Name the civil servants ...
... who operate the existing data repositories, and publish the data. Naming is often enough to hammer home the duty of care requirement when handling the public data. Get their skin in the game.
+1 for Chi.
122 posts • joined 27 Jun 2010
... who operate the existing data repositories, and publish the data. Naming is often enough to hammer home the duty of care requirement when handling the public data. Get their skin in the game.
+1 for Chi.
... I am going to work "up to" 40 hours. I expect my fixed salary to be paid no matter how many hours I actually work, of course.
@Test Man - completely agree. A CFO that doesn't have the CEO's number on speed dial, isn't a CFO. Duh.
@Enrico - containers are still more hype than reality when it comes to revenue processing work. Great fun to play with, if you have budget and time to play, but I haven't seen them doing any heavy lifting outside of the webby world of "here today, gone tomorrow" services.
I do agree that VMware needs a couple of new shiny technology idea things that last more than a few quarters on the price list, which we'll no doubt hear more about post September 7th. Hopefully.
Looking at the Powershell evolution since v1.0, you have to laugh at the broken bits for backwards compatibility. The PS team are boldly going forwards 'coz they haven't found reverse, or noticed the rear-view mirror.
An Oxford graduate who read History, then practised law for a few years ... what does he know about broadband technology? Who are the civil servants feeding him this information? Name them, and make them accountable for the spin their minister is offering.
Aiming for a USO of 10 Mbps will ensure the UK lives in the dark ages. Our government resolutely refuses to support communities like B4RN who *can* deploy synchronous gigabit fibre in rural areas.
Said it before, and I'll keep saying it ... based on the information the gubbermint chooses to release to us, we should scrap HS2 (cost £60Bn with 1.7:1 return) and give everyone a fibre to their home (cost £30Bn with 20:1 return).
But the gubbermint ignores its own figures and continues to remain unaccountable for that behaviour. No wonder folk vote against the political elite. There's little worth voting for, much to vote against.
... ... and those methodologies would have be be designed and invigilated by "non-vendor" folk to retain their credibility. Apples with apples, etc. etc. Seems simple, but vendors continue to pour honey into end user ears, ignoring glaring issues (features? ;-)) in many products. Disappointing that the market appears to support this behaviour still. I'd still pay more for quality, if it did what it said on the tin. I'm personally fed up with "lowest possible service level to meet price point" behaviour. Cloud services often stink of it.
Anyone got a link? Anyone heard any pricing? Show me the dark fibre that is now "available"? Pricelist?
Oink, flap, oink, flap, oink, flap .... >bang<.
I used to despair at these regular announcements from May when she was Secretary of State, punting the Snoopers Charter/RIPA legislation. I am no longer incensed, nor surprised, at the dismal lack of understanding of the subject matter. I console myself with the knowledge that we may indeed introduce such legislation, note that it is unenforceable, then either ignore it or repeal it.
The decimation of our financial economy is the primary reason that this nonsense will not prevail. The security consultants and knowledgeable crypto-folk, some of which comment here, are too few in numbers to make any measurable difference. The politicians play to the masses, who do not understand cryptology, or the risk this legislation presents to their freedom.
That is why I no longer expect any response from my MP Greg Clark, who returns mere "thank you for your letter" diatribes, with no indication of understanding of the fundamental freedom his party is attempting to destroy. Perhaps in his new role as Secretary of State for Business he may give more of a pooh. You know who I am Greg.
As I say to anyone who asks (I no longer offer this opinion without provocation on the RIPA subject), I would rather be poor and free, than rich and enslaved.
Go May ... go Rudd ... you are a comical farce in my eyes while you ignore advice from true experts in the pursuit of this nonsense.
Yep - 8 core sockets is the magic number, which if you go higher will cost you more in Server licence.
@gerdesj "SEWER VLAN" - Inspired.
I wonder whether this vote was as much a message to the political elite (UK and the EU, Brussels in particular), that lack of transparency, effectively showing contempt for the population that they serve, had reached the point where enough was enough.
A resounding clap of thunder/message has been delivered, if they were ever in any doubt.
The markets react to flatulence from any seismic event, and they get over it, eventually. Trump will be the next thing. They also react positively to good news, and good things. Let's create some. Those who continue to bray "we're doomed, it'll be misery forever" need to realise they are in a democracy, and democracy has spoken. Get onboard the train, and play the hand that democracy has dealt.
