There are a few experiments going on here now that this blog is on the new server. Massive thanks to my friend who has been working tirelessly to get us on to the new box and into the 2020s.
   First, there’s a post counter, though as it’s freshly installed, it doesn’t show a true count. There is a way to get the data out of Yuzo Related Posts into the counter—even though that’s not entirely accurate, either, it would be nice to show the record counts I had back in 2016 on the two posts revealing Facebook’s highly questionable “malware scanner”.

   Secondly, we haven’t found a good related post plug-in to replace Yuzo. You’ll see two sets of related posts here. The second is by another company who claims their software will pick up the first image in each post in the event that I have not set up a featured image or thumbnail; as you can see, it doesn’t do what it says on the tin.
   Some of you will have seen a bunch of links from this blog sent out via social media as the new installation became live, and I apologize for those.
   Please bear with us while we work through it all. The related post plug-in issue has been the big one: there are many, but they either don’t do as they claimed, or they have terrible design. Even Wordpress’s native one cannot do the simple task of taking the first image from a post, which Yuzo does with ease.

Recently a friend recommended a Google service to me, and of course I responded that I would never touch anything of theirs, at least not willingly. The following isn’t addressed to him, but the many who have taken exception to my justified concerns about the company, and about Facebook, and their regular privacy breaches and apparent lack of ethics.
   In short: I don’t get you.
   And I try to have empathy.
   When I make my arguments, they aren’t pulled out of the ether. I try to back up what I’ve said. When I make an attack in social media, or even in media, there’s a wealth of reasons, many of which have been detailed on this blog.
   Of course there are always opposing viewpoints, so it’s fine if you state your case. And of course it’s fine if you point out faults in my argument.
   But to point the “tut tut” finger at me and imply that I either shouldn’t or I’m mistaken, without backing yourselves up?
   So where are you coming from?
   In the absence of any supporting argument, there are only a handful of potential conclusions.
   1. You’re corrupt or you like corruption. You don’t mind that these companies work outside the law, never do as they claim, invade people’s privacy, and place society in jeopardy.
   2. You love the establishment and you don’t like people rocking the boat. It doesn’t matter what they do, they’re the establishment. They’re above us, and that’s fine.
   3. You don’t accept others’ viewpoints, or you’re unable to grasp them due to your own limitations.
   4. You’re blind to what’s been happening or you choose to turn a blind eye.
   I’ve heard this bullshit my entire life.
   When I did my first case at 22, representing myself, suing someone over an unpaid bill, I heard similar things.
   ‘Maybe there’s a reason he hasn’t paid you.’
   ‘They never signed a contract, so no contract exists.’
   As far as I can tell, they were a variant of those four, since one of the defendants was the president of a political party.
   I won the case since I was in the right, and a bunch of con artists didn’t get away with their grift.
   The tightwad paid on the last possible day. I was at the District Court with a warrant of arrest for the registrar to sign when he advised me that the money had been paid in that morning.
   I did this case in the wake of my mother’s passing.
   It amazed me that there were people who assumed I was in the wrong in the setting of a law student versus an establishment white guy.
   Their defence was full of contradictions because they never had any truth backing it up.
   I also learned just because Simpson Grierson represented them that no one should be scared of big-name law firms. Later on, as I served as an expert witness in many cases, that belief became more cemented.
   Equally, no one should put any weight on what Mark Zuckerberg says since history keeps showing that he never means it; and we should believe Google will try one on, trying to snoop wherever they can, because history shows that they will.

Ancient history with Google? Here’s what its CEO said, as quoted in CNBC, in February. People lap this up without question (apart from the likes of Bob Hoffman, who has his eyes open, and a few others). How many people on this planet again? It wasn’t even this populated in Soylent Green (which supposedly takes place in 2022, if you’re looking at the cinematic version).