I have about two week's worth of rather amazing activities, all Junkk-related, to blog upon, but as I look at the huge pile of materials to go through to do so, I keep procrastinating and dive off on a detour.
Last one, promise. And, sorry, not a heck of a lot to do with the environment, though I guess as a commentary on political leadership, media reporting and public opinion I guess it could be bent to fit. It's amazing how some other things have been.
As I sat in yet another jam, I happened to listen to Bill Clinton's speech at the Labour conference. I am still trying to scrape the sticky sweet ooze (that's saccharine, should anyone wonder) out of my speaker grilles. This was a consummate politician and speaker charming the crowds?
Maybe it's because I am biased. I'm afraid that no matter what his other achievements (I am sure there were some, but can't recall exactly what they were, or indeed any that were environmentally beneficial. Big Al, yes... Bill, no) all I can hark back to is a guy who didn't inhale, and a President of the USA who stood in the Oval office and figured not having relations would be a neat plan to establishing his country's position in the eyes of the world.
I must think of a twist on Groucho's 'I wouldn't want to join a club...' to apply to those who should be careful from whom they receive praise. So I couldn't resist this to the Sunday Times:
"So an ex-President is moved, special-relationship-wise, to confer not such faint praise on the personalities, achievements and legacies of our current government. Considering the source, cigars all round!"
More seriously, I do fear for political direction across all areas, especially the environment, when the media and public can be swayed so far, so quickly, so often, yet in the full face of the historical facts.
Addendum:
Hey, maybe I could become a columnist: This from the next day's Telegraph (don't worry, I'll be sure to have a go at some right-wing nonsense soon - Cameron's Huskie Hugging for example - and quote the BBC or Guardian when they catch up;):
"It was left to former President Bill Clinton to cheer them all up with a bucketful of Arkansan syrup – New Labour was a "stunning success" and had produced "prosperity and social progress for so long it's easy for people to believe it's just part of the landscape". That's one view.
A different assessment came from Dagenham MP Jon Cruddas, a contender for the deputy leadership. This one-time Downing Street adviser accused Mr Blair of living in a "parallel world". The real world inhabited by his constituents was one of falling wages, growing housing pressures, and healthcare in crisis: "You cannot say things are getting materially better." Who is right – Clinton or Cruddas? We know whose word we would take."
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Guilty until proven innocent... or you keep your nerve
As I'm a roll (blogging that is, I certainly can't apply that term to my journeys), I'd like to share something I just fired off to Jeremy Vine of Radio 2, having ached to contribute to a debate on speed cameras yesterday whilst trapped in my car.
It was a potetially interesting debate, involving points of law and frnakly bigger issues of precedent, and like usual I was amazed at the selection of contributors, designed more to stir things up than allow reasoned discourse. I was also suprised that certain key issues were not raised (and totally unsuprised, if frustarted, at what unnecessaily emotive ones were allowed to be introduced).
Let's make one thing clear. Speeding to excess is not safe. It is also illegal. It shoudl not be done. However, as this reply (typically verbose, and hence unlikley to be featured) shows, in addition to my views on rational legislation, the spirit of justice and a resonabel expecation of what policing should be about, there is a bigger picture to consider, and that is where the burden of proof lies, or should do. And in case you are wondering what the heck this has to do with the environement, well, not a lot. Until you get to a para near the end:):
"I was driving yesterday when you broadcast the segment about self-incriminating, potentially human rights-breaching, heavy-handed bureaucratic fascism in action.
It's not often I find myself on the side of human rights lawyers, but in this case I wish I could have sped up to find a layby and pitch in.
But as you offered a follow-up beyond the speeding issue, here's my two cents (first on this, second on the broader one):
There is a principle at stake here, and I'm surprised it was not mentioned (or I missed it).
That is: 'innocent until proven guilty'.
I may be misquoting as it was a while ago, but think it was Lord Denning who long ago said he was interested in justice, not the law.
Well, we've sped way past the spirit of the law, and now the letter is where we depressingly now find ourselves, from both sides:
WEDNESDAY 27 SEPTEMBER 22.30 BST - BBC TWO
FROM GAVIN ESLER
Speed cameras
A great aid to road safety or an unfair tax on those honest enough to pay the fines without a fight?
As two motorists go to Strasbourg to protect their privacy from snooping speed cameras, the UK's top traffic policeman has just launched a crackdown on motorists who use legal loopholes to avoid convictions for speeding. But we can reveal that police have been using their own loophole to cancel tickets for their officers who have been caught speeding.
Those who sprang to the cameras' defence, especially those with a vested interest in the revenues, seem to want it all one way.
But what worries me more is that fact that this all smacks of 'guilty until you prove yourself innocent'. The authorities are simply too lazy, mean or inept to police dangerous driving in a fair manner, and are relying on the catch-all of dumb robots to do the job of getting the truly guilty in with a much wider net, with the bonus of a nice little earner of the fine income.
I have not yet had a speeding ticket, but I'm waiting for the day I do. And dreading that I have an accident because my eye is too often on the speedo rather on driving the road safely.
However, I have had two motoring 'offence' notices, both of which were subsequently quashed, but only because I took the issue as far as it would go.
And yes, I was subjected to these aggressive notices, along with escalating threats of increased fines and eventually court proceedings, at every stage feeling I was dealing with a computer. And why not? Because having been vindicated, all that happened was the original, invalid fines were cancelled. I was put through the hoops and ever-greater penalties for simply questioning, yet the authorities had no such disincentive in the proceedings.
This is official extortion. Argue and the price goes up. Argue some more and we drag you to court. But if they are wrong, all bets are off.
When I see a speed camera where my kids are walking back from school (and yes, make it 20mph), and not on the only clear stretch of a remote A road where you can get safely past a tractor, and the damn thing has the speed limit posted on it (as opposed to a preceding few miles' worth of hundreds of bits of useless 'road furniture'), I'll call them safety cameras. If they are policed properly. And if booked I'll take my medicine, and rue the day that such things as context, mitigation and proof supported by official testimony and expert witnesses are no longer part of the legal process.
