Older blog entries for lkcl (starting at number 659)

UK Digital Economy Act

17 Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet

(1)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision about the granting by a court of a blocking injunction in respect of a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright.

(2)“Blocking injunction” means an injunction that requires a service provider to prevent its service being used to gain access to the location.

well then: all free software web sites such as tor, sourceforge, github, gitorious, openvpn and so on, are all fucked, then, aren't they.

Democracy Matters

... does it? i received this, today, and replied (below)

Dear Luke Leighton What will you do to restore trust and participation in politics? If you expect to win South West Surrey next week, we want to know what you will do as a Member of Parliament to restore trust and participation in politics.

We are an alliance of organisations including the Community Sector Coalition, Civic Voice, Citizenship Foundation, NAVCA, WEA and others, with members in almost every constituency. We will publish responses to this message through our membership and on our website, www.democracymatters.info.

We are deeply concerned that people do not trust politicians, parties or the political process and feel powerless to influence decisions. This lack of trust and participation in civic life matters greatly for the health of our country.

For democracy to be real, people need to know how the system works, how to influence decisions and how to have an effective voice.

We are therefore asking you to

1. Make public your support for the independence of citizens, community groups. charities and voluntary organisations to lobby, campaign or speak out about the issues that matter to them, respecting the Charity Commission’s guidance on campaigning (CC9); 2. Support our efforts to provide accessible and affordable practical political education so that all citizens can understand the system, get their voice heard and influence decisions about things that concern them; 3. Help local government implement the Duty to Promote Democracy in partnership with local education providers, community groups and civil society, through independent "democracy hubs".

We got a positive reply to our letter from David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party, and expect to hear from other party leaders shortly. But we also want to tell our members about your support, as their own prospective member of parliament.

Members of the Democracy Matters alliance enable citizens to have an effective say by providing information, advice, education and support to take part in society. Many of us ran regional road-shows across England last year, involving over 600 people from local community and voluntary organisations and local MPs. We hope to run similar events throughout the UK during the next parliament.

After the election we will publish a guide to promoting democracy and practical politics, including responses to this message from individual Members of Parliament and the political parties represented in local and national government.

We will also hold a public meeting in Parliament after this election and look forward to your support.

Please reply to ppc@democracymatters.info

Yours sincerely,

Titus Alexander Convener Democracy Matters Alliance Mobile: 07720394740



Democracy Matters grew out of nine regional road-shows involving over 600 people from community and voluntary organisations and local Members of Parliament. A summary of the main points was published in Campaigning is OK! which can be downloaded from http://static.novas.org/files/campaigningisok-456.pdf This was launched in the House of Commons in July 2009 by an all party panel including the Third Sector Minister Angela Smith, Shadow Minister Nick Hurd MP and Greg Mulholland MP

(see: www.navca.org.uk/localvs/infobank/ilpunews/campaigninglaunch .htm ). Learning Power: a contribution to the national skills strategy makes the case for practical political education, based on the work of the Scarman Trust. See: http://static.novas.org/files/learning-power-262.pdf with reviews by Francis Maude, John Hayes, Bernard Crick, Helena Kennedy and others.

If you want information from Democracy Matters in future, please join us at: http://www.democracymatters.info/html/join.html

On 27 April 2010 15:05, Democracy Matters <ppc@democracymatters.info> wrote: > > > > Dear Luke Leighton > > What will you do to restore trust and participation in politics? > > If you expect to win South West Surrey next week, we want to know what you will do as a Member of Parliament to restore trust and participation in politics.

dear democracy matters,

to answer the question, first i must give you some background.

democracy as deployed in athens is one of the most powerful governance methods i've encountered. random selection (effectively jury service) has powerful advantages: you get people who have no known personal or vested interest involved in the process of decision-making.

democracy as deployed _now_ is one of the weakest forms of governance known. to allow politicians to "fight" over what must be done, in a state of constant opposition, results in ridicule that is nothing more than "entertainment" but results in a weakened governance where nothing of lasting stability is achieved or even attempted, out of fear of alienating voters. the next parliament merely rips up the tracks laid by the previous government, which is at risk of happening again in four to five years time.

additionally, focussing of power by way of "party whips" into the hands of one man (the Prime Minister) for example leads us to have bills such as the "Legislative and Reform Bill" which was on its 2nd reading before anyone noticed its similarity to Hitler's 1936 "Enabling Act" - an Act which allowed him to shut Parliament the day after it was passed (because it was "reasonable") and declare himself Dictator (because it was "reasonable").

yet what we have is what we have.

