Freedom

So I am far from a political animal. I had no interest in politics while I was at school. I had no formal education in any of it. While at University I leant a bit towards anarchism but I have never really felt that interested. Politicians are all lying arseholes and they are all as bad as each other. What is the point of voting when they are all the same?

It is only fairly recently that I have changed my position on this. And it is almost entirely due to the increasing levels of authoritarianism of the Labour party.

Due to my lack of political background the rest of this post is probably going to be trite underthought bullshit. But when has that stopped me?

I believe in freedom. I believe that people want freedom, that they need freedom to thrive. I believe that true freedom has to include the freedom to fail.

I'm sure that Labour felt that they were doing the right thing for people. When they put up the CCTV their only thought is how it can protect people. The idea that people don't want their every move on film doesn't even occur to them.

When they decided to increase powers to hold people without charge, and make the ability to stop and search easier the only thing in their minds was "But it's terrorism!". Terrorists are by definition trying to make us fear. If they can get the government to overreact like this then the police end up doing their job for them. When people decide to leave their camera at home because they are afraid of the police confiscating it the the terrorists win. The other subject that comes up that Labour cannot see beyond is child abuse. Sure it is a terrible thing. As a father of a young child I can understand the urge to protect childred. But are CRB checks really the way forward? Mandatory checks with a cost associated and a nightmare bureaucratic process. That's certainly going to convince me to volunteer. Way to promote parent involvement.

I have listened to some of the debates over the past week or two about the revised guidance on section 44 stop and search powers, and the inquiry into counter terrorism, and I have been applauding the government. When I heard that Theresa May was going to be home secretary I never imagined for one second that I would listen to her deliver a speech to the house on civil liberties and find myself adding to the chorus of "Hear, hear!".

The state has gone too far. The state has become too big. Not only can we not afford it, but we also don't need it. I listen to the arguments. Labour MPs and activists say "The Tories are idealogically opposed to a big state". Well guess what, so am I. I am not a natural Conservative voter, and I didn't vote for the Conservatives this time around; however I most certainly agree with the coalition stance on cutting the bureaucracy and cutting the unneeded state interference in our lives.

Yes, the government definitely has a responsibility to protect us, the citizens. That duty is not only to protect us physically against external threats, it is also to protect us from internal threats to our liberties.

I remember September 11th. I was working in docklands that day. I remember watching the news unfold while sitting in the shadow of Canary Wharf. I remember the horror of what we were seeing as well as the fear that there could be a plane heading our way as well. But do you know what? Even having lived through that, and through using public transport immediately after the 7/7 attack, and walking through the soho area during the nailbomb attacks, and having worked in the original South Quay building that was blown up by the Irish republicans, and any other number of awful man made tragedies that have touched my life in London. Even after all of that I do not want these emergency counter terrorism powers.

I do not believe that an illusion of safety is worth sacrificing our freedoms.

At the same time I am applauding the efforts of the coalition to restore our freedoms I am slapping my forehead in frustration at the ridiculous proposal of Philip Hollobone. A private members bill to ban the wearing of a face covering garment in a public place. And not only is he putting this motion forward but he is claiming that campaigners for womens liberties such as Emmeline Pankhurst would be aghast at British women having the freedom to wear a veil if they so choose. His arguments are so specious that I am left flabbergasted. What on earth is he smoking?

There are so many things wrong with this. Firstly, what is covered? The concept of "face covering garments" could include any number of perfectly legitimate items. What about a balaclava / ski mask (or even a pulled up scarf) on a day where the temperature has dropped below freezing? What about full face motorcycle helmets? What about costume masks worn on Halloween? In the interview I watched this morning he drew a parallel to the requirement of motorcyclists to remove their helmets when they enter a bank. Firstly, this existing requirement is a civil matter, not a criminal one. Secondly the bill is worded as "in a public place". A park is a public place. A footpath is a public place. A road is a public place.

The next thing I have against the bill is the veiled (sorry) prejudice. Lets be clear. This is supposed to target Muslim women that wear full face veils. But wording the bill to this specific target would be seen as racist or as religious prejudice. So instead it is worded in the most general terms to avoid offense, and in the process becomes open for interpretations that were never intended. If the bill has a specific purpose it should be worded to express that. Call a spade a fucking spade. And let the rest of us ridicule you for the bigot you are.

