1. Why doesn't this woman get more press? "Hooters Waitress-Turned-Lawmaker Admits to Carving Initials Into Assembly Desk."
2. An estimate of how much it costs to attend Hogwarts.
3. Gizmodo's list of essential Spotify tools. (I've only played with it briefly, but so far I don't see why it's so much better than Last.fm.)
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Link roundup
1. This baseball player is apparently having the worst ever defensive year and already owns the single season strike out record.
2. Piers Morgan's involvement in the voicemail hacking scandal.
3. Analysis of Iran's role in the uprising in Bahrain.
2. Piers Morgan's involvement in the voicemail hacking scandal.
3. Analysis of Iran's role in the uprising in Bahrain.
Link roundup
1. "Writer Laurann Dohner has inked a 75-book deal with erotic romance publisher Ellora’s Cave." (Links are probably NSFW.)
2. Interview with the actor who plays Neville Longbottom. Relatedly, this is a good overview of the series, with an emphasis on the fact that although Harry and friends might have started out as geeky outcasts, they ended up the popular kids.
3. A good summary of the Palin phenomenon: At a screening of a new Palin documentary, the only person attending was a reporter.
4. The BBTS has the Boba Fett Mail-Away figure available for preorder.
2. Interview with the actor who plays Neville Longbottom. Relatedly, this is a good overview of the series, with an emphasis on the fact that although Harry and friends might have started out as geeky outcasts, they ended up the popular kids.
3. A good summary of the Palin phenomenon: At a screening of a new Palin documentary, the only person attending was a reporter.
4. The BBTS has the Boba Fett Mail-Away figure available for preorder.
The bikelash has arrived!
Over in New York, there's a fantastic power struggle going on, as important politicians fight troublemaking cyclists, to try and get a segregated bike path removed. There's a good summary online, by the economist John Cassidy. Sadly he, gets criticised not just by the usual activists, but by other economists. That worries us. If the people we trust to run the banks and get the global economy out of the mess the banks and the economists got it into can't even agree on how bad bicycles are for a city, well, it's not a good start. How can they come with a plan for the global economy that works if they can't even agree that bicycles and pedestrians don't belong in modern cities.
Here in Bristol, Cllr Gollop is one person who has taken a public stance, denouncing the Cycling City program for spending money, not increasing the number of cyclists they promised, and for taking away road space from us, the important people.:
This is why Cllr -soon to be Mayor- Gollop is in the lead for the 2010 Bristol Traffic "councillor of the year" award. He's our kind of councillor.
Some of the cycling troublemakers have been asking "where are all the bits of road that Cllr Glossop said had been taken away for bicycles". That's tough -we had to nip out and get one of those cycle bristol maps and do some research.
It seems to us, the things that have got worse over the cycling city timescale then are
What then was Cllr Glossop trying to say -what did he really mean? He meant this
Every bicycle holds up traffic, so while the private costs of a bicycle are low, the external cost is high. A bicycle occupying a whole lane takes up as much space as a car -and because it's going at half the speed, it slows down the cars behind it more than a single car would. The congestion cost of a bicycle is therefore higher than that of a motor car!
That's the real issue with the Cycling City. Not the infrastructure, not just the parking -taking away our pavements. It's the increase in bicycles on what the cycle planners call the key cycle routes to the city, but for which we have a different name: the main roads.
We've been saying this since 2008. Us, on our own, sometimes with help a couple of times a week from the niche papers the Evening Post and the Daily Mail. The BBC, they're on our side with Top Gear, but that's relegated to BBC2 now, and in their news broadcasts they don't often have people that speak our language. Even the AA, the RAC and the Association of British Drivers don't come out and spell out the real costs that cycling imposes on our city. As far as politics goes, we have Glossop and the Ministers Hammond and Pickles on our side -but the only party that wants to ban bicycles from important roads was the UK Independence Party. Nobody else speaks our language.
This is changing. Welcome to the bikelash.
[For anyone wishing to congratulate the councillor, his contact details are online. Why not email him and congratulate him for being on our side!]
Here in Bristol, Cllr Gollop is one person who has taken a public stance, denouncing the Cycling City program for spending money, not increasing the number of cyclists they promised, and for taking away road space from us, the important people.:
"The Cycling City initiative brought in match-funding which has delivered new cycling routes but these have largely been achieved at the expense of the majority of road users - by reducing road space or capacity.
