Little Storping-in-the-Swuff - Latest Comments

Re: Are O2 Giving Out My Phone Number Without Permission?

Jonmaclean — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:55:21 -0000

Just so you know, there's a better link for checking whether you are affected here: http://mobilenetworkcomparison...

Re: Are O2 Giving Out My Phone Number Without Permission?

Rose — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:22:25 -0000

I'm on O2 and don't see my details on that page... but I've been with them since BT Cellnet, with a BT Cellnet mobile number? No idea if that makes anything different.

Re: Are O2 Giving Out My Phone Number Without Permission?

Greg Marshall — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:05:32 -0000

I checked using my phone on a Vodofone SIM (WiFi off) and my mumber did not appear in the header,,,

Re: Are O2 Giving Out My Phone Number Without Permission?

Dunhamzzz — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 04:40:18 -0000

Just to confirm, this also happens with their subsidiary network, Giffgaff, and most probably Tesco as well then.

Re: Doctor In Distress

Simon Wood — Fri, 02 Dec 2011 13:33:05 -0000

I try to resist the negativity. I was certainly delighted at the news of the 2005 series. And I love David Yates' work, so I'm excited at the prospect of anything from him. But that would be true, of course, even if it wasn't Doctor Who.

The show does seem to have less influence, but it's hard to put my finger on why it seems so. Perhaps it's the Private Eye stories. I find it hard to believe the BBC (unlike the Daily Fail) place too much importance on the overnight ratings (I presume it's these that you refer to as declining - the consolidated ratings are holding up, aren't they?) And the only two-part Christmas special was in the year of specials, and it wasn't very Christmassey, the four previous Christmas episodes were one parters of around the same length as The Doctor, The Widow and The Wardrobe. Yet I share your feeling that the show has less influence at the BBC. My theory is that it's not actually a decline in influence, but that the turmoil in the production team means it's being weilded less effectively. Without Julie Gardner there isn't the same powerful advocate for the show, with Piers Wenger and Beth Willis leaving Steven Moffatt is having to provide the continuity. But he's got to find time to write the thing, as well.

Regarding smart shows, I have an alternate theory that it is possible for a smart show to achieve popularity, the televisual equivalent to President Bartlett beating guvn'or Ritchie. But that may be wishful thinking, owing a lot to the fact that I'm enjoying Doctor Who more than ever before: I thought the last series was the most consistent in its history and it contained one of my favourite epsiodes. Still, it is unashamed about getting complex and yet the ratings are holding up, so maybe it is possible? Certainly, like every Doctor Who fan, I'm wary of a break. It didn't do the show much good in the '80s, merely postponing the inevitable as well as prompting that terrible single...

Re: Doctor In Distress

Foomandoonian — Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:43:57 -0000

I seem to remember that there was a lot of fear and negativity surrounding the news of what would become the 2005 series. My 'fear' about this new movie is that a rebooted Doctor Who could be an amazing thing to behold, but there are countless ways it could be done badly. Of course, even if it's truly excellent, there will still be those who hate it.

Putting the BBC show on pause strikes me as a distinct possibility. I have no insider knowledge on this, but I think ratings may be in decline. Certainly, the show doesn't seem to have the influence it once did: The Christmas specials used to be epic two-parters, but now they are single episodes; the Children in Need specials were magnificent little stories in their own right, but the last one was reduced to a raffle. My theory is that the show has become too smart for a mass audience. A break may be a good thing.

Re: “Holy Flying Circus” Review

Simon Wood — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 04:42:32 -0000

Agree, Steve Punt's already a bit Eric Idleish, especially in appearance. I guess they reckoned that was enough. Worse was the lazy reliance on a pipe or an American accent to identify other team members. The actor doing Cleese had moments of Cleesiness (uttering the words "jolly good") that elevated the performance above basic moustache wearing. I read Jones' tweet that the Rufus Jones looked more like him when he was doing Helen Palin before I saw the show and thought it was a joke - turns out it wasn't - he really did look Terry Jonesey as Mrs P.

Though I thought the actor doing Palin looked more like Wilson from House, it really was extraordinary the way he picked up all the Palin speech patterns and characteristics - I'd love to see him in something else now, to know how much is natural similarity and how much was studied mimicry.

Re: “Holy Flying Circus” Review

feelinglistless — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:09:30 -0000

The bloke playing Palin was really extraordinary. I assumed the joke with Steve Punt playing Eric Idle was that he wasn't. He was playing Steve Punt. I decided that was deliberate.

Re: “Holy Flying Circus” Review

Simon Wood — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:57:18 -0000

I think the reactions of the other Pythons might have worked. I'm not so sure using original footage would have meshed... could have been jarring. Although, when Barbara Windsor appeared in Cor Blimey it took me a few moments to realise she wasn't Samantha Spiro anymore.

