Steve Jobbs Is Violating Technology

Yesterday Apple were granted a patent covering unlocking a touchscreen device using a gesture. This patent was applied for in 2009, when Steve Jobbs was trying do quash all opposition by claiming thay owned the intellectual rights to every piece of touchscreen technology (including laying out a menu in a grid!)

This is appalling.

Technology should be available for everyone to use, and make of it what they will. It should be power to the masses, not money in the pockets of a few.

Sir Tim Bernards Lee, inventor of the internet, holds no intellectual rights over his creation, possibly the greatest creation by man kind. He gave it to the world and let people make and create, what has become an incredible resource. He saw the power of technology, and what it can create. Steve Jobs saw it, and his only aim has been to make money.

Technology is power to the people, something that many civilisations crave for, and something that is widely recognised to improve the world (look at the scientific method)

I am by no means saying that a closed system, which is what Apple try to run, is a bad thing. Infact for many less technology savvy people it is ideal because it is simple to use and easy to understand; but when that closed system's sole purpose is to make money and not to spread freedom and liberty, then the core purpose and meaning of technology is being violated.

Steve Jobbs is not a hero, he no different from 19th century mill owner. He is only interested in technology if it makes him money.

Dan Wheldon: An Accident Waiting To Happen

Firstly, and most importantly, Dan Wheldon will me missed, and the loss of any life is tragic, especially in sport which is something designed for people to enjoy, not for people to die for.

Henry Surtees, son of John, died in a Formula 2 race at Brands Hatch in 2009 after a freak accident. Dan Wheldon died in an accident waiting to happen. 34 cars going at well over 200mph was never going to end well. Racing in Europe is incredibly safe. In Formula 1 there are massive run-off areas (that many fans despise) but these make it actually rather safe (apart from freak accidents that cannot be avoided) Whereas IndyCars may have greatly improved the safety of the cars in recent years, the oval circuits haven't changed in most of our lifetimes, but the cars have got faster and more numerous.

Everything else about the race, like the $5 million prize, pales into insignificance when you consider the structural safety issues in high speed oval racing, issues that IndyCars have done nothing to address.

Until IndyCars address the serious safety issues, there should be no more racing. Something radical must be done, before someone else is killed.

European Banking Crisis: How The ****!?

This isn't a question that I'm planning on answering, more just mull over.

A global banking crisis and already happened and you'd think that the people who run the world would have done something to stop anything similar from happening again; well, if those who run the world are true politicians.

There are two reasons, that I can think of, that would explain why sufficient action wasn't taken. First, that politicians are not doing thier job to improve the lives of the poeple they represent, but for some other gain. Money and power possibly? Secondly, that banks and countries couldn't help themselves from trying to make a quick buck.

Either way, it would appear that capitalism rules the world; but I would posit that this isn't a disaster as whilst capitalism may cause bust, it also causes boom.

So if you like an unstable life, with periods of artificial weath built upon borrowed money then by all means, support "The Man" but if you like a bit of stability in your life, the stick it to the man. (He is also causing me to miss out on cancer treatment. See the post entitled: Capitalism and Cancer)

Trust Our Elders?

As my previoud post suggested, I'm in the process of applying to university and today I was at Newcastle's open day (and I loved it but that's not the point) and my dad is full of advice, most of which is worthless.

A rather silly example of this is his claim that "Newcastle is a cold place, you need to think about that." I quickly moved the conversation onto other matters but he also seems to believe that university league tables are always totally correct and should be looked at very seriously.

My belief is that is league tables do have a use, but should never be taken seriously. For example; Durham are 36th for engineering in the UK; and Bath and Surrey are both in the top ten. I'm not saying these are bad, but Newcastle have placed all of last years mechanical engineering students (and are still getting requests from businesses for more) but yet are outside of the top ten!

Despite all of these inaccuracies, my dad, a man of 50+ and who didn't go to university him self, still regards them as vital, and as a result, believes that I shouldn't go to Newcastle (a course and place that I love) and should go to Nottingham, because onr league table puts them 4th in the country. Rubbish.

People of a certian generation don't appear to understand what we want from our universities, or the fact that not all official data is totally reliable (unless it supports his political agenda) It is my decision, and yes, advice is useful, but the overwhelming sense that he thinks I'm wrong it really not very helpful, or nice.

Applying For University: Playing The System

Applying for university through UCAS may in theory be straight forward; pick 5 places, write a personal statement and fill out your details. However the truth is far from simple.

To be successful at getting a university place you need to know the system. Whilst this may seem obvious, getting it right can be difficult. Without a highly supportive and knowledgeable school or collage behind you it can all be very stressful.

