that nobody has told MI5 about IM...
(Paris because at least she has a fucking clue!)
19 posts • joined 7 Mar 2007
AC wrote re. ThinkBroadband:
"Tick the Detailed Output box before clicking on the Start button. It downloads then uploads a 0.19 MB file, thence deciding what size larger files should be for download and upload."
Just tried that -- it downloaded a 5.7MB file and uploaded a 1.1MB one and informed me that I'm getting 5.3Mb/s from my 10Mb/s connection.
Shame that I get around 9.3Mb/s every time I download from n***gr**ps!
VM could presumably help matters by hosting a Speednet server within the VM network?
"We've not signed up with Phorm to snoop on your browsing. Yet."
Webwise is offensive, intrusive and offers no advantage to users so how come it's taking VM so long to evaluate?
Perhaps because they'd love the extra income if only all the fuss would die down?
(Paris, because she can spot a good shafting without a lengthy investigation too.)
re: Judicial Review? Anyone to step forward?
Recommend you read the (end of the) relevant Phorm thread on the CableForum website: http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated.html
You'll find support, advice and probably others who'll be glad to work with you to launch the legal challenge.
Thanks for taking a lead!
Will it be possible for users to identify Phorm-selected ads?
If so, could an Adblock filter be written to *highlight* those ads?
And if that came together, how long would it take to devalue Phorm if [a large number] of VM/BT/TT users clicked on every Phorm-served ad whenever they were fortunate enough to see one?
Every ad. Every time.
Just wondering, like.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019