Hurrah! There I was, watching as Elgato and Miglia fell out, when I stumbled across a link with BDA drivers for the TVMini for Windows. This is somewhat handy, given the version of Windows on my Mac is Media Centre Edition. This is even more handy given I had previous failed to get this working under Windows.

Hurrah for digital telly!

After all the kerfuffle about the BBC using Windows only DRM, the BBC has apparently explained. It's not much (basically: we couldn't find anything open that did what was needed) but it helps. After all, the Trust is demanding a cross-platform service within 24 months - and surely Mac & Linux users won't miss that much telly in that time?

Not that I'm really too worried, given they have committed to doing it. The BBC broadcasts in open 576i widescreen MPEG-2, and between my PVR (which lets me copy recorded content off over an USB cable) and my DVB-T USB adapter I can already access any current content I want. The archive is the main source of information, and I can survive a brief stint of having to reboot into Windows.

Every so often the government decides to create some mega-database that will contain all the information they need from citizens (or subjects, in our case). Viewing this optimistically, it is for the best of reasons - you'll only need to update your information once and hence it will be more accurate, queries will be faster and you'll start to miss the chance to send your passport in on each and every application form.

However, once pessimism (and a knowledge of history) kicks in, one has doubts - how will this information be used? What happens if a mistake is made? Can it be swiped? Who will have access? No country is short of scandals involving the theft and misuse of such information or the joys resulting from errors.

But there is an answer: public key cryptography. That may sound like gobbledegook, but it's very simple, very useful and [hopefully] very secure.

Public key cryptography is based on each user having a private key, that remains accessible only to the owner and is further protected by a password or similar means, and a public key, which is disseminated far and wide. By finding the public key of a recipient, you can then use your private key to either sign (thus proving yourself as the source) or encrypt (and thus hide the document from all bar the recipient) a document for that recipient. This document can then be checked or decrypted by the recipient using their private key and your public key. This system is used for many online security systems, and for the famous PGP (and its open source cousin, GPG).

Say you have a download-able piece of software (via WebStart for instance). This is open-source, allowing third-parties to verify the contents (and build their own if they wish). You enter your details, and then select which agencies you wish to make them available to (say, the DWP or HMR&C) and what parts of your details you wish to make available (e.g. name and address to DWP, NI number to HMR&C). The software then uses your private key (on your local machine) to encrypt these data for the public key of the appropriate agencies, and uploads the encrypted files.

This approach leaves you in control of your data - you decide who sees it and what they see. The data in the government's hands is encrypted - only you and the nominated agencies can read it.

Of course, this doesn't deal with cross-agency interaction. One thought is that you remain the middleman - data is sent back to you and you may choose to make it available to the receiving agency. This leaves complete control in your hands, at the cost of having to review such transactions.

Further, we're still stuck with human nature. People will loose their keys (via buying new computers, formatting their hard disc, or just plain silliness), forget their passwords and generally make life harder for themselves. Plus, given the reputed strength of the given encryption, this would wall off a lot of data from law enforcement agencies, and regardless of any other considerations this would be unlikely to find favour with our current authoritarian mob.

Still, it's one approach to making something like this work for the populace, not against it.

Just when I think politicians cannot sink any lower, they do. With little fanfare, the proceedings being covered by the arrest of Ruth Turner, the Commons have been sending the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill to a second reading.

What is this perfidious amendment?

There's nothing like accountability, is there? If you're in the UK, why not let your MP know just what you think of this?

Tony Blair has no bollocks when it comes to foreign policy. He appears to have no wish to go where Washington fails to lead. Hence Britain's [rather miserable] reputation suffered yet further when he failed to condemn Israel's foolish assault on Lebanon, and he has been nicely pre-empted this week by both the rather deplorable Prescott and heir-in-anticipation Brown. Today, however, reports have surfaced that, even if he has no backbone, he knows when it's time to chime in.

Interestingly enough, the Iraqi government has chimed in and said it may review relations with any country condemning the execution. Proof that the Iraqi government has no grasp of realpolitik. One can only hope they cut relations with the UK.