Yes, there are many guides to writing a personal statement but without someone to check it over, writing a successful statement can be tricky. All of this is forgetting the questions regarding how spreadout your grades can be.

All in all, to do well with UCAS you need to go to a good school and these are few and far between.

Sorry For The Break

I do apologise for the break in posting.

There have been leaves on the line and the wrong kind of snow delaying progress.

However I am now back and kicking.

Hello, again.

Troy Davis: Not Guilty, but Not Innocent

Death row inmate Troy Davis has been executed in the US state of Georgia for the fatal shooting of policeman Mark MacPhail in 1989.

Davis' death was delayed for hours while the US Supreme Court considered an 11th-hour appeal for clemency.

The 42-year-old's case was heavily disputed after most of the witnesses recanted or changed their testimony. 

Source: BBC News Website; Full Story: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15013860

The difference between "Not Guilty" and "Innocent" is the key in the disturbing case of Troy Davis. The evidence that he killed the policeman in 1989 is far from clear, but calls from human rights groups to "Free Troy Davis, free them all" is also way off the mark.


Being very distant from the case makes it hard for me comment on the evidence, but the evidence is murky, and when it is unclear, somebody should not be put to death for a crime, because if it is a miscarriage of justice then it's too late. Equally however, I am not saying he should be freed, because there is also unclear evidence that he did not do it either. He is neither guilty or innocent. As such, he shouldn't have been executed.


There should have been a full review of the evidence and possibly a re-trial, his state of limbo should have been maintained; and the fact that the state of Georgia will execute a man on shaky evidence is appalling, and arguably inhumane.


God bless America?

Capitalism and Cancer

The thought that a company could put profit before human life is a concept which I believe everybody can agree is wrong, in fact abhorrent, and something which we should stand for; however, drugs companies are doing just that.

The future of cancer treatment is a larger pool of drugs, each aimed at smaller group of patients, but because they are more targeted, they are more effective, and can increase the chance of a patients survival. Cancer kills over 200,000 people a year in the UK and finding effective, life prolonging treatment could have major positive consequences on protecting valuable human life. However, this never ending quest for better drugs, may have a limit; a limit caused by capitalism.

A cancer drug costs around £500 million across 12 years to get to market and all of these new drugs will require this level of time and monetary commitment from drugs companies; but with a smaller patient group, it makes the returns on these investments smaller, to the point of unprofitable. So, with no money to be made, the drugs companies won't develop these more specific drugs and will focus on the mass market and big profit drugs, potentially costing human life.

These drug companies are putting profit before life, not the other way around. Remember also that a third of public funding for cancer drugs in the UK comes from charities, and public money contributes a considerable sum towards the funding of drug development, so it is only fair that these drug companies should put public health first, and focus not on profits, but on developing the best drugs possible, whatever the cost.

What I'm saying is that drug companies should work more closely together to focus resources and work. Clinical trials should become cheaper to execute (but to maintain public safety whilst cutting cost is hard) but most importantly, drug companies should become not-for-profit and work for the public and try to save lives.

Cancer kills, we all know that, but drug companies have the power and the ability to develop drugs that can help people beat this horrific disease, but because it will get in the way profits they wont do it. This is horrific and leads to the claim: capitalism kills.

(Obviously, suffering from lung cancer, my views on this are biased, but the point still stands)

Government Savings or Government Cuts?

I would like to raise what is ultimately a point of language but is important; what is the difference in government between a cut and a saving?

This thought has come of the back of a government report into how to save money on the rail network with the claim that £1 billion could be saved in 8 years with the main money saving recomendations being:

• Train companies should work more closely with Network Rail to improve efficiency
• More car parking spaces at stations
• Restructuring of the fare system (raising off-peak fares and lowering peak fares)

All of these are being described as saving in the rail network, however only the first of these is a saving, by being more efficient, both of the other two involve the public paying more but yet this is publicised as a saving and this is a much broader point in this "time of austerity" the words the government choose to use can have a massive baring on what we think of them.

Describing something as a cut is, understandably, politically uncomfortable for a government because nobody wants to take services away from the public, but describing cuts as savings is technically correct. This is because by removing a service (cutting it) you are spending less money, so you are saving money. This makes the terms almost synonymous with each other. This means that we can't just listen to what the politicians say, we have to look at their actions, and don't think this point just applies to the party in power. It also applies to the opposition. This is because the government may be making a saving without cutting (for example through improved efficiency) but the opposition can legitimately claim that it's a cut.