Re: “Holy Flying Circus” Review

feelinglistless — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:09:14 -0000

Agreed. Might have been better to have included footage from the original show. I bet it was the one big debate they had behind the scenes. Another way would have been to have simply played it on the reactions of the other Pythons. But the show had the Palin figure as the spine and not showing him in there would have been like not showing Rocky fight. I suspect it wasn't helped by the repeat of #snsm afterwards.

Re: 76,641

jaystar — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 07:49:34 -0000

Sorry, I forgot the rebel MPs. I am not sure I have grasped your concern. How would it be different from what happens at present?

STV has a number of problems associated with multimember constituencies, and while electors can understand how to vote, very few will understand how the votes are counted.

Re: 76,641

jaystar — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 07:35:43 -0000

There is no logic in, or justification for, one MP one vote. (If the justification is on the basis of how well it works, the answer is badly). It is what we are accustomed to, but it is also the root cause of the problems we have with electoral systems in a party based representative democracy.
If we didn’t have Parties, one MP one vote would work well.
If we only voted for Parties with no constituency MPs, the result would be a block vote like an opinion poll with each party getting a percentage.
In practice we conflate voting for the individual and the party in one vote.

DPR voting separates out these to issues - Non party issue voting – one MP one Vote,Party issue voting – based on party strength percentage (shared out amongst the Party MPs.)
Many MPs owe their election, and therefore their vote in parliament, to the popularity of their party rather than their individual qualities. With DPR Voting their individual vote on Party matters depends not just on them as individuals but also on the popularity of their party nationally.

Re: 76,641

Simon Wood — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 13:44:03 -0000

I've not seen DPR before, interesting idea. I'm not keen on the idea of some MP's votes counting for more than others, though I understand the purpose of this; my head starts to boggle when I think of the implications of rebel MPs voting against their party line.

My strong preference remains for STV: it has preferential voting, and strengthens the independence of MPs. Although boundaries would need to be reviewed, having different sizes of multi-member constituency would allow local differences to be accounted for fairly.

Re: 76,641

jaystar — Fri, 07 Oct 2011 18:15:25 -0000

For a better electoral system try DPR Voting as a direct replacement for FPTP.
Constituency boundaries can follow natural communities, no need for frequent boundary changes.
It is intrinsically fairer because the voting power of each party in the parliament depends on the number of votes they get in the General Election, and each vote in every constituency makes a difference to the result. More at http://www.dprvoting.org

Re: “The Wedding of River Song” Review

Simon Wood — Thu, 06 Oct 2011 03:52:51 -0000

Well of course if you believe all the (unsubstantiated) guff the papers print annually about falling standards, then by the the time another 3000 years have passed she'd not only be the most qualified applicant, but her entire PhD could probably be APL'd.

Re: “The Wedding of River Song” Review

Lone Locust — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 13:32:32 -0000

Just realized that Melody Pond was educated in Leadworth, UK in the late 20th/early 21st century. Amazing educAtion system they must have to be able to get her into the doctoral program at university 3000 years in the future.

Re: “The Wedding of River Song” Review

Simon Wood — Wed, 05 Oct 2011 04:43:37 -0000

Looking forward to hearing your discussion with @lone_locust!

Re: “The Wedding of River Song” Review

Ben Ragunton — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 23:04:05 -0000

I won't go into too many details, but I will say that "generally" you and I are in agreement on pretty much most of the story points.

Re: 76,641

Veronica — Tue, 13 Sep 2011 08:40:52 -0000

Hope you express your views strongly in the feedback proposed on these changes! Trend to discourage people from identifying with their geographical communities seems to be the current fashion cf Attali's proposals to abolish French départements . . .

Re: “Torchwood: The New World” Review

Simon Wood — Wed, 20 Jul 2011 14:09:49 -0000

Wuvved?

The baby is a total star; the ear protectors (I've watched it again) are an excellent detail.

The other scene that I found a little clunky for some reason was Danes threatening the governor's representative. Maybe it was the line "sue his ass to high Heaven, 'til angels sing songs of him in their laments" or the overblown numbers ("million dollars a second") that RTD seems to like. Minor criticisms, really; it's a very strong opener.

I've got high hopes for the second episode. Doris Egan wrote most of my favourite episodes of House.

Re: “Torchwood: The New World” Review

Rachel Holland — Fri, 15 Jul 2011 05:29:27 -0000

I wuvved it (though like you, not so much the Retcon). And at least RTD let the baby wear ear protectors :)

Re: War on Tau

Simon Wood — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 04:09:12 -0000

That is brilliant. As is the "top comment" http://t.co/g0CTyMC about the non-bijective relationship between the musical scale and enumerating in base 10.

I think your next step should be raising τ at exam board meetings, and asking that it be used in future papers ;-)

Re: War on Tau

Tarquin — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:53:02 -0000

We've started by putting the "What tau sounds like" video on our Facebook page to see what they make of it.

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

Re: War on Tau

Simon Wood — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:17:55 -0000

Are you going to introduce tau to your students? “Let τ=2π”. It is a great learning opportunity.

Re: War on Tau

Tarquin — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 18:13:14 -0000

I have just astonished myself by agreeing. Tau is best.