I am pro-EU, but utterly against Brussels' lack of transparency and accountability. I couldn't convince myself to remain complicit in the status quo political landscape. I helped send the message. Those who will remain in power, both sides of the channel, now have the responsibility of picking up the pieces and building something a lot better than the status quo up to 10pm on June 23rd. With great power comes great responsibility. I sincerely hope the politicians on the new project have an utterly different approach to their work than the lot that fought a bitter, negative referendum campaign on both sides. After many years of disappointment in our political leaders, we felt the need to send this message with the only weapon available to us - our vote.
Now lets get on with the work of building our governments and trading agreements far more openly and transparently than we did prior to yesterday. Opportunity knocks. Lets not be afraid of it.
... so that non-techies can comprehend how invasive and nasty this legislation is to our fundamental freedoms. Central to all this is the repeated failure of our government to manage the data they are able to retain about us (legally) already. Why should we trust them with more? In the absence of clear evidence of WHY they need it, with the onus on THEM to prove the need - not us to prove they do NOT need it, they should not be given the legal right to monitor us as this legislation demands.
And it will become clear that BT is treated "differently" because BT doesn't know how many Km of lit fibre it has, or won't admit how much it has ... this is differential taxation, creating an unfair market.
Some self-advertised "Architects" need to read the Ladybird Books before coming into work.
I weep for the abuse of the A word in job titles.
What's often worse, is when "the business" puts the E or A hat on and decides to design a system or outsource a technical service that they don't understand. Same faeces, different day.
You don't get it your way. You get it the SFDC way ... or you don't get the dang thing.
Why does our Gubbermint ignore their own figures on ROI and benefits for infrastructure projects?
HS2 is estimated by the DfT to deliver a benefit ratio of 2.3 to 1. For every £1 spent on HS2, it will return £2.30. The DfT paper is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/365065/S_A_1_Economic_case_0.pdf
Right. Providing FTTP to the entire country is estimated to deliver an ROI of approximately £20 for every £1 spent. DCMS commissioned the report here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/257006/UK_Broadband_Impact_Study_-_Impact_Report_-_Nov_2013_-_Final.pdf
Which project would you do?
Is our gubbermint thick, or do they just ignore information they don't like, or doesn't fit their political agenda?
Reality is frequently inaccurate.
It is copper.
The exchanges that are FTTC enabled always had fibre. Taking fibre out to the street cabinets does not miraculously change the customer premises equipment from copper to fibre. The CPE is still copper bearer over POTS. I wish the ASA would wake up to this and stop this illusion that we're all getting fibre.
Curious. Who amongst them cryin' ... "risky" is able to understand the risk?
If they'd gone with "one throat to choke" and "greater performance penalties" and better defined "KPIs" then I'd leave them with Fujitsu but they arguably cocked that up. Why not try something new ... and stop bleatin' about risk.
Ignoring the discussion around the training test data ...
How important is that 15% of missed "events", and what is an "event"?
@1980s_coder Which planet are you on, and which Three are you referring to? Not the one I've been with for 3 years. Best of a dismal bunch, based primarily on price. The "service" is universally poor.
government missing the point. I travel from Tunbridge Wells to London on the South Eastern railway service mainline. There are 5 locations "not spots" with ZERO signal (all mobile operators), forcing all data and voice comms to be dropped. This is a principal mainline route into London. Do you think this is counted in the 90%?
... charging so little the bean counter can't resist. I have only had disappointing experiences with Wipro. I've gone back a couple of times, and met the same service levels. They only exist because bean counters look at price before service quality, and aren't held accountable when it all falls down. If we were better at measuring service levels, companies like Wipro would have a much harder time in a free market.
Right now, they're doing very well ... that's down to us repeatedly giving them work, which they do badly, but hey ... it's CHEAP!.
Not everything is about money and power. Oh wait ...
Someone had to press "F1"
@msknight and ummm ... did they try:
"Remember to reinstall Windows as we can't help you diagnose why your internet isn't working until you've done that. My call plan says you have to. You might be using your computer for things we're not aware of, so you have to reinstall it. Really you do."
@Cynical Observer .... 99.9999% uptime as measured over the last 300 seconds. They made 100%, as no outages in the last 300 seconds.
Spin, without the detail. Lies, damn lies ...
the phrase "former monopoly"? Their carrier network will backhaul the beeb traffic and we'll all struggle with unreliable FTTC, except for the last 5% of rural folk who will never be offered FTTC from Openreach, cough, BT.