While writing this I have just seen that the French parliament has passed a similar bill with only one vote against. I am happy to live in England where this private members bill is seen as little more than a joke, rather than in France where this is now law.

Give me my freedom. The freedom to express myself. The freedom to live. The freedom to fail. The freedom to be an arsehole.  The freedom to be a good samaritan.  The freedom to practise religion.  The freedom to mock religion.

The freedom to thrive.

Digital Economy Debacle

This post started life as a stream of consciousness journal on 750words.com.  Apologies if it is even more rambling than usual...

So last night was the second reading of the Digital economy bill.  What a farce.  There must have only been a dozen MPs present for the full reading.  Can they truly pretend that MPs care about this bill with such an appalling attendance?

The UK has a knowledge based economy.  Technology, communications and creativity are all essential to our future as a country.  Yet our leaders are as tech-savvy as a bowl of figs.  There were a handful of responses last night that understood the issues.  Tom Watson, Fiona MacTaggart.  Even John Redwood FFS.  "The vulcan spoke logically" as I saw someone say on twitter.  The debate went on and on.  Some of the commenters seemed to only be there to score political points.  Adam Afriye spent an age recounting those that had gone before, generally taking the sting out of the arguments of those against while also disagreeing with the arguments for the bill and concluding with a scathing remark about it being a washed up bill made by a washed up government.  He seemed to have an awfully long time at the microphone yet added very little substance to the debate.

But at least he was there.  My local MP was not, and I would guess that most other people felt similarly unrepresented in this.  The general election has been announced so many MPs are already back on the campaign trail, leaving London behind, perhaps forever.  So one of the most important pieces of legislation being considered is being left to be settled by a handful of stragglers left in the house.

One of the arguments trotted out is that the bill got plenty of consideration in the Lords.  The point was made in the debate (but seemingly not acknowledged by those who heard it) that the fact that this took longer than expected to pass through the house of Lords and arrive at the Commons, was that it was contentious.  Was that it required proper scrutiny. Scrutiny that is not possible in the time left to this parliament.

Usually a bill of this magnitude will start in the commons before being passed to the Lords for scrutiny.  This time the bill started in the Lords (and if many people's suspicions are right actually started over lunch between Lord Mandelson and major record label execs).  The bill went through a couple of readings, a set of major revisions, and was being modified right up until it was passed to the commons.  There were even clauses being updated as it was passed over, so any argument that it had received sufficient scrutiny in the Lords to allow consensus to form is specious.  If time had been available I have no doubt that this would have taken even longer than it did to pass through the Lords.  And we would all have been better for it.

I do not really have a problem with this whole bill like some people seem to.  I have read this bill through.  In several of its incarnations.  I have been following its progress through both houses.  I agree with a lot of the sentiments in it.

Broadcast isn't my area so I am not really fit to comment on those aspects of the bill.  As a long term user of DAB radio I would probably not be quite as pro-changeover as the bill seems to be, even though I am close to having a vested interest in freeing analogue spectrum up for digital communications.  Analogue radio has an important place to fill.  Even in urban areas digital radio reception can be poor.  And the station quality is extremely diluted.  Pretty much the only stations worth listening to are the BBC stations.  But then that is my opinion on analogue radio too, so that's not really news.

The orphaned works clauses are important but have not yet reached the correct balance of creator rights versus access.  This needs to be sorted out; however it needs further debate to be sorted.  This issue alone probably requires more debate than the hour that has been allocated today for the third reading.
The ability for the government to step in and take control of Nominet via Offcom is just plain weird.  One of the members speaking last night (I forget which one and cannot find it in Hansard at the moment) was saying that comparisons to the Internet censorship used in China were patently ridiculous[edit: It was David Cairns MP for Inverclyde and the phrase he used was "Clearly bonkers"].  Given that one of the primary powers the Chinese use to enact this censorship is control of the country's DNS infrastructure I don't think the claim is a far fetched as he believes it to be.

And of course the copyright infringement.  This was the bulk of the debate, and rightly so.  I don't think any progress was made in the second reading debate.  Neither side gave any ground.  The same arguments were brought up again.

