http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005-2007 by the authors Fri, 16 Dec 2005 06:36:42 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/ Phillip WinnSunday, August 26, 2007, marks the switch of all Blogcritics.org article feeds from full-content to short-content. This is the result of several converging factors, and is unfortunately a permanent decision (as permanent as any decision can be on the web, that is). We are aware of all of the reasons that this is a Bad Idea, and we are aware that some of you will be quite upset about having to click on something to read the free content, and we're sorry. Unfortunately, despite great effort, full-content feeds are not currently economically viable. Two other factors are involved: full-content feeds have resulted in an unprecedented level of content theft, with BC content appearing on many websites, usually spam sites, without attribution or permission. This duplicate content causes a cascading set of problems, not the least of which is that search engines generally aren't favorable to duplicate content, and don't always guess correctly. Finally, our RSS advertising partner is strongly in favor of short-content feeds. We hope that you'll continue to subscribe to BC via RSS, and when an article grabs your eye, it's only a click away, still free on the BC website. Thank you for your understanding. Administration0@blogcritics.org Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:00:00 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/16/063642.php Jon DownsIt's reassuring to know that, despite being around for so long, the Rolling Stones can still rock out rather well. What's more, the liner notes (to the standard edition at least) have the words for each song - a feature that seems to be increasingly rare these days, in fact an important feature for those of us who like to attempt to sing along.Anyway, weighing in at 16 tracks, this album is a hefty 64 minutes or so long, value for money in this age of increasing numbers of half-hour "lite" albums.But how does it play? It's reassuringly "Stones" in style - none of the tracks jump out at you for their original sound, but that doesn't stop it being good. I'm somewhat torn on the scoring of this - It's good enough for 4/5, easily, but...somehow, not quite peaking high enough for the full 5/5. If you're not a fan of the Stones, you probably won't be swayed in any way by this offering. But for those of us that like the classic sound that is the epitome of rock 'n' roll, it's a great album. 4/5This review was first posted on my blog Music41071@blogcritics.org Fri, 16 Dec 2005 06:36:42 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/17/093350.php Jon DownsUnderwhelming. That's the best way to describe this offering. In a similar way to Kasabian, it begins promisingly enough, but it never quite manages to really grab you and make you listen. You really have to make an effort to actually listen to the whole album through, and even then it's pretty forgettable.The first track, "Like Eating Glass", raises hopes of this being a Foo Fighters-alike sound, only to dash them when the singing starts.It's a less clubby sound than Kasabian, and more poppy instead. This is more down-to-earth rock, but it seems to be somewhat hookless. They do sound similar to the Kaiser Chiefs, unfortunately I don't have Employment to compare the two albums fully. It doesn't matter a great deal, though. It's worth a listen if you're a fan of this style - slightly-frayed-around-the-edges-pop-rock - but otherwise, stay away, unless you don't mind being disappointed.2/5First posted on my blog Music39675@blogcritics.org Thu, 17 Nov 2005 09:33:50 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/11/064537.php Jon DownsWeighing in at 13 tracks (at over 53 minutes) this is a more-hefty-than-average album. It's not without its share of catchy tunes, either - from the raw sound of "Club Foot," through the more tuneful "Processed Beats" and "Reason Is Treason," to the clublike sound of "L.S.F (Lost Souls Forever)."Each of the tracks feature at least a few electronic synth sounds mixed in with the more standard rock sound. It's an interesting mix, giving the album a kind of club sound, which I guess would make this "club rock" music. Though for select clubs only.The tracks certainly don't all have thumping bass lines or fast paces. The vocals on all of the tracks are kind of radio-raw, but not raw enough to make it sound like punk. I find it overall vaguely reminiscent of Ocean Colour Scene, with synth sounds thrown in on top: that doesn't really do it justice though. Maybe more like a lighter version of Pitchshifter - in fact the main riff on "Running Battle" made me think of Pitchshifter's "Hidden Agenda" straight away. Certainly, check it out if you like light rock.It won't set the world on fire, but it is pretty catchy nevertheless. 