A feminist pop-culture adventure, written by a number of people of this parish. I've read some of what's to come on this site, and if you care at all about one or both of equality or pop culture you will want to read this.

Because Toronto deserves something nice. There are a number of Torontonians around these parts. I urge you all to vote Murray, in the strongest, tenderest possible terms.

And yet we're still not funding space travel properly. What's up with that?

This ones doing the rounds, and with excellent reason. A bit of writing on posthumanity that encompasses all the usual stuff and cyborgs and tool using and modern infrastructure, and goes to some fascinating and non-generally considered places beyond that. For example: "a cyborg revolution was happening the same year Manfred Clynes and Nathan Kline coined the term. A hostile environment was being tamed by a newly and artificially capable people. It escaped notice and critique though, because the modified weren’t men, and then environment wasn’t space. The modified were women, and the environment was men. The women of the 60s were the first to modify and control their uteruses."

An absolutely superb essay on influence, creativity, and copyright. The absolute best writing I have read on this subject, anywhere. And with a truly superb sting in the tail…

This is one of those "so simple it's obvious" things, that clearly, no-one has ever thought of. I have one (semi-)regular physical interaction with my internet router, and I bet it's the same one you do. I turn it off and on again. That's the only thing I ever do with it. And yet, the switch to do that is hidden at the back, and there is absolutely no reason why this should be so. No reason at all.

Do you play the lottery? Here's a little tool that will simulate playing a reasonably normal lottery for you, twice a week, for 10 years, so that you can see just how much money you're flushing down the toilet for what kind of reward.

Most of you can safely skip this one, as it'll be incomprehensible tech bollocks. Unless you're interested in good coding practice when developing Javascript for other people to deploy of their websites. No, didn't think so.

Have you ever complained (or thought about complaining, or generally just grumbled to yourself and your friends) when LJ, Facebook, Twitter, or any other large website you use changed something? Have you ever wondered "why didn't they give us the option to keep doing it the old way, if we wanted to?" Well here's a good post explaining why.

Yeah, I know it sounds unlikely to the point of absurdity. But seriously, read this. I don't care if you don't give a shit about one of both of them are – unless you have no idea at all who both of them are (in which case, I congratulate you on waking from your 20 year coma, and welcome you to the future) they I promise you, you'll love it. It's absolutely brilliant.

I'm not posting this as an Apple fan – Apple are a long, long way from being the only example of this kind pace of technology, and probably aren't even the best. But they're a well know, very recognisable one. As you look at this though, I invite you to consider the following: you didn't even notice that change happening, did you?

Need to grab this and get it running somewhere – on the one hand, most of my stuff is inconsequential crap, on the other hand, I don't like not having my own copy of data I generate, so something that auto-archives my socialmeeja crap is handy, especially if it'll let me produce stats on it.

Some data on the behaviour of users who were referred by to a site, split by the site that referred them – for example, users referred by BoingBoing stay longer, but read less extra pages that this initial linked one than those who arrive via Bleeding Cool or io9. I'd be cautious of putting reading *too* much into the data, but it's still interesting.

A savage, brilliant deconstruction of the problems with the way science is reported in the press. Please note carefully the section toward the end (for maximum take-away, you understand) where fringe lunatics and cranks who don't understand how science works (or how to tie their own shoelaces, a lot of the time) are given their say.

I loved Bagpuss. I also love this. The Thomas the Tank Engine (linked within) one is pretty good, too. Well, it made me laugh, anyway.

Even slime mould can make decisions, it turns out. Sounds like it may be smarter than some humans.

Is there anyone in the US who I can paypal cash to, who would be willing to order to have them order one of these and post it on to me?

Of interest to a few folk around here, I'd imagine – a day at The French Laundry, a look at how they work, and how their ever changing menus are put together.

This is food for thought. Key quote: "Storytelling is clearly an extremely important function of societies, but it's nonetheless unproven that to be human is to be a storytelling being. Even if it is the case that human beings are completely intrinsically storytelling animals, it doesn't follow that that's something to celebrate, any more than we should celebrate the fact that human beings are defecating animals."

There're a number of obvious counter-arguments, that can essentially be lumped in as "the power of art to bring about change" but it's still a point of view worth remembering.

I think I'm going to have to pick this book up. A lot of the numbers around the environmental impact of livestock farming have seemed off to me particularly in relation to arguments about grain (because, well, what's wrong with grass-fed?) and water (because invariably, the numbers seem to assume that any water fed to a cow never leaves the cow, which is pretty self-evidently wrong). It's nice to see that someone's actually taken the numbers apart and proved them wrong/fallacious, and done so in a way that convinces even a big hippy like Monbiot.

A clear and sensible statement about the need to decentralise services like Twitter, Facebook, and really, almost any service, if you want it around for the long (decade+) haul. Idle thought: Someday, someone will figure out how to massively decentralise search, and than things will get really interesting. (Google have, of course, effectively done this internally in that their search architecture is spread over cluster after cluster, but that's not the same as true decentralisation…)

I really want this to succeed – once it's out of beta, and at the more-or-less easy to install stage, I'll probably put some time and cash, into setting up a Seed. I absolutely know that there are people I've lost touch with since leaving Facebook, and I know my social life has suffered for it. I've felt quite disconnected from many of my friends this year, and it's bugging me quite a lot of late. I'm not blaming anyone, you understand and I'm not going to be one of those arseholes who think that it's everyone else's fault – I knew what I was doing when I walked away from Farcebook – I'm just a little sad that people don't seem to use any other contact medium any more. So as soon as I can, I'll help offer a better alternative…