Why am I against the proposed actions?

Under the bill the accusation is the proof of guilt.  The accused has the burden of proving their innocence.  This is just plain scary and has wide ranging implications as a precedence if allowed through on the nod. The fact that current BIS recommendations included charging people to mount their appeals is also relevant here. 
Many arguments are made that it will be easy for ISPs to detect infringers.  That when infringers get more clever then deployment of DPI will solve everything.

Newsflash.  Vendors lie.  Not understanding that concept is a large part of why public IT projects constantly get delivered late and over budget.  The government and media industries faith in DPI is all based on vendor claims rather than the real world.

Mandating the use of DPI in service providers will slow down the growth of the net and will cause prices to rise.  There will be no incentive for vendors to lower prices - after all its not like the choice to not use their hardware is even available to people.  Does the government also plan on putting regulation in place on the DPI industry to stop price fixing?

I seriously oppose the way that this legislature will disincentivise people from providing free wifi access.  The risk will outweigh the benefits so people will stop.  Access will be reduced and innovation will be punished.
Note that I make no mention of the oft sported "downloaders spend more on digital content".  I fully agree that creators deserve to be paid for their works.  I am not one of the looney fringe that thinks that all copyright is theft.  I do not believe that this bill will do anything to stop serious infringes.

Disconnection is not a proportionate action.  The average infringer is not living alone in their dank basement, the sole user of their broadband connection.

Children may infringe on the end of the line that their parents rely on for their business.  Parents may infringe on the line their children use to research for their coursework.  An average user with no specialised security knowledge may unknowingly leave their access open to an infringer living in the neighbourhood downloading content on their connection.  In all of these cases the infringer is not the sole recipient of punishment.  How is this proportionate?

Another point often raised is: disconnection is a last resort.  If disconnected the user can just switch provider.  And it may be years before they are disconnected anyway.  So you are arguing that this is good law because it has no teeth? Really?

One last point before wrap up.  If rights owners block infringers they hope to increase their (already record) revenues.  If ISPs have to pay costs to disconnect their own revenue generating customers, where will these costs be reclaimed from? Other paying subscribers.  Innocent net users will be paying for the old media's old models.

Here's a thought about how it might happen: ISPs adopt the concept of no claims discount from the insurance industry.  All subscriptions rates are doubled and incremental discounts are available each year that passes without accusation.  After 5 years the discount rises to the cap of 50% (i.e. the original price). In order to allow transfers an independant body will maintain a subscriber database to track discount entitlements and accusations of infringement.  Maybe this could be yet another power for the beloved Offcom, mentioned so frequently already in the bill...

Just in case my opinion wasn't obvious from my tone in the previous paragraph: I do not think this would be a good way to do this.

I think that the Digital Economy Bill done right would be an important aid to our place as a leading knowledge economy.  I do not believe that bill currently before the house is done right.  I do not believe that this bill can be made right in the time available in this parliament.

In addition to the previous letter to my MP, posted here, I also agree wholeheartedly with the sentiments in this open letter.

An Interesting Evening

Well that was fun.

I got back to St Albans station this evening to a bit of a conundrum. When I went to the bike racks to collect my bike I find that there are two D locks connecting it to the frame, rather than the one I attached in the morning.

After spending a couple of minutes in "WTF??!?!?" mode I went back to speak to the station staff.

I explained myself to the guy at the ticket office and he recommended that I speak to the supervisor over at the information desk on platform one.

After explaining the situation he asks "Do you have any proof of ownership?". This was a bit of a problem. I don't tend to carry that sort of thing with me (and I imagine no-one else does either). I can open one of the locks attached to my bike, but not the other, so that doesn't help much.

Fortunately I have my passport in my bag and the guy is willing to take a copy of that along with a written statement of consent as sufficient excuse to get the bolt cutters out. He finds cover for the information office and we head over to the bike racks.

Of course the bolt cutters would have been up to the task if it had been a chain or cable lock. Not for a D lock though. After about 10-15 of fruitless effort we managed to get through the rubber sheath on the lock.

My main concern was that someone had put the lock on hoping that I would go home and leave the bike locked there; leaving them free to come back in the early hours of the morning and nick it. This thought didn't leave me with a good feeling about giving up on cutting the lock, even though it seemed pointless.

