http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/en-UKMokoFeed10http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/http://data5.blog.de/design/preview/27/a2a7f8296ee4e6025ae66e64926121_160x200.jpghttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/12/14/jesus_christ~3440731/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-12-13:/2007/12/14/jesus_christ~3440731/Fri, 14 Dec 2007 00:13:49 +0100 <p>We had a teddy bear to name. The kids wanted to call it Jesus. We had to relent because the local vicar threatened to tear off the heads of all the kids and spit down the hole. We called it Gay instead. The vicar invited us all round for cucumber sandwiches and tea. We did have some bother from the local hairdresser though - but he is less worrying than the vicar and Sarah (who is 5) kicked his ass. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/12/14/jesus_christ~3440731/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/12/14/jesus_christ~3440731/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/28/conscience~3366507/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-11-28:/2007/11/28/conscience~3366507/Wed, 28 Nov 2007 20:42:42 +0100 <p>... is what we call that little voice that reminds us that someone might be watching. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/28/conscience~3366507/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>consciencehttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/28/conscience~3366507/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/18/religious_scientists_does_it_matter~3316523/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-11-18:/2007/11/18/religious_scientists_does_it_matter~3316523/Sun, 18 Nov 2007 20:42:23 +0100 <p>Does it make any difference whether eminent scientists are religious (i.e believe in a supernatural God-like presence beyond the reach of science who had, and perhaps still has, power over our existence)?</p> <p>If you are religious - would eminent scientists who are also religious strengthen the cause? Would it make any difference?</p> <p>If you are an atheist - would they weaken the cause? Any difference? </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/18/religious_scientists_does_it_matter~3316523/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>religionatheistscientisthttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/18/religious_scientists_does_it_matter~3316523/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/08/burning_catholics_is_it_banned_now~3266926/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-11-08:/2007/11/08/burning_catholics_is_it_banned_now~3266926/Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:37:05 +0100 <p>Why didn't the (pretty big) bonfire night I went to not feature a guy? Is there now some EU directive banning the burning of Catholics after dark?</p> <p>If so, could we burn Tony Blair instead? Or Sir Ian Blair? Lionel? </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/08/burning_catholics_is_it_banned_now~3266926/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>tony-blairbonfire-nightburning-catholicshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/11/08/burning_catholics_is_it_banned_now~3266926/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/26/genius_of_photography~3200480/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-26:/2007/10/26/genius_of_photography~3200480/Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:24:13 +0200 <p>I enjoyed the first episode of the Genius of Photography on BBC4 last night. A lot of the information is well known but the programme was well put together and most of the contributors had something interesting to say.</p> <p>I'd recommend it to anyone with even a passing interest in Photography. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/26/genius_of_photography~3200480/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>genius-of-photographyphotographybbc4http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/26/genius_of_photography~3200480/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/25/welcome_back_clive_and_rory~3195172/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-25:/2007/10/25/welcome_back_clive_and_rory~3195172/Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:25:09 +0200 <p>Let's keep the Tigers roaring <img src="/img/smilies/icon_mrgreen.gif" alt=":>>" class="middle" border="0"> </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/25/welcome_back_clive_and_rory~3195172/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>rory-underwoodclive-woodwardrugbyleicester-tigershttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/25/welcome_back_clive_and_rory~3195172/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/21/bad_luck_to~3173020/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-21:/2007/10/21/bad_luck_to~3173020/Sun, 21 Oct 2007 19:43:02 +0200 <p>England Rugby squad - and well done for turning things around to the point where SA had to work hard and play very effective, pragmatic Rugby to win. Oh, and (through gritted teeth) well done Springboks - for change in attitude as much as performance since that awful (in many senses) 53-3 performance at Twickenham.</p> <p>And Lewis Hamilton - plenty more years for you though. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/21/bad_luck_to~3173020/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandrugbylewis-hamiltonbad-luckhttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/21/bad_luck_to~3173020/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/18/bench_press_own_weight~3158271/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-18:/2007/10/18/bench_press_own_weight~3158271/Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:11:19 +0200 <p>Have just decided to challenge myself to up my bench press to at least my weight (currently the lowest it's been for ages at around 180lbs). I have been coasting around the 155-165lbs region for a while so need a specific challenge. An old (now very slight) shoulder injury from Rugby hits my confidence in lifting but I should try for something more challenging.</p> <p>I suspect that lifting your own weight would be no challenge for a committed gym user but I only get to go 2/3 times a week and have a sedentary job so get next to no exercise outside the gym.</p> <p>I guess one of the things I'm saying is that we should challenge ourselves to our own level and not be bothered if we are lower on the scale of whatever it is we do than others. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/18/bench_press_own_weight~3158271/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>bench-pressgymchallengehttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/18/bench_press_own_weight~3158271/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/10/no_sax_for_ages~3116031/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-10:/2007/10/10/no_sax_for_ages~3116031/Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:35:55 +0200 <p>I've just realised I haven't picked up my saxophone for ages <img src="/img/smilies/icon_sad.gif" alt=":(" class="middle" border="0"> </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/10/no_sax_for_ages~3116031/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>saxophonehttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/10/no_sax_for_ages~3116031/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/08/why_can_t_the_aussies_make_aeroplanes~3102821/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-08:/2007/10/08/why_can_t_the_aussies_make_aeroplanes~3102821/Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:40:57 +0200 <p>Because their props keep going backwards. Boom Boom. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/08/why_can_t_the_aussies_make_aeroplanes~3102821/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>aeroplanesaussiespropshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/08/why_can_t_the_aussies_make_aeroplanes~3102821/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/04/175_000_new_bloggers_per_day~3085747/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-10-04:/2007/10/04/175_000_new_bloggers_per_day~3085747/Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:44:03 +0200 <p>... or so someone told me today. How many are writing to nobody as I seem to be doing? How many are effectively writing a diary? How many would be better off to talk to real people? How many will still be posting in a month? </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/04/175_000_new_bloggers_per_day~3085747/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>175000bloggersdiaryhttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/10/04/175_000_new_bloggers_per_day~3085747/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/26/thought_for_the_day~3044992/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-09-26:/2007/09/26/thought_for_the_day~3044992/Wed, 26 Sep 2007 21:05:01 +0200 <p>It's easier to get forgiveness for something you have done than permission for something you haven't. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/26/thought_for_the_day~3044992/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>thought-permission-forgivenesshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/26/thought_for_the_day~3044992/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/20/dispatches_from_java_land_test_coverage_~3013970/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-09-20:/2007/09/20/dispatches_from_java_land_test_coverage_~3013970/Thu, 20 Sep 2007 20:27:10 +0200 <p>One for the Java geeks:</p> <p>I found a nice code coverage tool today (Cobertura). We have a Spring-configured model layer with JUnit tests executed as part of the Ant build process.</p> <p>As happens a lot our test coverage has slipped and is not where it ought to be. It was an easy task to integrate Cobertura into the build process to measure coverage of those JUnit tests and then produce an easily readable report (HTML) with loads of detail. See the <a href="http://cobertura.sourceforge.net/">Cobertura sourceforge page</a> for more. I plan to expand it's use across all our model layer components and then up into the control layer.</p> <p>Incidentally I came across it whilst reading the excellent NFJS (No Fluff Just Stuff) Anthology, Vol. 2 (Pragmatic - all their books seem to be very good).</p> <p>Anyway, a good day. I seem to be one of the rare cases of someone who enjoys their job - or perhaps the unhappy ones are just more vocal. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/20/dispatches_from_java_land_test_coverage_~3013970/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>coberturalike-my-jobantjavatest-coveragejunithttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/20/dispatches_from_java_land_test_coverage_~3013970/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/favourite_geek_joke~3008452/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-09-19:/2007/09/19/favourite_geek_joke~3008452/Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:37:11 +0200 <p>There are 10 types of people in the world - those who understand binary and those who don't. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/favourite_geek_joke~3008452/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>geek-jokehttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/favourite_geek_joke~3008452/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/hoax_funeral~3008445/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-09-19:/2007/09/19/hoax_funeral~3008445/Wed, 19 Sep 2007 21:35:49 +0200 <p>Check out <a href="http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=21508199">Hoax Funeral</a>. I've just bought the CD and it's pretty good. Difficult to classify in style really - a bit folky but not really folk music (at least not as I understand it - I don't much like folk music).</p> <p>They apparently appear in the current "Next Big Thing" section of Q Magazine. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/hoax_funeral~3008445/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>musichoax-funeralhttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/hoax_funeral~3008445/#commentshttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/creationism_as_scientific_as_darwinism_d~3008217/tag:optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk,2007-09-19:/2007/09/19/creationism_as_scientific_as_darwinism_d~3008217/Wed, 19 Sep 2007 20:51:15 +0200 <p>Oh yes. A controversial subject to start with.</p> <p>I've just been reading a little bit of Philosophy (what we used to think of as drunken stupid conversations when we were younger). It seems that some adherents of Creationism claim it to have equal scientific value as Darwinism, which becomes a problem when those people are setting educational programmes for children (notably in the US).</p> <p>Claiming that the fossil record supports Creationism as much as it does Darwinism (on account of the "great flood" explaining the layering of the species with the higher mammals universally reaching higher ground prior to their becoming future fossils) is just plain daft. It <em>might</em> conceivably be correct on the grounds it can't be disproved but that is just the problem.</p> <p>If a single human fossil were to be found in the layers from the time of the dinosaurs the Creationists would undoubtably (and quite reasonably) claim this supports their view. The strength of the science behind Darwinism is that it would be immediately disproved if such a discovery were made. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/creationism_as_scientific_as_darwinism_d~3008217/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>sciencecreationismphilosophydarwinismhttp://optimisticcynic.blog.co.uk/2007/09/19/creationism_as_scientific_as_darwinism_d~3008217/#comments