Average Life Expectancy of the Homeless in Hastings is just 43 Years Old


A survey by the National Health Service has revealed that the average life expectancy of  women sleeping rough in Hastings is just 43 years old, with men living until 47- some 30 years shorter than that of a housed citizen.

The Snowflake Shelter provides temporary accommodation, hot meals and companionship to hundreds of homeless people during the winter months, running from November to Mid-March, with guests being referred by local trusts such as the Seaview Project.

The charity, which was established in 2005, entirely relies on charitable donations and grants to continue its work, and has since appealed to university students to volunteer their time and to donate supplies; such as food, warm clothing and sleeping bags, with several donation bins located around the Hastings Campus.

Screen Shot 2016-11-21 at 10.42.21.png

In the last year alone, over 325 Homelessness applications have been made to Hastings Borough Council  with only 138 of those being approved; leaving nearly 200 people to live on the streets this winter.

Volunteer your help at the Snowflake Shelter this Christmas.


“If you’re Not Angry, then you’re Not Paying Attention”

Thousands of Anonymous Supporters Flood the Streets of London to Unite Against Anti-Capitalism for Civil-Rights and Liberty


(Photo Credit:// Danny Sargent Photography)

Remember, remember the 5th of November- but not as a night that a “traitor” attempted to bring down the Monarchy. Last night rang a truth as much a reality in present day England as it was in 1605; a largely corrupt Government with the refusal to acknowledge its people’s ambitions or needs.

“People Shouldn’t be Afraid of their Government, Governments should be Afraid of their People”

In response to the atrocious Paris terror attacks of 2015, Anonymous successfully hacked and dismantled over 20,000 ISIS Twitter accounts- but was that reported widely within the mainstream press? No. Instead the media continuously chooses to immensely exaggerate the collective, describing the members as “hooligans” and “anarchists”. Well, what else are we to expect from a government that habitually attempts to silence what they fear most?

“The Police are not your Friends”

Challenging the Government will never be a challenge overcome with ease, but it will most certainly not be achieved through the actions of ignorance, violence or hate- qualities that many of those currently in power, presently possess. Last night London saw 53 arrests of Anonymous members, many of those occurred unprovoked:

A peaceful Anonymous  protester has his mask confiscated by Police (VIDEO CREDIT:// George Prescott)

“If you’re not Angry, then you’re not Paying Attention”

Whilst a minority of participants utilised violent actions to articulate their anger, the march remained in majority, true to it’s purpose; peaceful but ardent, and ultimately represented the people as a collective.

Lack of identity often poses several salient issues; the most prominent being “the Disinhibition Effect”, a term that states that those hidden by a cloak of anonymity  are likely to act disconnected to that of their habitual character; behaving as they wish without fear of consequence. Anonymity can provide several lines of thought to any collective member: “You cannot see me” and therefore “You do not know who I am”.

There is an old Japanese belief that we have three faces: the first we show the world, the second we reveal to our close companions, and a third that we exhibit to no one but ourselves. This third face is rather easily revealed when we are stripped of our individual identity, similar to the way that online users can behave aggressively when part of a collective or mob. Please do not misunderstand me: I do not, to any extent disagree with Anonymous and their initial beliefs and ambitions, I am an avid follower and supporter –but these theories can somewhat explain as to why a small minority of members can act out against the groups founding beliefs.

Anonymous protesters march together (VIDEO CREDIT:// Carl Tanner)

I have observed the many good deeds of Anonymous in awe, and been a follower of the collective for five years- intensely impassioned with the concept that the group has no leader and is governed by its people, as it rightly should be.

Despite some blemishes on last night’s initial aims, Million Mask March 2017 is set to stampede full steam ahead- and I for one will stand proudly with them, with the knowledge that I am doing all I can to challenge the wrongdoings of our “leaders”, that I am fighting for justice, and that I am not alone in doing so.

One Solution: Revolution.