And if a government can convince the public that it is saving rather than cutting it will be far more popular and so will stand a chance of wining the next election; and in the UK may be labelled, if successful, the savours of the economy. A cabinets worth of political reputations are reliant on this linguistic swindle, and it looks like they might pull it off. 

So next time you see or hear something about a government cut or a government saving, from either side of the argument, don't just take their word for granted, look at what is being proposed because the word "cut" and the word "saving" appear to have become synonymous with one another during this parliament; but non of this should be that surprising. We have never been able to trust politicians.

Writing Stuff Down

Having a slightly less than perfect memory can pose its problems at the best of times, but when you're grappling with difficult thoughts it can be an absolute nightmare as some of the most fleeting of thoughts have a habit of being some of the most truthful. This memory problem also starts to annoy the people around you as you open your mouth to say something, only to realise that you've forgotten what you were going to say; and you could have been about to say something deep and meaningful that could have changed someone's life.

So after being scored by Fran for doing this far too often, I shall now be writing lots of things down in an attempt to hold onto these brief thoughts. Some things that I write down will be deep and meaningful, and many will be pointless, but the point of this is that I can elaborate on the important thoughts later, when I have the time and space to think about them, and it is time which I crave then most.

It's just a shame that I have AS-Levels to revise so I have little spare time but things are working. Progress is being made, I am feeling better, but yet I still manage to feel awful at the same time. It is all very confusing, but I do at least have a place to start with my thoughts. I need to work out what I want from everything. Once I know that I can start working towards it.

A Philosophical Preamble

This is the start of a new tag for this blog, it's the start of the "Philosophy" tag. Obviously, if you find it all boring then don't read the philosophy posts, this won't affect the other posts on here so you can still keep reading them.

Whilst revising form my philosophy A-Level exam in January of this year I found myself distracted by one of the topic areas which I was studying. It is known as "social contact theory" and it is basically trying to explain why we obey the state (government) and what the state should be like. It also looks as what the world would be like if there was no state, however I have not concerned myself greatly with this second point.

So what shall follow in the philosophy posts is my theory on why we follow the current governments rules, and what I think the world should be like, how we should run our lives. Obviously, it will be done in chunks and will try to avoid using long words and complex language as I believe that philosophy only has a use if it understood by all, not just an educated few (of which I am most certainly not one) but first I would like to make something clear.

My theory is based around the work of John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes, I am mostly combining their work in to theory that I believe is both; applicable to the modern western world and; something in which I truly believe. I am also fully aware that my ideal society will never happen as it is too far removed from the current world, however this does not stop me believing that; something useful can be taken from it; and that it is the best way to live our lives.

I hope you find what follows to be both thought provoking and interesting but most of all that you enjoy it. I welcome all criticisms to my points and will respond to anything which I believe answering.

Enjoy

PS All of this blog is under copyright to myself, but for other posts I do not see the views expressed as important intellectual property.
However, for this series of posts I do believe this to be my intellectual property; and as such I ask that you respect this.
This message will appear at the bottom of all posts where I believe this to be the case as a reminder.
© Andrew Hill 2011

A Buzz Of Happiness

The past week or so has been a funny week in my head. A buzz of happiness has surrounded it (the reason for which I will not disclose) but, whilst being amazing for the most part, has led to some awful lows.

I can't lie, I have felt the best I have felt for an awfully long period of time this week. Everyday life has been manageable with no spells of misery filling moments when I'm not mentally active. I have gone to bed at night not wishing to not wake up. Life, in itself, has been enough to keep me going, I haven't needed constantly picking up by the people around me, in fact some of them are slightly worried by my good mood.

However, all of this has come at a cost. The side effects of this buzz of happiness is that the genuine lows are now far more pronounced. Before they just blended in with the general feeling of awfulness, but now they stick out like a sore thumb, and make me want to lash back. I'm just afraid that I'll do something daft.

I have got used to emotional swings, but before there has at least been some emotional middle ground, but at the moment my head is either floating around on serotonin or in my hands in agony. This next month ahead could present a new set challenges, but I've promised many people that I'll keep fighting, and that is what I shall do.

After all; it'll be rate.

AV Referendum Result

Having said I would comment on the AV referendum, I shall do.

Hmph.

Sheffield's 2011 Elections

Before I start about this, here are the results from the local elections here in Sheffield...

• Liberal Democrats 32 (formerly 41)
• Labour Party 49 (formerly 40)
• Green Party 2
• Independent 1

Overall turnout 41.82%

...and now you know that:

Firstly the turnout was very impressive for a local election. Sheffield has traditionally been an apathetic city with small pockets of the middle classes propping the election turnout. This may still be the case but a large student turnout again (remember the scenes at the 2010 general election of people queuing around the block to vote?) has boosted the turnout again this time, with traditional apathetic heartlands showing little change.