... or, in the UK, it is what we _used_ to have.

with sovereign power having been handed over to the E.U., the crime of treason was committed by Edward Heath, as the E.U. Directives (decided and agreed by "strangers") which must be enacted as law in the member states, "overawes" the Houses of Parliament. these are key words in the 1848 Treason Felony Act - an Act which has NOT been repealed.

additionally, the 1999 House of Lords Act - a "general" Act of Legislation - CANNOT be used to revoke Royal Proclamations ("Letters Patent") granting hereditary peers the right to a seat in Parliament (see Baroness Ashton's reply on this, 29th Sep 2008, clarifying this point). but, by illegally revoking the passes of some 900 hereditary peers, Parliament has been "intimidated" - by order and at the instigation of Tony Blair (and other conspirators).

the unfortunate (some would say fortunate) side-effect of this second act of Treason is to throw into doubt the legality and validity of any law passed since 2000 (including ironically the Lisbon Treaty, as well as several thousand other pieces of legislation); for details, search for Lord Mereworth's legal challenge, initiated in late 2009, to the revocation of his pass granting him access to the Houses of Parliament.

so we have a serious, serious situation in which the entire democratic process in the UK has been completely and systematically undermined... and nobody's noticed!

there's something desperately, desperately wrong and i am at a loss to explain peoples' total lack of interest.

that is just the background. now i answer your question.

what i _have_ done (not what am i "going" to do) is report the crime of Treason at my local police station. what i _will_ do is report the _second_ crime of Treason, tomorrow. i appear to have accidentally stumbled onto something that i cannot now "let go of" or "let rest" until i find out if people are actually interested. which is most unfortunate.

should i find out that people do not care if we are no longer a sovereign nation, i will happily stop pursuing this. the only real way to find that out is by a referendum. it doesn't matter how that referendum is carried out. the politicians didn't bother to consult us; they all promised that they would have a referendum if they were voted in, and they didn't damn well fulfil their promise.

well, unfortunately for them, by going ahead without consulting us, they committed criminal acts: Treasonous acts.

so, there is actually another way to get the referendum that people might seek: by going down to your local police station and reporting Edward Heath for the crime of Treason and all Prime Ministers since as being complicit in that crime (for taking us into the E.U. and handing over Sovereign Power); and reporting Tony Blair and the other conspirators (339 other politicians voted for that bill) for a second crime of Treason.

now, whilst the Crown Prosecution Service has the discretionary power to not prosecute if it is "not in the Public Interest", note the word "Crown" in the sentence "Crown Prosecution Service". all policemen serve Her Majesty, the Queen - and no other.

the critical question is: does the Chief of Police have the balls to make the arrests? i have a feeling that if he knows that he has a sizeable chunk of the UK population behind him, with a record of several million reports of Treason (and their associated Crime Reference Numbers), he will not only have no choice but to make the arrests but also will be able to easily justify his actions to the accused.

so you want to know what i'm doing, to restore trust and participation in politics? starting with _you_, i'm asking _you_ to make the above a matter of public record, and i'm asking _you_ to take up the challenge to restore our shattered political system.

i look forward to receiving another "general mailshot" from you, covering the above in your own words, with a link to a suitable petition, giving advice on what people should do to restore "trust" in our political system.

i should not have to remind you that if you fail to make an independent investigation, fail to do due diligence, fail to take up this task now that you have been informed of it, you will be failing entirely and utterly to hold true to everything that your web site claims to stand for. you state that "democracy matters", but if you do not act to help _make_ democracy matter, then you are no better than the traitors who have undermined our Sovereignty and our Parliament.

these may sound like strong words, but i swear to you that they are mild in comparison to the ones i really should be using.



25 Apr 2010 (updated 26 Apr 2010 at 13:16 UTC) »
Treason. Again.

let's connect the dots, shall we?

House of Lords: Letters Patent - 29sep2008 Column WA396

Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:

"By what means Letters Patent creating peerages can be changed; and in what legislation that has occurred. [HL5196]"

The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): "The effect of Letters Patent creating peerages can he changed by legislation which has that specific effect."

