Print Story For God so loved Saturn
Diary
By Breaker (Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:25:53 AM EST) (all tags)
He put a ring on it.

Inside: Super Soaraway BreakerMatic content!




One government to rule them all - EUia in further grab over member sovereignty.

Further joined up thinking, from our Government of all the talents.  25% rise in beer duty in the last 2 years, and yet the El Gordo appoints a Minister for Pubs.

NuLabia announce cuts, bigger cuts, out cutting will be even more cutting than (spit) The ThatcherSaurus although Thatcher raised public spending -

"Under her premiership, public spending grew at a healthy average of 1.1 per cent a year.  Only in two years did public spending actually fall in real terms: 1985/6 and 1988/9. Even then she planned to freeze spending, not cut. It only fell because of lower than expected social security outlays."  So is this one of those spin operations, and Darling plans to actually outspend the Thatch?

In one booklet from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, officials said stress-related problems could be caused by having "too little work or responsibility" and suggested that pressured workers take up a hobby to alleviate anxiety.  That's your tax money being spent right there.  Any further takers on the "how much should the State be doing for us" discussion?

Times Online to start charging for news online.  I would be surprised if people go for it, unless other major newspapers also move to a chargeable model.  Not least, the Times pissed a lot of intermongs off over NightJack.

< on the enemy | I'd rather not pay $2,600 for drugs >
For God so loved Saturn | 76 comments (76 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Newspaper charges by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #1 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:31:45 AM EST
I don't think it's a fundamentally bad idea, I'd certainly pay a subscription to read the Guardian online, but £1 a day is far too expensive. It should be more in the region of 20p.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

I bet by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #3 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:38:07 AM EST
They won't cut back on the ads though for subscribed readers.

I am surprised you read the Grauniad though; I'd have thought their use of offshore tax havens to avoid paying UK tax would have put you off.


[ Parent ]
Well no by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #11 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:47:02 AM EST
It's about raising revenue, why would they introduce one revenue stream and cut off another?

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
Increases the value of the subscription by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #15 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:49:55 AM EST
To the subscriber, like many other websites (eg /. [1]) do.

[1] Haven't visited there for ages, but this used to be the deal - subscribe and get the site ad-free.


[ Parent ]
Ah OK by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #16 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:54:19 AM EST
Can see how that makes sense.

I really, really don't care about ads myself, I never notice them, have never felt the need to use adblock anywhere.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
It is worth it for some people though. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #19 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:03:07 AM EST
If they really hate ads.


[ Parent ]
I /normally/ don't mind by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #26 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:22:58 AM EST
until they start with interstitials and those fly-by things.

I hate those.
--

[ Parent ]
Yes by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #36 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:59:22 AM EST
Those ones really wind me up, too.  Especially when your browser window is effectively hijacked, and only locating a tiny cross overlaid on the page can you carry on.


[ Parent ]
Just revisited by anonimouse (2.00 / 0) #20 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:06:24 AM EST
Either my karma or UID is such that I can disable adverts without a subscription.


Girls come and go but a mortgage is for 25 years -- JtL
[ Parent ]
It's a karma thing on slashdot I believe by marvin (2.00 / 0) #33 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:34:39 AM EST
I don't run an ad blocker, but NoScript takes care of 90% of the ads, and all of the malicious ones. It wouldn't bother me to see ads on sites like slashdot and ArsTechnica, but I block javascript for most sites, and I'm certainly not running javascript from an ad provider.

[ Parent ]
They don't expect you to pay a quid a day by Vulch (4.00 / 1) #5 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:41:02 AM EST
They're after getting a regular 2 quid a week. Back in the day when I used to look after a mobile phone version I think it was 4.50 for a month and 45.00 for a year and at one point there were daily and weekly options at increasingly less attractive prices.


[ Parent ]
Erm they are charghing £1 a day by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #10 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:46:13 AM EST
Of course you should pay less if you repeat subscribe, they're right on that, but £1 a day is too much for a one-off purchase.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

[ Parent ]
Yes but... by Vulch (4.00 / 1) #18 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:02:09 AM EST
Some people will pay the quid once in a while, NI will land up with between 20p and 50p of that depending how the billing is being done. It's deliberately overpriced to get you to pay twice as much on the grounds you may use it 3 times in a week because the second quid they will keep most of.

