Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[BetBlowWhistler]

With reference to people asking 80/20 to drop Phorm - even at this stage where I've lost my job and moved on, I would still probably work for BT again if they (for example) asked me to come back and help them design this platform so that it was as compliant with the law (assuming that's possible).

Even though I dropped them in it, I did it for (what I believe to be) the right reasons. Those same reasons would mean I would feel obligated to go back and help them fix their mess (on everyone's behalf).

Does that make sense to you?

[Florence]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

With reference to people asking 80/20 to drop Phorm - even at this stage where I've lost my job and moved on, I would still probably work for BT again if they (for example) asked me to come back and help them design this platform so that it was as compliant with the law (assuming that's possible).

Even though I dropped them in it, I did it for (what I believe to be) the right reasons. Those same reasons would mean I would feel obligated to go back and help them fix their mess (on everyone's behalf).

Does that make sense to you?

Yes it makes sense but if those people feel strongly enough about not being linked into equipment Kent has a finger in move to other ISPs the main ones will lose the interest of Kent he is only after large customer base, a numbers game hence why I think a hiden trojen to use the customers PC's once it is live.
Trust small word has a lot to answer I would not give anyone a second chance if they still show old traits and Kent does. The fact he has tried hard to hide the past by no mention at all in his CV is the first warning sign.
Respect this comes from what people have done in the past Kent has none in my eyes since his past is not respectable. VM had respect once but this has slipped away with the length of silence over phorm.

I do still have trust and respect in Simon from 80/20 thinking I also pray he sees the light that phorm could be the trojen horse to conquer all...

[tdadyslexia]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

[big snip]
Does that make sense to you?

Yep

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by BetBlowWhistler

With reference to people asking 80/20 to drop Phorm - even at this stage where I've lost my job and moved on, I would still probably work for BT again if they (for example) asked me to come back and help them design this platform so that it was as compliant with the law (assuming that's possible).

Even though I dropped them in it, I did it for (what I believe to be) the right reasons. Those same reasons would mean I would feel obligated to go back and help them fix their mess (on everyone's behalf).

Does that make sense to you?

Makes perfect sense to me.
In the same manner that I enjoy seeing an upturn in the share price every now and again as it invariably allows for some margined day trades when the price again drops with every bombshell.
I might despise this phorm/webwise business model and have nothing to do with it but I'd not expect anyone here to object if I decided to make a little money every time some idiot comes along and makes large buys in a bid to bolster the price and inevitably the shorters jump in gleefully waiting for that drop.

I've said all along that targeted advertising will come. It is as sure as your granny could suck eggs. It might not happen with phorm and it certainly won't happen with the current tech proposed but it will happen. This sector is the fastest growing market on the planet and it is moving into a tech area that is still the only market that could pay off its long term debt and still be in a position financially to weather the upcoming ( and in some areas current ) financial downturn and lack of investor confidence.

We have to accept that it is going to come, The reality is that service provision in the UK is not profitable ( hence we have seen all those small start-ups come with so much fervour and go with not so much as a whimper )
All we can do is hope that our ISPs listen to our concerns and implement this in a way that is open, transparent, legal and profitable to all parties. In that I mean that we the consumer benefit from better service and products as a direct result of the ISP making better profit plus the content providers making profit too.

I reiterate though that this current proposal by Phorm is a non-starter and if the PIA says anything different I expect I shall be the first to cry foul. I especially will be getting my ICO PIA handbook out and requiring answers to questions regarding the framework of the PIA, the initial screening process and especially asking to see that all ICO criteria for a full scale ( which is required seeing as this is a high risk privacy area ) PIA were rigorously adhered to. ( something I doubt as I have seen no mention of any polling of the people most affected by this. i.e. Us, the ISP consumers.

I certainly feel that the stakeholder analysis criteria will not have been fully met.

regards

Craig.

[vicz]

I fear you are right Craig. Due to advertising the mass-market Internet will become as unusable as US teresstrial TV is unwatchable. Inevitably cheap and poor will oust quality. Which is maybe why the end of 'net neutrality' may not be such a bad thing after all.

[Florence]

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

We have to accept that it is going to come, The reality is that service provision in the UK is not profitable ( hence we have seen all those small start-ups come with so much fervour and go with not so much as a whimper )
All we can do is hope that our ISPs listen to our concerns and implement this in a way that is open, transparent, legal and profitable to all parties. In that I mean that we the consumer benefit from better service and products as a direct result of the ISP making better profit plus the content providers making profit too.

regards

Craig.

