Hawkwindforum

graham wrote:... So Google can act on their new motto (Be Evil) as much as they like...

Is this an April Fool? I have an uneasy feeling it isn't.

graham wrote:It's unfortunate they bought YouTube, though. There's no alternative that has anywhere near the audience reach and the ease of use that YT has, so far as I know.

I've had a series of problems with YouTube since Google took over. I don't know if I've been unlucky or whether that's general, but I suspect I've seen the whole range of Google silliness because of a quirk with my PC, and everyone else will find the same problems, but more slowly: These are problems because they're badly implemented and even if you agree to what they want they won't let you go ahead without jumping through hoops because they're so pathetically bad at running their empire.

My PC periodically logs me out of sites I should be automatically logged into. When that happens with YouTube I have to log back in, and every time I do I find some new problem. First it was persistent requests for a Google email address I was supposed to have. I do have one which I never use, but they wouldn't accept the password. I now just ignore that demand of theirs. There have been other little attempts to extend the Google empire, which I can't recall. Yesterday I had to create a YouTube page, which meant I had to create a new identity because my current identity was already taken. Of course it was taken - it was already taken by me, but they wouldn't recognise that fact so I had to create a new identity. No big deal in itself, but a further example of them creating barriers when all a person wants to do is log in.

There are a couple of other video sites similar to YouTube. I found these at one time, and the list is probably larger now:

http://www.veoh.com/

http://technorati.com/videos/tag/clipfish

http://www.dailymotion.com/gb

True, daily motion sounds like a bowel movement, but it was ok despite that. Maybe Google will sign their own death warrant and we'll all move on.

graham wrote:Funnily enough, I now have a vague liking for Microsoft, and Google rank way....

I would not trust Apple, MS or Google, but I see no reason to prefer any MS product or trust them more than anyone else. Google's search algorithms work well, their email is convenient to use, their browser is fast and clean, unlike MS's clunker. Android shows great promise. Unlike Apple and MS, Google use open source software-- far from the paranoia of of Apple, who claim to invent everything.

If you want you date kept private you have to use encryption-- anything else left mirrored everywhere. Google store too much data but what have we got to worry about?

All corporations are inherently 'evil' by their nature.

Jon Downes, the guy who fiddles around with the earlier-mentioned "News Alerts," has found a few more, and was surprised to find the Warrior album seems to be the centre of attention today. (Link.)

--

Re substitutes for YouTube, one thing about VEOH is that there's some Hawkwind and TOSH on there. Official postings, I mean, not bootleg stuff.

Sweep wrote:

graham wrote:... So Google can act on their new motto (Be Evil) as much as they like...

Is this an April Fool? I have an uneasy feeling it isn't.

Well, it was a bit tongue-in-cheek, I suppose.

The problem with the world having gone mad is that it takes all the fun out of April Fools.

There's just no way of knowing any more. Next thing we know all the political leaders will be vying with each other to be photographed eating pasties and sausage rolls instead of doing something responsible about the crisis we're in that's largely been caused by them. Or trying to sell off our forests, or wrecking the NHS or something. Or George Galloway will be elected somewhere on a landslide, instead of being under one.

Sweep wrote:Or George Galloway will be elected somewhere on a landslide, instead of being under one.

Please elaborate?

IMO, The UK needs more maverics like George Galloway. I dont agree on everything he says, but he does at least say something, rather than toeing the party line.

As an example, here is what Galloway said regarding the situtation in Afghanistan and the six soldiers, who were all killed in a vehicle explosion in Kandahar province earlier this month.

"Mr Galloway said: "The idea that we should stay and shed more blood because of the blood we have already shed is simply ridiculous.
"They have died in vain. They shouldn't have been sent there. They were sent there to their deaths by Tony Blair and George W Bush."

Where the previous labour leader of the Bradford council said broadly "I support the troops in Afghanistan"

Spot the difference? Courage of conviction vs ass kisser.

Yes, Galloway does say some sensible things at times, but I don't get the impression he's a good politician despite that. The ones we have in the three major parties are idiots and also corrupt right through, which makes Galloway stand out when he says something most ordinary people would say, but I don't think that's enough to make him electable. And it's questionable, as with any politician, what he might say if he was in power and not seeking it.

Add to that the party he's now with, and I can't say I'd be inclined to rush out and vote for him on that score, either. We do need new political parties, but the Respect party doesn't strike me as a party I'd want to see given power.

And there's also the abiding image of Galloway making a pathetic spectacle of himself in the Big Brother house when he should have been out doing the work his constituents had voted for him to do.

So I agree with the statements you've posted, but in full context I feel less confident about them when Galloway says them.

Galloway strikes me as one of those "old fashioned" blokes who talks like Arthur Scargill used to. A good old ass-kicker.

OTOH Galloway seems to have got voted in on an an Islamist fundamentalist agenda, from what I've been reading this week.

I didn;t always agree with Arthur, but I sometimes watched the BBC 2 TUC / Labour conference coverage in the 1980s, just to enjoy his attacks on Thatcherism.

Yes, I think that's the crux of the problem. The `answer' to an extreme is not another extreme, especially an opportunist one.

A Hawkwind cardigan, anyone? http://www.streetcasuals.com/knitwear/1234-obey-hawkwind-cardigan-heather-grey.html

^

Anyone worried by extreme politics, they should feel happier if they know they can buy a Hawkwind cardigan

What's all this "Obey Hawkwind" stuff, though? Are 20,000 Hawkind fans going to march into the Bridport gig in synchronised step, all wearing identical cardigans?

(Well, it depends on what the weather's like, I suppose.)

graham wrote:^

Anyone worried by extreme politics, they should feel happier if they know they can buy a Hawkwind cardigan

What's all this "Obey Hawkwind" stuff, though? Are 20,000 Hawkind fans going to march into the Bridport gig in synchronised step, all wearing identical cardigans?

(Well, it depends on what the weather's like, I suppose.)

I can't see a Hawkwind fan spending £95 on a cardigan!

Ady wrote:[





I can't see a Hawkwind fan spending £95 on a cardigan!

Why Not? To me it'd be more useful than a Sonic Attack splat at 380 squid.

Ady wrote:A Hawkwind cardigan, anyone? http://www.streetcasuals.com/knitwear/1234-obey-hawkwind-cardigan-heather-grey.html

Hawkwind cardigan from Street casuals. Travel back in time to the early 1980's and start a riot at a footie match! We are the Hawkwind casuals! We have wedgers! We wear Hawkwind cardies over our Gallini tops! Get your hair cut son!