Maybe "They don't want you to pay a quid" would be closer to the mark.


[ Parent ]
Intermongs? by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #2 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:32:27 AM EST


Intermongs. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #6 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:41:23 AM EST
NT.


[ Parent ]
Fuckwit. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #8 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:44:19 AM EST


[ Parent ]
Enchanté. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #13 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:48:10 AM EST
You get out of bed the wrong side this morning perchance?


[ Parent ]
No. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #22 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:11:42 AM EST
You used a heinously unpleasant word.

You're happy to call everyone else on the site a fuckwit but you apparently don't like it when anyone calls you one.

[ Parent ]
Awwww by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #24 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:16:57 AM EST
Would you like a hug?


[ Parent ]
Fuckwit. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #25 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:21:49 AM EST


[ Parent ]
Charmed. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #30 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:30:29 AM EST
Or wriggling in the grasp of your unstoppable argument?

Who knows?

Are you having a bad day old chap?

Did you think my initial response was to call you an intermong, or a confirmation that I meant intermong in the diary main body?  Because I assure you I meant the latter.


[ Parent ]
Forgive my ignorance by Driusan (2.00 / 0) #39 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 12:38:35 PM EST
But why is that unpleasant/offensive?

There's nothing that stands out about the word over here in the new world.

--
Vive le Montréal libre.

[ Parent ]
Mong by ambrosen (4.00 / 3) #43 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 01:31:22 PM EST
Is a word for someone with Down's syndrome. I'm really not OK with using names of disabilities as insults.

I also don't like the idea of describing groups of people with insults. It makes discussion pretty much impossible.

Breaker did say that pretty much everyone here was a lefty fuckwit the other day, too, which is partly why I felt free to use that word.

And I'm picking up on smaller things because I tried the whole 'exchange of ideas' schtick with Breaker's political diaries for a while, and it was clear that there was no cooperation on his side which could result in either side learning anything. He is also, for example, too arrogant to realise that Theophile Escargot is head and shoulders above pretty much all of us in terms of his reading and understanding of politics and economics.

[ Parent ]
I already knew the last 3 paragraphs by Driusan (2.00 / 0) #44 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 01:49:13 PM EST
I just never heard of "Mong" being used as a word for someone with Down's syndrome and couldn't figure out why it was so offensive.

--
Vive le Montréal libre.
[ Parent ]
I'm thinking listening to Devo would help by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #45 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 01:51:28 PM EST
but then listening to Devo helps everything.


[ Parent ]
Used to be called Mongolism by Vulch (2.00 / 0) #47 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 02:22:08 PM EST
But these chaps and their countrymen didn't like it.


[ Parent ]
Not in my lexicon. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #51 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:09:16 PM EST
"Mong" was always used to define a self induced state of uselessness.  As in - it's your fault you're rubbish, is the upshot.

Missed your train through poor preparation?  Monged it.

Feeling under the weather today because of last night's hedonism?  Monged out.

An opportunity to make a fool of yourself?  Mongtastic.

Someone that takes the Internet too seriously and too often?  Intermong.

I was wondering about why your replies were so vituperative, it's now clearly just a difference in word definition.  I didn't realise the word had multiple uses / definitions, especially for the handicapped, and I am sorry for that.

Sounds like your understanding of the word is derogatory against a specific sort of disabled people; mine is uncomplimentary but it is not vindictive, beyond self mockery and friendly banter; most definitely not in the province of the disabled. 

Take the word "cob|b|be" (still pronounced the same) for instance.  Some people think that's a place to dock small boats, to throw something, or a flat bread roll. 

Three pretty different uses of the same word.

I'll address your other points in a sibling post.


[ Parent ]
OED lists two etymologies by lm (4.00 / 1) #53 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 09:58:28 AM EST
One that dates back over a hundred years, from `mongrel' that enshrines the idea of persons of mixed race being despicable.

