1. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/VirtualBox#Create%20A%20Bridge
2. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=830777
3. http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=752127

Anyway, let’s begin.

Does it Work…?

First step along this Rocky Road to Near-Fail was to follow the useful advice in Link 1 above, and thus making sure that creating a bridge and activating it and the TUN/TAP actually worked. It did. From that link, I did the following:

~$ sudo aptitude install bridge-utils uml-utilities

This installs the pre-requisite applications to do the fun stuff.
The second point depends on your viewpoint, but it’s probably worth backing up your current /etc/network/interfaces file in case you manage to break something:

~$ sudo cp /etc/network/interfaces /etc/network/interfaces.good

Obviously, what you call and where you place the backup is up to you. Just make sure it’s something you remember later.

Now for preparing the bridge itself. Fun:

~$ sudo tunctl -t tap1 -u USERNAME
~$ sudo chown root.vboxusers /dev/net/tun
~$ sudo chmod g+rw /dev/net/tun

Next up, we need to edit another file, apparently to help make permissions persist after reboots. The file we need to edit is /etc/udev/rules.d/20-names.rules
Again, we need to edit this as root, so from the terminal:

~$ sudo [$editor_du_jour] /etc/udev/rules.d/20-names.rules

And then at the end of that file, find the following line:
KERNEL=="tun", NAME="net/%k"
And add the following to make it look like this:
KERNEL=="tun", NAME="net/%k", GROUP="vboxusers", MODE="0660"

Take whichever process your editor takes for saving and closing that.

Now we can create the bridge itself:

~$ sudo brctl addbr br0

Now put the network interface into promiscuous mode, add it to the bridge, and set the Bridge to DHCP (if you are using DHCP, if not, ignore these and see the next statement):

~$ sudo ifconfig eth0 0.0.0.0 promisc
~$ sudo brctl addif br0 eth0
~$ sudo dhclient br0

If you are NOT using DHCP, and have a STATIC IP, follow this example:
~$ sudo ifconfig br0 192.168.1.105 netmask 255.255.0.0
~$ sudo route add default gw 192.168.1.1 br0
(Obviously, replace the IP, Netmask, and Gateway IPs with your own…)

Now, simply add the tap1 device to the bridge and bring up the interface:

~$ sudo brctl addif br0 tap1
~$ sudo ifconfig tap1 up

Last thing I did was just to run ifconfig to double check everything that should be there is there. You should have the Bridge (br0) with your IP Address, the physical interface (eth0) set promiscuously, and the TAP, tap1.

Opening up VirtualBox and change the appropriate network settings for your VirtualMachine to point to the new tap device (in my case, tap1). First step in that is to change the ‘Attached To’ drop-down to point to ‘Host Interface’.

Starting the VirtualMachine now should be effortless, and when it starts up (and you add them), the same routes you’ve been using should work just fine… so ping, ping away!

Making it Permanent

The initial instructions I was hoping to follow from Link 1 didn’t work out all too well for me, so I was back trying to work out exactly where I could fix it. Thankfully, SpaceTeddy on the Ubuntu forums was able to point me in the right direction of some useful hints he’d written.
In the end, I did the following.
First step is to go back and edit /etc/network/interfaces with your preferred Text Editor. You need to be root to do this. In there, you are replacing your current Physical Interface settings for the bridge, or, in my case, swapping out eth0 for br0. Then you are adding a rule to tell the bridge it using your physical interface (eth0). Finally you are adding the stuff that brings eth0 up as promiscuous. It should look like this:

auto br0
iface br0 inet static
bridge_ports eth1
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet manual
up ifconfig $IFACE 0.0.0.0 up
up ip link set $IFACE promisc on
down ip link set $IFACE promisc off
down ifconfig $IFACE down

It’s probably worthwhile noting that you SHOULD NOT remove the references to the Loopback Interface (lo), but do make sure any other references to your physical interface are commented out, or plain old deleted – you made a backup anyway, right?

After doing that, the only thing left to include is finding a way to bring the TAP interface up on startup. The other guides do mention ways to do it through /etc/network/interfaces but they didn’t work for me – I still don’t know why.

Instead, I just added the commands to /etc/rc.local, along with the routes I need to bring up everytime I startup. This was as simple a case as opening up the file in my preferred text editor (again, sudo is needed) and adding the following:

tunctl -t tap1 -u MyUser
brctl addif br0 tap1
ifconfig tap1 up

exit 0

Make sure to keep the ‘exit 0′ at the end of that file – it seems to work.

And that massively over-lengthy block of text is all that you need to do. I will try and refine this at some point but, this works for me and seems easy enough to follow if I need to remind myself what I did again.

In the Beginning

Attending the Festival as a group was John, Mike, Owen, Duncan, and myself. Duncan would be joining us on the Thursday, whereas the rest of us drove down on Wednesday. The journey down was uneventful, but we had the vehicle packed to the rafters with bags, tents, booze, and Pot Noodles. There really was little else.

The Music

So, this is the selection of artists I actually managed to see live whilst I was there. Of course, the sad thing is that I will miss some artists out, particularly those that I heard in passing or caught their sets midway through on the Wednesday or the Thursday, where no published program seemed to exist to help me find out the names of some of the funky musicians I listened to.
More or less, this list is in chronological order, starting on Thursday with The Levellers, and finishing with The Verve on Sunday night. You can fill in the other times and days yourself, or just trust me when I say they follow through the weekend…

Unfortunately, I didn’t get to see everybody I’d wanted to see, but I did get a fair old whack at things.

The Levellers

[last.fm linkage]
Various signs around the place on Wednesday and during the day Thursday had made it fairly clear that the Levellers were performing, and I decided pretty early on that I had to go see them. I don’t know why I thought that, because I’d only ever heard one track by them (knowingly) pre-Festival, and that was Just the One. But I went anyway, and plodded down to the Left Field tent in the pissing rain to try and get inside and be remotely dry whilst watching and listening. The place was full to the rafters.

As to the performance. Personally, i thought it was brilliant. Everybody loved it, lots of singing along, the sounds quality was good and the atmosphere was great – a really solid band to unofficially kick things off. Shame I got piss wet through in the process, but that’s what it’s all about I guess!

Kate Nash

[last.fm linkage]
Mornings soon proved to be not the best of times for our merry little crew, be it because we were sleeping, recovering, or just plain ol’ procrastinating instead of going out there and listening to music. Thanks to that, we arrived pretty late to see the last couple of songs Kate Nash was performing.

Kate Nash tends to get quite a lot of flack, or so it seems to me anyway and, if I’m honest, I think I was the only one of us who quite fancied going to see what she was like live, which probably doesn’t score me any points on the heterosexual scale. Bugger.
Still, I have to say what I saw at the end of the set was good, if you like the stuff she does, which I do. It’s entertaining, easy to listen to, and amusing, which is just fine in my book.

The Subways

[last.fm linkage]
To be honest, I hadn’t listened to much Subways stuff before the festival and wouldn’t have initially rushed anywhere to see them. I have the first album lying around somewhere and it occasionally gets a listen to and does the job well. However, they followed Kate Nash on the Pyramid Stage so we figured, why the hell not? There was nothing else particularly pressing that I wanted to see in the morning anyway.

As with what I saw from Kate Nash, I enjoyed it. They seemed to have a fairly solid stage presence and were fairly interesting to listen to. I only recognized a couple of songs from the first album, and wasn’t entirely sold on all the new material they tried out, but it was fun. Would see again (at a Festival… probably wouldn’t go out of my way to buy tickets).

Hobo Jones and the Junkyard Dogs

[last.fm linkage]
Fecking brilliant. John summed it up afterwards by commenting that this sort of thing is exactly what Glastonbury should be about- variation and random fun.

The atmosphere was brilliant, the performance was amusing and captivating and generally to a pretty good quality considering the washboard was in action. The three of them did brilliantly and genuinely seemed to convey an almost humble attitude to being there. They may have opened by saying it was a joint effort between the audience and them, but it really did seem that way as it went on – every single person in the room seemed to become a real part of the gig. Simply brilliant, and I hope to see these guys again at a future point. Try and listen to some of their stuff, it’s fun!

Alabama 3

[last.fm linkage]
Over to the Jazz World stage, this was another artist I really didn’t know very much about (except, of course, the Soprano’s Theme ). They’re fascinating. In a really weird sort of way. I really can’t even begin try and describe them, as I wouldn’t know where to start. The vocals are a strange mixture but they seem to work and there’s something completely unavoidable about how cool and, dare I say it, funky the whole band is. Genuinely interesting.

Candi Staton

[last.fm linkage]
Everyone knows and loves at least one Candi Staton song, even if they don’t know her by name. And, arguably, this was one of the best sets I saw over the whole weekend.

Simply put, she’s brilliant. Superb voice, great stage presence, and everyone loves the music. She belted out some absolute classics, seemed to hit every note just the way she wanted to, and seemed to be having  a great time being there. If you didn’t see her, you missed out, regardless of whatever else you saw in her place. Sorry, you just lost the game.

Fun Lovin’ Criminals

[last.fm linkage]
The start of a crazy evening.
I’ve seen Fun Lovin’ Criminals before, in Lancaster, and thought they were great then. This time, they also didn’t disappoint, although I had a much more relaxed approach to watching them – that being that I was wandering around the gig on my own, too drunk for my own good, and talking to strangers (see ‘Reckless Abandon’, below for more). So in many respects, they were background music. But it’s great background music. This set also served to remind me that I should listen to them a bit more often. Tasty.

Sinead O’Connor

[last.fm linkage]
I was pretty excited at the prospect of being able to see Sinead O’Connor live in the run up to the festival, and so was a little disappointed with hindsight to admit that I didn’t actually see the show.
I was there – please don’t think I skipped it all together – but I just heard it again as background music whilst I was talking to two very nice people from the Czech Republic. Good times.

What I heard was good though, although it would be hard to claim she has a bad voice and, as with FLC, it was really nice to have good music going on around you whilst you could sit and talk to strangers, embarrassing yourself along the way. Lovely jubbly. I also failed to spot if she still had a shaved head, so anyone who can help confirm / deny that it would be much appreciated.

Kings of Leon

[last.fm linkage]
I’ve enjoyed listening to the Kings of Leon ever since I first heard Molly’s Chambers, which always struck me as fairly fun and easy to listen to. However, I will quite happily take the points made by both John and Mike that, relatively speaking, they are quite a boring band and don’t bring anything new to the table. That doesn’t bother me though. One thing Glastonbury reaffirmed for me is that I’ve largely got past worrying about where the music’s come from, what it means, what it brings to the table, or whether its overrated, ’sold out’, or any other such phrases. Of course, if a songs got an emotional background, pushes boundaries and has something I can relate to in it then it will be preferred, but it doesn’t stop me just enjoying listening to things non-committally.

And so it was with Kings of Leon. I knew when I saw them announced that they were one of the few acts I would feel I _had_ to see whilst at Glasto, purely because what I’ve heard recorded I’ve enjoyed and – just as with so many other acts at the Festival – I really wanted to see what they could do live.

Honest verdict? I was disappointed. I enjoyed the songs, but I felt as a live act they were simply dull. I think I was expecting a bit more stage presence, and probably beer. I wanted rock and roll but all I got was this lousy CD-quality experience.
That’s not to say they were necessarily bad though. I did enjoy what was played and had a little solo boogie all to myself in my slightly spaced out state but, in future, I wouldn’t be overly bothered whether I saw them or went to see something else.

Pete Doherty

[last.fm linkage]
Following the end of Kings of Leon, I staggered up towards The Park to see the end of Pete Doherty, seeing as he’s another artist I really haven’t heard much from. I literally arrived right towards the end, but from what I did see and hear, he did a good job. Well played that man.

James Blunt

[last.fm linkage]
No one will believe me, but this was largely accidental. We lost Owen, and I had to hold the fort whilst the search parties went their separate ways. Turns out it meant I got to sit / sleep through this. Everyone there seemed to love it, good for them. Have to admit I was strongly apathetic, letting this rank as my biggest regret / wasted time moment of the weekend. It’s not that he’s necessarily bad, he’s just not really anything I’m into.

The Raconteurs

[last.fm linkage]
I dozed a little bit for this as well, but I thought they did a pretty good job overall. I knew hardly anything about them before sitting through it, and I probably would see them again given the chance. Not much more to say though really.

Manu Chao

[last.fm linkage]
Another artist I was determined to ensure I caught at least once during the festival, we decided to stick at the Pyramid Stage and see Manu Chao there. They didn’t disappoint. Energetic, upbeat, and all under the late afternoon sun. It couldn’t have been better.

A great mix of their songs, some new, some old, all timeless, it was everything I would have hoped for from a Manu Chao gig. Would definitely try to see them again.

Amy Winehouse

[last.fm linkage]
Not really a lot to report on this one that would be classed as ‘new news’, seeing as how everybody seemed to be talking about it and the ‘Punch up’ incident since the Festival. However, I thoroughly bloody enjoyed it. She was incoherent at times (could have been the sound levels). She was tottering about looking rather unstable. And the dress wasn’t the most flattering. But fuck it. She also has a brilliant voice and got stronger and stronger as the show went on. If newspaper reports are to be believed, and if she really is ‘ruining herself’ then, yes, of course it’s a shame and a sad story but, at the same time, if she’s having fun and making good music then… meh… maybe I’m just being selfish, but I actually quite enjoy seeing musicians embrace the rock and roll spirit every now and then. They’re only human, afterall. Why should their mistakes and life choices be plastered all over the place? And why should it bother us from a music point of view? To me, it shouldn’t.

So, Miss Winehouse, well done on the performance. I salute you.

Jay-Z

[last.fm linkage]
It’s been spoken about enough, but the intro was brilliant, and showed a solid sense of humour. To then open up with 99 Problems was something I knew and appreciated. Good song.

Whilst I didn’t watch the entire set, the first half I watched was good. It was entertaining, had a decent variety of samples that brought back some songs I hadn’t heard for a long time, and it brought variety and controversy to the floor. I certainly hope there’s hip hop at next year’s Festival, even if it doesn’t headline. It brings it back to being a Festival in celebration of music, in all its forms.

Massive Attack

[last.fm linkage]
Given that the timetables clashed between Massive Attack and Jay-Z, I was only able to catch the last bit of Massive Attack before retiring for sleep. From what I saw, and from what I heard others say, it was epic. Great use of lasers as well. A little part of me is gutted I didn’t see it all, but then I was glad I got to see Jay-Z.

Neil Diamond

[last.fm linkage]
There’s very little that can be said against this mighty fine individual. In fact, if I had to nitpick, it would be because I thought his acknowledgement of the applause he received was a little repetitive – there’s only so many times I can hear “thank you so much” and hearing it after every song got a little boring.

Still, it was actually a lot better than I’d hoped it would be, with highlights clearly including Sweet Caroline and, for me at least, Pretty Amazing Grace since I’ve enjoyed the song immensely since I first heard it (repeatedly) on the Radio when it was released. It sounds just as good live.

Good clean fun would be a good way to describe the set. The afternoon sun made it very continental in it’s party atmosphere. Wild.

