I seem to be getting slower and slower at processing photos … this lot is just from the first (half) day at Weymouth!
The Soil Cliff
The Next Hill
The Secret Garden
This one might require a little explanation … the land between the current cliff face and the sea is obviously from previous collapses of the cliff and has created an environment that is almost totally inaccessible.
Over the past few weeks, there have been dramatic (and violent) protests over a certain anti-Islamic film clip from which were originally released to YouTube on the 1st July this year. The film was made in America, but apart from that it’s origins appear very shady although an organisation called Media for Christ, although it seems there are multiple organisations with that name.
It would appear that the film is a deliberate attempt to stir up trouble in the Middle-East, and it appears that Islamic extremists have played into the hands of the film makers. Whilst peaceful demonstrations against the film are both understandable and indeed perfectly justified, some of the reactions come across as extreme or bizarre in the extreme :-
What is less well known is that most of the protests around the world were peaceful (excluding a touch of flag burning). It is also remarkable that the protests happened to have occurred on or around the 11th September, which may have something to do with another event in history. It is also interesting to note the reactions of Libyans to the storming of the US consulate in Bengahzi – which probably had nothing to do with the film.
Given the numbers who turned up at the various violent protests, it is blindingly obvious that the overwhelming majority – however unhappy they may be with the film – are not violent extremists. But the violence does give the impression that Islam is extremely intolerant of any form of criticism. Of course that is not limited to Islam as most religions have their extremists who react in similar ways, but it does seem that Islam is particularly prone to extremism.
Criticism? Of course this latest film probably (I haven’t seen it) doesn’t qualify as criticism, but is probably just some Christian extremists trying to get a rise out of Islamic extremists. Mocking someone’s beliefs is fundamentally a nasty thing to do. But so is threatening people with eternal damnation.
But genuine criticism also seems to generate this sort of reaction. And the dividing line between genuine criticism and mocking someone’s beliefs is very grey; you could even argue that mocking Islam to generate the kind of reaction it provokes is itself a piece of criticism through demonstration (although going too far).
Criticism is not necessarily a bad thing. At “best” it allows for misconceptions of Islam to be corrected – perhaps that the death penalty for apostasy is a radical interpretation, and at “worst” could provoke a useful discussion.
Long overdue …
The Knights Lineup
Splintered
First Joust
Splintered
The Knight’s Groupie
Some French gossip magazine has published topless photos of Kate Middleton (who is married to someone who may eventually become a notional head of state) taken when she was staying at a private location on holiday. My first reaction: So what?
Who cares if someone famous was topless in private? We’re all naked in private at some time or another … even if it is just getting into the bath or shower. It’s hardly a revelation to learn that the rich and famous can also be found naked (or in this case topless) at some point or another. This hardly qualifies as news … or frankly even gossip.
But on second thoughts, this is an invasion of privacy – at the same level as some pervert setting up hidden cameras in your bathroom to take photos of you naked … and then gets them published. Sure the royal couple are famous, but unless they’re getting up to something evil or hideous they should be able to expect a reasonable level of privacy when they are in private.
And the fact that Kate can sometimes be found topless isn’t the sort of thing that counts as in the public interest to reveal.
There comes a moment in some violent anti-capitalist protests where genuine if illegal protest becomes mindless thuggery; for example turning from daubing slogans on the windows of the nearest bank, to throwing objects through the windows of the small independent shop next door. And you do have to wonder if those “hacktivists” who are supporting Julian Assange’s wish to be given safe passage to Ecuador have reached beyond that point.
First of all, I should point out that whilst I’m a supporter of WikiLeaks – or at least the idea of a website where whistleblowers can responsibly publish leaked material in raw form – I’m no supporter of Julian Assange in his attempt at escaping justice. A mentioned previously, I believe he should go back to Sweden to face the charges that will be made once he arrives.
But neither do I think that Julian Assange’s supporters should be silenced however mistaken they are about the situation. They have a right to protest, and I’m not even opposed to a bit of responsible “hacktivism” – in my private life I’m quite willing to go along with the ideal that sometimes it is ethical to break the law. But I also believe that the current flood of ‘hacktivism” is going just a little bit too far.
Those who have been reading just the mainstream media (and here) may be under the impression that the hacktivists have been attacking just a few places; more relevant media makes it plain that there is something more widespread. The first story mentions Cambridge University; none of the stories mentions that the hacktivists have claimed to have broken into up to 5 universities. The list of victims of this week’s surge seems to include :-
And this list looks a little random to me.
It’s not that difficult to break into a website – even I could do it, but the question to ask is just how many websites did they rattle the doorknobs of before they found these low-hanging fruits? And it’s always worth remembering the old classic cartoon by xkcd.com :-
Of course they didn’t just widdle a picture of Julian Assange over the front page of a web site; they also broke into some databases and stole some personal information! That’s a bit more serious. And in the case of the information grabbed from the police, it’s a lot more serious.
But if you look closely at the data stolen from the UK universities involved, it becomes a little less dramatic. It would appear that the hackers have managed to break into a few databases used by various departmental web applications. Web applications often use databases as a convenient place to “stash” stuff including account details, which is what appears to have been leaked here. These account details are normally separate from any other account details (unless of course the owner of the account uses the same password), and give access only to the web application itself.
It does not appear that any core business function data has been exposed by this – i.e. the personal details of all the students for example. If it were not for Julian Assange’s name being attached to the incident, it is very likely that the media would not be interested in the story itself which would make it far less serious for the institutions concerned.
When you come down to it, Julian Assange’s real supporters should probably be a bit dismayed by this mindless thuggery – it doesn’t reflect well on their protests if it appears the best hacktivists that they can get to support them are rather on the low end of the scale. Of course a conspiracy theorist might take this as evidence that the hacktivists here are actually deliberate making the supporters of Julian Assange look bad.