* Posts by Bluenose

310 posts • joined 19 May 2010

Page:

Brexit: Time to make your plans, UK IT biz

Bluenose

Re: Whose agenda?

Why was Greece forced to sell state assets? Because by doing so they received something called money which can be used by the State to pay pensions, the interest on loans and lots of other wonderful and worthwhile things that all Govts need to do. Kind of like why you have to sell your house when you can't afford the mortgage.

The EU does not have directives that force privatisation it does have directives that strive to create a level economic playing field for businesses. State owned business skew that playing field as they can keep going back to the Govt to get money when they lose money undercutting other businesses (Air France was a great example of that).

As for undemocratic, compared to what the House of Lords? The Council of Ministers contains elected officials from every Member State and at the end of the day those elected ministers can decide whether to suppor or reject the suggestions of the European Commission whch in some ways is like the House of Lords being made of personal appointees of the relevant member states leader (Dave Cameron in the UK's case). And then MEPs. Not sure where your fourth chamber comes from because last time I checked the treaties all EU law goes from Commission to Parliament to Council of Ministers.

As for being right wing neo liberal agendas, have you looked at the UK govt recently? In fact the biggest threat to the NHS remains the British Govt not the EU or even TTIP. But then if you are American, the EU is the communist replacement for the old USSR what with its social welfare and health for all ideas.

The reason why immigration is the focus is pretty simple. No one knows what will happen if the UK votes to leave (well other than the economy will suffer from a short to medium shock of major consequence for business and citizens alike) or stay (other than things will go as before). Therefore the Brexit bunch have identified something simple to understand, "the EU lets in lots of foreigners and they are all coming to the UK" and then complains when those who want to stay say "its more complicated that that".

I do agree about it not being an issue of "little-Englander" mentality though. It is significantly more complex than that. Europe is riven with massive problems not all of which the UK is immune to. Those cracks need to be addressed, if we are outside we cannot do that, if we are inside we will have to use diplomacy (not somethng we are very good at) and all the while we have the media constantly making out that everything is simple and can be fixed with a quick wave of a magic wand (talk about dumbing down the population). Whatever the decision on 23rd June, the consequences will be massive and no one in the media is telling anyone the truth about that.

13
6
Bluenose

No it doesn't

The UK is a signatory to the Eurpean Convnention on Human Rights. The British Govt has been bound by the decisions of the Court of Human Rights since day 1. Why do you think the Tories got so annoyed when it banned the use of corporal punishment in British schools. It also banned the Isle of Man from whipping criminals and they aren't even part of the EU.

The purpose of the ECJ is to interpret EU law (including the EU Charter of Fundatmental Rights which includes the rights dealt with by the ECHR). To the extent that an element of Human Rights law is applicable to the EU then it would have to give it special significance because TADAH every EU member state is a signatory to the ECHR treaty therefore to ignore the rulings would result in the EU member states being fined or whatever the sanctions the ECHR has.

We can only get out of being bound by the ECHR rulings if we decide to derogate our agreement to the Treaty that puts on the Council of Europe. That would make us the same as Belarus and even the Tories are having a hard time figuring out how that little PR trick will work.

5
2
Bluenose

Re: Time to make your plans

But the ECHR has nothing to do with the EU! It is part of the Council of Europe which is made up of 42 European states includng Russia.

Most European countries treat their citizens rights with contempt apart from Belgium who don't appear to bother spying on anyone, even the criminals.

12
2

Govt: Citizens, we know you want 10Mbps. This is the last broadband scheme for that

Bluenose

Or we could just....

Bring our cattle and other animals with us take up all the green space in the city and then you would be nearer to your food. However, we would also need to plough up a few streets to grow the crops that you also need us to provide for your bread, vegetables, ec. Or would you rather starve whilst enjoying you allegedly unsubsidised fast broadband?

Not everyone gets to CHOOSE where they live. The jobs people do also have a relavence to where they are required or need to live. You also ignore that this is actually a very small island on which we live where no one lives more than 75 miles from the coast. Very few people actually live more than 10 or 15 miles from a major conurbation and due to the fact that broadband is a network, very few actually live more than 2-3 miles from a major network link (there is one that runs right down the middel of the high street in my village). The issue therefore is not that the networks are not there rather than the cost of actually connecting people to them and reducing bandwidth to those who pay more (businesses) to provide it to those who pay less (consumers) means that most telecoms providers are reluctant to make the necessary investment.

