A report on El Reg about MI5 reportedly wanting access to travel records associated with Oyster cards (report originally in The Observer 16/3/07) raises considerable issues regarding electronic data and privacy.
This makes me wonder what MI5 might want, once the Phorm system is installed in the ISPs representing the great majority of broadband users.
The BBC news website reports that Sir Tim Berners-Lee has serious objections to ISPs tracking users' web browsing habits - as proposed by Phorm (and to be introduced by BT, Virgin Media and TalkTalk - probably to be followed by the other big players).
[This item has been updated several times on 17/3/08 and 18/3/08]
The New York Times has another article about Phorm. It quotes a Phorm employee, Virasb Vahidi:
“As you browse, we’re able to categorize all of your Internet actions,” said Virasb Vahidi, the chief operating officer of Phorm. “We actually can see the entire Internet.”
Not only did BT trial the offensive Phorm system last year (despite denying it at the time and subsequently), but it transpires that BT ran tests on 18,000 customers back in 2006, again without seeking permission. (Register article, BBC News article)
In essence, the story is as follows:
1. The pilot ran from 23/9/06 to 6/10/06
2. All 18,000 customers were opted-in with no attempt to seek consent
3. BT still plan to change their terms and conditions (which they presumably violated in the 2006 and 2007 tests) before any further implementation.
4. BT refuse to say where these 18,000 customers were.
5. In 2006, the system was called "PageSense".
6. The BT tech guy at the time was Stratis Scleparis, now he's with Phorm.
The BBC report quotes a FIPR spokesman as saying that the tests were "an illegal intercept of users' data".
I came across this website (http://www.inphormationdesk.org), while cruising around the badphorm.co.uk forums. It gives a very clear outline of the Phorm system, and why many of us object to it.
The Register reports that the Information Commissioner has reported that the Phorm system must be opt-in to comply with the law. Interesting, especially since BT therefore engaged in (presumably) illegal activities during their 2006 and 2007 trials of webwise (which, don't forget, they strenuously denied at first). There's also a story at the BBC.
Oh, and the Phorm share price continues its slump (at least on 9/4/08).
I've just received a FrogPad portable keyboard, to use with the OQO UMPC I bought recently. It's Bluetooth enabled. The manufacturers claim one can reach 40wpm quite quickly, even for those who aren't already touch typers. I'm most definitely a "hunt and peck typist", so it'll be interesting to see how this gets on. Besides using the keyboard with the UMPC, I plan to use it with my (hopefully soon to be resurrected) iPaq hx4700 Pocket PC.
This is what a Righty FrogPad looks like (if you click on the image, you should see a life-size version). I bought the Lefty version, in white, with the intention that this would leave my right hand free for mouse or stylus use.
Physically, the unit seems pretty robust, with a slide on cover. It comes with a CD with a typing tutor (for Windows and Mac, but the Windows version seems to work OK on Linux under Wine), a retractable USB power cord and mains adaptor, and several leaflets and manuals.
One of the enduring myths of cycle racing concerns the relative merits of tubular tyres relative to clinchers. Convention has it that nothing can compare to the performance of a quality tubular. However, lot of anecdotal evidence is bandied around supporting high quality clinchers as superior to tubulars. I was recently sent a link to test data regarding the characteristics of tyres versus tubulars - this gives clear data to support this contention.', '
A couple of images to show the differences between a tubular and a clincher (links to external website images)
BT have hit the news bigtime recently over their shady deals with Phorm, a company which appears to have a shady past that many allege involves spyware. There's a good overview on The Register. Essentially what seems to be proposed is that BT Broadband subscribers internet browsing habits will be forwarded to Phorm, who run an advert server called OIX. Web pages which use OIX to serve up adverts will then aim adverts at you based on this information. Sounds creepy? Well it is.There are several issues here:
1. BT trialled this last summer, an act they are loath to admit to.
British Telecom have a Privacy Policy. I reached this page from the BT Webwise page, so presumably it applies to their proposed arrangement with Phorm.
We may share your personal information with other companies so that they can contact you with details of other products or services you may be interested in. We will only do this if you have agreed to this and where the companies agree to use your personal information for that purpose only. If you have agreed to receive information about products and services from another company and later decide not to you will need to contact that company yourself to let them know. You can of course ask us not to continue to provide your personal information to any more companies in future.
