Another major shocker.

In an announcement that is about as stunning as Mark McGwire admitting to use steriods, John Edwards confessed that he is the father of Rielle Hunter’s baby.  I am shocked, I tell you, shocked!  How could the populist Edwards, Lord of the $600 hair cuts, have gone and done such a dirty, dirty thing?

Fuck.  Sadly, I think the National Enquirer broke this a few months back, so you could actually make an argument that the National Enquirer is more on top of the news than, well, the news.

Russian Pr0n Win!

Seriously.  This is a great hack.

An enormous television screen showing a pornographic film caused a midnight traffic jam in central Moscow Thursday as stunned motorists slammed on the brakes to gawk at the writhing naked bodies.The owner of the advertising screen, which sits atop a main road about two km (1.2 miles) south of the Kremlin, told the state-run RIA news agency that hackers had broken into the screen’s computer system and turned on the porn.

“They were either acting out of hooliganism or were from a rival company,” Viktor Laptev, commercial director of advertising firm Panno.ru, told RIA.

“Acting out of hooliganism” is a terrific acusation.  I’m going to have to remember that for the next time my daughter does something hooliganish.

Well, That’s One Way To Increase Participation In … Anything …

Give a pint of blood – get a pint of beer!

Yeah, seriously.

A Washington state blood center is offering donors a deal: Give a pint of blood, get a pint of beer. Cascade Regional Blood Services in Tacoma says its “Give blood, get beer” promotion has worked so well that it’s being expanded.The News Tribune of Tacoma reported Monday that donors who are at least 21 years old are given a coupon for a free pint of beer.

Participating pubs and restaurants must wait at least four hours after the blood drive ends before donors can collect their free pint.

OMG WTF!?

Stop the fucking press.  Mark McGuire says he used steriods when he broke the single-year home run record more than a decade ago.

I am shocked.  Shocked, I tell you!

Obama Is Contributing To Fast-Growing Environmental Problem.

At least, I assume he is, what with all that golf he’s been playing.  Turns out that your average golf ball takes between 100 to 1,000 years to biodegrade, releasing all kinds of nasty shit into the environment while it’s at it. 

It was found that during decomposition, the golf balls dissolved to release a high quantity of heavy metals. Dangerous levels of zinc were found in the synthetic rubber filling used in solid core golf balls. When submerged in water, the zinc attached itself to the ground sediment and poisoned the surrounding flora and fauna.

Course manager for the Danish Golf Union, Torben Kastrup Petersen, said the scale of the problem is unknown: “There has been very little research on the environmental impact of golf balls, but it’s safe to say the indicators are not good. We are planning to collaborate with environmentalists in America to conduct more tests to fully explore the extent of the problem.”

Local government ministers in Scotland have also complained about the level of golf ball littering. UK lawmaker Patrick Harvie told CNN: “From the moon to the bottom of Loch Ness, golf balls are humanity’s signature litter in the most inaccessible locations.”

And he’s not wrong. On February 6, 1971, astronaut Alan Shepherd was filmed taking a swing with a six iron on the surface of the moon. According to Shepherd, the balls flew off in the distance and landed a few kilometers away. Although the balls were left for future golfers to discover, it is believed the extreme temperatures on the surface would have dissolved the balls many moons ago.

In many cases, removing a partially degraded ball from a lake or woodland area could result in further damage to the wildlife.

Axing The BBC?

Apparently, the idea of getting rid of the BBC or seriously scaling it back has been suggested by the Torries, and could actually happen if they win the next election.  Nevermind that the BBC makes double what it costs; nevermind one of the main proponent of it is US based Rupert Murdoch, who has a lot to gain if the BBC goes offline, owning the Sky network and all that. 

Cameron’s policy is sanctioned by US-based media mogul Rupert Murdoch, who wants the BBC dismantled to further his TV interests, which include Sky.

The Tory leader wants to freeze the BBC’s £3.6billion-a-year licence fee, creating fears, voiced by Doctor Who writer Russell T Davies, that a Tory government would dramatically downsize the corporation.

Deloitte describes the British independent production sector as “one of the crown jewels of the UK creative economy” and says it would shrink by two-thirds – a drop of £1.4billion – if it wasn’t for the BBC .

Director general Mark Thompson is thought to be preparing for a Tory onslaught if they win the election.

He has not ruled out closing channels. He may also scale back the BBC’s extensive website, which commercial rivals claim ruins the market for paid-for online news.

As far as I’m concerned, this is a terrible idea – no BBC means no Doctor Who!

Fattism Strikes Again!