As we were struggling away a guy comes up to collect his bike which is locked up near mine (not on the same rail). He realises that his bike isn't locked up.

Somehow he managed to put his bike in the rack and then put his lock onto a completely different bike. Mine.

There were embarrassed apologies and statements of relief then we all went our separate ways.

I have come away with increased respect for the staff at St Albans station. Everyone there was very polite and helpful. Much kudos.

Now back to your normal bitter and cynical programming...

Merry Christmas Commuters

Christmas eve is not a public holiday here in the UK. Sure there are plenty of people with the day off but many of us still need to get to work on time.

For the past few days the 7:44 has been advertised as having 8 cars then arriving with 4. The 7:18 has been cancelled the past 2 days. 7:32 was cancelled this morning and from memory its not the first time this week. The 7:44 was advertised as being on time up until 7:45. Then suddenly its running 15 minutes late? Wtf?

So I'm on the 7:50. Now to see what time I arrive at West Hampstead so I can get off the wind up version and onto a real train to complete the journey...

Platform Ping-pong

Damn. My rant has been deflated just as I was starting it...

Arrived in Wet Hamster just after 18:00. Board reporting that the 17:36 was due at 18:29.  I learnt my lesson yesterday and didn't assume that I would have time to grab some food.

Today's picture shows the crowd on the footbridge.  Many people have learnt how much they can trust the boards and wait until they can see the train before commiting to a platform.

So at 18:19 a train pulls into platform 4. I can see it is full, as are the platform and the stairs.  I don't even make it past the top step before the train pulls away at 18:22.

Just afterwards (within a minute) a train arrives on platform 2.  Of course platform 2 has just been drained by people trying unsuccesfully trying to get the train that just left.  I am towards the front of the crowd when I get down to the platform and even manage to get on the train quick enough to snag the last seat in the carriage.

As I write we are stood still after having just left the platform with no clues when we might move, but I'm in the warm and have a seat which is pretty good going.

While I'm waiting I'll backtrack a little.  I have been checking the live departure boards online which I hoped would give me an edge.  The boards at the station had been disabled and were just displaying an "Dear flock, our trains are screwed.  Wait patiently like the sheep you are." message.  The online info wasn't looking quite so bleak.

Tonight's excuse?  A broken down train at Farringdon stopping all through London services.  Yes, that's right, a single faulty train has managed to bring one of the busiest commuter lines to a standstill. Again.

Has it been snowing recently? Not for nearly 24 hours.  This must be another case of a train with a leak. This is England.  This is outside.  Wet should be standard procedure.

I did a bit of research earlier.  The injury claim vultures reckon that neglecting to grit in stations, carparks, etc is a carcass worth circling around. There are long standing regulations that can be leveraged for litigation. The grit embargo on the platforms has the potential to blow up in their faces but no matter how much I want them to suffer, there are two problems: people would need to slip badly enough to get hurt and any penalties they pay would end up coming out of the cattle's pockets.

Back in st albans at 19:00. Amazing how such a screwed up system can get me back home so quickly.

Is there a right kind of Snow?

 

Aaah, the joys of rail travel in the Snow.

What excuses did they roll out this time? Broken down trains. Signalling faults. Translation: "Our kit is worn out and isn't waterproof any more".

Overall this morning wasn't actually too bad. Sure the train was running late, and was tremendously overcrowded. At Elstree there was a guy who had taken all he could of waiting in the snow and physically forced his way onto the train. Uncomfortable for those of us already aboard, but I can understand his frustration. It took 20 minutes to go two stops; however when I finally got into Canary Wharf I found that I was actually back on schedule and wasn't late into the office at all. Bit of a result really.

Then comes the trip back.

Around 4:30, when the snow was coming down hard again, the boss gave us an out, so I was a little early leaving. I had a phone call to make on the way to the station so didn't wear my gloves. By the time I got across the footbridge and indoors my fingers had pretty much seized up. When I got down onto the Jubilee Line platform the crowd was immediately apparent. I considered changing at London Bridge and getting the Northern line up to St Pancake but decided against that. It turns out that was a good plan, as I saw a little while later on Twitter that London Bridge station was closed for safety reasons due to overcrowding.