This is a monopoly. There is no other word for it.
@AC "So, you actually agree with the post that says the situation is the Quango's own making and not Openreach then?"
Yes. Absolutely. Openreach are doing what any self respecting private sector company with a monopoly position would do - maximise profit and retain market dominance.
@AC - "deliver faster broadband to as many people as possible for as little money as possible".
If you subscribe to "one chunk of chocolate today, rather than a whole bar tomorrow" then BDUK is what you want. Short sighted. I would have the government think strategically, beyond the next general election, in order to avoid wasting billions on dead end technology. OR owns and operates the network BDUK is funding - we are paying the BT shareholders to build their infrastructure. It has limitations no different to where we came from before FTTC. The fundamental limits of copper bearers have not been removed. FTTC has no future - it is a tactical option, with short term benefit. The technology deployed will not be reusable when inevitably we end up deploying FTTH in the future. Our government and BDUK is in denial by not realising this and thinking far enough ahead.
Scrapping HS2 and using that money to fund FTTH would do it.
@AC But you skipped over the essential point that the FTTC technology is DEAD END. It cannot be made to deliver what a fibre optic cable can, and will not provide internet to rural areas too far from cabinets. That was one of the primary goals of the BDUK fiasco. The BDUK framework was designed to make FTTC technology be the "only" realistic solution to the problem as formulated by the quango. This made Open Reach the only viable contender, with anyone else not owning last mile copper a competitor in name only.
The only sensible stuff to be rolling out is a fibre optic cable to every household - FTTH not FTTC- but that would decimate the BT Group pension fund, leased line business and PSTN line rental business. There ... I said it out loud. The elephant on the table is flatulent.
@Terry 6 - indeed. A FoI request should produce the business case, showing the savings over the other 2, 3 4, whatever options that were costed. It rarely does, as I experienced with the "commercial confidentiality" screen last time I FoI'd them regarding BT and the BDUK broadband money.
Seeing a good deal of the business case detail would help, as government IT hasn't got a great track record. It's our money after all, and I'm sure there are private sector clever cloggs's out there with time on their hands that could very well donate their knowledge to pointing out the holes in the contracts and saving us from a outsource pong fest. What does KCC have to lose by publicising business case detail? Unless there is something to hide? They should stop treating the public as idiots. Sure there are some, and equally there are clever clogs amongst them that can help.
@JimmyPage and when somebody else drops in some "extra bits" into the hoovered data they have on you, what do you do then?
You have precisely no proof you didn't go there, and they have the logs.
If you weren't monitored "by default" in the first place, this scenario can't happen. Privacy is an individual's right, not a right the government is required to grant, or authorised to take away.
... this is a Liberty vs Control debate. By foregoing a grown up discussion of the benefits of monitoring, we neither validate or reject the business case. We are wasting time considering implementation options with judicial oversight. Hearing those that request these invasive powers repeatedly provide hyperbole such as "we can't tell you, it's national security" is utter nonsense. In the absence of such public proof, and the associated business case our government should not be asking us to give up our privacy to them in this way. Through repeated data security blunders, our government has demonstrated an inability to manage our data safely. They have not earned our trust. Snowdon has provided evidence of how our government has indeed undermined our trust.
Why has Ms May not been held to account for her use of the draconian "because I say so" loopholes in the Telecommunication Act? She is a politician, not a member of the judiciary. Hold her to account.
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
... it will have O(n!) different licensing mechanisms. I mean seriously ... Priva-what? I'm keen to understand how this will be disseminated and whether profit or control will be evident, and exercised by a select few individuals. It has a name that stinks of commercialism.
Chaum has an impressive cryptography pedigree, with an equally impressive list of patents. Popcorn out, projector on ...
Let the 4% good times roll ... they are all guilty of negligence in maintaining their database, and are not being held to account. They should not be able to sell their database which we clean for them, at our intense discomfort when they cock up. A 100% fail for us when they get it wrong, is a 0.000001% fail for them.
... to assess risk. The Annualised Loss Expectancy calculation, although rough cut, would have prevented the acceptance of this risk. https://www.langtonblue.com/2015/03/information-security-budget-planning-donkey-tail/
The donkey was not harmed in that article, I am assured.
I'm sorry, but why should we listen to anything Osborne says about information systems security?
