My good lady wife & I are very proud parents, and regularly post photos of our lovely daughters on Facebook for our friends.
We are, however, very conscious of keeping our photos private so that ONLY friends can see them, and we have our Facebook privacy settings set accordingly.
Unfortunately, I'm well aware that quite a number of my friends (and family!) who like to share our pics on their own Facebook streams are not as security-conscious, or simply have such huge numbers of strangers (to us, and often to them!) on their Friends list that privacy settings simply don't matter.
I would like to be able to share my photos without them being able to be copied up to others streams. Facebook, however, feel differently.
Yes, there's no totally secure way to stop this (save photo to desktop then upload again, for example). But a privacy setting along with suppressing right-click menus on the photos themselves would make it hard enough for 95% of people not to bother.
Facebook is renowned for its privacy blunders, and while this may be a relatively small one, it would be great if they would address it.
Or should I stop sharing photos on Facebook? Poor grannies! :(
Friday, 19 August 2011
Friday, 28 January 2011
Twitterage
I love Twitter, its just quite simply awesome.
Even more, I love Tweetdeck. I use it on my work PC, my iMac, my MacBook Pro and on my iPhone. Why do I use this client above and beyond anything else?
Simple, its because I *LIVE* in lists. I find it the only way to keep track of who is tweeting what. I have lists for friends, lists for news, technology, sport, work, location, celebrities. (I even have a list specifically for Joss Whedon-related celebs!). This is where TweetDeck comes into its own. It allows me to display every list I want in a separate column in one display and just scroll across the lists and scan down to see new tweets.
I'm currently facing a bit of a quandary. TweetDeck for the iPhone just isn't doing it for me any more. Sure, from the "viewing lists" point of view, its just as good as its desktop counterpart, but there are two distinct problems. Firstly, there seems to be no way to add people to a list after I start following them. I keep having to go back to the desktop or use Safari to log into Twitter via the web to do this. Secondly, and somewhat more irritatingly, its started crashing quite a lot. This seems to be a known bug, but not one that Tweetdeck seem to have looked to issue a fix for.
So I need one of two things to happen. Either a) Tweetdeck issue a new version with bug fixes and new features (and I have no idea if/when that is on the cards), or b) I have to find another Twitter client for the iPhone which handles lists on one screen as well as Tweetdeck.
So far all of the clients I've looked at have forced me to go through about three screens, just to be presented with a list of my lists, and with no way to see how many new posts I have within them without actually viewing each list individually.
So this is my cry for help - can someone, ANYONE (even TweetDeck) find a solution to my problem?
Internet, you have your orders. Make it so.
Even more, I love Tweetdeck. I use it on my work PC, my iMac, my MacBook Pro and on my iPhone. Why do I use this client above and beyond anything else?
Simple, its because I *LIVE* in lists. I find it the only way to keep track of who is tweeting what. I have lists for friends, lists for news, technology, sport, work, location, celebrities. (I even have a list specifically for Joss Whedon-related celebs!). This is where TweetDeck comes into its own. It allows me to display every list I want in a separate column in one display and just scroll across the lists and scan down to see new tweets.
I'm currently facing a bit of a quandary. TweetDeck for the iPhone just isn't doing it for me any more. Sure, from the "viewing lists" point of view, its just as good as its desktop counterpart, but there are two distinct problems. Firstly, there seems to be no way to add people to a list after I start following them. I keep having to go back to the desktop or use Safari to log into Twitter via the web to do this. Secondly, and somewhat more irritatingly, its started crashing quite a lot. This seems to be a known bug, but not one that Tweetdeck seem to have looked to issue a fix for.
So I need one of two things to happen. Either a) Tweetdeck issue a new version with bug fixes and new features (and I have no idea if/when that is on the cards), or b) I have to find another Twitter client for the iPhone which handles lists on one screen as well as Tweetdeck.
So far all of the clients I've looked at have forced me to go through about three screens, just to be presented with a list of my lists, and with no way to see how many new posts I have within them without actually viewing each list individually.
So this is my cry for help - can someone, ANYONE (even TweetDeck) find a solution to my problem?
Internet, you have your orders. Make it so.
Tuesday, 11 January 2011
Doctor Who - A Christmas Carol
OK, so its been long enough since the Doctor Who christmas episode aired (and indeed long enough since I last blogged!), so what did I think?