(translation: "general" acts of legislation do not apply, cannot apply, and do NOT revoke, repeal or make redundant, "Letters Patent")

transcript of Baron Wensleydale's Letters Patent

"and that he may have, hold, and possess a Seat, Place and Voice in the Parliaments and Public Assemblies and Councils of Us, Our Heirs and Successors, within our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, amongst other Barons, as a Baron of Parliament and Public Assemblies and Councils,"

Also of interest is the generic forms of peerage letters patent" all of which - life peerages and hereditary peerages - specifically state that peers have a right to be in Parliament.

(translation: the hereditary peer is entitled to sit in Parliament, wherever and whatever that may be. quite forward-thinking and far-sighted, really)

House of Lords Act 1999

"1. No-one shall be a member of the House of Lords by virtue of a hereditary peerage." (except those exempted, which is covered in the rest of the Act)

(translation: a "general" piece of legislation, which is completely ineffective and invalid - as clarified by Baroness Ashton.)

Treason Felony Act 1848

"If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, ... or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, ... or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable . . . . . . F4 to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life . . . . . ."

(translation: oh dearie me).

Lord Mereworth's challenge to the 1999 House of Lords Act vs his Letters Patent

In a passage that shows the explosive potential of the case to trigger a constitutional crisis, he says: “Any reform [of the house of lords] that failed, but affected the composition of the house would have the effect of jeopardizing all subsequent legislation until remedied. This would appear to apply to the house of lords act 1999 if its regime were to be judged flawed.”

(short summary of above link: all hereditary peers are entitled to sit in the House of Lords, despite the 1999 house of lords act.)


We take it on trust that Baroness Ashton has had good advice, extremely good access to legal council, and that her statements can be confirmed as correct. Thus, we can take it that the 1999 House of Lords Act (a "general" piece of legislation) does not apply. In other words, to actually remove the Lords from the House of Lords would require 900 individual, separate and distinct pieces of specific legislation, specifically naming each specific hereditary peer and specifically revoking their access, rights and privileges to "sit in the Houses of Parliament, councils etc. etc." (wherever and whatever those might be)

Thus, the revocation of all the passes issued to each member of the House of Lords who happened to be a hereditary peer, can be construed to be an "overt act" to "intimidate" one of the Houses of Parliament: the House of Lords. If it was just one peer, that would be intolerable but would be difficult to construe as "intimidating" one of the Houses of Parliament. However, given that 900 of the 1000+ representatives were "intimidated" and illegally prevented and prohibited from entering the Houses of Parliament by having their passes revoked, I believe it's safe to say that the "House of Lords" was, itself, "intimidated".

This is Treason.

Let's see whom we need to report to the Police, as having committed this crime, shall we? wikipedia to the rescue... .... ahh, yes. Tony Blair, possibly Viscount Cranborne, and ahh, yes - 340 members of the House of Commons. 339 to be precise (Tony Bliar not being counted twice).

So we actually have two explosive pieces of news, here. The first is that all Laws passed since 2000 are likely to be constitutionally invalid, and the second is that a crime of Treason was committed by Tony Blair, and that 339 other members of the House of Commons were complicit in that crime, amongst others.

Regarding the constitutional invalidity of all Laws since 2000: it has to be pointed out that when the Queen signs an Act, it's an Act. Alternatively, a representative of Her Majesty can say "La Regle, il vaut" - which I sincerely hope is not old french for "The Monarch Wants It" as I would prefer it to mean "The Monarch Wishes (or declares) It To Be So".

But, we have to remember that the actual passing of the House of Lords Act itself would be a crime of Treason; also as would the signing of the E.U. Lisbon Treaty and all other Treaties. I cannot believe that Her Majesty would herself commit a crime of Treason against herself, so there must be a loophole that Her Majesty, with access to the country's most knowledgeable and highly regarded Legal counsel, has exploited.

Either that, or these bills (all since the House of Lords Act, 1999, or possibly even earlier, dating back to the E.U. Treaties) have not been passed or declared as Law, and we simply haven't been told (*). In light of the simple requirement that it takes a representative of Her Majesty merely speaking the words "La Regle il vaut" to make an Act "an Act", rather than specifically writing them down or signing the Act, it leaves me wondering perhaps if someone hasn't "gone and appointed themselves" as a representative of Her Majesty...

