As we see a change of Poet Laureate, the panel on last week’s Any Questions - including the outgoing Laureate, Andrew Motion - were asked to explain the point of the role.

Read the rest »

While we’re on the subject of websites for creatives, I’ve just launched a whole network of sites for design professionals, the World Interior Design Network. I’m quite excited by the fact that it’ll be my first go at blogging professionally (although the blog isn’t available yet - grr IT development time).

The range of sites is quite terrifying; indeed, it’s one of the biggest projects I’ve ever managed. But we’ve already got some really good pieces covering the whole interior design universe, from hotel design through lighting design to retail design, healthcare and education design and public sector design. Not to mention all aspects of home design, including kitchens, bedrooms and bathrooms. Oh, and office design, which is arguably ironic given the thorougly un-designed budget nature of our offices.

So if you’re in the industry, have a look; if you’re not, then have a look anyway if you like looking at random halfway-interesting websites. 

I just voted for West Midlands creative networking blog Created In Birmingham as the Best UK Blog in the 2008 Weblog Awards, and I’d urge you to do the same.

No, I don’t particularly care about the Brummie creative arts world (much as I love Napalm Death and Jasper Carrott…), but they’re the entrant with the single best chance of beating evil bigot and certifiable lunatic Melanie Phillips to the top spot. View it as a kind-of Rickrolling For Good…

Oh, and congrats to Nosemonkey, formerly of this parish, for his nomination. Sometimes you have to let the good suffer to avoid the evil, or similar items of cod philosophy.

Q: Is my maths right that to add step-free access to this station would cost 0.0075 per cent of the overall Crossrail budget?

A: I am sure your maths is correct, my Lord, but the point I am making is that the whole project is made up of things which cost 0.0075 per cent of the cost.

A fantastic line from Crossrail MD Keith Berryman, being cross-examined by the House of Lords

This is one of the best analyses of Labour’s current situation that I’ve seen, from comedian Richard Herring:

What does Gordon Brown really have to lose at this point? If he said “David Milliband is a scary eyed Brutus trying to stab me in the back and Ruth Kelly is a stupid Christian twat. I’m in charge and they can all fuck off!” wouldn’t we suddenly have a new found respect for him? Wouldn’t we think, “Hey let’s give old King Ralph a chance”?” He’s going down in flames anyway, why not go down as the politician who suddenly cut out all the bullshit and told it like it was. He might just survive.

Nice quote:

Who’d have thought that we’d see Newcastle United sponsored by the Bank of England and Manchester United by the Federal Reserve?

(from here)

Q: When is a low-carbon fuel not a low-carbon fuel?

A: When it’s hydrogen.

If you think that’s not funny, you’re right. It’s not. Hydrogen is being touted as a climate saviour, yet would actually lead to greater carbon emissions.

Read the rest »

Software, whether that’s a CD, a text file of a book, or a computer program, is a good with a marginal cost of zero. Hence basic economics tells us an individual act of software copying makes society in aggregate better off and harms nobody (because the total producer surplus plus consumer surplus is maximised when price = marginal cost). In nearly all societies historically, copying software has been perfectly legal; sharing information is precisely what allowed us to develop civilisation in the first place.

The reason why software ‘pircay’ is forbidden in today’s society is that we’ve decided that granting a monopoly (which would normally be prohibited by law…) to people who invent particular kinds of stuff, is the best way to incentivise more people to invent more stuff. Originally, this was done through patents; copyrights were introduced later for similar reasons (in both cases, there were also tax and censorship benefits for the government, but that’s another story).

But in short, by permitting these controls, society has decided to set aside basic moral principles for a utilitarian goal. That’s great, and copyright is probably the least worse way of incentivising people to create things. It would be better if it worked more like patenting - 20 years’ protection and you have to publicly disclose the source code - but it works better than alternatives like funding all research out of taxation.

However, this does mean that anyone who thinks software copying is something immoral, rather than something which is a wholly positive act in and of itself, but which regrettably has to be illegal for the greater good, has no moral understanding at all. And anyone who thinks it’s theft not only has no moral understanding, but also no understanding of what words mean…