know who I am. 7 days after the incident in the Post Office I received through the post a nice shiny new Passport with my fat face in the back of it.
I feel like a trip to the Post Office just to gloat.
2006-03-22
2006-03-07
Do you know who I am?
There can't be many levels of embarassment and self-pity below where I sank yesterday.
I went to renew my 10 year passport at the Post Office; they do this "check and send" service, where you get the application form checked for you and a guaranteed two-week turn around. I got myself some nice new pictures taken and queued like a good man. I stepped up to the counter and presented my documents; one valid passport as ID, one application form and one set of new pictures. Whilst the counter staff are whizzing away on my application I switch-off.
I went to renew my 10 year passport at the Post Office; they do this "check and send" service, where you get the application form checked for you and a guaranteed two-week turn around. I got myself some nice new pictures taken and queued like a good man. I stepped up to the counter and presented my documents; one valid passport as ID, one application form and one set of new pictures. Whilst the counter staff are whizzing away on my application I switch-off.
BEFORE"Excuse me, but you haven't had these counter-signed", says the man. He's referring to the new photos of my, which don't need to be counter-signed for a renewal if the existing passport is valid still. "But I don't need to because this is a renewal", I reply. "That's true, but not if your appearance has altered significantly from 10 years ago."
"What do you mean?", I ask. "Well you've put on a bit of weight and I don't believe that you bear any resemblance to the passport photo." Oh, excellent. In public I have been told that I'm fat and that my passport application won't be processed. I calmed myself slightly and responded with, "I don't have them counter-signed and I want to apply. And anyway, how come no one in the US, Canada, New Zealand, China and most of Europe hasn't said this to me as I cross their borders?"
"What do you mean?", I ask. "Well you've put on a bit of weight and I don't believe that you bear any resemblance to the passport photo." Oh, excellent. In public I have been told that I'm fat and that my passport application won't be processed. I calmed myself slightly and responded with, "I don't have them counter-signed and I want to apply. And anyway, how come no one in the US, Canada, New Zealand, China and most of Europe hasn't said this to me as I cross their borders?"
AFTER2006-03-05
Who put the ming in Menzies
Why is Menzies pronounced Mingis?
Thank you to the BBC for helping clear up why Sir Menzies Cambell has such a strange pronunciation of his first name.
There are some notable comments at the bottom too, my favourite is this:
"... Jean Harlow was at a dinner party and kept on addressing Margot Asquith (wife of prime minister Herbert Asquith) as MargoT (pronouncing the 'T'). Margot finally had enough and said to her "No Jean, the T is silent, as in Harlow"
Oh you don't find it funny? Then stick two fenzers up your ass.
Thank you to the BBC for helping clear up why Sir Menzies Cambell has such a strange pronunciation of his first name.
There are some notable comments at the bottom too, my favourite is this:
"... Jean Harlow was at a dinner party and kept on addressing Margot Asquith (wife of prime minister Herbert Asquith) as MargoT (pronouncing the 'T'). Margot finally had enough and said to her "No Jean, the T is silent, as in Harlow"
Oh you don't find it funny? Then stick two fenzers up your ass.
2006-03-03
Shock news - journalists sensationalise stories
I read this story and listened to and read other supporting news stories today. As a scientist, I am all for accurate reporting. It frustrates me to listen in to talk shows or read posts by misinformed, opinionated, but ultimately wrong people discussing science stories on the news. Take the MMR furore, millions of babies have now not been vaccinated and may catch some of the diseases it prevents while waiting for the singular injections, which in turn will probably increase the rates infection of a preventable disease. The cause? One article suggesting a slight correlation between the MMR jab and autism. The news reports blew it out of proportion and at no point was any hard fact put up to inform people. So there is a risk associated with a vaccine? So what! There is a risk associated with crossing the street, but many people do it and with out crossing the street they can not carry out their daily lives. It's not about risk it's about acceptable risk.
Anyway, I'm not writing this in order to argue for or against old news. What is new news is the recommendations for science journalism:
* Newspapers and broadcasters should employ more science graduates
* Scientists and science graduates should be encouraged to undertake media training
* Universities should offer multidisciplinary science degrees which include issues of ethics
* Policymakers need a better understanding of public perceptions of risk
This is all well and good when a story is being covered by a science correspondent, what this doesn't address is what happens when a science story moves from the science correspondent to the political correspondent as the news story gathers pace and becomes a full scale political story. You can't keep the facts from being sensationalised because the political correspondent sees his/her spin on it and also they are not formally trained in science. Seriously, would you read political or economic commentary from a person with a chemistry degree? No, you'd expect a politics or economics graduate with experience in the field otherwise the story isn't credible.
The other side of this is that censoring the news or regulating the news is either wrong or right, but never in the middle. If you censor science stories, what about the stories that get the facts wrong in other areas. You either censor them all or none. The stories that ruin people's lives based on rumour and conjecture or take down political careers could equally be censored. Personally I feel that love them or hate them the journalists bring the stories to our attention and do provide a source of information about important news that may otherwise pass them by. Hell, it may even save a life or benefit others if someone goes to the doctor or whistle-blows on their employer based on information in the news.
What we really need to do is not focus on the journalists, but on the readers. If the average member of the public isn't science savvy enough to question something and do their own research or can't stop themselves from believing everything put in front of them it's them that needs help.
Don't censor the media, enlighten the people.