3/5First posted on my blogBTW, I feel obliged to point out that for some reason, on the US Amazon store, this CD is labelled as "copy-protected," yet the on the UK version it isn't (even though I believe the CD is). You have been warned... Music39380@blogcritics.org Fri, 11 Nov 2005 06:45:37 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/11/03/161616.php Jon Downs"20 songs on 2 CDs One loud. One not so loud."So says the sticker on the front of the CD case. What it amounts to is one CD (CD1) of standard Foo Fighters fayre, and one (CD2) of acoustic, somewhat quieter fayre. CD1 follows the style of their previous outing One By One. It features Dave Grohl's kinda gravelly, and definitely loud, vocals.The tracks on this CD are all reasonably heavy, my favourite probably being the title In Your Honor (yeah I know, American spelling cos the Foos are American), with Best Of You a close second. Much like One By One, the tracks all bounce along at quite a pace - and they all make you want to sing along.The second CD is a bit of a departure from their standard style. The acoustic guitar in place of electric gives the second CD a more subdued sound, and Dave Grohl sings more than he shouts. The pace of the second CD is also somewhat slower than the first. Overall, it makes for a more refined feel, and it's none the worse for it. The opening track, Still, is a good introduction to this side of the Foos - my favourite track from CD2, though, is What If I Do?. It will certainly be interesting to see how far they take this refined sound - perhaps a fully acoustic album next? At the least, it shows they aren't content with just sticking with the same sound all the time. One By One was a difficult album to follow, but the Foo Fighters have managed pretty well. 4/5First posted on my blog Music39007@blogcritics.org Thu, 3 Nov 2005 16:16:16 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/30/154206.php Jon DownsDifferent. Well, different to my normal listening material. The truth is, there might be alot of music out there that sounds like this. However, I suspect there aren't many groups around making this kind of music, compared to during the eighties. Vaguely similar to Echo And The Bunnymen, it sounds...kind of poppy, though generally heavier than Echo & The Bunnymen. And yet, in all honesty I've not heard all that many top-40 songs sounding like this. This is better, thankfully. That's it - I've decided on the best way to to describe this style - it's music to paint to. Quite slow in general, but not usually actually depressing, the irony is this stuff is probably more "emo" than emo. At any rate, it's probably more musical. If it came to a show down between these guys and Echo & The Bunnymen, on the strength of what I've heard so far, I'd go for Echo & The Bunnymen - in my opinion, they are the better band. But if you want something similar-to-yet-not-the-same-as Echo & The Bunnymen, this would be a good start. Just don't expect it to be quite as good as them. This is actually a double-sided CD/DVD (CD on one side, DVD on the other). It includes the video for the track Song In Space (pics of the band interspersed with some footage from a rocket launching), the entire album in surround sound and stereo, and portable music files. I haven't checked out the portable music files yet, but having the album available in surround is an interesting extra - unfortunately, I can't make use of it at present. 3/5This was first posted on my blog Music38777@blogcritics.org Sun, 30 Oct 2005 15:42:06 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/25/153106.php Jon DownsEven if you haven't heard of the band, the chances are you've heard some of one of their songs - Apple used the rather catchy Walkie Talkie Man on their iPod ads not long ago. I rather liked that track, so (again) I decide to risk the full album (also going on the strength of the user reviews on Amazon). What you get is 12 tracks of suprisingly punky tunes, plus the video for Walkie Talkie Man (more about this later) and a second video of similar length on the making of the Walkie Talkie Man video. And right now, Amazon seem to have gone crazy, pricing the album at 2.96 (shurely shome mistake?). Anyway, the Walkie Talkie Man video is satisfyingly different - set in a world of yarn. It won't set the world alight, but at least it shows some creativity (and I like it). The "making of" just shows how they did some of the bits, like the yarn drum kit. It's a nice little diversion from the album proper. The Steriogram sound is "suprisingly" punky because it's not as poppy as the likes of Blink 182 et al, but considering that Apple used one of their tunes in an ad, I'd hesitate to call them "true" punk. Their sound isn't quite that raw either. At the standard Amazon album price of ~£9, I could only really recommend it for fans of rock, and I'd give it 3.5/5. But at the insanely low price of £2.96, you'd be a fool not to snap it up, if only to get the video to go with the full track used in the Apple ad.This review was first posted on my blog Music38497@blogcritics.org Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:31:06 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/10/25/121854.php Jon DownsI got onto these guys thanks to just one track - the majestic "The Killing Moon", as played on the opening scene of the original cut of Donnie Darko. That masterpiece of - what to call this style? I suppose "pop-folk" covers it best, but mere pigeon-holing is inadequate here - doesn't actually make an appearance on this album. But 17 other tunes do. Well, strictly speaking, there are 12 tracks, plus alternate versions of five of them. That's no excuse not to buy it though, at the measly price of £6.97 at Amazon. For a piece of pop history, that's peanuts (and while you're at it, get the remastered version of Ocean Rain, too).Somehow, the tracks manage to be quite upbeat, yet still feel somewhat sedate. It's not so much music to dance to - it's more music to listen to. I find the music of Echo And The Bunnymen tends to encourage self reflection, and this can certainly be said of this album. There is a kind of '80s feel to it all, but it doesn't detract from it at all - and it's certainly more individual than alot of stuff that came out of that era.I don't think it's easy to sum up this album - the best way to do it justice is to listen to it. I took a risk when I got this but, for me, it's paid off. Perhaps you should too.First posted at my blog Music38478@blogcritics.org Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:18:54 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/06/19/165114.php Jon DownsI've not written anything here or on my own tiny blog for over a month now, so this is long overdue. I'm sorry that it's another poem. You don't have to read it if you don't want to. We, The Self-Condemned Alcohol is a mask That we decide to wear An assassin's cloak we use To try and hide from all our fears; Lock them deep within our heart And drench them all with beers Yet, each time we heft the burden It gets a little heavier to bear And desiccates just a bit more That place between our earsSo if you reach a point in life When you start believing you're all alone And think the world is covered head-to-toe With some all-consuming strife Just stop before you reach a most bitter end Then throw away your alcohol With its ever-thirsty, ice-cold knife The one whose aim is always straight and true Even as it pierces right through your heart While grasping for your soul And know that it's time to face the fears around youOnly then will you again feel whole first posted on my blog Culture31278@blogcritics.org Sun, 19 Jun 2005 16:51:14 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/30/090616.php Jon DownsAdvertising. One of those necessary evils of the modern world - actually, it's been around, in one form or another, for a long while. But as far as I'm aware, never anywhere near so prolific as it is now.There's advertising I'll put up with, because I know, somehow, that it's needed. I don't know the details, I don't care, and the chances are I'll ignore it.But online, we seem to have a greater concentration of advertising companies willing to do "whatever it takes" to get hits for their clients. Maybe I'm wrong on this, and it's just because I'm far more used to the online world than the "outside" world, so online I spot stuff like this more. My job definitely helps - more on this later.There are plenty of ways to fight back - many of them free, I should add - the main thing is raising awareness of the situation. The average PC user is likely entirely oblivious to the problem. The success of "rogue diallers" and so on proves this.So let's start with a brief explanation of the methods. Even being brief, I'm afraid this may take awhile, and I certainly won't cover every possible method. I will be crossing over a bit into other territory - namely, the different forms of viruses (I mean, virii =+) - these days, the vast majority of diallers are considered virii by anti-virus programs. There are also some particularly nasty ad delivery programs that are considered virii, as they use some virus methods to spread themselves, etc.Adware, broadly speaking, is any piece of software specifically designed to "deliver" adverts to a PC. Not to be confused with adaware, which is software that helps you to find and delete adware from your PC.Adware can take many, many, many different forms. I'm going to include diallers for two reasons - firstly, they generally are distributed in the same style as adware and secondly, they are at least as big a problem, despite regularly making the news. Oh, and their effects, if successful, are worse than adware.So then, diallers. What is a dialler? A dialler is a very small piece of software, often under 1MB. Currently, diallers only work if you have one of those "old skool" voice modems - a modem that uses the phone line. This doesn't include ISDN or ADSL modems, which work somewhat differently. Now, voice modems are effectively a telephone that is controlled by your PC. Diallers take full advantage of this - the idea is that they have settings for your voice modem, that make it dial a different number to your usual Internet provider's number. It probably seemed a good idea at the time - a good way to allow private bulletin boards to stay alive, for example. Of course, it wasn't long before the scamsters moved in. What you'll find these days, is that diallers point to premium-rate numbers. Ultra premium-rate numbers, often in some tiny European country you've never heard of until now. You find them being offered, usually, as services to allow you to download cracks, warez, music, games, and porn. Let's just assume for a minute that peer to peer networking doesn't exist, there's no such thing as BitTorrent et al, and you don't feel like learning how to use mIRC. Do you actually think using a dial-up connection to a premium rate number is going to be a more economic option for getting software than just going out and buying a legal copy? that's assuming any of these diallers really provide the service they claim. I have no idea how many actually do, if any, but if I had to guess I'd say that very close to 0% are for real.Now, if you have a PC with a voice modem that you use, by far the simplest way to protect against diallers is to unplug the phone line when you're not online. How easy is that? if the phone line's not plugged in, there's no physical connection that the dialer can make. You could have every single diallers hiding away on your PC, and it won't rack up any huge phone call bills for you. However, this isn't full protection - plenty of diallers mess with your Internet explorer connection properties, or simply add their own as your default. So, as ever, prevention is better than cure. At the end of this article, I'll be giving links for free to download, adware-free, tried-and-tested adware-busting programs.Next up, we have the kids' stuff. Yeah, many of these advertisers are as evil as the real-world bastards. They target kids, only here, it's not so much because of their control over their parents' wallets, but more because the kids aren't going to have a chance in hell of understanding any of the over-complicated Escher-esque mazes claimed as "license agreements"even if they were to bother reading them through. Which they aren't. They want free games, free smilies, screen savers, and so on. They're not going to read several pages of legal mumbo-jumbo they don't care about. So they click "I agree" or "OK" and bam, you have a whole load of adware dumped unceremoniously all over your PC. The advertising agencies aren't stupid; that's exactly why they use this tactic. They get their clients loads of hits from these PCs where the kids have downloaded "free" stuff. They know the chances of these people actually being interested in the adverts they show is slimmer than a supermodel, but they don't care, as long as they get paid for the hits. Which they evidently do, as there's so many of the feckers.In a similar style, we have toolbars/taskbars. Now, to be fair, some toolbars/taskbars aren't really adware. But more often than not, there's no real reason to get them anyway. They don't actually do anything you can't already do.Finally, we have the hijackers. These guys are real nasty. Some give you warning, some are just a form of virus. They all try to take over your Internet start page (the page that loads by default), your search page, and so on. To give you an idea of what's possible, there's a Windows 98 variant of, I think it's CoolWebSearch, that's a real bugger to get rid of, that hijacks your start page, and also watches for certain keywords, which if you type in with Internet explorer open, it will then redirect you to one of several of its pages. So what hope in hell do you have if you want to fight back? well, you may not be able to go and hack their websites, and you may not be able to walk into their offices and smack their owners with a 2x4, but you can protect your PC.Programs that I heartily recommend:Lavasoft Ad-Aware SE Personal Edition (they have a pay-for business version too)Spybot - Search & DestroyAntivir Personal Edition - Yeah, a good, free antivirus program!For those of you feeling a little more adventurous, also get HijackThis. There are some other useful programs there, but HijackThis is the most useful. You will probably need to go to a forum or two for help though.There's one other free defense - use of the "hosts" file. This allows you to fully block any web domains you want. See this site for more info.Later this week, I shall be doing a piece on using a local proxy program for greater defense of your PC.This was first posted on my blog. Sci/Tech30306@blogcritics.org Mon, 30 May 2005 09:06:16 EDT http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/05/12/055127.php Jon DownsThanks to The Drudge Report for drawing my attention, however briefly, to an article by Pat Buchanan on WWII (the article was actually published online yesterday). Ahahahahah! Excuse me, I'm finding it hard not to break out into one large fit of laughter. Please, people of the USA, please tell me no one takes this guy seriously.At best, his racism is as well disguised (i.e. not very) as that of Robert Kilroy-Silk. At worst, it's even less disguised. He's one of the "intelligent" racists (a misnomer, but I don't mean it literally), who can make their views sound all well and reasonable. But then you notice a certain...tone the writing takes. This guy seems to think that WWII was actually all about white Christians vs. any other race of people, who by the way are all dirty commies. More to the point, he seems to be trying to present a skewed view of what happened during that horrible period of recent history in such a way that it's tempting to draw comparisons with the current "war on terror." He also makes it sound kinda like he thinks we're still smack bang in the middle of the Cold War.But funniest of all are the rather baffling views implied by the whole article:1) Only white people can be Christians. 2) Any non-Western person is a commie 3) The communists still rule the USSR with an iron fist. Actually, this may be true. Seeing as the USSR no longer exists, who can tell who rules it? 4) Hitler was really an alright guy. We should have let him rule Europe, 'cos at least he was on the side of white peopleOn reading this steaming heap of doodoo masquerading as a piece of "journalism" (I've changed my mind, I could easily be a journalist, all I have to do is develop some rabidly left-or-right-leaning views and I'd be sorted), I am actually somewhat relieved that Bush Jr. is your president. Why? if there's one guy like this Buchanan dude, that means there's likely to be more. Which means, theoretically, the US could have ended up with someone like this as president. Then things'd really be scary. Politics29397@blogcritics.org Thu, 12 May 2005 05:51:27 EDT