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

[OF1975]

My opinion is that it should be left as it is Alexander for the reasons you stated. The decision was taken not to inform customer services about the trial and the end result in at least one case we know about was that one customer actually bought a new pc after customer services told him he had a dns hijacker. A clear case of deception by ommission, in my opinion.

See what others think also though.

EDIT I just wanted to say thanks for all the hard work you are putting into all this Alexander and I really like the paper so far.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Barkotron

I think that "deceived" is fair enough, but I'd remove "deliberately", or replace it with "deliberately or inadvertently". Maybe something like "decieved, whether deliberately or inadvertently". I really think it's best not to put in anything that can't be really solidly backed up.

Sorry, back to reading.

OK changed to:

"This means that not only did BT PLC engage in secret trials without the consent of their customers but they also deceived their customers when concerns were raised by them (either deliberately or inadvertently)."

I have updated the version on the server too to reflect the changes.

Alexander Hanff

[Barkotron]

Thanks Alexander, I really think it's worth giving the PR teams as little foothold for dismissing what you're saying as possible. So stick as closely to known facts or published opinions as you possibly can, and don't let justifiable anger get in the way. Wow, now I feel like Yoda or Mr Miyagi or someone.

Small stylistic point, personally I'd not use words like "basically" (as in the bit about DPI on page 5). It doesn't add anything to the sentence and it's a bit conversational/informal. Also, readers can find it a little condescending.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by Barkotron

Thanks Alexander, I really think it's worth giving the PR teams as little foothold for dismissing what you're saying as possible. So stick as closely to known facts or published opinions as you possibly can, and don't let justifiable anger get in the way. Wow, now I feel like Yoda or Mr Miyagi or someone.

Small stylistic point, personally I'd not use words like "basically" (as in the bit about DPI on page 5). It doesn't add anything to the sentence and it's a bit conversational/informal. Also, readers can find it a little condescending.

Ahh I missed that one fixed now. I went through it earlier and removed a bunch of "Clearly..." type comments for the same reason.

Alexander Hanff

[Barkotron]

Nice one - now go get some sleep!

[CaptJamieHunter]

PhormUKPRteam are back *waves*

[AlexanderHanff]

Yeah I am going in about 10 minutes.

If anyone finds it is difficult to understand anywhere, please let me know. I am trying to write it as a formal article (as I would my academic coursework) but at the same time I want the general public to read it so I am trying very hard to explain technologies and issues in sufficient detail for a broad audience to understand. It is a difficult balance when you come from a technical background so I fully appreciate that I might get it wrong at times either by over explaining or not elaborating enough.

Alexander Hanff

[OF1975]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

PhormUKPRteam are back *waves*

Awwwww how sweet. They must have missed us.

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by OF1975

Awwwww how sweet. They must have missed us.

Think we've scared them oph again. Unless they've gone phor a phag break, phor reprogramming or phor a phar reaching reindoctrination programming phase

[mark777]

Originally Posted by CaptJamieHunter

PhormUKPRteam are back *waves*

PhormUKPRteam, just to help, you could copy and paste this into your daily report to Kent.

The opposition continues to :-

a) Explore all legal avenues, and lobby public bodies and legislators, to apply the law.
b) Explore all ways to bring the issue to a wider public audience.
c) Continue to point out the damage being done to the BT and Virgin brands in particular, due to their continued association with Phorm.

They seem to be having success in all these areas.

You could then point out you need a bigger team and lots more money in order to stop the rot.

Glad to help.

[mart44]

I'm a bit reminded of the outcry against Microsoft's WGA. Everyone was very much 'up in arms' over this but in practice, it hasn't proved to affect people's lives. Can a parallel be drawn?

[OF1975]

Spotted this in a comment from theregister website. Phorm look to be recruiting (or maybe one of the ISPs involved?) :

http://www.jobserve.com/E4ECDD80ACF7BD0A7.job

---------- Post added at 16:39 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------

Originally Posted by mart44

I'm a bit reminded of the outcry against Microsoft's WGA. Everyone was very much 'up in arms' over this but in practice, it hasn't proved to affect people's lives. Can a parallel be drawn?

Good question. For me the answer depends on whether we value our data protection and privacy rights. It depends whether we believe big business should be allowed to break criminal law without sanction or punishment and whether or not we are happy to sit back and do nothing in the face of such a threat to our values and rights.

[lucevans]

Originally Posted by OF1975

Spotted this in a comment from theregister website. Phorm look to be recruiting (or maybe one of the ISPs involved?) :

http://www.jobserve.com/E4ECDD80ACF7BD0A7.job

---------- Post added at 16:39 ---------- Previous post was at 16:19 ----------



Good question. For me the answer depends on whether we value our data protection and privacy rights. It depends whether we believe big business should be allowed to break criminal law without sanction or punishment and whether or not we are happy to sit back and do nothing in the face of such a threat to our values and rights.

An extract from the job advert;

"...ISP's are currently committing to an opportunity to derive online advertising revenues from customers visiting 3rd party Websites utilising anonymous information from their customers wider browsing behaviour. Advertising revenue is only derived from ads placed on our own portal and we do not monetise customers wider browsing activities.

The Project's primary objective is to deliver fully operationally supported online behaviour targeting technologies (Phorm) within the existing Network Architecture. This will enable us to derive incremental online advertising revenues. As a result of customers off portal browsing activities, serving them targeted ad's on third party Websites, based upon the ability to monitor online behaviours. Maximising performance of low value inventory on our portal.

Working with a company called Phorm an opportunity exists for us to derive significant incremental online advertising revenues as well as delivering the customer an anti phishing service.

Revenues are derived by:
The deployment of Servers into the network providing the ability to monitor customers online browsing behaviours on the wider Web and as a result of the technology and 'market place' Phorm provide serve them targeted ad's on third party Websites.
Maximising performance of low value inventory on the our portal, driving wholly incremental revenues..."

(Please note: this is NOT the entire article; there should be no copyright problem with quoting part of the page...)

Any talented people here? Fancy bringing down the system from within?

Since they're not prepared to tell us anything about the technical workings of this system, we'll have to find out for ourselves...

[CaptJamieHunter]

Damn, beaten to it again! I take my tea very seriously though, it has to be *just* right. The job description makes interesting reading. Here's an alternative translation.

Usual Project Manager sort of spec with:

"Strong personality that can take control and manage a very high profile project with high risk factors"

It's high profile because of the backlash and negative publicity we're getting you The risk factors are high because of potential legal action and regulatory investigations.

"Excellent communication skills"
"Focus and commitment to deliver a unique and controversial project"

aka thick skinned enough to take all the flak, capable of spinning to confuse the weak minded and being about as popular as Max Mosley is with the F1 constructors

"Track record of managing projects where benefits are likely to be in the range of £5-50m"

Are these actual proven claims? After all The Guardian rejected Phorm. With everything else going on making claims about benefits is rather brave.

"Proven record of managing high risk projects with complex delivery"

aka someone we can nail thus protecting our own management and reputation if this all goes titsup

Now there is a competitor which headlines that "No Need for Bad-Phorm Approach to Online Advertising."

*waves at PhormUKPRteam*

I've just got a read recipt from David Davis

[mark777]

Originally Posted by lucevans

An extract from the job advert;

Any talented people here? Fancy bringing down the system from within?

Since they're not prepared to tell us anything about the technical workings of this system, we'll have to find out for ourselves...

If you do apply, they won't want a CV, just your 'hacker' nickname, darkstalker or cyberspy, for example.

They will know of you then by reputation.