I also live 2.5 miles from a small town that has fibre to the cabinet and about six miles from one where Virgin Media is providing 200MB plus to the residents. Unfortunately free market capitalism means that no one wants to punt some capital investment to link me up to the faster forms of broadband apart from BT who will do it eventually say in another 2 years which is the normal delay in deploying faster broadband technologies where I live (that is 2 years after everyone else has it).

0
0

How a Brexit could stop UK biz and Europe swapping personal data

Bluenose

Re: Nice that someone else realized it

Sorry, I thought being in the EU meant that all our legislation was written and enforced by them and that Parliament has no power?:

However, the truth is that the legislation passed by the UK Parliament will only apply in the UK and there is no obligation on the EU countries to accept or acknowledge such legislation making it a one sided relationship and thus potentially creating an issue whereby the UK continues to comply with EU laws but gets shafted by the EU which doesn't see the need to work in the same way.

The other issue is that such UK legislation is predicatd on membership of the EU and free access to the market. As is clear we won't have that access or membership and therefore quite a bit of our legilstation is frustrated thus null and void.

4
0
Bluenose

Re: I wonder how many years would pass

The fact that the UK as a whole will be requesting to leave the EU will create issues within the EU legal system not least because it will take more than two years of negotiations for Scotland to negotiate the required separation following an independence vote. There are also the political issues that existing within other EU countries that will have to be addressed if, Scotland were allowed to remain part of the EU. The Spanish and Belgiums will be forcibly anti the desired Scottish position as may others who have communities seeking to find a way to independence in Europe.

As for borders, Kent is not the only border with the EU (Northern Ireland is a large and very porous border today) and when considered fully this whole island by its nature is a border and we do not have the manpower or financial resources to prevent incursions by migrants despite the claims of UKIP and others.

3
0
Bluenose

Re: @John Brown - Scotland not only gaining independence...

The real issue here is not whether Scotland seeks indepence but whether Wales and Northern Ireland will go the same route. Both have large majorities in favour of staying in the EU as they both benefit materailly from that organisation.

And for Northern Ireland staying in the EU, whilst difficult politcally in many respects, is just a matter of agreeing to reunite the nation of Ireland.

2
0
Bluenose

Re: @codejunky

"Trading with the whole world is bound to be worth more." But that is the whole point really in my view. Just because we are in the EU does not mean we cannot trade with the whole world in fact we do that today (have a look at our export figures). So can someone please explain what big of magic occurs when we leave the EU that will mean our trade with the rest of the world will increase? Oh and telling me we can negotiate our own trade agreements won't wash as that can take any were up to 15 years (EU-India Free trade deal as an example) and the UK has little experience in this area as all our trade negotiators currently work for the EU.

5
0
Bluenose

Re: Rubbish. Germany really doesn't need the damage...

"Ha no. At no point does leaving mean we lose the financial centre which was before we joined and has continued since"

The UK has always had a finance industry, however it was not a global player prior to the EU. Big Bank really kick started the UK finance industry and the introduction of the Euro supported that even more.

London currently transacts more in Euros than any other major European financial market because it is in the EU and we can block EU legislation that might damage it. If we leave then Frankfurt can seek changes in the Euro nations that ensure that those Euro transactions will take place there thus undermining London.

3
5
Bluenose

Re: former EU partners less willing to jump to ... to rescue UK economic interests

What damage to the German car industry? They already sell to most of the world including the US and China whereas the UK industry is focussed on sales in the UK and Europe. The only damage to their industry will be if the UK Govt ups import duties and VAT on foreign produced vehicles.

The worst that will happen is that they will withdraw investment from their plants in the UK and take up that capacity in mothballed plants in Germany and France and then flog the Minis back to us at the inflated tax price that the UK Govt would be forced to apply in order to protect whatever rump car industry is left in the UK.

4
0
Bluenose

Re: former EU partners less willing to jump to ... to rescue UK economic interests

As Mr IDS argued on Radio 4 on Friday that Britain's economy as the 5th biggest in the world with a much lower level of unemployment generally and at youth level has been achieved during our membership of the EU becuase the UK has control of its benefits legislation, I think your argument would be better if it said that membership of the EURO nations imposes material ecomomic harm.

With respect to the EU Data Protection Directive, the legilsation known as the Snoopers Charter needs to be compliant with that Directive from the EU if it is to be passed otherwise the British judges who must apply it will have material issues and may declare it non-compliant with the Human Rights Act and therefore force the government to make necessary changes. This is true even if the vote is Out in June since it will be two years before we leave the EU even from that date and more probably from the date that parliament passes the necessary legislation to repeal the relevant European Act.

