Setup

I got bored of my old 19 inch monitor, I also got paid. These two facts mean only one thing; a brand new monitor. I wanted to go all out on this new one because I know that I’d need it for many things: web design, television, high definition films and usual computer stuff.

I decided to go for this ASUS which is packed full of features including a 26 inch screen running a 1920×1200 resolution, HDMI, DVI, VGA and RGB inputs as well as speakers and a webcam. The price may look like a little much, but when it’s in front of you it’s simply amazing; the size of it and how well it works is fantastic. Anyway, enjoy the poor picture below!.

Next month, iPhone! Steven, Administrator.

End of the Universe

There was a goblin, or a trickster, or a warrior. A nameless terrible thing, soaked in the blood of a billion galaxies – the most feared being in all the cosmos. And nothing could stop it, or hold it, or reason with it. One day it would just drop out of the sky and tear down your world.

On 26/06/10 the Pandorica will open and silence will fall.

The iComedy Theory

I’ve come up with a theory – it’s my first theory so don’t be too harsh. I’ve called it the iComedy theory because it revolves around how I think new technology and social networking is changing the face of humour and how this change has allowed anybody to become their own comedian.

In the old days, if you wanted to tell a joke to a lot of people you’d have to find work at a comedy club and get yourself a five minute slot after convincing the management. Then you’d probably stress over your material for hours on end by trying to get input from everyone and anyone to reassure yourself that the crowd will love you and your jokes – remember, these people probably haven’t paid to see this new talent so they won’t hold any bars if they don’t like what they hear and probably wouldn’t be above heckling until the act broke down into tears.

However, in 2010 and with the introduction of Facebook and Twitter I reckon that the whole aspect of comedy is going to change, where instead of being talent spotted in a dingy bar at 2am sweating like a Liberal Democrat realising a hung parliament is inevitable while being covered in urine thrown at you by drunk truckers who think they’re attacking a The Who support act, that you’d instead catch the eye of an agent with one simple Tweet.

For my theory to have any basis I need to further explain why I think social networking is rapidly evolving comedy… I’ll try my best. Picture this: you’re sitting at work or at school, twiddling your thumbs trying to make one go forwards and the other one go backwards but you instead see something happen in the class or office you’re in and bam… You’ve thought of a great observational comedy joke, or overhear a funny conversation that you can take out of context, or you’re browsing BBC News and you’re able to think of a dark joke about a murder or a rape or something. If you have your phone or a computer handy, you can simply type out the joke and send it off to Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, etc. There you have it; it’s done, no trucker’s urine on you and hundreds of people have now read your joke, and if they enjoy it then they’ll either ‘like’ it, comment it or send you a Tweet back. Instant gratification in action.

This goes one step further with Twitter though, if people really like your joke – they may retweet it for a whole new audience to read and reply back to you, this again creates further feelings of instant gratification – and this time from people who you don’t even know. However, let’s say your joke does not go down well, no-one comments on it or you re-read it and think that you can make it better. No problem, you can simply delete it and start all over again without the fear of getting further backlash because you physically retract your actions.

I do this all the time and therefore have firsthand experience with the iComedy theory, I often think of funny quips that usually involve dark humour to the extent that I often refrain from publishing them such as the following joke: We should elect a black man to become the new Labour leader, you know, it’s ironic… Slave labour. Usually when I publish a joke, 99% of the time people comment it, ‘like’ it or reply which gives me instant gratification because I wouldn’t say such jokes in real life for fear of them not working out which isn’t a problem online because I can simply delete and refine. With everything, however, there are some down sides.

Even though I feel this new wave of comedic expression is a good thing in order for comedy to evolve beyond that of a theatre stage, it all relies on one thing: the published jokes have to be funny, if they’re not funny, (which is obviously subjective, but you know the sort of people I mean), it leads me to think that maybe some people, some time, should shut up.

Steven, Administator.

Twitter @­anywhere

No longer is it acceptable for websites to only exist within their own domain name; now they have to spill out onto different platforms such as the iPod Touch, smart phones and desktop applications. Facebook did this some time ago with it’s Connect platform that allows its users to use Facebook in order to connect with and log into other sites in order to post comments, it also allows iPhone applications to post updates if you complete a level in a game for example.

Twitter is now the latest widely-used website to extend its service beyond that of it’s browser-bound domain name with they’re new platform, @anywhere. As the name suggests, the platform is aiming to implement the primary uses of Twitter from any website. This ranges from being able to view profile information of Twitter users, (just hover over the the Twitter username above to see what I mean or hover over a username from my Tweet box to the right of this text), being able to post status updates from any website about what you’re doing or simply being able to choose to follow someone.

At present, a good amount of well known websites such as Amazon, Yahoo and eBay have signed up with Twitter to introduce the @anywhere platform to their websites. This will allow any Twitter user to post updates from their respective websites, for example, if someone were to be browsing on Amazon and found a product they like, they woudld be able to write in a Tweet in a box a few pixels away to tell their followers. It’s an extremely simple concept but allows Twitter to be used outside of it’s own website in order to be more interactive.