Anyway, I'm not writing this in order to argue for or against old news. What is new news is the recommendations for science journalism:
* Newspapers and broadcasters should employ more science graduates
* Scientists and science graduates should be encouraged to undertake media training
* Universities should offer multidisciplinary science degrees which include issues of ethics
* Policymakers need a better understanding of public perceptions of risk
This is all well and good when a story is being covered by a science correspondent, what this doesn't address is what happens when a science story moves from the science correspondent to the political correspondent as the news story gathers pace and becomes a full scale political story. You can't keep the facts from being sensationalised because the political correspondent sees his/her spin on it and also they are not formally trained in science. Seriously, would you read political or economic commentary from a person with a chemistry degree? No, you'd expect a politics or economics graduate with experience in the field otherwise the story isn't credible.
The other side of this is that censoring the news or regulating the news is either wrong or right, but never in the middle. If you censor science stories, what about the stories that get the facts wrong in other areas. You either censor them all or none. The stories that ruin people's lives based on rumour and conjecture or take down political careers could equally be censored. Personally I feel that love them or hate them the journalists bring the stories to our attention and do provide a source of information about important news that may otherwise pass them by. Hell, it may even save a life or benefit others if someone goes to the doctor or whistle-blows on their employer based on information in the news.
What we really need to do is not focus on the journalists, but on the readers. If the average member of the public isn't science savvy enough to question something and do their own research or can't stop themselves from believing everything put in front of them it's them that needs help.
Don't censor the media, enlighten the people.
The Infuriating Case of the Vanishing Funds ad infinitum
If anyone reads this blog, which in its infancy is unlikely due to the sparse population of posts and the monotony of the subject matter thus far, they will no doubt be familiar, perhaps even avid readers of, the credit card fiasco. This will be the last post on this matter unless something very dramatic happens because as you will see this post can be read over an over again until all I have to say about it will be done.
Picture me calm and composed receiving my credit card bill and not really paying attention; then picture me enraged, spitting fire, eyes bulging, red in the face spouting the most colourful expletives I know and a few I made up (which were rather funny actually and good for another blog post). Well these are the scenes in my lounge before and after I noticed that I had not been credited the charges I incurred reclaiming my bank account and the further interest incurred from the original credit card fraud.
So, I ring up the credit card company, explain the situation and I am told that my account is in credit and that if I wish to receive the money I merely have to pay it in to my bank account using the credit card. But, that'll incur a further charge I say, well thats the deal they say. Sigh.
I'm currently pending some settlement at a higher source within the company, but in reality I expect to be repeating the following process gradually reducing the amount I owe expending much time and energy until I feel comfortable writing off the loss:
1. Pay money in to my bank using credit card to claim back credit card refund.
2. Incur charge for using credit card in step 1.
3. Receive credit card refund.
4. Go to 1.
Fucking hell.
Picture me calm and composed receiving my credit card bill and not really paying attention; then picture me enraged, spitting fire, eyes bulging, red in the face spouting the most colourful expletives I know and a few I made up (which were rather funny actually and good for another blog post). Well these are the scenes in my lounge before and after I noticed that I had not been credited the charges I incurred reclaiming my bank account and the further interest incurred from the original credit card fraud.
So, I ring up the credit card company, explain the situation and I am told that my account is in credit and that if I wish to receive the money I merely have to pay it in to my bank account using the credit card. But, that'll incur a further charge I say, well thats the deal they say. Sigh.
I'm currently pending some settlement at a higher source within the company, but in reality I expect to be repeating the following process gradually reducing the amount I owe expending much time and energy until I feel comfortable writing off the loss:
1. Pay money in to my bank using credit card to claim back credit card refund.
2. Incur charge for using credit card in step 1.
3. Receive credit card refund.
4. Go to 1.
Fucking hell.
2006-02-13
Differences between the UK and the USA: #1
UK: Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott was under intense pressure on Wednesday night after he was involved in a punch-up...
USA: Cheney shoots man in hunt error
This difference is that whilst Prescott meant to hurt his man, Cheney is the only one that could have killed his man. Guns don't kill people politicians do!
USA: Cheney shoots man in hunt error
This difference is that whilst Prescott meant to hurt his man, Cheney is the only one that could have killed his man. Guns don't kill people politicians do!
2006-02-12
Google Adsense, hmm
For some reason I've signed up to google adsense for this blog. What sort of money is a schmuck like me gonna get for spouting shite eh? Well we'll see. Perhaps I won't even pass their vetting procedure. Anyway, if you click on the links or whatever there are on the page I'll total the cash up and if it's significant I'll probably give it to charity. If it's not I'll just laugh at my stupidity.
The Infuriating Case of the Plastic Totem and the Vanishing Funds - Epilogue
After thinking it was all over, I was sadly wrong. If your credit card issuer says they will not attempt to take payment from your account after they have resolved your credit card fraud issue don't believe them, it is a barefaced lie.
I checked my balance the other day and I was several thousand overdrawn. "So what's new Ian. He, he, he!", you might say, but you'd be wrong. Post university I'm pretty tight with my money, ("So what's new...", you might say) and I'm pretty proud of not being overdrawn and of having a good credit record. This sent me in to a bit of a rage. I could have (and with hindsight should have) stopped this month's direct debit because I thought this might happen, but I didn't because somehow, through laziness and a false sense of trust in my credit card issuer. Considering how untrustworthy they had proven to be already, I have to conclude that this was a truly stupid action on my behalf and could land my clean credit record in serious trouble.