This is why Cllr -soon to be Mayor- Gollop is in the lead for the 2010 Bristol Traffic "councillor of the year" award. He's our kind of councillor.
Some of the cycling troublemakers have been asking "where are all the bits of road that Cllr Glossop said had been taken away for bicycles". That's tough -we had to nip out and get one of those cycle bristol maps and do some research.
- Bike lanes? Same as ever: short stay parking.
- Keep clear zones at school? Same as ever, though some yellow lines are going in -lines we can't blame on the bicycles.
- The Kingsdown RPZ? The locals voted it for it so they'd have the opportunity to park after going for a drive. Selfish actions by inner city troublemakers, but not cycling-city work.
- Bike Parking? Yes, this has taken space away, something to cover later.
- 20 mph zones? A topic for another day.
It seems to us, the things that have got worse over the cycling city timescale then are
- The removal of paveparking opportunities
- The 20 mph zone
- The increased cost of driving
- The showcase bus routes.
What then was Cllr Glossop trying to say -what did he really mean? He meant this
To us, the important people of the city, the Cycling City program is a failure because the number of people on bicycles and hence in our way has increased.This is of course the Daily Mail commenter line, but everyone is afraid to come out and say it. Not us, not John Cassidy -and not a lot of Evening Post commenters, but they don't make the proper economic argument. We shall.
It doesn't matter that no direct road space has been taken away in the inner city apart from eight paid parking spaces --the mere presence of bicycles slows us down. The fact that these people pay nothing while the cost of driving continually increases makes us even more angry.
Every bicycle holds up traffic, so while the private costs of a bicycle are low, the external cost is high. A bicycle occupying a whole lane takes up as much space as a car -and because it's going at half the speed, it slows down the cars behind it more than a single car would. The congestion cost of a bicycle is therefore higher than that of a motor car!
That's the real issue with the Cycling City. Not the infrastructure, not just the parking -taking away our pavements. It's the increase in bicycles on what the cycle planners call the key cycle routes to the city, but for which we have a different name: the main roads.
We've been saying this since 2008. Us, on our own, sometimes with help a couple of times a week from the niche papers the Evening Post and the Daily Mail. The BBC, they're on our side with Top Gear, but that's relegated to BBC2 now, and in their news broadcasts they don't often have people that speak our language. Even the AA, the RAC and the Association of British Drivers don't come out and spell out the real costs that cycling imposes on our city. As far as politics goes, we have Glossop and the Ministers Hammond and Pickles on our side -but the only party that wants to ban bicycles from important roads was the UK Independence Party. Nobody else speaks our language.
This is changing. Welcome to the bikelash.
[For anyone wishing to congratulate the councillor, his contact details are online. Why not email him and congratulate him for being on our side!]
The politics of copyright
We see that the "Turning Bristol Red" blog is using one of our photographs of Jon Rogers. Not just embedding, but putting a complete new copy up on their own server: http://turningbristolred.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/p1030249.jpg.
That was a photograph staged as part of the ongoing treegate story. Yes, like Top Gear, sometimes things are rigged. It was Chris Hutt's funeral, Jon was one of the people who stood up said nice things about Chris: it was a year today that we were all down at the Zetland Road junction, where Chris presented Jon with the second place in the Antibicycle awards.
It's bit of a shame, therefore, that what was a deliberately staged photograph at Chris's funeral has become, well politicised. This doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the text, it's worth a read and the audience can come to their own conclusions, only that the Bristol Traffic team doesn't like making enemies, as it interferes with our strategic plans. We sometimes see Jon in the street, he stops and says hello. And last week one of our reporters bumped into Paul Smith over in Portishead, where Paul was polite, despite the fairly muddy condition of the reporter. If someone we know and respect -such as the Bristol Blogger- had wanted the pic, we'd have said "yes, go for it", but we're not so bemused by someone using it who hasn't yet done anything to help us, and without even asking.
