Davenport Lyons...

Well, well... The Register reports that Atari has ended its association with attack dogs Davenport Lyons. Could this be because, like other companies are discovering, the idea of sending nastygrams to people who really shouldn't be allowed out on the internet isn't so good - or profitable.

In an undated press release on Davenport Lyons' web site, David Gore, a partner at the firm, says: “Illegal file-sharing is a very serious issue resulting in millions of pounds of losses to copyright owners. As downloading speeds and Internet penetration increase, this continues to be a worldwide problem across the media industry which increasingly relies on digital revenues. The damages and costs ordered by the Court are significant and should act as a deterrent. This shows that taking direct steps against infringers is an important and effective weapon in the battle against online piracy.”

The problem is, if law firms keep going for the technically incompetent without stopping to think about the ways in which they may have become unwitting P2P peers through infection, the bad publicity generated means this deterrent becomes increasingly meaningless as more people come forward to challenge their nastygrams. For example, by typing "Davenport Lyons" into Google, I found this thread on a consumer action forum suggesting ways to bog down such actions and otherwise fight back.

It can only be a matter of time before an employee of Davenport Lyons is found to be unwittingly illegally sharing files. As I said in October, the way forward is protection of the innocent from themselves, not their prosecution. That requires technology they can't forget to install or update. The ideal situation is Microsoft putting anti malware protection in the Windows kernel. Great idea, you'd think, but there's now a huge anti-virus industry predicated on them not doing so. It's my guess that not only is this a situation that won't go away, it'll get worse.

Zimbabwe on 18p a day...

The Guardian is reporting that the Zimbabwean army has for the first time rioted.

The report quotes a soldier who (for the pretty obvious reason that he wouldn't last long otherwise) wished to remain anonymous: "We have no food in the barracks. There is no medication in military hospitals, and we cannot access our money in the banks. Even if people are to riot, there would be no enthusiasm to stop them."

The Zimbabwean army has stopped feeding all but senior ranks. Desertions have nearly halved it's size from 40,000 to 26,000. Those who remain cannot get at their money simply because there aren't enough bank notes to go around. The law says you can withdraw a maximum of Z$500,000 a day - that's just 18p (about US$0.09).

Mugabe is capable of complete self-deception. He's a brutal man running a brutal regime. The reason for that brutality is power; when his power goes, he's a dead man and he knows it. So, he has to rely on those he can still afford to pay. When there's no one left to rely on , it'll be over for him, and that can only be a good thing.

It's been noted many times that if South Africa cuts electricity to Zimbabwe (it supplies pretty much all of it), Mugabe's stranglehold would be gone within a week and the country could begin to breathe again. It's also worth noting that this hasn't happened. You have to ask why.

Arduino pet robot head taking shape...

My ideas for an Arduino-based pet robot are slowly taking shape in spare minutes. I have a basic movement-based vision system up and running.

At the moment, it has basic (LDR-based) stereo light input, which feeds a weird real-time event integrator algorithm and some associated data structures - one per sensor. These feed a further algorithm which calculates the position data being sent to a servo upon which the two LDRs are mounted (revolving left and right in the the Y axis). The act of turning this "head" servo to indicate captured attention creates new input data itself, leading to complex feedback.

The whole thing is designed to produce nothing more controlled than emergent behaviour. For example, I never told it that if I sweep my hand in front of the sensors from left to right, the head should turn to follow it. Nor did I tell it that if I sweep my hand the other way the head should follow. For a laugh, I mounted the device in front of the computer's monitor, set the wallpaper to black and moved a small white window around. The head followed it, slowly losing interest when it stopped. I placed the device in front of a TV and let it track moving objects. It's weird to watch the head suddenly take an interest in things. At some point, I'll post a video.

The next phase is to add more LDRs to resolve movement in more detail, followed by a second servo to control the head's X axis (sothat it can look up and down), but already this project is getting very interesting.

The silent treatment...

He he.... do you get a lot of those "silent" phone calls from cold callers? Want to stop them permanently? Here's how. It takes a couple of months for them to stop, but I've done it, it's a lot of fun, and it worked for me.

You receive a silent call. Don't hang up. Every few seconds, keep inquiring, "Hello?" When someone eventually takes the call, keep on asking "Hello?", "Is there anyone there?" "Speak to me." etc. Never be tempted to make any noise other than you trying to hear a reply.

Basically, you're making it appear that there's no sound at your end - even if there's some background noise at your end. Sometimes, the other party will begin again. At other times they'll start again but louder. But the funniest for me is when they begin shouting to see if it clears the line. Have fun. Try asking: "Is this a dirty phone call? Eventually, the caller gives up and marks you down as a trouble maker. Do it a few times and the calls miraculously stop.

Sticking in the boot...

The Daily Mail: it just can't allow anyone their moment in the sun, can it? There always has to be a nasty, pointless little dig. Take the story about Rachel Riley, about to take over from Carol Vorderman on Countdown.

The main online headline is "Rachel Riley's Countdown to 'the coolest maths job in the world'. It's a feel good story of what can happen if you work hard and do your best, have a great personality and are universally liked. But look at the sidebar on the right of the page and there's different slant on the story:

"Countdown girl says it's the coolest job in the world... not surprising when you're getting £100k and still living with your parents. Rachel Riley is just 22."

So what if she's getting £100k for doing sums on telly. That's her job. So what if she's 22 and living at home? Those are her circumstances. Why is the Daily Mail trying to get its readership to think less of her remarkable achievement? Go to a newsagent on any given day. You'll discover that this is the Daily Mail's job. It's a nasty, selfish, mean-minded job.

And on, and on, and on...

Oh God! The Brand-Ross Dissonance is still rumbling on. This was a pre-recorded show. As a jobbing freelance writer, if I were to send in a piece of work that wasn't fit for printing, my editor would throw it back at me to be done again. Magazine articles can take a considerable amount of time to write, but this was just an hour of improvised radio. Why did no one think to simply tell those working on Brand's show it needed re-recording? After all, it's not a solo effort kept secret until transmission. Radio is a team effort.

UPDATE: According to a report in The Guardian, no one bothered to listen to Brand's show before broadcast. Oh dear...

When the music stops...

I've never seen BBC1's Saturday night sequin-fest "Strictly Come Dancing", so I was perplexed that one of the biggest breaking stories yesterday was the announcement that contestant John Sergeant has quit the contest. Now I know a little more, I'm not surprised he went.

The reports on today's news ran with clips of the judges really laying into him. It's not a serious competition; it's a popular entertainment show. It doesn't matter who wins. but it seems the judges forgot that. Does it matter if he looks like an embarrassed butler as he respectfully twirls his dance partner around? It's funny, and it's meant to be funny.

"If the joke wears thin," says Sergeant, "if in fact people begin to take it very seriously, and if people really are getting so wound up that it's very difficult to carry off the joke, then I think it is time to go."

After hearing a selection of the personal comments the judges threw at him week after week, I'm not surprised he decided to call it a day. Who wants to attempt comedy with that level of heckling going on?