Now, things have got truly complicated. I know my bank charges me £25 for going over my overdraft limit and repeats this charge for 3 days up to £75 in any month. On top of this they will charge a further £25 for every day during which any further money is withdrawn from my account, which causes me to go further overdrawn. There is no limit to this charge. In order to work out what's going on I tramp down to my local branch and plead stupidity and innocence.
By my reckonning the credit card had now become in credit to the tune of the same amount I was previously fraudulently in debit. I checked this out and it was. My plan was to first resolve the bank charges and then pay the money back by using the credit card. My bank, which is part of the same company as my credit card issuer, was very good to me throughout the 30 minutes it took to resolve things. I was let off the charges and any further that were already in the pipeline, but any further charges couldn't be dealt with. However, the tricky part was how to resolve things with the overdraft itself.
My bank suggested that rather than pay a charge to the credit card issuer for the cash advance to pay back the overdraft I should get the credit card issuer to repay the money. The assistant was able to get my credit card issuer on the phone and they said they could automatically return the money to me at no charge. Brilliant I said, how long will it take. Five days was the answer.
Damn! So, not only have I got two banking organisations involved making this more complicated, I now face two choices. One, pay for the cash advance on the credit card, but stay in the good books of my bank. Two, pay nothing for the credit card refund, but be over drawn for five days. This in itself is a nightmare because I've detailed the overdraft charges of my bank above. It was further compounded because I realised that the very next day for about 2-3 days my monthly bills are all taken from my account. So I'd be charged even more by the bank. The bank were good to me, but they can't link the credit card account and then bank account, which means I would be liable if I went overdrawn further. I agree with this because if I was in a different bank or had a different credit card issuer I couldn't expect any favours. The decision was therefore simple, bite the bullet and pay the credit card charge and then fight with them over it.
What a horrendously complex thing. Add a new bank, creditor or person to a financial situation and watch the complexity shoot right off the scale. I am now backin credit with everyone concerned, but I'm seriously annoyed with my credit card issuer. I just got this months statement with the charges on it so I can now take issue with the card issue. I know now they'll pay the charges, but there is now interest on the cash advance and more interest on the original fraudulent balance transfer to deal with. Sheesh. Anyway, tomorrow it should all be put to bed.
Remember kids, banks and credit card firms are bad. Not per se, but because you don't know how bad (or good in the case of my bank) their internal policies are. You don't know how secure your money is nor how easy it is to resolve fairly simple things. Just say no!
I checked my balance the other day and I was several thousand overdrawn. "So what's new Ian. He, he, he!", you might say, but you'd be wrong. Post university I'm pretty tight with my money, ("So what's new...", you might say) and I'm pretty proud of not being overdrawn and of having a good credit record. This sent me in to a bit of a rage. I could have (and with hindsight should have) stopped this month's direct debit because I thought this might happen, but I didn't because somehow, through laziness and a false sense of trust in my credit card issuer. Considering how untrustworthy they had proven to be already, I have to conclude that this was a truly stupid action on my behalf and could land my clean credit record in serious trouble.
Now, things have got truly complicated. I know my bank charges me £25 for going over my overdraft limit and repeats this charge for 3 days up to £75 in any month. On top of this they will charge a further £25 for every day during which any further money is withdrawn from my account, which causes me to go further overdrawn. There is no limit to this charge. In order to work out what's going on I tramp down to my local branch and plead stupidity and innocence.
By my reckonning the credit card had now become in credit to the tune of the same amount I was previously fraudulently in debit. I checked this out and it was. My plan was to first resolve the bank charges and then pay the money back by using the credit card. My bank, which is part of the same company as my credit card issuer, was very good to me throughout the 30 minutes it took to resolve things. I was let off the charges and any further that were already in the pipeline, but any further charges couldn't be dealt with. However, the tricky part was how to resolve things with the overdraft itself.
My bank suggested that rather than pay a charge to the credit card issuer for the cash advance to pay back the overdraft I should get the credit card issuer to repay the money. The assistant was able to get my credit card issuer on the phone and they said they could automatically return the money to me at no charge. Brilliant I said, how long will it take. Five days was the answer.
Damn! So, not only have I got two banking organisations involved making this more complicated, I now face two choices. One, pay for the cash advance on the credit card, but stay in the good books of my bank. Two, pay nothing for the credit card refund, but be over drawn for five days. This in itself is a nightmare because I've detailed the overdraft charges of my bank above. It was further compounded because I realised that the very next day for about 2-3 days my monthly bills are all taken from my account. So I'd be charged even more by the bank. The bank were good to me, but they can't link the credit card account and then bank account, which means I would be liable if I went overdrawn further. I agree with this because if I was in a different bank or had a different credit card issuer I couldn't expect any favours. The decision was therefore simple, bite the bullet and pay the credit card charge and then fight with them over it.
What a horrendously complex thing. Add a new bank, creditor or person to a financial situation and watch the complexity shoot right off the scale. I am now backin credit with everyone concerned, but I'm seriously annoyed with my credit card issuer. I just got this months statement with the charges on it so I can now take issue with the card issue. I know now they'll pay the charges, but there is now interest on the cash advance and more interest on the original fraudulent balance transfer to deal with. Sheesh. Anyway, tomorrow it should all be put to bed.
Remember kids, banks and credit card firms are bad. Not per se, but because you don't know how bad (or good in the case of my bank) their internal policies are. You don't know how secure your money is nor how easy it is to resolve fairly simple things. Just say no!
2006-01-25
The Infuriating Case of the Plastic Totem and the Vanishing Funds
During the last 14 days I have been trying to sort out my finances. Normally when someone says that, especially around this time of year they are discussing their day-to-day budget and their overdraft/credit card, which took a pounding recently. In my case, as a result of someone else pounding my credit card, I am sorting out my finances to assess the potential damage I am yet to uncover.