It's bit of a shame, therefore, that what was a deliberately staged photograph at Chris's funeral has become, well politicised. This doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the text, it's worth a read and the audience can come to their own conclusions, only that the Bristol Traffic team doesn't like making enemies, as it interferes with our strategic plans. We sometimes see Jon in the street, he stops and says hello. And last week one of our reporters bumped into Paul Smith over in Portishead, where Paul was polite, despite the fairly muddy condition of the reporter. If someone we know and respect -such as the Bristol Blogger- had wanted the pic, we'd have said "yes, go for it", but we're not so bemused by someone using it who hasn't yet done anything to help us, and without even asking.
-This site doesn't make any declaration of how our pictures can be re-used. There's an implicit declaration of copyright there -that it is retained by the original photographers. If people want to use our photographs elsewhere, it is not merely polite to ask, it is a requirement -something that someone trained in law should realise. We are pleased that our work has ended up being used in the campaign leaflets of the Labour, Green and LD parties over the past few years -everyone who asked got the response "yes". But they asked, they didn't just take.
This is particularly ironic given one of the last acts of the labour government was the Digital Economy Bill, which has some pretty awful provisions on copyright in the internet era, as record and DVD companies don't understand about how networks work, and would rather we all sat at home paying a premium to consume whatever Sky TV beams to us, with the little TV box then uploading statistics on what we watched. Not, say uploading our own photographs or videos to youtube, to become our own media reporters, whether it's on traffic issues in the city centre or -far better and braver- filming the overthrow of dictatorships from your mobile phones as you stand up to rulers that have declared a state of emergency for forty years.
It's also amusing given the experience of Crap Walking and Cycling in Waltham Forest, who had some of their artwork used by their Local Labour party; quite a story [1, 2, 3, 4, 5], though we suspect Freewheeler would be happier if they actually addressed some of the issues that the photographs raise.
Darren, you can re-use the four photos on this posting. That's two of you, one of Gary Hopkins and one of the Eastville ward results where Glenn Vowles is not that far behind the conservatives.
But not the current Jon pic you are using, and if you want any of our others, email us first.
Next time we're at an election we'll try and get some less blurred ones of you. We hear Charlie Bolton will be standing again, and he shared his chips with us. Nobody else did that.
Trouble in the Trees
Our coverage of forest sell off issues continues. Last week, how locking up the generally open forestry commission car parks will prevent us Bristolians from driving out of town to engage in casual sex with complete strangers.
This week, the mountain bikers join in. No, not with the casual sex with van drivers -they are too muddy and dress strange- but with the sell off.
This time, it is the Bristol Trails Group, the people who build and maintain the MTB trails in Ashton Court, 50 acre wood, Leigh Woods and nearby, complaining that this will mean that most of the woods will be closed off to them. The problem is liability insurance, more than anything else. Who wants to pay for the insurance for letting bicycles in. Far more profitable to turn it over to private shooting facilities instead, for important people. This will ruin the plans to have a mountain bike centre near Bristol. While we obviously don't engage in any such actions ourselves, every MTB-er who cycles over to Ashton Court not only means one less car on the M4 heading to Wales, it provides entertainment for us in the city to see these people coming home again covered in mud.
We note the Conservative MP for the Forest of Dean will be appearing at a meeting in Coleford, at 7pm tonight. This sell off matters as much to Bristol as it does to the Forest of Dean, so attendance there may be fun.
We also note that there is a public consultation on the proposals, a consultation which invites feedback. And what is the address for feedback?
This week, the mountain bikers join in. No, not with the casual sex with van drivers -they are too muddy and dress strange- but with the sell off.
This time, it is the Bristol Trails Group, the people who build and maintain the MTB trails in Ashton Court, 50 acre wood, Leigh Woods and nearby, complaining that this will mean that most of the woods will be closed off to them. The problem is liability insurance, more than anything else. Who wants to pay for the insurance for letting bicycles in. Far more profitable to turn it over to private shooting facilities instead, for important people. This will ruin the plans to have a mountain bike centre near Bristol. While we obviously don't engage in any such actions ourselves, every MTB-er who cycles over to Ashton Court not only means one less car on the M4 heading to Wales, it provides entertainment for us in the city to see these people coming home again covered in mud.
We note the Conservative MP for the Forest of Dean will be appearing at a meeting in Coleford, at 7pm tonight. This sell off matters as much to Bristol as it does to the Forest of Dean, so attendance there may be fun.