Admittedly Brown does seem to be getting off to a good start. Everyone knows Blair's days are numbered, as he has but six months or so to go. And so Brown has pre-empted Cameron and started to formulate some idea of what his premiership may look like: somewhat ethereal, but more concrete that the sound-bites of Cameron. He does lose points for invoking the spectre of 'patriotism' however.

The problem is, of course, as Blair leaves in the shadow of Iraq, corruption and general incompetence, Brown is left tarnished by his 10 years of association and lack of experience in foreign policy. Can he re-establish Labour as a force worth voting for, especially given his lack of charisma? Perhaps a moot point, given the increasing lack of difference between the major parties.

Just to prove that I can accomplish more work on the Tube than the tits at Metronet, I've finally update my Tube on Google Maps application.

We now have the complete Misery/Northern Line, mostly smoothed (apart from the Charing Cross branch), the dusty dusty Drain aka Waterloo & City Line, the rather jagged (for the moment) Circle Line and the central part of the District Line.

There have also been code improvements: it now uses the Google Maps API V2, interchange stations are differentiated from stopping stations, lines on the same path do not completely overlap (in progress, still a bit dodgy around Paddington) and it works again (an API change had broken a dodgy bit of code, whoops).

Still a little way away from being useful, but getting there. Slowly.

On the south bank of the Thames sits the hulk of Battersea Power Station, once the source of 20% of London's electricity, now a rusting and decaying hulk left to rot by its owners, for whatever reason. Now they claim to have a [planning approved] vision, and have opened it to the public, in conjunction with the Serpentine Gallery, for the first time ever.

It's open for a month, and when we tried last Sunday we found the gates shut due to overwhelming demand. So we suffered the processing fees for pre-ordering and returned today, finding it open early and with the rules on photography much relaxed. Coming through the gate the south wall looms above you, and below are a collection of bikes to use while exploring the site - an interesting idea, but not nearly enough was open to warrant it. Only the south side was accessible, and so all was within easy walking distance.

The art exhibition is sitting on three floors in the newer turbine hall B. But, like most visitors, we veered off to the left and into the cavern of the boiler hall. The turbine hall at the Tate Modern is awe inspiring, yet only the lack of a roof allows some relief from the size. Since one of the upper walls and the roof were demolished in the 1980s this area has been decaying - old patches of tiles emerge from the dirt and grass on the floor, while rusting girders hold back the holed remnants of the walls. The bulky towers below the chimneys turn out to be held up by a matchstick structure of girders, while the pits, arches and traces of stairways leave visible reminders that this was once a hive of industry.

On either side sit the smaller turbine halls - both still immense in size, hall B like some gigantic post-apolocolyptic office block, while hall A is lined in (apparently) Italian marble, with ornate balconies. Rumour has it that the control room and offices on that side of the building are also in fine art deco style; these, however, remain out of view.

Above hall B lies the exhibition - three vast, dark and mostly empty floors, with only the token piece of machinery or a decaying door sign to remember it's past use. The art was visual and auditory, and yet mostly overwhelmed by the space. At the top of the block sunlight streamed through the rusty frame and lit upon plywood covering a mammoth hole in the floor, possibly a quicker way out than down the ancient stairway, back into hall B and then out into the scrubland which rings the site.

The scrolls and delicate touches on the facade of this cathedral of power only accentuate the shocking disregard for the building's state. Since the pipe-dreams of the 80s fell apart and left the building exposed it has been allowed to rot, the developers allowed to sit and twiddle their thumbs while a grade two structure surrenders to entropy. And even as they showcase fantastic designs for a reinvention of the space, with entertainment and shopping facilities surrounded by office space and housing, the Time reports that they may have once again changed their mind, once more backing down, although perhaps this time at least restoring a roof to the site.

Should you be in the vicinity I would highly recommend you pay the meagre £5 they ask and go and explore before they close it again - who knows when you'll get another chance to do so?

It appears Jack Straw has made himself a pariah and the cause of all sin by daring to voice that he'd prefer if Muslim women removed their veil when talking to him. Note the qualifier - “preferred” - he has repeatedly stated that he in no way wishes to force this, and I'm sure few would disagree with the state having no right to dictate the dress of its citizens.