Recently I received a letter from my credit card provider asking me to call them. When I finally was able to get through to them it appears there has been some fraudulent use of my credit card. This is a description of what happened.
During the initial call, I was asked if I had called the company in the last week. I said no. In fact I had only called them once (the previous month) in the last 2 years. I was asked a series of questions that whittled down the point that I had not transferred £4500 from another credit card to my credit card. Next proceeded a series of questions to try to establish how the card had become fraudulently used. It appears that someone has gotten hold of my credit card number and the CVV code (that security code on the back). Using this number they have been able to transfer funds from one card to another.
I've not used the card on the internet as far as I know and in fact the card had lain dormant for almost 2 years so although I can't discount internet fraud, it's a long time for someone to wait before using information they obtained that way. The other way for someone to get this information would be to actually get it from me. As I said, the card has lain dormant for 2 years and was stored securely in my room in my flat for that time. It was only one month ago that I put it in my wallet for a trip to Holland and so there is a very small window for the information to be taken. What is strangest is that my card is always buried in my wallet and deep in my pocket. So, sometime in the last 30 days, I've had my pocket picked, the card read and then replaced. Or something like that. I may have over looked things and the information got out another way, but that's how I see it anyway.
That is also how my credit card company sees it. I was asked a lot of questions about whether I had a shared mailbox (I do, but it's irrelevent because I'd had the card for three years); about shared accomodation (I do share, but with a friend of over 20 years, that, although you can never say never, I severely doubt would defraud me) and about how secure my premises and use of the card were. I became very upset when it seemed they were pointing to my housemate having done this and also that they said that because I lived in shared accomodation I should always carry my card with me. Firstly, as I mentioned, my housemate has been a longtime friend for many years and secondly, I resent the fact that my own flat and my own room within my flat are considered a less safe place for a credit card other than my wallet out in public.
Well, keeping my calm, I continued with the phone call. I would be required to sign a disclaimer denying using the card and the matter should be resolved soon enough. So, I put down the phone and waited for the post. Then it hit me! The problem was not with the credit card number and CVC code being used, it was the whole security process, which could leave me open to complete identity theft and widespread fraud.
When I telephoned the credit card company I was required provide the answer to several security questions before I was identified and the fraud case could be discussed. The fraudulent user of my card had also rung up to transfer a balance and so it stands to reason that by passing this security test they have access to more information than one credit card number. They had the ability to access any of my financial accounts and use them fraudulently.
I rang back the credit card company and asked them to review how the fraud occured. Yes, a call had been made and yes, security questions had been asked. I enquired about which questions were asked and the person on the phone hadn't got that information available. This strikes me as ridiculous. How can determine fraud and maintain security if you don't log the security information you ask for? I was told the matter would be transferred to a superior and I'd get a call back. In the mould of all customer service complaints, I am still waiting for that call. Meanwhile, I still don't know what questions were asked, what information was provided about me and to what extent I need to call my financial providers to get security changed. Worrying at the least.
Regarding the actual fraud, things are now resolved, but I'm left with a seriously bad taste in my mouth and I still haven't heard back from the company about my possibly compromised security details. Be careful with your information and don't rely on one password or security detail to protect more than one account. I would make up a different set of answers for security questions for each account you have with a new provider, including different mother's maiden name. It sounds an awful lot of effort to do this and that kind of security is rarely needed for the general public, but think about this: how much more effort would it be to change all details with every account in one go and to persuade them that they needed to change the details. Why should they believe you, perhaps you're the fraudster on the line securing the account? The bottom line is the financial nightmare of losing all of your savings and investments and also being in debt a huge amount. A massive swing from financial security to bankruptcy.
Recently I received a letter from my credit card provider asking me to call them. When I finally was able to get through to them it appears there has been some fraudulent use of my credit card. This is a description of what happened.
During the initial call, I was asked if I had called the company in the last week. I said no. In fact I had only called them once (the previous month) in the last 2 years. I was asked a series of questions that whittled down the point that I had not transferred £4500 from another credit card to my credit card. Next proceeded a series of questions to try to establish how the card had become fraudulently used. It appears that someone has gotten hold of my credit card number and the CVV code (that security code on the back). Using this number they have been able to transfer funds from one card to another.
I've not used the card on the internet as far as I know and in fact the card had lain dormant for almost 2 years so although I can't discount internet fraud, it's a long time for someone to wait before using information they obtained that way. The other way for someone to get this information would be to actually get it from me. As I said, the card has lain dormant for 2 years and was stored securely in my room in my flat for that time. It was only one month ago that I put it in my wallet for a trip to Holland and so there is a very small window for the information to be taken. What is strangest is that my card is always buried in my wallet and deep in my pocket. So, sometime in the last 30 days, I've had my pocket picked, the card read and then replaced. Or something like that. I may have over looked things and the information got out another way, but that's how I see it anyway.
That is also how my credit card company sees it. I was asked a lot of questions about whether I had a shared mailbox (I do, but it's irrelevent because I'd had the card for three years); about shared accomodation (I do share, but with a friend of over 20 years, that, although you can never say never, I severely doubt would defraud me) and about how secure my premises and use of the card were. I became very upset when it seemed they were pointing to my housemate having done this and also that they said that because I lived in shared accomodation I should always carry my card with me. Firstly, as I mentioned, my housemate has been a longtime friend for many years and secondly, I resent the fact that my own flat and my own room within my flat are considered a less safe place for a credit card other than my wallet out in public.
