Weekly Round-Up: 30.06.06

Imagine the Round-Up's surprise when during a moment of abject boredom this week (or Ukraine v Switzerland, to give it its proper name) some channel hopping on the television uncovered a rather magnificent gem of information right where you would least expect to find it.

The Round-Up didn't even know there was a 'Community Channel' on cable but as the channel hopping flashed onto it the familiar face of a long-haired man singing his heart out on screen stopped the Round-Up in its tracks.

It was one of those 'I know that face' moments which is immediately followed with 'but from where?'.

Fortunately the face in question was pretty distinctive and it wasn't long before the Round-Up placed it... Though the setting was a little unusual. Singing away with a big grin and long, long flowing hair, it was unmistakably Gary McKinnon, the UK man who hacked into NASA's computers, discovered incontrovertible evidence of alien intelligence (but was 'too stoned' to remember what it was, m'Lud) and now faces extradition to the US for his troubles.

In all the coverage of McKinnon's case the Round-Up had never heard any mention of his past as a singer/songwriter and actor, though his part in a dubious low-budget movie, called 'Lunar Girl', from 2001 appears to be his only credit.

(You can check out McKinnon's two songs from the film here, and while downloading files created by a self-confessed hacker may not seem wise, we're pretty sure they're safe.)

The Round-Up will spare the blushes of the silicon.com team member who said 'Who's that? It's quite good' while we were playing these tracks, though we concede they are admittedly a lot better than we feared they might be – with a slight Bowie factor, dare we say.

A number of the lyrics stood out, not least of all "I stand, lonely and without a place to stay", which the Round-Up has a feeling may be a problem the US government will gladly address with some state-sponsored accommodation in the near future.

Likewise, "You don't know what you're looking for but it ain't here, so say goodbye", from his song 'Only a Fool' might neatly sum up McKinnon's search for ET (though we're willing to admit we're wrong when the invasion fleet arrives).

However, it's not all doom and gloom. McKinnon also sings "I could be the hand that breaks the chains and sets you free..." Which sounds like it could be a useful skill to have under the circumstances.

In fact only one lyric really seemed out of place. "I can be the sunny smile that brightens up your day."

That would be this sunny smile, we presume:

That'll brighten up any day.

However, the Round-Up hatched a plan at this stage which it is surprised McKinnon's defence and growing band of supporters haven't hit upon yet (possibly because this musical string to McKinnon's bow seems to be something of a secret).

Get the songs on iTunes, start a viral marketing campaign on the internet and get Gary McKinnon to number one – a few thousand downloads alone will see him hit the charts.

Why? Well how many celebrities have 'beaten the rap' in the US on the back of having a music or movie career... think about it.

Moving on, it sounds like the most incredibly mismatched underwater death-match but this week silicon.com published an article about a contest which pits Octopus against Oyster.

Let's get ready to rumble!

How would that play out? The octopus has everything going for it – reach, strength, weight but try as it might the Round-Up can't help thinking the whole 'shell' issue would thwart its best efforts.

But of course this article wasn't really about mollusc on mollusc action. It was in fact about the differences between London's Oyster card and Hong Kong's altogether more impressive Octopus card.

What the article doesn't address is why both systems are named after molluscs. The Round-Up assumed Oyster had something to do with the little two-part folder they are issued in and the way they open like an oyster but when it comes to the Octopus card, although some journeys may have eight legs, the card most certainly doesn't (nor does it squirt ink, which would be handy, if a little unpredictable for filling in your crossword on the tube).

The story makes for interesting reading, however, and gives us an insight into just what we may expect of our little blue Oyster cards in the future.

Still loosely on the subject of being out and about, thank you to those readers who suggested some wi-fi enabled pubs. We've now updated our list, which you can see here.

And another story from a previous Round-Up must also get another mention – that of the DVLA and the problems it has had with staff spreading smut around via email.

It seems pretty clear cut – swap smut via your work email address and face the consequences.

But one reader wasn't so sure.

"The question is: How pornographic was this?" he asked, sounding worryingly like a connoisseur.

"Was it just breasts? Was it the full monty?" he asked, possibly getting a little over-excited at the implications of his own questions. "Was it full intercourse?" he inevitably enquired.

"On two of these you could now get sacked for sending a picture of the old masters, with young plump women lying there."

The Round-Up is pretty sure people will be able to distinguish.