The chance of this is zero the ones that will benefit from this is the shareholders of VM and the CEO with his large bonus

[mark777]

The reason the ISP's are not profitable is because for years the have concentrated purely on increasing customer numbers at the expense of all else. Get the numbers and the profits will come later.

They need to think of a better way of making profits than deploying something like Phorm. It's not inevitable that targetted ads will come. In fact it's fairly simple for the Government to ensure it doesn't, so start kicking now, when they are on the floor.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by vicz

I fear you are right Craig. Due to advertising the mass-market Internet will become as unusable as US teresstrial TV is unwatchable. Inevitably cheap and poor will oust quality. Which is maybe why the end of 'net neutrality' may not be such a bad thing after all.

You see I really don't mind advertising on the net. I don't see any of it anyway. I and others can do more to educate the average user to ensure that he sees less advertising if he chooses ( I've yet to test IE8 yet but it is sat here waiting for install, and I've used FF3 a little but until there are release candidates I won't do into how the consumer can use these products in a manner that strips all of the bits that are intrusive or irrelevant )
Adverts are going to happen and people like me are going to ensure we never see them.
All I ask is that my ISP operate in a manner that is moral and legal when handling my data and don't fall foul of interception of communication laws.

Actually, just thinking about it, I don't understand why the ISPs need Phorm. I know that NTL manage all my data and I'd be much happier for them to use that data ( legally ) to create anonymous data profiles so that their advertising could be made more relevant if it meant that they can profit and I can get my 100mbit connection back at last without having to re-mortgage.

Phorm just seem to me to be a sleazy middle-man with a very murky past. Cut them out and I might be willing to contemplate this future with a better attitude.

Regards

Craig

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:23 ----------

Originally Posted by mark777

The reason the ISP's are not profitable is because for years the have concentrated purely on increasing customer numbers at the expense of all else. Get the numbers and the profits will come later.

They need to think of a better way of making profits than deploying something like Phorm. It's not inevitable that targetted ads will come. In fact it's fairly simple for the Government to ensure it doesn't, so start kicking now, when they are on the floor.

I disagree. I think it is inevitable that targeted ads will come ( as they already do on TV )
I don't actually have a problem with that ( as said above ). There just has to be a legal and acceptable ( to all parties ) way of doing it.

Advertising is the biggest industry in the world, one of few still growing and targeting your customer precisely with items relevant to him is the number 1 factor in being a success. It's not even something to be scared of if we as consumers are given a little more respect than has previously happened.

[Bonglet]

Isp's could pipe ads to you if they wanted to now irespective of phorm, the whole concept of being profiled is really flawed you should not profile anything i do as an individual or a family without my express yes and sign on the dotted line.

Claims for the random number generated in phorm are just what they say they are claims, no such thing as a random number if you were that random how would the relevant advertising be relevant?, they can match your webwise id to you as a customer even though they say they dont by simply matching it to your name address or account number which is what the isp will share with phorm.

Does the old 121media project people on paper not sound vaguelly familiar with what phorm/webwise are doing atm?

Lots of guests still viewing this thread maybe kent will grace us one day who knows someone might be doing a investigative big show report about this subject .

p.s still waiting for my reply to questions vm time is ticking .

[vicz]

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

You see I really don't mind advertising on the net. I don't see any of it anyway. I and others can do more to educate the average user to ensure that he sees less advertising if he chooses ( I've yet to test IE8 yet but it is sat here waiting for install, and I've used FF3 a little but until there are release candidates I won't do into how the consumer can use these products in a manner that strips all of the bits that are intrusive or irrelevant )
Adverts are going to happen and people like me are going to ensure we never see them.
All I ask is that my ISP operate in a manner that is moral and legal when handling my data and don't fall foul of interception of communication laws.

Actually, just thinking about it, I don't understand why the ISPs need Phorm. I know that NTL manage all my data and I'd be much happier for them to use that data ( legally ) to create anonymous data profiles so that their advertising could be made more relevant if it meant that they can profit and I can get my 100mbit connection back at last without having to re-mortgage.

Phorm just seem to me to be a sleazy middle-man with a very murky past. Cut them out and I might be willing to contemplate this future with a better attitude.