The recent atrocity of Brexit reveals just that: that even after a “democratic”, public vote (albeit the outcome, a result of mass scaremongering), parliament are still considering an all-MP “referendum” to decide that final consequence.

Scientists Visit Mars through Augmented Reality

By Darcey Haynes

The Red Planet Can Now Be Studied by NASA Researchers, Providing Valuable Insight Into the Martian Landscape


Virtual reality; something that many of us associate with new media social innovations such as Second Life, in which the user can visit different worlds and interact with Internet dwellers from across the globe through the use of an avatar.

Despite this evolution in the way that we connect with one another in the modern world, rather than exploring cyberspace, scientists at NASA have created a use of not the virtual, but augmented reality and how this can be used to better our understanding of the Universe.

Whilst the possibility of stepping foot on Mars is light years away ( the 2030’s), NASA has created a new technology in which researchers can freely roam and study our alien neighbor. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) have teamed up with Microsoft to create a new software; OnSight , and with the combination of the HoloLens headset, can now explore Mars from Earth, more than 140 million miles away.

Check out NASA’s OnSight Software in Action!

The software utilizes actual data gathered by the Curiosity Rover on Mars, and constructs a holographic simulation of it’s landscape, regularly being updated and remaining accurate. The augmented duplication allows researchers to interact with the landscape, with JPL software engineer, Parker Abercrombie to enthuse: “What’s really exciting is what we’re looking at is a reconstruction from Mars” formed by “real data send by the Curiosity Rover”. Confirming the software’ s accuracy, Abercrombie went on to say that “this isn’t an artist’s conception of what Mars looks like- this is what Mars actually looks like”.

So, deactivate your Habbo hotel accounts people- in the near future, you too can visit the Red Planet, all whilst drinking your cuppa in your pajamas.


The Immortalist: Upload Your Consciousness and Live Forever

By Darcey Haynes

Science’s Quest for Immortality Continues as Russian Billionaire; Dmitry Itskov Promises  to Make Eternal Life Possible by 2045.

Horizon; a BBC documentary series most recently focused on a subject we have all pondered: Eternal Life. Unlike the fictitious story of the forever youthful, beautiful, ageless vampire; Edward Cullen, online media tycoon Dmitry Itskov plans to achieve immortality through the merging of human consciousness and technology.

Whilst social media organisations compete to succeed one another in the digital world by enhancing  smartphone applications; Itskov is attempting elude the confinements of time and space; to ultimately transcend death in entirety. In endeavor to achieve this, Itskov has congregated an expert group of researchers and scientists, with the optimum aim to extract all vital aspects of the human brain, including: “individuality, personality, memories”.


Entitling the plan the 2045 Initiative, Itskov presented his own replica android at Russia’s 2045  Conference in 2012, naming it the “next step in human evolution”, arguing it was the start of the “neohumanity” era.  Undeterred by the many flaws within his ambition, such as; time frame, insufficiency of current technology but most significantly, the present lack of understanding in the complexity of the human brain- Itskov has gained a vast following of 20,000 supporters.

Despite hailing the Horizon documentary as the best of Wednesday night television, Gerard O’Donovan of The Telegraph argued that science is “still more than a lifetime away”.

Discluding the bounteous dilemmas within his plan, even if immortality was so soon to be achievable- the complexity of faith and morals cannot be avoided, and hence deepen the issue with the concept of living forever. Itskov does not believe that any present religion “can handle the societal implications of living forever- as most of the current ones have you dying first in order to achieve immortality”.  Considering this a prominent controversy, Itskov has founded a new political party; Evolution 2045 , naming it “the party of intellectual, technological and spiritual breakthrough”.


The documentary featured quadriplegic man; Erik Sorto, and showed him successfully controlling a robot arm with his mind- two metal electrodes are now permanently embedded into his skull- meaning that when these are hooked up to a specifically designed computer, he can feed and water himself.