If someone is proven driving illegally and dangerously, throw the full legal book at them. Fines. Jail. No more licence. I'll support that 100%. But not using a robot backed with bureaucratic fascism to generate income from the easy mark of someone who has paid for their tax and insurance, and may have very good reason for thinking they were not at fault or simply not know who was driving or how their car was so labeled (which is what policemen are for, to stop and catch them - no wonder we no longer hear 'it's a fair cop').
And to those who use the 'what if it was your kid' for bending this aspect of criminal justice to suit, wait 'til there's a knock on your door because a facial recognition system has you or them pegged as a mugger, or your bin has the wrong rubbish in it. Fine if it's up to the system to prove it was you first: not so fine (or actually ever-increasing fines) if it's incumbent upon you to prove first that you have no association with the crime or a good explanation. Or drop a family member in it instead.
I'd be glad for someone to explain the difference with such cases and the one above.
First they booked the [alleged] speeders, then they came for...
It's an interesting state, sorry, country, Britain has become. And a fine legacy for the leadership who have brought us here.
Addendum:
I have awoken next morning to posting this to the following in my in-box from the Telegraph:
'The case for speed cameras destroyed in a flash"
While this will doubtless intensify debate, it does broadly add weight to my core beliefs.
However, I personally believe that we should have the cameras, only that they should be moved to urban situations where pedestarisans are at danger. At best they will act to cause even the most dangerous to check their speed, and at worst provide some additional ammunition to trace, track and build cases aginst consistnetly offending vehicles. Meaning more police effort: 'Chris Grayling, the Tories' transport spokesman, called for greater use of police patrol cars, rather than cameras, to deal with the menace of "rogue drivers".'
This would contribute to the cause of safety. If the human rights case proves successful, it will mean no further, or at least much reduced, revenues. It will be interesting to see whether the authorities maintain their enthusiasm for our safety if there is no money it.
It was a potetially interesting debate, involving points of law and frnakly bigger issues of precedent, and like usual I was amazed at the selection of contributors, designed more to stir things up than allow reasoned discourse. I was also suprised that certain key issues were not raised (and totally unsuprised, if frustarted, at what unnecessaily emotive ones were allowed to be introduced).
Let's make one thing clear. Speeding to excess is not safe. It is also illegal. It shoudl not be done. However, as this reply (typically verbose, and hence unlikley to be featured) shows, in addition to my views on rational legislation, the spirit of justice and a resonabel expecation of what policing should be about, there is a bigger picture to consider, and that is where the burden of proof lies, or should do. And in case you are wondering what the heck this has to do with the environement, well, not a lot. Until you get to a para near the end:):
"I was driving yesterday when you broadcast the segment about self-incriminating, potentially human rights-breaching, heavy-handed bureaucratic fascism in action.
It's not often I find myself on the side of human rights lawyers, but in this case I wish I could have sped up to find a layby and pitch in.
But as you offered a follow-up beyond the speeding issue, here's my two cents (first on this, second on the broader one):
There is a principle at stake here, and I'm surprised it was not mentioned (or I missed it).
That is: 'innocent until proven guilty'.
I may be misquoting as it was a while ago, but think it was Lord Denning who long ago said he was interested in justice, not the law.
Well, we've sped way past the spirit of the law, and now the letter is where we depressingly now find ourselves, from both sides:
WEDNESDAY 27 SEPTEMBER 22.30 BST - BBC TWO
FROM GAVIN ESLER
Speed cameras
A great aid to road safety or an unfair tax on those honest enough to pay the fines without a fight?
As two motorists go to Strasbourg to protect their privacy from snooping speed cameras, the UK's top traffic policeman has just launched a crackdown on motorists who use legal loopholes to avoid convictions for speeding. But we can reveal that police have been using their own loophole to cancel tickets for their officers who have been caught speeding.
Those who sprang to the cameras' defence, especially those with a vested interest in the revenues, seem to want it all one way.
But what worries me more is that fact that this all smacks of 'guilty until you prove yourself innocent'. The authorities are simply too lazy, mean or inept to police dangerous driving in a fair manner, and are relying on the catch-all of dumb robots to do the job of getting the truly guilty in with a much wider net, with the bonus of a nice little earner of the fine income.
I have not yet had a speeding ticket, but I'm waiting for the day I do. And dreading that I have an accident because my eye is too often on the speedo rather on driving the road safely.
However, I have had two motoring 'offence' notices, both of which were subsequently quashed, but only because I took the issue as far as it would go.
And yes, I was subjected to these aggressive notices, along with escalating threats of increased fines and eventually court proceedings, at every stage feeling I was dealing with a computer. And why not? Because having been vindicated, all that happened was the original, invalid fines were cancelled. I was put through the hoops and ever-greater penalties for simply questioning, yet the authorities had no such disincentive in the proceedings.
This is official extortion. Argue and the price goes up. Argue some more and we drag you to court. But if they are wrong, all bets are off.
When I see a speed camera where my kids are walking back from school (and yes, make it 20mph), and not on the only clear stretch of a remote A road where you can get safely past a tractor, and the damn thing has the speed limit posted on it (as opposed to a preceding few miles' worth of hundreds of bits of useless 'road furniture'), I'll call them safety cameras. If they are policed properly. And if booked I'll take my medicine, and rue the day that such things as context, mitigation and proof supported by official testimony and expert witnesses are no longer part of the legal process.
If someone is proven driving illegally and dangerously, throw the full legal book at them. Fines. Jail. No more licence. I'll support that 100%. But not using a robot backed with bureaucratic fascism to generate income from the easy mark of someone who has paid for their tax and insurance, and may have very good reason for thinking they were not at fault or simply not know who was driving or how their car was so labeled (which is what policemen are for, to stop and catch them - no wonder we no longer hear 'it's a fair cop').
And to those who use the 'what if it was your kid' for bending this aspect of criminal justice to suit, wait 'til there's a knock on your door because a facial recognition system has you or them pegged as a mugger, or your bin has the wrong rubbish in it. Fine if it's up to the system to prove it was you first: not so fine (or actually ever-increasing fines) if it's incumbent upon you to prove first that you have no association with the crime or a good explanation. Or drop a family member in it instead.
