Older blog entries for lkcl (starting at number 666)

FontForge and Python

well, i've been asked to create some demonstrations of the use of python with fontforge - not just "little scripts" but entire dialog boxes which will do the same job as the existing menu options. ultimately, the goal is to replace every single menu option with an equivalent. ok - the goal is for me to prove that even one dialog can be replaced, such that other people can realise it's possible. and, importantly, whilst replacements for the menu options are being developed, font developers can continue to use either the replacements or the existing code.

why do this at all?

well, fontforge's widget set was developed from scratch at a time when widget sets didn't handle unicode (which fontforge has to) and many more things which are listed on the fontforge FAQ. however, as time has progressed, _some_ features of widget sets - not all - have caught up. for example, the FF FAQ states that GTK can only do one type of RGB bitmap but FF requires several, and so on.

but, some of the fontforge input boxes are... archaic: for example there is no mouse-wheel-driven input widget, so font developers are forced to type in numbers (which often involves them looking down at the keyboard, not at the screen).

to replace such widgets and to generally make any kind of UI changes is... tiresome, as the code - including its widget set - is entirely written in c.

so, to make the job easier, the experiment is to implement an example menu option in several different python-based widget sets, and see which one flies. personally, i like pyjamas, not least because - believe it or not - its use means that fontforge could turn into a client-server application (!) using JSONRPC to get at the data, and the front-end GUI could be run in a modern web browser.

but, to be a proper experiment, several widget sets will be tried. so far i have a pygtk / cairo experiment up and running, and also a pyjamas (gwtcanvas) one. all really quite exciting. ultimately, it is hoped that it will be possible to use fontforge-nox with python bindings, and drop the main fontforge window, replace it with pygtk / pyjamas / pyqt4 / pyclutter and... done!

Glade UI Generator for Pyjamas

yaay! kees bos has started a User-Interface generator, based on the glade concept for GTK, for pyjamas. called PyJSGlade.

in essence, it's very simple: an editor, allows addition of panels and widgets and the editing of their properties, save the layout as an XML file, and then a second stage once you're done throws out a .py file which represents the application.

pretty straightforward, and very very cool.

what will be particularly interesting at some stage will be how to include HTML files and link widgets to existing bits of DOM. that's gonna be fun and games, and something that GTK-Glade _can't_ do.


well, surprisingly, the pyjamas-dev list is getting very active, all of a sudden, with what... five or six ongoing conversations a day. it's kinda nice to see that there's signs of the project taking off. i've got an upcoming article and also europython 2010 so it might get a little more hectic, which would be nice. web site needs a redesign though...

26 May 2010 (updated 26 May 2010 at 16:13 UTC) »
CT-PC89E or ST-PC89E as it's now known

hooray! we have the schematics of the 200-pin SO-DIMM and the netbook's motherboard! exactly how my friend adam managed to get these i have no idea, but it is very very good news. it's now possible, for example, to create an upgraded 1ghz ARM board (e.g. with an S5PC110 or the very expensive OMAP3530) for what is otherwise a slightly "lacking" machine.

the problem with the current S3C6410 system is that the software developers (mid-fun.com) are GPL violators. seatron, the hardware developers, are having difficulties convincing mid-fun to release the source code, and the hardware design is intimately tied with the [gpl violated] linux kernel.

so, by having the schematics, many of those gpl violations problems go away; additionally, by making a replacement 1ghz ARM SO-DIMM board the linux kernel GPL violations _also_ go away because we would have full knowledge of the design...

25 May 2010 (updated 25 May 2010 at 17:22 UTC) »
apathy and its antidote

well, i went down to the guildford library, took photos of the 50 or so pages of the 1948 statute reform act... over two weeks ago. the photos are still, unexamined, on my SD card.

in other words: out of sheer apathy, i'd left the Treason investigation behind me.

so receiving a stalinist "invitation" to attend an "assessment" was like a 50kV taser shot to the nuts, throwing me into _completely_ the opposite direction intended by the fascist/ignorant/stalinist decision made by some as yet unknown person in the Surrey Police Force.