Whilst the concept of uploading one’s active consciousness is widely deemed as impossible and a somewhat laughable theory by the neurologist community, Dr Randal Koene – a  neuroscientist and research Professor at Boston University’s Center for Memory and Brain says “All of the evidence seems to say in theory it’s possible – it’s extremely difficult, but it’s possible”.


Would you want to live forever? Personally, I think the most wondrous things about life is that it is limited- it pushes us to dream, and strive to achieve all that we possibly can in the short time that we have. Even if a replica Darcey android awaited me after a physical death, I would reject it; life is unpredictable and because of that, I appreciate what I do have more. What do you think on an ethical basis? I’m divided. I think it’s remarkable that we as humans are capable of potentially making this a reality- but whether I think it’s right or not, I’m unsure. I guess we’ll have to wait until 2045…

Want to learn more? – If you’re in the U.K watch here. Rest of the world: here.


The Headphones That Can Get You HIGH!

New Electronic Device Nervana Promises to Leave You “Feeling Good” by Triggering a Release of Euphoric Hormones

By Darcey Haynes.

The Nervana (pictured) has three modes of play. 'Music mode' analyses incoming music and generates a synchronised signal so the listener can 'feel the music'. 'Ambient mode' uses an internal microphone to pick up sound from the wearer's environment, and 'formula mode' stimulates the vagus nerve without music

Your daily routine of putting in headphones to avoid social interaction could now be made a lot more exciting all thanks to the creators of Nervana; the portable music-enhancing device that analyzes signals from your iPod to target the Vagus nerve; inducing a state of euphoria.

The device was received well at last year’s Consumer Electronics Show in Vegas, and sells for $279 (£194) a piece. ” Nervana” being a play on ‘nerve’ and ‘Nirvana’ ….classic pun…  uses these impulses to produce Serotonin and the ‘cuddle hormone’ Oxycontin in your body. These chemicals give a “happy feeling” similar to that after eating too much chocolate, exercising or hugging someone you love. Whilst stimulating the Vagus nerve is sometimes used to treat depression or epilepsy through surgery, Nervana is non-invasive and can be easily used by anyone needing a little pick-me-up.

Aside from its claims to “increase calm and reduce stress”, the company does not promote this as a medical asset- but as an “entertainment device”. This makes me question the product’s safety- I’m not an expert when it comes to anatomy, but surely it isn’t wise to mess around with nerve impulses that can alter the way you feel or behave? The company’s site claims that the device has been tested on “hundreds of people” with positive results- I don’t know about you people, but I want numbers, exact numbers of people proclaiming it’s safe to use, I haven’t seen any evidence for that.

In contrast to Nervana’s advertisement, The Verge reviewed the product, saying that after usage a stinging feeling was induced; similar to a “subtle zap hitting your ear like an electrified Q-Tip”- that doesn’t sound like a “happy feeling” to me. ..Oh and another heads up for you; some branches of the Vagus can stimulate some heart functions, such as bmp- so I wonder if this product could funk with your heart-rate too? I don’t know, I’m not a doctor.

To allow the product to have the promoted affect, its advised to use Nervana in two daily sessions ranging from 15 to 45 minutes- that is unless you’re incredibly moody and need to listen to it for longer and more often. Does it work? No idea. But I want to find out.

Why the New Facebook “Reaction” Button is Destroying Your Social Skills

By Darcey Haynes

New Study Reveals that One in Four of us Socialize More Online Rather Than in Person


We’ve all been in that tricky situation where you’re unsure whether to ‘like’ a friend’s status; for example, a post announcing the anniversary of a loved one’s death. “What if my like is misinterpreted?” you say, well fear not; Mark Zuckerberg has heard your cries- from today onwards, your Facebook newsfeed about to get a whole lot more exciting: the greatly anticipated “react” button is here.