Another that goes back to the eighties, from `mongol' which at one point was used as a technical term to describe those who suffered from Down's Syndrome which was known as mongolism. This use, in turn, is founded on using the stereotypical traits of a particular Asiatic ethnic group to describe certain types of mental infirmities.

The second etymology seems to me to be a bit suspect. The Mongol -> mongolism connection is sound but the mongoloid -> mong connection seems to me to be a bit questionable. It could very well be the case that people were using the word `mong' and it was hypothesized that such use came from `mongoloid' even though it didn't.

In any case, I think taking offense at such politically incorrect speech is rather gay. Most of those who do have no problem with the pejorative use of words such as `barbarous', `vandal', or `patriarchal' even though they are founded on the same sort of stereotypes.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
taking offense by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #57 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 02:37:04 PM EST
think taking offense at such politically incorrect speech is rather gay.

hey!

For that word in particular, I think the word has actually bifurcated: there's a word which means "of or pertaining to being attracted to the same gender" and there's a word which means "ostentatiously stupid" and they happen to share the same prononunciation and spelling.

the fact that the second word evolved out of the first word by analogy doesn't mean that people using the second word intend to be expressing any opinion about the first one.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
I did that on purpose by lm (2.00 / 0) #59 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 03:26:47 PM EST
Mostly because it seemed rather relevant to the discussion at hand.

But, I think you're kind of, sort of right about it being two separate words. They probably share something of a common etymology. But that doesn't mean that the words are related in the present. So far as I can tell, the definition of `stupid' predates the the definition of `homosexual' in the same way that `queer' had a meaning of `odd' long before it meant `gay.'

There are other examples of similar usage. One of my favorites is the word `niggardly' which is commonly presumed to be related to `negro' but is not. Another funny one is `history' (hist, time, + ory) that many feminists think comes from `his' + `story.'


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
I've never met anybody by hulver (2.00 / 0) #56 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 01:59:24 PM EST
Who used "Mong" and didn't know the etymology of it.

I'm not accusing you of lying, I'm just surprised.
--
Cheese is not a hat. - clock

[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #64 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 05:13:16 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
Exactly. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #67 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 09:59:33 PM EST
I am fully expecting some form of space time contiuum rip about now.

xth agrees with me.

Admittedly, on an extremely narrow and well defined scope, but there you go. 

We have accord.


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #68 Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 07:05:17 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
Look at lm's etymology above... by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #65 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 09:50:43 PM EST
For me, the Down's == mong link never existed. 

Even read xth's comment below.

For me, the word exists as I have described it in a post before.

I bet Kate Fox'd love this.

In any case, I'll happily rail against you leftist loons, you idiots, and you leftist loonidiots. 

And in the strongest terms. 

But eh, I'm disappointed that some on HuSi think I'll take a cheap shot at the disabled. 


[ Parent ]
But neither lm nor xth by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #73 Mon Mar 29, 2010 at 07:08:55 PM EST
grew up in the UK, and both me and hulver did. For the record, most pre-pubescent playground slang probably can't be used in polite company without knowing what it means beforehand.

And insults, even against third parties, even ones that are merely derogatory to the targets of the insults, have no productive use in a debate that's intended to lead to enlightenment.

[ Parent ]
I thank you for your apology. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #75 Tue Mar 30, 2010 at 11:33:51 AM EST
Although you could have just said sorry.


[ Parent ]
Second post by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #52 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:27:52 PM EST
Do we agree on the terms of reference of the word "fuckwit"?  To me that is someone who has no personal intellect or wit, or indeed, independant thought.

For your definition?  Let's get this clear now, shall we?

there was no cooperation on his side
You mean I didn't agree with you?  I read every BreakerMatic link I post.  Do you?

I don't necessarily agree with the content of every link target, but I ask you to look at it objectively.

Why do I label you as "leftist fuckwits"? 
Ah yes, that'd be because I marked that diary with a clear warning "I will attempt to make up the shortfall with extra vitriol"

Are you the part of the population that needs the safety warning on a packet of peanuts "Warning: may contain nuts, or nut products"?

Further to that, one of the links in this diary above contains clear evidence of several Government divisions having nothing to do.  You want Big State (leftist) bias?