However, the "collapse" in the Lib Dem vote has made national news, mainly due a local MP being the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, but in truth there is little to be concerend about. The Torys have always been weak in Sheffield and that doesn't look like changing so with all Lib Dem losses being Labour gains and an "anyone but the Torys" attitude common place, in truth, there is little for Nick Clegg to worry about.

I also put collapse in inverted comers because actually, it isn't a collapse, it is a return to the status quo and little more. The Lib Dems only gained power due to voters frustration with the local Labour administration. National issues may have had an effect, but the incompetency of the Labour council must have played a much larger part, and Lib Dems are now suffering the same. After their incompetent spell in charge (not helped by the local paper it has to be said) the Lib Dems are now suffering the same issue, people are fed up and want an alternative. It is local politics, not some comment on Westminster politics.

It is not the end of the world for the Lib Dems, Sheffield always has been a Labour city, and always will be. Nothing major has happened in these elections, just a return to the historical norm.

PS I will comment on the AV referendum, but my prediction is that the Yes camp will only be saved by No voters apathy and if No does win then a legal challenge will be talked about from the Yes camp due to the lies from the No camp.

Lies, Damn Lies and No to AV Campaign Leaflets

Front Cover of No to AV
campaign leaflet

Today in the post, my household received a No to AV campaign leaflet (right) for the May 5th referendum on voting reforms. It contained 24 lies, misleading truths and scaremongering statements. 


Here are my picks of the errors and lies:

First double page spread featuring 6 issues

(Apologies for the incorrect numbering order, there were so many errors I missed a few)

The first double page (left) has 6 issues:

1. The claim that AV will cost £250 million pounds. LIE

2. £130 million pounds will need to spent on electronic voting machines LIE

3. The "£26 million" on explaining the new system is included in the cost of the referendum and is from an unspecified source MISLEADING

4. Describes it as a "politicians fix" without saying what is being fixed SCAREMONGERING

5. They strongly imply that you must number all candidates when in fact you do not have to  MISLEADING

6. Refer to the person coming third wining, no, the definition of wining is being changed. Also say that the least popular candidate can hold the balance of power both MISLEADING and SCAREMONGERING

Now for the second double page (right) where I have 5 issues, but there is a truth!

7. Another incorrect claim regarding coming first MISLEADING

8. "AV is unpopular" LIE

9. "AV is not fair" unsubstantiated, no definition of fair and AV is considerably fairer than first past the post LIE

10. A popularity claim about AV from Australia is used despite no source being specified and yet another Papua New Guinea reference MISLEADING

11. The claim that the only major support for AV comes from the Lib Dems MISLEADING

but they did get one thing right:

"The vote will take place on Thursday 5 May - between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m." TRUTH!

The next page is a beauty in scaremongering:

12. Another strong suggestion that you must rank all candidates MISLEADING

13. Another claim regarding coming first and not wining MISLEADING

14. "AV will mean the end to equal votes" LIE

15. A deliberately long winded and complicated explanation of AV to make it seem far more complex MISLEADING

16. A claim that AV means some people get more than one vote LIE

17. A claim that it gives power to the BNP SCAREMONGERING

And finally...my favourite and the by far and away the worst page, the back cover:

The outrageously bad back cover.
This is why politics needs changing

18. "AV leads to broken promises LIE

19. It suggests Nick Clegg promised to make job cuts, increased VAT & tuition fees and cut public spending, when he tried to avoid all of the opposites MISLEADING

20. A lack of source of a quote from an MP MISLEADING

21. It would mean more hung parliaments LIE

22. More back room deals would be done LIE

23. AV is only for Nick Clegg LIE

24. Entirely negative campaigning 

SCAREMONGERING 

There are 24 reasons why politics needs changing, 24 reasons why the No to AV campaign should not be listened to and 24 reasons to Vote Yes on May 5!

So Much Time Needed, So Little Time Available

The title of this entry may suggest that this is a moan about the amount work I currently have to do and you would, in part be right; however, school work only exacerbates the problems, rather than causing them.

Right now, my head needs a break, more so than at any time in the last 16 months of being ill, but yet, it simply isn't an option. Yes, there are AS-levels to pass, and yes that is an awful lot of work, and yes, I am struggling, but that is not the main problem here. The main issue is the fact that whenever I do try to stop and rest; my mind doesn't stop, and right now, I have no way of stopping it.