I too have started to implement this new platform onto my website, you’ve probably tried out the hover card feature by hovering over a Twitter username somewhere on this website, (as indicated with the @ as its prefix). On this post you’ll see experimental features of the platform that I have yet to implement on my site fully. Not following me on Twitter? Well click the box below to do so. Want to say something to me? Tweet by using the box below too! Note: these two latter features are temporarily unavailable.

Twitter, taking one leap forward into the three dimensional web universe.

Steven, Administrator.

The Live Leadership Debates

After three debates on three channels with three party leaders, has this historical first changed anything? Some may argue yes because it shows that the United Kingdom is heading towards a more democratic approach to elections where the audience made up from members of the public, (albeit a heavily controlled and medically sedated audience, who could resist flinging their own excrement at David Cameron to see if it bounced off his head made from 50% tyre rubber?), can ask the three main party leaders a range of questions where they can receive in-depth responses.

However some may argue no because although it’s a step in the right direction; it excludes all other parties that although small, people do still vote for them and therefore have the right to appear alongside the three main parties. Oh and because of the heavily rehearsed and controlled environment it’s essentially boring, predictable and uninformative.

I for one however, don’t really care about their policies. I mean, I do care, but that’s not the focus of this article for two reasons a) I’m a political vegetable with limited knowledge, so I wouldn’t be able to draw up any accurate conclusions b) I don’t support any single party, my brain is essentially grey human sludge waiting to be moulded. Maybe in the future my grey human sludge brain will be of more use to society. In this article I’m basically just going to talk about how they came across – sorry if you thought it was something better than that.

To avoid any kind of perceived favouritism, the position of each of the leaders changed in every program; this is apparently because standing on the right side gives off the impression of being right, or something like that. I don’t know why they weren’t allowed to sit down, it was very eerie watching them standing up for 90 minutes crossing their legs while looking around the room like a meditating Buddhist keeping one eye open to see if anyone is secretly recording a video of them to publish onto YouTube . None of them looked good to be honest – Gordon Brown looked like The Joker trying to complete a difficult Sudoku, David Cameron looked John Merrick wrapped in cling film, and Nick Clegg looked about as useful as the camera on the iPod Nano. However, I can’t talk because I resemble a caveman carved out of boiled ham.

The first debate was held by ITV; the set looked very small and the leaders were within touching distance, by the half way mark I half expected the lights to dim and for them to break into song before the audience voted one of them to sing a solo to Alastair Stewart as they tearfully faded off into the distance à la Over the Rainbow, (or Over the Rainbow Coalition in Gordon’s case), but that didn’t happen. I don’t think many people expected the outcome that Nick Clegg, the underdog, would end up literally creating a band wagon big enough for The Guardian to change their political opinion a week before polling day. This first debate put the Liberal Democrats into the spotlight, a tactic which didn’t work out for David Cameron when people said he didn’t live up to expectations. Oh and Gordon Brown turned up.

The second debate was held by Sky News, a move that worried viewers so much that most people tuned in preparing to see the ominous Sky News Logo projected onto every available surface including the logos that were physically there in the first place. This debate only got around 4m viewers, a drop of 5m from the ITV debate. Nick Clegg started to show signs that he was running out of steam after suddenly appearing in the spotlight, (again, not a sign of a sing off in sight). David Cameron apparently won this debate, much to the bemusement of basically everyone who watched because he didn’t do that well. Oh and Gordon Brown turned up.

The third and final debate was held on the BBC, the only television channel where expressing a political opinion on air is punishable by death, or punishable by being forced to watch an episode of The Life of Riley without being allowed to close your eyes and pretending you’re watching My Family instead. This debate was held in Birmingham University which made the likelihood of a sing off even less promising than it previously was. It was however a much better set than the pokey ones given to us by both ITV and Sky News. The viewing figures were a respectable 9m, about 9m of whom were probably tuning in to see if Gordon Brown would call an audience member a ‘scruffy cunt’ under his breath, unknowingly forgetting that he was live on air and looking directly at the camera.

Regarding my previous comments about the likelihood of a sing off, I’m almost certain that within the next decade we’re going to have a political Big Brother spin-off where prime ministerial candidates have to partake in a task where they create a viral video from bits of Family Guy in order to win the respect of the moronic masses because that’s where this doomed society is inevitably heading: we’re all stupid.

There you have it, the first historical set of leader debates summed up in a slightly humorous, ill educated and un-biased way. The entire point of these debates were to ultimately change the viewer’s opinions on who to vote for. However it only made me think of one thing: if I were to turn this on and David Cameron had failed to turn up, I’d easily mistake it for a repeat of Brokeback Mountain with more sodomy.

Steven, Administrator.