Well, at risk of turning this blog into a) a Doctor Who comment blog and b) a Steven Moffat love-in, I really enjoyed it. Was it the huge action adventure of the Tennant-era Christmas episodes? No. But damn me it was Christmassy with a capital CH! It focused primarily on the Doctor (let's face it, that's what we want) but giving Amy her moment to shine and still kept Rory just hanging in there, as was (for the most part) the way things went during season 5. It was nice to see a more feel-good, character-driven piece for Christmas for a change, especially after last year (just how do you top the return of the Master, the return of the Time Lords and Gallifrey, and the death of the Doctor himself? Certainly not with an attempt at action - Moffat gets this!).
Once again, Moffat was clever - he used his intuitive grasp of how time travel actually works to have the Doctor change the future in a number of subtle ways, without ramming them down our throats.
Was it perfect? No - there were definite things I'd have liked to have improved. Wasn't sure about the whole shark thing (although I did like the whole Santa & his sleigh approach!), and I particularly didn't like how the Doctor and the young Kazran weren't shown getting away from the shark when it first attacks them in the cupboard - it kind of felt like Moffat was saying "Hmm, really backed the Doctor into a corner here. How are we going to get him out of this? No idea - he just will, he's the Doctor". (Yes, I know that it verbally explained what he was going to do, but that whole bit was rather "meh"). I also wanted to have more Amy (don't we all?!), especially after her lack of appearance with the Doctor in the last series of Sarah Jane Adventures, and considering Amy's star-turn in the Season 5 finale, but I can see why Moffat couldn't give her too big a part without diluting the rest of the story. I suspect this is partly why RTD kept his Christmas stories with one-off companions after the first year. Still, Karen Gillan AND Katherine Jenkins together? Bliss!
Overall, I was nicely pleased. A nice character piece that fitted perfectly at teatime on Christmas Day.
Think I'd like an action adventure next year though please, Mr Moffat.
Still, looking forward to the new series starting in the Spring, although not sure I can cope with them splitting it up to show half the season in the Autumn! Argh!
Well, at risk of turning this blog into a) a Doctor Who comment blog and b) a Steven Moffat love-in, I really enjoyed it. Was it the huge action adventure of the Tennant-era Christmas episodes? No. But damn me it was Christmassy with a capital CH! It focused primarily on the Doctor (let's face it, that's what we want) but giving Amy her moment to shine and still kept Rory just hanging in there, as was (for the most part) the way things went during season 5. It was nice to see a more feel-good, character-driven piece for Christmas for a change, especially after last year (just how do you top the return of the Master, the return of the Time Lords and Gallifrey, and the death of the Doctor himself? Certainly not with an attempt at action - Moffat gets this!).
Once again, Moffat was clever - he used his intuitive grasp of how time travel actually works to have the Doctor change the future in a number of subtle ways, without ramming them down our throats.
Was it perfect? No - there were definite things I'd have liked to have improved. Wasn't sure about the whole shark thing (although I did like the whole Santa & his sleigh approach!), and I particularly didn't like how the Doctor and the young Kazran weren't shown getting away from the shark when it first attacks them in the cupboard - it kind of felt like Moffat was saying "Hmm, really backed the Doctor into a corner here. How are we going to get him out of this? No idea - he just will, he's the Doctor". (Yes, I know that it verbally explained what he was going to do, but that whole bit was rather "meh"). I also wanted to have more Amy (don't we all?!), especially after her lack of appearance with the Doctor in the last series of Sarah Jane Adventures, and considering Amy's star-turn in the Season 5 finale, but I can see why Moffat couldn't give her too big a part without diluting the rest of the story. I suspect this is partly why RTD kept his Christmas stories with one-off companions after the first year. Still, Karen Gillan AND Katherine Jenkins together? Bliss!
Overall, I was nicely pleased. A nice character piece that fitted perfectly at teatime on Christmas Day.
Think I'd like an action adventure next year though please, Mr Moffat.
Still, looking forward to the new series starting in the Spring, although not sure I can cope with them splitting it up to show half the season in the Autumn! Argh!
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Doctor Who
OK, now a few days have passed since the season finale of Matt Smith's first run as the Doctor, I have had enough time to mull it over, and here are my thoughts.
Firstly, very clever. Moffat's natural grasp of the whole concept of a time-traveller merged the usual Doctor Who approach (don't meet yourself), some paradox-threatening moments, and a good chunk of Bill & Ted for good measure ("leave the sonic in her top pocket") and you get a well thought out, if sometimes slightly confusing adventure.
And that, gentle reader, is the crux of my complaint as well. It *WAS* confusing at times, and if I (a hardened 30-something sci-fi nerd with a computing degree) found it so, how would some of the younger audience find it? (I'm not looking forward to explaining it to some of the family, I can tell you!) That's not to say that ALL kids couldn't enjoy it, or even follow it, but I suspect there are quite a lot of kids and adults alike sitting thinking "I really enjoyed that. Now, what just happened?" Still, I'd much prefer the show to challenge people like this than to dumb it down, so I suppose I shouldn't complain too loudly :)
Other thoughts...