We also note that there is a public consultation on the proposals, a consultation which invites feedback. And what is the address for feedback?
Forestry Commission EnglandBy our estimate, that is just over the Recognised Pedestrian Route from the UWE campus. If some ukuncut/no-to-tuition-fee-rises/no-to-forest-sell-off-event were to take place up there one weekday afternoon, it could be, well, entertaining.
620 Bristol Business Park
Coldharbour Lane
Bristol
BS16 1EJ
Fun in the Forest
We're a bit concerned about government plans to privatise the forests. This is not because we have taken up mountain biking -even though we appreciate such activities do not get in our way, we fear that they encourage the riders to get fit during the week by commuting.
We're slightly worried that even our papers, like the Daily Telegraph, are expressing doubts. But frankly we don't care that much about dog walking, horse riding or other daytime leisure activities.
Some people may think we would be in favour of cutting down the trees, putting in more shopping malls, new suburbs. Motorways. But remember, we are part of a big society that uses those forests for night time activities too.
Who hasn't nipped up the M4, over the old bridge and up to the Forest of Dean, pulled in one of the laybys and had an intimate encounter with a complete stranger from time to time? It doesn't matter about your sexual preferences, it's classless: MP, priest, van driver, housewife, TV presenter of football or car shows -it's all the same in the dark. Anonymous entertainment, with only the bridge tax to stop us doing more than three or four times a week.
And with our van being a roaming retail outlet for the city's sex life's accessories, those trips can a big business for us. Selling safe sex accessories in the 'dean can be a nice little earner -some of those TV presenters have been round the block a few times, and you need all the protection we can sell you.
There's a national campaign against this organising a petition; everyone should sign. There's also a local group, Hands off our Forest, working for the Forest of Dean itself.
These people have been very active, and have this lovely quote from their conservative MP Mark Harper on Jan 3 2011:
For some reason it reminds of Bill Clinton's "technically we did not have sex" claims, or Tony Blairs' "The legal opinion was that we didn't need a second resolution". A statement which, from a legal perspective is honest, but means something entirely different at the time. We'll have to remember something similar the next time one of the team's drivers is caught in a compromising situation with a local MP up near the Forest of Dean.
This is why we not only support the Hood campaing, we propose a new slogan for the campaign " Fuck in the forest, not with the forest"
We're slightly worried that even our papers, like the Daily Telegraph, are expressing doubts. But frankly we don't care that much about dog walking, horse riding or other daytime leisure activities.
Some people may think we would be in favour of cutting down the trees, putting in more shopping malls, new suburbs. Motorways. But remember, we are part of a big society that uses those forests for night time activities too.
Who hasn't nipped up the M4, over the old bridge and up to the Forest of Dean, pulled in one of the laybys and had an intimate encounter with a complete stranger from time to time? It doesn't matter about your sexual preferences, it's classless: MP, priest, van driver, housewife, TV presenter of football or car shows -it's all the same in the dark. Anonymous entertainment, with only the bridge tax to stop us doing more than three or four times a week.
And with our van being a roaming retail outlet for the city's sex life's accessories, those trips can a big business for us. Selling safe sex accessories in the 'dean can be a nice little earner -some of those TV presenters have been round the block a few times, and you need all the protection we can sell you.
The proposals to sell of the country's forest to the highest bidder will interfere with small businesses all round the country.
There's a national campaign against this organising a petition; everyone should sign. There's also a local group, Hands off our Forest, working for the Forest of Dean itself.
These people have been very active, and have this lovely quote from their conservative MP Mark Harper on Jan 3 2011:
there are not and never have been any plans to sell off the Forest of Dean to developers who would cut down the Forest to replace it with recreation parks.This is beautiful. If they say, sell off half the forest to developers who cut it down and replace it with recreation parks, the MP was being honest. If they say, sell of the entire forest, cut it down and replace it with suburban housing estates, the MP can say they were speaking truthfully. And if if they do sell of the entire forest and have it cut down and replaced with recreation parks, provided the documentation shows the planning didn't begin until Jan 4, then again, he was telling the truth at the time.