Then look at how many posters have addressed that issue.  At the minute, it's none.  Big State Leftist bias?  Look at the comment ratings (which I believe you do, look at the ratings you're happy with and believe you're on the "right" side).

You're either happy that tax money keeps nonjobs functioning, or you're paying so little tax you don't care, or delude yourself it's going into "frontline services".

As someone who pays almost all of their taxation at the very, very highest rate, I'm not happy about much of Government spending, hence the links to raise your consciousness.

And that really, is the heart of the BreakerMatic diary ethos.  Those of you paying less tax but who want better service(s), think that others should pay for their desires, not themselves.

I've been accused of selfishness, but surely the ultimate selfishness is expecting others to pay for things you either can't afford to pay for, or don't want to pay for.

Don't get me wrong, as a higher earner, I am OK with putting a bit extra into the pot.  But as such, I am a little more watchful on how it is spent, because Government tax and even moreso, Government spending is out of control.

Do you realise now that for every pound spent now by the Government, 25p is borrowed?

There's better ways of providing a safety net for those who lose jobs through no fault of their own, better ways of providing "free-at-the-point-of-care" medical services, but these are never explored.  These are things the State should guarantee, IMHO.

In short, I'm happy to stump up (along with many leftists) for services our country needs, just the way we provision and deliver them differ.

Do you want five 5-a-day dietary "consultants" or 7 new nurses?


[ Parent ]
On reading every Breakermatic link by lm (2.00 / 0) #60 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 03:34:01 PM EST
I personally think that's kind of rude.

Imagine two blokes having a friendly discussion in a pub.

One hands the other a magazine and says, `Here's what I think, read it and then we can talk meaningfully.'

The other bloke is going to think the first one is an asshat who can't be bothered to clearly state why he thinks what he does.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Distinction by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #66 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 09:59:32 PM EST
Bloke in a pub goes "I think this.  If you want to know why, then read this magazine first, because otherwise you'll be ignorant of the points I am about to make".

If you're lucky, the other bloke in the pub will say:

"I think the other.  If you want to know why, then read this magazine first, because otherwise you'll be ignorant of the points I am about to make".

And therein, discussion is born...


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #69 Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 07:11:37 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
I think you'll find by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #71 Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:12:41 AM EST
It's yours!


[ Parent ]
That's an odd distinction by lm (2.00 / 0) #70 Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 08:39:48 AM EST
I always thought that discussion was born between two people talking (or swapping messages on a web forum) rather than swapping magazines.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Depends on how anoraky you want to be by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #72 Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 10:15:59 AM EST
For example two people may have an opinion of a football player and be able to discuss the players relevant merits and so on.

If you want to discuss career total goals in league and international, you're either a complete anorak if you know that stat straight off the bat, or you have a football magazine tucked under your arm.


[ Parent ]
I'm not sure what questions I should answer. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #74 Mon Mar 29, 2010 at 08:06:07 PM EST
So I'll start with the last one. The answer is that the premise is wrong. With support staff and other costs, you'd be lucky to get two nurses for the cost of 5 of your putative five-a-day co-ordinators. I've never seen an ad for a five-a-day co-ordinator, and the only ad on NHS jobs at the moment with the word "vegetables" in the job description is for a catering description, so I'd argue that you're following a red herring there.

As to the issue of whether I'm a leftist fuckwit, I only read one newspaper, whose (over 150 year old) mission statement is to fight for intelligence against an unworthy timid ignorance. It is not generally regarded as left wing. I read news.bbc.co.uk, and do occasionally watch The Daily Show or maybe Newsnight. I'm not generally regarded as stupid by those that know me well, either. I even know the difference between a peanut and a tree nut. And the value of trading precision for recall when a false negative might be a matter of life and death.

I'm sorry that you find the fact that I don't earn a particularly high wage to mean that I don't expect the government to extract maximum value from taxpayer's money. Especially seeing as I spend all my working week consistently delivering all the value I can deliver towards keeping genuinely important life-changing frontline services running properly. And I can tell you, and I'm sure everyone I work with would agree, all the value I can deliver is a far greater value than all the value I'm paid to deliver.

