People often accuse us cosmologists of making shit up, but at least we’re not as bad as cosmetologists (with whom we’re sometimes confused, at least in America)…
Follow @telescoperArchive for the Uncategorized Category
Making shit up..
Posted in Uncategorized with tags cosmetics, Cosmology on August 21, 2011 by telescoperNicholas Robinson; Burglary; 6 months: An appropriate sentence? (via MTPT)
Posted in Uncategorized with tags burglary, nicholas-robinson, riots, sentencing, uncategorized on August 13, 2011 by telescoperI hope we all agree that all the looting and violence was wrong, but 6 months in prison for stealing something worth £3.50….really?
I personally think these “rioters” (most of whom seem to be simply opportunistic thieves) would be better punished by being made to clear up the mess they’ve made…i.e. by community service orders.
via MTPT
Life goes on…
Posted in Uncategorized on August 3, 2011 by telescoperI wasn’t planning to post anything today, but I’ve been so touched by all the messages of sympathy I’ve received via the blog comments and elsewhere, both in public and in private, following Columbo’s death on Monday, that I wanted to register a big public “Thank You” for all the kindness communicated to me over the last couple of days.
I know that I’m not the only person who will miss Columbo, but for those of you who have expressed concern for me personally, please don’t worry on my account. It’s no secret that this has hit me very hard, as I always knew it would. However, I do know it won’t do me any good moping around at home, so I have at least made the effort to find some distraction through work, and by taking lots of long walks in the sunshine.
They say that time heals all wounds. I hope they’re right.
Follow @telescoperIf a Married Lesbian Couple Saves 40 Teens from the Norway Massacre and No One Writes About it, Did it Really Happen? (via Talk About Equality)
Posted in Uncategorized with tags gay-marriage-2, hege-dalen, heroism, lesbian, lgbt, lgbt-history, marriage-equality, massacre, Media, norway, press, rescue, toril-hansen, uncategorized on August 2, 2011 by telescoper“..let this not blind you to what virtue there is; many persons strive for high ideals, and everywhere life is full of heroism.”
Legal Insults
Posted in Uncategorized with tags 1986 Public Order Act, 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act, Peter Tatchell, Stonewall on July 30, 2011 by telescoperHere’s something I think is an interesting topic for a quick post.
Apparently, the government is considering proposals to change the 1986 Public Order Act, specifically Section 5 thereof, which states that
a person is guilty of an offence if he … uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour … within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby
The criminal law also contains provisions intended to protect individuals from various other forms of harassment. For example, the 1986 Public Order Act and its amendment in the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act created the criminal offences of “causing harassment alarm or distress” and “causing intentional harassment alarm or distress”, where an offence is committed if an individual “uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour, or displays any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress thereby.” Incidentally, these offences also apply to comments made on websites, as do the provisions of the Malicious Communications Act 1988.
The particular focus of the current discussion is the presence of the word “insulting” and whether it should be a criminal offence to insult someone. The first discussion of this that I read was in the context of homophobic abuse, and it’s interesting how it has divided opinion. For example, gay activist Peter Tatchell agrees with the proposed removal of “insulting” from the law, on grounds that it is a threat to freedom of speech, whereas the campaigning organisation Stonewall opposes the change.
This is a subject about which I will attempt to tread delicately, given my past experiences, but I have to say that I largely agree with Peter Tatchell. I don’t think it should be a criminal offence per se to make insulting remarks about another person, even if that insult comprises racist, sexist, homophobic or blasphemous language. I’m not saying that it’s right to insult people in such ways, just that it should not of itself be a matter for the criminal law.
The inclusion of “abusive” and “insulting” seems to have led to a situation in which the Police can interpret the law so widely that they can lock up anyone they don’t like the look of at the slightest provocation. By the same token, the law is so blurred that it is hard to apply where it is supposed to be intended – to stop harassment and intimidation. The proposed changes will not completely simplify matters, as judgement will still be required as to whether the behaviour is actually threatening or not. Some people are more easily intimidated than others.
As a matter of fact, I’m not even sure that amending this act is the best way forward. Perhaps it would be better to repeal it and think again, drawing up something less open to abuse. And yes, I do think it has been abused by the Police for their own ends.
Having said that, I don’t think freedom of speech can be absolute. It has always been tempered by wider considerations. The old argument about shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre and all that. I agree that attempts to restrict it should be kept to a minimum, but there has to be some form of redress if someone oversteps the mark. Abusive, insulting or harassing behaviour in the workplace should be dealt with in terms of internal disciplinary procedures, as many employers have their own codes of conduct to follow if someone misbehaves in such a way and their employees are bound by contracts to observe them. If the employer decides to enforce them, of course…
I find it even more difficult to support the current laws about “incitement”, such as the 2006 Racial and Religious Hatred Act which could be used to prosecute people simply criticising other people’s religious beliefs. It seems to me that it must be a poor kind of faith that can’t survive being questioned by others. If language is used that is intentionally threatening it is in any case already covered by the other laws I already mentioned.