I'd be glad for someone to explain the difference with such cases and the one above.
First they booked the [alleged] speeders, then they came for...
It's an interesting state, sorry, country, Britain has become. And a fine legacy for the leadership who have brought us here.
Addendum:
I have awoken next morning to posting this to the following in my in-box from the Telegraph:
'The case for speed cameras destroyed in a flash"
While this will doubtless intensify debate, it does broadly add weight to my core beliefs.
However, I personally believe that we should have the cameras, only that they should be moved to urban situations where pedestarisans are at danger. At best they will act to cause even the most dangerous to check their speed, and at worst provide some additional ammunition to trace, track and build cases aginst consistnetly offending vehicles. Meaning more police effort: 'Chris Grayling, the Tories' transport spokesman, called for greater use of police patrol cars, rather than cameras, to deal with the menace of "rogue drivers".'
This would contribute to the cause of safety. If the human rights case proves successful, it will mean no further, or at least much reduced, revenues. It will be interesting to see whether the authorities maintain their enthusiasm for our safety if there is no money it.
Incoming!
I have been persuaded to allow comments on my blog.
I had originally decided against, as I really don't have the patience, skin-thickness, time or willpower to resist getting embroiled in, at best, passionate debates, or at worst flame wars.
But I have been shown the comment moderate option.
This will not spare me from beiung lured into civilized discourse, and hence will be dangerous to my already woeful time-management. But it will mean that anything I don't fancy, and/or which looks like going in a fruitless direction, won't make the cut... just like the BBC, Telegraph and a few others (The Guardian possibly not, unless they don't have a swear filter).
So if you feel like pitching in, feel free. Just remember that I hate waste, and do have a nice big, virtual red pencil I'd hate to have to wield. Oh, and a family who like me to get away from the keyboard on occasion. So while I may allow a post. I may not reply. No offence meant.
I had originally decided against, as I really don't have the patience, skin-thickness, time or willpower to resist getting embroiled in, at best, passionate debates, or at worst flame wars.
But I have been shown the comment moderate option.
This will not spare me from beiung lured into civilized discourse, and hence will be dangerous to my already woeful time-management. But it will mean that anything I don't fancy, and/or which looks like going in a fruitless direction, won't make the cut... just like the BBC, Telegraph and a few others (The Guardian possibly not, unless they don't have a swear filter).
So if you feel like pitching in, feel free. Just remember that I hate waste, and do have a nice big, virtual red pencil I'd hate to have to wield. Oh, and a family who like me to get away from the keyboard on occasion. So while I may allow a post. I may not reply. No offence meant.
First, offer a viable alternative
Missed me? I'd like to say that the lull in my posting has been a result of a well-earned rest, lazing on some sunny beach, but sadly it's merely a case of 25-hr days... most of which have been spent in a traffic jam.
Let's get out of the way straight away that I am in a car because I have no choice. Either it would be impossible to get from Ross to where I'm meant to be (and, more importantly, back - too many calls to the missus to pick me up at Swindon to drive us both to Gloucester to pick up my car) or too expensive (Ignoring the joys of lugging demo kit on a rush hour tube, I can still get to London and back for about £25 in fuel plus £10-20 parking, which is about half the cost of even a pre-booked train and often having to wait a few hours to get the cheap rate. I like seeing my kids.
Any road up (if you'll excuse the pun), I have been on (as opposed to moving along) waaaay too many of the things, and it is not an experience I'd wish to repeat, given the choice.
In addition to incredible roadworks decisions (like taking out most of London's Euston road last night at the tail end of the rush hour), listening to the radio is like getting intel on new minefields as you barrel across the desert. The other day I was headed for London (again), when first the M4 was 'closed', so I dived off onto the A40, only to learn that the M40 ahead was also shut down, prompting a detour back to the M4 past the other mess.
And as I listened to Radio 2 on other journeys I was amazed how daily entire major arteries were literally taken out of commission all day for a jack-knifed lorry or overturned caravan.
Now I fully endorse everything necessary being done to secure the safety of those who may be injured in accidents, or to render dangerous situations safe, but I cannot recall in the past this requiring such swingeing over-reactions of such durations. What on earth is going on? Are they simply trying to make the process of road travel so miserable that people no longer try? Most are already having such horrible time it can only be of necessity, so they obviosuly have no choice.
And I am sure it is not helping the planet to have all those vehicles sitting in a 15-mile tailback on idle.
Let's get out of the way straight away that I am in a car because I have no choice. Either it would be impossible to get from Ross to where I'm meant to be (and, more importantly, back - too many calls to the missus to pick me up at Swindon to drive us both to Gloucester to pick up my car) or too expensive (Ignoring the joys of lugging demo kit on a rush hour tube, I can still get to London and back for about £25 in fuel plus £10-20 parking, which is about half the cost of even a pre-booked train and often having to wait a few hours to get the cheap rate. I like seeing my kids.
Any road up (if you'll excuse the pun), I have been on (as opposed to moving along) waaaay too many of the things, and it is not an experience I'd wish to repeat, given the choice.
In addition to incredible roadworks decisions (like taking out most of London's Euston road last night at the tail end of the rush hour), listening to the radio is like getting intel on new minefields as you barrel across the desert. The other day I was headed for London (again), when first the M4 was 'closed', so I dived off onto the A40, only to learn that the M40 ahead was also shut down, prompting a detour back to the M4 past the other mess.
And as I listened to Radio 2 on other journeys I was amazed how daily entire major arteries were literally taken out of commission all day for a jack-knifed lorry or overturned caravan.
Now I fully endorse everything necessary being done to secure the safety of those who may be injured in accidents, or to render dangerous situations safe, but I cannot recall in the past this requiring such swingeing over-reactions of such durations. What on earth is going on? Are they simply trying to make the process of road travel so miserable that people no longer try? Most are already having such horrible time it can only be of necessity, so they obviosuly have no choice.
And I am sure it is not helping the planet to have all those vehicles sitting in a 15-mile tailback on idle.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Here comes the sun. There go the bills.
