Skip to main content

So silence falls...

...well, a little bit, anyway.

There are now some people I’m no longer allowed to refer to on my ’blog, which is one of a number of ridiculous-seeming handicaps which have been enforced upon me recently, along with a number of... imaginative accusations; & of course that means that I’m not allowed to tell you who they are.

If you notice anyone censored from what I post now, that may be the reason.

I’m also not supposed to post “personal” stuff, which is a pretty nebulous term, but I think I gather a reasonable understanding of what the invoker of that ban meant, so I’ll be carefully avoiding certain subject matter.

Thankfully, there is no serious way that I can read “computer stuff” into that directive, so I should be able to post about getting a QuickCam Communicate STX & making it run with Skype on my laptop under Mandriva 2008.0.

Comments

Unknown said…
Hi Leon,

I think if anyone is trying to tell you what to write on your blog (or not write) then you should remind them that the blog is yours, and they are very welcome to not read it. It is just not right trying to censor someone. Sometimes I get cranky or disagree with other people's views, but I'd never try to shut them down in this way.

In the case of someone not wanting to be named, there can sometimes be a case for it, but it sounds like some people are being a bit sensitive.
Leon RJ Brooks said…
Hi, Pippa!

I appreciate the sentiment, very much.

Unfortunately, the “no ID” ban means that I can’t describe the purporters too closely. The ban includes any “web site that you manage” & probably, in practice, posts to mailing lists etc.

When this is all over bar the shouting, I’ll have a good, careful think about what actually is admissible, & take it from there.

Popular posts from this blog

An Open and Shut response to Darl McBride

Hi, Darl. I see you’re being dishonest again . It’d be really nice if you could shoot straight for a change, but I think Kerry’s Dad will be selling snowplows in Hell first. Three years ago, when I first joined The SCO Group, we focused the company on the area that was most profitable and provided the most benefit to customers, investors, resellers, developers and employees: UNIX No, you focused the company on suing people, which was most profitable to lawyers and provided some golden parachutes for your buddies. People thought we were crazy. They were right. But since SCO owns the UNIX operating system The SCO Group does not own UNIX® in any sense of the word. The Open Group owns the UNIX trademark, definition and other rights , The SCO Group does not. The SCO Group doesn’t even own the UnixWare® or OpenServer® code, the rights to those are held by Novell and TSG use them only by permission and under certain conditions — which they have violate...

5x7 text dot-matrix in five minutes...

This is a fairly primitive toy I threw together today for a specific purpose, published in case it’s any use to others... feed it a list of words as command arguments, which it will then display as a 5x7 ASCII dotmatrix with ‘#’ as a dot & ‘_’ as a blank. /* * display text using a 5x7 bitmap font in ASCII letters */ static unsigned char font [] [5] = { { 0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00,0x00 }, // 0x20 32 { 0x00,0x00,0x6f,0x00,0x00 }, // ! 0x21 33 { 0x00,0x07,0x00,0x07,0x00 }, // " 0x22 34 { 0x14,0x7f,0x14,0x7f,0x14 }, // # 0x23 35 { 0x00,0x07,0x04,0x1e,0x00 }, // $ 0x24 36 { 0x23,0x13,0x08,0x64,0x62 }, // % 0x25 37 { 0x36,0x49,0x56,0x20,0x50 }, // & 0x26 38 { 0x00,0x00,0x07,0x00,0x00 }, // ' 0x27 39 { 0x00,0x1c,0x22,0x41,0x00 }, // ( 0x28 40 { 0x00,0x41,0x22,0x1c,0x00 }, // ) 0x29 41 { 0x14,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x14 }, // * 0x2a 42 { 0x08,0x08,0x3e,0x08,0x08 }, ...

Citizens Augmenting Government Waste

So here we have Microsoft-funded “ Citizens Against Government Waste ” (CAGW) heavily criticising Massachusetts’s switch to an internationally accepted and open document standard (not open source, open standard — but I seem to remember a large monopolist who frequently confuses the two when it suits them). I remember CAGW, they were the organisation who had dead people writing in to support Microsoft in court a few years ago — thanks to sbergman27 for the link — is this “the dead hand of CAGW” at work again? Let’s follow the money and find out. Who stands to lose the most money and control if Massachusetts switches to an unencumbered document format? Big surprise, it’s CAGW sponsor Microsoft, through their dominant MS-Office suite. Why did CAGW list Microsoft’s suite last, after two other much-less-dominant examples which are waning anyway? If you’re inclined to wallow in additional irony, consider that at leas...