It's as if getting voted in suddenly endows politicians with years of experience and knowledge that they didn't have before they won an election.
Get some experts involved, not mouth puppets.
Any day now Theresa May will slam home the Snoopers Charter RIPA legislation, without a single shred of additional information on how the data helps track terrorists down. She will use the Paris horror and people's reactions to take away our freedom.
ISIS will be winning the battle if that happens.
"Anybody would think they didn't want to provide this service."
@AC - they don't. I called up and asked for FTTP at "any price" and they said "nope - never happening at your exchange". My exchange has had FTTC for 9 months now, so they have the bandwidth, just not the "will" or "desire" for reasons they are not telling anyone.
We need to wait and see what ridiculous proposition Osborne will propose in the statement.
HOWEVER, in one of my little Ltd companies I spend between £10K and £15K per year on IT equipment and services to build proof of concept infrastructure and educate myself. My clients reap the benefit of this, and pay for it in my day rate/fees. Would this be possible in the new world? Who knows.
Penalising my Ltd company by compelling it to pay PAYE and NI contributions on my client rate makes my investment in my knowledge unaffordable.
If Osborne's intention is to stop small companies from this kind of exercise, the rumours just need to be partially correct. But let's wait and see. There will be time to lobby and scream afterwards. I can't see myself voting Conservative after the debacle with the Snoopers Charter and now this. That means an abstention at the next election as there is nothing worth voting for. I'm a senior Security Consultant and Enterprise Architect. None of my engagements are below 6 months when changing the culture and approach of an organisation. Once changed, I hand the reigns to the guys who keep the lights on. My role changes the lights, once, hopefully.
I have already written to my MP (Greg Clark) warning of the decimation of the IT contracting industry if even some of the rumours are correct.
Only FTTP will catch us up with the APAC countries rolling out fibre. Anything else is folly. Peter Cochrane (ex. BT CTO) told our government this repeatedly before leaving BT, and they ignore all similar advice from "experts", preferring to fill BTs coffers and support dead end copper connectivity.
Scrap HS2, and replace it with a FTTP project the length and breadth of the UK. Done.
It is about time that civil servants and security experts who are spewing out these figures and business cases were named, to make them more accountable for the immense cockup that looms ahead. Their track record is abysmal and unlikely to improve. Why should we give them another bite at the cherry? Get experts who know what they are doing, and can build business cases based on facts, or STOP with the trying.
25% of production apps are CURRENTLY in the cloud.
30% of software testing is CURRENTLY in the cloud.
Where did you conjure up those statistics from? Your claims are as baseless as your statistics. Utter nonsense.
Name drop goulash. Middle Age crisis Chris? ;-)
"There's no indications of great wealth" ... with a dash of apostrophe horror.
If Dido hadn't gone on camera claiming that trusting the SMTP "From:" address was "ok", then perhaps the TalkTalk media engine would have a chance. But they let her do that, and deserve what they get as a consequence.
Geez - media really need to get their facts right, so that non-techies and techies alike are all happy to consume the goo they spew. As it seems to be right now, it all stinks.
Without actual facts, I ignore the headlines and media, as most of us probably should. Let them get fined, according to the seriousness of their cockup, decided by experts who have access to the facts. Mooing and bleating about it based upon media reports is putting us all back into the medieval ages.
... utterly pointless, guaranteeing the UK will end up as a 3rd world connected internet country within a decade. It's like aiming for failure, and achieving it.
Only FTTP has a future. I don't see Openreach ever aiming for that unless it is split out of BT.
It pains me to see individuals in government wield such power over matters utterly foreign to their experience in the real world. We should name the civil servants that advise the ministers, so we know where the commentary comes from, or the minister should state clearly that neither they nor the civil servants know diddly squat about the matter in hand and are "taking a punt" based on lobbyist incentives.
Right. That's going to happen. Almost makes me appreciate Mr Corbyn who might just say he knows nothing about something when that is indeed true. Almost.
There's nothing to spend it on. By giving BT the BDUK money, maintaining their monopoly, anything that isn't FTTC remains esoteric or too expensive. None of the Kent County Council ISPs could offer me FTTP when I called them up and asked them. FTTP is the only solution with a future, and far too expensive or just not available.
The fact that Ed Vaisey calls this voucher campaign a success underpins why people are disillusioned by politics in general. Utter nonsense, tantamount to lipstick on the pig that is BDUK support of FTTC as our future.