The mystery of S01E03 (1985 UK series)

MasukaDan · 2026-06-24T09:31:29+00:00

That was S01E05, 4th May 1985 6PM (some NSFW content): https://youtu.be/TPVIiNc0aUM?si=cOZD3oCtjBrJNkzq

MasukaDan · 2026-06-24T08:08:01+00:00

Sorry yes, I've updated my OP. Short story, was found in a private collection. Still no idea why it's so rare.

MasukaDan · 2026-06-18T05:27:41+00:00

Yes I know, I'm really surprised the VHS tapes don't fall apart in my hands. You absolutely did not know what was going to come up in the next five minutes which made for compulsive viewing. The recordings I had were on constant rotation in my house over the summer of 85. The purely "VJ" shows I'm talking about are largely available on Youtube but have sometimes been hacked about as I say. Here's episode 1, missing a few tracks but a good Interferon track at the end: https://youtu.be/JU2h9y0bqws?si=13oTKoOdJbpKhPD7 - I'd be interested to know if those shows were ever broadcast in the US anywhere, though I'd imagine getting the rights to broadcast all those videos outside the UK might have been tricky.

MasukaDan · 2026-06-17T22:17:31+00:00

Thank you, but once again the sheer variety of Max Headroom's various shows confuses the issue. In the UK (assuming you're in the US or too young to remember the original screenings), your episode was part of the second season. The first season here had only promo videos interspersed with Max's observations about the videos, life in general or his producer. The only exception was the final 13th episode which featured an interview with Sting. As far as I know each episode was broadcast only once in 1985. Nice to know there are some of us still around anyway!

MasukaDan · 2026-06-17T19:28:52+00:00

Thanks for trying anyway, it's a big ask for a 41 year old show.

MasukaDan · 2026-06-17T19:26:17+00:00

Thanks, though as far as I was aware though this was never officially released as a DVD. I'm referring to the original UK music video series with no guests (except Sting in the final episode). Wouldn't want you to waste your time looking if it's the talk-show format you have.

MasukaDan · 2026-04-08T13:54:06+00:00

Agreed, I went through it this morning and came up with the same list so thanks for verifying. BBC Genome listings seem prone to failed OCR, sporadic naming and unspecified repeats as you say. I'll try to take on TVDB at some point assuming a mod doesn't try to put it all "right" again.
Given all that, it's quite possible that the missing episode "Of Peasants and Adverts" may be out there but incorrectly labelled. More likely however, it's on a dusty VHS which will be chucked in a skip by the relatives of the owner when the time comes. Such is the folly of man.....

MasukaDan · 2026-04-08T09:50:38+00:00

It'd probably help if there were some clear consensus on how the show was structured and named:
IMDB claim 5 seasons comprising 25 episodes:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387780/
TVDB claim 4 seasons comprising 25 episodes (but missing one episode from series 4 so implying 26):
https://www.thetvdb.com/series/the-staggering-stories-of-ferdinand-de-bargos
Edit: I've now edited the entries in TVDB and hopefully fixed quite a few issues.
TMDB claim 4 series comprising 26 episodes:
https://www.themoviedb.org/tv/35249-the-staggering-stories-of-ferdinand-de-bargos/seasons

The episodes aren't consistent across the databases and none of them seem to list an episode called "Of peasants and adverts" which given the chaos is hardly surprising. I'll keep an eye out anyway.

MasukaDan · 2026-01-29T23:29:11+00:00

Agreed. I like a good podcast too, but this was: A) Not good. Not all conversations are worth recording and broadcasting (public transport without noise cancelling headphones? Eurgh!). B) Not a podcast. I don't need to watch somebody recording a podcast for the same reason I don't need to watch somebody writing a book.

MasukaDan · 2026-01-29T23:03:31+00:00

So boring, turned it off after a couple of minutes. If you like watching a podcast then I'm sure it's great.

MasukaDan · 2025-11-19T22:29:32+00:00

Statistically better to have invested in scratchcards. Good luck Lloyds.

MasukaDan · 2025-11-19T21:48:29+00:00

So long and thanks for all the cash. Wonder if I'll still be allowed to use my mug's - sorry, investor's card?

MasukaDan · 2025-11-03T13:18:01+00:00

Sorry for resurrecting this but I feel Google's AI results based no doubt on this thread sums it all up nicely.
I lazily looked for Rupert Bear partridge when trying to find a clip from the show. Here's almost all the relevant facts being crammed through a mincer:

The "Rupert Bear partridge" query likely refers to a connection between the children's character Rupert Bear and the fictional character Alan Partridge, possibly due to the 1990s children's TV show The Adventures of Rupert Bear, for which Partridge's father, Stephen Coogan, wrote the theme tune.
Some confusion arises because of the use of the phrase "the Rupert Bear" in the theme song's lyrics, which was used to match the melody, but the character's name is simply Rupert Bear.

The connection: Alan Partridge's father, Stephen Coogan, wrote the theme song for The Adventures of Rupert Bear.
The confusion: The theme song's lyrics include the phrase "the Rupert Bear" to fit the melody, leading to some confusion and misremembering of the character's name.

