Thursday, April 7, 2011

Outdoor Advertising & Council Cuts

Wonders never cease!

Splodge can't claim to be responsible for the current OFT action looking into OUTDOOR ADVERTISING monopolies but its a coincidence that after pointing out such things in the post about Outdoor Advertising + Council Cuts that an investigation is underway!

And another strange coincidence in Dublin (A HOAX but highlighting a genuine issue):

                                                       Dublin: Thursday, Apr 7th, 2011 
There has been a history of controversy in Dublin. There have been no accidents but this is because people are having to take extra care on these public foot ways. This contract must be up for renewal soon, there MUST be better alternatives.

This video from a few years ago gives a good idea about things in Dublin.


(Reuters) - The Office of Fair Trading said it had started an investigation into certain JC Decaux and Clear Channel contracts as part of a probe into barriers to entry in the outdoor advertising market.

guardian.co.uk home Office Of Fair Trading to investigate Outdoor Advertising Monopoly:

OFT: Press releases 2011 -

OFT publishes outdoor advertising market study: Barriers to Entry, competition is stiffled.... allegedly. 

Decaux response: looks like shutting the barn door after the horse has bolted - JCDecaux issue a Code Of Ethics!


 Years after their boss and founder gets SIX MONTHS:

Decaux sentenced in corruption scandal

City bus shelter tycoon in corruption scandal.

Glasgow News
A MILLIONAIRE businessman who recently won the contract to supply 50million pounds  worth of bus to Glasgow has been convicted for his part in a corruption scandal.


Jean Claude Decaux supplies local authorities throughout Scotland with the latest public loos and bus shelters.


His firm, JC Decaux, recently wrested control of the contract to supply Glasgow with bus shelters from arch- rival Adshel after a bitter battle.


An appeal by Adshel bosses to the Court of Session in Edinburgh against the decision was then thrown out.


But the company owner and chairman has been convicted in a French court after he allegedly colluded with a corrupt politician.

Apart from the strange amount for bus shelters valued at 50Million?

It makes you think about how all this street furniture got to be so prominent in most UK cities, and cities all over the world?

Where there is huge amounts of cash you often find corruption of one kind or another.
And Dublin has given JCDecaux access to massive profits whilst the country's debt drags it down.

Good LUCK:  OFT as these outfits have enough cash drawn from our city's stupidity to allow them access to huge funds; more than enough profits to fight any outcomes in the courts for years; thus stiffling any competition! IPSO FACTO.






Monday, April 4, 2011

Splodge on Crime Maps

There a great idea! Well done UK Police.


POLICE. UK


These maps work from inputting your Post Code (USA: Zip Code).

Then you can see the reported crime activity positioned onto a local map.

This Police crime activity site gives out Twitter feeds of current crimes.

A year or so ago I attended a conference with a Police officer giving a very informative talk telling the audience about Location Crime. He maintained that all criminal activity is location connected from the point of the criminals. They all operate within their own known geographical area, or locations they know, a sort of safe zone that they are comfortable with. This means that they observe and plan ahead and know all escape roots before performing any actual criminal activity: its their territory.

Now this is VERY interesting because in most cases, an example being burglary, the burglars are our local neighbours.

CCTV may put them off.


Anti-social behaviour is a crime wave and these folks are always local and probably all known to the Police, the problem is evidence- catching them in the act.

Like the local burglar(s) they know that there are no Police about and then if the Police do show up – that’s when their mobile phones inform their mates, so they disapear.

Virtually all low level crime is drug related. But the fact is that elected officials do not like to take up issues regarding drugs, why? And the Police; why do they withdraw into their hideaway Police stations. I think its apathy.

We can do something about all this.

When we realise that some organisations do monitor these Police maps and the results that they see can hit you in your pocket: home and car insurance. If you live in the wrong area your car insurance can be hundreds of pounds more than a neighbouring community area.

So even if your not mugged, had a burglary or your car broken into you are paying the cost for it to perpetuate!

On the basis of saving ourselves a lot of money and using the Police data to support the case we should demand that the politicians take an interest and that the Police patrol these areas…. I would suggest a few hide in the bushes for ‘sting’ operations – call me radical… Splodge can take it!

Live statistics such as this Police example are good material for digital citizens to use to push through reforms armed with facts. Statistics of all types can be obtained online from government and other agency’s – they may be gathered for one originating reason: rising crime means more funding for the Police etc and the website can be used for that purpose, but with a little thought and imagination such material can be used to force change in different directions.