i'm meeting with my MP on friday. i've written a letter to the Queen, explaining my outrage and concern that i may have to seek asylum outside of the EU. i've made a complaint to the IPCC and will be asking my MP to contact them on my behalf, in order to add teeth to the enquiry. a friend of mine has contacted the slightly unnerving UK Column on my behalf, and someone from UK Column just _happens_ to be visiting and lobbying members of the House of Lords today...

all in all the _complete_ opposite effect intended by the stalinistic approach, which is presumably intended to either call into question the credibility of the person reporting the crimes, or to scare them off.

as people who actually bother to do their research about me tend to know, i don't take too kindly to being threatened by "powerful" people: it tends to piss me off and i start looking for metaphorical two by fours to go metaphorically smacking them about the head with.

question: has anyone heard of the "Fixation Unit"? it's apparently a unit that is tasked with referring citizens who report crimes committed by politicians to "mental health assessments".

such delicious irony: my apathy was overcome by the accusation of "fixation". who's _actually_ "fixated" - me or this fucking "Fixation Unit"?

22 May 2010 (updated 22 May 2010 at 13:11 UTC) »
Contacting the Independent Press Complaints Commission

I researched and reported two crimes of Treason at my local police station; references PNNNNNNN and PNNNNNNNN.

today i was shocked to receive a letter from Spelthorne Mental Health Community Team "inviting" me to a "mental health assessment".

to be absolutely honest scared shitless of the implications and extremely angered by what are effectively accusations by Police Officers that i am "mentally unwell", and of the implied breakdown of trust by those Police Officers passing on my name and address without my consent.

i reported these crimes in good faith.

if i had known that i would be "accused of being mentally unwell" then do you _seriously_ think that i would have reported the crimes? what are the implications there: do you think that people will report serious crimes if they are at risk from being "locked away as mentally ill"?

i am now extremely concerned for my safety, as a direct consequence of the actions taken by Police Officers. god knows what these idiot Social Workers are going to do, now. my partner marie is here on a 2-year Visa, and we have a 14 month old daughter. is the Home Office going to have access to this information through the NHS "Spine", without my consent, and "refuse to issue a new visa" when we come to renew it? if Marie is deported, will I ever see my daughter again?

so you can see - the decision by the Police Officers to pursue "mental health allegations and accusations" against me has serious, serious implications and consequences.

one thought occurred to me which should shock you into investigating and taking this seriously: there is an incredible similarity between what is being done to me and what Stalin used to do to his "political enemies". whilst Stalin himself was sufficiently mentally ill to "invent" enemies and get people executed (which is not going to happen in 21st Century England), many intelligent people in Russia in the 50s were simply too afraid to talk openly, for fear of accusations of "being mentally ill".

my only form of defense against this kind of attack is to make everything that i say public. that includes this report, and it includes contacting newspapers.

Thank you, your complaint has been received by the IPCC and will be allocated to a Casework Manager. We try to respond to complaints as soon as possible, however the allocation time does depend on the number of complaints received. In the meantime if you have any queries please contact us, quoting your reference number on : 08453 002 002 Kind regards IPCC

6 May 2010 (updated 6 May 2010 at 15:55 UTC) »
Statute Law; Act of Supremacy 1558; Bill of Rights 1689; Statute Law Revision Act 1848

Well. it seems that almost the entirety of the 1558 Act of Supremacy has been repealed (and potentially replaced / upgraded) by the 1848 Statute Law Revision Act.

unfortunately, the text of the 1848 Statute Law Revision Act is not available online, as best i can find. i will find a copy.



UK Digital Economy Act

17 Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet

(1)The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision about the granting by a court of a blocking injunction in respect of a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright.

(2)“Blocking injunction” means an injunction that requires a service provider to prevent its service being used to gain access to the location.

well then: all free software web sites such as tor, sourceforge, github, gitorious, openvpn and so on, are all fucked, then, aren't they.

Democracy Matters

... does it? i received this, today, and replied (below)

Dear Luke Leighton What will you do to restore trust and participation in politics? If you expect to win South West Surrey next week, we want to know what you will do as a Member of Parliament to restore trust and participation in politics.

We are an alliance of organisations including the Community Sector Coalition, Civic Voice, Citizenship Foundation, NAVCA, WEA and others, with members in almost every constituency. We will publish responses to this message through our membership and on our website, www.democracymatters.info.