Well, keeping my calm, I continued with the phone call. I would be required to sign a disclaimer denying using the card and the matter should be resolved soon enough. So, I put down the phone and waited for the post. Then it hit me! The problem was not with the credit card number and CVC code being used, it was the whole security process, which could leave me open to complete identity theft and widespread fraud.
When I telephoned the credit card company I was required provide the answer to several security questions before I was identified and the fraud case could be discussed. The fraudulent user of my card had also rung up to transfer a balance and so it stands to reason that by passing this security test they have access to more information than one credit card number. They had the ability to access any of my financial accounts and use them fraudulently.
I rang back the credit card company and asked them to review how the fraud occured. Yes, a call had been made and yes, security questions had been asked. I enquired about which questions were asked and the person on the phone hadn't got that information available. This strikes me as ridiculous. How can determine fraud and maintain security if you don't log the security information you ask for? I was told the matter would be transferred to a superior and I'd get a call back. In the mould of all customer service complaints, I am still waiting for that call. Meanwhile, I still don't know what questions were asked, what information was provided about me and to what extent I need to call my financial providers to get security changed. Worrying at the least.
Regarding the actual fraud, things are now resolved, but I'm left with a seriously bad taste in my mouth and I still haven't heard back from the company about my possibly compromised security details. Be careful with your information and don't rely on one password or security detail to protect more than one account. I would make up a different set of answers for security questions for each account you have with a new provider, including different mother's maiden name. It sounds an awful lot of effort to do this and that kind of security is rarely needed for the general public, but think about this: how much more effort would it be to change all details with every account in one go and to persuade them that they needed to change the details. Why should they believe you, perhaps you're the fraudster on the line securing the account? The bottom line is the financial nightmare of losing all of your savings and investments and also being in debt a huge amount. A massive swing from financial security to bankruptcy.
2006-01-03
Ten Tracks From 2005
It's been a good year for me musically. I've bought a lot more music, managed to seek out a whole bunch more music myself without relying on word of mouth so much and managed to see more bands live than any other year in the last five years a least. Here's ten tracks from ten bands/artist(e)s in no particular order that I found, re-discovered or generally listened to a lot in 2005.
Captain Beyond: Dancing Madly Backwards (On A Sea Of Air)
(Captain Beyond, 1972)
Great rock, I loved this the moment Chris, my house mate, played it to me. Randomly no one had heard this amongst us despite it being over 30 years old until Chris read a forum post about greatest rock albums ever. This was one persons greatest album so he had to listen to it. The rest is history. This is an amalgam of the first three-part track on the album.
Bright Eyes: Road To Joy
(I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning, 2005)
Bright Eyes have/has both curried and lost some of my favour this year, Road to Joy is my favourite song from I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning, however listening to the little fucker screeching on Lifted: Or The Story Is In The Soil So Keep Your Ear To The Ground has somewhat soiled the relationship. That album is supposed to be better than I'm Wide Awake... and on full listen through it's pretty good, but I still can't get with the grown man crying thing.
Devendra Banhart: Little Boys
(Cripple Crow, 2005)
Is he a paedophile or just singing from a different point of view? Which point of view, a paedophile's point of view, big gay pirate's or a cheeky little girl's. Or is it something completely different? I can't figure it out, but I like the song despite the cringing lyrics.
Editors: Bullets
(The Back Room, 2005)
Finally something on XFM's play-list that isn't so much commercial dross or something I haven't already discovered. I was a little worried about buying this album in case the two songs I'd heard on the radio were all it had and that the statement above wasn't true, but thankfully it's a good album. I wanted to put an album track down here, you know to be cool, but actually nothing reminds me of Editors more than Bullets, it's good song and I get hairs standing up on my back when I listen to it.
Joanna Newsom: Peach, Plum, Pear
(The Milk-Eyed Mender, 2004)
Freaky deaky Joanna, scourge of my girlfriend, but love of mine. Another randomly discovered artist this year (before the Orange adverts of course). I missed out on seeing her this year due to an administrative error, or is that an administrator's error (eh, Chris?), but there's enough on The Milk-Eyed Mender to make up for that.
Richard and Linda Thompson: The Calvary Cross (live)
(I Want To See The Bright Lights Tonight, 1974 - live version released 2004 on re-issued album with bonus live tracks)
This was a random purchase this year after becoming more folk oriented during the year. I bought this solely because, for many years, the resemblance between Richard Thompson and my Dad has been joked about and seeing as my Dad is tone-deaf I wondered if his doppleganger was any better. He is.
Belle and Sebastian: If She Wants Me
(Dear Catastrophe Waitress, 2003)
Dear Catastrophe Waitress is an equally good song from this album, which I only picked up this year, but there was something about this that made me want it on the compilation more. Yes, I know that negates the comment about the equality of the two tracks, but deal with okay!
The Arcade Fire: Headlights Look Like Diamonds
(The Arcade Fire EP, 2003)
Along with Editors, The Arcade Fire was a risk worth taking. I bought the The Arcade Fire EP on the way to New Zealand. After passing the Ceara test (she didn't like it) I thought I'd buy Funeral on my return. Both CDs are great, I went with Headlights Look Like Diamonds because a) it's one of the first songs that made me think, "hey I kind of like like this" and b) because I couldn't find my copy of Funeral to choose a song from that as well as Arcade Fire.