Follow @telescoperA Walk in the Park
Posted in Uncategorized with tags Bute Park, Cardiff, Cardiff City Council on July 30, 2011 by telescoperI know my posts about Bute Park tend to be very critical of its “restoration” (i.e. commercial redevelopment) by Cardiff City Council, especially the ridiculous construction project that is doing untold damage opposite the cricket ground. However, I thought I’d balance that with a bit of credit where credit is due. The floral beds in the Park are looking really beautiful, as you can see from these snaps I took on the way home last night. See how many plants you can identify!
The problem is that you’re increasingly likely to come across this sort of thing these days too, as the Council seems to want to encourage private motor vehicles to drive around the footpaths and park on the grass. This was taken just down the footpath, to the south of the flower beds shown in the previous picture.
If you recognize the numberplate please tell the owner he’s a twat, from me. If I had my way there’d be a complete ban on cars and lorries in the park.
Another thing you might be interested to learn concerns the little refreshment kiosk just north of the flower beds:
This little Wendy House was built to replace a Victorian summer house as part of the Council’s “restoration” project. Actually, it’s not a restoration, just a new cafe, next to a paved seating area that doesn’t look anything like the original, doesn’t add anything to the aesthetic of the park, and eats even further into the contiually dwindling green space. What I’d most like to know, however, is how this little building managed to cost the Council £165,778.20. That’s more than the cost of an average home in Cardiff….
…dare I suggest that somebody has been lining their pockets at the expense of the local Council Tax payers?
Follow @telescoperNom de Google?
Posted in Uncategorized with tags Anonymity, Google+, Harassment, Netiquette on July 26, 2011 by telescoperGoogle+ has arrived. So I’m told. It’s meant to be a rival to Facebook, I think, and it is described as “making sharing online more like sharing in real life”. Um.
Membership of Google+ is apparently by invitation only and, although I’ve received a few invitations, I haven’t taken the plunge yet. I’m not sure I ever will. I already waste so much time on Twitter and Facebook that I’ve scarcely got time to write my blog keep up with work.
Despite not actually being on Google+, I still feel the urge to comment on an issue that I’ve picked up via Twitter. And why not? Complete ignorance of subject matter has never stopped me from commenting on things before.
The problem, it seems, is that, unlike Twitter, Google+ does not allow users to hide behind a pseudonym. One influential blogger describes Google’s policy as “gestapo-like”, “narrow-minded”, and “big brother” . Another suggests that it indicates that Google hates women. Both have been banned from Google+ for using aliases rather than their actual names. These and other reactions have developed into a fully-grown to-do accompanied by a not inconsiderable hoo-hah.
At the risk of being controversial, I have to say I think Google’s policy is actually quite reasonable.
There are of course many reasons why someone would want to use a nom de plume instead of their real name either on the net or elsewhere. I’ve done so myself, as a matter of fact (and I don’t mean the thin disguise I use on here, which simply demonstrates that I’m overly fond of anagrams).
The use of a pseudonym is by not illegal, neither does it imply some nefarious intent. However, I find it hard to understand the logic that removing the right to remain anonymous (or pseudonymous) is the violation of some fundamental human right. I’ve blogged about this issue before, so won’t repeat myself here.
I also don’t understand the argument that allowing people to use Google+ incognito will do anything whatsoever to prevent harassment, stalking or bullying. The point is surely that allowing users to conceal their identity allows miscreants to do so too. Far better in my view to police misconduct by naming and shaming those responsible for abuse.
It’s an interesting coincidence that Sunday’s Observer carried a long feature about internet trolling which makes a persuasive case that the cloak of anonymity actively encourages obnoxious behaviour on the internet. People will say and do things when their identity is concealed that they wouldn’t dream of when out in the open. Allow pseudonyms on Google+ and it will be an even worse environment for those likely to be victimised.
As another blog post explains, Google’s policy is not in any case based on it being some kind of public service, motivated by the ideals of free speech and mutual respect. It’s a business. The reason it wants people’s real names is so that it can target them with advertising.
My policy on this blog is a compromise. I allow commenters to post comments provided they give me a genuine email address. These addresses are not visible to the outside world but they reassure me that if the commenter engages in abuse or harassment then I can identify who they are and take action if necessary. I automatically check IP addresses too. I can tell you there would quite a few surprises if I revealed the identities of certain prominent individuals who have posted or attempted to post comments on this blog. In fact the biggest problem I have on here these days tends not to be abusive comments but spam; tedious automatically generated messages with links to dubious websites outnumber genuine comments by about 5 to 1.
But I digress. It seems to me that the main point is that nobody has to sign up for Google+. If you don’t like their anonymity policy then just don’t go there. Simples.
Follow @telescoperTop Tips
Posted in Uncategorized with tags Top Tips, Viz Comic on July 18, 2011 by telescoperNot a lot of people know that one of my first publications was a contribution to the Top Tips section of the esteemed Viz Comic, which originates from my home town of Newcastle upon Tyne. The aforementioned Top Tips offer absurd, impractical or ludicrous suggestions to parody those in “lifestytle” magazines proposing handy hints to make domestic and everyday life easier.
I’ve been tweeting a few of my favourites over the last few days, including a couple of (very) vaguely astronomical ones, so I thought I’d collect some of them here. The first is relevant to this week’s festivities:
- Avoid feeling uncomfortably hot during your graduation ceremony by wearing only underwear underneath your gown
- A ‘guide bat’ tethered to your finger with a short piece of string is the perfect way to avoid trees and horses in the dark.
- Prevent your shoes from giving you blisters by lining their insides with sticking plasters
- Astronomers avoid total blindness when viewing the sun by using a telescope rather than binoculars
- Reduce the risk of night-time fires by soaking all your furniture with a hosepipe before going to bed
- Make your own inexpensive mints by leaving blobs of toothpaste to dry on a window sill
- A used condom filled with water and left on a radiator makes an attractive yet inexpensive lava lamp
- Avoid the need for expensive binoculars by simply standing cl0ser to the object that you wish to view
- Avoid hiring unlucky people by immediately tossing half the CVs into the bin
- Sausage rolls sewn together side by side make an excellent emergency wig for judges
- Dabs of silver model aircraft paint can transform repulsive facial warts into fashionable piercings
Feel free to add your own contributions- preferably original and, even better, with a physics or astronomy theme – through the medium of the comments box…
Follow @telescoperDissembling Nature
Posted in Uncategorized with tags academic publishing, Nature Magazine, Nature News, Science, scientific research, Twitter on July 16, 2011 by telescoperInteresting that the Journal Nature is introducing a registration wall for its News pages. These pages have previously been free and, we’re told, will remain so. However, in order to access them one will now have to give a name and email address.
I heard about this On Wednesday (13th July) on Twitter (via @NatureNews):
OK, we’ve got some news that may annoy: @NatureNews is going to start requiring registration to view some of our free news stories. (1/2)
Don’t panic! All the news is still free. We’re just going to ask for a name and an email. (2/2)
(For those of you not among the Twitterati I should point out that messages on Twitter have to be less than 140 characters long, hence the use of two tweets in this case).
My immediate reaction – and that of manyof my colleagues – is that this looks very much like the strategy pursued by the Times online edition. First introduce registration, then shortly afterwards turn it into a paywall. In the meantime can collect all the email addresses in order to send marketing spam to those who have registered.
I inquired as to what they were planning to do with the email addresses they would be harvesting in this way, but didn’t get a satisfactory reply. Then I received a message from another branch of the Nature twitter operation, @npgnews:
@telescoper Hi Peter. Thanks for your comments. We’re about to send a series of tweets in response to Nature News registration.
Being a reserved British type I was a bit annoyed by the “Hi Peter” from someone I don’t know and have never spoken to before, but didn’t respond. Instead I waited with baited breath for the in-depth explanation of what Nature is going to do. Eventually it came, in three tweets:
Thx for your comments about the Nature News registration system. We’re asking all readers to introduce themselves by registering once (1/3)
Registration enables free access to the Nature News content, which remains unchanged. (2/3)
We’re working hard to expand and introduce more tailored services for readers and registration is necessary for that (3/3)
To say I found this disappointing would be an understatement. What a load of flannel. Note the word “enables” in Tweet No. 2. Free access was previously enabled to everyone, but is apparently to be disabled in order to facilitate the collection of user data for some unspecified purpose. Tweet No. 3 is a masterpiece of non sequitur. Why does expansion of Nature News require a database of email addresses? And what can “more tailored services” mean other than restricting access? Needless to say, I won’t be registering. There are other plenty of other sources of science information
Nature is of course a business operation, and you have to see this move against the wider backdrop of traditional publishing companies trying to find the way forward in the digital age. As a commercial enterprise, they are entitled to charge customers, although I wish they would be a little more honest about their intention to do so. I would remind them however, that The Times‘ paywall has been an unmitigated disaster, in terms of the negative an effect it has had on the readership figures. Given the revelations of the past weeks about the behaviour of News International, I bet people who were foolish enough to register are now wondering who has their personal information now. Will Nature News go the same way?
More importantly, however, as a scientist, I think that Nature’s policy of copyrighting and restricting general access to scientific papers is fundamentally wrong and is actively damaging science. I believe that scientific results should be in the public domain, as should the data on which they are based. Open access is the way it should be. In the past, publishers greatly assisted in the dissemination of research both between academics and to the public. Now, I’m afraid, the academic publishing industry is simply parasitic, and it is a threat to the health of scientific research. Fortunately, I don’t think a drastic remedy is needed; it will wither away on it’s own. Let’s just let Nature take its course.
Follow @telescoper
Buzzwords (via The Upturned Microscope)
Posted in Uncategorized with tags business, buzzwords, comic, comics, humour, lab, management, Science, science-2, webcomic on July 15, 2011 by telescoperThis wouldn’t be so funny if it weren’t so true…
In the Dark 