Togas on

Posted on by February 5, 2012
Reply

Posting about a 1970s TV series recently has reminded me to say something about a 2005 one 🙂

I've been using the PMA400 I bought a month or so ago to watch Rome, finally, when I commute by train.

I'm currently about a third of the way through series two which puts me at an advantage to people waiting for the BBC to show it. (As s2 starts a minute or so after the end of the s1, going straight from one to the other is also the sensible way to do it.)

Apart from curiously skipping over showing anything of the battles – one tiny section of Alesia at the start of s1e1 is all there's been so far – my ghod, it throws money at the screen, doesn't it? Pity that it looks like there won't be a third series as a result.

They've also taken a few odd liberties with history, some dramatically understandable (what a good thing Octavian's real mother can't sue for libel!) and some not (from Julius having so much hair to the aftermath of the assassination being rather different), but overall the basic idea of picking on two legionaries and throwing them onto centre stage works.

The series also features one of the most horrific deaths I can remember on a TV series.

The train of thought that linked the two was I, Claudius, of course. Oh, to have that acting and script with Rome's production values rather than innumerable 'how can we hide the fact that we're in a studio' shots.

I suspect I'm not the only person to Google email addresses

Posted on by February 5, 2012
Reply

At work, some people who contact us don't say whether or not they're an escort. So one quick test is to see, via Google, if the username from their email address is attached to an ad somewhere.

Today's tip: if you want to post on a site for people who want to be more than just good mates with our four-legged friends, and you don't want people to know, it's probably a good idea to use a different username.

Don't think stations, think zones!

Posted on by January 30, 2012
Reply

The fares for 'main line' trains in London moved to the zone system this month, only about a couple of decades after the tube with some odd results…

Previously, the fare from station A to station B was fairly arbitrary, depending on how many companies were involved, who ran which station, is one a 'London terminal' etc etc.

So, to give two examples, it cost more to go from Crofton Park (zone three) to Elephant and Castle (zone two and one) than from CP to London Blackfriars (zone one, the next station into London from E&C). It also cost more to go from West Brompton (zone two) to Honor Oak Park (zone three) than to go from WB to HOP using two tickets, eg WB to Clapham Junction and CJ to HOP.

That's over.

But now there are new anomalies… for example, the cost to go from Brockley (zone two) to West Brompton (has to go via zone three, as there's simply no other 'not via London' way to do it) is much less than the cost to go from Brockley to HOP.. the first station you pass en route. (You go through about ten other stations too.) It's also cheaper than HOP – WB, despite being a longer journey with HOP as the first stop.

Clearly, it doesn't matter which zones you go through, only the end points count.

Is this a game of chance? Not the way I play it…

Posted on by January 17, 2007
Reply

Part of me is surprised about yesterday's decision in relation to the commercial hosting of poker games without a licence.

Just because a game involves an element of chance does not make it one without skill.

An example given of 'pure skill' is quiz machines – yet the machine picks the questions to ask at random from a fixed selection of supposed difficulty. If you happen to be 'dealt' the 'right' questions, i.e. ones you already know the answers to, you win. If you're dealt the 'wrong' ones, then you lose.

The setters of the questions for Who Wants to be a Millionaire thought knowing the size of a google was worth £1m – I knew this at primary school! They also think questions about soap operas are easy, but I typically won't have a clue about the answer. Does this make me skillful or not?

So I'm sure this one will go to appeal, not least as I am sure I remember a decision relating to Backgammon going the other way in the late 70s/early 80s. Yet that turns out to be currently considered a game of luck by the Gaming Commission. To which I can only say 'Would they like to play for money?'

Another amazing discovery is that they think 'French Roulette' (single 0 on the wheel) has effectively died out in Britain and been almost totally replaced by 'American Roulette' (0 and 00 on the wheel = double the house's advantage). Instead of insisting that casinos offer both, or even banning the American version, they've acquiesced in this theft.

The supergroups that never were

Posted on by December 10, 2006
Reply

I was thinking on Wednesday evening * that The Who have lost their drummer and bass player Рthe r̫les of the surviving members of The Beatles.

What would The Who have been like with Ringo on drums and McCartney doing bass?

Less exciting without Moon's drumming (compare the Who albums before and after his death to see how irreplaceable he was) but I can imagine McCartney being an asset. I don't imagine he'd have stayed very long though.

What would The Beatles have been like with Moon doing drums and Entwhistle on bass?

Less varied vocally and more cynical – Lennon would have ended up doing a lot more of both singing and writing. But it'd have been fun to see Lennon and Harrison try to cope with Moon's drumming.

(*) Prior to seeing Bent, which had lots to like – particularly Alan Cummings clearly being delighted to be queer on stage – but which didn't move me in the way it has others. It was full, which it certainly deserverd to be, and I was very impressed with the fact that everyone looked to have returned for the second half.