1. Charles Stross discovers that the writers of Star Trek: The Next Generation didn’t even pretend to themselves that the science of the show was good. I feel his pain, I guess. I just feel it somewhat remotely, as it was obvious from the YAGLA plot of the initial episode that ST:TNG wasn’t going to be Star Trek: The Show That Puts the Science into Space Opera.
My problem with ST:TNG is that many of the plots are boring because the utopian background diminishes the opportunity for conflict. The Borg episodes tend to be pretty good, but then all those damn holodeck episodes (“It was all just a dream!”) brought the average way down again.
2. Science proves that Edward III was not written by Shakespeare, at least not by Shakespeare alone. I sort of determined this myself by reading the play last winter and muttering, “This can’t be Shakespeare.” In fact, I can’t see why anyone ever thought that it was by Shakespeare: there seems to be no internal or external evidence to support the assertion.
But the funny thing to me, in the article linked above, was the line: “the possibility that Shakespeare didn’t spend his entire career as a lonely, independent author should rock traditional academics.” The person who wrote this isn’t really hip to the last century or so of Shakespeare scholarship, but she thinks she is. Academia is a little like sf/f, in that the people who know least about it are the most sure that have its number. This is the sound of me saying “arrrgh.”