Goldfrapp

[last.fm linkage]
Yet another band I really didn’t know enough about / of before going to the Festival, I was very pleasantly surprised at quite how much I liked them. Granted, I dozed through a good portion of the set, but the music clearly wasn’t so offensive I couldn’t sleep to it. Great voice, and really quite interesting, I can imagine I’ll listen to more of this stuff before too long. Good job.

Leonard Cohen

[last.fm linkage]
The one artist I feel I can write an unhealthy chunk of text about.

Without doubt, this was the single greatest performance of the weekend (in my humble opinion), even if I wish to put all the weight of that achievement onto one song – Hallelujah. Simply stunning. Words don’t even come close. I am being completely honest when I say I don’t think I have ever seen any other live performance that has simply knocked me for six on an emotional scale as watching Mr Cohen belt out his version during this set. It actually makes the original album version seem rather disappointing by comparison, and it’s a song I absolutely adore.
As it happens, I had also been listening to Jeff Buckley’s version of the song a few too many times to be healthy in the weeks before the Festival, and that had always managed to intrigue me, but by comparison, it can’t do anything like Cohen’s version can. It’s husky, it’s candid, it’s bare bones, and it’s brilliant. It seemed to get possibly the greatest applause that I witnessed during the weekend and, if everybody was doing as I was, it was automatic. I could think of nothing else but applause. I couldn’t have shouted anything out. It genuinely hit me like a bottle of wine.

Maybe it was because I was still in a mildly fragile state from the previous few days, but it brought me bloody close to crying. Sad? Probably, but it’s the truth. Whether it was the combination of the music and the setting sun, with the added mix of having the entire crowd hanging off his every word with adoration or not I really don’t know. But it was special. I’ve linked a mobile phone video that somebody put on YouTube below. Check it out if you like. It’s rather good.

In many ways, it was a shame that Hallelujah came in the middle of the set because, as Mike said, it meant that the next few songs almost felt disappointing, but in so many ways I really don’t think Cohen cared, and he definitely kept everyone on board and interested as he continued through the rest of his set.

If you ever get the chance to see Cohen live, do it. Don’t think twice about it. Don’t wait. Just do it. You probably won’t get many chances. If he’s performing at a Festival near you and there are tickets left, buy them, and go. You will not regret it. It’s a statement I’m probably going to grow up to hate myself for saying, as it sounds a bit weak, but he’s an amazing performer, coming across as very commanding over his domain whilst at the same time seeming genuinely humble and honoured to be so adored. Plus, seeing as all his songs are largely, and primarily poems, I would be very surprised if he ever performs the same song quite the same on any two occasions. Brilliant.

Go watch the video: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=_tPQQLMXmQ4

The Verve

[last.fm linkage]
Probably the one band I was most excited about pre-Festival. The performance itself has no doubt been well documented. I thoroughly enjoyed it, especially Bitter Sweet Symphony. Nearly returned me to tears again. I believe it brought Owen closer.

Seriously good show though. Very impressive, and clearly appreciated by all who attended. They were every bit as good as you would expect them to be, and deserve any and all praise they receive. Solid performance.

Reckless Abandon

Friday night was Crazy Friday. In fact, Friday in general was Crazy Friday. But it was brilliant, and full of, you guessed it, reckless abandon.

I did everything my mother always told me I shouldn’t do:

• I wandered around on my own in a strange new place
• I drank excessively
• I spoke to (and accepted gifts from) complete strangers
• I applied the ‘cocktail’ methodology to my stimulants of choice
• I picked my nose

With hindsight, it was foolish. It was also bloody brilliant, and something that I’d never done before. That’s not an encouragement though.

Anyway, where to begin? Well, my guess is it started with that Guinness at an ungodly hour of the morning. In so many ways it was a wrong choice, yet it seemed so right at the time. Lovely stuff. Then there could be the Hot Spiced Cider. After all, it’s only apple juice fundamentally, so we were all more than entitled to give it a whirl. Invigorating in and off itself.

As I remember it, at some point after this myself and John returned to ‘base camp’ to get some booze and lunch, by which I mean a Pot Noodle and the remains of the first box of red, red wine. Plodded on down towards The Other Stage to meet up with Michael and co, at which point the cave suit was on (it had started spitting again). Here came the first break, as the rest of them were off to see… someone… can’t remember who, and I headed back to Jazz World for the Alabama 3, ‘bag’ of wine now in hand (the box disintegrated in the rain). According to the strangers I was talking to, it looked quite suspicious, me being in, effectively, a boiler suit with a transparent bag in hand containing an unidentified red liquid. I’m sure they loved it really though.

At the end of the Alabama 3 set,which I enjoyed thoroughly, I latched onto some unsuspecting Welsh folk to chat about my dodgy appearance and why I was on my own (”No, really, I _do_ have friends, they’re just… erm… somewhere else…” ). Just before Candi Staton came on stage, Mike and John found me (apparently, my bright yellow suit stood out… *shrugs*) and we made our way to the rest of them to watch – and subsequently boogie a little to – Candi Staton.
Once more, we got talking to strangers. A couple of fellows from down south, and a considerably older gentleman I’m led to believe was not with them, but who was, certainly, loving life. It was a solid hour of banter, and I thank them for that.

After that, I believe myself and John went back to the tent again, or maybe a few more of us did, to replenish food levels (with Noodles) and to grab another beer. I was to be the only one who wanted to see Fun Lovin’ Criminals over the other options so I set off back down there on my own, this time replacing my sun hat with the Indian Headdress. I could probably cite this as the defining moment of the evening.

On the way from The Other Stage to Jazz World, I stopped for another Cider, and shook many strangers hands, not to mention uttering the famous ‘How’ whilst raising my right hand a good few times. The concept made me giggle.

Arriving at FLC, I decided it was too busy for me to be bothered to get near the front, so I wandered aimlessly (and drunkenly) towards the edge of the sound stage. It was hear that I latched onto my second group of the evening – a jovial bunch of guys from Anfield (of course, I played the dubious card and admitted I was a United fan – not something I would have done sober). They were a really nice bunch and seemed to appreciate my odd attire. They offered me a beer which, for a Carling, settled surprisingly well, and soon introduced me to Gary, which I mistakenly thought referred to Green when they first mentioned him. Apparently, I was wrong, and I can only guess his name should be spelt Gar-E. But that’s just a best guess, the truth is, worryingly, that I have no idea. I know it wasn’t negative, and it made me eager to talk to strangers but beyond that, I’m stumped. The Gar-E suggestion came from Mike.

Anyway, the Jolly Scousers soon departed, and I was back to embarrassing myself in front of another group who, I think, were from London way and were only to eager to provide a screen for me to piss behind – a fact I had forgotten until a couple of days later – I know, I’m an embarrassment to my family.

After chatting for a while, I realized that I was risking missing Sinead O’Connor, so I made my apologies and left. On the way I got talking to a delightful couple that were heading towards The Other Stage who decided to share some poppers with me before we went our separate ways. Apparently, they liked my headdress. Lovely folks.

I carried on walking, in my blissful state, up past the Left Field stage, where I stopped briefly to cut short some little kids who were trying to take the piss. I blind-sided them with good temperament and wished them a good festival. I still don’t quite know why, it just seemed easier than ignoring them.

Before long I was up by the Acoustic Stage, sat outside it and returning the ever-increasing number of “Hows” I was receiving, even occasionally going as far as responding with “That’s How… for now [dodgy facial expression]“. It amused me greatly.
Up outside the acoustic stage I got talking to Tom and his Czech girlfriend (Katka?). Lovely people. And really quite interesting. God only knows what they thought of me. All I really remember is repeatedly apologising for ruining their evening. I sat outside the tent talking to them most of the way through Sinead’s set. Her set provided great background music.I also spoke to a group from New Zealand and did a crap job of taking their photo for them numerous times. Even the time I tried to rest the camera on Tom’s head didn’t work. Wacky.
We sat, chatted, had a little smoke to stir things up and laughed about Tom’s apparent knee fetish. Fun times.

After staying just long enough to thoroughly embarrass myself I left to go catch the Kings of Leon set. Feeling fairly content still, the walk there passed quickly, with a silly grin slapped across my face. More “Hows” were exchanged.

Wandering around the crowds waiting for the Kings of Leon, my initial intention was to find Mike and John, who I knew were both meant to be there somewhere. Apparently, they were equally smashed after getting through as much of the booze as they could. Solid performance.

However, I didn’t find them, as I was distracted by a fun-loving group who stopped to talk to me. After providing them with my carefully rehearsed caution – “I warn you, I am an idiot and have spent the evening attaching myself to different people as I can’t find my friends” – we joked, laughed about my attire, and smoked some more, and waited for the show. It was fun, but I sort of drifted away from them mid-Kings of Leon as I seemed to be struck by a niggling sense of paranoia / soberness that left me realizing I may be ruining everyone’s night _and_ the fact that they seemed to think I was gay. I questioned what I was doing, and just switched off and watched the rest of the set on my own. That was rude of me, and I apologise. As with most people I met that night, they were a lovely group, and I shouldn’t have let my social ineptitude stand in the way of me trying to be polite. God damn my shy side!

Before the end of the set, I was talking to another two strangers briefly, as one of them wanted his picture taken with the headdress on. I said he could, provided I was in the picture. He agreed, the picture was shocking, and I apologise for ruining it. Besides that, I don’t remember much of the conversation.

As soon as that set finished, I left and set off for The Park, to see the end of Pete Doherty’s set. I’d forgotten how long a walk it was, and arrived just in time to catch the end of it, although I very nearly didn’t see anything – the multicoloured tower in the corner caught my eye and I walked aimlessly towards it… and past the stage.
You can’t make this shit up.
So, after doubling back on myself to see the end of Doherty’s set, I was at a loss as to what to do I realized I was still on my tod, 5 hours after I’d last seen any of my friends, and I was sobering up.

I took a stab in the dark and guessed that the rest of them might be in the Dance Village, so I set off down there feeling distinctly alone.
When I couldn’t spot them, I turned around and walked back up to the tent (near The Park). When they weren’t there, I went _back_ down to the Dance Village where I got a little bit worried when one reveller threw his arms round me and tried to tell me that I had his hat. I don’t remember what exactly I said to him, but I think I took his comments as more threatening than they were intended. So, sorry for that.
If they were meant threateningly however then you, sir, are a cunt, possibly the only one I met that weekend.

As I got back to the tent, John and Mike arrived, both thoroughly drunk. I was glad to see them and chirped up a lot. Shortly after John threw up and passed out. I took photos. Mike had a Pot Noodle (I think). Then we grabbed some Strongbow and headed up to the Silent Disco in The Park, for all of about 30 minutes, after which it closed, and we returned to camp to sit around and talk. Mike slept, and I decided to wait up for Owen and Duncan, like a paranoid parent. I still don’t know why, I guess I just wasn’t sleepy.

And that kids, is the story of Crazy Friday. Or, at least, my interpretation of it. I’m sure the others have their own specific stories and fables as to how their evening went, but that was mine. It was truly reckless, spur of the moment, and surprised me in that regard, but it was also just pure fun, and the first time I’ve ever really felt an significant effect from pills. Very interesting, if not very clever.

The Food

Not the cheapest but – when you balance it off against the circumstances – not ridiculous either. I believe Mike estimated, and we concurred, that you could easily buy every meal of the day for £15 each day. Which really isn’t as bad as it could have been, as that estimate is on the generous side in as much as we would feel full after such a day
We, however, took many Pot Noodles with us, and a good few cans of beans (some even with added sausage!) and a spot of soup. We ate (relatively) well, but I don’t want to look at another Pot Noodle for at least another year, no matter how good they were at the time..!

Of course, it also fails to factor in beer. I’m glad we took our own.

Averaged £3 a pint, which for a festival isn’t bad, although there were surprisingly few bars offering the bitter.

However, the Hot Spiced Cider stall went down a treat – total win. And, dare I say it, fecking lovely.

Regrets

Surprisingly few, really.

One big one is that I didn’t get to see Duffy. I really should have forced myself off my arse and gone and seen her. Nothing wrong with the Raconteurs, but I do rather like the Welsh girl.

Another one would probably be for the few artists I really wanted to see but didn’t manage it – namely Groove Armada, the full Massive Attack set, and Fatboy Slim.

Yet another one would be that I didn’t spend more time around The Park. Some good stuff on up there.

One more? Missing out on Tony Benn because of a timetable change. I actually wasn’t that bothered to see him pre-Festival,  but the disappointment of a later schedule-change bothered me. Fucker.

Final one? Not taking the Monday off work. Not only because it nearly killed me, but because I would have rather enjoyed going fookin’ crazy on the last night. That would probably have killed me as well.

Conclusions

Glastonbury really doesn’t need a conclusion. It met and surpassed all my expectations.

However, one caveat – keep the variation. Maybe hip-hop doesn’t warrant a headline slot yet, but it needs a place. Good hip-hop is, well, good. And it was a brave choice. So bravo.

If you get the chance, go to 2009. And if you do, let me know. We’ll beer.

It was the first time I’d ever really been caving, be it scuba diving or, as in the case, (relatively) dry. I didn’t take a camera, which was both a mistake and a saving grace (I would have managed to trash it), so unfortunately what follows is just my experiences of it.

I met Rob, Dez, and Danny in the Cafe above Inglesport in Ingleton just after 2 in the afternoon which, to me at least, seemed an odd time to be just considering setting about doing something, but then I guess that’s from a diving mindset of getting places early and spending the day doing it, given the time constraints involved in being underwater.
They’d all just about finished their food and brews and so we headed more or less next door to hire me an oversuit, undersuit, and helmet. I brought my own wellies… Then we set off in convoy, following Danny up to Leck Fell to leave the cars, get changed, and head down to the entrance to the cave – effectively a shockingly small hole covered with a man-hole cover which, for some reason, was not the entrance I was expecting to find. I say ‘for some reason’ because, whilst I expected caving round these parts to be small and tight, I still can’t explain why but I wasn’t expecting a vertical shaft access to it. Just call me naïve.

I headed into the shaft third, with Danny closing the way and replacing the cover. the LED lamps on the front of the helmets actually provided an impressive amount of light across quite a wide beam, which was nice. Straight from the outset it was about climbing down scaffolding and a bit of breeze-block-fashioned ladders, which was interesting, although admittedly I was stuck wondering at first quite how long this would go on for. Judging by how quick we seemed to get back up it on the way back, it really wasn’t as far as it seemed.
To me, the bit at the bottom was where it got interesting, if a little difficult. Getting pointers from Rob in front and Danny behind about how best to twist and turn my body to get over or around various obstacles and tight gaps was pretty entertaining at times, as I never quite realized how much movement you can have when you really need / want to. It was also pretty refreshing to be having to think about things in a similar sort of way as I had to when I was out climbing with Dicko and Rob.