As to whether there is an impact on UK business is debateable. Currently more UK data is probably processed in Eastern Europe than the other way around. IT companies and others have been "near-shoring" IT support and maintanence to the like of Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary for many years. The real impact on the UK will be the VAT impact, the cost of doing business in a market with export controls and the potential risk of countries such as those in Eastern Europe raising taxes on the local branches of IT companies (unlikely but if the economic problems of Europe continue not impossible).

2
0

BT dismisses MPs' calls to snap off Openreach as 'wrong-headed'

Bluenose

Re: New Zealand has done it.

In Milton Keynes, BT were the incumbent cable supplier to the whole city, the Govt of the day decided that this wasn't fair so forced them to sell their cable to NTL or whoever was the massively indebted cable provider of the day.

Some 20 years later, Milton Keynes does not have Virgin Media cable based broadband because Virgin Media didn't bother to upgrade the original copper cabling as it was too expensive to do so. The only fibre provider is BT and that is limited to the cabinet.

So much for markets and competition.

1
0
Bluenose

Re: Publicly owned business

Some people may wish to read the article at the following site, http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-lost-the-broadband-race-in-1990-1224784. Makes for interesting reading and shows once again how the party of business is more about the party of making money for its mates.

3
1
Bluenose

Re: Publicly owned business

We could always turn to the head of Marconi, he knew what he was doing. Or perhpaps the head of the recent state run East Coast rail line before it was passed back in to private hands based on some pretty crappy maths from the current Government.

Both state and private industries have a reputation for massive cockups and failures, the media tend to focus more on the former than the latter because it often results in a loss of "tax payer" money whilst ignoring the far greater loss of "pensioners" money.

A QUANGO is not a business and, as others have pointed out, BT prior to privatisation was a profitable business and focussed on improving its technology including upgrading its telephone network and exchanges.

The issue with state industries in invariably the problems caused by politicians sticking their mates in to the leadership roles and having them work to support an unannounced agenda (for the Tories privatisation and for Labour a flawed sense of equality between management and workers). It is this hidden agenda that screws most state sector industry in the same way as companies get screwed by boards who are more interested in their short term easy to achieve bonuses based on share price increases than on the long term return to investors based on growing sales.

7
0
Bluenose

Re: Publicly owned business

But Churchill was convinced we would all be flying around in helicopters as a quick cheap form of travel and so didn't need the train system.

1
2
Bluenose

Re: Roads. Electricity. Internet.

I almost agree with you, though. The only problem is that nationally owned infrastructure is generally mismanaged by a committee. I've no idea why, as it should be able to operate as any other large business.

I'll give you a clue. They're called politicians and they don't give you a chance to get the first project done before they have changed the requirements, pulled the funding and generally had a great time destroying what hasn't been built in the first place.

11
3

UK energy minister rejects 'waste of money' smart meters claim

Bluenose

Re: Purpose

The problem is that as always the concept of something new (spot pricing) is being presented as a great advantage to consumers however, I found the following on a web site in New Zealand:

A spot-price contract can bring significant savings but also can expose consumers to financial risks. If you are thinking of signing up, before proceeding, carefully consider all the risks and rewards and whether your financial position gives you the ability to manage the risks.

If you are unsure - seek independent advice.

So yet again consumers are being sold something that is more likely to see them screwed than one that actually gives them real benefits. One only has to think of all those who found that the value of their investments went down significantly when they needed to go up or found themselves with wonderfully cheap interest only mortgages that the linked investment accounts can't pay off.

As the original comment on this said, the people who really need stability and certainty of price so as to be able to adequately budget and pay for their power will find themselves railroaded through mis-selling in to contracts that result in them being cut off and chased by debt collectors.

3
0

North Wales Police outsourcing deal results in massive overspend

Bluenose

Not always down to the outsoucer

The problem with outsourcing and quite often with those who criticise it is that the actual party looking to outsource a)does not know what their IT people do, b)has no idea of the true cost of IT and c)gets rid of the people to manage the outsourcer because hey there is no IT department to be managed anymore.

For example someone asks for a one hour webinar and gets charged £3,000. Or you can actually break the task down in to its constituent parts; someone spends couple of hours finding out what it is that the customer actually wants rather than the vague statement a webinar on Software as a Service; then they write a presentation for a couple of hours to make sure it meets the requirements that were provided and then they prepare for the presentation to make it polished and professional. Suddenly the one hour webinar turns in to a whole day piece of work (and note I left out all the stuff about finding out whether the customer's own infrastructure supports webinars in the first place).