Regards

Craig

Yes well at the moment thanks to Safariblocker I also seldom see ads or popups but I regard that as a temporary minor victory but inevitably some new form of ad will come along that we will struggle to manage. Already for example, when browsing via 'digg' I often get so fed up with simple articles being spread over several web pages (so they can fit more ads in) that I just stop reading them. The amount of advertising around at the moment is just about manageable. It was the animated Flash movies and shouting out 'smilies' that drove me to the ad blocker solution, but what will come next? For example, with layer 7 interception, even without phorm, it would be easy to inject an ad-plastered 'page loading' page before your web page was retrieved. Or even periodic ad breaks forcing you to page through several ad pages before resuming browsing. Unless we are prepared to pay a realistic amount for a quality broadband service this creeping death by advertising seems inevitable. The ISPs see content providers making big bucks and want a slice.

Just a thought, we have all tended to focus on phorm's analysis and profiling, but it is the ISPs abuse of our data stream that we need to be fighting. /RANT

If targetted advertising is inevitable then so be it... As long as it doesn't involve connection interception...

Then at least I will be given a fighting chance to avoid it with, if neccessary, third party filtering software...

I want to retain the choice as to whether or not I use browser related add ins and enhancemments.

"Obligatory" just won't do I'm afraid!

[NTLVictim]

My thoughts are with The Captain at this time.

As to bringing the average end user online and making them aware, how about pushing the word "webspy" along with "webwise", by association?

Simple, I know, but the beat ideas often are.

[Bonglet]

We already pay way way over the odds compared to other eu countries why should we pay more they already spend 80% of there budgets on advertising (ironic).
So we have to pay more again for them to advertise more and not improve the service (but we dont get served ads) err no thanks.
Wait untill you see how phorm speeds up your browsing experience im sure the insheep will love it.

[Pasanonic]

Originally Posted by Bonglet

We already pay way way over the odds compared to other eu countries why should we pay more they already spend 80% of there budgets on advertising (ironic).
So we have to pay more again for them to advertise more and not improve the service (but we dont get served ads) err no thanks.
Wait untill you see how phorm speeds up your browsing experience im sure the insheep will love it.

That's not quite true.
We may pay more than other EU countries but we do that for almost all consumer products in the UK. This has much to do with out unwillingness to enter the EU monetary markets as a partner rather than an objector as it does to do with individual business practices.

Regardless of the fact that we pay more the hard truth is that we do not pay enough to allow the providers to make a profit and if you think that you have the right to take services without the provider making his end then you are naive.
If I built your house for you and after I gave you the price you then demanded that I still provide the house at that price despite the fact that you have added way more content to the design than the scope of the budget can manage would you still expect me to work at a loss? ( think torrent files )

I know it's a poor analogy but it is the area in which my business operates and one that makes sense to me.

I just think that people need to get a grip of reality some times. By all means object to things that are wrong but don't turn into guerilla activists disavowing all that you don't like for no other reason than you don't like it. Just be objective and be wary of making wild statements that bear no resemblance to fact, it just makes you look ill-educated and paranoiac in an area where there will be very well educated and informed minds waiting to pounce on such ill-informed rhetoric. ( this is not directed at Bonglet, just a comment based on my observation of some other comments made in the past, that I wanted to say generally )

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Pasanonic

Regardless of the fact that we pay more the hard truth is that we do not pay enough to allow the providers to make a profit and if you think that you have the right to take services without the provider making his end then you are naive.

With respect ISPs are turning a profit there are scores of ISPs out there who are "mature" companies and doing quite well. Yes they might want to make more profit but who doesn't? That doesn't mean it is ok either legally or morally to categorically invade people's privacy.

The biggest problems ISPs face in the UK are almost entirely regulatory based. OFCOM have failed the country so often with regards to BT's control over the telephone network's infrastructure that goes far beyond unacceptable. BT holding back ADSL as long as they could in order to monetise on the significant investment they made into their failed ISDN product didn't help matters either.

LLU has been made as difficult as possible by BT in order to try and keep their grip on the infrastructure and the cost of BT Wholesale products to the ISPs is a farce (made worse again by OFCOM).

However, BT will be having a bit of a shock soon because they simply cannot keep up. With use of the sewer systems to deliver high speed broadband coupled with LLU some of the larger industry members will soon be in a much stronger position to genuinely compete with BT not just through the provision of data products but also voice which until now has very much been BT's domain due to their control over PSTN.

Alexander Hanff