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

[JohnnyWashngo]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

markt - I suspect you'll end up getting your wish. I think the delay in rollout has been caused by tweaking things to make it all like the TalkTalk model.
Once it is all up and running, BT etc can then start to turn the screw by offering those who do opt-in either a cheaper service or better speeds.

As much as I hate to feed the troll... that last sentence just boils my blood. The net isn't supposed to be a tiered system where people with more money, or people willing to take advertsiements can get a better quality of service. It is meant to be neutral. Net Neutrality is the key principle of the internet, a principle that ensures everyone receives the same service regardless of the ISP they use.

Granted, some people will pay more for a faster connection, which is something I don't agree with. It is just another form of tiering, albeit one which allows someone with a tight budget to still get access to the internet.

But once the kind of systems that Phorm and NebuAd offer gain traction in ISPs, we will start to see a new level of tiering, a new kind of 'the haves and have-nots'. At the moment, the promise of these systems is that the adverts you see will be better targetted for you. The next step is to do as you suggest which is to offer more incentives for letting them monitor your intenet activity and make money off of it.

That is morally wrong.

If they need to make more money from their customers, they should increase the premium for the broadband service. Simply offering broadband cheaply(or for free) and then skimming surfing habits off of you in order to sell advertisers your eyeballs is thoroughly evil and needs to be stopped before it can begin.

As an aside, the whole cookie method of stating your preference for these systems is pathetic. For the privacy conscious, like myself, deleting cookies when you kill a browser session is the accepted way of protecting yourself. When the cookie is the only way of opting out of these systems, you will find that you may be opted in permanently for being a smart internet user and deleting your cookies.

The whole situation stinks. Moreover, it stinks of businesses once again thinking they have the right to any and all data they can get their hands on.

[HamsterWheel]

JohnnyWashngo.

Sorry, but don't agree. The net is just another utility. If you use more gas, you pay more. Electricity, water, the same.
If you use more bandwidth, someone has to provide it. They can't do that if no-one pays for it.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Stuart - Ernst & Young have done a full privacy audit on what Phorm does. And they will no doubt regularly update it. And BT, Virgin and CPW will also have done their own work on the privacy aspects and data retention.

If you are going to say that you still don't trust them, then one wonders if you could ever trust anyone or any commercial organisation ?

And if there are any shenanigans, then BT etc will be the first to scream as it is their reputations that will be on the line.

Harping back to Phorm's background is getting a bit turgid now. The company is rather different now and has a hugely heavyweight board that would not be involved in anything inherently dodgy.

---------- Post added at 14:24 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------

Wildie - very happy that you don't see the ads, but without the revenue generated by them, the board would obviously not exist would it ?

The same Ernst and Young who were recently suspended from doing such reports for the US government because of dodgy dealings? The same company who did a similar report on Enron if I remember correctly and weren't they also included in the WorldCom scandal?

Oh and on a final note, Ernst and Young the company that wrote an analysis based on US law and the company Kent has an historical background with?

Keep trying I am enjoying the laugh.

Alexander Hanff

---------- Post added at 15:25 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Originally Posted by mark777

Lots of shares being bought at the moment, in big lumps.


http://www.lse.co.uk/ShareTrades.asp...re=phorm_reg_s

That will just give us more to laugh at when the price plummets again next week.

Alexander Hanff

[Florence]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

JohnnyWashngo.

Sorry, but don't agree. The net is just another utility. If you use more gas, you pay more. Electricity, water, the same.
If you use more bandwidth, someone has to provide it. They can't do that if no-one pays for it.

Excuse me but Phorm doesn't pay for the internet networks we have paid for what we use all the time I am lucky if I use 5 gig a month and pay each month for a 45 gig allowence. What gets me the most is we pay to access the internet yet you want to come allong and earn money from our paid for surfing habits..
Now to get this right you want to earn money from surfing clicks start your own ISP see if people will sign up to phormISP free surfing paid for by the clicks might get some...

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

Hi Alex !

Here's what you said - I tool it as a threat. "I would suggest you don't come to the protest I doubt, despite my usual good temperament, that I would be able avoid giving you the physical smack in the face you so rightly deserve."

What is it about Alexes and the theat of violence ? First you, and now Big Brother !!

I only posted the credit card link as you were suggesting that I was posting on this board when i was not. For some reason you seem to think I am the only person in the world who is not anti-phorm. If you have a pop at me, I will reply.

Thank you for confirming what I already stated in reply earlier, I said I "doubt" I could resist, not "I am going to smack you".

Funny how you fail to see the difference.