So I got the Jubilee straight through to Wet Hamster. Arrived at the Thameslink station to see a board full of delays (surprise!). There was about half an hour to the next departure northbound according to the board so I grabbed myself a kebab while I was waiting.

The board had said the train was due at 18:28. I got there 10 minutes before that to see a train on the platform and ready to leave. Annoyance one: The primary source of information for the cattle/product (previously known as people) on the station is the information board. It would be nice if the delay predictions were based on reality rather than guesswork. FCC arrival times are similar to Windows file transfer estimates and seem to have no connection to actual events. Sure I will be pissed about the delays either way, but if the time estimates on the boards are accurate at least it gives me a chance to do something other than wait around on a freezing cold platform.

The next one on the board was due at 18:58. I settled in for a long cold wait on platform two. Annoyance two: I am not sure whether this is true or not. When I tweeted a few days back about a lack of gritting on the platform causing me to slip on ice, someone I know informed me that current health and safety guidelines are to not use grit on walkways. The reasoning being that if you grit then people expect the surface to be ice free (and presumably are able to sue you if you have missed a bit). Whether this is the reason or not, I have not seen any gritting of rail platforms taking place this year. I can see how some H&S womble may come up with this sort of reasoning; however when I have to regularly walk along long lengths of rail platform covered in compacted snow and ice I find it hard to believe that this is in any way better for the end user. Personally I always wear military issue combat boots which have decent traction on most surfaces. Sheet ice causes problems but I rarely slip on the compacted snow. Watching other people in smooth leather soled slip ons shows that other people don't have it so easy.

About 15 minutes later I notice a train pull in behind me at platform 4. No announcement was made until the train was already at the platform. Take this last minute alteration alongside the state of the platforms and you have a scene reminiscent of a Japanese game show. 200 frozen commuters must walk 200 yards across ice to reach their train and then see how well they can convince people already on the train to sacrifice their personal space. No thanks. Annoyance three: last minute platform alterations. Are we supposed to believe that the control centre don't know which platform the trains are going to end up at? That they just can't be arsed to inform the station staff so that they can make an announcement? Or are the station staff up in the box waiting until the last minute to announce the change so they can get a laugh watching the chaos?

So after letting that train go, I decide that waiting on the platform is a bad idea. I make my way back to the footbridge and settle in midway between platforms 3 and 4. The boards show the next train arriving on 4, but I have lost all confidence. More and more people gather on 4 and I start to think I should get down there so I can be sure of squeezing on. I hold out on the bridge with a number of other people (there are enough of us waiting up there that there is little chance of people getting past and onto the platform). A few minutes after the train was due on platform 4 it finally shows up. On platform 2. Again the announcement is only made as the train is pulling into the station and the boards are updated at about the same time. My gamble paid off this time and I am one of the first couple of dozen down onto the platform. The train is already running full but there is enough room for me to squeeze on. I thought I was going to be one of the last but then some of the people from platform 4 arrive and decide enough is enough. There is a sudden push and I find myself propped at a 30 degree angle as my body is forced forward while my legs are stopped by some luggage in the aisle. I manage to retain my balance and after a couple of minutes people manage to jiggle about and while I am still pushed up against a metal pole, I am at least upright. One of the spearhead of shovers jokes "it will get better after Elstree"... which is about 6 stops away at this point.

After one of the most crowded train journeys I have had on an overground service (I have had worse on the underground though) I finally get off at St Albans only about half an hour later than usual. Which given that I left nearly 30 minutes early certainly isn't a good trip; however it isn't that bad either.

I have voluntarily let trains go past, so am not entitled to any compensation. I have heard that FCC may give 5 free trip scratch cards as a compensation measure when season ticket holders renew. There are not many details of this scheme available yet. Given that I am off to Australia on Jan 1st, and will not be renewing my season ticket until around the 20th, I doubt there will be much chance of seeing one of these cards.

Bringing Contextual Advertising into Real Life

OK.  So I'm standing at Wet Hamster zoned out waiting for my delayed (surprise) train when I realise what I'm looking at.  An ad for Google Chrome.

I love Chrome.  In development circles chrome refers to all the fancy bells and whistles in the user interface.  All the bells and whistles that Google have got rid of in their bare bones lightning fast browser.