It is the same with light bulbs. What's that I hear you say £60 to change a light bulb that's a rip off. Of course if there is no one to buy the light bulb, no one to find someone to go and change it, no one to order a replacement for the failed one so that we have one in the cupboard for the next one to fail rather than waiting until someone pops to B&Q to buy one (which of course will a 2 hour round trip).

Outsourcing works for companies who know what their IT departments do, the value they provide the true costs of providing that service and the tasks and activities that take place in order to deliver the current in house services. The problem is that such companies are few and far between.

And the problem with having lots of companies doing different bits of work is that someone needs to manage them all and that, in today's public sector, means getting a SMI in to that job.

The UK Govt keeps pushing outsourcing because of an erroneous belief that private is best. this has been a driver for years and explains PFI as much as IT oursourcing. The problem is that outsources inherit the same "inefficient" staff that the Govt claims exist in the public sector which is why outsourcing will be cheaper in their view and they also inherit the same inefficient customer who doesn't know what they need in the first place.

2
1

More UK broadband for bumpkins, but have-nots still ain’t happy

Bluenose

Re: choice

Please define arseend of nowhere. I leave less than 2 miles from a small town with fibre to the cabinet, 5 miles from Milton Keynes with fibre to the cabinet, 11 miles from Leighton Buzzard (fibre and cable services) and about the same from Flitwick (with its Virgin Media super fast service and fibre to the cabinet) and I still get a crappy broadband 'cos our exchange is to small to do make it economic to upgrade.

There are also estates in Milton Keynes where the broadband is pretty crap or non-existent although I think BT did eventually replace all the aluminium wiring that prevented customers from getting broadband

1
0
Bluenose

Re: well-known technology news site covers rural broadband

That's next week's headline and will appear after the Express announces its latest cure for Alzheimers and that Statins have been found to sort out MS.

1
0
Bluenose

Almost right

Where we live the target is apparently 2mbps for the countryside. Our council teamed with Milton Keynes and Bedford Borough to get BT to improve broadband in the larger market towns (Sandy, Biggleswade, etc.) but where a village already received 2mbps then nah no need to do anything.

0
0

Sky bangs on Ofcom's door – demands BT competition probe

Bluenose

Why Splitting OpenReach off from BT won't work

There are strong economic reasons why splitting OpenReach from BT is a bad idea. The fact that BT retains a majority position in both the fixed line telephone and broadband markets means that there is value for them in investing in OpenReach and pushing out new infrastructure to areas where the likes of Sky, TalktTalk and others don't want to play.

For BT, this means that there is money in putting in new cabling, cabinets, etc. via OpenReach as there is a return on their investment since they will pick up pretty much all the customers in the remote and rural areas which whilst not massively profitable to offer additional margin and revenue which is cheap to capture in terms of marketing and also cheap to retain. The situation also means that the Govt can put pressure on BT to deliver services to the more rural and remote areas of the UK by threatening to take away OpenReach.

If OpenReach is taken away then Sky, Virgin, TalkTalk and BT will focus all their investment where they will make money, cities, towns and larger village conurbations and say sod off to all other communities. The current obligations on BT to provide a Universal Service will also need to be removed as it would be unfair to force such conditions on one supplier when they no longer have the benefit and responsibility of the network to support such a Service. OpenReach of course would still have the obligation but will struggle as it would have have limited power to force the service providers to deliver the Universal Service unless the Govt makes it mandatory to a far greater level than is applied by Ofcom on Talktalk and Sky today. OpenReach will probably also find investment to build infrastructure in areas where the telecoms vendors refuse to play in any material way and so will park all their vans in the financially sound areas (won't be able to move in some towns for their vans) and smaller towns and villages will screwed.

The Govt will then shout and scream but as the "MARKET" is the key to ecomomic success, etc. the companies will simply tell them to get stuffed. Of course the Govt could legislate to resolve this as an issue but one can imagine the response they will get from the big pension companies, Rupert and others who will complain that the Govt is overriding competition and trying to create a new nationalised industry.

1
2
Bluenose

Re: Without supporting Sky in any way...

But I note that young James is there as a non-exec and 21st Century Fox owns just under 40% of the shares. Since young James is also a director of 21st Century Fox I think Rupert baby has sufficient indirect control over Sky.