I think I quite like that Moffat has introduced cliffhanger elements to the series, but only because he has done so quite cleverly. I hate series that end on a cliffhanger, especially in US shows where the chances of a second series seem to be practically nil these days. Where Moffat was smart was to tie up the whole series, mostly, so that the viewer felt satisfied by the end, and then make passing reference to the loose ends, before having the Doctor and companions summoned off on a separate adventure (hoping this will mean Orient Express at Christmas!). As long as the BBC give him plenty of notice should the series eventually get axes under his reign, Moffat can continue to hang me from cliffs in this way! (provided they are different cliffs; let's not have the Silence run for more than another series!)
I was a little disappointed that my theory about Rory being modelled on Kenny from South Park didn't pan out - http://twitpic.com/1z7ypd
One other note - the show explained how Amy remembered the Doctor in quite a logical way. But what about River? Why was she at the wedding? Did she remember him, and if so, how? If not, why was she there at all? Hopefully this will be explained in the near future, but that was one loose end I wished they had resolved - not the whole mystery surrounding River, just that bit which applied to that story. My guess is they couldn't without revealing more about her, but I really hope it's going to be worth the wait.
What am I saying? It's Moffat, of course it will be!
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
Firstly, very clever. Moffat's natural grasp of the whole concept of a time-traveller merged the usual Doctor Who approach (don't meet yourself), some paradox-threatening moments, and a good chunk of Bill & Ted for good measure ("leave the sonic in her top pocket") and you get a well thought out, if sometimes slightly confusing adventure.
And that, gentle reader, is the crux of my complaint as well. It *WAS* confusing at times, and if I (a hardened 30-something sci-fi nerd with a computing degree) found it so, how would some of the younger audience find it? (I'm not looking forward to explaining it to some of the family, I can tell you!) That's not to say that ALL kids couldn't enjoy it, or even follow it, but I suspect there are quite a lot of kids and adults alike sitting thinking "I really enjoyed that. Now, what just happened?" Still, I'd much prefer the show to challenge people like this than to dumb it down, so I suppose I shouldn't complain too loudly :)
Other thoughts...
I think I quite like that Moffat has introduced cliffhanger elements to the series, but only because he has done so quite cleverly. I hate series that end on a cliffhanger, especially in US shows where the chances of a second series seem to be practically nil these days. Where Moffat was smart was to tie up the whole series, mostly, so that the viewer felt satisfied by the end, and then make passing reference to the loose ends, before having the Doctor and companions summoned off on a separate adventure (hoping this will mean Orient Express at Christmas!). As long as the BBC give him plenty of notice should the series eventually get axes under his reign, Moffat can continue to hang me from cliffs in this way! (provided they are different cliffs; let's not have the Silence run for more than another series!)
I was a little disappointed that my theory about Rory being modelled on Kenny from South Park didn't pan out - http://twitpic.com/1z7ypd
One other note - the show explained how Amy remembered the Doctor in quite a logical way. But what about River? Why was she at the wedding? Did she remember him, and if so, how? If not, why was she there at all? Hopefully this will be explained in the near future, but that was one loose end I wished they had resolved - not the whole mystery surrounding River, just that bit which applied to that story. My guess is they couldn't without revealing more about her, but I really hope it's going to be worth the wait.
What am I saying? It's Moffat, of course it will be!
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
Saturday, 8 May 2010
Hung Parliament
OK, so everyone else has had their say, now it's my turn.
Let me start by explaining my historical political leanings. I have been a lifetime Liberal Democrat, and don't see that changing in the near future. I have always been opposed to the Nationalist views, believing Scotland would struggle to support itself (at least in the short term). I have always been staunchly opposed to the Conservatives (probably due to growing up under Thatcher's government). And I must admit to being something of a Labour sympathiser.
So bearing all that in mind, what happens if Clegg & Cameron reach a compromise?
What happens is that Scotland gets a government it didn't elect. Cameron received 16% of the Scottish vote, and claimed just one seat. How can a Government who came 4th in a Scottish election truly represent the people of this country?
We will end up being run by a government elected predominantly by middle & higher class English citizens in the Midlands and further south.
I don't agree with an awful lot that Alex Salmond and the SNP say. But I do believe one thing - they care about Scotland. They believe they are doing what is right for our country. Nothing the Tories say can convince me of that, because they almost don't exist north of the border.