At the bottom of that little stretch it all started to level out a bit and opened up into a much larger chamber than I was ever expecting to find. This was only really the start though, and the next part was a damn sight tighter and closer than I had planned on as we scrambled up a mud slope into an insanely low section, crawling on bellies for what seemed a bloody good distance until it opened up enough to, initially, sit up and take a breather and, eventually to stand up and walk around a bit, as well as seeing my first sight of some nice stalactites, by which I mean ones that weren’t around 6cm long. As ever, it sounds stupid, but I really wasn’t expecting to see much in the way of stalctites and the like as I simply wasn’t expecting to be in passages big enough to house ‘big ones’. As ever, I couldn’t be more wrong.
Back into another tight scramble we went, at which point I was getting a little irritated, not at the scrambling, but at the though of “if this doesn’t go anywhere, there’s no way I am going to be able to crawl backwards out of this bastard. And I sure as hell can’t turn around”. It wasn’t really the tight scrambling that annoyed me, in its own way it was actually quite fun, it was the fact that I was failing to get used to the idea that I couldn’t look straight ahead, as my helmet would keep hitting the roof, so I had to look to the side and angle my body accordingly.
Anyway, this didn’t go on too long and, to be fair, it was all worth while as we came out the other side above a fairly fast-flowing stream that had clearly carved it’s path through the surrounding rock over a number of years – exactly the sort of thing that, for whatever reason excites me. Maybe it’s just the image of running water that I’ve always sort of found fascinating.

We headed further up against the stream through the fairly narrow but high parts and carried on that way until the flow slowed off as things got a bit wider, flatter and, in parts, deeper. We carried on up that way, towards the sump (I can’t pretend I remember where it’s meant to lead) and Rob and co. were commenting on how the water level was a lot lower than the last time they were there. That struck me as odd as it started to reach testicular level on me… shortly after that though we were, indeed, at the sump, and had to climb up and across to take another small-ish route which involved a lower rough, making crawling on hands and knees the ideal approach (if a little uncomfortable without gloves and, before rob gave me his elbow pads, any knee protection).

At this point Rob and Dez continued a pretty intense mud fight, which was entertaining to spectate  on at least. The next stretch continued the mud theme, along with the crawling, all of which was easy enough, although I was becoming increasingly more aware of the added weight from having a suit that had become fairly waterlogged (if not actually too cold) and still thought we were going to have to crawl on hands and knees for a large distance on the return journey. After passing some more impressive formations, myself and Rob stopped whilst letting Danny and Dez go ahead and, quite literally, test the water at the next block they came across. To say it was deep would be an understatement. Turns out it was another sump, apparently leading to ‘a huge chamber’ (Danny’s words, not mine). But to get there we were going to have to swim across it.
I think if we’re honest, Rob and I were all for turning back, but we cracked when Dez came back to encourage us. I have to admit, even when I was stood waist deep in the water on the edge of where I was going to have to swim, I was having doubts, but I figured I’d got that far, I might as well give it a whirl. Besides, the rest of them were already on the other side. Turning back would have made their swims a waste of energy. So I finally went for it.
To say it was cold would be an understatement. It was fucking freezing. The sort of cold that takes your breath away (although, admittedly, I was impressed with how well the simple wooley bear and oversuit worked at slowing the influx of water).

So we’d manned up and swum across the gap (probably a couple of metres across). We then got out, shook around a bit to try to keep warm, and set off towards the ‘chamber’ Danny had promised. It got narrow, and before long the water got deeper again. Expletives were uttered, albeit in a light-hearted manner, and we turned back, for another swim. It was no warmer, but we were having a laugh at least.

The way back was largely uneventful, following a similar route. Before we got back to the spot we’d belly-crawled through, Danny took me on a diversion to show me Curry Inlet. There were some simply stunning formations on the way to it and I’d love to go back and spend a little more time around the area just admiring the formations.
The route back took a slight variation as we got to the point where we’d crawled through as, instead, we followed the stream down and winding around through the narrow passage back to where Danny and Dez had left the bags. This was a great way to end the walking around as well, for me at least. All down hill, water rushing all around, various rocks that had fallen lodged at different angles to duck and weave around. Great stuff.

As mentioned right at the start, the climb out was both a lot easier and a lot quicker than it had felt on the way in and before long we were back above the surface, where the visibility had improved, providing a simply stunning view right out down the valley and over the bay towards the offshore wind farms. Again, the lack of camera irritated me although, to be fair, if I had one it probably wouldn’t quite have captured what a good view it was.

Time to change again, try and put dry clothes on, and then down to the Marton Arms for a swift point before the drive home.

Overall impressions? It was a lot of fun, and in many ways lived up to everything I expected it to be. I wouldn’t say any of it particularly surprised me, although I did expect to find generally a lot more smaller passages and a lot less of the open spaces that were there, along with the formations.
I don’t know a lot about caves in general, and in a way I kind of like that, as it leaves me just appreciating things as they are and as I see them, rather than knowing all the reasons why they’re like that. Of course, it would be nice to know why as well, but I’m happy to have Dez, Rob and Danny tell me instead for now!

Would I go again? Definitely. I mean, it’s not something I can see myself ever really getting into and being as passionate about as I am with my divin but, just like with climbing (which I really need to start doing more of) I could definitely se myself doing it every so often, having a laugh and just getting out and about.

And that just about wraps it up. I’m pretty sure there was more I initially wanted to conclude with, but I guess if that reappears in my head I’ll add it later. Muchos thanks need to go to Danny, Dez, and Rob for letting a numpty such as myself tag along with them and for showing and teaching me some really cool things. Was definitely a good way to spend 4 hours in the dark!

I know it’s not a hugely popular one to pick on, given the number of organisations who swear by them, but to me they seem to be the perfect example of (yet another) crutch people take with them because:

1. It’s what they were told
2. They don’t know any better
3. They think it makes a difference

The point is that none of the reasons are particularly valid.

Of course, everybody will come up with other reasons as to why they take their snorkel with them (’in case I’m stuck with a long surface swim’; ’so I don’t use my air on the surface’; ‘in case the weather’s rough and I need to swim back to the boat’ etc. etc.), but the point is that all are solutions to problems that shouldn’t exist in the first place, if everything is truly covered to an adequate level of safety.

The simple fact of the matter is this: Snorkels are for Snorkelling.

Snorkels only have any real application when you are within centimetres of the surface, which for 95% of my time in the water (if not more) is simply not the case. For all the added complexities a snorkel adds to gear configuration (dangling and dragging from the mask, causing confusion and irritation in a gas sharing situation, generally being an object that screams ‘entangle me!’ to any loose line or catchy bits) it doesn’t give enough in return to be worth taking. Even if you strap the thing to your leg, as some people do, it only serves to add an extra ‘hook point’ (however small) to your gear, and it does so in the one place you’d struggle to get to if entanglement occurred or if you needed to use it – if you don’t need it, don’t take it.

For all the arguments thrown above, there is a much simpler way to solve the initial problem.

1. Using Air on the Surface

Simply put using your air on the surface shouldn’t be a huge deal, provided you account for it in your gas planning, and your gas planning is correct. If you know that you use, on the surface, say 1 bar / minute from whatever tank configuration you are diving (which, by the way, is an easy calculation to learn and use regularly) and you know you have to swim 5 minutes to and from the site you want to do, then you can calculate that you should use 5 bar each way, and so you will need 10 bar for the two legs of the journey. Perhaps you want to factor in some reserve in case you have to work hard, in which case you can apply it appropriately (say another 10 bar in this example). That means you need to plan for using 20 bar to go to and come back from the dive. So you can simply take this figure off from the amount of Usable Gas you have (Starting Pressure – Minimum Gas) and see how it affects what you want to do (in most scenarios this will probably make the difference of 1 or 2 minutes over the course of your dive) – suddenly you realize that it’s not that huge a difference. Of course, if 1 or 2 minutes is too big a difference for you to handle (maybe because the dive site is going to disappear… ?:-/) then you’ve just told yourself that you should be diving a higher capacity backgas (be that doubles or a larger single tank). Taking a snorkel in this case simply does nothing but add confusion for, potentially, the sake of 1 or 2 minutes, although by using the snorkel and dealing with the water entering / having to be cleared during the swim, you may end up so tired at the start of the dive that you use this amount of gas anyway on descent. But what you have done is add an extra piece of gear that you don’t need.

2. So I don’t use my Air on the Surface

See above. Plan your gas properly…

3. Rough Weather

As alluded to in Point 1, this is also a completely counter-intuitive, but oft-mentioned reason for taking a snorkel, especially when diving from boats – “There are some big waves between the boat and the descent point so I can’t have nothing protecting my air way”.

While the reasoning is good – you certainly don’t want to be stuck on the surface in bad weather without a surefire way to be receiving air all the time – the choice of snorkel over regulator is insane. The regulator is simply the better choice, in all situations. The regulator is attached to your tank, and forms a sealed system to deliver air without water. The snorkel is an open tube to the environment. This means that whilst it is realistic to expect at least some water to get into the snorkel (especially true in bad weather, regardless of your snorkel technique), it is virtually impossible (barring opening your mouth, which would be dumb in any situation) to get water into the regulator feeding you your air. This in turn means that the regulator provides less hassle than the snorkel, which makes it both easier and more efficient… so why take the snorkel?

Again it would seem the reason comes down to being Point 1 again, and the issue of ‘wasting’ gas supply. See Point 1 for why this is (or should be) nonsense.

Again, it ultimately comes down to a matter of education, which is a reflection of the fact that diving is an ‘alien’ activity – it’s not something we were meant to do or designed to do. This means that anyone receiving instruction will be receiving (in most cases) completely fresh information. As I believe the phrase goes, Shit Sticks, and people are very hesitant to question what they hear first, and keep going through it until they are finally convinced that it’s wrong. As with most things in the dive industry, so many people have done it / been taught it so repetitively that they rarely have to question it, so it sticks. Equally, it’s not a huge safety issue in itself, and I doubt many (if any) people have died from it, so people ignore it. But the fact is that whether it is life-threatening or not, it is not as efficient as it could be, and is a very easy change to make. If you stop striving to make things more efficient and effective then you are making a backwards step – in any area / sport / technology. Some things just make more sense, even if they are telling you that you’re wrong. It can be a bitter medicine to swallow.

Just to reiterate though, this is not a dig at snorkels are general. Snorkels are great and suit their purpose fantastically, but:

Snorkels are for Snorkelling, not for Diving

But, for me at least, I like to mix and match what I’m listening to, to try and access the full spectrum of music I own and see where I end, so such things as random selection become important, and other things.

So what I’ve decided to do here is attempt a quick review / run down of how five different Music Management applications perform, things I like about them, things that could be better, things that – for me – are notable in their absence. Where applicable I will also make broad comparisons to the proprietary equivalents such as iTunes, Windows Media Player and… I can’t think of another.

Because all the ones I am looking at here are Open Source and running on Linux. Some of them will be able to run on Windows or OS X, some won’t, some may be currently under development as forks.

The Media Players I’ve chosen to look at (with their version numbers) are:

• Amarok 1.4.3

• Rhythmbox 0.9.6
• Banshee 0.11.1
• Exaile 0.2.3
• Quod Libet 0.23.1

As you can see from the version numbers (if you use those as a guide), some of these projects are more mature than others and all offer slightly different things. I have used all of these projects for extended periods of time recently, and still use Amarok, so it might come across as bias in some areas. But I use Amarok for a number of reasons, which will follow.

All thumbnails used in each section link to bigger screenshots, just click to follow.

I don’t pretend that these five comprise the only options for Linux users or any other users, but they are the five better ones I’ve tried. Players such as XMMS and others are classics and solid players, but they don’t handle the management part well enough to be included. If you feel there’s something I’ve overlooked, please comment!

All items were used on a PowerBook G4 running Ubuntu 6.10 (Edgy Eft) and the GNOME Desktop.

Amarok 1.4.3

Amarok (http://amarok.kde.org) is the only player in this roundup to my knowledge that is designed with the KDE Project in mind, and as such is also the Project’s Music Player of choice, coming pre-loaded with the majority of – if not all – distributions that ship KDE. The website states:

Amarok is the music player for Linux and Unix with an intuitive interface. Amarok makes playing the music you love easier than ever before – and looks good doing it.

I think most people would have a hard time disagreeing with that statement.

The interface is fairly clear cut, whilst a couple of things could be adapted to make it easier for people crossing over from using iTunes or similar. It is intuitive. The album cover manager works well for those who like to be able to view the cover artwork of the albums whilst listening to their music.

Even running Gnome with the default Ubuntu ‘Brown’ in the window title bar you become immersed in the Amarok GUI – it just looks nice. There’s no other way to describe it. I’ll agree, the Windows Media Player GUI isn’t too bad either, nor is iTunes, but I find them both a little overbearing, whereas Amarok comes across as very soft. But that’s a personal opinion one would guess.

Another thing that the Amarok team have done well with is the tight integration to last.fm. A lot of music projects now are including last.fm integration as standard or plugin form, but Amarok, to my knowledge, were one of the very early adapters, and it shows with the maturity the integration has reached. Not only do last.fm Radio stations appear in the Playlists tab, but all songs are quickly and easily uploaded to the last.fm servers whilst you listen and recommended artist and song lists are generated for you to check out – very useful.

As with most things KDE, the options and settings boxes for Amarok offer quite a high degree of configurability, with certainly more options than the Gnome equivalents.

The basic layout when starting up Amarok works something like this: Down the left hand side you have 5 Tabs: Context, Collection, Playlists, Files, and Media Device. In the very latest versions of the software there is also a 6th box that links to the Magnatune servers – an online music store that allows full playback of it’s entire catalogue before choosing whether to purchase or not. Very cool.

Along the top of the window you have all your usual options plus a few Amarok specific ones: Engage (allowing you to play CDs, web streams, or specific folders without yet adding them to your collection), Playlist (for playlist-specific functions, such as undo, clear, add, remove, save, etc.), Mode (repeat or randomize), Tools, Settings, and Help.

Following on from this, the main bulk of the available window space is taken up by the playlist window, showing the songs that have either finished playing or are due to play, along with the usual Forward, Back, Stop, Play, Pause buttons, timetrack, and a spectrum-analyzer for bored.

The Context tab is a great feature for those who want to learn more about the music that’s playing. It itself is subdivided into 3 more tabs: Music, Lyrics, and Artist.

The music tab will provide you with information on the current playing track, linking in with last.fm as mentioned earlier to provide short lists of recommended / related artists and tracks, as well as displaying the current album art (if applicable), the last time you listened to this song, and this songs present rating (by default as based on it’s playback). Below all this there is the list of your favourite tracks by this artist (again, based on playback) and the list of albums by the artist that also reside in your collection. All these albums are expandable to choose a particular track you want to listen to – just drag it into the playlist.

The lyrics tab has also matured over time, and now gives you the option to connect to one of several online lyric sites which it goes off and searches to find the lyrics of the current playing song. It’s a really nice idea, but personally, I’ve found that often, no matter how many of the sites I try, it struggles to find the song I’m listening to exactly and provides some ‘Related Choices’ that seem to bear little or no relation to what I was looking for. However, this could easily be the fault of the Lyrics hosts over Amarok’s.

The Artist tab, on the otherhand, is a very useful tab indeed, if you want to waste time. What it does is takes you to the corresponding Wikipedia page for your currently playing artist and embeds it in the tab. For the well documented artists it is nice to have for extra pictures, band history and the like, but for less well-known artists it just yields empty pages. Of course, the beauty of Wikipedia means that if your favourite band or artist is lacking information, you can add it yourself right there and then.