For a substantial amount of time, Facebook users have been commenting: “I wish I could LOVE this”, well your wish has been granted. By hovering your cursor over the familiar ‘like’ icon you are now enabled to attach your emotional response in the form of  emojis: “love”, “haha”, “wow” and “angry”. The ambiguity that a ‘thumbs up’ can cause is now finally stabilised. According to Facebook, the function behind this is to enable users to “easily and quickly express how something you see in News feed makes you feel”.


Despite this “revolution” in new media, it’s estimated that roughly 70% of what we gain from face to face communication is understood through the perception of non-verbal actions– the present issue being that these physical reactions are becoming increasingly replaced by emojis. Professor of linguistics at the University of Bangor, Vyvyan Evans says that this is “essentially fulfilling the function of non-verbal cues in spoken communication” and hence we are gradually becoming desensitized from the reality of emotion. For example, how many times have you replied “lol” to a message and no even so much as smiled?

Online exchanges aided by the platforms of Twitter, Facebook and text messaging are steadily becoming favoured over conversation in reality; it can give its users a sense of confidence that they might not have otherwise. However, this promotion of seemingly blog6innocent narcissism is disengaging us from literal reality and genuine reaction. More often than not, social media users are aiming to impress their friends or followers by forging an interesting or fun social life, rather than literally being engaged with an event that they are attending . It’s become normality to attend a  concert and watch it through your device’s screen, too concerned about the popularity of your posts and the potential for gaining new followers.

Last month, YouTube stars Justin and Genevieve perfomed a paraody of the Lion King’s “Circle of Life” that highlighted comedically and accurately, the narcissim but ultimately the disengagement from reality and genuine emotion:


So what do you think? Is the new like button a fun addition to social media or further aiding our increasingly desensitized generation into disengagement? Facebook reasoned that the  creation of Reaction was largely influenced by the organization’s ambition to increase user engagement, because quite frankly,the current 1.44 billion active monthly users just isn’t enough.

Should Reality Stars Have the Right to Privacy?

By Darcey Haynes

With the Rise of Reality Stars Using Social Media to Promote their Social Lives, are they Justified in Seeking a Right to Privacy?

“Some celebrities are so desperate for publicity, they’ll take the lows as long as they get more highs- and coverage”– Jeremy King (Editor of industry paper Media Week).


The Kardashian Klan’s momentous fame is built upon their willingness to share their private lives; including the bountiful supply of laughs, dramatics  and scandals that they so cleverly weave together. Collectively, and surprisingly intelligently, they have constructed an empire of limitless wealth- simply from asking an audience to observe and gain entertainment from their lives.

With a combination of 373.5 million followers on social media, each family member individually shares almost every aspect of their day-to-day life; from an event they are attending, to the time and even their location; they ferociously grow in popularity with each ‘post’. Yet by sharing these precise and personal details- is it any wonder that with an increasingly infatuated audience, grows the public’s need for more intimate details?


Since it’s pilot in 2007, Keeping Up With the Kardashians has offered its audience a sweet taste of excessive wealth and fortune; ultimately an escape from the average civilian’s reality . The reality stars allow the viewer into their lives at the expense of their right to privacy and in exchange for being extraordinarily well paid- therefore should all elements of their life be made public?

Desperate Housewives actress Eva Longoria recently spoke out against Khloe Kardashian‘s refusal to respond to an interviewer on the Australian TV show Sunrise, after claiming that the question she was being asked was too personal. The Kardashian later tweeted “You are so f**king desperate” and “stop reaching for a story”. In a later response to Khloe’s abruptly ending interview, Longoria said: “they’re (the Kardashians) famous because of the reality of their lives”, continuing that “she (Khloe) gave up her right to privacy when she agreed to live her life on camera”.

 In particular, Kim’s career is established by the fact that she has no private life. Posting to her 60 million Instagram followers to publicize her brand- herself- devout fans frequently swarm to attend her public appearances, queue for hours to purchase her clothing designs and stampede in the minute chance of snatching an autograph. Yet after willingly allowing the broadcast of her wedding to Kris Humphries to 4.4 million people (and making $2 million), something that the majority of people would consider an intimately private event- Kim then banned the E! network from filming the aftermath leading up to her divorce.