Given that Chrome's promise (which it delivers) is speed, it seems ironic that this ad has been put on the platform of the worst performing train franchise in th UK.  The first thought is ironic coincidence, then the next thought is "what if this is deliberate?".  We are used  to stupid billboards. Any relevance is purely coincidental.  But this is Google. These guys know a scary amount about who we are, what we like and where we live.  These are the guys that put personally targeted advertising in front of us every day.  These are the one company in the world that I feel actually have the smarts to be behind a conspiracy theory.

If they have deliberately put these ads up on First Capital Connect platforms to target pissed off commuters experiencing real world delays every day, providing us with a promise of reduced delays in the virtual world, then I salute them.

Hats off to you Google.  You are the smartest guys around.  My earlier tweet "Google: pumping shit into the intertubes and seeing what sticks" is intended as a compliment.  Google foster innovation and produce good ideas at the speed of light.  Many of them fail, but some do not and if that leads to gmail, maps, reader, wave, etc then I say Bravo.

Bringing the rants back home

So I've been spamming my twitter account recently with updates on the farce of commuting with First Capital Connect.

My frustration levels have been rapidly raising the length of my tweets and twitter just isn't cutting it as a stress outlet anymore. This site has been the home of my rants for years so I'm bringing the madness back home.

First a recap for those of you lucky enough to not be prisoners of the First Capital Connect franchise area...

A couple of months back news started coming out that FCC drivers were taking action at the recommendation of their Union. The stated reason was a poor pay deal (freezes for this year with minimum 2% next year if memory serves). At the time I thought this seemed reasonable given the current financial circumstances and was pissed with the drivers.

It wasn't long until it was made clear that the action they were taking was to 'work to rule'. FCC were relying on the goodwill of their drivers to operate their business, and when those drivers decided to work only their core hours, to take the rest days they were entitled to and to refuse the offer of overtime. Because of this FCC had to introduce an emergency timetable cutting the scheduled trains by 50%.

This implies that half of their services were possible only because the drivers were working too long. I don't know about you, but I like to think that my driver is getting the rest he is entitled to. Train drivers have to concentrate for long periods of time and small mistakes can have big consequences. Stress + tiredness = fail.

Sure they say they have new drivers coming and sure training takes a long time. I still think that letting things deteriorate so far equates to monumental incompetence on the part of the managers.

Some people have suggested that the new timetable was organised such that the minimum number of trains are run without delaying anyone by more than 20 mins (the magic number before compensation can be claimed is 30 minutes). Personally I am doubtful that they would be capable of that level of organisation.

Time for an aside on compensation.

In the old days when Thameslink ran the franchise if they missed their targets everyone renewing a season ticket would get a blanket discount. Simples. First Capital Connect have a system called 'delay repay'. Under this scheme, if you are delayed by 30 minutes or more you submit a form and someone from FCC customer services will check against registered stats to try and prove you wrong. In theory it doesn't sound too bad. In practice I don't agree and have given up with it.

It doesn't take account of connections (5-10 min delay can frequently increase journey times by >30 mins but this doesn't meet the claim criteria). It is based on the original timetable (which has been taken down at the stations while the emergency timetable is in effect, meaning you have to do online research to find out if you were delayed or not). I frequently find that trains are too crowded to board (this happened before the current reduction in service too. Having to get on a slow train because the express is full extends my journey but doesn't entitle me to compensation).

When I am delayed it wastes a considerable amount of my time. Sure I am pissed that I pay so much for a crappy service but no amount of compensation is going to get that time back. Given the amount of time I have already wasted, why should I waste even more on an overcomplicated procedure that will only give me a token payment?

Yesterday FCC ran a forum on their website called 'Meet the Managers' where commuters could ask questions and supposedly get answers from FCC management. In the hour the board was open there were around 220 questions. Only a handful of answers gave a name so they could have come from anyone. Almost all the answers could have been cut and paste from recent marketing bullshit posted on the FCC site. It was clear from the questions my opinion on delay repay is far from uncommon. It was clear from the answers that the FCC management don't want to change things. There were lots of weasel words used and no comitment to act.

