Fitting the battle of life

I own an iPod.
Because my mother bought it for me when I finished school. I don’t have rockbox on it because I did buy a couple of songs from the iTunes store which are drm’d (I also bought some iTunes ‘plus’ songs which are drm-free), and while they’re not the best songs in the world, I do still want to be able to listen to them!

I use Flash.
Because half the internet would be unavailable to me. Yes, I know there’s gnash, but I’m not sure if it’s stable enough for my browsing habits - anyone with experience here would be welcome to leave their experiences in comments below :)

I have most of my music in mp3 rather than ogg.
Simply a relic of my Windows days - and given that iPods don’t support ogg, I’ll unfortunately be sticking with mp3 for the foreseeable future. I do use my iPod quite a lot, so it makes sense to keep doing this. If and when my nano breaks, well, perhaps I’ll be buying a more Linux-friendly player, and then start moving to ogg. What do I mean, ‘perhaps’? Of course I will.

I use the restricted ati driver.
Because Hardy told me to. Would that all graphics cards would come with open-source drivers, but alas, it isn’t (yet) the case.

I use Skype.
It’s simply very good at what it does, and isn’t interoperable with other voip networks. Various people I know use Skype, and so do I. If a lot of people I knew used something else, or there was a compatible open-source programme, I’d use that. I still use a hotmail account for MSN chats, although I do use Pidgin for those.

Am I a freedom hater? No, I’m just pragmatic.

I am at an utter loss to understand why two of London’s mayoral candidates have vowed to remove the bendy bus from our streets (background here). Reading the comments shows how silly people can become, pleading for the return of the Routemaster (which still operate on two routes, including the number 9). Since when did nostalgia overtake practicality as a primary factor in public transport policy? Idiots.

The bendy bus has had accidents associated with it, yes. But not so many as to pose a massive danger to public health. Plenty of other cities have been using them for years without the same outcry.

The bendy bus is long, yes. And? It means it can take more people. They make up 5% of the buses in London, but account for 9% of the passengers. I call that efficient, not an eyesore.

So people can get on without paying. They can also get on double deckers without paying, by sneaking in through the exit doors. Bendy buses are subject to more inspections than other routes - because of this fact. And since inspections now consist of the police surrounding the bus and its exits in a military-esque operation, it’s not exactly a pleasant experience to admit to not paying. (And not paying is how a lot of students I know tend to survive week to week.) The answer is not to get rid of bendy buses, it’s to create a system whereby more people are likely to pay. I imagine if TfL were making a horrendous loss, they’d do something about it, but it seems for the moment that they are in an equilibrium where those who do pay, pay enough to cover the ‘loss’.

Oh, they’re difficult to stand on, apparently. Rubbish.

The only concern I agree with is from cyclists (as an itinerant cyclist myself). But any concern about how they are driven is not to do with the vehicle itself, but the driver. Lorries are worse, anyway. And taxis, they’re pretty manic. Ban the lot?

I think that’s enough. Sod the critics, keep the bendy bus - don’t vote Boris. Brian Paddick’s suggestion of trams is at least creative, but with the volume of traffic in London I think is a little impractical (to say nothing of the cost). Seems it’ll have to be Ken…

The trouble with Monopoly. (Warning: rant follows.)

Yes, the board game. I bought it at the weekend for our flat, and there’s only been one night since that we’ve not played at least one game. We really do enjoy it; it’s a great game that relies on cunning negotiations and all that, even if a little luck is necessary to start with.

Anyway, I’ve realised I just don’t like it. Not as a game, oh no, I still enjoy it. It’s the concept that we should be finding market domination fun that’s slightly worrying. (It was at this point I found myself worrying that I might actually be Marxist-influenced, but more on that later.) Why must we teach children (aged 8+, according to the box) that you can be a ruthless capitalist and have a great fun time with the whole family? Well, you can’t. I don’t know about your childhood but mine was fraught with arguments at my grandparents’ house, where Monopoly was eventually effectively banned. It’s not good.

You’ll never find a game of Monopoly that’s going to end while everyone’s happy; they always end in an absolute Monopoly (unless you play a timed game, in which case well, you’re a loser anyway) for one player. Mergers are not permitted, I learned in the rules. (I read rulebooks. So what?) Co-operation can only be employed in order to eliminate another player - trading between two parties to keep a third party from gaining possession of a property, for instance, that would help him.

Then again, Monopoly wouldn’t be fun if you just perpetually circled the board, paying no rent because everyone’s nice and doesn’t charge.  And yet, there exists now an entire culture based around things being free. This blog is free, for instance. I neither pay wordpress.com for hosting it nor charge you for the the (dubious) privilege of reading it. Ditto facebook, google, and myriad other web services.

And then there’s Linux. Some people charge for it - Red Hat the first example to spring to mind - and other’s don’t, charging instead for premium support. But there’s still lots of different free distros - and yet a market remains. It’s a market where the`best’ distribution wins the largest market share. It’s not a market based on who can force their way in through underhand mean, but an actual meritocracy. What else can it be when it’s all free anyway? Only the best will do the best. (For a definition of `best’, of course - people who operate with a different definition will find their way to Gentoo, and still be happy. Just not right.)

Sometimes having the same price point can be damaging to competition, apparently. The loss of the net book agreement that led to the rise of 3-for-2 offers and the decline (not death) of the indie bookshop, for instance, was meant to encourage competition. Personally, I think it’s damaged the book market. Instead of marketing good writing, witness the books on the offer tables. Timeless classics yes - they’d have been bought anyway - but the hideous array of celebrity autobios, shitty poplit like Dan Brown, and countless other genres I’d rather see consigned to the eternal flames of Pandaemonium.

This is all turning into a bit of a rant.

What am I trying to say? That a zero price point encourages creativity and competition. There’s so much more to play for when you know your market share has no financial incentive to stay with you, just a purely functional incentive. With linux, as soon as something better comes along, migration is easy (for a given value of easy, of course - but a lot easier than switching from Windows to Mac, for instance). You’ve got to be at the forefront of development to retain a market share.

In Monopoly, all but one player loses. There’s no second place. It’s an old-fashioned market, and one that I think - hope - is a dying breed.  The new markets we can see emerging everywhere point to increased co-operation and competition, which can only be a good thing. Nothing moves forward while a monopoly exists.

This is the text of a note I posted earlier today on Facebook, just to get it out into the wider public. It’s pretty much a companion piece to the post I made a few days ago about the troops out of UCL motion, but refines my stance:

I just want to clear something up about why I want there to be an EGM (either because it is called by 400 students, or as a result of disciplinary action).

It is not because I fundamentally disagree with particular motions that were passed at the re-convened AGM last week. I take issue only with the way the meeting was run, which for me renders anything that happens at the meeting undemocratic. I want all the motions rescinded. Not just the Palestine one, not just the OTC one. The top-up fees and the deportation one as well. None of them can stand as legitimate motions in the context of the meeting.

I reiterate. This is not about politics. It is about democracy. That is why it is important, in the likely event of an EGM, you should try and attend. Please keep your eyes on your e-mails for news of when an EGM might be - probably early next term. It’ll be one evening of your time, but will secure the future of democracy at UCL Union. Tell your friends, flatmates and countrymen to come too, not to support any particular voting bloc, not to support any particular political cause, but to back democracy. It’s all important. Please.

I am still against the troops motion, but that is not the reason I back an EGM. (I’m not a sore loser.)

For more information you may want to read this issue of one of the student publications [warning:pdf link] here.

Recently, at a rather silly AGM (but that’s another story for another day), UCL Union passed a motion effectively banning Officer Training Corps and the Territorial Army and other such ‘military organisations’ from Union events and premises. An amendment to this motion stressed it wasn’t anti-troops, and tried to bring up some non-discrimination rubbish about homosexuals in the OTC. It was, to all intents and purposes, an anti-Iraq war (even though it’s over) and anti-Bush motion:

Now, because of the circumstances of the meeting and the vote, I feel pretty confident in saying that the views expressed in the motion are not the views of the majority of UCL students (who are, I must admit, a pretty apathetic bunch). There are several hundred of us - far more than even turned up to the meeting, and far far more than the number who backed the motion - signed up to a facebook group protesting the result of the AGM, and organising a petition for an EGM where the policies voted on at the AGM will hopefully be repealed.

I don’t necessarily support the war in Iraq (and the current mission is UN-mandated, we must remember) or other Bush foreign policies. But if a vocal minority want to protest about that, banning troops from Union events is not the way forward. It’s distinctly off-target, in fact.  Backers of the motion have consistently got their facts wrong and ignored rational argument, disputing statements made by members of the OTC when they have no factual basis to do so, and branding all opposers of the motion ‘right-wing lunatics’. Anyone who knows me might agree I’m a lunatic at times, but in no way right-wing. Just a rational human being who sees the sheer stupidity of the motion.

Further, this has been reported in the Sun, the Guardian, the Times and the Independent (and I think the Torygraph as well), bringing our Union - and by extension all of its members - into disrepute. The actions of a few have reflected badly on the whole. While sometimes being vocal and drawing attention to your opinions is valid and legitimate, to do so while bringing others into disrepute is unacceptable. By all means, let people know your opinions. But don’t pass it off as mine.

I’m not a parent, heaven forbid. But I do recognise the immense value of education, both in terms of its worth and its cost. Richard Stallman’s article on ‘Why schools should exclusively use free software‘ struck something of a chord with me. With education in this country in a not-so-perfect state, and there not being a whole lot of cash around, increasing the use of free software is, I think, an important step we should be taking. Other European governments are taking the lead; it’s time we caught up and got ahead, I feel.

For those of us living in the UK, there’s some simple steps we can take, like writing to our MPs and the Secretary of State:

Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families
Sanctuary Buildings
Great Smith Street
London
SW1P 3BT

A simple letter asking why the minister is not instructing schools to use free software when it costs nothing, can be run on older hardware better (thus reducing cost further) and when companies like Dell are openly supporting it, and when the French government are using it, might get us nowhere. Conversely, of course, it could start a little pebble rolling at the top of a very large mountain.

I just finished reading this story from the Guardian (sorry, it’s just my paper of choice) that has made me slightly angry. They concern remarks made in a leaked e-mail from a Tory mayor:

I am aware Islamic organisations are keen to promote a view that they are peaceful, forward-thinking individuals who wish to integrate into the British way of life.
The policy of clothing the feminine population of Dewsbury in black sack-like clothing from head to toe, the occasional trip out to cause mayhem with explosives and the proposal that all those of homosexual persuasion should be killed by shooting or other means is adequate and practical testimony to the level of progress being made in this direction.

These inflammatory remarks do nothing to help solve some of the problems we have in this country. As much as there is a very small (very small, if I might repeat myself) minority of people in this country who are willing to engage in acts of terrorism, I personally feel that they are not as dangerous as the kind of people who will equate that tiny minority with an entire religious or ethnic group to which they (claim to) belong.

Furthermore, where is the equal outrage from people like this man against all homophobia, for instance? I can’t for a minute believe he truly would like to eradicate homophobia; it is being used as a poor excuse (because again, that is the view of a minority) to make disparaging and damaging remarks against a particular religious group.

I also love how ‘the British way of life’ is trotted out as something that must be defended against all change forever, as if this nation should be stuck in a timewarp, repelling all immigrants and outsiders. There is no ‘British way of life; just look at London. The people and behaviour you might associate with (for instance) white English people living in Camden and Islington is very different, and these are two boroughs right next to each other. Extend the idea to all non-white British inhabitants of these two places and already the ‘British way of life’ is a hodgepodge, smorgasbord, veritable rainbow of customs and cultures. The ‘British way of life’, to me, is about accepting and integrating different cultures by preserving them, not by destroying them and imposing homogeneity.

Mayor Robert Bennett said:

I apologise for any remarks I have made which may have caused offence. I sincerely hope my comments will not undermine the important job of work that has to be done in building greater community cohesion throughout West Yorkshire.

He has rejected calls for him to resign; he is evidently wrong to have done so. I don’t think he can retain any credulity after such remarks, especially as a servant of the public. When he attacks part of that public, even if he later retracts those comments, the damage has been done.