At the weekend I made my first venture into free energy, thanks to Dave and his solar-powered dehumidification system, Solarventi (he's more than happy to help us for helping him, so until we sort out proper click throughs, please tell him you came via us so we get a credit!).
He kindly came along to brief me on the system and also help with the installation to maximise its effect. We were lucky that the weather was lovely, so a few pounds were shed as a few pounds' worth of potential was bolted on to the house.
I'm planning to do a full feature review as soon as a few twiddly bits are tidied up and I've had a chance to assess its effect, which I'm looking forward to. We have a big, damp cellar, and with luck it will soon be dry... for ever... for free!
Friday, September 15, 2006
If something worth doing...
I'm at it again! A post by the BBC Newsnight head honcho covering a few topical issues, from sugar-coating negative, major issues, to the potential cop-out of dumbing-down with gameshow techniques to generate interest from an apathetic (or plain overwhelmed?) audience has prompted my reply:
"Sugar coat, no. But the notion of incentivising, rewarding or at least boosting people's tendency to engage by whatever means work - is an interesting one, and one I happen to subscribe to.
Take my personal area of interest and activity, which is the environment. You have mentioned as a big issue climate change, and today was a good example. Some depressing stuff on the front pages, and grabbing the broadcast leads too. Your very own Ethical Man gracing my screen as I was rapidly losing my appetite for breakfast (not due to him, I stress, but the storyline itself, combined with a slight concern as to where my strawberry-dappled muesli and coffee actually came from).
Even with his noble example as inspiration (though I was struck by the intro piece that mentioned his [family's] efforts were (just) for a year - all back to 'normal' thereafter?) it came across as a bit 'doom & gloom' and 'well if that's the best we can manage taking it to the barest of bones, we're pretty screwed anyway'.
What struck me was how it came across overall as a pretty negative rough ride, and such benefits as there were erred more on the warm fuzzy, 'doing the right thing' feelgood variety, and not terribly much tangible on the personal front.
And when it came to the major problem areas that overhwelm the personal efforts, caused or overseen by business or government, it didn't seem too encouraging at all.
But maybe, just maybe, there are little pockets of proactive, positive hope that can cast light on a few trees in the woods, and where relationships can be established that do help, the environment... a bit... to serve to inspire, motivate and maybe even reward the individual, and just possibly can as a consequence be made to appeal to the short-term beancounters or pols who really can only see to the next fiscal or election.
Not all can afford a hybrid as a 3rd car or a solar panel. Low-energy bulbs, yes, though the fittings are an issue (and the bulb guys are coming up with adaptations daily... yay!). But while reusing a plastic bottle cap as Scout Woggle may not solve global warming overnight, if someone gets their head around having a bit of fun making rather than buying, repairing than disposing, and saving a bit of dosh and maybe a bit of time whilst doing something to save the planet rather than just talking about it, then that's a small step worth taking. Not to mention popping as many of such possibilities into storylines to help redress the balance what can often be some pretty heavy and hopelessness-inducing big issues can be worth it too.
So we'd love a mention for the likes of Junkk.com should you feel disposed. Making a very small positive difference to a big negative issue, and at the very least not costing anyone anything. How feelgood is that? "
"Sugar coat, no. But the notion of incentivising, rewarding or at least boosting people's tendency to engage by whatever means work - is an interesting one, and one I happen to subscribe to.
Take my personal area of interest and activity, which is the environment. You have mentioned as a big issue climate change, and today was a good example. Some depressing stuff on the front pages, and grabbing the broadcast leads too. Your very own Ethical Man gracing my screen as I was rapidly losing my appetite for breakfast (not due to him, I stress, but the storyline itself, combined with a slight concern as to where my strawberry-dappled muesli and coffee actually came from).
Even with his noble example as inspiration (though I was struck by the intro piece that mentioned his [family's] efforts were (just) for a year - all back to 'normal' thereafter?) it came across as a bit 'doom & gloom' and 'well if that's the best we can manage taking it to the barest of bones, we're pretty screwed anyway'.
What struck me was how it came across overall as a pretty negative rough ride, and such benefits as there were erred more on the warm fuzzy, 'doing the right thing' feelgood variety, and not terribly much tangible on the personal front.
And when it came to the major problem areas that overhwelm the personal efforts, caused or overseen by business or government, it didn't seem too encouraging at all.
But maybe, just maybe, there are little pockets of proactive, positive hope that can cast light on a few trees in the woods, and where relationships can be established that do help, the environment... a bit... to serve to inspire, motivate and maybe even reward the individual, and just possibly can as a consequence be made to appeal to the short-term beancounters or pols who really can only see to the next fiscal or election.
Not all can afford a hybrid as a 3rd car or a solar panel. Low-energy bulbs, yes, though the fittings are an issue (and the bulb guys are coming up with adaptations daily... yay!). But while reusing a plastic bottle cap as Scout Woggle may not solve global warming overnight, if someone gets their head around having a bit of fun making rather than buying, repairing than disposing, and saving a bit of dosh and maybe a bit of time whilst doing something to save the planet rather than just talking about it, then that's a small step worth taking. Not to mention popping as many of such possibilities into storylines to help redress the balance what can often be some pretty heavy and hopelessness-inducing big issues can be worth it too.
So we'd love a mention for the likes of Junkk.com should you feel disposed. Making a very small positive difference to a big negative issue, and at the very least not costing anyone anything. How feelgood is that? "
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
The short and long of it
I'm a glutton. No sooner do I recover from the disappointment of the big idea heats hurdle fall than I get all excited by the next award that I really have a hamster in a shredders chance (for those not reading the daily eco-pages of the tabloids, one did survive, so I'm hedging my bets) of winning.
However, in my guise as a designer, and with the obvious need to get back to the day job to earn a crust to keep junkk.com in the limelight, I entered this rather dubiously-named effort: Designers Are Wankers
And lo, it seems I am on the shor... long list. Not quite six of nine (how Next Generation is that?) but better than not being on the list. And with £5k in the kitty, well worth a goat sacrifice or two.