During the session I asked about the new steps at West Hampstead (Q 207 I think). Background: They started work on putting in a new set of steps between the platforms at West Hampstead. Eventually there will be a new entrance at the side of the station. This is desperately needed, the existing steps to the exit on West End Lane have nowhere near the required capacity and I am frequently queuing at the steps for upwards of 5 minutes just to leave the station. I viewed the steps go up quite quickly and was looking forward to a greatly improved experience. Then they stopped. It has to be near 6 months since any work was done. The construction area is surrounded by hoardings that reduce the width of the platform by about half. When I asked when we could expect the work to finish I was given a glib "summer 2010". Why on earth would you start an intrusive work and then leave it half finished for a whole year before completion? Another example of how management incompetence is causing commuters pain on the Thameslink line.

Of course the other thing they are doing at West Hampstead is increasing the platform length to accommodate 12 car trains. The question 'Why?' immediately springs to mind for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the current platforms can take 8 car trains and many existing services use this; however when the full timetable is in operation there are frequently 4 car trains running during rush hour. Many of the current overcrowding issues could be addresses merely by running 8 car trains through the existing facilities. Secondly, the current exit stairs cannot handle the people getting off of 4 car trains. With the second set in operation there may be enough to handle an 8 car train. A 12 car train is going to get us back to the current overcrowding levels when leaving the station.

So that covers some of my general gripes... now on to a couple of specifics.

Last minute platform changes. Last night I was waiting on platform 2 at West Hampstead for the 18:38. At around 18:45 I spotted the lights of the train as it approached the station. Shortly after I spotted it an announcement was made that it would now be stopping on platform 4. I was at the opposite end of the platform from the stairs (current crowding levels preclude hedging your bets and waiting by the stairs). As I was making my way down the platform and the train pulled in two things became clear. Firstly that I was not going to make it up the stairs to cross to platform 4 in time. Secondly I could see that the train pulling in was already overcrowded and that only a small fraction of thoses trying to cross would actually squeeze on.

Tonight I got to West Hampstead at around 18:38. I was just settling myself in for the wait on the freezing cold platform until the 18:51 when a train pulled in. It wasn't on the departures board. Noone knew where it was stopping. We got on anyway. Just before the doors closed (too late for anyone to get off) they announced it was fast to Mill Hill. Noone in my carriage was bothered by this. We settled in cosily in the aisles crushed together and a few people joked about the pot-luck service. Someone noticed that the display on the platform was listing a stop at Elstree but not Radlett. This made a couple of Radlett residents nervous; however there were confident replies that trains that stopped at Elstree always stop at Radlett too. When we got to Elstree and skipping Radlett was confirmed the general opinion was that getting off was a bad idea. Some people had heard that there might be another train stopping at Elstree some time in January but were unsure of the year.

I was fine because I was getting off at St Albans.

As I left the station I overheard someone say "Its quite fun really, never knowing what time your train will be."

This is no way to run a business. But then its not as if their captive audience have any alternative way to get to work so they can get away with whatever they want.

Braindead design

So they seem to be pretty much finished with the renovation at St Albans station now and I am finding it hard to think of ways they could have done it worse.

The new departure boards are about half the size, don't seem to display all the trains and no longer show the current time. They are small enough that I find it hard to read them from the far side of the ticket barriers and I have pretty good long distance vision. They are also located such that you can't see them from the ticket queue or from the new barriers so you had better know where your train leaves from before you get your ticket.

The lifts look ok so I guess they didn't get it all wrong.

While I'm on the subject of annoyances at the station... Why are there never any free cashpoints near rail stations? Do the bastards running the £1.85 per withdrawal rip-off machines have some sort of exclusion zone arrangement?

I also had a bad experience with a piece of shit windows based ticket machine this morning. Selected the ticket (have to give kudos - I like the interface on the A-Z station finder. I rarely have to type more than 3 letters). Paid witha £20, took it first time. Gave me my ticket and £1.30 change... Then sat there at a please wait screen for around 2 minutes before giving me the last £1. I've lost count of the times I've seen embedded windows systems crash or randomly pause in the middle of a transaction; yet still they build more because M$ have the corporate mindshare.

