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

[HamsterWheel]

Paul - Alex gives as good as he gets.
If he can't cope with the flak he gets back, that's his problem.
I've never threatened him.

[Deko]

Hamster are you on BT ADSL ?

EDIT: Can a MOD see if his IP is on BT-central's range ?

[warescouse]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Florence - I am not phorm or Kent or Phorm's PR.
I'm an ordinary shareholder who thinks Phorm is a good investment and does not impinge everyone's privacy in any meaningful way.

Even Alex (who posts on my board frequently) does not think I'm Phorm.

Bearing in mind that the majority of antiphorm writers on this site are either IT specialists or have legal vocations, I really cannot think how an ordinary investor (without any of these skills), can put up any technical or legal argument that could convince us otherwise.

Every independent legal analysis I have seen (Those not in the pay of Phorm or hold shares in Phorm) clearly have shown its illegal. Don't quote American legal analysis. it doesn't wash over here. Different legal system.

BT have stated they have legal advice. What they have not stated is where that legal advice comes from!

Again, independent IT persons (again not in the pay of Phorm) who have studied the system also verify this via their analysis. You have a motive for supporting Phorm if you are an investor. My advice would be for you to sell because in the long term Phorm will be gone!

[BetBlowWhistler]

Some interesting reading
http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp...921&sort=whole

What's good for the goose and all that. Having read that little thread I can only conclude that Hamsterwheel understands only what he's been told about the technology and methods used in the Phorm business model. Just another PR junkie.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Try going and finding a proper issue to worry about - starving kids in Africa or mines or something.

I did see someone was trying to promote the interests of kids a while back, using internet ads.

Then someone mean and heartless took those ads and overwrote them with ads for Weight Watchers and credit cards. It was despicable. I hope they catch the culprit.

I'm glad we can agree on the relative merits of those causes. It is important to help starving children in Africa. I hope the paragraph below doesn't get overwritten;

SOS Childrens Villages
"Our main role is helping children whose parents are not there for them. They may be AIDS orphans, street children, child soldiers or children orphaned by war, poverty or natural disasters. We give these children a mother and a family in a home within an SOS Children's village. In places where there is a high rate of child abandonment, we run programmes to help strengthen vulnerable families and keep them together."

[HamsterWheel]

Deko - I see you are now trying to track my ISP - so much for privacy.
How two-faced.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:49 ----------

Dephormation - be careful. As I'm sure you're aware, Phorm actually paid for ads for charities. Alex fell into that trap too, and had to apologise to Phorm.

[Deko]

@ Hammy

When you sign up here you IP will be recorded during posting (as required by law) the mods can see this IP only.

This is T&C's of the site whihc you agreed to, I was just wonder if you are on BT will you enable webwise if it ever go's live ?

are you happy to be profiled and have all your weby stuff intercepted and sold for money while you do not get any benefit at all?

[smcicr]

Yawn.

As has been said before:

Let's have something concrete and tangible from the rodent to explain:

- why Phorm is legal,
- why the notable individuals and organisations are wrong,
- where the legal advice provided to people like Phorm and BT came from and why it isn't being proffered every chance they get to kill this point stone dead

without even starting on:

- why we should trust Phorm at all in the absence of the above (company history, omission of info to HO, secret BT trials, spin of info from HO, hosting shenanigans etc etc)
- why has the BT trial been delayed since March
- why have VM (to an extent) and the Guardian (totally) distanced themselves from the product
- why did CPW feel it necessary to change the way they are looking to implement the system
- why the share price has gone tank tank tankety tank over the last few months

and on it goes....

I mean really - let's have it - I think everyone on here would love the chance to debate the issues with a pro-phormer. As (again) has been said before - the lack of such debate suggests that there is no interest in doing so because there are no good answers. No-one wants to turn up to a debate if they know in advance they are just going to be made to look entirely foolish, do they?

[BetBlowWhistler]

from http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp...845&sort=whole

it is a tech company that is going to be looking at virtually everything on virtually everyone's PC !

from http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp...845&sort=whole

Phorm will not store anything for more than a fortnight

from http://boards.fool.co.uk/Message.asp...921&sort=whole

the comment they make "your browsing history, which it collects direct from your ISP" is wrong.