Alexander Hanff

[HamsterWheel]

Alex - you sound a bit desperate when you have to resort to knocking one of the Big 4 firms of accountants to try and prove a point.
If you're not going to trust them to do anything then you must not trust them to audit banks or any companies, and therefore you cannot risk having a bank account or going shopping, or leaving the house really.

I keep telling you that to get any credibility in your quest you should concentrate your attacks on areas that you have a chance against. Or else you just come across as something of a rabid ranter.

[dav]

Originally Posted by markt50

Phorm have never once provided any suitable answers to these and many other questions. Let me put it this way, if Phorm was introduced as an 'Opt In' system, and if I decided not to opt in and my traffic was never changed from how it works today, then I would have no problem with Phorm at all. The facts are that Phorm does not work this way, it has no 'opt out', it is trying to trick people by launching with a default 'opt-in' policy.

All Phorm has to do for me is prove that I can really opt out, and that if I opt out my Internet connection is not going to be degraded. They have failed to prove these very simple things and I can't help but wonder why.

This really is all I require from Phorm, too. If it can be proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the system is truly OPT-IN and that, by default, all trafic goes nowhere near any profiling kit or undergoes no redirects etc, then my (and I assume many others' objections) will largely disappear. This, for me, is the big get-out (stay-out?) of jail card for those wishing to force this system on unsuspecting members of the public who may wander blindly into being tracked and monetised.
As an idea I can see that Webwise may well appeal to certain people and they may well feel that it enhances their web experience. Unfortunately, for it to be less distasteful and truly transparent, let it prove its worth by letting people make a positive decision to sign up to it. If it really is the holy grail and all that it's cracked-up to be, ordinary people will be flocking to enable it. If it's a piece of old tosh then it'll die a quick death. The point is, it should live or die on its own merits, not be slipped under the radar and enabled by stealthy means on unsuspecting users' PC's.

[AlexanderHanff]

No I don't trust Ernst and Young even remotely, they are one of the most douchebag companies on the planet. Furthermore I would NEVER trust an accounting firm to do a Privacy Assessment, simply because they are not qualified to do so, they are accountants not privacy or human rights lawyers and as accountants they have a vested interest in seeing companies like Phorm succeed.

Anyway I have had enough of your vitriol for one day, welcome to ignore.

Alexander Hanff

Originally Posted by Privacy_Matters

She.. HamsterWheel is a she..

So she is


Wow - I really like feisty women hammy if I email you will you add me as a friend on Facebook?


Pleeeeeeeeeeeese

[Raistlin]

Shame really - there was a time when this thread was looking like it was going to do some good.

Now it just looks like all the good energies that had been concentrated here are just being channeled into fighting each other.

My honest opinion? Just ignore those people that you know to be doing no more than trying to stir things up - if you don't you'll hand them what they want: a) this thread closed so you can't do any more good, and b) a serious threat to Phorm discredited.

Come on people, you've accomplished so much already - you're better than this!

[HamsterWheel]

Guys - let me in on the joke - who is this woman I'm supposed to be ?!

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

If you use more bandwidth, someone has to provide it. They can't do that if no-one pays for it.

Many ISPs (BT included) already include caps on some tariffs, thus limiting the bandwidth you can use.

All members will refrain from making personal remarks - If I have to enter this thread again because some people are incapable of holding a civil discussion without resorting to personal insults. Their account may face suspension from these boards. I will not tolerate such ridiculous and childish petty behaviour whatsoever.

Thread re-opened.

[HamsterWheel]

Many ISPs (BT included) already include caps on some tariffs, thus limiting the bandwidth you can use.

They do, which just goes to show there is a bandwidth problem that needs the ISPs to commit billions of pounds to replace the networks. Without some serious revenue to help them do it, it won't happen....

Enter Phorm, stage left....

[icsys]

Originally Posted by HamsterWheel

They do, which just goes to show there is a bandwidth problem that needs the ISPs to commit billions of pounds to replace the networks. Without some serious revenue to help them do it, it won't happen....

Enter Phorm, stage left....

There are better ways to do it rather than pimping peoples data.

Increase prices, stop rolling out unachievable speeds, stop giving away 'free' broadband.

We would all like something for nothing, unfortunately it can't realistically happen.

Why do we need all this bandwidth and speed? When broadband was first launched we had the dizzy speed of 512k, it was perfectly adequate at the time.
Now, because the media want to deliver streaming video and TV it has to be faster and faster.
The iPlayer is blamed for the bandwidth bottleneck. then along comes c4 and itv on demand.
Well maybe the media should be stumping up some cash to improve the delivery medium? (this isn't the place for that debate)

data pimping is not the answer
Exit Phorm stage right..... and keep on moving.