For some reason it reminds of Bill Clinton's "technically we did not have sex" claims, or Tony Blairs' "The legal opinion was that we didn't need a second resolution". A statement which, from a legal perspective is honest, but means something entirely different at the time. We'll have to remember something similar the next time one of the team's drivers is caught in a compromising situation with a local MP up near the Forest of Dean.
This is why we not only support the Hood campaing, we propose a new slogan for the campaign " Fuck in the forest, not with the forest"
Breaking news: congestion in the city centre
"Mike" sends us a note to point out that the Evening Post has finally stopped going on about football stadiums and cyclists in shopping streets in nailsea, and instead focused on the key problem of the city: congestion caused by hundreds of students.
As usual, we got our coverage in days earlier. If somebody is now surprised that it takes a while to get out of town by the M32 at 17:00, they don't know the secret routes through Broadmead or St Pauls. Tourists.
Bristol Indymedia has some more coverage. While we are against students, obviously, some of them may go on to earn enough to afford decent cars -but with these proposed funding changes, they may be forced to walk, cycle or use public transport for many years after graduating.
As usual, we got our coverage in days earlier. If somebody is now surprised that it takes a while to get out of town by the M32 at 17:00, they don't know the secret routes through Broadmead or St Pauls. Tourists.
Bristol Indymedia has some more coverage. While we are against students, obviously, some of them may go on to earn enough to afford decent cars -but with these proposed funding changes, they may be forced to walk, cycle or use public transport for many years after graduating.
Police work over the University
For some reason we could not get our van down Whiteladies Road and over to the M32 this afternoon, so had to divert up the hill and hit the Highbury Vaults for a few beers before continuing. One thing we could see was this police helicopter circling the university quarter, which may be a sign of student unrest.
Students! Yes the government is going to massively increase fees for all future degree students, and take away the attendee allowance for anyone in higher education colleges. But the collapse of the economy implies the chances of you being in the payback part of the scheme is much less likely than you think! Furthermore, this government has abolished all funding for speed cameras! For that reason alone, we cannot come out and support you. That and the traffic jams you have created today!
Students! Yes the government is going to massively increase fees for all future degree students, and take away the attendee allowance for anyone in higher education colleges. But the collapse of the economy implies the chances of you being in the payback part of the scheme is much less likely than you think! Furthermore, this government has abolished all funding for speed cameras! For that reason alone, we cannot come out and support you. That and the traffic jams you have created today!
The Wye Valley Sustrans Path Proposal
Now that even the cycling world has picked up on the Wye Valley Sustrans Path proposal, and Tidenham Parish's opposition, we have to own up to something. We drove our white van over the sea to Wales to lend our support for the "Say Yes" photoshoot. Not because it will increase Tidenham Parish council tax rates by 40% -apparently- or because it will encourage cycling, but for some other reasons.
- There are many fine pubs along this path, including the Bridge Inn, Chepstow at the rear of the photograph below. Fine pubs, with proper English beer on one side of the river (Stella Artois and Kronenbourg), and strange Welsh beers (Brains SA) on the other.
- Having a bike path that goes all the way up the valley will offer us excellent pub crawl opportunities - a trip from Chepstow to Symond's Yat and back would earn about nine pints.
- The path will go all the way to Chepstow, and, through Bulwark, over the Severn Bridge to Aust.
- If you park and pedal from Aust, you don't have to pay the bridge tax, which costs you about two pints.
Therefore, we support it not for those cycle commuters or family rides, but for lowering the costs of pub crawls up the Wye valley. The fact that it will be funded from Lottery money, charity donations and Tidenham Parish makes it even better.
Therefore we encourage everyone who fancies a pub crawl across two countries to lend their support to these plans.
Therefore we encourage everyone who fancies a pub crawl across two countries to lend their support to these plans.
Note also that the supporters all came out with their helmets on, heartwarming. The joyful sight of a small child scootering along at walking pace in full body armour gives us hope for the future.
Returning to Tidenham Parish Council, note their web site encourages visitors, advocates visiting nature and promises the cycle path will improve the area:
Why then, are they really anti cyclist? Well, the obvious reason is that cyclists are strange people with funny clothes, helmets and personal hygiene who don't pay their own way. Which is something we know already. But why is Tidenham Parish Council scared to come out and say the truth, why is still living in a war-on-motorist, political correctness era where it shuffles politely and complains about parking, instead of saying what they really think, which is they don't want people on bicycles through their parish?