The Collection tab, to me, highlight’s one of the most important areas as it covers just how the application handles the music it does – ie. How well it does it’s job.

Amarok’s Music Collection is handled in a similar way to others, such as Quod Libet and Exaile, in that the user adds the folders that contain the music into a selection field and then the application goes off and searches that folder and all sub-directories and adds all the music it finds to the collection. The important point here is that it doesn’t actually move the files and put them in it’s own music directory as iTunes would, nor does it track where these files go if the user moves them outside of the ‘Selected Directory’. It simply reads the Selected Directory / Directories constantly and adds changes to the collection and removes ones that no longer exist. As far as I understand this it achieves this through the use of databases to make things simpler. For me, living my life out of the laptop, this is ideal, as it means I configure the player to read all music files from both the music folder in my Home Directory, and on my External Hard Drive. If the External isn’t plugged in then Amarok (obviously) doesn’t show the tracks that are there as they aren’t playable. However, if I plug the external in, then the next time it checks for a collection auto-update, all those songs will appear back in my Collection Tab, ready to play. It also means that if I copy a new CD and slot it into the Music Directory where I want it and organised how I want it to be, Amarok can find it, read the files, put them in collection, and… leave the Filesystem alone! I’m particularly anal about how my music is organized both in my CD Rack, and on my Computer, and so this point is very important to me.

Once in the collection, the files are shown, by default, organized by Artist under subheadings of 0-9, A, B, C etc. Spreading the artists out a little bit when quickly scanning through to find where, for example, the Red Hot Chili Peppers albums are. It also groups Albums containing songs by multiple artists into their own ‘Artist Name’ of Various Artists, which appears at the top of the list. Each artist name is then expandable to reveal the available albums (individual tracks are placed in an ‘Unknown’ box). In turn, each album expands to show the tracks. Double-clicking on any aspect will add the appropriate parts to the playlist – so, if you double click on the Red Hot Chili Peppers then all songs by them will be added to the playlist, if you just double-click the album ‘Blood Sugar Sex Magik’ then just that album’s songs will be added and so on. One downside to this is that it can become frustrating for new users who double click a few too many times to find multiple songs in their active playlist as they add them when they intend to play them, but it takes only a short amount of time to get used to this.

The Playlists tab opens up, as the name suggests, all the playlist options, but also includes the Podcast directories and Radio Streams, all of which you can add and subdivide at will. There really isn’t too much more to add on that point, a host of different Smart Playlists are already in place, and the one other aspect is the Dynamic Playlist option.

Because of the way in which Amarok handles music playing (you add songs from your Collection to a ‘blank’ playlist and wipe or save when finished) there is no real need (yet it exists) for a ‘Shuffle’ or random play button – you are able to create your playlists on the fly with ease and rarely have your entire collection in the playlist – and so the Dynamic Playlists came into play (or so I would have thought). What these do is basically start a script that will constantly keep xx number of songs that are coming up for play in the playlist, and Y number of recently played (xx and y are configurable). As each song plays, one disappears from the recently played and a new song is added to the end. Ad infinitum. It’s effectively random play, but you get to see what’s coming up and make some changes. The one major annoyance I have with this is that if I don’t monitor it closely then I end up with Podcasts or speeches turning up in the middle of my music. Sometimes I appreciate it but it would be nice to be able to block it.

The Files tab gives you access to your filesystem to find files that maybe aren’t in your playlist / have just downloaded or maybe just to move things around. That’s up to you, and I’ll be honest it’s a tab I don’t find myself using often because everything is already in my collection. Still, it’s there.

The final tab on the list is the Media Devices tab, probably more commonly known as the iPod tab. With the rise of such devices nearly all media players feature one of these now, and Amarok is no different. I can’t comment much on its functionality though I’m afraid, as I run Rockbox on my iPod so treat it as a hard drive. Sorry. As far as aesthetics and interface though, the Amarok one stays true to form and truly looks easy. Whether it is or not is someone else’s area of expertise.

Of course though, nothing is ever perfect, nor is Amarok. Whilst it is an excellent Music Manager, it suffers, in my mind on one major level – it is just too KDE. All the extension options that I’ve tried to use whilst running on Gnome just don’t quite match the ease of performance you get when running in a KDE environment. I suppose this is to be expected, but I will provide examples. One major example is burning playlists to CD. If you have K3b installed then you have no problems, but there is no customisation option (that I can find) that would allow you to change this to Serpentine (for example), the default Gnome CD Creator. Now, I’m not getting into an argument as to which is better, but it would be nice to have that choice, even when running KDE. Another (and in my mind, bigger) example is web browsers. Now, for this, there is an option to change your preferred browser when Amarok needs to access the outside world but – in my experience – performance suffers greatly when I have it set (as I do) to Firefox over Konqueror and is generally a pig to the point that I don’t bother to use it.

Another issue I have is that there really are almost ‘too many’ features in Amarok. To really get the most out of things like the Wikipedia hooks, the rating system, and all the other pieces of information you can give yourself you need a really wide screen. Even on the 15″ PowerBook I’m running on the Wikipedia information and occasionally the album information looks too ‘bunched up’, but expanding it loses a lot of the playlist information off the edge of the screen (and I only have Song, Artist, Album, Length, and Type selected!). But then the flipside is that most of the features that exist are features I like and wouldn’t like to miss out on, so drawing the line is difficult.

Rhythmbox 0.9.6

Rhythmbox is a Music Management app designed specifically for GNOME, and lives up to that name in providing something that ‘just works’ and with limited configuration right out of the box. It is the default Music Management app that ships with Ubuntu on the Gnome desktop and is in most respects the opposite of Amarok. That’s not to say it’s bad though. It does what it does very well. If it didn’t it wouldn’t have such a large userbase.

But it is different. The first thing I noticed back when I first started to try Rhythmbox (about a year and a half ago) was that it looked vaguely familiar. And it still looks the same now, give or take, although other factors have changed so you might not recognise it. The reason it looked so familiar is because it was originally inspired by iTunes, and to the end incorporates some features i Tunes users will be familiar with. By far the most useful of these is the fact that it uses DAAP, which is the same protocol iTunes uses to share music, thus allowing someone using Rhythmbox to see and listen to an iTunes users music on the same network, and vice versa.

As far as the music management goes, again it runs things quite similarly to iTunes. Looking through the preferences allows you to set the Library location, along with a check box to enable watching for new files. Conversely, if files are removed from the library then a list appears under the Library option to show you what’s disappeared. Adding files or folders is as simple as sticking them in the library directory, or by going to Music > Import File.. / Import Music… – fairly straight forward really. This is where you will also find all the other goodies, such as adding a radio station or podcast.

Playlist management works very similarly to iTunes as well. Simply create your playlist on the sidebar, open up your library, and drag and drop the songs you want into your playlist. Arrange them at will.

When you open up the library, what you will be met with is a split-pane window, the top off is occupied by a searchbox, Artists Pane, and an Albums Pane, allowing you to search through for the artist you want, then a specific album if you so desire. The results of your clicks will appear in the lower half, with all the songs and associated information, ready to play or to move into a playlist. The biggest downside to this, in my opinion, is that if you set an album off playing in the Library Pane and then head off somewhere else in your library to see what you want to play after the album finishes you need to be wary. As soon as the current playing song finishes, the next song to play will not be the next one in the album, but whichever artist / album / song you have currently navigated to. Not so bad if you like to make playlists for every album / situation, but I don’t like that. It’s a personal preference though.

It is very hard to actually knock Rhythmbox down on any specific technical issues as it does just work. The only things I can really knock it back on are my own personal disagreements, which mainly come from liking how I control my music. The fact that everything has to go in just one library screws me up from using my external drive in conjunction with my hard drive, which the collection setup in amarok and some others allows me to do. I also struggle with the playlist idea as it’s just not a process I particularly like. I’m the same with mix-tapes / mix-cds. After a very short while I get bored with them and want to mix something else on there. I can happily go back to the same mix after a break of other music, but listening to anything repeatedly frustrates me. I also dislike having large numbers of playlists available (as I would have to do if I wanted to playlist each album separately). Incidentally this was something I never liked about iTunes either.

Another is the lack of a ‘Various Artists’ grouping such as Amarok has. This leaves me with the same problem I used to have with my iPod that every artist on a compilation album has there own listing, album, and all for one track. It strikes me as illogical. But Rhythmbox is not alone in doing this.

So, whilst there’s not something I can point out as being a single reason for others not to use it, it’s just something that doesn’t ‘feel’ right to me.

Banshee 0.11.1

Banshee is the fairly new entrant as far as my experience goes and I had high hopes for it. This probably sways my judgement somewhat and it must be taken into account that is still a fairly new project, and has a lot of growing to do before it is as mature as some of the others here.

The reason my hopes were so high for it is that, having used Beagle for desktop searching quite a lot, and having F-Spot recently beat off the competition from Digikam in becoming my Photo-Manager of choice, I figured another Mono-related Project would also be able to sway me. Quite simply it hasn’t. But it still has plenty of time to prove itself. To start with the positives though:

It has to be said that Banshee does look, very simply, delicious. The artwork is clean, simple, and well finished. It has a very polished look to it for such a low version number.

The Preferences and configurability options are, like Rhythmbox, kept to a minimum but provide variables for all the basic functionality you might need. The Music folder can be set here, along with the option as to whether you want to copy the imported files to the folder. Very similar to iTunes in that respect.

There is a notable lack of ‘Smart’ Playlists, which to my mind is a good thing. Playlist management already is quite tidy, with new playlists sitting in their correct place within the library, not sitting after the Podcasts option, which is one minor grumble with some other players. This also aids the visual impact of plugging in an accessory, such as an iPod, as the icons for these appear after the Podcast icon, and help give everything a sense of proportion (Playlists are comprised of Library files, and so such be considered a second level of the library itself – makes sense to me). Once again, I didn’t try to use the iPod connection feature to sync items, but judging by the Project Website’s screenshots it seems that the whole process very much adapts the polished feel and looks almost as though the iPod was designed to be sued with it. As to how well such features actually work at the moment, again, I’m afraid I don’t have the experience with the feature to comment.

As with Rhythmbox, the Plugins are very easy to handle, and simply need checking to be activated and then any minor configuration, where necessary, can be made. The plugins currently available allow for things such as Podcasting, last.fm, and Recommendations. Commendable stuff.

One area in which Banshee is nearly unique to the other options mentioned here it is that it is designed, out of the box, to be a complete solution – you can rip a CD inside it, fix up the tags and make playlists, and then burn an audio CD all in the one project, something open source players up until this point have not really concentrated on as a major issue. This is nice to see

But still, I just cannot warm to Banshee. True, it looks better than Rhythmbox and yet shares many features, but I wouldn’t even entertain the thought of using Banshee over Rhythmbox. I think my primary (and possibly only) reason for this is the Library setup.

Firstly, with the standard Library view, it is exactly what I, personally, do not want from my Music Manager. everything is lumped together in the same list with only the search box in the top right to help find things. Now, it’s true, most of the time I will know what I want to find, but equally there are many times where I just like to scroll through my entire catalogue of music and see what I have. If I was to do this in Banshee I’m sure I would soon be blind. There are no spacers or ways of cutting down the lists at all. Whilst Amarok has the A,B,C collection approach, and Rhythmbox / Quod Libet / Exaile have the artist lists, Banshee just has one big grouping and a search box. Now, I know, by using Mono and given the nature of Beagle (smart searching) and F-Spot (tagging) the search feature has always been enough and is probably every bit as intelligent as Beagle-search is (perhaps one day Beagle will scan ID3 tags and bring back those search results as well) but it just doesn’t cut it for the way I use my Music Management. If I want to skim through my entire library of artists, the very lack of an easier to read list makes that job a lot more difficult and confusing. For example, I have over 300 songs by Bob Dylan alone, by using any of the other Music Managers’ methods of Artist-handling that immediately removes 299 list entries to skim through. I would agree that to many people it’s probably a minor point, but to me it just becomes irritating.

Exaile 0.2.3

Exaile is another fairly new project, setting out to be the Gnome equivalent to Amarok – that is a fully featured music management solution – and it’s started out on the right footing.

The main layout is similar to Amarok with a central playlist ‘whiteboard’ taking up most of the space and tabbed options int the left hand side bar, although it stays ‘very Gnome’ by placing the current track information and album art on the top of the screen and leaving the main play buttons at the bottom of the screen. To find out more artist information you need to navigate the View menu, where you can go to Lyrics, Artist, or Album information. In this menu you can also add or remove viewable columns, or use the Action Log to see what your version of Exaile has done since you opened it up, including last.fm logs (if you use it) and the like.

Moving across one to the Tools options opens the key feature – the Library Manager. Unlike the other Gnome apps I looked at, this bears much more operational resemblance to Amarok, giving you the freedom to add whichever directories you want and then hitting apply. Also in here you can manually rescan your collection, force a retrieval of album covers from Amazon, clear or view the queued songs and playlists, or use the Blacklist feature.

This is a superb feature of Exaile and opens another playlist tab with the heading blacklist. As the name suggests, what this playlist does is act as a reference point for the randomization options, giving a list of tracks that should not be selected by the random method. It may not sound too exciting, but when you have an archive of 40 or so 90 minute spoken word podcasts it is a godsend. There is nothing more disruptive than having a random playlist playing your music and then to have the start of a speech or podcast break up the flow of music. The blacklist gets around that. Of course it can also be used to place music you don’t want to listen to in, but my suggestion would be to simply hit the DELETE button in those instances. It’s an excellent feature.

You may have noticed that in introducing the Blacklist feature I also passed over tabbed playlists. This is another, in my opinion, very smart move on Exaile’s part allowing you to have open and accessible multiple playlists whilst one playlist plays through in the background. Why is this useful to me, he of little faith in playlists? Well, it’s useful to me because if I need to make a playlist of music I want to stick on my audio player for a car journey or trip, rather than go through specifically worrying about finding each track I like and where it belongs right before leaving, I can instead be listening to a randomized playlist, and whenever a track comes on that I like I simply drag it over to the new playlist’s tab and drop it straight in. When I finish my listening for the day I simply go have a look at what’s been collected in the new playlist and stick it on the audio player. Of course, for those who like to design custom playlists, this feature will never grow old, and would in fact become a standard requirement in managing your music. No more having to look through the list of all your playlists to make sure you add to the right one, just open that one up next to the one you are listening to and drag and drop. Easy!

Ratings within the playlist are also straight forward and, unlike most other music managers on the market, allows up to 10 stars, giving you much more freedom to grade your music realistically and determining a good cut off point when deciding what you want to listen to.

As far as the sidebar tabs go, Exaile doesn’t differ hugely again from Amarok – Collection is there, as is Playlists, Radio (which is kept separate, unlike Amarok), and Files are all there, and one would imagine that if it doesn’t do it on automount already, one day the Media Device option will be there as well. Of course, Context isn’t needed, as it handles that information elsewhere (see above).