0
0

Britain beats back Argies over Falklands online land grab

Bluenose

Re: Get yer skates on Argentina!

I believe that the Chinese are supposed to be obtaining a number of Chinese FC-1/JF-17 "Thunder" fighters (according to the Express back in February). According to the same source they are allegedly amongst the "most advanced fighter jets in the world" although having read some background on them I think the answer is that they are small medium priced car (with Argentinian number plates) which a few extra Typhoons and improved long range ground based radar would probably find relatively simple to manage.

0
0
Bluenose

Re: Local control

I think the problem is that the Argentinian govt would prefer it if the islands where given a AR country code or that the code was fk.ar. The fact that the islanders have been given a code without the permission of Argentina undermines the Argentinian legal claims as it shows the the islands are not subject to the control of Buenos Aires but are allowed by Britain to exercise their own political and economic will without interference.

1
0

'Why don't you buy from foreign sites?' asks Commish, snapping on the gloves

Bluenose

Yet another waste of a politicians time

Doh, why don't people buy from shops in other countries.................. because 99 times out of 100 the ordinary person in the street has no clue as to the name of the shop they need to go to. If I want to buy electronics I go to Maplin, ebay or Amazon. Why would I go and search around the internet to find the name of a couple of shops in Germany, France or any other country?

Perhaps if politicians had a clue about real people they would realise that people buy from those companies they know and mainly trust. For example how many people buy from John Lewis because of its well established reputation? People don't buy from foreign shops because in the main they have no idea who they are and if you don't know who they are how do you type in their URL?

The other side of the coin of course is that for international trade most of the business will generally flow more and more towards those companies that have international reputations and those will be companies like Amazon, Baidoo and others who use their massive purchasing power to undercut national web suppliers.

0
0

Didn't the Left once want the WORKERS to get all the dosh?

Bluenose

Captialism got rid of Racism!!

What a brilliant article, here is someone explaining how free market economics got rid of racism, shame it is, like football in many respects, a load of balls.

Racism is an attitude that still exists in football and can be found every day just by looking at the industry: from the kids in South America and Africa who are exploited by the Capitalists in order make money from their possible sale (Carlos Tevez was only the start of an industry where players are owned by agents and touted to clubs for money). Then you have the chants and attitudes of Italian fans to black players or the comments by both Spanish and Italian managers about the number of black players. It soon becomes clear that just because a black guy is paid the same as a white one, racialism is still prevalent in the football and industry.

More importantly, I am keen to find these Captilists who magic up the spades to sell to potato farmers. The only capitalists I can find are those who need workers to do the work whilst they provide some money. The problem is that the Capitalist uses their financial power to exploit the workers who are more important to the creation of wealth than those who simply move money around. As many coal miners would point out where it the wealth creation in using children to mine cheap Columbian coal to sell in Britain and other parts of the world?

3
6

Did NSA, GCHQ steal the secret key in YOUR phone SIM? It's LIKELY

Bluenose

Re: Bloody teenager

Whoever down voted you is obviously a West is Wrong/Baddie fan. Of course other spy agencies are doing this and they probably won't think twice about actually killing people to get the information (or did Litvinienko die of natural causes) or giving them some money to buy the information (might be cheaper than hacking in but leaves someone to tell the tale so revert to former point).

Back in the 80s when Terry Waite and co were all locked up in cells in Lebanon, someone kidnapped a couple of Russians. When this was discovered the KGB identified the perpetrators, captured their family members and threatened to shoot them unless the Russians were released. Hey presto prisoners released and no need for years of negotiations.

The Western spy agencies are not white than white and I disagree with a lot of the things they say they need to do, but compared to the intelligence agencies of Russia, China, Pakistan, India and most other countries I would say they are probably the whitest of the white amongst their brethren.

2
11
Bluenose

Re: The Five-Eyes-Of-Sauron are Legalized Criminals...

Sorry you missed some players of your list, what about FSB and the spy agencies of every other country in the world? Do you really believe that only the 5 Eyes have done this? Do you really think that criminals have not also sought to get this information? In many ways your post is symptomatic of this idea that only a small group of countries is doing this. Such short sightedness is incredible when one looks outside of the local national borders at the people dying daily in Ukraine, Tibet, Thailand, Africa as a continent and pretty much every other war torn place on Earth.

In this world knowledge really is power and every country is determined to have that power which means that we are all under threat not from the US or the UK or even Australia but by every country with a functioning intelligence service, so please add India and Pakistan and pretty much every other country in the world to you list.