Why is it, that after sharing such significantly personal aspects of her life- such as her sister Kourtney giving birth, does she feel that she is deserving of privacy?

In reality, it’s near-impossible to walk by a news stand without the tabloids plastering kardash2Kim’s social life left right and centre- even though these intimate interviews reveal a significant amount of detail about her personal life, the publicity was evidently not satisfactory enough for the reality star; in November 2014 Papermag’s Kim Kardashian: Break the Internet was published online. This publicity stunt seems thoroughly hypocritical; after her sex tape with ex-boyfriend Ray-J was leaked in 2007 a  devastated Kim stressed her embarrassment at being seen naked by millions of people- yet later willingly did so in the name of social media. Does this not strike you as ‘desperate’ attempt at gaining more followers, shares and likes?


Harry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe sensibly owns no public social media accounts in effort  to separate his personal and professional life; recently voicing that: “If you go on Twitter and tell everybody what you’re doing moment to moment, then you claim you want a private life- then no one is going to take that request seriously”. I whole-heartedly agree with this statement- in all honesty, I could not care less about where or what the Kardashian’s are eating for lunch, I can assure you that that information will not bring me satisfaction or enrich yours or my life in significant any way.

Personally, I am exhausted and quite frankly bored of seeing celebrities social lives being presented as ‘news’- both shared through social media and broadcast- I strongly feel that it defers attention away from fact- I simply do not see the importance or relevance in these self-elected ‘celebrities’ lives. The worst part for me is our generation of ‘computer zombies’ have an unbreakable dependence on social media- the circulation of celebrity narcissism is only going to increase. Why are they deemed more valuable and newsworthy than the rest of society? What we are presented with by celebrities on social media is in almost every circumstance not reality at all- be it Photoshop manipulation or a self-constructed device for attention or publicity. I view the majority of celebrity social media use as a narcissistic mechanism to for self-promotion and ultimately a distraction the from literal reality.


Survey Reveals that 78% of Young Children Own Social Media Accounts


Social media accounts- everyone has them; Facebook, Twitter, Instagram; but do we really want to ‘socialize’ with our peers? Or is this a 21st century mechanism for self-promotion and narcissism? Emerging in Ancient Egypt some 5000 years ago; portraiture was used to advertise one’s wealth and importance- and therefore ultimately a person’s worth within society; fundamentally fitting each individual into a categorized slot on the social hierachal scale.

These modern platforms arguably replace the device of portraiture: users fight to be bigger and better- more important than one another; concert goers film and post the show rather than ‘live the moment’, a woman uploads a photograph of her engagement ring the moment after she is proposed to, or group of friends will Snapchat a night in a club rather than dancing. Our value is weighed in likes, comments and shares by critical observers, so therefore is it surprising that the torch of self-obsession and judgement is being passed onto the younger generation?


A recent BBC survey revealed that 78% of 10-12 year olds have accounts on social media, with Facebook being the most widely used despite the profile holders being vastly below the age requirement. Does this open a gateway for continuing playground bullying?

The study coincides with Safer Internet Day, which oversees the joining of more than a thousand institutions that seek to promote the “safe, responsible and positive use of digital technology for children”. The organisation announced today that an average of four out of every five young people have witnessed online abuse: such as “offensive and threatening” language- with as many as two in five youngsters using social media to spread “rumours” about others.

Young people using social media sites has become somewhat of a normality, debatably causing children to become increasingly disengaged and unresponsive to one another. Further research by the establishment showed that juveniles now use social media more than they are watching television. In a rapidly changing society, youth children often possess individual laptops or tablets of their own; living largely within a virtual world that perhaps shapes the interaction skills that will form their adult selves.

With the vast depth of the internet and limitless services it provides, is it impossible to prevent the upcoming generation of “computer zombies”?

Let me know what you think.


Further Reading: