A Consuming Experience: internet

Showing posts with label internet. Show all posts

Saturday, 23 October 2010

Phone, mobile, internet, pay TV provider - get your refund, never mind ways to leave 'em!

It's bad but sadly not surprising to hear that when UK consumers change their mobile phone, fixed line telephone or broadband or even pay TV (eg cable TV and presumably satellite TV) service, the comms service provider doesn't always repay the customer for any credit amount due - eg advance line rental payments, or promotional credits.

In fact the total unclaimed money owed to UK consumers was at least £10 million over the last 2 years, according to UK comms regulator Ofcom.

All this is because you can get stung for two lots of fees (from old and new provider) at once, during the "overlap" period when your contract with your new provider has started but the one with the old provider is still within its termination period, usually 1 month.

An example may help. Say you pay BadProvider £30 in advance monthly on the 1st of the month for use of their service during that month. If you terminate with BadProvider on the 2nd of the month and start using ShinyNewProvider's service, you're obviously not using BadProvider's service after the 1st, but you've already paid BadProvider for it in advance.

So from the 2nd to the end of the first month you move to ShinyNewProvider, you're paying BadProvider for rental for the 2nd to the end of the month (even though you've stopped using it), and you're paying ShinyNewProvider rental for their service for the same period too.

You're paying twice over, unless BadProvider refunds you for the advance payment you made on the 1st, for the period from the 2nd to the end of the month ie 29/30 (assuming 30 day month) of the amount you paid on the 1st of that last month, or £29 in this case - which can be a lot when you add up the customers who don't get a refund!

Obviously the amount of credit due will be less if you terminated later in the month, etc, and some people may actually owe money to BadProvider at the end of the contract, depending on their usage, but this is just to illustrate with a concrete example.

(I'm ignoring any possible twists from the monthly payment date being on a different date from the "contract month" that the payment is for!)

After Ofcom's intervention, the good news is that they've produced a guide to help you claim your outstanding credit when you move to another communications service provider.

The guide has a handy table showing some big providers and what you need to do. Just to summarise (please check the guide for full details), the current position on outstanding credits is:

BT	Automatic refund of any credit, whatever the amount.
O2	Automatically credits amounts over £20; you have to ask for it if less.
Orange Post Office	Automatic refund of credit, whatever the amount.
Sky TalkTalk (including AOL and Tiscali) Three	You have to contact them directly to arrange a refund, but they should now be giving you "improved information" about your outstanding credits.
T-Mobile	Will now automatically refund all outstanding credit. This suggests they didn't use to!
Vodafone	Automatic refund of any credits "for all customers who pay by direct debit" only. If you paid Voda by another method, you won't get a refund unless you specifically request it from them.
Virgin Media Virgin Mobile	The press release contradicts the guide so I'm going by the guide. I wish Ofcom were clearer about this, it's not going to help consumer confusion. Virgin Media - automatic refund for amounts over £1. It doesn't seem to matter when you terminate the contract. Virgin Mobile - for amounts over £1: - if you terminate before 28 days, automatic refund - if you terminate after 28 days, you have to request a refund (but from December 2010 the refund will be automatic). I guess you need to contact Virgin Mobile to get a refund of any credit under £1 - the paper doesn't say.

The bad news? There isn't mention of lots of other providers include broadband internet providers.

"Ofcom thinks that industry best practice should mean that all providers refund customers the outstanding credit they are owed automatically, and without any further action needed by the consumer."

Well frankly that should be legally compulsory for all providers, not just "best practice".

More help on termination process?

To help customers with switching providers another area, Ofcom should look at and maybe provide a guide on the termination / cancellation process.

Asking for your MAC or PAC number does NOT always automatically terminate your contract (broadband internet and mobile, respectively).

If they are given a MAC or PAC number by your new provider some providers seem to take that as notice of termination, but others don't, and may keep on charging or debiting you unless you actually contact them as well to say you're ending the contract.

I repeat, asking for a MAC or PAC isn't enough. You need to check with your provider as to their termination or cancellation procedure and at the right time tell them officially that you're cancelling their service, and (if they're not listed in the table above) also find out what is their procedure for reimbursing any credits to you and follow it.

And you might also try (if possible) to time when you give them formal notice of termination such that you minimise the period of "advance rental" anyway.

Saturday, 12 June 2010

New Windows XP security issue - fix for non-geeks

For those with Windows XP or Windows Server 2003 there's a recently discovered security issue involving Windows Help and Support Center which could allow bad hackers to take over your computer. For this one, though, you're OK if you're on Vista or Windows 7.

Microsoft said "This vulnerability could allow remote code execution if a user views a specially crafted Web page using a Web browser or clicks a specially crafted link in an e-mail message." (See also this Microsoft blog post.)

How to fix the vulnerability

This zero day vulnerability doesn't seem to have been exploited yet, but for non-technical readers, the easiest way to protect your computer is to use this automated hotfix from Microsoft (direct link). That page also contains a link to undo or disable the fix as and when a permanent security update is produced and rolled out by Microsoft.

It's more of a workaround than a fix, and be warned that doing that may block innocuous activity, e.g. some of your Control Panel links may stop working. (You could undo the fix temporarily then re-enable it when you're done, perhaps!)

Incidentally the way this issue was reported by a Google security researcher (full details were published before a fix was found) has raised some hackles at Microsoft in relation to "responsible disclosure" of security vulnerabilities.

Friday, 7 May 2010

UK broadband - changing ISPs

An online survey by Opinium for comparison site Moneysupermarket.com in February 2010 showed that, disappointingly, of people requesting a MAC to enable them to change their broadband provider 34% experienced delays, which could cost broadband internet users as much as £143 a year. 82% of broadband users didn't change provider in the past 12 months.

It does pay to shop around. UK comms regulator Ofcom have recently accredited Broadband.co.uk for its broadband internet price comparison calculator, under a scheme launched by Ofcom because Ofcom had found that 65% of internet users would be more likely to shop around if they had information to calculate the cheapest supplier based on usage, with 66% being more likely to trust an accredited price comparison website. See Ofcom's consumer FAQ.

Not many websites have been accredited by Ofcom so far - the others include BillMonitor (for mobile services) and SimplifyDigital (for digital TV, landline and broadband services). Oddly, Moneysupermarket.com themselves don't seem to be accredited yet.

It used to be a nightmare to switch providers and Ofcom kept an eye on things for a while with their Own-initiative enforcement programme to give effect to General Condition 22 (Service Migrations), even fining Prodigy, but unfortunately in November 2009 they stopped as they thought things had improved enough.

Personally, while I have a lot of time for Ofcom, I think they shouldn't have stopped monitoring migrations, and the recent Moneysupermarket survey seems to confirm my view. Ofcom's light rap on the knuckles to Pipex was too lenient given the way Pipex had deliberately treated customers who tried to leave (I was one of them, Pipex told me they'd treated my request for a MAC as a notice to terminate my broadband service completely, not to switch! - and others had even worse experiences than me, just check out some of the transcripts of phone calls with Pipex in the Ofcom Pipex notification.)

See also How to switch your DSL broadband ISP: easier procedures, with teeth for Ofcom, and Ofcom's webpage and video, below, on how to choose the right ISP deal, and consider complaining to Ofcom if you have problems switching:

I think more still needs to be done by Ofcom to protect consumers. I am planning to change ISPs but I don't dare to do it yet because I can't afford for something to go wrong with the switch these next few months. I'm only going to ask for my MAC in June or July as I can survive if an attempted switch goes pear-shaped in August, but I can't risk the migration going wrong in the near future as I absolutely need working internet at home.

Thursday, 6 May 2010

Dating & mating: stats on what women & men want - & why?

There's an interesting blog post on Broadstuff on data from the OK Cupid dating site showing how perceptions of the desirability of men & women change over time, & also on the traits that women & men want in the opposite sex. See the detailed OK Cupid analysis which covers a lot more - fascinating.

Women are viewed as most desirable in their early 20's, men in their late 20's (there's a graph in the post). Big drop off for both genders after that!

The Broadstuff post also discusses possible reasons for these preferences, and mentions research showing that the qualities women think most important in men are, in order: commitment, social skills, resources, attractiveness and sexiness. (Not sure what the difference is between "attractiveness" and "sexiness"?)

Interestingly, for what men prefer in women, the list is exactly the same - except that attractiveness moves to the top of the list, i.e. men consider attractiveness in women most important, while women feel commitment in men is the most important - no surprises there!

Also see:

Tuesday, 20 April 2010

Online shopping - get refund of delivery charges too

If as an EU consumer you order goods from an EU website or indeed by mail order or telephone sales, and you decide you don't want it, under the EU Distance Selling Directive you are entitled to return it and get back the price you paid - as long as within 7 days after receipt you tell the retailer / supplier / vendor that you don't want it (with some exceptions, e.g. you can't return perishable goods like food or cut flowers, or travel-related things like plane tickets).

You have to cancel (i.e. exercise your withdrawal rights) within that time period in writing, but email to their official email address is fine.

Out-law now reports that the European Court of Justice has recently said in the Handelsgesellschaft Heinrich Heine case that not only do you have the right to get the full purchase price back, you are also entitled to a refund of the delivery charge, postage costs, courier fee or whatever they've called it. I.e. what they charged you for the original sending of the goods to you.

What it costs you to post or courier back the goods to the seller is a different matter. It's up to your home country's laws whether you can get a refund for your costs of returning the goods.

In the UK, the seller doesn't have to refund you for return postage, although some decent retailers do it for the sake of customer goodwill and brand reputation (most will refund your expenses for the return, e.g. your postage costs, only if there was something wrong with the product).

So, consumers unite - if an online shopping website doesn't refund you for the original delivery costs, demand it! (But be prepared to pay the full return costs - though they can't charge you an admin fee or restocking charge).

Also note:

you can cancel within a "cooling off period" of 7 working days beginning with the day after the day on which you receive the goods; most retailers tell you it's just "7 days", which is wrong, and probably designed to make consumers think it's too late to return something when it isn't
if the seller doesn't give you certain info required by law, you have even longer than that to cancel. Most people don't know this. It could even be as long as 3 months and 7 working days after receipt!
but the cancellation right doesn't apply to e.g. downloads of software, movies or music
if you cancel you obviously have to look after the goods properly (take "reasonable care" of them) till they are collected or you return them, but they don't have to be returned unopened. Equally obviously, you have to package them sensibly so they don't get damaged in the post, and you may have to pay for them or get sued if you didn't look after them or pack them properly and they get damaged etc.
strictly, it seems you can even make the seller collect the goods from you if their original contract didn't say you have to return the goods if you cancel! (most website terms will, of course) - but it's safest to return them, reasonably well packaged, even though you have to pay the return costs, as then you're no longer responsible for the goods
if there's something wrong with the goods, you still have your normal consumer rights e.g. if they're faulty or defective and the fault only shows up after the 7 working days, and they'll have to pay for your full return costs then (especially if the fault cropped up in the first 6 months after you bought it)
the retailer has to reimburse you within 30 days beginning with the day on which you cancelled in writing. Yes, even if they haven't received the goods back yet
if the seller tries to say you can't get a refund unless you've returned the goods within X days, actually they shouldn't. It's the cooling off period that counts. See the OFT guide referred to below.