We are deeply concerned that people do not trust politicians, parties or the political process and feel powerless to influence decisions. This lack of trust and participation in civic life matters greatly for the health of our country.

For democracy to be real, people need to know how the system works, how to influence decisions and how to have an effective voice.

We are therefore asking you to

1. Make public your support for the independence of citizens, community groups. charities and voluntary organisations to lobby, campaign or speak out about the issues that matter to them, respecting the Charity Commission’s guidance on campaigning (CC9); 2. Support our efforts to provide accessible and affordable practical political education so that all citizens can understand the system, get their voice heard and influence decisions about things that concern them; 3. Help local government implement the Duty to Promote Democracy in partnership with local education providers, community groups and civil society, through independent "democracy hubs".

We got a positive reply to our letter from David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party, and expect to hear from other party leaders shortly. But we also want to tell our members about your support, as their own prospective member of parliament.

Members of the Democracy Matters alliance enable citizens to have an effective say by providing information, advice, education and support to take part in society. Many of us ran regional road-shows across England last year, involving over 600 people from local community and voluntary organisations and local MPs. We hope to run similar events throughout the UK during the next parliament.

After the election we will publish a guide to promoting democracy and practical politics, including responses to this message from individual Members of Parliament and the political parties represented in local and national government.

We will also hold a public meeting in Parliament after this election and look forward to your support.

Please reply to ppc@democracymatters.info

Yours sincerely,

Titus Alexander Convener Democracy Matters Alliance Mobile: 07720394740



Democracy Matters grew out of nine regional road-shows involving over 600 people from community and voluntary organisations and local Members of Parliament. A summary of the main points was published in Campaigning is OK! which can be downloaded from http://static.novas.org/files/campaigningisok-456.pdf This was launched in the House of Commons in July 2009 by an all party panel including the Third Sector Minister Angela Smith, Shadow Minister Nick Hurd MP and Greg Mulholland MP

(see: www.navca.org.uk/localvs/infobank/ilpunews/campaigninglaunch .htm ). Learning Power: a contribution to the national skills strategy makes the case for practical political education, based on the work of the Scarman Trust. See: http://static.novas.org/files/learning-power-262.pdf with reviews by Francis Maude, John Hayes, Bernard Crick, Helena Kennedy and others.

If you want information from Democracy Matters in future, please join us at: http://www.democracymatters.info/html/join.html

On 27 April 2010 15:05, Democracy Matters <ppc@democracymatters.info> wrote: > > > > Dear Luke Leighton > > What will you do to restore trust and participation in politics? > > If you expect to win South West Surrey next week, we want to know what you will do as a Member of Parliament to restore trust and participation in politics.

dear democracy matters,

to answer the question, first i must give you some background.

democracy as deployed in athens is one of the most powerful governance methods i've encountered. random selection (effectively jury service) has powerful advantages: you get people who have no known personal or vested interest involved in the process of decision-making.

democracy as deployed _now_ is one of the weakest forms of governance known. to allow politicians to "fight" over what must be done, in a state of constant opposition, results in ridicule that is nothing more than "entertainment" but results in a weakened governance where nothing of lasting stability is achieved or even attempted, out of fear of alienating voters. the next parliament merely rips up the tracks laid by the previous government, which is at risk of happening again in four to five years time.

additionally, focussing of power by way of "party whips" into the hands of one man (the Prime Minister) for example leads us to have bills such as the "Legislative and Reform Bill" which was on its 2nd reading before anyone noticed its similarity to Hitler's 1936 "Enabling Act" - an Act which allowed him to shut Parliament the day after it was passed (because it was "reasonable") and declare himself Dictator (because it was "reasonable").

yet what we have is what we have.