However, in my guise as a designer, and with the obvious need to get back to the day job to earn a crust to keep junkk.com in the limelight, I entered this rather dubiously-named effort: Designers Are Wankers
And lo, it seems I am on the shor... long list. Not quite six of nine (how Next Generation is that?) but better than not being on the list. And with £5k in the kitty, well worth a goat sacrifice or two.
Even nearer...
No, not a diatribe against food miles. Though, mind you...
Anyways, Junkk.com maintains its roller-coaster ride of fortunes and emotions, and after the major downer of the weekend's end, it's nice to be able to sahre a nice upward turn again.
A wee while ago I read about a new website called Green & Easy. Nice name, nice site, nice people and... nice and near!
Becuase it turns out they are just up the road, and I am not long back from a lovely morning in the company of David and Jackie. And as it turns out they read my blog... hi guys!
All we really did was chat as neighbours, but I am hopeful that soem synergies may evolve. There really are few areas of overlap between us, and we even agreed that if there were areas where we might be seen to be competitive, then so what... it's all making the green cause stronger!
Anyways, Junkk.com maintains its roller-coaster ride of fortunes and emotions, and after the major downer of the weekend's end, it's nice to be able to sahre a nice upward turn again.
A wee while ago I read about a new website called Green & Easy. Nice name, nice site, nice people and... nice and near!
Becuase it turns out they are just up the road, and I am not long back from a lovely morning in the company of David and Jackie. And as it turns out they read my blog... hi guys!
All we really did was chat as neighbours, but I am hopeful that soem synergies may evolve. There really are few areas of overlap between us, and we even agreed that if there were areas where we might be seen to be competitive, then so what... it's all making the green cause stronger!
Monday, September 11, 2006
So near...
Sunday was my big chance at The Big Idea.
It was a roller-coaster of a day. I got through the first round but sadly fell at the next.
Lord Bilimoria was quite charming and seemed very taken with the concept. I showed how his beer bottle caps could be made into a waste bin, and he noted the one I had chosen was from his wife's homeland.
Ruth Badger was surprisingly supportive as I'd been told she could be pretty fierce. She was the only one to ask a question about revenue, and seemed satisfied. So I had two votes.
Craig Johnston loved the idea, but reckoned it could not count as an invention, so it was looking like he would defer. But then he changed his mind, which was nice... and a relief.
At this point I was over the moon. They had all been very positive and as the day progressed it seemed I was one of the few to get 3 votes.
I was then called to the next round, with a shortlist of nine from whom six were chosen. Sadly this was where I didn't make it any further. It was a bit odd, as there had not been any further opportunity to present, so I am not sure what they did subsequently to decide one way or the other. As I was the only one who didn't have a patentable device I fear that may have been it. I'm now wishing I'd shown an invention I'd created via Junkk.com, but as the patent is not registered I couldn't. Know any cheap IP lawyers?
I can't pretend it was not a huge disappointment. In addition to the money, I was looking forward to working with some business brains to complement my creative talents. Junkk.com flounders a lot for the lack of such a team. Most others had the inventor, money man and sales brain. Plus of course the public exposure of the series as it progressed wouldn't hurt build our audience.
We will get some I hope with the first episode (maybe all, as I wore a lab coat and they asked me to do a series of thoughts on life in the future - see pix), as the crew really took to the idea, me and the family and filmed a lot of vox-pops. Whether they make the final edit is another matter.
For Junkk.com all I have left to target in the near future is the Guardian Social Entrepreneur of the Year Awards. Fingers crossed!
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
The thief of time
In addition to procrastination, and I don't know if it was just time that was stolen, but blogging (reading others and posting) certainly was taking a major chunk out of my day (and night). So having experimented with routing the majority of the daily feeds to the trash, and hence restricting the urge to comment on tons of stuff (mostly climate spats), I have tried to focus more on making Junkk.com work harder in areas it is stronger.
To this end I recently typed our name in Google and was frankly amazed at the extent and breadth of places we have been mentioned and, I'm happy to say, positively, if not in glowing terms. Time to upgrade our media section under 'About' on the site!
Not to mention our PR folder.
Because, by way of more good news the next few weeks will see me heading off, having got through some heats (how woo-hoo that achievement is remains to be seen, but it's better than a 'Dear Peter...' letter at the first hurdle) to be briefed on the next round of a) the Guardian Social Entrepreneur of the Year Awards, and b) SKY TV's 'The Big Idea'. Neither are insignificant opportunities (financially we're talking £20k and £100k prizes respectively, but also both will extend our reach to a much wider audience). In both cases some considerble 'heft' was also accorded to getting media coverage and, of course, any contribution to the environment. I think we can tick those boxes.
Now all I have to do is stop staring at this screen and figure out just what I take to show and what I tell in the brief few moments I'll get to pitch Junkk.com Wish me luck!
To this end I recently typed our name in Google and was frankly amazed at the extent and breadth of places we have been mentioned and, I'm happy to say, positively, if not in glowing terms. Time to upgrade our media section under 'About' on the site!
Not to mention our PR folder.
Because, by way of more good news the next few weeks will see me heading off, having got through some heats (how woo-hoo that achievement is remains to be seen, but it's better than a 'Dear Peter...' letter at the first hurdle) to be briefed on the next round of a) the Guardian Social Entrepreneur of the Year Awards, and b) SKY TV's 'The Big Idea'. Neither are insignificant opportunities (financially we're talking £20k and £100k prizes respectively, but also both will extend our reach to a much wider audience). In both cases some considerble 'heft' was also accorded to getting media coverage and, of course, any contribution to the environment. I think we can tick those boxes.
Now all I have to do is stop staring at this screen and figure out just what I take to show and what I tell in the brief few moments I'll get to pitch Junkk.com Wish me luck!
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Demand and supply
They're to mean to post it free, and I'm too mean (well, broke) to pay to access it in its entirety, but here's something encouraging from the Indy today: Supermarkets in pursuit of the green pound.
