WebMink

Least-Worst [SocioPolitico]

My attention was drawn by pro-blogger Ashlee Vance to the US Army's Guantanamo Bay web site. It seems they have as their slogan that the internment camp down there is the "Least Worst Place", a fascinating self-judgement if ever I have heard one.

I actually use the expression 'least-worst' fairly often to indicate the scenario where the ideal outcome is unreachable. Instead of constantly yearning for it one instead faces the reality of the situation and aims to maximise the good given the unavoidable bad. It's different to compromise, which is the selection of a less-good outcome in recognition of the position of others despite the availability of a 'best' outcome.

What can we learn from the use of this phrase in this context? Well, two thoughts spring to mind:
First, the people who coined it (presumably army folk) must consider a posting to Guantanamo Bay like Russian soldiers used to consider Siberia. The only people who had it worse were the prisoners. In fact, considering this as a tropical Gulag Archipelago seems quite appropriate.
Second, the people who put them in this position - the US government - must consider the use of the rule of law to govern the situation as impossible. One can imagine the internal discussion - "stupid US democracy, stops us from just shooting the prisoners and being done with it. If we hold them here, basic human rights will force us to treat them like people. So the only option - the least-worst - is to throw them on some island and let the world forget them"
Only we haven't.

posted at 7:33 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Projection [WebTech]

Finally the realisation dawns. I should have spotted it earlier, the behaviour psychologists call 'projection' - where you attribute to others (usually your perceived 'enemies') your own thoughts and actions. The phenomenon is frequently seen in the corporate actions of Microsoft (no, I'm not criticising the individuals - Robert and Dare can relax...) as I have mentioned before.

But today's article in The Register, where Andrew O says bloggers are behaving like teenage girls, finally discloses what should have been as plain as my nose - that Andrew is one of the original bloggers, writing in a group blog called 'The Register', wounded by the fact that all the newcomers have failed to realise he has a heritage and a readership that makes Searles and Weinberger look like marginalia. Heck, they even have an RSS feed (even if it lacks the full content - hey guys, we don't want to rip you off, we just want to read your stuff the modern way). So let's be gentle, now, and start a fund to pay for therapy and software licenses.

posted at 2:47 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Tuesday, May 27

BA Rant [PhotoTravel]

British Airways claim they are "the world's favourite airline". Who are they kidding? While their cabin staff can offer great service, on the ground BA still suck big time like they always have.

Many years ago when I worked for IBM I used to travel with them regularly (I was a 'Gold' card holder, their top frequent flier tier), but after a while I realised that most of the courtesies I take for granted with north american airline frequent flyer programmes are unknown to BA, so I stopped flying transatlantic with them. What do I mean? Well, here are some examples:

Today I am flying from London to Copenhagen. I (well, Sun) paid the full fare for the ticket that BA quote on their web site, yet I am not entitled to any frequent flyer credit on my AAdvantage account for this segment. If I instead give a BA frequent flyer number I will get a few token miles for the flight and no credit towards 'elite' status. In fact, despite flying with BA eight times this year (no alternative) I haven't got enough 'points' even to renew their walk-off-the-street-and-join blue card.
Two weeks ago I met my father for a day out in Amsterdam. Flying back, despite the fact that I am entitled to use the BA lounge becuase of my AAdvantage Platinum status, BA would not allow my elderly father to accompany me because he wasn't flying on BA. That wouldn't happen at the Admiral's Club. I had thought when the same thing happened in Denver airport (I was travelling with my wife) that it was a matter of failed discretion or error, but twice proves policy.
Today I am travelling with my family. Despite the fact that I am entitled to use the BA lounge and we are all flying on BA, they would not admit us because BA lounges will only admit one guest. Once again, that wouldn't happen with American or United who both welcome families.