So thanks but no thanks for the links to improve my consciousness. Every time I've made the effort to describe what I see happening in social work, education and healthcare, and to deliver an honest impression of what value the taxpayer's getting for their money, you've attempted to refute me with vague links and failed to convince me that you've understood what I'm saying, and when pressed, have told me that that's not the issue. So, given that writing cogent, focussed and effective responses to what other people write is something that takes real time and effort*, you'll have to forgive me for saving it for people who appreciate the work and reciprocate with responses focussed on the issue at hand.

[ Parent ]
I'm not sure why I bother by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #76 Tue Mar 30, 2010 at 12:32:55 PM EST
Para 1) With support staff and other costs now would they be support staff, like pharmacists keeping the ward drug cabinet properly stocked and so forth, or clipboard wielding management looking to make sure Government imposed boxes are ticked?  Perhaps not 5-a-day co-ordinators but you only need to look at the Grauniad's job pages to question if every job being offered is really in the taxpayer's interest.

Para 2) Newspaper - The Economist? (There was a joke in there about reading the Daily Sport only for the quality journalism but we're having a proper discussion here so I shan't stoop).

Para 3) Don't twist this; I did not say anything about your wage, only your tax contribution.  So you do expect the government to get value for money from your tax then? 
Which makes it odd that you didn't comment on the link in the diary if you're that bothered about it.
Nor commented that we're spending vastly more than we can afford, as a nation.  We're £1.4 trillion in the red and the Government is likely to borrow £167bn this year on current spending plans.  Now, we're unlikely to agree on how to fix that deficit without damaging the recovery, but to ignore obvious waste in government spending is just stupid.

Para 4) thanks but no thanks for the links Says BreakerMatic on the tin. Why else would you read a BreakerMatic diary?  
given that writing cogent, focussed and effective responses to what other people write is something that takes real time and effort That'll be this cogency and this focus, presumably?  You can argue cogence and focus but I can't see how that'd take a long time to type.
On the subject of BreakerMatic diaries, why not take the time and effort to write an anti-BreakerMatic[1] one?

[1] Anti-Breakermatic, not anti-Breaker.


[ Parent ]
Not just one ring [nt] by riceowlguy (4.00 / 1) #4 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:38:43 AM EST


The other rings by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #7 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:42:38 AM EST
Came later, eternity rings, birthdays and the like.


[ Parent ]
Don't forget the original ring by riceowlguy (4.00 / 3) #14 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:48:59 AM EST
the Promise Ring that came from her Daddy, Uranus.

I could be mis-remembering some things, I got a C+ in Greek mythology.

[ Parent ]
It was only by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #17 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:56:42 AM EST
A throwaway joke, but hey I learnt something today.  For last minute gifts, keep a Promise ring up Uranus.


[ Parent ]
Beer brewing as a hobby by georgeha (4.00 / 1) #9 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:46:06 AM EST
that kills two birds with one stone.


(Comment Deleted) by xth (4.00 / 1) #12 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 09:47:28 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



Have you even been reading by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #21 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:10:04 AM EST
BreakerMatic diaries the last year or so?

Starters for ten - look at the differences between the law and court systems in use across Europe.  Many of them are fundamentally different (eg Napoleonic, common law).  Look also at the differences between countries' industry - where do they earn their income? 

One size does not often fit all.


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #23 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:14:09 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
You would have differences though by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #27 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:23:00 AM EST
And would each nation state get a vote on when those differences were smoothed out?


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #28 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:26:06 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
You're calling by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #32 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:31:59 AM EST
Democracy unimportant?


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (2.00 / 0) #34 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:38:34 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
So changing a country's legal system by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #35 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:57:57 AM EST
Is a pretty big undertaking.  But you think it should just be left to the MEP's?

Who voted for Rompuy again?


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by xth (4.00 / 1) #37 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 11:08:37 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by xth



[ Parent ]
Precisely. by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #38 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 11:09:57 AM EST
TTYL!


[ Parent ]
What's this "grabbing members" nonsence? by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #29 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:27:27 AM EST

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

Worked by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #31 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 10:31:19 AM EST
For Michael Jackson!

Ow!!!