Taking a chance

Arrived at the station this morning to find the notice "6:43 Moorgate - Cancelled" up on the board. Was just about to pull out the G1 to write up a rant when up pulls a train... Interesting... The guy comes out of the office to signal the driver so I ask "Is this the 6:43?" "Yes" "The board says cancelled" "???". He disappears back into the office to find out what's wrong. In the meantime they are closing the doors so I hopped on without being sure where this thing is going... Fingers crossed...

Back the original planned rant. Under the line saying the train is cancelled there is a scrolling list headed by "Calling at:". Surely if the train is cancelled that should be "Not Calling at:" or even better, give a reason for the cancellation...

Looking good so far. West Hampstead should be next if this is really is the 6:43.

Fucked Capital Connect

Nightmare journey already and I've only just left St Albans station.

Got to the station with around 10 mins spare which should have been plenty of time to buy my ticket. First hurdle: No cash in the first machine. Next machine is out of order. Go inside to find that the temporary machines they've had during the ticket office remodelling have gone. Try the ticket machine just in case they have started to accept Electron... Of course they haven't.

Back to the bike and off to the nearest cashpoint. In St Albans city. About a mile away. Up a big fucking hill.

Get back about 15 mins later just in time to see the 7:04 leave. Great, I'm into the big gap in the timetable where none of the trains stop at West Hampstead.

But wait, there's more. When I first entered the ticket office at 6:45 it was virtually empty. At 7:05 it is packed, with queues for every machine as well as for the main windows (and of course only two of the five windows are open)

While in the queue I notice that there is no longer a deparures board in the ticket hall and the guy I buy my ticket from can't tell me which platform the next train to West Hampstead leaves from. End up having to cross to platform 3 to check the board there befor coming back to platform one.

Am finally on the move but running way behind schedule.

World Gone Mad?

OK, I'll open with a brief disclaimer: I in no way condone the distribution child pornography or the exploitation of minors. OK, now that's over on to the post

I am with Neil Gaiman in believing that the Australian legal service has made a catastrophic blunder and created a ludicrous precendent by convicting a man of child pornography offensive for possessing naked images of Simpsons characters.

But Justice Adams agreed with the magistrate, finding that while The Simpsons characters had hands with four fingers and their faces were "markedly and deliberately different to those of any possible human being", the mere fact that they were not realistic representations of human beings did not mean that they could not be considered people.

The characters from the Simpsons need to be considered as people under the Law?

To take an idea from the post by Neil Gaiman above: are we going to need to consider Grandpa Simpson's pension rights as well?

Even in the case of more realistic depictions I would argue that as long as no real child is harmed no crime has been committed. The argument that availability of such images could potentially cause future child abuse seems to be a step too far. If we are going to convict people for things they might do in the future with no evidence that they were planning anything of the sort should then we are on a very slippery slope. Where are the lines drawn?

In the US, the CBLDF do a great job of protecting free speech; however AFAIK no such organisation exists in Australia.

It is not uncommon for laws to stray beyond their original bounds. There have been numerous cases of peoples civil liberties being infringed on when laws introduced with the intention of preventing terrorism have been applied when no terrorism is involved. Child pornography seems similar in this regard. Like Terrorism, no right minded person can possibly try to defend it; however we need to overcome our personal distaste or we will be setting dangerous precedence that can come back to bite us in future.

More laws... Just what we need...

Apparently the UK Government is redrafting a law from the 60s preventing the promotion of suicide to make it explicit that the law applies to online content as well as audio and print. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7620676.stm How on earth do they reckon they are going to enforce this? I'm by no means pro-suicide, and no matter how depressed I've been in the past I've always viewed suicide as giving up and I never considered it an option; however this sort of thought policing always annoys me. Sure someone explicitly trying to get people to end their lives is below contempt; however someone who legitimately believes what they are posting has a right to post their opinion (and hopefully be ridiculed for it). It is also legitimate to post this as a starting point for debate. What about fiction? What about discussion about euthanasia? In addition to the general objection to being told what I can or can't do... How many blogs host content in the UK? If I'm in the UK and want to post a pro-suicide blog, what's to stop me just blogging it to one of the many US based platforms? Do they really think that emo kids googling for info on suicide are going to hit the "Pages from the UK" radio button? OK. Rant over.