The Playlists tab is worth a quick mention in the way it physically boxes off the difference between Smart and Custom playlists, unlike the folder option in Amarok. Personally, I think I actually prefer this method. I also prefer separating the Radio and Playlists tab, allowing them to both do exactly what they say (granted, Radio also handles Podcasts). I was, in honesty, a little disappointed to see that the Radio tab doesn’t follow the trend set by the Playlists tab in the organization of Radio and Podcast – for this it reverts to the Amarok folder idea. Still, it’s functional and works fine.

As with both Rhythmbox and Quod Libet, the Preferences area remains quite limited on Exaile, although I would imagine there may be a necessity to expand this slightly if it follows its course of becoming the full Gnome alternative to Amarok. I would have thought plugins and the like could quite easily be fitted in this area. But, it is presentable, straight forward, and lets you change the most important things which, I guess, is what it needs to do.

Without a doubt, Exaile is an excellent and exciting looking project, considering it is still in such early days. The interface is, like most Gnome user interfaces, very straight forward, clean and usable. But it still lacks, just like Rhythmbox and Quod Libet before it, a way of compressing some of the collection under a ‘Various Artists’ label. Related to this, the Collection list at the minute still doesn’t have the subdivides (A, B, C, etc) that are nice to have when collections get silly-big. Methods of sorting through the collection are good, but not as configurable as those that Amarok has, although this sticks with the simplicity aspect of Gnome.

Another problem I found personally was with the On Screen Display, something that I haven’t mentioned with the other projects because, even though they have them, they don’t either stand out as a huge positive or negative either way, they’re just there. But the one on my PowerPC version of Exaile here seems buggy. By which I mean that it seems to choose its own moments for reminding you what you’re listening to as it pleases, whether or not you’ve selected it to even be displayed. The lack of a transparency layer option to this also makes this frustrating as it manages to complete cover up whatever was underneath it. But I can let that slide down to early version numbers and running on another platform.

Quod Libet 0.23.1

Quod Libet is another music management application designed in GTK+ and designed primarily for the Gnome desktop, but not exclusively.

It is a lovely music management app and ships with Ex Falso, which can be run as a standalone program for mass-editing of ID3 Tags. This utilises the same tagging backend as is used if you want to edit tags within Quod Libet and functions perfectly well for the job it performs.

On initial startup, I found the main interface to be fairly similar to what I was used to with Rhythmbox – very Gnome, well laid out, clear, and functional. The default View on startup is the ‘Paned Browser’ option which provides 3 panes – Artists, Albums, Playlist, as described in Rhythmbox. This functions perfectly well and with all the same functionality as Rhythmbox provides. The Back, Play, Forward and Volume controls sit at the top of the window on clear view and easy to access.

The one main difference here though is that there is now sidebar with Library and Podcasts and the like as exists in Rhythmbox and Banshee. Instead, what Quod Libet does is introduce a View section to the top taskbar, allowing you to choose which Browser view you want (from a choice of Disable Browser, Search Library, Playlists, Paned Browser, Album List, File System, and Internet Radio) and whether you want to see the Song List (for each album / artist / library), Queue of upcoming songs, or both. Most of these options don’t need explanation as they have been mentioned earlier so I will concentrate on the ones that are slightly different, primarily the Album List.

As you will expect from the name, this is a list of all the album’s in the current collection library, sorted by either title, date, or artist – options you can choose via a drop-down menu. It also features a search bar to help wade through the list and, where available, will show the album art next to the title. Any albums not assigned an album will all appear together under a ‘Songs Not in an Album’ section.

Preferences, sticking with the Gnome approach are fairly minimal, although a bit more fleshed out than Rhythmbox. One library option is available, which is also regularly scanned for updates.

Plugins- and Extensions-wise, Quod Libet seems to have quite a dedicated fan base that supply quite a good range of plugins to cover the same range as most of the other players here offer.

Now, for the disagreements. As with Rhythmbox, my primary concern is the option to obtain music in your library from a single source. This works fine for someone with all their music files in the same location all the time (desktop user) but simply doesn’t cut the mustard for someone in a position such as mine. I won’t the labour the point, I’ve said it already.

Missing Audio Feeds. This could well be a harsh criticism on my part, as the Quod Libet Wiki does indeed say that there is a view option for this, but it is not in my latest Ubuntu package. Which is a shame, as it is a useful feature for all media managers to have and to avoid having to use an external app / manual download for keeping things up to date. Maybe it’s the case that this is a plugin, but on my version, such an option didn’t exist.

The Album List. Doesn’t quite work right for me. First of all, I have a lot of individual tracks that don’t have an album associated with them (if I don’t have a full album I wipe the album tags of all the odd tracks and lump them in one folder in the artist’s directory). I found on mine that whilst, by and large things were ordered properly, there kept being one or two odd-cases at the top or bottom of the list that were out of sync. This is ok though, as I don’t actually have to use it, the pane browser works just fine, albeit with the same lack of a ‘Various Artists’ tab to keep the numbers down.

And the Winner Is…

Amarok.

In my personal opinion it is the only music manager out there at the moment that caters so entirely for my needs. This could be claimed that it only manages that because it’s bloated and has so many features in that parts of it just have to appeal to something somebody wants, but I don’t feel that’s the case here.

Certainly, it does have an overdose of features, not all of them that work well in a smaller screen environment (ie Wikipedia links), and it does have some options that are plain gimmicky (moodbar, which I don’t use), but overriding all of that is the fact that it works excellently at what I want it to do – which is manage where the files in my music directories are, what they say, and present them to me in the most clear and concise manner. It suits me because that’s the way I like to browse through my music.

Incidentally, Exaile very nearly meets all my requirements also, and as soon as things such as the ‘Various Artists’ annoyance, and Alphabetically-separated collection browsing come into it, it would become my first choice when using Gnome simply because it fits into the environment so much better.

But for now, it simply can’t match Amarok for the way it displays my music to me and allows me to organise it.

Equally, the ease at which Amarok incorporates such things as its scripts manager (plugins) by allowing browsing, installing, and configuring within the confines of the application is admirable, and something the Gnome projects could learn from. There is nothing more frustrating from a user perspective than having to fire up the browser, search through the website listings, download a tarball of the plugin you want, untar it to the correct directory, and then going back into your music manager to activate it and hope it works. Tight integration is the key here for me. Of course, if its something completely abstract that hasn’t been uploaded to the kde-look archives then that’s my responsibility to find, but for all the cool little tweaks, extras, and themes, it makes sense to keep access to them as simple as possible.

Of course, as I mentioned earlier, none of these applications are perfect, and Amarok is no exception. Things that I believe could help improve it as a complete music management are things like tight cooperation with a pure tagging application (such as EasyTag, to use a KDE example). Tagging and Tag Editing is already pretty good within Amarok, but I do sometimes find my tags haven’t saved properly when accessing my music in another application, and occasionally when trying to reopen the same file in Amarok, moments after it has saved the changes. Odd, but it happens.

Another feature that I never even thought of until I used Exaile but which I believe all the other apps severely lack is the Blacklist feature and the Tabbed playlist. The extra level of usability and enjoyment they have the potential to provide the user with is immense, considerably more than it sounds when you read about it…

And that’s not the only application that Amarok could learn from. There’s still plenty to be said for making the Play / Pause / Forward / Back / Stop buttons play a significant role in the interface – they are, after all, the key functions of controlling music, and are and aspect that the Gnome-projects tend to do very well in.

Even Banshee, the definitive loser in this race has significant enough positive points in it that Amarok should take note of – namely the ability to listen, rip, and burn CDs within the application, without having to link that work off to another application is a huge step forward, and an important one in usability. I have no idea what the development plans are looking like for Amarok, but my personal thinking is that this should be a number one priority (along with Blacklist and Tabbed Playlists ) in future versions – the current interface and level of operation is good enough to not have to worry about adding new shiny-bits such as the moodbar – of course, it will always be able to be improved, and shouldn’t be forgotten about, but something such as the CD control would be a huge step forward, and raise the bar that bit higher for all the other media managers. I mean, K3b is a brilliant CD application, but I don’t won’t to have to go through the extra step of loading that up when I want to quickly burn a CD before I head out. I should be good to go from the minute I choose ‘Burn Playlist to CD…’.

Still, there will always be room for improvement, and I am not for one minute suggesting any of the applications need to become the same – the fact they are all different is the one thing that gives us such choice – but they do all have certain areas that I see them lacking in with respect to their current features, and some minor tweaks that would make the whole thing much easier.

To finish, I’ll be a bastard and rank them all, in order of the preference that they do the job I want them to do:

1 – Amarok

2 – Exaile

3= Quod Libet

3= Rhythmbox

5 – Banshee

So there it is. Of course there will be people who disagree with what I’ve chosen or the grounds on which I’ve judged it, that’s inevitable. If you feel I’ve missed something or been too harsh, comment on it. But the important thing to note is that I don’t rate any of these as particularly bad applications, and would certainly run any of them before I would run Windows Media Player or iTunes through CrossoverOffice or anything similar – even Banshee (if I have to have a Music Manager move my files, I’d rather an Open one did ).

Since the end of World War II (and arguably since the Great War) the world saw the emergence of a new world power, one that advocated (in speech, if not necessarily action) freedom, equality, and democracy for all – a land of opportunity: the land of hopes and dreams…
This new power brought something else with it: it didn’t have an agenda of invasion or ‘traditional’ empire-building. Rather, it was to stand as a shining example of humanity (racism aside…), a beacon of hope and pillar of support from which the people of the world can build their own freedom.
This was a fairly new, exciting country, one that had united in casting off its former imperial infringements[4] in revolution and solving its internal disputes. It was the United States of America.

As the years came and went (along with US international presence) between the two world wars, the number of world powers dwindled as their respective empires shrank. All the while the financial strength of the USA (the power that enabled it to enter the world stage) increased as it sold its products and provided financial services for a war-fatigued Europe . The closure of World War II saw the situation accelerate rapidly, leaving (primarily) two opposing superpowers in its wake: the United States of America and the Soviet Union. Empires of the other world powers crumbled back to their countries of origin as revolutionary movements in the formally ‘owned’ countries forged their own levels and choices of democracy and freedom.
Whilst the former powers received token acknowledgement in their acceptance and collaboration on various projects (i.e. the United Nations), it was from this point that the battle began between the two remaining super powers, in an attempt to whittle that number down to one.
And, whilst the Soviet Union took their border states (thus bringing down the so called ‘Iron Curtain’) the USA continued their indirect, or alternative, form of imperialism – one that was, it was claimed, built upon helping support ‘democratic’ and ‘free’ states from the incoming wave of ‘communist infiltration and subversion’. They were defending the freedom and democracy of the world, provided that those notions conformed to the American plan or at least guaranteed amiability towards the benefactor.
But, in spite of this thin veil, why were/are American citizens not just oblivious to, but supportive of, such a policy? For all its faults, America is not under under dictatorial rule and its formation and constitution, whilst open to misinterpretation and misrepresentation, hardly seems to counteract freedoms. So how can the freedom-spouting citizens allow their successive leaders to support (to the extent of overriding popular feeling) and impose American-style democracy upon other people, all the while feeling no sense of irony?[5]
The answer, whilst relatively complex and long winded as a whole, can be summarized into a few areas: personality, propaganda, and fear.

Firstly personality. Whilst the vast bulk of American citizens do seem genuinely concerned about being in a position to ‘help’ the world in providing freedom and democracy, it is also a fact that a very large part of the population has never left the country, and as such have very little understanding if even the existence of different mindsets, besides the information they’re fed. What this means is that for them (the majority) the notion of exporting their form of democracy and American ideals to the rest of the world (cleverly called ‘uncivilized’ as opposed to ‘different’) is an obvious one, and is applicable universally. As their exists no real knowledge of other places and cultures (and a very controlled information system), these people struggle to comprehend why people are fighting back against these ideals, all the while retaining the belief that their government our only trying to help.
In brief: the American public rarely complain because they feel their actions have a sense of ‘moral goodness’.

Related to this personality scenario is the issue of propaganda.
It is no hidden fact that the vast majority of mass media networks are controlled (and hence dictated to) by people of a similar political orientation, namely the ‘right wing’. Whilst this does not mean that they create the news items, it does mean that the most well-known options for receiving information is relatively limited in its scope (in some areas) and certainly its representation of the facts/topics is well refined. It also, surely, is no coincidence that much of this information is supportive/adheres closely to what the (’right wing’) White House government says. This may well also explain why, historically, many reports either contradicting the government line or revealing the negative aspects of government action/inaction/policy rarely make mainstream news. Given that the owners of these media outlets fall into the ‘media mogul’ category, the knock on effect is that they also tend to own many of the TV stations that choose which programs to host. Clearly, this not only limit the widespread availability of alternative viewpoints, but gives the moguls the choice as to what degree of ‘alternativeness’ they are prepared to allow in appeasement.
With limited access to (or at least harder to find) alternative information, can it be surprising that a large proportion of the population effectively lies dormant to the outside world, or, at least, is coerced into believing what is told (since an opposing voice is rarely heard)?

Of course, we can not forget the role of fear in this course of propaganda (both government and media-run), especially since the events of 11th September 2001 and the start of the current round of TWAT (The War Against Terrorism).
Of course, fear has had a role at all stages of American policy, both in order to gain support for action and inaction alternatively. In the Cold War for example, the Communist ‘threat’ was justification for many active causes: the nuclear arms race, intervention in Korea, Cuba, and ultimately Vietnam and initially Cambodia and Laos.
Post-Vietnam, the fear of similarly high losses and extended campaigns were reason enough to try and limit involvement/lack of knowledge in Pol Pot’s Cambodia, in African conflicts and struggles, and with Saddam Hussein’s ‘Kurdish Problem’. A strange idea to grasp given today’s activities.
Because now, once more, we’re back solidly in the camp of fear of inaction and, in fairness, it is sometimes difficult not to be drawn into this cycle. Why wouldn’t you be afraid? You’re being told that your very existence is being threatened by an invisible enemy. It could be anyone and everyone. They live amongst you. Maybe they’re even related to you. How do you not fear that?
What this means is that this trio – fear, propaganda, and personality – have been put together and had their desired effect upon the public, allowing the governmental pursuit of absolute superpower status and the imposition of American democracy, ideals (and businesses).