... or, in the UK, it is what we _used_ to have.

with sovereign power having been handed over to the E.U., the crime of treason was committed by Edward Heath, as the E.U. Directives (decided and agreed by "strangers") which must be enacted as law in the member states, "overawes" the Houses of Parliament. these are key words in the 1848 Treason Felony Act - an Act which has NOT been repealed.

additionally, the 1999 House of Lords Act - a "general" Act of Legislation - CANNOT be used to revoke Royal Proclamations ("Letters Patent") granting hereditary peers the right to a seat in Parliament (see Baroness Ashton's reply on this, 29th Sep 2008, clarifying this point). but, by illegally revoking the passes of some 900 hereditary peers, Parliament has been "intimidated" - by order and at the instigation of Tony Blair (and other conspirators).

the unfortunate (some would say fortunate) side-effect of this second act of Treason is to throw into doubt the legality and validity of any law passed since 2000 (including ironically the Lisbon Treaty, as well as several thousand other pieces of legislation); for details, search for Lord Mereworth's legal challenge, initiated in late 2009, to the revocation of his pass granting him access to the Houses of Parliament.

so we have a serious, serious situation in which the entire democratic process in the UK has been completely and systematically undermined... and nobody's noticed!

there's something desperately, desperately wrong and i am at a loss to explain peoples' total lack of interest.

that is just the background. now i answer your question.

what i _have_ done (not what am i "going" to do) is report the crime of Treason at my local police station. what i _will_ do is report the _second_ crime of Treason, tomorrow. i appear to have accidentally stumbled onto something that i cannot now "let go of" or "let rest" until i find out if people are actually interested. which is most unfortunate.

should i find out that people do not care if we are no longer a sovereign nation, i will happily stop pursuing this. the only real way to find that out is by a referendum. it doesn't matter how that referendum is carried out. the politicians didn't bother to consult us; they all promised that they would have a referendum if they were voted in, and they didn't damn well fulfil their promise.

well, unfortunately for them, by going ahead without consulting us, they committed criminal acts: Treasonous acts.

so, there is actually another way to get the referendum that people might seek: by going down to your local police station and reporting Edward Heath for the crime of Treason and all Prime Ministers since as being complicit in that crime (for taking us into the E.U. and handing over Sovereign Power); and reporting Tony Blair and the other conspirators (339 other politicians voted for that bill) for a second crime of Treason.

now, whilst the Crown Prosecution Service has the discretionary power to not prosecute if it is "not in the Public Interest", note the word "Crown" in the sentence "Crown Prosecution Service". all policemen serve Her Majesty, the Queen - and no other.

the critical question is: does the Chief of Police have the balls to make the arrests? i have a feeling that if he knows that he has a sizeable chunk of the UK population behind him, with a record of several million reports of Treason (and their associated Crime Reference Numbers), he will not only have no choice but to make the arrests but also will be able to easily justify his actions to the accused.

so you want to know what i'm doing, to restore trust and participation in politics? starting with _you_, i'm asking _you_ to make the above a matter of public record, and i'm asking _you_ to take up the challenge to restore our shattered political system.

i look forward to receiving another "general mailshot" from you, covering the above in your own words, with a link to a suitable petition, giving advice on what people should do to restore "trust" in our political system.

i should not have to remind you that if you fail to make an independent investigation, fail to do due diligence, fail to take up this task now that you have been informed of it, you will be failing entirely and utterly to hold true to everything that your web site claims to stand for. you state that "democracy matters", but if you do not act to help _make_ democracy matter, then you are no better than the traitors who have undermined our Sovereignty and our Parliament.

these may sound like strong words, but i swear to you that they are mild in comparison to the ones i really should be using.



25 Apr 2010 (updated 26 Apr 2010 at 13:16 UTC) »
Treason. Again.

let's connect the dots, shall we?

House of Lords: Letters Patent - 29sep2008 Column WA396

Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:

"By what means Letters Patent creating peerages can be changed; and in what legislation that has occurred. [HL5196]"

The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): "The effect of Letters Patent creating peerages can he changed by legislation which has that specific effect."

(translation: "general" acts of legislation do not apply, cannot apply, and do NOT revoke, repeal or make redundant, "Letters Patent")

transcript of Baron Wensleydale's Letters Patent

"and that he may have, hold, and possess a Seat, Place and Voice in the Parliaments and Public Assemblies and Councils of Us, Our Heirs and Successors, within our United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, amongst other Barons, as a Baron of Parliament and Public Assemblies and Councils,"

Also of interest is the generic forms of peerage letters patent" all of which - life peerages and hereditary peerages - specifically state that peers have a right to be in Parliament.