1
9
Bluenose

Re: Any chance of clarification...

Do you have evidence that the activities to undertake these steps were unauthorised? I am pretty certain that they will have the necessary legal sign off to obtain this type of material. Remember the Security agencies of any country are not directly bound by the laws of the land to the extent that the national governments have given them a specific objective to achieve using techniques and activities necessary to the achievement of the objective.

Someone downloading tv/music or any other copyrighted material for their own use without agreement from the seller or approval from their government is theft.

0
14
Bluenose

Re: Does anyone still think this is only about terrorism? ...Its just too big a dragnet...

You're making the same mistake that everyone makes, blame the 5 Eyes members. What about China,Russia, North Korea, South Korea, Israel, Iran and all the other countries in the world with a semi technical literate intelligence service? The fact that Western democracies refuse to control in any material way their media outlets allows this type of story to come out. Meanwhile journalists in other countries are prohibited from publishing similar stories (to the extent that someone has not been killed before telling them) on risk of death or because the Govt controls what they print.

Billions are threatened by this but not because of the 5 Eyes members but because most intelligence services are doing it and those that aren't well they want to.

4
14

£100 MILLION poured down drain on failed UK.gov IT projects - in just ONE YEAR

Bluenose

Re: Government contracts

Government would have provided the contract and refused to negotiate on any of the terms.

0
0
Bluenose

Re: As a new start up...

Or you could simply apply to join one of the many Govt frameworks that are out there: G-Cloud, Network Services, Digital Services, Technology Services, etc. These are all designed to allow small companies to get their foot on the ladder of Govt. tendered work. Of course you will have to sign up to all the T&Cs but then most small companies never let an onerous contract term stop them from bidding :)

0
0
Bluenose

Re: Basically...

You must see some odd Govt contracts then since I deal with them daily and every contract I look at has clauses in that allow the customer to claim for actual loss if the supplier is late in delivery or does not deliver the services to specification. In fact I recently tried to amend one framework where suppliers does not get paid for any work performed if they are late in delivery by more than a fixed number of days. Govt would not even return the work products that were provided even though they had not paid.

Oh and by the way the reason there are no penalty clauses in UK Govt contracts is because under English Law you cannot seek a penalty in a commercial contract. Only damages to put you back in the position you would have been in had you not entered in to the contract and those clauses in Govt contracts are comparable with the IT industry norm for contracts.

0
0

'Tech' City hasn't got proper broadband and it's like BT doesn't CARE

Bluenose

Re: BT in GB and AT&T in the US

Of course they want to suck every penny out of the infrastructure, it cost them (or in BT's case the British taxpayer) hundreds of millions if not billions of pounds to implement that infrastructure and will now cost billions to upgrade it. The whole purpose of capitalism is to maximise the return from an investment in order to earn a profit and create the capital needed for future investments. Dumping an infrastructure before it has paid for itself or created the capital to replace it is a dumb idea.

In fact it is almost as dumb as a politician demanding that BT provide a service to their constituents. Why should BT have to be told what to do, if it believes it can maximise its profits by providing services elsewhere then that is its right as a private (although shareholder owned) company. If the politician really wants to be able to dictate where business invests its cash and seeks its profits then nationalise the company so that you have the right to make that demand.

1
1

HMRC fails to plan for £10.4bn contract exit... because it's 'too risky'

Bluenose

Re: Fraud Vs Incompetence

Only certain companies can bid because only certain companies can afford to accept the unlimited liabilities, bureaucracy, prevarication and constant change of requirements that goes with bidding for such a contract.

The people from the Internet world are employed and look at what a good job Martha Lane Fox did before she left. The remainder all work for Digital Services and they are doing a great job on the Government portal and various "Catalogue" sites that Govt customer are supposed to buy through these days.

And of course in all the commentary against this article no one has mentioned networks, firewalls, Govt required security lockdowns, the exceptions to those lock downs and all the other stuff that is needed to be in place before you can even start to build the application.

The change in value of Aspire would appear, based on an August 2014 article, a result of the most popular game in the Public Sector, buy A and then introduce change after change, after change, after... ad infinitum.

Finally, I would love to see the Internet world expert explain to the Dept how they can take their solution built on mainframes and written in ancient languages (like Cobol and Fortran) and easily convert them with a few lines of HTML code in to a brand new solution. In reality what they need is someone who stops them changing their mind about the functionality they need, when they need it and why imposing MI5 level encryption rather than the type used by Banks is a bad idea. Those are the people the Public Sector need but they are also the type of people politicians hate because they stop you implementing stupid ideas and policies by telling you how much it is going to cost.

