Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797] - Page 291

CaptJamieHunter · 21-04-2008, 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

Seeing the Cap'ns link to his footage of the London meeting has reminded me. Has there been any news on the pro version, promised by 80/20, being released?

vicz

This delay has got me wondering how long it can take to chop the video into manageable chunks and post it online...

Thanks to Mark for reminding me - I got an e-mail yesterday saying the bandwidth used has hit 80% (it's now 83% or 41.3Gb: the total files size is 135 Mb so that's a lot of downloads - 796 in total) so please link to the tobymeres.net site (340 visits so far) which has better bandwidth.

Wishing you success for tomorrow, Alexander.

Florence · 21-04-2008, 23:53

Good luck tomorrow in London we are all here supporting you in this.

gaz1 · 22-04-2008, 00:59

good luck tommorow Alexander

and have a safe journey

unicus · 22-04-2008, 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank

Well, I got a reply from Patricia Hewitt today.
...
but unfortunately when she "Checked the position with BT" they just gave her the standard lines to trip out to me:

What his her opinion? We know what BT have to say and she should not just take their word for it over someone else's (I presume you gave her the facts).

On the matter of MP's replying, mine replied quite quickly (see posts #2550 & #2554 )and for the record he's Labour.

bigsanta11 · 22-04-2008, 05:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by popper

Omg

related to this invation of privacy and data export.....under Jacqui Smith OC ,no wonder she ignored the Phorm questions.

perhaps a seperate set of questions to the lords on this matter.....

its hard enough getting access yourself, if you were to send a DPA request for any footage of you they might have, and the US gets all this for free .....
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...-allows-spy-uk
"
Secret pact allows the US to spy on UK motorists

Big Buddy is watching y'all

By Egan Orion: Monday, 21 April 2008, 4:16 PM

THE UK Home Secretary secretively signed a "special certificate" last year that gives foreign security agencies real-time access to traffic camera images and related data monitoring British motorists on highways throughout the UK.

Opposition politicians and civil liberties advocates yesterday accused Gordon Brown's government of attempting to hide from Parliament its covert plans to facilitate international surveillance of UK citizens in violation of privacy laws.

Under the authorisation signed last July 4 by Jacqui Smith, video feeds and still images captured from roadside TV cameras, along with personal data derived from them, can be transmitted out of the UK to countries such as the US, that are outside the European Economic Area
......
"

If you watch the third bourne supremacy film,they have a scene where a US security firm are using the cameras in london ,just like what's in that article .

Unbelievable to think that the film was showing something which is now possible.

---------- Post added at 05:51 ---------- Previous post was at 05:36 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by lucevans

BBC Enterprises are allowed to show adverts to non-licence payers as a means of bolstering funding - for this purpose they assume that all UK-resident websurfers are licencepayers and all non-UK surfers are not.
Sadly, I think the latest incarnation of the BBC Charter allows advertising to be pushed at all non-licence payers (they justified it as "helping to keep UK licence payers fees down") and given that they've allowed this mission-creep, they're also likely to be okay with profiling of UK users for the purposes of targeted advertising on sites visited other than www.bbc.co.uk

My personal opinion: Roll-on all-digital TV, when they can do-away with the licence fee and charge those people who actually watch BBC (I'm one) by means of direct subscription, hence continuing the brilliant tradition of advertisment-free, high-quality television in this country.

Come to think of it - I think this is Kent Ertugrul's biggest miscalculation in the whole sorry Phorm affair: He assumed that UK citizens are, in consumer terms, the same as US citizens. What he failed to realise is that, unlike our US cousins, we have a great tradition of high-quality, advertisment-free media content which is funded effectively by subscription (OK - licence fee, but hopefully subscription in the future), This contradicts his business' premise that content services cannot survive without advertising (and therefore Phorm is a necessary evil), so he choses to ignore this inconvenient example of how good the internet could be.

High quality tv, that made me chuckle

Rchivist · 22-04-2008, 07:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

This delay has got me wondering how long it can take to chop the video into manageable chunks and post it online...

Thanks to Mark for reminding me - I got an e-mail yesterday saying the bandwidth used has hit 80% (it's now 83% or 41.3Gb: the total files size is 135 Mb so that's a lot of downloads - 796 in total) so please link to the tobymeres.net site (340 visits so far) which has better bandwidth.

Wishing you success for tomorrow, Alexander.

I emailed 80/20 24 hours after the meeting, via their Contact Us link, to ask about the promised video. No reply I'm afraid.

OF1975 · 22-04-2008, 07:40

Good luck for the click interview Alexander. Go get 'em.

Paddy1 · 22-04-2008, 07:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank

1. Contrary to what we all believe, no personal data involved in the secret trial interceptions, no customers identified, no data kept and no law broken (we disagree I think!)Hank

This ones easy to get around...

BT drone: "No personal information was processed..."

Questioner: "So, you didn't remove personal information?"

BT drone: "Yes, we did"

Questioner: "Then you processed it"

They can't have it both ways

mark777 · 22-04-2008, 08:50

BBC : Security firms scrutinise Phorm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7359024.stm

"Phorm have hinted that most ISP's will choose an opt-out solution based on a cookie," he said. "We have expressed our concern that's not informed consent and most likely will meet our detection criteria."

hehe, they have the F-Secure on Phorm blog linked as well.

Florence · 22-04-2008, 08:58

Yes seems like they have no intentions of changing the method of delivery which will mean many will not even know it is on their system plus many minors could be tricked onto the system without consent.

Rchivist · 22-04-2008, 09:13

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/7359024.stm

A story on security firm responses to Phorm. Interesting in the light of my question to BT

"What will happen to browsing (and the Phorm business model) when browsers like Firefox (and security software vendors) start to look at layer 7 redirection and treat it as suspicious activity? and their reply - "It is not clear to me that they will do that."

Well maybe it is clearer now.

The BBC pages on this are looking quite organised, with very good links, a couple of video links to their TV reports including interview with Emma Sanderson about the secret illegal trials from BT, and provides a good first stopping pointfor someone wanting to learn about Phorm/Webwise from scratch. If this is the basic template design of the pages for their current Phorm stories, it will be helpful.

The article ends with some Kent spin.

OF1975 · 22-04-2008, 09:13

Posted to the iii website with the bbc link. I won't be around much today. Got a job interview to prepare for. Keep up the good fight!

Stuart · 22-04-2008, 10:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by R Jones

My statement is correct. BT do say that. Whether that position represents the legal realities is another matter. I never said BT were planning a legal system!

But they have said publicly that websites can ask to be Phorm blocklisted - and I'm keen that several million website owners contact them and ask.

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you were wrong.. I actually meant BT is..

Rchivist · 22-04-2008, 10:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you were wrong.. I actually meant BT is..

No problem - I can definitely agree with that.

TehTech · 22-04-2008, 10:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by mark777

BBC : Security firms scrutinise Phorm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7359024.stm

Quote:

So far three net firms, BT, Virgin and Carphone Warehouse, have signed up for Phorm. Carphone Warehouse has said its customers will have to opt in to the system the other two will automatically enrol anyone that does not explicitly ask to be excluded.

This is ILLEGAL!!!

When virgin finally do make this PhormeWare go public, Im out and taking ALL 3 of my services and they can go jump!

That is a total of Ã‚Â£1,176 a year Virgin will be losing out on, and this is just from me!!