(translation: the hereditary peer is entitled to sit in Parliament, wherever and whatever that may be. quite forward-thinking and far-sighted, really)

House of Lords Act 1999

"1. No-one shall be a member of the House of Lords by virtue of a hereditary peerage." (except those exempted, which is covered in the rest of the Act)

(translation: a "general" piece of legislation, which is completely ineffective and invalid - as clarified by Baroness Ashton.)

Treason Felony Act 1848

"If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, ... or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, ... or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable . . . . . . F4 to be transported beyond the seas for the term or his or her natural life . . . . . ."

(translation: oh dearie me).

Lord Mereworth's challenge to the 1999 House of Lords Act vs his Letters Patent

In a passage that shows the explosive potential of the case to trigger a constitutional crisis, he says: “Any reform [of the house of lords] that failed, but affected the composition of the house would have the effect of jeopardizing all subsequent legislation until remedied. This would appear to apply to the house of lords act 1999 if its regime were to be judged flawed.”

(short summary of above link: all hereditary peers are entitled to sit in the House of Lords, despite the 1999 house of lords act.)


We take it on trust that Baroness Ashton has had good advice, extremely good access to legal council, and that her statements can be confirmed as correct. Thus, we can take it that the 1999 House of Lords Act (a "general" piece of legislation) does not apply. In other words, to actually remove the Lords from the House of Lords would require 900 individual, separate and distinct pieces of specific legislation, specifically naming each specific hereditary peer and specifically revoking their access, rights and privileges to "sit in the Houses of Parliament, councils etc. etc." (wherever and whatever those might be)

Thus, the revocation of all the passes issued to each member of the House of Lords who happened to be a hereditary peer, can be construed to be an "overt act" to "intimidate" one of the Houses of Parliament: the House of Lords. If it was just one peer, that would be intolerable but would be difficult to construe as "intimidating" one of the Houses of Parliament. However, given that 900 of the 1000+ representatives were "intimidated" and illegally prevented and prohibited from entering the Houses of Parliament by having their passes revoked, I believe it's safe to say that the "House of Lords" was, itself, "intimidated".

This is Treason.

Let's see whom we need to report to the Police, as having committed this crime, shall we? wikipedia to the rescue... .... ahh, yes. Tony Blair, possibly Viscount Cranborne, and ahh, yes - 340 members of the House of Commons. 339 to be precise (Tony Bliar not being counted twice).

So we actually have two explosive pieces of news, here. The first is that all Laws passed since 2000 are likely to be constitutionally invalid, and the second is that a crime of Treason was committed by Tony Blair, and that 339 other members of the House of Commons were complicit in that crime, amongst others.

Regarding the constitutional invalidity of all Laws since 2000: it has to be pointed out that when the Queen signs an Act, it's an Act. Alternatively, a representative of Her Majesty can say "La Regle, il vaut" - which I sincerely hope is not old french for "The Monarch Wants It" as I would prefer it to mean "The Monarch Wishes (or declares) It To Be So".

But, we have to remember that the actual passing of the House of Lords Act itself would be a crime of Treason; also as would the signing of the E.U. Lisbon Treaty and all other Treaties. I cannot believe that Her Majesty would herself commit a crime of Treason against herself, so there must be a loophole that Her Majesty, with access to the country's most knowledgeable and highly regarded Legal counsel, has exploited.

Either that, or these bills (all since the House of Lords Act, 1999, or possibly even earlier, dating back to the E.U. Treaties) have not been passed or declared as Law, and we simply haven't been told (*). In light of the simple requirement that it takes a representative of Her Majesty merely speaking the words "La Regle il vaut" to make an Act "an Act", rather than specifically writing them down or signing the Act, it leaves me wondering perhaps if someone hasn't "gone and appointed themselves" as a representative of Her Majesty...

(*) - if an Act is not passed into Law by Her Majesty, Parliament must be dissolved. My understanding is that the Monarch should also resign. This constitutes our last line of defense in the UK against a tyrannical government.

657 older entries...

New Advogato Features

New HTML Parser: The long-awaited libxml2 based HTML parser code is live. It needs further work but already handles most markup better than the original parser.

Keep up with the latest Advogato features by reading the Advogato status blog.

If you're a C programmer with some spare time, take a look at the mod_virgule project page and help us with one of the tasks on the ToDo list!