More info:

UK OFT guide for businesses on distance selling - useful for consumers too in terms of what retailers are and aren't allowed to do.
EU Distance Selling Directive
UK Consumer (Distance Selling) Regulations 2000 and amendments

All this is of course only general info, and up to date only at the date of this post; this isn't legal advice etc, and you ought to consult a suitably qualified lawyer about your own situation if you have an issue.

Monday, 29 March 2010

Broadband speeds: Ofcom may act on Code

I've banged on for a while about UK broadband speeds often not matching up to the speeds advertised by ISPs ("headline" speeds) - they normally advertise the maximum possible speed achievable (I'm tempted to say "by someone living on top of the telephone exchange in perfect conditions"), which is not necessarily, and indeed probably not, the average top speed that most internet users would experience in practice.

To date we've only had a voluntary code of practice on broadband speeds for ISPs, from December 2009, by which "ISPs who have signed-up to the Code commit to provide information to consumers before they enter into a contract about the maximum broadband speed they can expect on their line, and about the factors that will affect their actual speed. "

Recently, UK comms regulator Ofcom carried out a mystery shopping exercise (full PDF report by Synovate), and it may come as no surprise to many of us to know that they've found that ISPs aren't fully complying with the Code of Practice. Ofcom noted, "although more information on broadband speeds is now provided by ISPs following the introduction of the Code^(-2-), information is still often not sufficient to allow consumers to have clear expectations about the broadband service they sign-up to."

From Ofcom, I've emboldened and italicised bits:

"The research found that the majority (85 per cent) of telephone mystery shoppers were provided with an estimate of the maximum speed available on their broadband line before signing up with a provider.

However, almost half (42 per cent) of these shoppers had to prompt providers for their speed late in the sales process.
In addition, three quarters (74 per cent) of mystery shoppers were not informed that their actual speed was likely to be below their maximum line speed…
The research also showed that shoppers often received a wide variety of different estimates of the maximum line speed from different ISPs for the same line."

What explains the big differences? Well, Ofcom found that:

ISPs use different methods to calculate and present line speed information
Some ISPs often gave estimates for maximum line speed as a wide range (such as "10-20Mbit/s") - which could lead customers to expect much higher speeds than actually received.

As a result of the mystery shopping, Ofcom means to tighten the Code to ensure consumers are given adequate information about their broadband service when making purchasing decisions. "This involves working with the ISPs to ensure that they are able to give more consistent and accurate information on line speeds." More specifically, Ofcom said they'll:

"work with ISPs to agree a consistent and accurate way of calculating and presenting access line speed information and amend the Code accordingly;
amend the Code to require ISPs to commit to giving the access line speed estimate early in the sales process, i.e. before asking the customer for bank details or a MAC. Currently the Code only requires ISPs to give this information before completion of the sales process.
find ways of ensuring that ISPs give consumers better information on why and how actual broadband speeds may be lower than headline speeds.
explore with ISPs whether it would be appropriate to add a new provision in Code which allows customers to leave their contract period without penalty if the access line speed received in practice is significantly below the estimate given at the time of signing up."

Their press release said, "Ofcom expects to be able to agree changes to the Code by summer 2010. If agreement cannot be reached with ISPs, Ofcom will consider whether it is necessary to introduce formal regulations." And Ofcom indicated they'll also do more mystery shopping to check if there are improvements in compliance.

Frankly I don't think that's good enough; I previously pointed out the key shortcomings of the voluntary Broadband Speeds Code, which I thought wouldn't actually help consumers much, and it's disheartening to be proved right.

It's also disheartening for consumers that Ofcom are only considering working or exploring things with ISPs - why not involve consumer groups like Consumer Focus, or indeed the official Communications Consumer Panel?

I feel that consumers should be able to terminate their contracts immediately if they find the speed they actually get is significantly less than what they were told, rather than be stuck for a year on speeds much lower than they were sold on. The Ofcom Consumer Panel (the former name of the Communications Consumer Panel) had pointed that, and other issues, out as long ago as 2007.

For what it's worth, see Ofcom's advice for consumers on broadband speeds. More to the point, you might consider taking part in Ofcom's broadband speed tests, and even raising the argument that there have been unfair commercial practices on the part of the ISPs.

Friday, 5 March 2010

Help test UK broadband speed claims

UK regulator Ofcom seek volunteers to help them test how far real broadband speeds experienced by consumers actually match up to broadband speeds advertised by internet service providers. This will be in partnership with SamKnows, who say:

We aim to provide the UK with reliable and accurate statistics on the actual performance of broadband connections, and not just the speeds that they are advertised as being "up to".

If you want to help out and you meet the requirements, you can sign up to register your interest.

The test will involve your getting a glamorous "‘White Box’ that sits in the consumer’s home, which does not monitor the home network or web traffic, but focuses solely on the relevant ISP’s network."

From their similar research in 2009, Ofcom found that the average ‘up to’ headline speed in April 2009 was advertised to be 7.1 Mbit/s - but the average broadband speed obtained by users was in fact only 4.1 Mbit/s (megabits per second) i.e. just over half the advertised speeds.

Ofcom have produced a guide on issues and factors to consider when you're looking for a broadband deal.

Remember, not only may actual average speeds be significantly less than the "up to" speeds ISPs advertise in big bold letters, but also the usage allowance may not in fact be "unlimited" even though they say it is - see my blog post on ISP and mobile networks' top speeds, "unlimited" usage & consumer rights.

Wednesday, 3 March 2010

Consumer tips when shopping: your rights

Not tech-only, but helpful and not everyone knows these tips, which apply to shopping in person and for item 4 online or by mail order or telephone - from the good ol' UK BIS, so mostly relevant to UK consumers only, I've added the bits in italics:

1. Not my style – some might be surprised to learn that you do not have a right to a refund if you simply decide you don’t like what you have bought.

2. Six month rule - if you make a claim for a repair or replacement of faulty goods within six months of purchase it’s actually up to the retailer to prove that the goods were not faulty when sold to you. [Note: this may not help if you're buying from outside the EU, or indeed possibly even the UK.]

3. No receipt required - you do not need a receipt to obtain a refund for faulty goods. However, you may be required to show proof of purchase with a credit card slip, bank statement or cheque stub.

4. Online is fine - if you buy goods on the Internet you also have the right to a seven working-day ‘cooling off’ period from the date you receive the goods, with the right to a full refund regardless of the reason for return. [Note: this applies to phone orders or mail order too, but it only works when you're buying from a retailer in the UK or EU. You need to tell the seller within 7 days of receipt that you want to return the goods, but you don't actually have to return the goods within 7 days, as long as you do return them ASAP and certainly within 30 days, safest to take that as 30 days after the order or at most 30 days after receipt. Buying from outside the EU e.g. the US is another matter, and much, much riskier for EU consumers - I'm planning a different blog post on that as I've been burned myself.]

5. Returning it to the retailer - when you buy goods, your contract is with the retailer not the manufacturer and you should always go back to the retailer to make a claim.

6. Fit for purpose - the goods you buy from a retailer should be fit for purpose and of satisfactory quality. If they are not, you are legally entitled to make a claim for a refund, repair or replacement. [Again, you will likely encounter problems in practice if you're buying online from outside the EU, e.g. the USA, even if the goods are faulty.]

7. Act quickly - if goods are faulty and you wish to claim a full refund you must return the goods to the retailer within a reasonable period of time.

8. Smarter sales shopping - you are not entitled to a refund on sale goods if you were made aware by the retailer that the goods were faulty or if the fault was obvious. Also, if you change your mind about liking the goods you aren’t entitled to a refund.

9. Nearly new –you have similar rights to a refund, repair or replacement as you do for new goods but remember that the law doesn’t expect second goods to be of the same quality as new ones.

10. Stick up for your rights – if the retailer is failing to acknowledge or respond to your consumer rights, in the England and Wales, you can file a claim (under £5,000) with the small claims court.

See further this info on your rights when shopping online. For help with problems - Consumer Direct.

Monday, 22 February 2010

Seesaw online TV: review - "TV on demand" will take off

Seesaw from Arqiva is a new video on demand (or VOD) service which lets you watch previously-transmitted TV programmes from (currently) the BBC, Channel 4 (4od) and Five, streamed over the internet to your computer. You can't download anything, it's streaming-only.

Unlike BBC iPlayer and similar offerings from other channels, it isn't restricted to "catchup TV" for recent shows - it went live with over 3000 hours of content, mostly archive TV from the last decade, so there's a wide selection of programmes you can view on demand, from The Apprentice and Little Britain to White Teeth, even past series of Doctor Who from certain years:

No account or login is required. It's free, funded by ads (can't skip, can pause) - note there are ads even for the BBC programmes you watch via Seesaw because the commercial arm of the BBC, BBC Worldwide, did a deal with Seesaw.

If you click on the picture while an ad is playing, it'll pause the playback and open another tab to take you to the website of the advertiser, which is a nice touch. You can easily go back to the previous tab and resume playing.

Seesaw's service is still in beta currently so don't expect perfection, but it does pretty much what it says on the tin. It can be jerky of sound and pic though, depending on the time of day - when lots of people are on the Net, it's not very good, but it's the same with other VOD services like iPlayer.

You don't have to download any software or login, but it's designed only for Firefox, Internet Explorer or Safari on Windows or Mac computers (but from my testing Chrome in Windows works fine, though Opera doesn't).

It's certainly convenient to be able to search several channels' programmes in one place, in case you can't remember which channel broadcast a particular programme you missed.

In terms of content, although Press Association releases say that Seesaw have deals with "independent production companies who produce content for ITV", there's no ITV channel listing. So I'm not sure about ITV content. If they could get all the main free-to-view UK channels or indeed other channels on board too, Seesaw will be one to watch, pardon the pun.

Other similar free online TV services have more channels, on the non-UK front anyway (see my FreeTube free online TV review).

Finding programmes to watch, and watching

As you'd expect you can view by Channel (e.g. just BBC programmes). Or you can view by Category (Comedy, Drama, Factual, Lifestyle, Entertainment, Sport - dunno why it's not alphabetical).

Within each view, certain shows are automatically Featured, but you can browse programme titles alphabetically:

Alternatively you can search, and it cleverly offers suggested titles in a dropdown as you search:

But it doesn't offer searching by name of actor, programme description etc. Hopefully that'll come?

It shows all episodes for the year for a given series and you just click the name of the episode you want to see, then click on the picture to start it playing.

It will "turn the lights down" to heighten the viewing experience. But you can always turn the lights back up:

The controls are as you'd expect to pause, fast forward/rewind with the slider (except during ads), turn subtitles on or off, mute, volume up or down, etc:

And there's a full screen option (Esc to exit):

For trivia buffs

Seesaw uses the technology produced by the ill-fated Project Kangaroo, started up between the BBC, ITV and Channel 4 to set up a joint video on demand service.

Kangaroo was killed off when commercial broadcasters objected and the Competition Commission said No, so Seesaw's parent company Arqiva bought Kangaroo's assets for £8 million in 2009.

Any points to note?

I've mentioned above it works on common browsers on most computers.

It seems to slow down my computer a lot but that could be a coincidence.