So maybe, just maybe, now is the time for Mr Salmond to try and push through a referendum on Scottish indepenence. At the moment, I might actually agree with him.
As for Mr Clegg, I sympathise. He needs to be in power in some way, for the people that voted for his party. Nothing less would be acceptable. The larger number of supporters are south of the border, so assuming he can get certain agreements from them, the Tories are the sensible choice to get into bed with. If he does, though, he is turning his back on the Scottish voice. And in that case, my vote is quite possibly going to swing to the SNP.
Everyone is calling him Kingmaker, but I'm not sure that I would want Mr Clegg's job right now.
Let me start by explaining my historical political leanings. I have been a lifetime Liberal Democrat, and don't see that changing in the near future. I have always been opposed to the Nationalist views, believing Scotland would struggle to support itself (at least in the short term). I have always been staunchly opposed to the Conservatives (probably due to growing up under Thatcher's government). And I must admit to being something of a Labour sympathiser.
So bearing all that in mind, what happens if Clegg & Cameron reach a compromise?
What happens is that Scotland gets a government it didn't elect. Cameron received 16% of the Scottish vote, and claimed just one seat. How can a Government who came 4th in a Scottish election truly represent the people of this country?
We will end up being run by a government elected predominantly by middle & higher class English citizens in the Midlands and further south.
I don't agree with an awful lot that Alex Salmond and the SNP say. But I do believe one thing - they care about Scotland. They believe they are doing what is right for our country. Nothing the Tories say can convince me of that, because they almost don't exist north of the border.
So maybe, just maybe, now is the time for Mr Salmond to try and push through a referendum on Scottish indepenence. At the moment, I might actually agree with him.
As for Mr Clegg, I sympathise. He needs to be in power in some way, for the people that voted for his party. Nothing less would be acceptable. The larger number of supporters are south of the border, so assuming he can get certain agreements from them, the Tories are the sensible choice to get into bed with. If he does, though, he is turning his back on the Scottish voice. And in that case, my vote is quite possibly going to swing to the SNP.
Everyone is calling him Kingmaker, but I'm not sure that I would want Mr Clegg's job right now.
Monday, 15 February 2010
Renovation
We are finally getting our dining room and bathroom renovated. This involves removing and rebuilding a wall between the two rooms, replumbing so the new bathroom actually has water and drainage, and then get a toilet suite fitted.
I have to admit being rather in awe of people who can do stuff like that. With the DIY skills that I have, flat-pack furniture can be a struggle! I wish I could do stuff like building a wall, but it's just beyond me.
After day one, the new wall is up, another wall is down, and the dining room light switch has been moved.
Day two should consist of the remaining wall getting taken down, and if I'm lucky a new doorway cut out upstairs where we are going to put in a new toilet.
Updates as it progresses.
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
I have to admit being rather in awe of people who can do stuff like that. With the DIY skills that I have, flat-pack furniture can be a struggle! I wish I could do stuff like building a wall, but it's just beyond me.
After day one, the new wall is up, another wall is down, and the dining room light switch has been moved.
Day two should consist of the remaining wall getting taken down, and if I'm lucky a new doorway cut out upstairs where we are going to put in a new toilet.
Updates as it progresses.
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
Tuesday, 2 February 2010
TV Challenge
In line with my previous posts, I've decided to set myself a challenge. As of now, I am going to watch only shows made in Britain.
I'm making 3 exceptions - Flash Forward, cos I'm half way through and really enjoying it; Fringe, because I got the season 1 box set for free; and CSI:Miami, cos who in their right mind could abandon Horatio Caine?!
But with those exceptions, I plan to boycott all US shows.
Why? Well basically because I'm overloading. There are just too many shows I'm trying or want to watch.
24, Desperate Housewives, House, Caprica, CSI, Fringe, CSI:Miami, Flash Forward, True Blood, Family Guy, The Cleveland Show, Glee, the list goes on and on, and there just aren't enough hours in the day. Or week. Or year.
I'll keep you updated on how I get on.
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
I'm making 3 exceptions - Flash Forward, cos I'm half way through and really enjoying it; Fringe, because I got the season 1 box set for free; and CSI:Miami, cos who in their right mind could abandon Horatio Caine?!
But with those exceptions, I plan to boycott all US shows.
Why? Well basically because I'm overloading. There are just too many shows I'm trying or want to watch.
24, Desperate Housewives, House, Caprica, CSI, Fringe, CSI:Miami, Flash Forward, True Blood, Family Guy, The Cleveland Show, Glee, the list goes on and on, and there just aren't enough hours in the day. Or week. Or year.
I'll keep you updated on how I get on.
——————————
Posted from BlogPress for iPhone
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