0
0

Then there were 3: Another UK mobile network borged ...

Bluenose

Re: Wrong logic

Considering the limited scope of BT's plans for FTTC, it is more probable that they will only get a few thousand additional small cells and all of them will be in large urban conurbations. Us poor "country" dwellers will have to stick with Vodafone 3G or what ever other company sticks up a mast but doesn't bother extending its LTE to them.

0
0

Cheer up UK mobile grumblers. It's about to get even pricier

Bluenose

Re: Seriously?

But then again you could go and ask the same group about EU legislation and most of them wouldn't be able to tell you what EU legislation was the cause of the issues.

Most people are ignorant about the EU and believe whatever simple arguments are given to them because it is to hard to understand the complexities. More people believe that the EHCR is part of the EU than believe in Father Christmas.

That said I doubt that anyone supports UKIP because of mobile phone charges.

1
0

EU copyright law: Is the Pirate Party's MEP in FAVOUR of it?

Bluenose

Getting access to authors proved difficult?

I must admit I found the statement from the report that getting access to individual authors and other creative types was difficult. The fact that the people who speak on behalf of these people are also businesses with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo is a concern to me. How do we truly know, both the members and the recipients, that the case being put forward by such bodies is unbiased and correctly reflects the views of those whose work should be protected? Does the PRS actually seek input from its members in order to respond to questions from people like this MEP or do they create their own version of the truth as they see it?

Personnaly I think the report as reported here appears to be reasonably well balanced and attacks a few issues that I think need attacking for example the fact that if I buy an e-book I get only a license to use not ownership of the book. This limits my rights, versus those in physical goods space, to sell on something I no longer need or to loan it to someone else. Perhaps I should stick to buying the physical and ignore the electronic world, not least because the actual savings achieved are minimal if I am not a big purchaser of music or books or even DVDs.

3
0
Bluenose

Re: Double edged sword

So everyone should sell at the lowest possible price and then we can all live on $1.50 a day like the people in the rest of the world. Sounds fair enough of course it will put paid to the products that are developed in rich countries as they cannot to recruit people at $1.50 per day for some reason.

There will always be an imbalance between the cost of goods in under developed economies and those in developed economies, not least because of the exchange fluctuations that exist between economies, £1 in the UK is equal to Euro 1.3 today but maybe only Euro 1 tomorrow.

Economic control also drives up the price. The luxury good markets love China and other countries where the use of money is controlled by fixed exchange rates and limitations on peoples ability to travel. They are the countries where luxury goods sell for the full price whereas in the developed economies they sell below that price because people can go elsewhere to find it cheaper.

Nothing will ever be sold for the same price all around the world apart form U2 albums from Apple.

4
2

UK.gov prompt payment promise is POPPYCOCK - NAO

Bluenose

Whose fault is this?

The following is taken from the CCS model contract (framework agreement) which is used as the basis for all current Govt framework agreements including IT and is publicly available on the CCS website:

23.2.1 The Supplier shall ensure that all Sub-Contracts contain a provision:

(a) requiring the Supplier to pay any undisputed sums which are due from the Supplier to the Sub-Contractor within a specified period not exceeding thirty (30) days from the receipt of a valid invoice; and

So the Framework that suppliers sign requires them to include this in their contracts and the clause goes further insisting that the Supplier tell the Govt when they have not met the 30 days limit and gives the Govt the right to publicise this failure and still this is an issue??

The problem here that the NAO really needs to highlight is that Govt Contract Managers do not enforce the contracts they sign and CCS waste time putting clauses in to contracts that they never enforce. Perhaps if Civil Servants did their job things might change.

0
0

HP breaks for Xmas week - aka 'staff hols' - source

Bluenose

Re: Exactly, makes sense

You must be American, in the UK 4 days does not equal 50% of vacation

0
0

The police are WRONG: Watching YouTube videos is NOT illegal

Bluenose

The PR department said "may"

And therein lies the issue. It "may" be criminal dependent on the wording in the Terrorism Act 2006 if you regard You Tube or any other media site on which the video has been made available as passive and that therefore the act of transmission is initiated by the person who clicks on the play button for the video. As the police wish to stop people viewing this (and not necessarily for criminal purposes but for the protection of the public in general) then they may "choose" to interpret the law in such a way. As the PR wonk said, it is all down to interpretation.