Also, there's a bug in that in Internet Explorer 8 (but not Firefox). If you go to full screen view then back to normal size, the controls move downwards "below" the picture so you can't get at anything except the Pause icon; clicking to start the show playing again fixes it, but obviously then you have to watch it again from scratch:

Seesaw's terms say you can only use Seesaw if you're a UK "natural person (i.e. not a company or another business entity)" over 16. So non-UK people can't use Seesaw, though I don't know how they'd detect geospoofing which is pretty easy to do these days.

Aside: I've never known a company that could watch TV or surf to a site, except through the medium of a human being, so I don't see the point of banning companies. Do they mean, you can't use it through a company internet connection, or at work or college? If so, why don't they say so? But then I'm weird like that, I actually like to look at Terms and Privacy policies.

Their use of "High, Medium, Low" in the controls (only visible when you first start playback) might confuse some. That's to do with the speed of your Net connection, if you've got a fast internet connection pick High, else pick Medium or Low. I think they should use "My internet connection is: High speed Broadband, Normal broadband, Dial-Up" instead. At least they will provide a warning if you ought to switch to a lower bandwidth option.

There's the usual "Not suitable for under 18" type of age verification which is easy to just click on:

But they do offer a form of parental control, again probably not too tough for kids these days to get round.

The future?

In future, Seesaw intend to offer premium content which must be paid for, e.g. high profile US dramas.

AP quotes Seesaw's controller John Keeling as saying:

"This way of watching television will be on TVs from this year. One of the fastest selling electronic goods is an HDMI cable which connects a laptop to the back of the TV and bingo, you're online and your TV has become an enormous monitor for your laptop."

I think he's right. As I said in my iPlayer review, if you can hook up your computer to your TV, obviously that'll be much more friendly on the eyes and family in terms of watching stuff. Some computers can be connected directly, some need converters. It's easier to do now than it was. If there's demand for a howto blog post on this, please let me know in a comment.

However broadband speeds, or perhaps Seesaw speeds, do need to be a lot faster, more reliable and less jerky if consumers are going to migrate to watching TV over the internet; otherwise, it can be too painful.

I like the semi-interactive feature where you can click on an ad that's showing, to go to the advertiser's webpage. Now that following a consultation last year the UK will be allowing product placement on most TV programmes (to help commercial broadcasters whose revenues are suffering in the downturn), there's scope for Seesaw to set it up so that a viewer can click on the image of the product to go to the webpage for that product!

I must admit I've gone to As Seen On TV before because I really liked a jacket or whatever that I'd seen on a TV show, but I've never been able to find the item I wanted. While on the one hand one doesn't want to condone blatant commercialisation of everything, there's still room to do this sort of "click to buy" thing and stay on the right side of the line.

I predict it'll be coming on YouTube, anyway. Convergence, here we come!

(First heard of via the IAB ).

Friday, 19 February 2010

Children: 10 internet safety tips for parents & guardians

EU cyber-security agency ENISA have just published their suggested 10 internet safety tips for parents and guardians, to help preserve the security and privacy of children online.

Here they are in bold, with my notes added (in italics):

Communicate with your child about his/her Internet experience. Discuss the importance of Internet safety and teach the basics

See point 8 note 2, below.

Set house Internet and mobile phone rules

Note: see also ENISA's 17 golden rules on mobile privacy and security - not specific to kids, but still useful.

Educate yourself on the latest threats facing children online and have a good understanding of how your child spend his/her time online

Note: See Get Safe Online (UK), Stay Safe Online (US); and in more detail Ofcom's survey of online protection mechanisms
The EU do have a Safer Internet Programme including assessments of social networking sites.
Recently the EU assessed the child-safety of social networking sites against their Safer Social Networking Principles. You can read their summary and individual site-specific reports on the safety of individual social networking sites like Bebo and Facebook.

Keep the computer and any other Internet-enables devices used by your child in a common room. Install firewall and antivirus software

Note: on antivirus, etc, see some suggestions on free antivirus software & other software for online protection; and Microsoft have since released for free their Security Essentials antivirus.

Ensure parental control, parental consent, age verification and content lock are activated. Ensure barring process and filtering are in place

Note: it's a truism that many kids can easily get round these; nevertheless, they're worth considering. Thinkbroadband offers some brief info on parental controls etc; and see the more detailed Privacy Rights Clearinghouse guide.
Be warned - it's one thing if a parent monitors their children's activities online, but quite another if the company selling filtering or monitoring software collects and harvests info on what your kids do on the internet, and sell it to marketers. And they've done that.
Parental control software has also been known to block innocuous sites while letting unsafe sites through, and they may also censor sites based on the religious or political views of the software's proprietor.
You can tell I'm not a big fan of parental control software. I say, teach your children critical evaluation skills, bring them up to be sensible off line and online, and let them explore and learn - see my notes to point 8, below.

Analyse content providers’ policies and their compliance. Check contractual flexibility (e.g. how to delete an account) and use of automated moderation filters in conjunction with humans

Note: hmm, this might be tough for non-lawyers to do given sites' (deliberately?) long and obscure terms and policies!
It would be good if a site were to analyse policies etc and publicise the summaries. Rather like what the EU have done, see point 3 note 3, but on an ongoing basis. Anyone? Parents might be willing to subscribe.

Check your child’s page or profile on a regular basis. Track your child’s spending online carefully
Tell your child to never use full names and share passwords. Prevent your child from sharing personally identifiable information (e.g. address, telephone number, name of school, sport club).