[ Parent ]
Shamone! by dmg (4.00 / 1) #54 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 11:55:08 AM EST
or is it Chamone? eee-heee.
--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.
[ Parent ]
Who's by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #55 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 01:28:15 PM EST
Dead Bad?


[ Parent ]
woah by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #40 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 12:50:07 PM EST
He put a ring on it.

So you're saying Saturn is God's cock?
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

are you saying ... by BlueOregon (2.00 / 0) #48 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 02:57:28 PM EST
... that jackhammer jesus isn't?

yeah ... nsfw

[ Parent ]
prognostication by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #41 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 12:51:56 PM EST
I would be surprised if people go for it, unless other major newspapers also move to a chargeable model.

Yeah, this is a huge problem for the newspaper industry. The current situation - free news - is unsustainable for them as a business model. But going behind a paywall individually just drives eyeballs to the remaining free sites.

The ideal situation from a business perspective would be putting everyone behind a paywall, but you can't get there without an illegal conspiracy in restraint of trade.

Which means most of the newspapers die.

If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

Like the music industry by Breaker (2.00 / 0) #50 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 08:20:27 PM EST
Evolve or die.

The music industry has now started pillaging tour & merchandising receipts, I'm told.  They'll get their fucking bit, don't you worry.

Newspapers, however, are another thing.

Video industry's going to take a hammering too I think.

I was out at someone's house tonight for a baby first aid course.  Noting their downstairs toilet had VHS videos piled floor to ceiling on a particularly well designed shelf rack, I asked the guy what he'll do when he can no longer buy  a VHS player.  I only know this guy as we're on the same first aid course, and we're his familial home only as a venue for the course.

He replied along the lines of: "I'll get my techie friend Dave[1] to show me how to download it off the internet so I can still watch the films I've paid for.  Some of the older ones I can't even get on DVD and I don't have the stuff to turn VHS into computer playable".

[1] I am not Dave, not do I know him.


[ Parent ]
evolution by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #58 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 02:39:51 PM EST
it's not clear to me how the newspapers evolve, and from what i can tell, it's not clear to them.

this worries me because, as much as newspapers suck, they're still better than television news, and i don't think that blogging is going to be able to replace newspapers as a source of information. which is to say: the newspapers do a terrible job of watching the powerful, but the post-newspaper world will do an even worse job.

this concerns me asa  citizen.

-------------

dude should get his vhs stuff converted into something playable; the tapes are gonna degrade even if he can keep finding VHS players.
If television is a babysitter, the internet is a drunk librarian who won't shut up.

[ Parent ]
many will die by codemonkey uk (2.00 / 0) #62 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 04:05:18 PM EST
but enough will survive

--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.
[ Parent ]
TV News by Vulch (2.00 / 0) #63 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 04:18:53 PM EST
Televison News in the UK is rather better regarded. Murdoch would love to get the BBC news website shut down because it is the main news source for a large chunk of the population and, while the evening news programmes no longer attract the audiences they once did, the two main "terrestrial" channels still pull in more than Sky News does.


[ Parent ]
(Comment Deleted) by aphrael (2.00 / 0) #42 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 12:52:51 PM EST

This comment has been deleted by aphrael



Chargin for online content by dmg (4.00 / 3) #46 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 02:06:56 PM EST
The only flaw in that business model is that it is not compulsory to pay on pain of imprisonment even if you don't want the content. 

Perhaps its time for a more general 'media reception licence' to replace the outmoded TV licence. It could cost say £500, and would licence you to read certain state-backed newspapers and play state-sanctioned video games. 

--
dmg - HuSi's most dimwitted overprivileged user.
Comrade by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #49 Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 08:12:40 PM EST
Are you sure that £500 is sufficient? 

We are after all, offering the future of the white heat technology, and I am sure the proles will happily pay £1500 a year or more for such wholesome, State backed & sanctioned family entertainment.

It would be the right thing to do.


[ Parent ]
I would be happy to pay that by codemonkey uk (4.00 / 1) #61 Sat Mar 27, 2010 at 04:03:03 PM EST
If it would make the Daily Mail, Sun, and Express go away.

--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.
[ Parent ]
For God so loved Saturn | 76 comments (76 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback