). The latest PowerPC version of OpenOffice appears to run satisfactorily under Rosetta. Not fast, but adequate until the Universal version is stable and reliable.

So I do, after all, have compatibility with all my previous documents -- which is a relief, considering that this shiny new MacBook, for all its sooper dooper coolness and utility, is supposed to earn its keep with mundane stuff like wordprocessing.

It's arrived!

2006-06-13T20:56:00.000+01:00

I now have a shiny new white MacBook. So far I've used it only in my kitchen, connected wirelessly to the router I bought a month or so ago specifically with the prospect of a new notebook in mind. The MacBook's wireless performance is impressive, picking up half a dozen networks I'd never seen before.

The screen appears extremely sharp, making my cheap 17" TFT look decidedly woolly, and even my 19" CRT now seems a bit furry.

I've been downloading software updates, as well as some other free and open source software I expect to be using. I gather that the Intel versions of DivX and other plugins for QuickTime are a bit iffy, so for the time being I'll be using VLC for playing AVI files.

I have hit a problem. My preferred office software, OpenOffice, isn't available as a Universal Binary in stable form yet, and I've discovered that the alternative, NeoOffice, won't run under Rosetta. For word-processing only, I've downloaded AbiWord, but the two times I've tried to use it (under Rosetta), it's bombed out. Not good.

That's how far I've got, in one-and-a-half evenings. More later.

I've had other delights as well...
...but you'll have to read my other blog to find out about that.

Macticipation

2006-05-31T18:58:00.000+01:00

After nearly two weeks of dithering, I've ordered my MacBook. I knew my next laptop would be a Mac, but I'd been waiting for Apple's announcement of the iBook replacement before making a decision. The black MacBook is seriously desirable, but at a £90 premium I felt I was being taken for a fashion-conscious, cash-careless air-head.

I don't blame Apple for exploiting those who want to show off the rarity value of a black Mac. If the black iPod is selling better than the white, why not try to make some extra profit? People can always vote with their credit cards.

As I'm doing. I've ordered the white one, upgraded to the spec of the black.

Now I'm checking out which apps have been (or soon will be) released in Universal versions. I use mostly open-source software on my Mac mini, apart from iLife '05, and though I'm looking forward to using iLife '06, there are some apps which I'll be using under Rosetta, at least for a while.

Meanwhile, I'm checking my account at the online Apple Store every day....

The rumours are true

2005-06-09T21:22:00.000+01:00

Steve Jobs was very impressive in his keynote at WWDC, even if he did seem a bit flustered in the last few seconds.

So, OS X has been running on Intel for the past five years? And this doesn't mean that OS X will be available as an alternative operating system for Windows XP machines? Isn't OS X based on Unix?

Linux runs native on PCs so why shouldn't OS X? Even if it's not Apple's policy to make available an alternative PC operating system it seems to me that it's inevitable. Mac and PC hardware has been converging for years, and many software companies have a wealth of experience developing applications for both platforms. Apple itself has iTunes and QuickTime running on both. Will we soon see bootleg PC versions of OS X available for download from dubious websites? My guess is that these versions already exist, and the only way Apple will stem the spread of unofficial 'PCOSX' is to release an official version.

What Windows user hasn't envied the sleek designer efficiency of the Mac? (Okay, some Windows users say they never have, but they're lying.) The cool usability of the Mac is largely derived from its operating system, and the chance to sample it directly on cheap PC hardware could be too tempting to resist.

Just think: the release of a PC OS X could be the one thing that takes PC design by the throat and hammers some rationality into it. Currently the main authority on what makes up a PC is Microsoft. If Apple started publishing strict system requirements and hardware standards for PCs to run OS X, we might start getting better designed PCs that weren't so prone to crashing.

And amongst all this speculation let's not lose sight of the irony that the originator of the PC -- and therefore of all the clones that followed -- is the company that Apple are now ditching in favour of the 'heart of the PC'.

Everything needs a purpose...

2005-06-05T18:41:00.000+01:00

I've been wondering (and this is why there have so far been few blog entries here) what exactly I should be using this blog for.

The other one, The Rev Up Review, is the blog for my podcast (called...er...The Rev Up Review), and it's echoed at http://revup.libsyn.com/. Stuff that's related to the podcast will be posted on The Rev Up Review, so what's this for, given that it is kind of related to what's going on there?

I suppose I should use it for anything that isn't directly related to The Rev Up Review. Such as...

After my unforgivably stupid episode concerning the Windows Recycle Bin, which was prompted by a concern for how much bandwidth I was using, I have given up any pretence of regulating the amount of downloading I'm doing. Wanadoo state they're not checking customers' bandwidth at present, but when they do, I'm going to have to upgrade. Whether that's to one of their higher-capped packages, or to a competing ISP, is something I'll decide at the time. I could be seriously better off switching to cable, for both broadband internet and telephone.

NTL, my local cable provider, do several packages including cable TV, but frankly I'm not much bothered about the TV side of things. I have Freeview, which I got mainly for digital radio, but if NTL have a good offer at the time, including a box with a digital audio output, that could swing it for me.

Unbelievably, incredibly, utterly...stupid

2005-05-14T23:41:00.000+01:00

I still can't believe it. How could anyone, even someone with even the briefest acquaintance with the mechanics of computing, be so thick-headed and...just plain dumb?

But there we are. I suppose some people just have moments of temporary insanity.

After a discussion earlier today about the options for getting my dad fixed up with broadband, I wondered how close I was to my 2Gb-per-month cap with Wanadoo. So I did a search in Windows XP of all my downloaded podcasts during the last 30 days -- just to get an idea of how much stuff it was. Only thing is, the search doesn't show the total size. So I copied the results into a folder on the desktop and used 'Properties' to see the total. It was 3.62 Gb, which means I'll probably have to go up to the next band when Wanadoo start metering usage.

Fine, I thought, it's what I expected. But I didn't want a 3.62 Gb folder cluttering up my desktop, so I dumped it in the Recycle Bin. And I didn't want all that still on my hard disk so I emptied the Recycle Bin.

It was only when I next tried to sync my iPod that I realised that I hadn't 'copied' all those files, I'd 'moved' them. And deleted them. And emptied the Recycle Bin. 3.62 Gb! How could I be so STUPID?

Well, to cut a long story short, I did manage to retrieve the majority using a utility (let's hear it for restoration.exe, available at http://aumha.org/a/recover.php), but I still had quite a few gaps to fill in.

So much for worrying about my bandwidth usage -- it's certainly gone up this evening....

Here I am again...

2005-04-17T22:03:00.000+01:00

Yes I'm back, though a lot later than I'd thought. How am I supposed to find time for all this stuff?

I'm getting the next Rev Up Review podcast ready, and I've received emails from a couple of authors who have given me permission to use their promos. I had hoped to be posting the new podcast this evening, but I had a major black-fingered-episode on Saturday morning, as my trusty HP printer is finally on its last stutterings. It's served me well for nearly ten years, so I can't complain.

So it was a quick trip to the local PC box-shifter to pick up a new printer -- I went for the Epson R300, as it was cheap, and bog-standard, and I'd been thinking about buying a proper photo printer for some time.

I set it up today, connected -- dare I say it -- to the Mac mini.

Okay I admit it. I'm one of those, you know, victims of what they're calling the 'halo effect'. One of those -- speak it in low tones, covering the mouth -- 'switchers'.

Well, maybe. I'm not entirely new to the Mac. I have a Mac Plus right here in my studio, though I've not used it for a number of years. And, let's face it, I'm not about to stop using my year-old Winderz PeeCee, as it's a blistering box of power that currently runs my life for me.

But hey, being a Mac user is kinda like, totally awesome and cool.

The New Stuff Starts Here

2005-04-07T01:43:00.000+01:00

It's about time, I thought. After all, everyone's doing it, aren't they?

Blogging, I mean.

I haven't tried it, so far. Until now. As a writer, I've always had the feeling that my writing should be channelled into something more productive, something that someone, somewhere, might pay actual money for.

Which is all very well, except that recently I haven't been writing. So as an excuse for not maintaining an online journal, or web-log ('blog'), it doesn't really stand up.

Nevertheless, I've lots of things I want to be doing, and only so much -- or so little -- time to do them. I have several interests: writing fiction; writing non-fiction; reading; listening to radio drama and book-readings; photography; fiddling with computers; going to the theatre, listening to music (on CD, and -- in the case of classical music -- going to concerts). And architecture. Mustn't forget that one, even if it is my work, and as such I have mixed feelings about it.

Some years ago I even cultivated an amateur interest in philosophy, though I never properly followed it through.

In the last few weeks I have swayed with the breeze and become interested in the bizarre world of 'podcasting' -- to the extent that I've even produced an experimental podcast of my own.

But when do I find time for all of this, as well as the day-to-day living, cooking, laundry, etc?

The answer is that I don't. Something gets reluctantly squeezed out, left on the side of the highway that is my congested calendar. But neither am I particularly willing to give stuff up. I do all this -- or try to -- because I like it.