BA claim they are updating their frequent flier scheme this summer (including a revolutionary new concept called 'upgrades') but a quick look shows it's still desperately mean compared with what US travellers experience, and there's no sign of change in the basic premise of BA's attitude ('you get what you pay for on each trip, and any frequent flier benefit is a huge favour'). Any OneWorld Americans who think that they will get the same benefits from BA as they get from AA had better think again. They will deny you mileage credit, make your family sit out on the concourse and generally take every opportunity to show you that you are there for their benefit.

posted at 3:26 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Monday, May 26

Raelian? [WebTech]

My attention was drawn by Jason Brooks's (there's that apostrophe again...) article to the page of Stallman and Perens quotes posted by SCO. Why, do you think, are there no links to the sources of these quotes? Do they need lessons on use of the "A" tag? Or is it that they would rather we didn't see the context of each quote? For example, the full text of Free as in Freedom is available online (the quote they pull is in chapter 5, where Stallman is talking about changes the law needs - the quote starts "I'm looking beyond what the existing laws are to what they should be"), and the irony of the Perens quote (which should show context of "Perens said he is making a habit out of testing the limits of the DMCA, mainly to show just how trivial most DRM technologies are" according to InfoWorld) is ignored. I hope the promised proof is better (and more honourable) than this...

posted at 3:45 AM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

House of Cards

I wonder if their creators [via Ego] realised they were creating a new category of polemic when they created the now infamous Iraqi Most Wanted playing cards, that have now become big business? On the anti-war side, the ones from the Ruckus Society are politics, while others smell of opportunism. On the pro-war side, there's commerce a-plenty. And there's a growing fringe industry of posters, screen savers and more. There's even a web site keeping a list of all the decks out there. What was initially amusing is to my mind getting rather tired now, but I expect to see regular re-runs.

posted at 1:26 AM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Sunday, May 25

Dark Conspiracy? [SocioPolitico]

Third Superpower takes me to task for fearing a 'dark conspiracy' over the Texas Walkout. I doubt there was any concerted campaign of media silence at the time of my posting (although I suspect only Republican voters will be worried about the fact that the Democrats used the only tactic open to them in the face of an uncompromising opposition ) and I wonder if it got picked up in a Google trawl.

My comments were meant to point less to those specific actions and more to the general fact that the US media that was being dumped heavily outside my hotel rooms last week was previously able to hit a frenzy of outrage over Mr Clinton's indiscretions and yet has hardly a word to say about the (apparent) gerrymandering, nepotism and elitism in charge of the US at the moment. That's less a matter of conspiracy, which requires co-ordination, and more a matter of the political affilliations of the commentators, in my view.

Now, the stuff Ed Cone and Josh Marshall are pointing to is much more of a potential blockbuster. If Tom DeLay is indeed orchestrating a conspiracy then it needs a name like 'Watergate' because it could be huge. Or at least it would be if it was the Dems doing it.

posted at 8:56 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Circles within circles [MetaBlog]

So the results are coming in thick and fast - no, not the Eurovision Song contest ('nul points' for Britain, top marks for exposed flesh) but the Inner Circle question. Dwight Shih votes for content, as does Ted Leung, who also hints that linking is important. Robert Scoble, as I have mentioned, votes for both style (dump the frames! - I'm thinking about it) and for heavy linking. Scott Duffy tells me I have Bloggers Angst (possibly, Scott, but I think it was more part of an ongoing conversation with Scoble, whose 'spotlight' - along with Winer's - can do no harm...)

My personal conclusion so far is that content is important, but that frequent postings, many links to other bloggers (especially referrers) and a style that ensures referrer links point to the correct posting are all crucial hygiene factors. But I'm still watching the voting patterns.

posted at 8:44 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |

Circles [MetaBlog]

Ted Leung is very kind in his comments on my blog and raises the question on how one measures the "success" of blogs. While Robert Scoble is quick to claim he's not part of any 'inner circle' there's no doubt his name is getting dropped in plenty of places I read. I suppose at some point I will have to turn my thoughts to the meaning of 'inner circle' but I suspect it's one of those things that is only easily defined at the extremities and hard to define at the border-line.

posted at 3:24 PM (UK) | Comment? (0 so far) | links to this post | |