Note: that should be "or" share passwords, shurely.
Child psychologist Dr Tanya Byron produced an excellent review for the UK government on children's use of the internet and videogames. From a 2008 speech of hers:
"Kids socialise via technology. Our culture is now so risk averse we don't let kids out into the streets - the radius for children has reduced by 80% since 1977. They can't go outside so they go online. They're tech savvy but haven't got the skills of critical evaluation to keep themselves safe…
Policing is pointless: Australia tried to set up blocking at ISP level, and within 24 hours a 14 year old boy had got round it by guessing his mother's password! It's not about prying, or even warning kids about predators online (in fact cyberbullying is their biggest fear); it's about supervision and thought.
Parenting is an online not just offline task. Parents need to talk to their children, make sure that they think, that they know who they're talking to: prepare their children to understand the risks, give them the tools and critical evaluation skills to check the reliability of sources and that people are who they say they are."

Ensure your child understand what it means to post photographs and any other content on Internet

Note: see note 2 to 8 above.

Educate your child by explaining never to arrange to meet in person someone he/she first met online. Warn your child about expressing emotions to strangers directly online.

Again, see note 2 to 8 above. It's really about good parenting, not installing software.

Saturday, 13 February 2010

Online shopping: delivery - the last mile is still an issue, are solutions in sight?

I've gone on and on for ages about one big problem with internet shopping - having to be home to receive the delivery.

One advantage of Amazon Marketplace, which enables independent retailers to sell their goods via Amazon, is that once Amazon have verified a customer and their alternative addresses e.g. their workplace, orders from a Marketplace seller can be delivered to the customer's address registered with Amazon if the consumer wishes - including the office.

Unsurprisingly, the Interactive Media in Retail Group, a UK trade body for e-retailers, recently said they'd found that:

"the major area for parcel delivery businesses to work on is giving consumers a day or time as to when they will receive their goods, rather than them having to guess when they will come… when you ask consumers what they want to make deliveries more convenient, nearly eight out of ten are looking for a specific delivery day, and seven out of ten are looking for a time delivery".

So it's good that UK parcel carrier DPD have developed systems to enable them to offer 1-hour windows for home deliveries to customers of retailers like Three, Dixons Direct and iwantoneofthose.com:

"Shoppers who buy from retailers shipping with DPD can receive a free SMS or email giving them a precise one hour window in which the driver will arrive. And, if the recipient of the SMS knows that they won’t be in to sign for the package, they can reply and arrange for DPD to deliver on a more convenient date."

To me, that's still not good enough - a 1-hour window is no use if it's not a window of the consumer's choice - I'd rather a 2 or 3 hour window I could pick when I know I'm going to be in. Having to arrange with work etc to be at home for a 1-hour window I can't control isn't much better than having to take half a day or a whole day off.

Back in December 2009 startup Shutl launched to much fanfare at LeWeb09 and supposedly, by connecting retailers with local same-day courier companies, gives online shoppers the choice of receiving delivery:

"within 90 minutes of purchase or

a one-hour time window of consumer's choice", apparently at almost any time, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Now that sounds much better from a consumer viewpoint. However, they say they're only trialling in London currently and, unlike DPD, haven't announced which retailers are using them, which suggests it's not many. The idea is great but they'd better get a move on…

It's interesting that according to IMRG and Internet Retailing, health and beauty retailer Boots is considering letting other pure play and multi-channel retailers use Boots' 2600 stores as pick-up points for their online shopping customers. Much more convenient to be able to collect your order from the Boots store nearest your work or home, e.g. at the weekend. (And Argos, anyone?)

However, I'm surprised that credit card companies haven't reached deals to "register" work addresses so that consumers can use their credit cards to get orders delivered to their offices, or that supermarkets like Tesco's which do offer short delivery windows of the customer's choice haven't made arrangements with retailers to make their deliveries for them (as I've suggested before).

Things still have too far to go on the delivery front, in my view. Online shopping has grown and grown, but it still has much potential, and it's about time fulfilment channels were sorted out properly to enable that potential to be met.

Monday, 1 February 2010

Carnival of the Mobilists #209

Thanks to WAP Review for featuring my Mifi mobile wireless broadband review in Carnival of the Mobilists #209.

Check out the Carnival for a round up of other blog posts on things mobile during the last week!

Friday, 11 December 2009

Sing karaoke at home, free - LuckyVoice offer

I reviewed home online karaoke service LuckyVoice a while back. You can belt out your fave songs in the privacy of your own home with your friends, or indeed just solo, as long as you have a computer, broadband internet connection and Web browser (and, if you wish, mic and home stereo).

They've recently revamped their site and are offering free unrestricted access to all 6750+ songs on their site for a whole week. You do need to have the free Adobe Flash Player version 10 if you haven't already got it.

To get the free full access for a week from now:

Sign up free for a LuckyVoice account if you haven't got one.
Then sign in to your account.
Click "Buy singing time" (top right, outlined in red):
In the Voucher code box at the bottom of the page, enter the code LUCKYYOU and hit Submit:

They've also changed their pricing model so that you can either buy song credits (as you'd think - buy blocks of number of songs you can play, from 50 songs to 500 songs currently), or buy by time period (i.e. unlimited singing within a period of 24 hours, 1 month etc up to 1 year).

You use up a song credit if you go 30 seconds past the start of a song, so if you start playing a song and decide you don't like it you can save your credit if you skip it quickly enough (see the LuckyVoice Help pages).

What's more, they've given users 25 song credits which will start to be used up after the week's free singing. And there's a clever new rewards system whereby you can earn even more free song credits:

"Creating an account gets you 25 credits.
If you sign up for our monthly newsletter, you gain 25 credits.
After you've sung your first 10 songs, you gain 5 credits.
When you reach 30 songs sung, we'll give you another 10 credits.
Once you've reached your singtenary (100 songs), you get 20 credits.
If you invite a friend to sign up through the site, and they create an account, you get 20 credits.
The first time you love a playlist, you'll earn 5 credits.
When another singer "loves" your playlist for the first time, you gain 5 credits."