The Shins: So Says I
(Chutes Too Narrow, 2003)
Despite Chris, Penny and co. loving the Shins I didn't actually properly listen to them until late in 2005. I wished I bothered to listen to Chutes Too Narrow before. I really like their sound and the album has almost no filler. As with The Arcade Fire, So Says I was the first track that got me hooked after a few listens.
Bob Dylan: Tombstone Blues
(Highway 61 Revisited, 1965)
As part of a jumbo pack of Thirtieth birthday classic CDs from James and Chris, Highway 61 Revisited was one of the most frequently listened albums. I re-found some love for Dylan and would recommend the album to anyone. Tombstone Blues is probably my favourite although Highway 61 Revisited itself is also as good because with both the lyrics are either clever or cute most of the time.
Captain Beyond: Dancing Madly Backwards (On A Sea Of Air)
(Captain Beyond, 1972)
Great rock, I loved this the moment Chris, my house mate, played it to me. Randomly no one had heard this amongst us despite it being over 30 years old until Chris read a forum post about greatest rock albums ever. This was one persons greatest album so he had to listen to it. The rest is history. This is an amalgam of the first three-part track on the album.
Bright Eyes: Road To Joy
(I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning, 2005)
Bright Eyes have/has both curried and lost some of my favour this year, Road to Joy is my favourite song from I'm Wide Awake, It's Morning, however listening to the little fucker screeching on Lifted: Or The Story Is In The Soil So Keep Your Ear To The Ground has somewhat soiled the relationship. That album is supposed to be better than I'm Wide Awake... and on full listen through it's pretty good, but I still can't get with the grown man crying thing.
Devendra Banhart: Little Boys
(Cripple Crow, 2005)
Is he a paedophile or just singing from a different point of view? Which point of view, a paedophile's point of view, big gay pirate's or a cheeky little girl's. Or is it something completely different? I can't figure it out, but I like the song despite the cringing lyrics.
Editors: Bullets
(The Back Room, 2005)
Finally something on XFM's play-list that isn't so much commercial dross or something I haven't already discovered. I was a little worried about buying this album in case the two songs I'd heard on the radio were all it had and that the statement above wasn't true, but thankfully it's a good album. I wanted to put an album track down here, you know to be cool, but actually nothing reminds me of Editors more than Bullets, it's good song and I get hairs standing up on my back when I listen to it.
Joanna Newsom: Peach, Plum, Pear
(The Milk-Eyed Mender, 2004)
Freaky deaky Joanna, scourge of my girlfriend, but love of mine. Another randomly discovered artist this year (before the Orange adverts of course). I missed out on seeing her this year due to an administrative error, or is that an administrator's error (eh, Chris?), but there's enough on The Milk-Eyed Mender to make up for that.
Richard and Linda Thompson: The Calvary Cross (live)
(I Want To See The Bright Lights Tonight, 1974 - live version released 2004 on re-issued album with bonus live tracks)
This was a random purchase this year after becoming more folk oriented during the year. I bought this solely because, for many years, the resemblance between Richard Thompson and my Dad has been joked about and seeing as my Dad is tone-deaf I wondered if his doppleganger was any better. He is.
Belle and Sebastian: If She Wants Me
(Dear Catastrophe Waitress, 2003)
Dear Catastrophe Waitress is an equally good song from this album, which I only picked up this year, but there was something about this that made me want it on the compilation more. Yes, I know that negates the comment about the equality of the two tracks, but deal with okay!
The Arcade Fire: Headlights Look Like Diamonds
(The Arcade Fire EP, 2003)
Along with Editors, The Arcade Fire was a risk worth taking. I bought the The Arcade Fire EP on the way to New Zealand. After passing the Ceara test (she didn't like it) I thought I'd buy Funeral on my return. Both CDs are great, I went with Headlights Look Like Diamonds because a) it's one of the first songs that made me think, "hey I kind of like like this" and b) because I couldn't find my copy of Funeral to choose a song from that as well as Arcade Fire.
The Shins: So Says I
(Chutes Too Narrow, 2003)
Despite Chris, Penny and co. loving the Shins I didn't actually properly listen to them until late in 2005. I wished I bothered to listen to Chutes Too Narrow before. I really like their sound and the album has almost no filler. As with The Arcade Fire, So Says I was the first track that got me hooked after a few listens.
Bob Dylan: Tombstone Blues
(Highway 61 Revisited, 1965)
As part of a jumbo pack of Thirtieth birthday classic CDs from James and Chris, Highway 61 Revisited was one of the most frequently listened albums. I re-found some love for Dylan and would recommend the album to anyone. Tombstone Blues is probably my favourite although Highway 61 Revisited itself is also as good because with both the lyrics are either clever or cute most of the time.
2005-12-31
Merry Cutemas
I was clearing up the flat after the Christmas revelries and started reviewing some of the cards I received. Almost all are going in the recycling bin except for this, possibly the best Christmas card I've ever received. I don't know why, but I think it's just the best.
2005-12-29
Wasps of Freedom
The Wasps of Freedom as reported by USA Today, "Scientists at a Georgia laboratory have developed what could be a low-tech, low-cost weapon in the war on terrorism: trained wasps. "
Whilst this sounds a very cunning way to subtely monitor baggage behind the scenes, what if they want to use this out in the public? Everyone "loves" and respects the sniffer-dogs, but a sniffer-wasp? I'd just swat it, I mean am I going to get arrested for swatting a wasp? Are they going put up signs says, "no insect destruction"? "I'm sorry sir, you have just murdered one of our trained wasps I'm going to have to take you downtown". What if I suffer from wasp allergy or anaphylaxis then surely I'm going to a) run from a wasp or b) strike it down.