(*) - if an Act is not passed into Law by Her Majesty, Parliament must be dissolved. My understanding is that the Monarch should also resign. This constitutes our last line of defense in the UK against a tyrannical government.

Pyjamas 0.7

fiiinally, i got round to the 0.7 release of Pyjamas.

24 Apr 2010 (updated 24 Apr 2010 at 20:23 UTC) »
Film: Hardwired

am just watching this film, now. it's _everything_ that technology should not be used for.

another one...

Invention of Lying. couldn't resist. i can't stand ricky gervais, but this film was poignant and funny. the "magic" only broke a couple of times (walking down the street telling people things, over music. yuk). other than that: beautiful film. ok, maybe there's something to respect about mr gervais, after all :)

Farnham Hustings

well, that was veeery interesting on wednesday. the first of the lot, and the people i met from churches together were absolutely fantastic. the other candidates i met, i also found i was very pleased to be standing with them, get an opportunity to meet them. the people i was sitting next to during the debate were very supportive (is it fair if i say who they were? well - they know, and they were, so thank you :)

what did we discuss? what were the questions?

one was something along the lines of: "what is in your heart when you think of fairness and justice?" and _wow_ that was an interesting question. the answers, as you might expect, were really varied - but i was staring so hard at the piece of paper on which i'd had to ask richard mollet to repeat it for me (!) that i couldn't tell you what they were :)

my answer was that i'm a spiritualist (but i didn't mention that i have a catholic / christian upbringing and background), and so i view this veeery very differently. to understand where i'm coming from, it's best to read "journey of souls" (google it). from that, you appreciate that each of us is born to learn specific lessons; face certain challenges; be a part of peoples' lives; play specific roles and so on. so when you encounter something that is "unfair" or "unjust", and you feel strongly that you should act, that's your "life cue", and you have the free will to choose to act - or not... :)

so, in light of that, (and i perhaps didn't make this clear at the time, but i do keep emphasising it in writing) the "role" i'm putting _myself_ forward for (being a politician) is to empower people when they want to act, in ways that, on their own they feel unable or unwilling to do, so that _they_ can tackle the things that they feel are unfair or unjust (with my help).

the trouble is (as roger meekin's party UKIP is strongly pointing out) that the ability _to_ faithfully represent people - to enact laws in our own country - has been undermined by handing over sovereignty to the European Parliament. yes, you could get the law changed to deal with something, but the next week, a European Directive comes through that requires a _different_ law to be enacted.

and the general feeling from the vast number of people there in the hall, of whom there were somewhere around 1,000, was that they were _extremely_ upset that they had not been consulted about going into the EU, by way of a referendum.

so, i pointed out the alternative method by which they could clearly make their feelings known: reporting the politicians, cabinet offices and prime ministers who took the decision - without consulting us - for committing the crime of treason.

i _wish_ i didn't have to point this out to people. i _wish_ i could just stand on a "purely PPUK manifesto" ticket, but i _can't_ make the promises to people that i will faithfully be able to represent them, without having to prefix every single promise with the words "subject to us being a sovereign nation", and, having researched it, i am _really_ pissed about this and, now that i know that the 1848 law has been broken, i _cannot_ keep quiet about it.

i want to talk to people about how technology can and should empower people! i want to talk to people to warn them of the dangers and insane costs of overstepping the mark in letting big businesses "have their way"! but with our entire political system utterly in pieces on the floor, made irrelevant by the European Parliament and by the Party Whips concentrating power into one man's hands, how _can_ i sit back and say "everything's going to be all right once you've voted one of us in"?

so the big question is: what now? what should people be doing, to take matters into their own hands, to prepare for the upcoming 2012 changeover? for those people who may not be aware: 2012 is the time which all the prophecies in all the religions point as being a "key pivotal moment" in human spiritual development. there are _no_ predictions beyond that point, because the decision of where we go, and what we do next, is to be made *globally*, as an entire planet and a species.

i mentioned in the hustings that people should look up "Transition Towns", and i mentioned that at least 90 japanese towns, brixton and many rural villages in the UK have gone "Transition Town". it's basically the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment, starting early in those areas. they're creating _local_ community ties, creating a _local_ currency (barter is already quite strong in many rural areas in the UK already); people are growing their own food; they're reducing carbon emissions and energy usage.