What's decidedly worrying is that he is under attack for voicing a view many share. Even the Muslim community is divided on this - the sane members are saying that they can see where he is coming from, while others say it is an attack on their culture. One could equally say that the veil is an attack on our culture and the significance of eye contact and facial expression within conversation. But at the end of the day the problem remains one of intolerance - the inability to tolerate discussion of differences, instead mandating that this be a line one cannot cross. Yet how can one have a tolerant multicultural society unless all constituents are able to debate without the fear of misguided emotional backlash?

This is also nicely embodied this week in the incident of a PC who asked to be transferred from his duties at the Israeli embassy due to their invasion of Lebanon. The press appear to have had a mostly irresponsible field day with this, blaming the Met for overwhelming political correctness and bowing to religious demands. Yet the PC in question only tabled a request, which happened to be granted - not once did he fail to carry out his duties and there's no indication he would have failed to do so had the request been refused - and the least any of us can ask is the chance to raise concerns about our duties when they may conflict with personal beliefs.

Or perhaps it's just been a slow news week and the tabloids and tub-thumping. In which case, shame on them.

It is somewhat ironic that the Pope has got himself in the ever simmering water of Muslim public opinion by trying to link religion and reason, two things that are the definition of mutual exclusion. Any reasonable examination of religion is bound to fail, for no religion answers the big question of live, the universe and everything - they merely push the question further out. Any solution that proposes a god or similar being but fails to answer (or even question) where this being came from is quite clearly not a complete explanation. And any rational thinker who settles for a partial explanation when better exist is clearly not using rigourous standards of rationality.

Of course this issue also nicely revitalises the lack of tolerance of free speech in much of the Islamic world, last seen after the Danes got their pencils out. And this is where the real problem lies - the rather grandstanding 'class of civilisations'. How can a society where free speech, secular government and religious freedom communicate with one that limits the freedoms of its citizens, frowns on secularism (with the notable exception of Turkey, thanks to the good Ataturk) and indeed despises the godlessness of the West?

There's no easy answer. Imperialism won't help - no occupied people welcome their conquering, no matter how good their intentions, and our actions are easily perverted into a seeming crusade against Islam. Nor can we hold our heads too high - while the Islamic world was making great strides in science and gave religious freedoms to those in their cities the West was busy with religious persecution and crawling step by step from the Dark Ages. Further, it has taken us centuries to rise from theocracies to representative government, and as the US proves irrational religion still has an immense effect on government.

And so we have the problem of our age. Can our society survive and prosper as international boundaries fall and immigration fills our cities with not only those who seek a new life and are willing to join and contribute, but those who bring their own prejudices and standards and attempt to build their own citadels amongst us? As John Reid was told the other day (in a lovely example of proving someone's point for them): “How dare you come into a Muslim area?” The point of multi-cultarism was never to ghettoise a country; it was celebrate difference while remaining a whole. And if people believe it's more important to be Muslim than to be British then we have a rift that cannot be healed, for how can a society survive when some of its members let its laws and conventions be but a secondary interest?

There is a wonderful event in London called 'Open House'. Held yearly, a vast array of London buildings are opened to the public, free of charge. Some may be generally open for a fee, but most close their doors for the remainder of the year and so this provides a unique opportunity to investigate the shuttered rooms of the area.

Some of the best sites are in Whitehall, as the major attractions in the City - the Gherkin and Lloyds of London - are inevitably booked out as soon as the chance arises. And so the Banqueting House, with its exquisite roof by Reubens, becomes free-to-all, and the Victorian decadence of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office goes on show. This is well worth a look: largely decorated via the overflowing coffers of the Indian Office, the building is a opulent palatial structure, the recent restoration making the Treasury across the road seem underwhelming. While the lost glory of Pax Britannia illuminates the FCO the Treasury has adopted a minimalist modern approach. This is probably quite practical, but makes it an unexciting spot to queue for.

We also managed to see the site of the remains of the Rose theatre. This was discovered during excavations for the current building and now resides under a pool of water and sand in the basement of the structure above. Unfortunately, while the quest goes on to re-excavate and build an exhibition centre there is little to see - a tragedy given the importance of these remains.

On a completely different note we also had the Thames Festival, complete with a beach or two on the Thames - marvellous.