Laugh or cry, take your pick

[HamsterWheel]

- why Phorm is legal, BECAUSE NO-ONE HAS PROVED THAT IT IS NOT
- why the notable individuals and organisations are wrong, THESE ARE ORGANISATIONS WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO SAY NO TO EVERYTHING, SO OF COURSE THEY WILL BE ANTI-EVERYTHING, THE LUDDITES.
- where the legal advice provided to people like Phorm and BT came from and why it isn't being proffered every chance they get to kill this point stone dead THAT WILL BE COMMERCIALLY CONFIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE !

without even starting on:

- why we should trust Phorm at all in the absence of the above (company history, omission of info to HO, secret BT trials, spin of info from HO, hosting shenanigans etc etc) BECAUSE ICO WHOSE JOB IT IS TO MONITOR ARE HAPPY WITH PHORM
- why has the BT trial been delayed since March NO DOUBT SO MORE CONTROLS AND OPT-OUTS CAN BE INCORPORATED TO KEEP YOU LOT LESS UNHAPPY
- why have VM (to an extent) and the Guardian (totally) distanced themselves from the product BECAUSE THEY ARE WIMPS WHO WILL SOON ADOPT ONCE THE DOSH ROLLS IN TO BT ETC.
- why did CPW feel it necessary to change the way they are looking to implement the system THEY ARE ENTITLED TO DO WHAT THEY WANT - THE TECH IS EVOLVING
- why the share price has gone tank tank tankety tank over the last few months ERR, SO HAVE THE MARKETS, AND SURELY THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU PRIVACY WORRIERS, BUT BEST LEFT TO INVESTORS TO DISCUSS

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Dephormation - be careful. As I'm sure you're aware, Phorm actually paid for ads for charities. Alex fell into that trap too, and had to apologise to Phorm.

I've read the report Hamster. I know what they did.

Go on, threaten me with legal action..

"The advertisements were used to replaced [sic] a 'default' charity advertisement (one of Oxfam, Make Trade Fair or SOS Children's Villages)"

Charity ads promoting the interests of STARVING CHILDREN were over written by ads for WEIGHT WATCHERS.

Let me write that again for you.

Malnourished and STARVING CHILDREN were deprived of charity donations to allow Phorm to profit from selling advertising to fat overweight people who might join WEIGHT WATCHERS.

[Privacy_Matters]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Dephormation - be careful. As I'm sure you're aware, Phorm actually paid for ads for charities. Alex fell into that trap too, and had to apologise to Phorm.

Ok clear this up then - did Phorm pay for the space these Charities use so they could overwrite with alternative adverts?

NVM Dephor has it.

If Phorm acted as above - they prevented the message being spread to those who could have helped. The revenues they would have received would NOT compensate the Charities for larger donations than the Funds that exchanged hands - and DEFINATELY not compensate for the professionals who at that time would have volunteered their services to help.

If this is correct - it DOESN'T matter how its glossed up - it's a dispicable act.

Oh yeah - SUE ME PHORM.

[BetBlowWhistler]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

- why Phorm is legal, BECAUSE NO-ONE HAS PROVED THAT IT IS NOT
- why the notable individuals and organisations are wrong, THESE ARE ORGANISATIONS WHOSE PURPOSE IS TO SAY NO TO EVERYTHING, SO OF COURSE THEY WILL BE ANTI-EVERYTHING, THE LUDDITES.
- where the legal advice provided to people like Phorm and BT came from and why it isn't being proffered every chance they get to kill this point stone dead THAT WILL BE COMMERCIALLY CONFIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW, PRIVATE !

without even starting on:

- why we should trust Phorm at all in the absence of the above (company history, omission of info to HO, secret BT trials, spin of info from HO, hosting shenanigans etc etc) BECAUSE ICO WHOSE JOB IT IS TO MONITOR ARE HAPPY WITH PHORM
- why has the BT trial been delayed since March NO DOUBT SO MORE CONTROLS AND OPT-OUTS CAN BE INCORPORATED TO KEEP YOU LOT LESS UNHAPPY
- why have VM (to an extent) and the Guardian (totally) distanced themselves from the product BECAUSE THEY ARE WIMPS WHO WILL SOON ADOPT ONCE THE DOSH ROLLS IN TO BT ETC.
- why did CPW feel it necessary to change the way they are looking to implement the system THEY ARE ENTITLED TO DO WHAT THEY WANT - THE TECH IS EVOLVING
- why the share price has gone tank tank tankety tank over the last few months ERR, SO HAVE THE MARKETS, AND SURELY THIS IS NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU PRIVACY WORRIERS, BUT BEST LEFT TO INVESTORS TO DISCUSS

Is this you?
http://digg.com/users/HamsterWheel/history/diggs

Joined 2nd June and Digg!ng every anti-phorm story there is to Digg!?

[HamsterWheel]

Ok clear this up then - did Phorm pay for the space these Charities use so they could overwrite with alternative adverts?

Apparently they paid for the space, then put adverts for charities on the bits they didn't use for Phorm, so the charities got some free adverts.
Which is apparently why Alex was happy to withdraw his accusations.

So far from stealing ads from charities, they bought them some.

I'm sure Alex will correct me if I am wrong.

---------- Post added at 10:11 ---------- Previous post was at 10:09 ----------

BetBlowWhistler - that's not me on Digg.
I guess it's someone's attempt at a joke.

[Deko]

So hammy once again are you willing to have phorm/webwise on your ISP account ?

Will you opt-in to it.