The bit worth getting encouraged about (at least for Junkk.com): "it would be misleading to put these revolutions in the grocery and retail sectors down to political pressure. Something substantially more powerful is at work. What we are witnessing is a new trend in consumer demand."
The bit worth getting encouraged about (at least for Junkk.com): "it would be misleading to put these revolutions in the grocery and retail sectors down to political pressure. Something substantially more powerful is at work. What we are witnessing is a new trend in consumer demand."
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Missing the points.
Two ads from the same magazine this week.
One is certainly a 'better than nothing'. The other seems slightly at odds with its aims, though.
It would appear that Clubcard points can range in hue.
Wednesday, August 16, 2006
Art. Life. On Reflection.
Still having trouble resisting the odd punt into the blogosphere, as in the case of this from Newsnight's Ethical Man. Before my wife clouts me, in mitigation there is an opportunity to get the URL across to the media (and, currently, 12 fellow posters, which seems a very small number all in all) such that they may wonder what we are and say hi.
I have had a few eyebrow twitches before on how the life of an 'I'm from the BBC' reporter, whose paid job this year is to be ethical, can mirror an average Joe trying to assess and install a multi-thousand pound sustainable energy system. Lack of film crew can seriously affect the way a supplier, council or local population treats you.
But in this case I thought the piece, and options, accurately reflected reality. Though it did seem prompted, as was my first thought when reading it, by the 'no car/arrived by car' question posed by an earlier poster. Anyway, as always, in case I do get edited, here's my offering:
"This well illustrates that not everything green can be painted in black and white, and almost any effort of this nature will inevitably be an exercise in compromise.
For those who wish to try, it does seem possible to exist in an urban situation without owning a car, but when it comes to needing one it would be nice to have the salary or expense account to enjoy when necessary the option of getting one on demand.
As a countryside homeworker I guess I could use public transport. However I am not sure how long I could sustain bearing the costs, especially those of transit time which I doubt any client will be prepared to support.
Equally, I'm sure if Ethical Man needs to do a far-flung piece, there may be some questions around the office water-cooler, HR and indeed by licence payers should he be away too long by sailing there.
But the importance of this feature is that one gets introduced to, and an appreciation of the options, from the personal to the professional to the environmental (which sadly can be conflicting), and assisted in making informed choices.
Hence in this case, as car was the chosen option for perfectly valid personal reasons, I was interested and impressed that a purely tokenistic vehicle choice was not made rather than barrelling down the motorway lugging a battery. The fantastic makes better copy than the mundane, with many in the media playing a part in keeping things overly idealistic and free of financial consequence (not all, including the BBC it seems, can swing a freebie or loaner from a PR dept!), impractical and hence beyond the abilities of many average families to embrace, no matter how keen they are to do their best.
At least DOING something is better than nothing."
I have had a few eyebrow twitches before on how the life of an 'I'm from the BBC' reporter, whose paid job this year is to be ethical, can mirror an average Joe trying to assess and install a multi-thousand pound sustainable energy system. Lack of film crew can seriously affect the way a supplier, council or local population treats you.
But in this case I thought the piece, and options, accurately reflected reality. Though it did seem prompted, as was my first thought when reading it, by the 'no car/arrived by car' question posed by an earlier poster. Anyway, as always, in case I do get edited, here's my offering:
"This well illustrates that not everything green can be painted in black and white, and almost any effort of this nature will inevitably be an exercise in compromise.
For those who wish to try, it does seem possible to exist in an urban situation without owning a car, but when it comes to needing one it would be nice to have the salary or expense account to enjoy when necessary the option of getting one on demand.
As a countryside homeworker I guess I could use public transport. However I am not sure how long I could sustain bearing the costs, especially those of transit time which I doubt any client will be prepared to support.
Equally, I'm sure if Ethical Man needs to do a far-flung piece, there may be some questions around the office water-cooler, HR and indeed by licence payers should he be away too long by sailing there.
But the importance of this feature is that one gets introduced to, and an appreciation of the options, from the personal to the professional to the environmental (which sadly can be conflicting), and assisted in making informed choices.
Hence in this case, as car was the chosen option for perfectly valid personal reasons, I was interested and impressed that a purely tokenistic vehicle choice was not made rather than barrelling down the motorway lugging a battery. The fantastic makes better copy than the mundane, with many in the media playing a part in keeping things overly idealistic and free of financial consequence (not all, including the BBC it seems, can swing a freebie or loaner from a PR dept!), impractical and hence beyond the abilities of many average families to embrace, no matter how keen they are to do their best.
At least DOING something is better than nothing."
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Doing the right thing for the right reasons... in the wrong way
I have littered about the place a hefty collection of essentially worthless grey boxes. Partly it is because I have this odd notion that I may one day have a use for an extra 1GB of storage lurking in an entire CPU, but mainly I am still unsure what to do about them.
The ideal of course is that I get some money. Well, forget that. For a start, as mentioned, they are essentially worthless. So next up is that they get reused. Or at very worst recycled. These latter involve donation, which I am happy to do, but then we come to a bit of an issue, and one that is more than a tad topical: security.
This of course has provoked a response from those with a vested interest in the business of discarded IT. One such we have just been happy to print on our very own pages, reassured by the defence of its service (noting in passing the double-edged sword of Google Adsense, which has ads on the same page for services that may or may not be as worthy - caveat emptor).
But one thing I do note is that to get the reassurance one needs, you need to pass off in excess of 20 units.
Now most idividuals, and even small SMEs, do not have such numbers. What can one do? Is there a similar service for single units? Is it as secure? Can it be sustainable for the reuser without being financially prohibitive for the disposer? And if not, is the council 'bin' any more secure?
Quite an issue.
One notion I have is using the localisation capability of Junkk.com to pool diverse individuals in a coalition of the willing that builds to the trigger level, at which point the units are pooled (centrally would involve storage, at least temporarily, and possibly transport commitments) ready for collection.
The ideal of course is that I get some money. Well, forget that. For a start, as mentioned, they are essentially worthless. So next up is that they get reused. Or at very worst recycled. These latter involve donation, which I am happy to do, but then we come to a bit of an issue, and one that is more than a tad topical: security.
This of course has provoked a response from those with a vested interest in the business of discarded IT. One such we have just been happy to print on our very own pages, reassured by the defence of its service (noting in passing the double-edged sword of Google Adsense, which has ads on the same page for services that may or may not be as worthy - caveat emptor).
But one thing I do note is that to get the reassurance one needs, you need to pass off in excess of 20 units.
Now most idividuals, and even small SMEs, do not have such numbers. What can one do? Is there a similar service for single units? Is it as secure? Can it be sustainable for the reuser without being financially prohibitive for the disposer? And if not, is the council 'bin' any more secure?
Quite an issue.
One notion I have is using the localisation capability of Junkk.com to pool diverse individuals in a coalition of the willing that builds to the trigger level, at which point the units are pooled (centrally would involve storage, at least temporarily, and possibly transport commitments) ready for collection.
Monday, August 14, 2006
Turkey is a dish best served cold
I'm still weaning myself off the surfing and the blogging, but it's not easy.
However, some things are helping me see the wisdom of the effort.
Take today's Guardian Online. I have captured a block of three topics, topped by the one that almost sucked me into its lair: 'Why do newspapers hate us bloggers?'
They don't hate you... er... us! They love us! Look at that figure in red below. Over a hundred comments before elevenses. Chock full of extreme and diverse opinion, quotes and links. Sure the readership number is trivial, but the source material is gold-dust. If you are a hack or commentator (or are they the same thing?) who is paid to read this stuff and write about it, who needs research?
Sadly, I am now having to find more profitable ways to spend my hours, so wading through such material, much as I'd like to, is no longer an option. And in any case, these days even if I do see something of interest, I have no faith in whether it's accurate or the time to check.
Sadly, it looks like the media I used to trust to discover and report for me are not bothering much either.
Space... the final frontier
A few posts ago I had cause to tweak an eyebrow at some coverage in the Sunday Times magazine last week regarding an eco-artist who took pictures of people protesting about global warming... from his helicopter.
This week there is a similar airborne piece, which I felt was much more striking and justified.
However, despite the familiar, depressing and assuredly concerning pictures of retreating ice fields and glaciers, what was more striking to me was the percentage that were not so much to do with climate change (though it all has a contributory effect) as population expansion and the consequent demands on our planet's finite space to house and feed these ever-increasing numbers.
For every square meter of forest turned into housing, as economies develop you'll generate a whole new source of domestic waste, and demands for energy to light, watch TV, water, garze cattle, grow soy, provide cars, roads to drive them on and biodiesel to fuel them.
I can't help but feel that if this is not addressed (though I have no easy-PC suggestions how) as a priority, all the rest is rather trivial in comparison.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Bouquets & Brickbats
The other day our laser printer started making a noise like a dying buffalo. After 3 turbulent years I thought it had given up the ghost. With a purchase price just shy of £200 almost all its residual value is in the consumables, and with it gone they are useless, so I was keen on fixing it.
Initial signs were not good. Well out of warranty, I was looking at call-out fees alone approaching £100. Even lugging it in for an assessment was in the £50 mark.
So I managed to locate the initial sales folk and they said it was worth trying the manufacturer (Epson) help line (0870 44 3 77 66 - select 'sales' and then go with the flow). And I must say it worked out very well. I eventually reached a human after the longest voice menu drill down in history. And, with luck, tproblemelm has been resolved. A free repair advice that saved all round.
That's the bouquet. The brickbat is the status print.
Why on earth is it necessary to such so much ink out on that bar on the left? Surely if it's a roller test one can have a narrow lengthwise and vertical bar to test coverage?
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Conspiration Constipation
'They' must be out to get me.
First up, no sooner do I start weaning myself off the vast amount of time searching, reading and too often fruitlessly responding to the flood of online blog static out there, I somehow now find myself seduced by a plethora of manhour-sucking awards and competitions.
Some involve money; some involve potential PR. And some the nirvana of hooking up with complementary talents to move things along. A few offer all of these. And so are too good to ignore.
I have just completed my application to Sky's The Big Idea. Literally a few days' worth of drafting, crafting and rushing around shooting a video pitch. But with £100k at the end, perhaps worth it. I just hope they buy my notion of Junkk.com as an 'invention' that has been created to help create an infinite number of other inventions.
But no sooner do I leave this one in the lap of the Gods of Ratings, than I come across a design competition for canny designs! Only due Friday, so I have, er, one day to not do what I was and devote to the slim chance of a shot at this. Oh, phew, it's 'members only'. And when once this would have me signing up I'm afrid that budget boat has sialed... and sunk.
And then there is this: profit@50. Not a great deal of dosh, but it scores big on the profile meter.
Just one problem. I am not... quite... yet... 50! I'm still embroiled in the thinking behind 'Must be under 30' Guardian cartoon competition (a few posts back), which I miss out on by being too old, and now this looks out of reach becausee I'm too young!!!!
Ever felt you were a square peg in a sea of round holes?
First up, no sooner do I start weaning myself off the vast amount of time searching, reading and too often fruitlessly responding to the flood of online blog static out there, I somehow now find myself seduced by a plethora of manhour-sucking awards and competitions.
Some involve money; some involve potential PR. And some the nirvana of hooking up with complementary talents to move things along. A few offer all of these. And so are too good to ignore.
I have just completed my application to Sky's The Big Idea. Literally a few days' worth of drafting, crafting and rushing around shooting a video pitch. But with £100k at the end, perhaps worth it. I just hope they buy my notion of Junkk.com as an 'invention' that has been created to help create an infinite number of other inventions.
But no sooner do I leave this one in the lap of the Gods of Ratings, than I come across a design competition for canny designs! Only due Friday, so I have, er, one day to not do what I was and devote to the slim chance of a shot at this. Oh, phew, it's 'members only'. And when once this would have me signing up I'm afrid that budget boat has sialed... and sunk.
And then there is this: profit@50. Not a great deal of dosh, but it scores big on the profile meter.