So, when will it end?
Will it end?
And, if it ends, what will follow it? Are we really dumb enough as a species to allow our errors to be repeated ad infinitum?
Personally, I find it hard to trust us not to fuck it up, but I hope we don’t. I also hope and believe that sooner or later this current wave of neo-imperialism will cease, but it looks like we may have a short wait for this to happen. Nonetheless, questioning, resistance and opposition to this wave, such as we saw in response to the planned, and executed, invasion of Iraq (regardless as to whether that was successful or not) will undoubtedly aid this decline, and inevitably accelerate it.
Related to this, I firmly believe that it is vital we, as people of the world [how fucking dramatic am I!] continue to speak out against things we disagree with/believe should be different, if only to limit our ability (and apparent desire) to self-harm.
By this I mean that only by voicing our dissent and daring to be different can we hope to at least limit our present (and future) imperialists’ fascination for nuclear weapons. Owning the largest nuclear weapons supply in the world is not a preventative or defensive measure any longer (no matter what your leaders may tell you), it is simply an extreme continuation of the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) policies or yester-year. But it goes one better.
Because now, whilst acting as a defence (and – ironically enough – simultaneously serving as justification for the invasion of fellow ‘nuclear states’) publicly, they privately serve as both a threat and near carte blanche in diplomacy and neo-imperialist expansion. Just out of curiosity, how many times do we need to be capable of destroying the world before we consider ourselves ‘adequately’ defended?
Perhaps we could start to downscale and perhaps – just maybe – we could start spending all those billions of dollars/pounds/euros/yen/whatever we currently spend of producing these weapons on the safe destruction and disposal of them? Maybe we could even afford a quick look (or passing glance) at why other people actually want to cause us harm and maybe pursue more productive countermeasures than retaliation, invasion, and forced freedom. Maybe.
Maybe when we do this we’ll find that forcing a country and its people to be ‘free’ (the way we want them to be free, don’t forget) is actually one of the reasons these people want to harm us. Strange, huh? But maybe it gets stranger. What if we find out that, actually, “they” are just like “us”? And just like “us”, “they” don’t like having policy dictated dictated to “them”, but rather want to be given some of the tools but able to adjust their comfort levels at their own pace and through their own understanding.
But why stop there? We might also find out that, actually, the policies we have pursued in recent times of ‘forced freedom’ is not actually the smartest move in the world, and in fact has an alarming tendency to leave a bigger, more complex mess in its wake.

Incidentally, at the time of writing, the people of Iraq are gearing up to vote on their exciting, new (and yes, probably shiny) constitution, with 1/3 of the majority ethnic groups (the Sunni Muslims) opposed to it. Violence and invasion troop (sorry, I mean ‘peace keeper’) deaths are escalating. The country is still in turmoil (see also Afghanistan), and terrorist attacks are still occurring internationally and arguably more frequently.

So, the ultimate questions:
Did we really fuck up (again)?
Are we really wrong (again)?
Are we ever going to be truly able to impose freedom?
Are we truly free?
Is TWAT (The War Against Terrorism) really making the world a safer place?

Or, is it really just too hard to be free?

Finis.

NOTES:

1. Too Hard to be Free by Amen (Album: We Have Come for Your Parents) – www.comaamerica.com
2. By ‘we’ I refer collectively to the ‘Western’ world, perhaps more specifically the Power Elite.
3. Eastern Desert, Egyptian Red Sea
4. Which, ironically, would include ‘terroristic acts’ under most recent legislation
5. Such references specifically to the US by no means exempt the role of former superpowers in such actions (Britain and France, for example), but unlike these former powers, for reasons stated above, the USA had a chance to stand up as a beacon for true freedom and democracy, without fear of hypocrisy. It now, admittedly, struggles in this regard.

At a time when Europe are considering legislation over the application and use of software patents which threaten the very essence and existence of Open Source software I felt inclined to present my view on what the current situation and threatened law suits mean for me, and in doing so, hopefully show what it means for you also, as an everyday user.
Many people at this point may feel this article doesn’t hold anything of interest to them, but I think those people will find themselves surprised if they choose to read on.

Let me start by explaining what I think of the Open Source Community and Free Software proponents: they are a shining example of the real potential freedom of speech and expression grants society as a whole. Conspiracy theories and some aspects of the last couple of years aside, the Internet has given the Open Source Community the opportunity and forum it needed to show what can be achieved when international collaboration of like-minded individuals is given the chance to flourish. Individuals casting aside the propaganda their respective governments may be feeding them and coming together to share experiences and advice with one collective vision: the enhancement of the particular piece of software (their joint vision, if you will). The information they have they are willing to share – in its entirety – with everybody else. If any individual wished to take certain aspects of one project and combine it with aspects of another project, to suit their individual needs (and choice), then they have at their disposal all the tools they need to do it – thanks to the Open Source Community. All that is ‘expected’ of them is that any discoveries they make they will share with the Community that helped them achieve the said discovery.*
Can you, just for one moment, imagine how much easier and speedier the exploration of space would have been if the Soviets and the Americans had worked together, sharing their knowledge and experience with each other as they discovered new things? Wouldn’t the world have been a better place than living on the edge as these two superpowers raced to beat each other?** What if – today – there was open international cooperation on similar projects? It wouldn’t put an end to friendly competition between countries if they wished to challenge and waste each others’ resources, but would it not help to tear down the invisible barriers that presently exist between countries if full cooperation could be attained on something that, ultimately, can and should be of benefit to the entire human race?
Or do you prefer the idea of individual countries locking themselves behind their own borders, developing their own plans in private, potentially conflicting with each others’ interests – but not being aware of it? Is that not a bigger source of conflict and potential instability? Is that not pushing us back to the acceptance of the rise of superpower(s) in space – unaccountable and uncontrollable? Is that progress?
Can you, in that same moment, imagine what it would be like if Newton or any of the pioneering minds in science had chosen to/been able to patent their early discoveries? The discoveries that have propelled and made possible almost everything we take for granted in modern technology. Would that have allowed the rate of development and innovation to have occurred as quickly as it had? Or would companies still be shelling out fortunes to use the theory of gravity or similar in any new inventions/ideas that required it? Would schools not be unable to teach such basic and yet profound ideas as the licensing costs of the theory would outweigh any practical gain that students could ever gain from it? How is that a better world?
And yet, in effect, it is that base level logic that is being worked against every day, all around us. From what I can make of it (and, admittedly, I don’t by any stretch know the full details, but its my understanding) the idea of specific software patents are not going to help this situation. How can it? Patents no longer protect innovators and individuals, and at any rate they don’t do anything at all for the proverbial ‘little guy’. They belong to, and are abused by, corporations. Just look at any Microsoft (for example) EULA (End-User License Agreement). Don’t know what that is? It’s with every copy of Microsoft software you own, detailing how you can use the said software and the limitations placed on you, the user. You’ll maybe be surprised how limiting it is. But look at the parts about intellectual property. Who does that intellectual property belong to? The corporation. Maybe I’m a geek, but it seems like that’s AI gone insane. Suddenly, a corporation, a non-living entity, has the intelligence able to create x program and copyright protect it. All on its own. Who needs programmers? Its a self-sustaining dream world…
But, perhaps the most worrying, and threatening, thing about patents is how they are going to be (and in some cases already are) being used. Rather than protecting the innovation as I believe their original concept was, they are being used within a framework of scare tactics by the bigger corporations against the small guy. They are allowing the bigger corporations with the big legal budgets the ability to police the world, American-style. They give these corporations the chance to threaten the open source (and largely non-profit) world with possible patent infringements and legal action. Whilst such action may never be taken is largely irrelevant – the mentioning of such infringements is intended to scare off the recent trend of national governments and corporations shifting their systems slowly but surely away from the Microsoft monopoly into the Open Source alternatives (namely Linux). The scare tactics also conveniently ignore the number of patients Microsoft and the other large corporations may also be infringing – they are able to offer each mutual protection rather than engaging each other in drawn out, expensive legal battles that neither side really gains anything from. It’s much easier to wage war on someone who can’t fight back – just ask various American administrations…

But how does that relate to the ‘oppression’ and ‘discrimination’ mentioned in the title? Well, the threat of both is very much there in the proposed software patenting, but the real meat of all this for the majority of users comes in the very basic form of the home computer, and the Operating System.
The Operating System (or OS), for those of you unfamiliar with the term, can probably best be described to you as Windows, or Mac OS. But it applies to any ‘primary’ system for your computer (DOS, Unix, Linux [a flavour of Unix] etc.). The problem here (and, notably, the oppression) is that for the vast majority of you purchasing a new, or used, PC (not Mac) you will receive on it, already loaded and ‘included’ is a copy of one of the few current Microsoft Windows distributions. The fact that the cost of that distribution (I believe on average around £50 sterling) is built in to the total cost of the system is not mentioned – for most people a computer needs Windows to work. That’s how it’s always been. Hasn’t it?
There’s your oppression. How do you have freedom of choice if you are forced to purchase your computer with a copy of Microsoft Windows, and nothing else? How is it freedom of choice if you are told that you need Microsoft Office if you want to write documents, use spreadsheets, make presentations, or draw graphs (in many cases also ‘bundled’ with your new computer)? How is it freedom of choice if you are told you need Microsoft Internet Explorer and Microsoft Outlook or Outlook Express to browse the Internet and read you email (incidentally, also present on your new computer)?
Sure, once you have this new computer and the Internet you can go looking for alternatives, but at what point during the purchase, set up, or running of your computer are you informed of the possibility of alternatives? It’s called a monopoly, and it oppresses your freedom of choice. You become locked into the ‘Microsoft’ way of thinking. And it’s going to constantly cost you (and crash on you***). Maybe you can get pirated copies of the software, but that doesn’t change the situation – all you find yourself with now is inherently faulty software that you can’t ask the manufacturers about for fear of prosecution and fines. God bless Bill…
But what can we do? We’re locked into the system. Surely we can’t break out? Well, actually, you can. But it’s not going to be easy. It requires some form of dedication to the cause. And an open mind.

Firstly we have to look for alternatives. And we do have alternatives. But in order to look at them we first have to appreciate that these are alternatives. We are leaving the boys from Redmond behind for a number of reasons, not least of which is their current monopoly of the market. This means that what we look at will not be ‘like Windows’. In effect we have to learn how to use these new alternatives. Inevitably, what we will find is that for most, in the same way as with Windows, we will quickly pick up what we need to do to get the things working we want to do, and similarly will use magazines/books/help-lines/Internet forums for things we’re stuck on. But the way these things work will be different.
Equally, many of the programs we’ve got comfortable using are designed purely for Windows, and Windows only (further support for freedom of choice). This means they will, most probably, not work on our alternatives. But never fear. We have many alternatives for these very programs available for our alternative OS (most of which, look, work and handle like the one you’re used to, even using the same files) and, failing that, we have ways of making those ‘Windows Only’ programs work… but we probably won’t need to. Thank god for geeks.
Once we’ve accepted that we can start to move on.

So, what alternatives do we have? Well, in my mind, we have two current alternatives:

1. Buy an Apple Mac and use OS X
2. Use a Unix-based distribution, probably for most users a form of Linux

Whilst the first doesn’t quite propel you into the Open Source world, it does provide a commercial alternative (and in my view, more reliable) to the Microsoft prison system. OS X is also based on a Unix underpinning, so it is possible to use quite a number of Open Source projects within your OS X system.
Of course, you can also get many Linux installations to be installed on your Mac
However, it is a commercial offering and, equally, it is not Open Source. Some aspects are opened up (I believe) but by no means all. And most of the Apple software is also closed source – so you risk running into a different prison, this time Apple. But at least it looks nice.
Also, it means purchasing new hardware, as the hardware used by Apple is a different architecture to ‘normal’ PCs (namely PPC as opposed to x86). Typically the Apple systems are not as ‘mod-able’, and most mods made would require a specific type of hardware (probably purchased from Apple). But for the majority of ‘day-to-day’ users I doubt this would be a big issue in itself.

The second option will fling you straight into the heart of the Open Source Community, and you’ll probably have a slightly bumpy landing as you see the new world unfolding beneath you. After a quick look around you will start to see quite how well developed this Community is, and how much help and advice is at hand, all around you. Maybe even in your local town thanks to the widespread and social nature of LUGs (Linux User Groups). And even as a potential new user you’re questions will be received and advice given. Maybe your local LUG guru can even help you make the transition.
The options facing you as to the Operating System you choose to use will seem vast at first, not to mention the options of which alternative applications you wish to use. The easiest way is to check through community archives to see what recommendations have been placed before and check places such as DistroWatch (http://www.distrowatch.org) for further help. Many distributions know also feature a LiveCD option, whereby you can try Linux, or the specific distribution, without removing or altering your current Hard Drive setup at all. Neat, huh? Not only that, but when you choose on your first distribution to try, the download will, probably, be a number of CDs containing lots of different applications (lists of applications are usually available on the distribution’s website) so you can, if you wish, choose during installation to personally add and remove applications you want from a ‘recommended’ installation, or you can take full control of the process with the ‘expert’ option, depending on your comfort level.**** Of the installations you are likely to try/have recommended to you first, they will complete the install ‘ready to go’. By which I mean that on startup you will be greeted by a graphical interface (much like your Windows desktop in many respects). Help files are extremely to access once you’re logged in and, just like the installation process, are very user-friendly (after all, the whole community has been able to participate in some way shape or form).
As an idea, here are some Distributions that may be of interest: Mandrake (http://www.mandrakelinux.com), Fedora Core (http://fedora.redhat.com), SuSE (http://www.suse.com), Ubuntu (http://www.ubuntulinux.org). There are many more available, but this is just a sample.
You will no doubt notice when browsing the distribution lists that some of them are commercial products. Indeed so. So what’s all this about Free Software?
Well, the Free Software mentioned is Free, but in terms of speech, not beer (as the GNU Project states). This means, to go back to what was discussed much earlier, that this software doesn’t have to be free financially (although it often is) but the coding behind it is freely available for development/adaptation. Unfortunately this isn’t always the case with some distributions more recently, but with many it is the case. The majority of the projects are released under the GNU Public License (more information at http://www.gnu.org) and as such are committed to Free Software ideals.
If we think back to the reasons we are looking for alternatives, we will remember that it is due to striking out against a monopoly of proprietary software, and as such choosing a ‘truly’ Free Software distribution will appeal to most.
In many cases, the ‘paid for’ version of distributions and software simply entitle the user to ‘official’ technical support 24 hours a day etc. – the money to pay the people must come from somewhere! And, in many ways it is akin to the current MP3 sharing arguments – if you like the distribution and the project, you would probably not object (and perhaps would quite like to) to helping finance the project.