and this is happening and inspired by people of their own accord! there's no "government initiative" involved. yes, there happens to be some laws, government grants and other things that can be taken advantage of, but the decision is being made _by the people_, and if they can't "get the grants" or "get government help" they just go ahead and do it anyway, regardless.

i think this is absolutely fantastic, and there needs to be more of it. and _fast_. we cannot rely on there being a continuous supply of either oil or national currencies: both are being undermined / running out / controlled.

and do you know what i think the most important thing to preserve is, whilst these "Transitions" are going on? global access to information, via the Internet; freedom of speech; freedom to find a damn good essential idea and copy it and implement it, free from threat of stupid Patents or other ways to "restrict" and "control" people.

oh look: maybe i am a Pirate, after all, and maybe PPUK does fit extremely well with what i stand for.

i'll leave it at that. have to get ready for Godalming Hustings.

20 Apr 2010 (updated 20 Apr 2010 at 21:36 UTC) »
Farnham Hustings 21st April

[update: this has been cleared up - cross-over of communications from several people involved in the organising of the hustings. i'm leaving this here for historical purposes. thank you to churches together for the opportunity to speak to the people of farnham.]

I was initially invited to the above hustings, to be given an opportunity to speak with people. However, it turns out that the person with "authority" to make that decision was away, and it appears that it was "merely assumed" that of course people wishing to represent the South West Surrey Constituency would be given a chance to speak.

I received a messasge today denying that opportunity. Here is my response:

dear churches together,

thank you for responding.

if churches together wishes to rig the next general election by not allowing representatives of parties to speak then i am not interested in being a part of any such proceedings.

"but not to take part in the debate on wider issues" indicates that you have already decided whom people should vote for.

you should be asking yourself why you are doing that.

should this be an oversight on the part of churches together, i apologise for misunderstanding and would welcome an opportunity to "take part in the debate to discuss wider issues".

i look forward to your response.

this conversation will be made a matter of public record.


dear churches together,

you can find a copy of my response, here :


i trust that by repeating one sentence of eleven words you would not wish to claim that copyright disbars me from making that sentence public.

i have removed your name but not that a representative of "churches together" has prevented and prohibited me from a reasonable and fair opportunity to discuss "wider views".

i believe that you may be mistaken in thinking that the pirate party is solely and exclusively interested in "narrow views".

please actually _read_ our manifesto which specifically states that the candidates are "free of party whips". http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/wiki/Manifesto

thus, outside of the very short and simple manifesto, which is in effect "Human Rights" upgraded to a Digital Age, i am free to represent peoples' views in ways that the major parties are NOT ALLOWED TO DO.

thus, you are denying people the opportunity to have someone represent them whose level of intelligence, integrity, honesty, and spiritual outlook is, even if i say it myself, far and above that of the majority of politicians. not that i like having to point that out to you, but you push me to having to "sell" myself to you, to make it clear, and i'm not particularly happy about having to overcome what is clearly prejudice on your part.

i trust that this is an oversight on your part that you would wish to correct promptly. [update: which they kindly did, pointing out the cross-over in internal communications, and i'm grateful for the clarification and the opportunity]


Wow, what a rush.

16th I got the approval by Godalming Council Offices (big thank you to Mary O.) to officially stand in South West Surrey in the 2010 UK General Election. I was so pleased it was approved - and first time - but it felt very strange. I felt I wanted to phone everyone and tell them, but what can you say? "Hi, I've managed to get my name onto 46,800 polling cards and it could cost PPUK £500" that's an achievement - hmmm.... :)

I also spoke to some interesting people, which was very important to me to do. The balance of "National Security" between the Digital Economy Bill and other abuses of political power, and the "Ace Card" - let's call it the "Jewel" - that I hold, is something that I take very seriously. I understand this balance better than most. If politicians overstep the mark, threating peoples' security - the People of Our Nation - I reserve the right to act to redress the balance. Not that I expect to be listened to, but hey, that's life.

17th was "recover from 16th" day, catch up on messages.

18th was an interesting day, work-wise (ok, negotiating some work). At least myself and my family got a good lunch.