For background to this article, see the related story about BT's relationship with the targeted advertising company Phorm. Note in relation to the patent application that Phorm (under a different company name had form as a spyware distributor) . For more information check out the links in that story.
Thanks to a commenter at an El Reg article, the following snippets from the Phorm patent (which you can read at the Political Penguin blog) should be noted:
Here's a report concerning file formats, Microsoft and MS Office 2003. In a slightly under-publicised move, it turns out that Service Pack 3 for MS Office 2003 removed the opyion of opening older file formats. These file formats include Word 6.0 and Word 97 for Windows, Word 2004 for Macintosh, along with older versions of Excel, PowerPoint, Lotus Notes, Corel Quattro spreadsheet, and the Corel Draw graphics package.
It's a pretty good example of why MS cannot be allowed to control a supposedly open standard for office file formats - witness the dubious shenanigans as MS attempts to have OOXML certified as a standard. It's just not in MS' nature to be open about proprietary formats, especially where these are key to the market dominance of their premier product.
Fortunately, we have an alternative: OpenOffice.org - a full-featured suite of office applications, available for Windows, Mac, and Linux. It supports the genuinely open standard, open document, and furthermore has the capacity to deal with the older MS Office file formats that MS don't want you to work with.
The GNU General Public Licence (GPL) is one of the most (if not the most) widely used licence under which open source software is released. There's a Wikipedia page on the GPL (but be cautious as with all Wikipedia pages on contentious topics). Recently the author of two software packages (atscap and pchdtvr) has announced that he has revoked their licensing under the GPL. This has predictably released a storm of comment on the internet. As usual, the best coverage is over at Groklaw, where PJ has provided a clear analysis of whether the software author can indeed take such an act, and many of the regular contributors add observations.
It's not clear whether the author of the software and the author of the announcement are indeed one and the same, and on the basis of PJ's article it doesn't look as though he can actually revoke the GPL. It is possible that some attempt to challenge the GPL is being made (but this has been tried before in several jurisdictions, without success).
It isn't clear why the software author is taking this step. A change of heart regarding FOSS? Patent infringement (in which case the problems lie only in those jurisdictions where software patents are permitted)? Perhaps over the next few days, these issues will be clarified.
Timetriallists spend rather an undue amount of time worrying about the aerodynamics of their bikes and of their body position on said bikes. I guess at least it's easier than training! Wheel aerodynamics are a frequent topic on discussion fora, but often the data are either non-existent or are derived from wheel manufacturers and are therefore unlikely to be impartial. As part of an ongoing review of bicycle wheels, www.rouesartisanales.com have put a detailed study of the aerodynamics of a variety of bicycle wheels online. The study has previously been published by the magazines Tour and L'Acheteur Cycliste.
The test setup
As with most such tests, the basis here is that the wheels are placed in a wind tunnel (the web page has some detailed images of various elements of the setup). The wheel under test appears to be fixed to an inverted fork, on which there are electrical strain gauges - effectively, these are what assesses the aerodynamic drag. The wheels are said to spin in air air flowing along the wind tunnel: it's not clear whether the wheels are driven, whether they spin due to the air flow, or whether this refers to a pivot that allows the wheel to experience air flow at different angles of attack. Drag was measured at wind angles 0 to 35 degrees. Because the more extreme win angles are infrequently experienced on the road, it seems that an average drag value is computed by giving less weight to the more extreme angles, and greater weight to smaller angles. This is indicated by the Gaussian curve in the graph.
XO Laptop: It's the Software, Stupid! - A nice post about how the OLPC empowers kids creatively. A riposte to a number of rather scurrilously negative posts circulating on the web.
I have occasionally linked to news items relating to Microsoft's dubious tactics aimed at getting ISO ratification of its 6000 page OOXML file format as an international standard. Now the European Union has waded in with an investigation into Microsoft's actions. Reports from CNN and The Wall Street Journal. See also Groklaw's chronology page on office file formats, which provides a huge set of links to provide background to the situation
Groklaw has a story linking the current MSOOXML deliberations to a Microsoft strategy document that's in the public domain thanks to at least one anti-trust case. (Note that it's a big pdf file, and that the groklaw story has it as text). The Groklaw story has many comments, and is worth reading. Is this normal behaviour for a company, or am I just naive?
Having looked at that document, this news story (Gates to tap young minds) sent shivers down my spine.