While fattism is primarily a big issue in the UK (with American obesity rates, it’s hard to be a fattist), it is striking closer and closer to home.  The dating site BeautifulPeople.com, a site that only allows “attractive” people to be members, just kicked some 5,000 people out of its club because they posted pictures of them that appeared to show they were getting, well, fat, after packing on the holiday pounds.

The site allows entry to new members only if existing members vote them as sufficiently attractive to warrant it.

The US, the UK, and Canada topped the list of excluded members.

The site has always been unrepentant about its selection process, calling itself “the largest network of attractive people in the world”.

The move was reportedly prompted by members themselves, who police the membership of the site to maintain a high – if highly subjective – standard of attractiveness.

“As a business, we mourn the loss of any member, but the fact remains that our members demand the high standard of beauty be upheld,” said site founder Robert Hintze.

“Letting fatties roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which BeautifulPeople.com was founded.”

The last line is the best line.  Letting fatties roam the site … it makes me giggle.

I Know, I Know …

I haven’t said anything in two and a half days.  In my defense, it’s because BBCA was running a three-day-long marathon of the entire new series of Doctor Who leading up to The End of Time Part II, in which we say farewell to David Tennant, and ever so briefly say hello to Matt Smith.  If you’re a Who fan, I hope you watched it tonight, because it was terrific.  It was tragic and beautiful and uplifting and heartbreaking and everything I expect from the Doctor – from this Doctor, anyway.  Damned exciting, too.  The final bits, the goodbyes, were heartbreaking.  I cried from the moment he knocked to the moment that the new Doctor realized he had legs.

So, anyway.  I’m back from nerdland, and will be back up to full capacity tomorrow.  Until then, internets, be good!

Happy New Year.

Hopefully, it will be better than the last!  Good wishes for all of you in 2010!

Booze, New Years, and the NHS

The NHS is facing a problem of “epidemic proportions”.  Is it the dreaded swine flu pandemic?  No.  Obesity?  No, obseity is the problem of the Worst Health Care In The World™ here in America.  Cancer?  Guess again.

The answer?  Alcoholism, an issue that costs the healthcare-to-every-Briton-for-free NHS system an estimated £3 billion a year.  That’s around $4.85 billion US, in case you were wondering.  In fact, New Year’s Eve alone may cost up to £23 million, prompting leaders to propose that any citizen hospitalized for intoxication pay £500, more than $800 US per individual. 

This stunning proposal comes on the heels of this study, which finds that the average Brit drinking at home overpours – no shit, Sherlock; isn’t that the point of drinking at home and not going to the bar?

Research has found that women who pour wine often give themselves their recommended daily amount in just one glass.

They are far worse than men at judging how much wine they can safely drink, the Department of Health study found.

But men are much worse when it comes to pouring spirits – regularly giving themselves much more than a double shot.

When people were asked to pour a single 25ml shot, the average amount poured was 38ml, with the highest a staggering 182ml.

The findings demonstrate the extent to which people may have overindulged at Christmas – putting their health at risk.

Guidelines say women should drink no more than two or three units of alcohol in a day, while men should stick to three or four.

The poll of households across England, showed that women were the most lavish pourers of wine.

Experiments found that the average amount of wine poured at home is 186ml, equivalent to 2.4 units of 13 per cent volume wine.This is the recommended daily limit for women in just one glass.

The survey, carried out for the Government’s Know Your Limits campaign, found that people drinking spirits at home give themselves more than double (128 per cent extra) what they would get in a pub if they ordered a single shot.

The average ‘home barman’ pours 57ml, compared to the 25ml in a single shot.

Meanwhile, they’re getting shorted up to 12% on pints in bars:

Trading standards officers conducting tests of 88 pints bought at 30 bars, pubs and restaurants in Birmingham found the average drink was three-quarters of a fluid ounce (22ml) short of full – 3.94 per cent of a pint.

One ‘pint’ the officers bought was almost 12 per cent short of full.

The Weights and Measures Act 1985 says a pint of beer should be exactly a pint – 20 fluid ounces or 568ml – but froth is considered ‘an integral part’ of a beer and can account for up to 5 per cent of a pint under British Beer and Pub Association guidelines.

Let’s connect the dots here.  First: Brits drink so much that it costs them billions of dollars a year in NHS costs.  Second: Brits who drink at home pour too much booze, just like anyone else who drinks at home.  Third: Brits who go to bars to drink get screwed.  Fourth: there is actually an Act that says how much you have to pour in a pint. 

And they wonder why so many of them are alchoholics.