Anxiety attacks have gone from something which TV soap writers turn to when they've run out of plot lines to a worryingly large part of my life, in an even more worryingly short space of time. I need time to stand and stare but I currently find myself running to stand still. There could not have been a worse time for me to feel worse but yet, every time I consider throwing it all in something keeps pulling me back to life and I do everything possible to keep me on the straight and narrow, even this is supposed to help in some way.

Life could not be worse; but yet at the same time, it couldn't be better either. My mind is broken but maybe it's all my fault. I refer you something I've said several times since my diagnosis but it could also be my problem:

"Maybe I’m trying to rationalise the irrational. Maybe I’m trying to quantify in unquantifiable. Maybe my core belief that everything is rational and quantifiable is wrong."

It'll be rate

Spotify Shoots the Music Industry in the Foot

In a blog post music streaming service Spotify announced that it is limiting its free users listening time to 10 hours per month and a maximum of 5 listens of a particular track in each month however, the free service will still contain adverts.


When Spotify launched it, and other similar services, was heralded as the saviour of the music industry, a way to maintain massive audiences and the artists still get paid and just last month they reported their millionth paying user and the business is being given ever increasing valuations, but with this announcement, Spotify may be about to shoot the music industry in the foot.


However, with this time limit being imposed from 1st May, many of the 5 million free users may return to piracy, the thing which is killing the music industry. So, not only are Spotify at risk of collapsing their own business (because when user-ship drop, so will ad revenues) they may also end up putting another death knell in the music industries coffin.


The music industries problems may run deep, but Spotify had a genuine opportunity to reverse the decline in the non-mainstream, however that opportunity may just have been squandered by yet another money grabbing business that surrounds music.

The Prevention and Cure of Immigration

In David Cameron's speech today, he will talk about an why the UK needs an immigration cap. However, like most politicians, he may be missing the point; and the only true way to cut immigration is by leaving the EU. The debate on the EU is a long and draw out one, and so I will say nothing more than that leaving the EU isn't an option and most people realise this.

As a member of the EU, we have no right to stop workers from other EU states from working here, in the same way that they have no right to stop British workers working in their states, and as the majority of UK immigrants are from within the EU; we can't stop the majority of immigration. This leaves the government's immigration cap looking like a policy which merely exists to keep the right of the Tory party happy, the focus needs to be on the effects that immigration has on the UK, and solving the problems caused by it. Prevention may be better than the cure, but when you can't prevent something, you need to put your efforts into curing it.

If government (and lets face it, the tory half of the collation) want to stop immigration then the only way to do so appears to be making the UK an unattractive place to come and live and work. However, as racism has, rightly, become unacceptable, this would mean making the UK unattractive to all workers, including British workers, and that won't win you an election.

So governments (and I stress the plural as it has been a problem for many administrations) find them selves stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to immigration. It may be an easy vote winner, however putting words into action is not so easy and this debate will rumble on until someone takes over the world so we all become one country. (I wonder what Ban Ki Moon gets up to in his spare time?)

NHS Reforms: Close to my Heart?

The coalition government, and in particular heath secretary Andrew Lansley, are attempting, and that may be the key word here, to force through massive reforms to the way that the NHS is run and being someone who regularly meets with the NHS coal face, there are few issues which are closer to my heart, but do we really care?


This may seam like an odd statement from a person who relies so much on the NHS (to the point whereby if if it wasn't for them I wouldn't be here to type this) but my point is that as an NHS 'consumer' the only I really care about it is the experience I have when I go to hospital  or visit my GP, who runs it all doesn't bother me, just as long as it is run well. However, my grave concerns lie with where the power is being put. 


Many millions of pounds have been put into making GPs more accessible to the public during the previous government by increasing surgery hours. However, now the GPs will have to spend their time working out what to do with the money instead of treating patients, completely undoing the good work and reducing contact time with patients.


This is why I am so vehemently against the reforms, because they will make the patients' experience worse, not because I'm ideologically opposed to reform. It's not "Hands of my NHS." It's "Don't ruin my NHS" however these two statements are not so easily separated in this case, so I'll stand by both claims for now:


"Hands of my NHS so you don't ruin my NHS"

Anybody Out There?

If you are reading this you are either a bored friend or you've got lost (If you are the later the back button on your browser should help) to any bored friends, welcome!

I would first like to say that this blog will mainly be my views on politics, and as I believe that politics should be about doing the right thing for the country, any solid political allegiance may be hard to find. It will also be dotted occasional with my musings on life in general, my life with a broken mind.

I have no idea how long this will last, or how regularly I will post, but whilst I'm here, I hope to provide some food for thought along with the outspoken opinions for which I find myself associated with.

If you really care, you can always follow me on Twitter: @AndrewJ_Hill

Andrew