Returning to Tidenham Parish Council, note their web site encourages visitors, advocates visiting nature and promises the cycle path will improve the area:
"Nature reserves, walking routes, cliffs for climbing, caves for exploring are only a few of the attractions available to both residents and visitors and there are plans for more such as the Wye Valley Cycle Path Scheme."It is interesting, then, that the parish council is against the proposal. -and their key complaint is the increase in parking. Well, its our inalienable right to park the Bristol Traffic White Van wherever we want, be it the city or the countryside, so that offends us -that's war on motorist speak there. Furthermore, as we note, the pub crawl will start in Aust, because that saves car drivers 6 quid, and us van people £10.90.
Why then, are they really anti cyclist? Well, the obvious reason is that cyclists are strange people with funny clothes, helmets and personal hygiene who don't pay their own way. Which is something we know already. But why is Tidenham Parish Council scared to come out and say the truth, why is still living in a war-on-motorist, political correctness era where it shuffles politely and complains about parking, instead of saying what they really think, which is they don't want people on bicycles through their parish?
The Park selloff -creating a new batch of troublemakers
We drove over to the Council House on the day the parkland selloff was discussed, as part of our campaign for a dual carriageway from Lockleaze to the M32. Nobody else, no other Evening Post commenters were there to support us and our van with it's "Make Muller Road an M-Way" sign on the side, and we didn't get into the local paper either.
There was someone with a horse who did, which gives us ideas for the future.
Nor were there any police FIT teams out recording these subversives, so we did their work. Welcome to the Big Society, where we are forced to spy on subversives without even the allowances the DDR used to give their reporters.
And who are these people we we were taking note of? Well on the right of the photos there some green party people already in the database for being potentially socialist ,but in the foreground, we were horrified to see the stockwood conservative councillor
These people should be on our side in the war of the motorists, yet they won't help us with our Lockleaze dual carriageway plans -no cash, they say- and are even starting to worry about parkland.
Looking at the video, it had a real 1980s feel to it. There's some union people up by the building entrance opposing cuts, people in the foreground shouting out against selloffs of council-owned assets. Ah, the old days are back again!
Early Adopters
"Early adopters of new technologies are said to reap greater rewards".
At least that's what an IT guru for a large construction company once told me after I'd told him I couldn't run anything ending in .exe, because I was using an Apple Mac. Still not sure what his point was, however...
With a new government comes early adoption of some clear and sensible thinking on at least two fronts.
1. No more speed cameras.
We like this. After all, we're careful drivers when we want to be, and with the cameras gone we can concentrate on cutting up the tax dodging cyclists at speed without fear of retribution. We might even be able to take out a few jay-walkers and get away with it too.
2. No more clamping on private land.
Again, a brilliant move. We'll be able to park on anyone else's driveway without fear of intimidation and extortion.
So we're particularly impressed with these early adopters, Skodas WR08OVK and WM08EZH, who've ignored the sign promising they will be clamped, and managed to spend quality time outside an ex-IMAX without being clamped.
Here at Bristol Traffic we believe it's important that we manage to catalogue these vital new parking opportunities, as they come on-stream, so that we can sell them to the wider driving community at a later date (for a profit, of course).
At least that's what an IT guru for a large construction company once told me after I'd told him I couldn't run anything ending in .exe, because I was using an Apple Mac. Still not sure what his point was, however...
With a new government comes early adoption of some clear and sensible thinking on at least two fronts.
1. No more speed cameras.
We like this. After all, we're careful drivers when we want to be, and with the cameras gone we can concentrate on cutting up the tax dodging cyclists at speed without fear of retribution. We might even be able to take out a few jay-walkers and get away with it too.
2. No more clamping on private land.
Again, a brilliant move. We'll be able to park on anyone else's driveway without fear of intimidation and extortion.
So we're particularly impressed with these early adopters, Skodas WR08OVK and WM08EZH, who've ignored the sign promising they will be clamped, and managed to spend quality time outside an ex-IMAX without being clamped.
Here at Bristol Traffic we believe it's important that we manage to catalogue these vital new parking opportunities, as they come on-stream, so that we can sell them to the wider driving community at a later date (for a profit, of course).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)