So, we’ve take the huge step and got ourselves set up in an alternative outfit, which is where we can truly start to learn more about our new path and how we do things, but what about the applications? What alternatives do I have there? And what if I don’t quite want to leave Windows just yet? Can I start to Open Source my Windows system?
Yes, you can.
As would be expected, it is primarily Linux and ‘full’ Open Source users who receive the full benefit of the many, many different applications available (and the many more being launched all the time). But many of the more well-established Open Source alternatives are being launched across all platforms, allowing for the transition to begin right away.
For want of keeping this relatively short I will only mention a few alternatives in relation to what I have used personally and, as mentioned, many distributions come bundled with a variety of different applications available for you to choose from.
From a Microsoft Office perspective, my main recommendation (as a cross-platform alternative) is OpenOffice.org (http://www.openoffice.org), which you may have already heard of. Capable of reading and saving to all current Microsoft Office formats, the Open Office project is moving forward with great success and support on all platforms. Its ability to interface so well with Microsoft Office documents means that you can update yourself to it today and still be able to communicate fully with the Neanderthals using Microsoft Office at work or over the Internet. The release of version 2.0 has just recently occurred so go on, treat yourself.
In another move to oust the wardens from your prison, why not try an alternative web browser (instead of Internet Explorer)? There are quite a few Open Source, cross-platform options out there, such as Opera (http://www.opera.com) and Firefox (http://www.mozilla.org), but personally I use the latter. The project’s aim is to create a browser with a minimum amount of bloat (my Mac version of Firefox takes up a third of the space compared with my – now deleted – version of Mac Internet Explorer). A number of extensions are available for download from the Mozilla website which are very straight forward and very easy to install to your browser if there are certain enhancements you would like to add to your browser – but you don’t have to suffer with the whole lot from the start. The beauty of Open Source development again allows for many new and different extensions to be released all the time.
Staying with the Mozilla Foundation, why not try their Thunderbird email client which recently reached the 1.0 release status. Designed with similar no-bloat ideals as Firefox, Thunderbird is a fully packed email client with some very clever extra parts added and, again, many themes and extensions are available from the website – it’s the perfect accompaniment to your Firefox download!
With a little looking around, it is also very easy to find Open Source replacements even for MSN Messenger (for example I use an application called Fire on my Mac). These Open Source alternatives are usually packed to include support for IRC, ICQ, AIM and others, allowing you to combine those many different clients into one package.
Similarly with some searching you can find alternatives to your Windows Media Player, either in the form of Apple’s iTunes or, if you would prefer not to swap one piece of garbage for a slightly smaller piece, one of the many Open Source alternatives available for Windows. Try a Google search… you’ll be amazed! While you’re at it, why not look at the OGG file format as an alternative to MP3?
For your movie files why not try MPlayer (http://www.mplayerhq.hu) or some similar Open Source options if you’re choosing to move Windows Media Player to its rightful location in the trash.
For Image Manipulation, why not see what the powerful GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Project) can do for you (http://www.gimp.org)?
For those Windows- or Mac-specific programs and games you just can’t seem to find replacements for natively, why not look at Wine (http://www.winehq.net), WineX/Cedega (http://www.transgaming.com) or Mac-on-Linux (http://www.maconlinux.org)?

The list goes on and on, including many alternatives for accounting, scientific applications and music recording and mixing. As with the distributions, you may well find that some of these alternatives will take some getting used to, but that’s no excuse for shying away from them. I’m sure some you’ll find to be even more powerful than the ones you’ve been used to.
At the moment, it is fair to say that Open Source users are discriminated against. For a long time many pieces of hardware and software had no way of working under Linux as manufacturers refused to take their eyes away from the Microsoft monopoly. But no driver support is becoming much improved, and by working together the Community was able to find its own way around the problems, including simplifying the process into GUIs (Graphical User Interfaces) so that even a newcomer can find it relatively easy. Of course we have to adapt to a change in environments, but its a change for the better – for freedom. The more you start to look at the Open Source environment the more options you will see in front of you – more choice.
And by moving towards this exciting community you will, in however small a way be striking a blow against the oppression and discrimination trying to challenge the survival of an international Open Source community in order to keep their monopoly over the industry alive. By maintaining this monopoly they can continue to churn out low-quality, unstable software, safe in the knowledge that manufacturers are going to continue selling their software for them, that the users are too scared to look for alternatives.

Maybe when the average user is given clear information as to the options available to them, and when the propaganda machine ceases to scare people away from alternatives, we will truly see what free communities are able to achieve, together.

For your information this article was written on a Mac Powerbook G4 using OpenOffice.org. It was posted to the Web Server using Cyberduck and Mozilla Firefox was used to add it to the Weblog. The Web Server powering the entire site is powered by the free software of the Apache Foundation and runs an open source flavour of SME Server (before it became closed). If you choose to email me I’ll be receiving your emails via Mozilla Thunderbird.
My Operating System is Mac OS X 10.3. It would be Yellow Dog Linux or Gentoo Linux if Apple and Broadcom would release Open Source drivers (or the ability to create them) to the Open Source Community so that I could use Wireless Internet. To my knowledge I have no specific Microsoft software installed on the system.

Think of this as our very own Shawshank Redemption: we’re locked into an unjust system having committed no crime. We can either shut up and deal with the shit thrown at us or we can work steadily towards ensuring our own freedom, even if it means crawling through shit to get there.
Hand me the rock pick.

NOTES:
* Of course, the requisite programming knowledge etc. would be required, but the potential is there nonetheless.
** Yes, other factors influenced the split in the Cold War, but think of the principle.
*** Based upon personal experience with various copies of Microsoft Windows. Interestingly, I have yet to have a Linux box crash on me.
**** I am generalising the options available over a broad range of Distributions. Primarily I am calling on my experience with the ‘mainstream’ distributions aimed at the ’standard’ user level, as well as catering to much beyond.

Ok, first of all I need to state where (I think) I stand on all this: I think all currently illegal drugs should be legalized. Not necessarily immediately, but certainly we should start on the path towards legalization and, in turn, some form of regulation. We should timetable the legalization of substances and, unlike most governmental plans, we should stick to that timetable.
Maybe I’m a hard-liner, I don’t know. And, to be honest, I don’t care – it’s just what I think.

To be able to do that though (and the other things we should, could and, indeed, need to do) we first need to tackle, head-on, the ingrained prejudice, stereotypes, propaganda and bullshit surrounding drugs. This is more than I can accomplish in my meandering thoughts, I can only tackle certain aspects.
It won’t be easy but, as Nelson Mandela wrote: “There is no easy walk to freedom anywhere”.
And that’s what this is ultimately about – freedom. The freedom to choose how you want to lead your life, as opposed to just accepting the shit that’s thrown your way and doing what others want you to do. Because, let’s face it, if you ‘do drugs’ (or indeed, ‘do’ alcohol or tobacco) you are only doing yourself harm. If you choose to go out and mug someone in order to get the cash to buy your next packet of cigarettes (which, with current prices, is quite possible..) then you are as much at the mercy of the law as any other criminal. But your choice to smoke or drink isn’t (age permitting). And why should it be?
I’ve been out drinking lots of times, and a few times I can’t really remember. But, to my knowledge, not once have I brought harm to other people. Maybe I’ve said some things without thinking that people have taken offence at, but I’ve done that sober. Equally I’ve smoked marijuana a fair few times and yet not once have I brought harm to anyone else as result of my smoking. So why am I (or would I be, if caught and arrested) classed as a criminal?
It just doesn’t make sense to me.* If I am not causing any more harm to anyone else than if I was speaking to them on the street**, how can I be classed as criminal?

The main argument that is pitched against the legalization of drugs is the deaths caused by them and the increase in their use (and hence deaths) such legalization would bring. Whilst many people before have already, quite successfully, reasoned against the argument, I want to add my slant: I think it’s wrong.
Scientific, I know. I think it’s both short-sighted and narrow-minded. Coincidentally, those are two of the most important things people need to shake aside in order to see the benefits and the many, many solid reasons to legalize all substances.
By locking yourself in to this propaganda-induced “All drugs are bad. They kill people” mentality you are effectively denying yourself the possibility to seeing the logic and reason behind most pro-legalization campaigners’ arguments. Because, believe it or not, not all pro-legalization campaigners are drug addicts or, in some cases, even users, and the majority of drug users are by no means addicts – they consume their substances recreationally, the same way many of you smoke and drink occasionally. Sorry to have shattered any illusions there.

And so, for the benefit of those with closed minds, let’s try and go through some of the benefits of legalization, together. You know, like rehab.

Firstly, legalization will not result in widespread binging on any substances available. The steps we should take in order to reach legalization should be more than enough to counter any ideas of that, let alone the fact that the vast majority of users would still have jobs to go to, just as they do now. Maybe they’ll now have somewhere specific to go to in order to consume with like-minded individuals (similar to going to the pub after work now), but that doesn’t mean that the world suddenly stops everything to get high – although that would have its benefits, I would imagine…
If the legalization was introduced as I believe it should be (timetabled progressively for more and more substances) then consumption levels will probably not vary greatly from their current status. Perhaps with some of the chemical substances there may be an increase as people previously put off from trying them due to the lack of verification available and the horror stories of what they are cut with are suddenly able to buy their drugs like they can by their alcohol and cigarettes today – with ‘ingredients’ and contents clearly stated, along with the knowledge that the substances are (at least in theory) produced to some form of standard. Hell, one day, maybe we’ll even have ‘Fair Trade’ Marijuana!
How can it be a bad thing to introduce standards and requirements to substances? Wouldn’t it improve the safety of the drug? At least it would provide addicts – who, in the absence of any real form of support and rehabilitation, are going to do the substances anyway – with a substance free from chalk, bleach and who knows what else.
To take a modern day equivalent regarding alcohol, why not look at the state of Sudan, where alcohol is outlawed according to Islamic law, so people brew their own and people wanting it receive the home brew. This particular home brew has been sighted as the cause of a number of deaths and blindness. Would regulation not help there?
I admit, this doesn’t remove the problem altogether, as people may still seek cheaper alternatives, but it does at least mean that the vast amount of substances ‘on the market’ will have met such requirements and as such provide a safer alternative to the people who use it already. For the vast majority of recreational users this would, I imagine, prove a very popular way of getting substances as, for one, it removes the illegality associated with the substance in its current state and secondly it removes a certain portion of the ‘risk’ in these substances, and hence increases the safety somewhat in their consumption. At that point the drugs become to the recreational user as easy and legal to obtain as alcohol and cigarettes.

Secondly, the legalized drugs market will, of course, be open to tax by the government, in the same way tobacco and alcohol currently are. Whilst I don’t, personally, think this is a great selling point for the legalization, it is very true. If structured correctly it is quite possible that the revenue created from taxing the legal substances could cover the costs of designated ‘drug centres’ and rehabilitation centres for addicts, in much the same way as alcohol and tobacco revenues should be put to now.***
The reason I don’t think this is a particularly great selling point for legalization is quite simple: compared to the other positive effects, this ‘pure profit’ approach seems to pale in comparison. Perhaps if the idea were more pushed with the thoughts mentioned above then I would prefer it. But without justification, the taxing of the product seems almost negative to the vast number of users, and, I would hope, not a particularly effective use of time from a government perspective. But if it could be used to give something back… well, that’s a different matter altogether.
The other problem with the taxing argument is that, at the minute, it seems futile. The government is not stupid. States are, I am sure, already aware of the extra money that could be made from such legalization. But, lacking an effective plan to implement legalization, the states back away from it. Legalizing purely for the taxation would be ineffective, as the inflated prices without justification would be undermined by the already flourishing black market. Only by being able to either justify the ‘higher’ prices or by initially charging competitive prices can the black market be slowed down. Given the massive holes in trying to stop the drug trade at present, we need to concede that we cannot and will not stop the black market. The only way to stop it is to compete with it.

Thirdly, rehabilitation. Now, I’ve already detailed some aspects of this (such as how it could be successfully funded), but how would it actually work? And how is it a benefit of legalization? Well, the first questions I can’t answer fully, as I have done, precisely, no research into the idea, but I see no reason why we couldn’t see the set up of ‘Drug Centres’ throughout the state, where people suffering addiction and with nowhere else to go can go in order to get their fix safely and in a somewhat controlled environment. As to whether drugs should be handed out there for free or not I’m not quite sure, but I would certainly have though ‘cut-price’ substances should be available. This improves safety both for the addict (who can get reasonable access to substances that have met the requirements for the rest of the state and also administer him/herself with those substances in relatively hygienic and private surroundings) and also for the public at large, who would begin to see an end to seeing the litter and somewhat dangerous items currently left around by users (needles, for example), as well as encouraging addicts to move away from the streets and public areas to get their fix.
Once that process has begun then more effective rehabilitation can begin from the centres and allow the addicts qualified professionals to talk to and seek help from. Sure, we have rehabilitation of a sort right now, but would this rehab not be much more effective and attractive to addicts if they don’t have this shadow of illegality hanging over their heads? Indeed, this is the other thing about this rehabilitation – it needs to be voluntary. Just as you cannot force people to be free (sorry, America…), nor can you force people to be rehabilitated. As more and more addicts begin to turn slowly to rehabilitation, it is inevitable that more will feel confident in stepping forward also – it can provide people with hope where there has previously been none. And, in everybody’s eyes, it will be worth it only if the substances are legalized and the addicts are not criminalized.
If the addicts (and rehabilitated addicts) are no longer considered criminal, then they are able to see that after rehabilitation they will be able to enter into employment with all the equal opportunities they would have had if they hadn’t caught themselves in the vicious cycle of addiction. Once again, they gain a new hope.

How can all that possibly be negative? Maybe I’m naïve but I can only see positives coming out of a well-considered legalization of all drugs. Of course, these are only my thoughts as I sit here now, and there are many more points and issues out there to take into consideration.
But in order to achieve any of this we have to first cast off these inhibitions about substances. We need to step back from our lazy hypocritical viewpoint. We need to realize that, in fact, drugs aren’t all bad. To the contrary, drugs can have very positive effects for some people. They provide an outlet that might not otherwise exist in the constant toil of everyday life. Effectively, we need to realize that everything we have believed about drugs up to this point has been largely misinformation. And that isn’t easy.
Of course, drugs have their negative aspects to – just as alcohol and tobacco have many negative effects (and yet they’re legal). What we need to combat that is better education – at all levels. And this needs to include more thorough education on alcohol and tobacco too.
Why is it that when someone dies from ecstasy or cocaine or, indeed, any illegal drug it is all over the newspapers, but when thousands die from alcohol or tobacco addiction the media stays silent and just quotes statistics? Why, for each of those thousands of suffering addicts of these legal drugs, do we not have individual life stories and recreations of the steps leading up to their deaths played back to us repeatedly and shown to children in schools? Why do we only save that for the ‘illegal’ minority?

And once we start to shake off those inhibitions, then we can start to implement things fully.
At that point can we publicly show and explain a timetable for the legalization of all substances, along with any intermediate adjustments to the ‘class’ of these substances. Then, as we start to legalize the first of this list of substances and begin to receive the revenue from their taxes, we can start to set up Drug Centres, primarily in the areas most badly affected by addicts, and staffed by professional NHS (not private) doctors and nurses, trained specifically to aid the rehabilitation process of addicts (perhaps including alcoholics and smokers).
The extra revenue could also be put to use in financing new educational schemes, aimed at freely providing as much information about all substances as possible, and developing new and diverse ways to make this information accessible to all.

Maybe then we can start to make a real difference.

So, what are you waiting for? It’s time to cast off your ingrained prejudice and open your mind.
Are you ready?

NOTES:
* I am not considering the effects of ‘passive’ smoking as in most places, smoking cigarettes is also legal. And besides, I smoked my weed ‘with nature’ – passive wasn’t really an issue.
** This could leave mental scars though, I agree.
*** I haven’t actually done any accounting with these figures, but given the number of recreational drug users, and the amount of revenue earned from alcohol and tobacco sales, I would have thought this could be possible, and a self-sufficient cycle.

I can honestly say one thing about death: it doesn’t frighten me. Now, maybe this has more to do with me not really thinking about it very much, but I know it doesn’t frighten me.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to die and, to be honest, I wouldn’t say I relish the prospect – if I did I would just kill myself and have done with it.
No, I actually enjoy being alive, probably because, in all honesty, I don’t know what to expect after I die, my guess is it will be pretty different: being able to walk through walls for example… but I jest.

Is there an afterlife? Shit, there’s a question I’ve considered more than a few times.
I hope there is. Not in the conventional heaven and hell bullshit sense though, you understand – I doubt I could handle that – but just in a general ‘wandering-soul-seeking-redemption-and-fulfillment’ kind of way. My thinking being that it would be nice to still ‘hang around’ and see what people are up to after I die, at least for a little while.
Failing that though, I wouldn’t mind being reincarnated – I’m not fussy.

