grahambinns.com

Mur Lafferty writes:

I am thrilled to announce that I have signed a contract to release Playing For Keeps with Swarm Press! Swarm is an imprint of Permuted, the small horror press, and is launching this summer with three superhero titles, PFK being one. (For podcast fans, Matthew Wayne Selznick's Brave Men Run is another title coming out from Swarm.)

This is fantastic news for Mur and for everyone that's followed PFK via I Should Be Writing since its inception.

Congratulations Mur! I'd raise a glass of gin in your honour, except I can't stand the stuff, frankly. Oh well. There's a bottle of single malt somewhere that'll do as a substitute.

The headline sounded promising: "'Respect atheists', says Cardinal." Unfortunately, and somewhat predictably, the story itself is a little different from what the headline suggests:

"I want to encourage people of faith to regard those without faith with deep esteem because the hidden God is active in their lives as well as in the lives of those who believe."

Which sounds less like what I'd hoped for (though I don't truly know what I really hoped for) and more like what I should really have expected, which is "love thy neighbour." You wouldn't think that was bad, and to be fair I don't, entirely, but I dislike the way it's framed.

There was also this:

God is not a "fact in the world" as though God could be treated as "one thing among other things to be empirically investigated" and affirmed or denied on the "basis of observation", said Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor.

Which, well, is one of those pieces of reasoning that I find to be more than a bit ridiculous, especially when said out loud. The problem is, of course, that it amounts to an argument from personal credulity, which is also know as an argument from ignorance.

The thing that really rankled me, though, for I'm hardly surprised to hear any of the above from dear old Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, is the way the headline was written.

And to tell the truth, I'd much rather that he'd said "You should treat atheists and agnostics with respect. Because, like you, they're human beings."

There's a nice story on the BBC news site:

The public perception of open source software is changing fast, said Mark Shuttleworth, who leads distribution of the Ubuntu operating system (OS).

"There has been a sea change in the way people think of Linux, which is very healthy," he said.

"We have seen a real shift in the last six months from folks seeing open source as either a super-specialist thing for people who run data centres or as an enthusiast thing, to something which is energising a lot of the straight commercial PC industry," said Mr Shuttleworth.

Hardy comes out on Friday. Ladies and gentlemen, start your bittorent clients*.

*Because it's easier on the servers than a metric assload of HTTP downloads.

So, after my two posts about this topic yesterday I thought I'd shut up about it for a while.

However, in the post this morning, along with my copy of Practical Photographer (which reminded me that I'd forgotten to enter the competition to win a Nikon D300, which I'd been coveting. Meh.) was a letter from my MP, Ben Wallace, to whom I wrote about this matter last Saturday. It reads:

Dear Mr Binns,

Thank you for your email of 12 April about photography in public places.

I am sure you will be pleased to hear that I have now signed Early Day Motion 1155 which urges the Home Office and Association of Police Officers to agree on a photography code for Police Officers on the ground, setting out the public's right to photograph public places and therefore enabling photographers to enjoy their hobby without unjustified suspicion.

Kind regards,

Ben Wallace

It's nice to know that writing to your MP really does work sometimes.

Oh, and whilst we're on the subject the photography stuff I posted about earlier, there's a petition on the Downing Street website that UK citizens and ex pats can sign:

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to clarify the laws surrounding photography in public places.

Through history, we have documented the world around us, whether through written word, art or photography.

Photography in particular has provided fantastic insights into the past and present, and is a hobby enjoyed by millions of people worldwide.

But today, it's becoming increasingly difficult to take photos of our surroundings, particularly in cities like London.

In recent years, the price divide between professional and consumer equipment has blurred, and it's quite common these days to see amateurs and hobbyists carrying around tripods, SLR cameras and a backpack full of equipment.

Yet, we are constantly harrassed by security guards and police officers in the name of preventing terrorism. They seem to be operating under a different interpretation of the law to the rest of us, believing that somehow the length of your lens, or size of your camera is relevant.

We would like clarification by the goverment on the law regarding photography of buildings and landmarks from public locations.

Seems like a worth sentiment. If you feel you've got an interest, please sign it.