10. Laze and Gem, I’m going to curtail this format now – it suits the weekend doings when people can check in as and when but during the week, certain topics need to be taken in isolation – the Queen’s Speech will be the first for this new week.
9. Eco-fraud video link:
The Guardian published another story on the same day which suggests Google is worried about maintaining their Section 230 legal immunity, the law which protects Google and other large internet providers from being sued if a user publishes something defamatory on a Google website.
Why are Google and friends so worried about their legal position, that they would fund right wing libertarian climate skeptics?
In my opinion tech giants have good reasons to worry. Leading Democrats like Elizabeth Warren have been talking up plans to hammer big tech companies with anti-trust laws.
Elizabeth Warren is not the only left wing figure attacking tech companies.
7. Follow up to the ole hound dog on piano:
[Is that Bing Crosby’s wife? A pretty-pretty if ever there was one.]
Going to be a new song soon – The Night They Drove Ole Chuckles Down and all the people were … Levon ain’t got nuffin’ on me.
6. Sorry to be thick but what’s the joke in this? I get the golf ball but the other bit?
5. Think my tweet in response says it all:
Totally irresponsible. There should be NO solo western female travellers, end of. But especially in rape and murder countries like that. Don’t remember Morocco? Sheer insanity. https://t.co/i2G1JLF3iN
— Deplorable James (@JamesHghm) October 13, 2019
4. Difficult to know what to say about this – not very good at what they do?
And while we’re at it:
Illustrating once more that science is dependent upon technology rather than the other way around, a petty Python script bug may force the retraction of more than 100 published scientific studies:
Scientists in Hawaiʻi have uncovered a glitch in a piece of code that could have yielded incorrect results in over 100 published studies that cited the original paper.
Could have? No matter. As for the thesis, what thinkest thou?
3. By all means call me a cantankerous ole curmudgeon but there’s just something in this article I can’t abide:
… mysteriously showed up dead … body parts precisely removed … not one drop of blood …
Without checking out the author, there’s just something Year 9 English lesson about the piece. Nowt wrong wi’that of course – girls must go through Year 9 before making their way in the world and were the author my student, I’d be praising her … or were she a daughter or a friend’s daughter … but really, someone should have taught her about the overuse or less than appropriate use of ‘qualifiers’ in sentences to make literary statements.
In other words, let the tale tell itself, less of the lily gilding, eh? It’s not the use of the words, it’s how and where. Also, it’s a question of the medium – in a blog, which the link points to, then fine, cut her some slack, but were it the MSM, on a salary, I’d say not good – where are the subbies when you need em?
The other day, I scrolled through the Wail … the typos and simple grammatical errors were jawdropping. Internationally read online news with glaring errors [there I go with the qualifiers] and it really was not good.
2. Good for rugby, not so good for Scotland:
1. Going to run this format today, then revert to the old way. Your comments always appreciated.