Just one problem. I am not... quite... yet... 50! I'm still embroiled in the thinking behind 'Must be under 30' Guardian cartoon competition (a few posts back), which I miss out on by being too old, and now this looks out of reach becausee I'm too young!!!!
Ever felt you were a square peg in a sea of round holes?
Tuesday, August 08, 2006
Still looking, but not finding
Another I couldn't resist pitching into, if only in the hope the mainstream journalist may read and wonder about my email address (I now see little other value in these things) and find out what a 'Junkk.com' is:
Wanted: a practical guide to saving the warming planet
"Debate on global warming, be it man-made or naturally-occuring, is really moot. So I agree the key things we must focus on are reducing consumption wherever possible (economical, political and a whole raft of other 'als' permitting), and certainly reducing waste. It is simply a matter of efficiency. Which surely must appeal to any 'conservative'.
Sadly, it's tricky whilst also worrying about natural conservation which, in any form, is going to be hard to achieve with an expanding global population. Most, myself included, shy away from going much further 'there'.
But I'm afraid a polar bear's few thousand acres will come second to a few thousand more voters' homes getting profitably bullt on an ironically water-starved South Eastern flood plain."
I'd read this with a hope that there may be an indication of what form this guide may take. Sadly it was again more debate on whether it was required or not, which I guess I added to.
But at least when it comes to guides on doing stuff that can help, there is at least Junkk.com to point to in mitigation.
Wanted: a practical guide to saving the warming planet
"Debate on global warming, be it man-made or naturally-occuring, is really moot. So I agree the key things we must focus on are reducing consumption wherever possible (economical, political and a whole raft of other 'als' permitting), and certainly reducing waste. It is simply a matter of efficiency. Which surely must appeal to any 'conservative'.
Sadly, it's tricky whilst also worrying about natural conservation which, in any form, is going to be hard to achieve with an expanding global population. Most, myself included, shy away from going much further 'there'.
But I'm afraid a polar bear's few thousand acres will come second to a few thousand more voters' homes getting profitably bullt on an ironically water-starved South Eastern flood plain."
I'd read this with a hope that there may be an indication of what form this guide may take. Sadly it was again more debate on whether it was required or not, which I guess I added to.
But at least when it comes to guides on doing stuff that can help, there is at least Junkk.com to point to in mitigation.
Monday, August 07, 2006
Unfortunate Illustrations
Not really anything to do with matters 're' or even Junkk.com's adventures, but I have to post this from today's Guardian - Cartoon competition.
As a not bad cartoonist, I was already sharpening my HB pencil when I noticed: 'entrants must be under 30 on January 1 2007'.
Ooooo, so close. But then I noticed a significant percentage of the posters below had asked 'why 30?', to which I can only add my voice. It's not like it's a kids' competition. I'm even pretty sure it is ageist and as such possibly now (or at least soon) illegal.
No excuses. This may prove interesting to monitor.
ADDENDUM: Paranoia is knowing they are out to ignore you
I decided to pop back to see what's what a few days later, and as there was no reply or, oddly, further posts (read on) decided to have another go. As this letter to the original poster (and attached screenshot) shows, there seems to have been a glitch preventing futher discussion. I wonder why?
Dear Mr. King
As I have an interest in this issue, I returned to the site today to still find no answer to the postings regarding the age limit, and hence composed the following. Sadly it was not possible to upload (see attached). I'm sure there is a perfectly good reason for this, though the phrase 'Comments not allowed on this entry' is less than enlightening, and does in itself raise a few additional questions. So I remain interested. Maybe I'll have more luck sending this to you directly:
"A few days have passed, yet I still see no answer to the majority of posters' legitimate questions regarding the age limit. It may be ageist. It may be legal. It may be demographics. It may be marketing. It may be ethi... well, maybe not. But having asked politely, I'd just like to know the reasoning behind one not being able to enter a non-gender specific creative competition for post-student, working-age UK adults (I can understand the need for kids' versions to have an upper limit) by virtue of being over 30. Is it hoped by staying mute long enough we can all be relied upon to have Alzheimers? Or maybe you too have simply forgotten... to reply? You could of course let such senior citizens enter, and then make sure they don't win if they don't suit the profile. Like every other media competition."
The Plot thickens... well, a reply:
On 9 Aug 2006, at 09:17, Oliver.King@guardian.co.uk wrote:
Peter
I dont have any email in my inbox from your email address so I couldnt have
responded. I am forwarding your query and complaint to Ian Mayes the
Guardian reader's editor. I work for Guardian Unlimited - the website and
not the newspaper. I was asked to publicise the competition by colleagues
on the paper which I did. I didnt draw up the rules to the competition and
do not even know who did so Ian is the best person to contact neither drew
up the rules Please contact Ian Mayes the readers editor with your
complaint.
Oliver King.
And so I stay hopeful, though with eyebrow twitching...
Dear Oliver,
Thank you for your prompt reply.
I do appreciate and sympathise with your position, and apologise if my wording made my comments seem personally directed at 'you'. This was not my intention as I fully appreciated the fact that you were just the guy writing the post to advertise the competition.
I was simply interested in answers. And the blog seemed the best place for these to be forthcoming from those who initiated it (I was not aware of the level of distinction between the paper and website); not necessarily to me personally but to address all with similar questions on the blog.
Hence it was frustrating to find that further comment had seemingly been stopped and there remained no organiser's reply after two days. It is surely only to be expected that following such postings there is monitoring of responses?
Still, we are getting places. I will await feedback from Mr. Mayes.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Martin
You can be too mature, apparently
A follow up and, I guess, an answer at last:
"Ian Katz who drew up the competition said he was looking for undiscovered
cartoonists the paper didn't know about. He also said the age limit is
similar to the student journalism competitions the Guardian regularly runs
which offer short-term work as a prize. It was determined to follow similar
rules in this case."
Whether it is a satisfactory one is another matter, along with my having the righteous energy to pursue further. I could still wonder why undiscovered cartoonists the paper didn't know about 'must' be under 30. Do you become known, especially to them, when you're over that age? And 29 year-old students are a new one to me, too.
Funny how 'ist' the supposed organs of liberty and equality can be when it suits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)