A very good way to reward heavy users.

But for those who are a tad reticent about their passion for 60's musicals, what's this about playlists and other people loving yours? It seems playlists you create are public by default - but never fear, you can click "make private" underneath the playlist to, well, make it private. And you can still share a playlist with selected friends by clicking Share under the playlist's name.

I've not gone through the new site with a fine tooth comb yet e.g. to see if they've implemented the other suggestions in my original review, but it looks good, and seems more user friendly than the original version.

Enjoy your free sing!

Monday, 19 October 2009

Carnival of the Mobilists #196: handsets, learning and lucre

ACE is again hosting the Carnival of the Mobilists this week, for the second time.

Regular Steve Litchfield from AllAboutSymbian has a post on The Top 5 Phones that aren't actually IN the Top 5, aka "Why choosing a phone in 2009 means choosing the one that sucks the least"! This is a comprehensive review of a big batch of current mobile phones - Nokia N97, Apple iPhone 3GS, HTC Touch Pro 2, Palm Pre, Nokia N86 8MP, HTC Hero, Nokia E75, Samsung i8910 HD, Nokia E71, Nokia N96, Nokia N95 8GB, Nokia E55, Blackberry Bold, Nokia E90 and the Nokia 5800. Whew! His conclusion is to counsel patience - and wait for the Nokia E72, Nokia N900, Nokia N97 mini, Nokia X6, HTC HD2 or Motorola DEXT and other qwerty Android phones (though not the Sony Ericsson Satio with its dire battery life).

Moving on from hardware to applications, several detailed reports on the Handheld Learning Conference 2009 ("about learning using mobile and inexpensive access technologies") come from Mark van 't Hooft:

Handheld Learning 2009, Day 1 HHL Festival
Handheld Learning 2009, Day 2:Where Is the Handheld Learning? Part I ("Funny (or ironic) part, there wasn’t a whole lot of talk about mobile or handheld learning, as the session titles indicate (Reflections on Learning, Creativity and Innovation, Games for Learning, Social Media for Learning). Maybe a sign of things to come??")
Handheld Learning 2009, Day 2:Where Is the Handheld Learning? Part II
Handheld Learning 2009, Day 3, Research Strand and Grand Finale

But let's face it, there's less focus on learning and more on lucre: the increase in attempts to monetise mobile is evident from the many posts around this issue.

Mark Jaffe of MobileMandala discusses Ten Reasons Why Mobile Advertising Has Not Reached Its Potential, suggesting 2 marketing approaches for the mobile phone grounded on consumer behaviour and usage, based on the mobile phone being a medium of immediacy and a medium of relationships.

From advertising to m-commerce, in Amazon Raises The Stakes; Making Mobile Shopping Less Hassle, Alfred deRose of MSearchGroove, noting Amazon's recent launch of their Mobile Payments Service (Amazon MPS), points out the importance of easy payments to mobile commerce, providing 3 do's and don'ts for integrating online and mobile businesses.

Appstores are a potential source of revenue that's getting serious attention following the success of Apple's iPhone appstore.

Ajit Jaokar of Open Gardens expands on the opening talk he gave as the chair of the CTIA mobile appstores event in San Diego, entitled From Intel inside to appstore inside and the rise of the Mobile Grandpas.., on what he calls the trend towards the "Appstore inside" which he thinks could be truly disruptive.

Franciso Kattan has 7 recommendations for developers on How to Merchandise Your App 2 Years Ai (after the iPhone), again following CTIA, summarising key lessons shared there for developers wanting to go mobile.

Jose Colucci of Mobile Strategy raises some questions on Mobile Applications and Loyalty, looking at comparative statistics for application downloads and usage of apps by Blackberry and Apple iPhone users - can they be believed, and what do they tell us about the differences between Blackberry and iPhone users?

Finally, a short post by C. Enrique Ortiz from About Mobility On the rise of open mobile takes the view that "the Android market is going to explode globally becoming a predominant mobile platform together with the iPhone".

That's it for this week's Carnival - look out for next week's Carnival, which will be hosted at TamsS60.

Tuesday, 4 August 2009

DIY home surveillance

I've no time for my own reviews at the moment, but I'd like to point you to Terence Eden's reviews (with pics) of some interesting British gadgets:

Y- Cam - wifi / Ethernet camera you can monitor via your mobile phone e.g. Blackberry, emails you photo on detecting motion, about £150.
Peepr - free, lets you broadcast to the web or mobile via your computer's webcam and mike, tries to send you SMS text on detecting movement.

Not CCTV exactly, but they sound ideal for personal home surveillance. Even if you have a burglar alarm for home security the ability to keep an eye on your home, literally, and to even take and save photos, can't be a bad thing.

See Terence's review and pics.

Monday, 27 July 2009

Online shopping comparison sites – shipping costs must be included

UK internet shopping web sites should probably (whether they knew it or not) have had to indicate shipping / delivery costs (as well as VAT) clearly on their sites since May 2008, under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations.

That particular point was made in guidance from UK government departments on computer online sales, rather than something that was explicitly spelt out for all web shopping sites, but it makes sense or is at least good practice, given the general law banning “unfair commercial practices” which should have been implemented across the EU in 2007 – the UK were late, and a few others are still behind (more on unfair commercial practices in the UK; and see which countries have banned unfair commercial practices).

A recent Google Base blog post mentioned that “on July 16th the German Supreme Court ruled in a lawsuit concerning shipping costs in comparison shopping results” and that Google were working on a solution for German merchants.