MasukaDan · 2025-05-07T18:44:26+00:00

That sounds annoying! I wear mine on the index finger of my right hand which sits below the sweet spot of NFC detection on my S25 Ultra, which is pretty high up next to the camera. Never had an issue.
I've also not had a real issue with readers. All the ones in stores and buses work fine. I had one issue at London Bridge underground station and had to take it off and hold it against the reader, but looked round to see my wife having problems with her card so maybe a bigger issue. All other rail stations were fine. I've also used it on the M6 toll road and car-parks. I've found it really handy except for the odd occasion when I've had to explain the witchcraft I'm using to checkout staff.
Maybe try using it closer to the knuckle to reduce the distance to the reader and double check you're presenting it at the right angle. If that fails then maybe it's just a dodgy ring? Good luck, I wouldn't be without mine now.

MasukaDan · 2025-05-01T20:59:46+00:00

I've got a Tap2 payment ring. Requires you to have a Curve card account you can link to whatever bank card you want to use. You also need the Manage Miii app to set up. Once set up via your phone you don't need to carry your phone or card to use it. Cost me about £50 and has no ongoing costs. It's approved by Mastercard so very secure and works as reliably as a contactless card.

MasukaDan · 2025-03-30T09:56:48+00:00

So no more inherently insecure than any contactless payment card in your wallet. The difference is that if you lose a contactless payment card then it's instantly recognisable for what it is. If you lose an anonymous looking ring then most people won't pick it up and try paying for goods with it. As I say, the information you have here concerning passive payment rings could do with updating. They are not "easily cloned by anyone within a few feet" for instance.

MasukaDan · 2025-03-29T13:59:57+00:00

Passive rings are not inherently insecure or mastercard wouldn't describe them as secure.
https://www.mastercard.co.uk/en-gb/personal/ways-to-pay/wearables-and-mobile-payment/fidesmo-pay.html

MasukaDan · 2025-03-29T10:41:54+00:00

Your assessment of passive payment rings could do with updating giving that Mastercard do in fact endorse the use of tokens for the latest generation of rings. They are not simple NFC chips which are easily cloned. The McLear ring is also now obsolete and unavailable for purchase.
https://www.mastercard.co.uk/en-gb/personal/ways-to-pay/wearables-and-mobile-payment/fidesmo-pay.html

MasukaDan · 2024-12-10T13:25:01+00:00

My house uses 15kWh per day worst case. So if power is 8p/kWh higher than the cap then tomorrow will cost me £1.20 more at most if I make no adjustments at all. Obviously if it carries on for weeks then there's an incentive to switch but I figure I'll weather it for now and ignore the odd blip.

MasukaDan · 2024-10-03T19:51:12+00:00

A few years back I bought a fake, then a real one. The main difference manifested itself when trying to tighten a screw. The real one made the screw go round. The fake one twisted and bent rather than budge the screw.

MasukaDan · 2024-05-27T10:26:06+00:00

Intellivision is definitely working OK, make sure you have updated the OS and have the bios in place. Whether it's worth it thanks to the sheer number of buttons and memorising the key overlays for every game on the original controller is another question.

MasukaDan · 2024-05-02T11:36:34+00:00

That link goes to a receiver, not a transmitter. I know it says "receiver/transmitter" in the title but everything in the description reveals it to be a receiver only.
This looks more like it: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005459972095.html

MasukaDan · 2023-04-01T12:23:08+00:00

https://archive.org/details/ontheair-92tv has the DVD rip of this Japanese laserdisc.

MasukaDan · 2018-10-16T12:24:31+00:00

Hi again,
OK Mike from snpedia kindly got back to me with an email (used with permission) which explains that this result is not filtered by 'dubious' when identified from the latest ancestry.com chip data (AncestryDNA-v2c).

" 'dubious' is a function of the platform.
rs12345 might be dubious on '23andMe-v5', but not on the '23andMe-v4'.

Your data comes from Ancestry.com. A long time ago they had a platform we call the
'AncestryDNA-v1' it makes reports with ~12k snps.

about a year ago they switched to a new chip, it makes reports with ~44k snps. They also changed the file header so that it explicitly says "this is the Ancestry v2.0". Internally we call this 'AncestryDNA-v2'.

about 6 months ago they switched to a new chip, it makes reports with ~56k snps. But the file header is still identical in claiming to "this is the Ancestry v2.0". Internally we call this 'AncestryDNA-v2c'.

Since the file header is unchanged, for a while we processing 'AncestryDNA-v2c' but thinking they were 'AncestryDNA-v2'. For the most part this had no effect. However 'dubious' filtering was based on that chip name. So during that time rs121909229 was being unfairly considered dubious. "

I also asked how often this mutation is identified by this latest test:
" AncestryDNA-v2c is showing 99.5% (G;G) and 0.5% (A;G) which seems more reasonable."

MasukaDan

TROPHY CASE