Just a thought.
Whilst this sounds a very cunning way to subtely monitor baggage behind the scenes, what if they want to use this out in the public? Everyone "loves" and respects the sniffer-dogs, but a sniffer-wasp? I'd just swat it, I mean am I going to get arrested for swatting a wasp? Are they going put up signs says, "no insect destruction"? "I'm sorry sir, you have just murdered one of our trained wasps I'm going to have to take you downtown". What if I suffer from wasp allergy or anaphylaxis then surely I'm going to a) run from a wasp or b) strike it down.
Just a thought.
2005-12-28
The Inbetween
Ladies and Gentlemen welcome to the Inbetween. Those days between Christmas Day and New Year's Eve. A purgatory between the hell of Christmas and the heaven of the new year. A period where for me at least I am too fat and hungover to enjoy the time off and yet too close to more parties to bother to take the time off partying that the 100 trillion cells that make up my body are crying out for. And in to this mix we have work. Oh yes, some of us have to work. For some that's the real hell of the sales for others it's down time that is a serious waste of time.
Take today for instance. When I could be bothered to get ready as the cold and Christmas excesses dictated, I had to drive Ceara and I to our respective places of work following Christmas spent at my parents. Just before leaving Jeff (the boss) rings to check I'm not dead after one of those snow falls that occaisionally render the UK inexplicably disabled. After explaining that yes, I am alive, he tells me that I shouldn't rush in as there is nothing to do. When I do arrive I chat to him for 30 minutes and then he tells me he's going home and that I can work from home if I want to too. Working from home is, to me a euphamism, for doing nothing, at worst being on call. So, for today, tomorrow and Friday I can go in to the office and do nothing or stay at home and do nothing. Basically a complete waste of time.
Some companies shut down completely for Christmas and don't penalise the staff for it by subtracting from their annual leave. Some companies expect staff to take the time off and book three days or whatever from their annual leave. Even this is better than the pointless existence I am currently leading, except I don't have any holiday following my extended trip to New Zealand. So anyway, why don't we just all take all of this period off work as a rule for the majority of people. It'll make many people's life just that little bit easier and allow us all to admit that we're really not doing anything productive anyway. Lets spend that time at home, with family, on the slopes, in bed or however we wish without having to "go to work" during the Inbetween.
Take today for instance. When I could be bothered to get ready as the cold and Christmas excesses dictated, I had to drive Ceara and I to our respective places of work following Christmas spent at my parents. Just before leaving Jeff (the boss) rings to check I'm not dead after one of those snow falls that occaisionally render the UK inexplicably disabled. After explaining that yes, I am alive, he tells me that I shouldn't rush in as there is nothing to do. When I do arrive I chat to him for 30 minutes and then he tells me he's going home and that I can work from home if I want to too. Working from home is, to me a euphamism, for doing nothing, at worst being on call. So, for today, tomorrow and Friday I can go in to the office and do nothing or stay at home and do nothing. Basically a complete waste of time.
Some companies shut down completely for Christmas and don't penalise the staff for it by subtracting from their annual leave. Some companies expect staff to take the time off and book three days or whatever from their annual leave. Even this is better than the pointless existence I am currently leading, except I don't have any holiday following my extended trip to New Zealand. So anyway, why don't we just all take all of this period off work as a rule for the majority of people. It'll make many people's life just that little bit easier and allow us all to admit that we're really not doing anything productive anyway. Lets spend that time at home, with family, on the slopes, in bed or however we wish without having to "go to work" during the Inbetween.
2005-04-24
I Had a Dream
How annoying? Very. I've just remembered that I had a dream last night and in the dream I came up with an incredibly good idea for a film or short story. It'd be more likely to be a film, because I actually visualised it whilst asleep. Still it's really annoying because when I woke up all I could think of was some really rubbish dream in which I drove to Cardiff, stopped off at a friend of a friend's house, asked if I could pick up his jeans he'd left behind (which I knew weren't there) and when I found out they weren't there drove home. On the way back I stopped off for a beer with my Dad who had appeared in my car and we drank beer in a pub that served ice with every drink and the ice was served in salad bowls with wooden salad tongs.
So, where is that getting me? I can't read anything except strangeness in to it, it's not going to get filmed not going to make me famous and more importantly it's not gong to get me recognised as one of England's foremost lateral and intellectual thinkers. No, it'll just get me locked away. And the film or short story? The reason I'm so hacked off? I have no idea about it. I can remember I had a dream about a fabulous story, but not the story itself. It's like my subconscious is taunting me. It's saying, look how much power I possess, such untapped riches, but you can not access them. Ha!
Anyway, if I remember the story I'll post it here or may be on the creative incubator that is spitbros (link below I think), if not thank you for making it so far through this non-event.
So, where is that getting me? I can't read anything except strangeness in to it, it's not going to get filmed not going to make me famous and more importantly it's not gong to get me recognised as one of England's foremost lateral and intellectual thinkers. No, it'll just get me locked away. And the film or short story? The reason I'm so hacked off? I have no idea about it. I can remember I had a dream about a fabulous story, but not the story itself. It's like my subconscious is taunting me. It's saying, look how much power I possess, such untapped riches, but you can not access them. Ha!
Anyway, if I remember the story I'll post it here or may be on the creative incubator that is spitbros (link below I think), if not thank you for making it so far through this non-event.