It is important to remember that the police are not only required to respond to criminal incidents but to act in such a way as to protect the general public from the possibility of crime. By interpreting the law in a particular fashion they may well be able to restrict or prevent people from doing something criminal. For example by planting the suggestion that watching a certain type of video may be illegal they may be able to prevent young knobheads from circulating the link as a joke or windup or even threat ("grass us up and this is what will happen to you") which is according to the Act a crime. One only has to look on line at the idiots who pose with guns or the money from drug deals to see some of the idiots that the police have to contend with or even worse the drunks who piss on war memorials while their mates film them.

I am not friend to the police having seen members of my family suffer from their stupidity and desperate attempts to justify large sums on investigating non-crimes but at the end of the day they are a very thin line responsible for protecting a lot of people and have often given their lives in undertaking that duty and it appears to me that they may, given a more favourable view of their actions be seen as trying to prevent crime by implying that an innocent act could be interpreted as a crime.

1
2

Pentagon hacker McKinnon reinvents himself as SEO guru

Bluenose

So not just the rich and famous

are able to avoid taking responsibility for their action. Or does he count as "famous" now?

0
3

Microsoft's Euro cloud darkens: US FEDS can dig into foreign servers

Bluenose

why would the Irish know?

If the warrant has been served on Microsoft in the US on the basis that Microsoft controls Microsoft Ireland then the obtaining of the data would be an internal activity which would be out of site of the Irish courts. Unless the specific individual knew that a)they were being investigated and b)that the warrant had been issued so at to be able to seek an injunction from an Irish court then the Irish would have not involvement in the decision to hand the data over.

1
1

UK.gov's Open Source switch WON'T get rid of Microsoft, y'know

Bluenose

Re: Of course it won't get rid of MS

'I've no evidence to support this, but I suspect the vast majority of users don't use Macros and other fiddly bits in their day to day ops (we certainly don't) and wouldn't notice the difference.'

Does this mean that OO and other ODF based products are now capable of tracking document changes and presenting it as markup? That was the biggest problem that we had in my old company and why a lot of people didn't use the ODF products, they could not support the monitoring of text changes in documents which in organisations which collaboratively work on them is a bit of bind. Of course the move nowadays is to collaborative document editing in the Cloud which while clever is not always an effective use of people's time.

1
5

French authorities take lead in grilling Google on 'Right to be Forgotten'

Bluenose

Hmm Interesting Position

"Following widespread concern from digital civil liberties groups, who believe that profit-making companies should not be making judgments about what is in the public interest at all...."

I assume that these people obviously also disagree with the newspapers and other media outlets all of whom determine what is in the public interest when deciding their editorial policy. Of course it could be argued that Google is not making such a decision as they only provide the link to another publisher who has already decided that publishing the information is a matter of public interest (well at least at the time they published it) therefore in reality it is the requestor and not Google who is determining whether or not something is in the public interest by asking for the link to be removed on the basis it is no longer in the public interest.

Perhaps people should stop and think this whole thing through a bit better than the judges who still think Androids are called Marvin and act pretty miserable.

6
0

Seeking LTE expert to insert small cells into BT customers' places

Bluenose
Alert

On the other hand

Is this how they plan to overcome the costs of deploying fast broadband to the expensive users , by deploying LTE wireless routers in the home and doing away with fixed line communications in their entirety?

0
1

'Unsolicited texts' outrage: Man fined £4k for DPA breach

Bluenose

How to stop PPI calls & SMS

Banks & Govt agree that no claim for PPI made by a third party on behalf of an individual will be dealt with but that the Bank must contact the individual directly (with their information being provided by intermediary to the Bank for free) to determine if compensation is payable.

Thus the individual claim will still be dealt with but the pariah firms who rip people off wouldn't get a penny

7
0

Days since IBM last reported revenue growth: About 810

Bluenose

Not all shareholders.....

Demand their pound of flesh from IBM.

The bigger issue from my perspective as a shareholder is that the board's incentive scheme for the directors is focussed solely on increasing the dividend to shareholders. This means that the directors don't care about whether the company grows in financial terms only whether they can generate sufficient free cash to pay the shareholders and earn themselves huge buckets of dollars.

I think that this focus on returns to shareholders is driven by the directors and has nothing to do with the demands of Wall St. IBM's directors are in this business for one purpose alone, to make as much money as they personally can at the expense of the staff and the company.

6
0

Page:

Forums