"David have you been emailing your dirty Reubens pictures to Susan again?
"But Clive, she is the curator of the Flemish collection..."

Even in the Round-Up's limited experience (of art) there is a world of difference between 'the nude' and pornography.

But our reader still isn't convinced, adding that there are "a lot of photos doing the rounds just now, no inappropriate touching, just posing".

And it's pretty obvious he's seen most of them.

It seemed clear therefore what our reader was angling for here and sure enough he eventually came up with an idea... can you guess what it was?

"What they should do is show the pictures..."

And he will, of course, in the name of making a judicious decision, be able to study them and decide whether they are indeed indecent.

The Round-Up can't see why the DVLA wouldn't take him up on such an offer, rather than relying upon its own judgment and internal policy.

And again, another story from last week - no sooner did the Round-Up think it had sent Bill Gates on his way with a ringing endorsement into the full-time world of philanthropy than the man is once again all over the news thanks to a $30bn – that's right, thirty billion dollars – donation to his charitable foundation from the world's second richest man (nice to see there's no rivalry) Warren Buffett – inventor of pineapple chunks and cheese on sticks as well as bite size sausage rolls and bowls of crisps. (Ed. note: That would make him Warren Buffet, you fool!)

Canny investor Buffett who made a fair wedge of his wad from a massive holding in Coca-Cola, among other major names on the stock market, has decided that he too has more money than he could ever arguably need (where's the ambition?) and has decided it's time to make the grand gesture.

And who better to handle that charitable stack than his old bridge partner Bill Gates who has already created some momentum in this area?

Speaking to Fortune magazine, Buffett likened his transferral of wealth to Gates' Foundation to handing the golf club to Tiger Woods when the job needs to be done well.

"What can be more logical, in whatever you want done, than finding someone better equipped than you are to do it?" Buffett said. "Who wouldn't select Tiger Woods to take his place in a high-stakes golf game? That's how I feel about this decision about my money."

So Bill Gates is the Tiger Woods of philanthropy and the comparisons don't end there. The Round-Up hears that a young Tiger Woods, when practicing his golf shots around the house as a child, was also responsible for a number of holes appearing in windows.

(Drum roll, cymbal – 'I thank you!')

Speaking during a press conference on Monday, Buffett said: "My kids were elated when I told them."

The Round-Up, being the cynical soul it is, stumbled over that notion briefly but Buffett explained.

"They knew my views on inherited wealth and shared them. I believe in equality of opportunity. They should not inherit my position in society, based on the womb that they were born from."

Which, putting aside "the womb that they were born from" bit to describe their mother, is a very noble sentiment.

The Round-Up can only imagine how wholeheartedly Buffett's children backed his decision.

And finally, there's been a fair amount of fuss in the media this week about a laptop with exploded at a conference. Pictures of the Dell machine quickly appeared online, showing the computer in flames – much to the alarm of a number of onlookers.

Dell claims it has now "captured" the laptop (they can be hard to hunt down) and is looking into what went wrong.

End of the story? Not a bit of it... there are points to be scored here and column inches to be filled. (Don't misunderstand, if the laptop had been on the Round-Up's knee at the time, there would be all hell to pay but to be honest we've never seen people so fascinated by a bit of fire since Ug the Mammoth Slayer first showed his brother Og a neat trick involving some kindling and two pieces of flint.)

One press release sent in to the editorial mailbox on the subject wins the award for most painfully obvious statement ever.

'Exploding Laptops Pose Hazard says Info-Tech Research Group,' read the subject line.

You don't say.

"The most recent event we’re aware of involved a Dell laptop exploding and bursting into flames at a business meeting in Osaka, Japan," said Info-Tech’s senior analyst Carmi Levy, showing that analysts are capable of reading from the internet like everybody else.

Levy continued, somewhat ill-advisedly: "The potential for an in-flight incident of this nature when travellers are using battery power for portable PCs certainly exists."

OK, if it's happened once, it can happen again, true.

"Everyone worries about covert explosives being taken on board planes but what about the average laptop that could be just as dangerous?"

Levy is clearly not a student of probability. One laptop in however-many-millions of laptops in existence goes up in flames (nobody gets injured) and all of a sudden that means "the average laptop" could be just as dangerous as a bomb (which by design tend to have a far higher probability of blowing up).

Way to go scaremongers.

Until next week the Round-Up is off to encase its laptop in concrete and then sink it to the bottom of the North Sea. Just in case...