2005-02-16
Spit Brothers
Here's a quick update on some stuff my friends have been doing. Still early days, but they're better than me: Spit Brothers
Update (2005-12-29): Whilst the initial flourish seemed to signify a more updated blog than mine it has since slumped in a similar style to, what I presume is the usual lack of content of the majority of blogs like mine.
Update (2005-12-29): Whilst the initial flourish seemed to signify a more updated blog than mine it has since slumped in a similar style to, what I presume is the usual lack of content of the majority of blogs like mine.
2003-09-28
English Women's Football: A Comment
I read this today on my forum [http://fw1.no-ip.com/the_list ] and I just had to reply and then post it here. Usual stream of consciousness ensued, I wonder if it makes sense to anyone?
Popscene wrote:
So I was watching the women's world cup today and I was thinking that it was a shame England didn't qualify having lost 2-0 to France in a home and away playoff. However, after looking at England's record against the teams that did qualify I'm almost glad they're still at home. England haven't beaten one of the sixteen teams that qualified since 1995 (Nigeria 3-2). In fact since that time our record against those teams is Played 30, Won 1, Drawn 1, Lost 28. Nice.
So why are we so shit?
Why is it that the home of football can't put together a decent team of women players. Are we really that backwards that there is no support for half the population to play our national sport?
My rambling reply:
I blame it on our culture of wannabee popstars and celebrity obsessed girls and boys. Why play football when you can watch David Beckham and drool over him whilst looking forward to watching Pop Idol afterwards? to get people playing you need to play at school, but schools are still selling off playing fields to afford to keep going, teachers no longer want to commit to extra-curricular activities because of the pressure of the education system on them, if they do they face being sued by our litiguous parental blame culture for anything that might happen to little Johnny or Jessica. It upsets me. Rugby is actually in decline, a real big decline. The sport that our country is best at and may win a world cup at has a declining grassroots support. That's as wrong as our women being rubbish and undersupported at football.
So many people tell me that at school (in the old days) they did 2 sessions of games a week at school and had Wednesday afternoons for playing the games as well. Now you have one session a week for it all if you're lucky. No training, no support or nurture for those that are new to a sport. It's always focussing on the kids that are already talented, which is probably because Mum and Dad packed them off to a youth team to play because they new the school would fail them. How come they stopped all these games sessions. Suddenly they have lots of new subjects to study, which must have taken their place. Subjects that are low-brow and pointless. I'm thinking that these new subjects appeared to allow you to take a GCSE and A-Level which leads you all the way to an ex-Polytechnic to study them. In summation the England Women's Football team are rubbish because the government allowed Polytechnics to become Universities. The ex-polytechnics with their new found credibility made-up pointless lightweight degrees that people felt were worth studying and had the same respect as other established degrees. These new degrees needed lower and further education support, which meant that schools had to teach the subjects and therefore replaced sports lessons with the new subjects resulting in the decline of school and grassroots sport in the UK.
Popscene wrote:
So I was watching the women's world cup today and I was thinking that it was a shame England didn't qualify having lost 2-0 to France in a home and away playoff. However, after looking at England's record against the teams that did qualify I'm almost glad they're still at home. England haven't beaten one of the sixteen teams that qualified since 1995 (Nigeria 3-2). In fact since that time our record against those teams is Played 30, Won 1, Drawn 1, Lost 28. Nice.
So why are we so shit?
Why is it that the home of football can't put together a decent team of women players. Are we really that backwards that there is no support for half the population to play our national sport?
My rambling reply:
I blame it on our culture of wannabee popstars and celebrity obsessed girls and boys. Why play football when you can watch David Beckham and drool over him whilst looking forward to watching Pop Idol afterwards? to get people playing you need to play at school, but schools are still selling off playing fields to afford to keep going, teachers no longer want to commit to extra-curricular activities because of the pressure of the education system on them, if they do they face being sued by our litiguous parental blame culture for anything that might happen to little Johnny or Jessica. It upsets me. Rugby is actually in decline, a real big decline. The sport that our country is best at and may win a world cup at has a declining grassroots support. That's as wrong as our women being rubbish and undersupported at football.
So many people tell me that at school (in the old days) they did 2 sessions of games a week at school and had Wednesday afternoons for playing the games as well. Now you have one session a week for it all if you're lucky. No training, no support or nurture for those that are new to a sport. It's always focussing on the kids that are already talented, which is probably because Mum and Dad packed them off to a youth team to play because they new the school would fail them. How come they stopped all these games sessions. Suddenly they have lots of new subjects to study, which must have taken their place. Subjects that are low-brow and pointless. I'm thinking that these new subjects appeared to allow you to take a GCSE and A-Level which leads you all the way to an ex-Polytechnic to study them. In summation the England Women's Football team are rubbish because the government allowed Polytechnics to become Universities. The ex-polytechnics with their new found credibility made-up pointless lightweight degrees that people felt were worth studying and had the same respect as other established degrees. These new degrees needed lower and further education support, which meant that schools had to teach the subjects and therefore replaced sports lessons with the new subjects resulting in the decline of school and grassroots sport in the UK.
Literary Fiction
I saw this as a section in WH Smith on Friday. I wondered if all the books contained stories about imaginary authors. Perhaps one was about that Booker prize winning novel I wrote aged 13. That certainly is literary fiction.
2003-09-27
Banzai!
I can't imagine many blogs start well, I mean how many of us actually have any idea what we're doing or how we're going to say it. Anyway, that it, I've done it and next time I write some seriously good stuff. Honest. At least I can say I'm not a virgin.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