Look at your local crime map post it to your MP get some action!

Susan Greenfield Professor of Neuroscience

Susan Greenfield Professor of Neuroscience


Susan believes that Social Networks may be harmful: “computers may be changing the way we think”. MAIL ONLINE: 24th February 2009





A lack of concentration from spending too much time on Social Networks:

Maybe. But probably building new skills such as rapid responses needed in Kill games mostly played by young men and boys, which may prove to be more harmful.

Are there compensatory factors?

Do games and long stays on Social Networks reduce real life social networking? I bet the answer is maybe, and for some people but not for others in fact a mixture of possibilities.

Professor Sue is obviously correct with some of her observations and she correctly identifies a lack of empathy capacity when dealing with other human beings as a result of using computers too much.

However this lack of empathy is due to the person, how the human being is, how their upbringing affected them, parental care etc; this and nothing to do with placing the blame upon the computer, it does however show that too much of anything is no good for nobody.


The video shows that Professor Sue is most likely correct about computer (A.I) intelligence: can such a device be conscious in the human manner?

As Sue says: its doubtful.

But its also doubtful that many human beings are conscious too! In the sense of self aware consciousness and having the capability to be fully aware and really cognisant of our actions – i.e. not to be driven by impulse and conditioning producing automatic responses.

“Computers may be changing the way we think” but maybe that’s just an observation provided by only recent ‘scientific’ observations of the way people are reacting with computers, has the way we think had periods of change due to many external circumstances in the past? For example no one was around observing how the printing press changed us, and in anycase do we really think? I mean think independently of our sets of previously conditioned and stored auto responses?

As described in the last Splodge Blog (Artificial Intelligence) people do appear to make automated responses that could be compared to a none thinking computer; programmed with automatic responses from external inputs. For example in arguments the tension rising between the persons arguing can appear to be an automatic emotional ratcheting up effect. Seen by an outside observer the pantomime often shows the stupidity of such functions. When the red mist of an argument causes anger; conscious self aware decisions are just not available and the results are stupidity. Good advice from the old adage is to count to ten before commenting against an argumentative opponent. Thus stopping the none thinking automatic response that is there on a hair trigger waiting to pounce.

Like the Manchester United footballer when given a yellow card, swearing to camera, Wayne Rooney said it was just: “a heat of the moment reaction” are we all subject to reactive moments?
Concurrent self awareness: monitoring yourself with an awareness of self offers much more control over the self - in fact we probably have multiple selves that auto act out responses in various previously experienced experiences, produce a template answer framework mindset, and its when these states do not then give up their ‘control’ that problems can set in, when an ‘argument self’ is resident all day; we have all encountered such states in others if not within ourselves.




Now here is a little experiment you might try for observing a self observing state of mind to see what I mean:


Repeat a word, any word, or a sentence if you prefer.

Repeat it for as long as you can. You will soon realise that you drift off dreaming other thoughts and that your intention to keep repeating the word was lost. You lost your conscious awareness!

Keep on re-trying each time you come back to self remembering: what your intention was. After a few attempts, a couple of times a day and maybe it may take a week for a noticeable result; then apart from realising that you have little authority to command your own mind to do your bidding, you will realise that there are periods when you find yourself ‘there’ concurrently conscious and able to observe another part of your mind fulfilling your command to repeat the intended words.

Its separate from YOU separate from you being absorbed and within it.

There you have it – that is real self aware consciousness; you are observing a sub function. YES a bit like a computer running a sub-routine function! But the human can do this whilst being cognisant of both – observing the observer of the sub routine: does this lead to what Frank Herbert was attempting to describe as ‘Mentat’ capacity in the DUNE series of books? WHO KNOWS. I refuse to go off onto a Splodge tangent!

It does have interesting effects; one is that this process can be called upon to change any repetitive automatic mental music that gets into your mind without permission. Often you just can’t stop it, that continuous monotonous repetitive annoying song that just wont switch off; however this little exercise will do the trick. Which proves to yourself if not to others that it is possible to take control of the sub mind by strengthening awareness in the overmind.

Why is there no psychology research into such matters?

Its quite possible that these self observations could lead to humans beginning to use the parts of the brain that are apparently dormant! It just begins with a little effort.

I wonder if Professor Sue has ever done such experiments upon herself, for the sake of objective science?