19th - today - was "begin leaflets" day. All political candidates have an opportunity to send out leaflets to their candidates (in my case - 46,800) at zero charge (postal- wise). I'm doing mine as tiny A6 single-sided jobbies. simple. logo. photo. words. We have veeery little time left, to get them to the Royal Mail. 23rd (Friday!) is the last day that Royal Mail can guarantee delivery before polling day. Leaflets have to be bundled in "100s"; boxes no heavier than 11kg; it takes 48 hours to "approve" the artwork (what??). Then you get a form. then you fill it in. then you have to provide the vehicle registration of the delivery vehicle. Let's hope it all goes through. waah!

11 Apr 2010 (updated 11 Apr 2010 at 12:05 UTC) »
The UK's Criminal Offense of Treason

a friend of mine told me about this retired police officer who reported the crime of treason to his local police station. look it up: it's a really funny story. this guy goes into a police station to report a crime, and the duty officer pretty much laughs at him, until he points to the statute books in his hands. the duty officer still doesn't take him seriously, and doesn't record it as a crime.

as this retired police officer knows his stuff, on his return a couple of weeks later, he reminds the duty officer that by not recording a crime and giving the person a crime reference number, that officer is not "doing his duty", and by "not doing his duty" he can be struck off without pay and without pension.

the retired police officer got his crime reference number, and the funny bit (only not really) is that he then came back, week after week, to check on the progress of the investigation, and, on discovering that it was not being investigated, made such a stink that he managed to get another police force investigating this one for "not doing their duty to investigate the reported crime of treason".

the crime that he reported is that the ted heath government, by handing over sovereign power to the european parliament, committed the crime of treason. not only that, but every cabinet office and every prime minister since then is _complicit_ with that crime of treason.

thus, also, every member of every major party that has been in power since - liberal, labour and conservatives - are complicit in the crime of treason.

i thought... this can't be right.

so i looked it up. and, to quote ian banks in one of his excellent "culture series" novels, Excession, the most appropriate think i can think of to say is "dear holy fucking shit".

the guy's right.

i have to say - it takes quite a lot to upset me, but this has done it.

let's take a look at it, shall we?

3. "If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend to deprive or depose our Most Gracious Lady the Queen, from the style, honour, or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom, or of any other of her Majesty’s dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty’s dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty, and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing . . . . . . F3 or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable . . . . . . F4 to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life . . . . . . F4"

8. "As to the punishment of accessories before and after the fact. In the case of every felony punishable under this Act, every principal in the second degree and every accessory before the fact shall be punishable in the same manner as the principal in the first degree is by this Act punishable; and every accessory after the fact to any such felony shall on conviction be liable to be imprisoned, . . . . . . F7 for any term not exceeding two years."

so by signing away power to the european parliament, these criminals have "overawed both Houses or either House of Parliament". it's very very clear.

not only that, but under the lisbon treaty, it is acceptable for troops from other european member states to be stationed on british soil. this is a bit less clear-cut, but if those troops were to act against british citizens, then they could definitely said to be a "foreigner or stranger with force", and thus anyone who caused them to be "moved" there would have committed an act of treason.

i'm having ... enormous difficulties with this. i'm supposed to be standing as a candidate MP, and yet if i do not go down to my local police station and report this crime, i could go to jail for being complicit in the crime of treason if i become an MP.

ok. ok. deep breath. it's not hard. you've taken on microsoft and adobe, dealt with foreign intelligence agents, and you're not dead. you can do this.

$100 (retail) 300mhz ARM9 netbook with a 10.1in 1024x600 LCD!

linuxfordevices report

chinese review

good god :) i don't know whether to be impressed or horrified. we will see if this machine gets taken up outside of china. on sheer price alone it should be compelling enough, like the Skytone Alpha 400.

but, the problem with the skytone alpha 400 is that due to the low cost, the margins are so low that it's unlikely that retailers actually made enough money to consider doing a different machine.

at this sub-£99 price range, the profit margins per machine are just ridiculous. you have to sell 50,000 machines just to get one person a salary plus tax plus corporation tax.

and, unlike "ordinary" laptops, there's no way you can slap a 2-3 year warranty on it and charge £200 per year for the privilege.

so ... i'll say it again: if free software people want an ARM netbook that they would actually stick with for years, and be happy with, they're going to need to get it custom- made, just like the open-pandora. retailers are _not_ going to deliver.

650 older entries...

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!