Funny Article on ID cards

Click the linkage.

Update on ID Cards

The Register had a great article on ID Cards last week.

I particularly think the last paragraph of the second section is relevant:-

"Now, the Government is clearly proposing to use the public's very real concerns about what it thinks of as 'identity theft' as a major justification for ID cards. The public thinks ID cards will help deal with 'identity theft', so very well, the Government will use that in support of the ID Cards Bill. It's listening after a fashion, we suppose, besides being something of an ID fraud in its own right."

The article goes on to blow the £1.3Billion figure, often trotted out as the value of ID Theft in the UK each year, out of the water. Most of what the £1.3Billion represents would not be affected by ID Cards, with The Register estimating that roughly £35Million of it could be linked to ID Theft which would be combated by ID Cards. The figure is probably somewhere in between, but if the London School of Econimics is right (see a couple of posts below...) then the annual cost is likely to be between £1.2Billion and £1.8Billion.

Rio Ferdinand

Rio Ferdinand must be the biggest liability ever. While I admit this latest incident does not appear to be his fault, he does have a habit of getting into these situations.

This time he was punched and possibly headbutted in a club in Sweden, last time he attacked a reporter with a bag of CDs.

He also must be one of the dumbest footballers in the Premiership (and that's saying something), having managed to injure his knee while sitting watching football on TV. Obviously there was the failing to piss in a bottle incident too.

Exaclty how much money does this fool think he deserves?!?

Why I'm Against ID Cards

This article neatly sums up why I'm against the introduction of ID cards.

Can we trust the government, and all future governments, to use the data responsibly? Already many public sector bodies will have access to the data - what happens when companies or foreign governments with ties to this government want access to the data?

Such a large repository of information is implicitly a massive target for fraudsters. By centralising all the data, I predict that identity theft type crime will increase rather than decrease.

The London School of Economics has just finished analysing what the true costs of the scheme would be. Their findings were that the costs would be between £12bn and £18bn over ten years- twice to three times the government's estimate. This would make the cost per person between £200 and £300 instead of the £96 the government estimates.

As for the supposed benefits of ID cards; how will they prevent terrorism? Those who are considered dangerous are already known about.
Tackling the 'problem' of illegal immigration? All asylum seekers are already issued with compulsory ID cards, so the situation would not change.
As for tackling organised crime; where is the evidence that ID cards can change anything?
Spain has had compulsory ID cards since the 1930s, but these have not solved the social ills the government claims will dissolve under the might of ID cards.

Cup Final

The Cup Final was last week. It was fatastic. Except United, despite spending god knows how many millions on attacking players, continue to struggle to score. Rooney must have hit the post more than anyone else this season, and Ruud still doesn't quite look his sharpest.

Aresnal were torn apart by Rooney, Ronaldo, Scholes etc and should have won by a hatful. Alas it wasn't to be.

My mate James (a Spurs fan) told me about a helpline set up for disconsolate United fans.
The number is 0-eight-hundred-one-nothing-one-nothing-one nothing.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

CIA War Games

The CIA has been overseeing a simulated cyberattack on the United States 'on the scale of Sept-11'. How the hell can any cyberattack be on the scale of September 11th?!?!?

My favourite line from the article linked to is

"The simulated attacks were carried out five years in the future".

Classic.

We Are On! After-Exam Party - Saturday 18th June

Get your party hats out everybody, the long-promised party at my place is confirmed for Saturday 18th June. The day after a stupid Student Conference I have to attend, my degree will be completely over, except for a possible viva and picking up my results.

Anyone who considers me their friend is welcome to come. You should know where I live, but if not drop me a line to check. Probs be starting around eight.

Hope you all can make it!

Except Hamish. You are not invited. We don't like you.

EDIT: My place in Southampton, by the way, not back home in Manchester...
Mancehster people still welcome though! :D

George Galloway

Galloway, while not being totally likeable, sure gave hell to the US Senate Committee which accused him of benefiting from Iraq's oil voucher sales recently.

I'm pretty confident the allegations will prove unfounded, just as those appearing in the Telegraph did.

Purple Light Sabre - cool :-)

Star Wars Meme by sailor_phobos
1st 2 Ltrs of 1stname + Last 3 Ltrs of last name
1st 2ltrs of moms last name+Last 3ltrs of city brn
Sith or Jedi	Jedi
Skin Color	Blue
Eye Color	Orange
Light Saber Color	Purple
How close you are to switching sides: 20%
Username
You're Random Star Wars Quote:	The plans you refer to will soon be back in our hands.
Your Padawan (if you're a jedi)	pixielass
Your apprentice (if you're a sith)	pixielass
You're Master	pixielass
Quiz created with MemeGen!

Difference between Glazer and Abramovich

The difference between Glazer and Abramovich is that while Abramovich took a debt-laden club and made them super-cash-rich, Glazer will take a cash-rich club and make it debt-laden.

Yes, he wants to make money. United make more money from merchandise than from on-field success already, so he's likely to view the football side as a bit crap compared to the business side. He will do the same as he did with the Tampa Bay team and drastically increase ticket and merchandise prices.

We're going to have £265 Million of debt. UEFA have said that if we have sustained debt, we might not get a license to play in European competitions!

Abramovich is a multi-billionnaire who sees Chelsea as a challenge and a hobby, not as an investment. Glazer only sees the $$$ signs.

Follow the link in the title for Football365's reasons to not like the Glazer takeover.

Glazer

£265 Million of debt will be transferred to Manchester United if, as seems likely, Malcolm Glazer reaches the 75% plus one share mark in the takeover of Man U. Shareholders United, the supporters group, own 18% - which is nearly all the remaining shares not owned by Glazer, so it might not come to that yet.

Basically, fuck off Glazer, we don't want you or your debt. I'd like to say you're gonna see how difficult we can make it for you, but I'm sure plenty of people will still go to the games and buy the merchandise :-(

Very pissed off.

Climate Change Denial Bollox

Recently, David Bellamy, of all people, has been quoted as saying that contrary to almost all scientific evidence, 555 of the world's 625 monitored glaciers have been expanding, rather than shrinking.

This has been seized on by climate change deniers as 'evidence' that climate change is not happening. Unfortunately, when the claims were investigated by George Monbiot of the Guardian (follow the link in the headline), he found them to be based on the work of Professor Fred Singer, whose source for the data was "a paper published in Science in 1989". There was no paper on glacial advance or retreat published in Science in 1989. The sources - iceagenow.com and 21st Century Science and Technology - cited by David Bellamy are renowned for their bizarre theories - such as the one about the British Royal Family running an international drugs syndicate.

Bellamy made one more error in his work - when typing, he meant to type 55% of the 625 glaciers rather than 555 of the 625. Makes quite a difference, though in the words of the World Glacier Monitoring Service, "[Bellamy's work] is complete bullshit".

Sadly, David Bellamy's comments carry weight, and his careless - and plain wrong! - words are being taken up by those who continue to deny the mountain of evidence of climate change.

We did it :-)

An historic third term for Labour has been won. Congrats and thanks to all who voted Labour or tactically Lib Dem.

The result is pretty much what was expected, except the main beneficiaries were the Tories rather than the Lib Dems.

I'm delighted Labour has won, and I am pretty happy with the (estimated) majority of 66, as it shows Blair that we are unhappy at certain things, but still allows Labour to continue the good work it is doing to alleviate poverty, both here in the UK and around the world.

Cheers to Bob for hosting the love-in, er, election watching last night.
Good to see ya again Rob :-)

I got more linkage for ya

I can feel the anticiapation - oh wait that's a draught from my window. Anyhoo here's some more vote labour links...

John O'Farrell - pretty funny
John O'Farrell - not as funny, but still makes a point

Robin Cook - rallying the Old Labour troops
Robin Cook - don't punish the vulnerable by electing the Tories

Lord Richard Attenborough - Labour has done much that is good - don't let the Tories wreck it

Observer Leader - Election is not a referendum on the War

Various Science Luminaries - Labour is best for Science and Engineering

OK i really gotta do some work, so that's yer lot!

Once more with feeling

As an addendum to my previous post, here's a link to the Leader Comment from today's Guardian (Tuesday 3rd May). It provides a very good argument for voting Labour (or Lib Dem in safe Lib Dem seats) at this election.

Why I (Can't) Vote Labour

This was supposed to be a summary of why I decided I could not vote Labour on Thursday.

I was undecided until recently, and then the full Legal Advice from Lord Goldsmith was published. I was angry that, in my opinion, Blair had not allowed MPs or even his own Cabinet to see the full advice, complete with caveats about the legality. I vowed I could not vote Labour.

However, my sister got wind of this and forwarded me some links to articles imploring Labour voters not to abandon the party.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1452975,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1471061,00.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1472812,00.html

Polly Toynbee argues in these articles that Labour has had success in helping those in the most need, and that while the Tories would not cut highly visible services much, plenty of programs to help those who need it most would quietly dissappear, without the middle classes really noticing.

I was forced to admit that Labour are still the best choice for those who believe in social justice, and will vote for them, despite differences over Iraq, Foundation Hospitals, Anti-Terror Laws, ID-Cards (more on this later, Bob...), and the general creep of privatisation and PFI.

In fact, reading the articles has instilled me with much more confidence in the Labour Party, with the realisation that they have not completely abandoned their principles.

Vote Labour!

'Different' Ideas

Saw something that made me laugh on BBC webby today. About half way down the article linked to in the title, David Bishop of the Church of Militant Elvis Party claims he would like to:-

"go the Antarctic, stand in front of icebergs and shout at them to "stop melting".

"It won't do much good but it's more than Bush and Blair are doing," he says.

Somehow, it seems he has a point...

Oh, and I know I promised to do the why I can't vote Labour thingy yesterday, but I didn't. So I'll do it today. OK?