He had an advantage, he trusts humans

recently noticed that Peanut returned, though he’s older now and no longer looks like a kid. Peanut was introduced as “adopted” when Durian (Durduron) showed up and last night Durian stayed here until about 6:40PM when it gets rather dark.

Durian is no longer a youngster; the food we gave him and the training I gave him (e.g. how to stand stable on the door knob) make him increasingly indistinguishable from the adults.

Unlike him, Peanut developed little or not much in terms of size.

Birds that trust humans are bound to benefit. Just don’t trust evil humans.

We didn’t start this

t’s sunny again, but very cold (about 5 degrees this morning). Today we’ll go out a number of times, taking advantage of the good weather.

Yesterday’s “Litigation Update” seems to have struck a nerve. Good. It means it was effective.

We now have more than a fortnight to put forth some input to the judge, who said Garrett’s case was a waste of the court’s money.

Lazy Panda still open

azy Panda Pan Asian is still open! Phew.

The other week Rianne was a bit startled by what seemed to be a shut down local eatery, where we had brought family members and where we often celebrated special occasions.

Upon closer look, it was only closed for that day, as usual.

We don’t eat “out” all that often (taking out food from home is another matter). When we do, we’re loyalists who stick to what we know to be reliably good.

Sadly, many restaurants shut down in recent years. We’ve lost track.

t is a matter of public record (as of today) that another Order was issued. It was issued by the joint head of the media and communications list at the UK’s High Court. As is already known to the opposing party, we’re not unrepresented in the case because of Legal Aid and pro bono advice from a “leading specialist in defamation, privacy, and data protection law.”

We are not fearful of the Court (but we do respect it) because we had done no wrong by opposing merciless attacks on women, on Computer Science, and on computer security. I did no wrong by protecting my wife from online abuse and by protecting women in America from physical abuse in America. The other side is wasting obscene amounts of money trying to project in absentia. The aim is to distract from their own horrific actions and make it sound like the real culprit is the person who wrote about the actions.

It’s not naive to have faith and genuine belief that at the end justice will be served, not weaponised.

Gettint cold, sun low

‘ve just slept in the sun, maybe for the last time (for this year), as it rapidly gets cold(er) and if clouds cover the sun, then it is too much to bear for a long time. Eyes shut, with music on, it’s all turning into a rather deep sleep. Within seconds, not minutes. Controlling a Discman is easy without seeing anything (mechanical buttons).

Somehow it feels increasingly certain this was the last for the year.

In some sense, “goodbye, 2026.”

Hard to pretend it ain’t happening

recently learned that the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) will take a privilege ruling to the UK Supreme Court. Being the SRA, it’ll probably end up being a waste of British people’s money with no serious outcome.

Over the past 3 years I’ve had a lot of hands-on experience with the legal system here. This week, for example, I’ve learned that “Court of Appeal Judges are senior judges with lengthy judicial experience. Appointment is by The King on the recommendation of a selection panel convened by the Judicial Appointments Commission.” In the High Court, judges are forced to retire at age 75.

I learned that many judges are in fact barristers. Some of them get gradually elevated to that role, with or without “Silk” (KC), but there is still potential for conflict of interest due to past loyalties or old colleagues (who might still be close friends).

The SRA has a similar “revolving doors” problem; many who work at the SRA came from law firms and many people inside law firms used to work for the SRA. Many solicitors and barristers once worked for the government (e.g. Home Office or Ministry of Justice).

How do we tackle this issue without ‘insulting’ people?

“Up” is elusive

think it’s fair to say Shakira wants to be famous like Madonna.

And Madonna never became epic like Parton.

Boyzone never became popular like Take That.

And Take That never become historic like Michael Jackson or “Jackson 5″.

To a millionaire, the aspiration tends to be “become a multi-millionaire”.

That multi-millionaire wishes to become a billionaire.

The billionaires look down on multi-millionaires and millionaires.

The average billionaire is a joke to the “top 10″ billionaires.

The tenth richest billionaire loses sleep over not being “number one”.

Eventually they all die.

If one’s goal in life is recognition through fame or mindless, pointless hoarding of “Capital”, then what is life really about?

Let’s be honest; who in the 21^st century still remembers (cannot remember, except by reading books) the “top 10″ richest people of 1926?

The old robber barons have had many offspring or generations of inheritance, which got ‘diluted’ over time.

Making it to “the top” misses the point that everyone eventually goes “down under” (burial). The difference is, what did one do whilst alive?