I guess the reality is that nobody really knows if there is an afterlife, in any way, shape or form. It’s kind of along the same lines as trying to prove there’s a god (or gods) – impossible. The only way we’re going to find out is when we die, and then we realize it’s too late to tell people about it (unless you’re like Patrick Swazie in the film Ghost, in which case you can come back and make sweet, sweet love with your girlfriend/wife through the help of a female medium in the guise of Whoopi Goldberg).
I really hope there isn’t a god or heaven etc though – because if there is I am, in all senses of the word, fucked. No amount of soul-searching, confessing, praying, and lie-swallowing is going to help me now. I’ve well and truly taken the proverbial shovel and dug myself as close to hell as I can get – if it exists. But I like it down here, it’s got central heating… and good music.
And, whilst I don’t mean to turn this into a religion-centred article (I prefer to talk about me), I still find the god idea difficult to swallow. And, I know I probably shouldn’t do it and may even be accused of discrimination, but I’m going to focus primarily on Christianity for this little aside, as I have no other real ‘close-up’ or ‘first-hand’ experience with any of the other ‘main’ religions around the world as of yet. And, whilst I have never fully read the ‘good book’ (yes, the same ‘good’ book that contains some blatant references to very real discrimination) nor have I read any of it for quite a while, I can still remember some parts that confused me.
(Note: I do intend to read in the relatively near future – provided I don’t die – copies of both the bible and the koran, amongst other religious works if I can get hold of them)
The first thing that confuses me is the simple number of religions – how are you supposed to work out which is correct and, equally, how can you ever justify (if only to yourself) that what you believe (that’s right, you have no actual proof) is the real way? Maybe I’m cynical, but I always find myself searching for the ‘truth’ behind anything, and to that end I find religion an unnecessary distraction in the search for truth, certainly when there are much more pressing – albeit ’smaller’ in the grand scheme of things – issues I need to sort out in my head and in the present day before I tackle my very existence. In a similar sense I think it’s somewhat blind of people to try and discover evidence for such a massive issue as their existence when there are so many things confronting that very existence right here and now. I can leave finding out about my existence until after death if it gives me chance to arrange some of the many ‘present day’ issues in front of me. Maybe that’s just me though.

Another issue that causes me to question things is the organizational aspect of religion – it seems, to me, extremely dull. Sorry, that’s the wrong word, I mean morbid.
We hear all these stories of the benevolent god, so generous that he sent his only son down to earth to die for us, blah de blah, and then we’re told that this same god needs us to do things in a certain way if we want to join him for a house party when we leave earth.
So, let me get this straight: this god fellow will sacrifice his son for us, but won’t let us come around to his house for a party? What’s he afraid of, we might break a vase? I don’t get it. It’s either that or we look at the flip side of the coin: Jesus was an accident, so god fabricated this whole ‘miracle virgin-birth’ deal in order to knock off his son, thus saving himself from what could have otherwise been a rather messy media incident. It was the perfect, and (if the stories are to be believed) oldest, form of spin.
But, all hope is not lost: we can go to the party if we confess and address our ’sins’ and accept god ‘into our hearts’. Now, the first part of this I wouldn’t have a problem with if it wasn’t for one small aspect: who decides what these sins are? We certainly don’t. The choice lies ultimately with this benevolent god, but, as we have no way of communicating with him/proving he exists, his ‘message’ is conveyed to us second- and third-hand as to what sins actually consist of. Anybody played ‘Chinese Whispers’ when they were kids? You see my point then…
And even regardless of this little game, does this essence of confession and the determination by someone else of what constitutes a sin not contrast dramatically with the idea of free choice? I don’t know about anybody else, but I have done plenty of things that I would admit were mistakes and, admittedly, probably constitute as ’sins’ as well, but equally I’ve done a lot of things that would be considered ’sinful’ and yet I have no wish to regret them – I wouldn’t even class them as mistakes. But now, if I want to go to this big party in the sky, I am forced to regret these said ’sins’.
Maybe I’ll just go to hell, nearly all my friends will be there at least…

Related to that last comment, the idea of the ‘miraculous virgin-birth’ is another thing I can’t quite grasp. Now, every religion has its miracles, that is part of the propaganda that ensures you draw believers in, but can this particularly one not be countered with reason and science? Now, the science bit I’ll let you work out yourselves, but the reason bit I’ll walk you through, as it may help me understand myself better.
Here we have this so-called benevolent god who, 2000 years ago, sent his son to earth to die for us (long and short of it, Jesus was a kamikaze pilot, or a suicide bomber). His son comes down, talks to a few people, does his job, then a few days later pushes a big stone out of the way and flies to his dad’s house. The god believes his work is done and settles down to sleep again. Years and centuries pass and, pretty soon, it becomes obvious that mankind is, in fact, no different: they’re still fighting, still killing each other. The only difference is that now they have a ‘higher cause’ to point to as their justification: religion.
So why doesn’t, or why won’t this same ‘benevolent’ god send another son (or daughter – I’m not sexist) down to try and rectify it again? If he’s been able to perform this ‘miracle virgin birth’ before, then why not repeat it a bit further down the line? Maybe try to re-emphasise the points he thought Jesus would do? Given the state of the world right now, would it not be a good time to send another person down to explain things again?
Or perhaps we should face what could well be the reality of the situation: god gave up.
It’s no secret that if we look back at the ancient religions we see a trend forming in gods having their ‘wicked way’ with humans of any sex – an affirmation of power – so why is it not conceivable that the Christian god would do the same? He’s only got one incident of it documented, granted, but why would he not consider coming down and repeating the act – the act of recall states that the thing you heard or learnt most recent is the one you’ll remember best, so why not repeat the cycle every few hundred years and remind people you’re still about and that there’s still work to do? Why not stop the little demons running amok in the most highly armed, technically advanced (and dangerous) countries in the world? Why not make things better?

I know the argument is fielded that if he chose to make things better then it would be a denial of free choice, of sorts, but is it not at least arguable that the very stated presence of ‘the almighty’ and the rules laid down by him/her/them are a basic denial of free will? See my point about sins earlier.

But I digress massively and, most likely, I made no sense. So my apologies. To return to our scheduled programming, for me, the existence of an afterlife is irrelevant. I’ll find out in good time I’m sure.

But, thinking of that, how would I like to die? I know the usual response is ‘peacefully’ or ‘in my sleep’ etc, but the truth again is that I really don’t mind. There are a few ways I would prefer not to die: drowning, burned alive, starvation – slowly, basically, but I can’t say I have any preference over my mode of death. I know I’m going to die some day, I just don’t know when exactly that is yet, and I prefer not to know.
I don’t think there can be anything worse than being told when you’re going to die (even vaguely), regardless as to whether you’re afraid of death or not. In my lack of knowledge of the existence of an afterlife, being told I have x amount of time to live would kind of put a downer on that remaining time, do you not think? Knowing I only have x amount of time in which I know I can see my friends and family, in which I can go out and have fun, and all the while that fun being frowned upon by the knowledge I can’t do it for much longer. Fuck that.
I’d rather go out unexpectedly, bit of a surprise. Not necessarily in a rock-star-esque-drowning-in-your-own-vomit kind of way (I’m a bit too squeamish for that), but just wham-bam-thank-you-ma’am.
Maybe.

Similarly, after death, I wouldn’t want people to be all somber and depressed at any funeral service that would maybe be held (that’s if anyone came to it). I’d rather it be a party, a celebration of, well, me. It sounds self-centered but I don’t mean it that way. All I mean is I would rather have a funeral like a birthday party (less the presents as I won’t benefit from them) than like, well, a funeral.
To that end I’d rather plan the funeral before I die. Not in a specific date-and-time way you understand, just as a general plan. Like an Idiot’s Guide to Dave’s Funeral. It would feature potential locations (not a religious building), rough ceremony ideas (again, without religion), a music playlist, my preferences for the food (not that I’ll be eating much), as well as a list of things I definitely would not like to happen (see first two points). Also included may be some party games, choice of substances, you know, the usual.
I just think it’s a better way. How much more enjoyable would it be for people at a funeral if it was fancy dress and had good music and a bouncy castle? Rather than the old-age black dress and somber faces you could have just a bunch of crazy drunk high people dancing the night away and laughing. If I could get chance to see my funeral in some form of afterlife, that is how I’d like to see it – much nicer than seeing a bunch of miserable bastards moping around looking sad.

I don’t know exactly what the musical list would look like, but my early thoughts would have it consist of some of the following:

• BeeGees – Stayin’ Alive
• [spunge] – Live Another Day
• AC/DC – Hell Ain’t a Bad Place to Be
• Audioslave – Show Me How to Live
• Rage Against the Machine – Know Your Enemy
• The Clash – Should I Stay or Should I Go
• Coolio – Gangsta’s Paradise
• Dead Kennedys – Forward to Death
• Deep Purple – Smoke on the Water
• Donovan – Universal Soldier
• Dr. Dre – The Next Episode
• Earth, Wind & Fire – Disco Inferno
• Eric Clapton – Cocaine
• Foo Fighters – All My Life
• Gene Pitney – Singin’ in the Rain
• Genesis – I Can’t Dance
• Green Day – American Idiot
• Guns N’ Roses – Live and Let Die
• House of Pain – Jump Around
• Incubus – Nice to Know You
• James Brown – Papa’s Got a Brand New Bag
• Jimi Hendrix – Fire
• Judas Priest – Living After Midnight
• John Lennon – Imagine
• Kings of Leon – Molly’s Chambers
• KISS – God of Thunder
• Manu Chao – Bongo Bong
• Marilyn Manson – Personal Jesus
• MC Hammer – Can’t Touch This
• Metallica – Holier Than Thou
• Michael Jackson – Billie Jean
• Monty Python – The Bright Side of Life
• N.W.A – Fuck the Police
• Nirvana – Smells Like Teen Spirit
• Operation Ivy – Room Without a Window
• Pearl Jam – Alive
• Pink Floyd – Another Brick in the Wall
• Primal Scream – Rocks
• Propellerheads – History Repeating
• Pulp – Common People
• Queen – Bohemian Rhapsody
• Rammstein – Ich Will
• Red Hot Chili Peppers – Give it Away
• Red Hot Chili Peppers – Under the Bridge
• Red Hot Chili Peppers – Road Trippin’
• Steppenwolf – Magic Carpet Ride
• Thin Lizzy – The Boys are Back in Town
• Velvet Revolver – Do It For the Kids
• Wagner – Ride of the Valkyries
• The Who – My Generation
• The Zutons – Long Time Coming
• Europe – The Final Countdown

So, there’s my thoughts. I was going to post this to a website at first, but I’ll maybe not bother now.
‘Till death do us part.

That is the only conclusion I can draw.
The ‘higher, unknown power’ is not mine to name. Nor is it anybody else’s. That is how it comes to be ‘unknown’.
Make of it what you will. Be it God, Allah, Jupiter, Venus, Satan, Zeus, a higher conscious and spiritual level – it matters not. Nor is the point of these writings to prove/disprove any theories.

“The artist is the creator of beautiful things.
To reveal art and conceal the artist is art’s aim”

- The Picture of Dorian Gray, Oscar Wilde

As I sit here – another peaceful evening, the sun beginning to set in the west, the horizon a multitude of colour, running from the green of the palm trees, through the burning red of the setting sun which ignites the sky around it to a dusty orange, up, up into the deep blue of the highest skies, the stillness and serenity broken only by the sound of the wind wrapping itself up amongst the shrubbery and the final chirps of the birds – I finally realise how beautiful, and yet so inexplicable – nature is.
Perhaps its incomprehensibility is what makes it so beautiful.

It must be so. So often are the things we can never truly understand the exact same ones that capture our hearts so wonderfully. The things that words alone can never justify, that pictures can merely imitate – those are the things that capture us.

I have only been here (Florida, USA) a few days (as I have just checked the date for the purpose of this article I can confirm this to be five days) and yet I can honestly say that I have become so completely absorbed in reading and silent reflection that I had lost all track of dates. They appear a peripheral issue. It really has been bliss.
And whilst I can not, and will not, pretend I have spent all my days in reflection of nature such as now, a large part of my time has been spent this way.

The problem is, as much as I am enthralled by the beauty of nature, I am apparently killing it. As we all are. We can not help it.
Now, I am not one who can say I concur with all the beliefs that humankind is ‘defying nature’, or that we are being ‘unnatural’ in our destruction of the planet. That is not to say I revel in the prospect (and reality) of us having a role in the destruction and elimination of various species. Because I don’t.
But, when we are analysing the ‘destruction’ of the awe-inspiring beauty that is nature, I feel we must bear in mind the one harsh reality of that beautiful creature - everything dies.
We can argue over who/what is responsible for the destruction of the planet/nature but, basically, nature is killing itself.
Harsh, but ultimately true.
Whatever higher power we believe is responsible for nature’s creation (even if it was Mother Nature herself), it was created with that fundamental flaw: from the moment something is created it slowly begins to die.

That is not to say that I believe we should abandon all our schemes to prolong natures life as long as possible. That is like saying we should abandon medical research.
I do not agree with industrial fishing tactics, shark finning, deforestation, whaling, the unethical treatment of animals or the vast consumption of nonrenewable energy sources to name but a few. But that does not mean I accept the idea that humankind are solely at fault for the steady destruction of nature.
In the same way that it can be argued that all living things on earth (and in nature) are created with a purpose, is it not arguable – and perhaps even true – that human ‘destiny’ was as we are currently doing?
I realize, of course, that using the word ‘destiny’ opens me up to many criticisms, and perhaps it is the wrong word to have used, but it seems to work for the time being.

Humankind are, undoubtedly, pretty useless as far as being ‘natural’. We have no real natural defences, nor do we have any natural way of hunting our prey (perhaps vegetarianism is natural after all…), and yet, somehow, we have ended up at the top of that thing we call a ‘food chain’. We are the apex predator.
Through the use of ‘extra equipment’- spears, knives, guns etc. – equipment that we, as a species, have evolved to create, we have survived. In the same way countless other species have evolved to survive throughout the centuries and millenia, we too have evolved in order to survive. That, also, appears to be
natural.
We are just as intelligent as any other species (but not more so, contrary to popular belief).

And yet, it would appear, for the purpose of discussing the steady demise of nature, we seem to discount ourselves from it. We see ourselves as ‘unnatural’. In effect we are viewing ourselves as the ‘higher power’. We talk about it as though we are the very ones that have control over the life or death of nature. Little bigheaded don’t you think?

And it’s wrong.

We are no ‘higher-power’. We are way too flawed to be such a power. We simply have control over whether we try to help in prolonging the remainder of nature’s life, or whether we continue as we are. It is the same as the choice between researching into cancer and/or any other illness or disease and administering the appropriate drugs, caring for the patient etc. or just disregarding the issue.
The end result is the same.
Nothing is invincible.

If the higher, unknown power truly created nature as a way of saying ‘Better than you’, then it threw in death to prove its point. ‘Game Over’.

Finis.