Now I’ve not been able to track down the judgement or any other news on it yet, but I strongly suspect that the court must have ruled that internet price comparison sites are required to include the full total price when serving up results comparing products from different websites, i.e. sales tax and shipping charges as well as the base price.

And I wouldn’t be at all surprised if that’s because of the Unfair Commercial Practices laws in Germany.

As soon as I've more info I'll report back. Does anyone else know any further details about this case?

Update: now see the German court's press release (in German) on the German supreme court ruling of July 16, 2009 - I ZR 140/07 (LG Hamburg, decision of 16 Jan 2007 416 O 339/06 & OLG Hamburg, decision of 25 Jul 2007 5 U 10/07 Karlsruhe, 17 Jul 2009), kindly sent to me by someone whose translation of the press release is as follows:

"Under the price regulation, a dealer is obliged to indicate whether in addition to the final price of the product there are additional delivery and shipping costs. Where appropriate, he must indicate their amount or the way in which they are calculated. This information must be clearly assigned to the advertising as well as easily identifiable and clearly legible or otherwise be made clearly perceptible.

With prices in price comparison lists, consumers must be able to see at a glance whether the price includes shipping or not. The significance of the price comparison, which is usually displayed in a ranked list, depends on this essential information. Under these circumstances, it is not sufficient if the consumer is only informed about additional shipping costs at the moment he consults the details for a specific product."

While that’s just a local German case, it may be influential elsewhere in the EU. And there's no reason why it shouldn't apply as much (if not more) to shopping sites as to price comparision sites. If the result of the case is to make European retail websites as well as price comparison services (aka shopping comparison sites or price engines) pull their socks up and provide complete easy to find pricing information in terms of the actual total cost to the consumer, making it easier to compare the total cost of purchase, that can be no bad thing for consumers.

Tags: unfair commercial practices, consumer protection from unfair trading regulations, consumer rights, consumer law, Improbulus, A Consuming Experience

Thursday, 23 July 2009

Adobe Acrobat – Flash / PDF security issue

Heise Security report a critical security vulnerability relating to Adobe Flash Player, Adobe Reader and Acrobat 9.x for all platforms (Windows, Mac, Linux).

Your computer could be infected by a PDF trojan (Trojan.Pidief.G) and taken over by malicious hackers if you open an affected PDF document or visit an affected website whether via Internet Explorer or Firefox. (Flash is used for lots of things on the Web like displaying YouTube and other videos.)

The exploit hasn’t hit many people so far, but you don’t want to be one of them!

Until Adobe release an update to fix this (hopefully by the end of July), to protect yourself:

Don’t use Acrobat / Reader! There are other free PDF readers around like Foxit (though even they get security holes from time to time; but they’re less of a target)
Use Firefox / NoScript when browsing. Then Flash content will be blocked until you click to let it through. Needless to say, click at your own risk! And you still have to beware when opening downloaded PDF files.
Delete or rename the authplay.dll file, which in Windows is usually located at C:\Program Files\Adobe\Reader 9.0\Reader\authplay.dll or C:\Program Files\Adobe\Acrobat 9.0]\Acrobat\authplay.dll (I didn’t have it at all on my computer, oddly). This deletion may make some PDF files crash, but probably not many.

Note: you may need to get your computer to show hidden files first. In My Computer / Windows Explorer that’s Tools > Folder Options > View tab > Hidden Files and Folders – select Show hidden files and folders.

Disable Flash in your Reader, Heise has suggested (which is what I did, as I couldn’t find the authplay.dll on my Vista system). That’s done via Edit, Preferences, then Multimedia Trust; find the line Permission for Adobe Flash Player and select it, then choose Never from the Change permissions dropdown, and OK it. Here’s a screenshot for those who prefer visuals:

Wednesday, 22 July 2009

Vanish: self-destruct your Facebook posts, Webmail emails etc

If you’re privacy / security conscious and worried that once email or other data gets out onto the internet it’s there forever (usually even if you hit Delete on your own computer), then you may be interested in Vanish, a new open source research prototype (i.e. not yet bug-free), which has just been released by the University of Washington, so that what you say online won't come back and bite you someday!

How it works is, Vanish:

“can place a time limit on text uploaded to any Web service through a Web browser. After a set time text written using Vanish will, in essence, self-destruct.”

Note that it “wraps round” the sensitive text that you want to self-destruct, so it can be included in virtually anything displayed in a browser.

It’s meant to work with Facebook messages or Wall posts, Gmail (Google Mail in the UK), Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail, as well as Google Docs and (if you really must) Blogger posts, even chats and other Web services (Outlook too, see below):

“After a set time period, electronic communications such as e-mail, Facebook posts and chat messages would automatically self-destruct, becoming irretrievable from all Web sites, inboxes, outboxes, backup sites and home computers. Not even the sender could retrieve them.”

Normally I test stuff, often for months, before I blog about it in a full review. But the documentation for this is pretty detailed and well written, complete with video even (embedded above), and I think the concept is brilliant, so I’m doing a quickie overview / review about it now.

So, you'll know I’ve not tried it in depth yet, but I think it’s well worth trying – it’s free so you’ve nothing to lose (but bear in mind it’s beta or even alpha).

I’ll of course blog more about it once I’ve had a proper go, if I've more to add.

How to use Vanish

You need to:

install the Vanish software (Java 5 minimum required, EDIT: the Vanish team say it's been tested on Linux Fedora Core 7, Ubuntu Jaunty, Mac OS X 10.4+, Windows XP, and Windows 7) and, to use it on the web, install their Firefox plugin, or
you can just try Vanish online without installing anything.

What it does is to convert the text you select into a jumble of encrypted characters. Paste that text into the email you're going to send, Wall post etc, instead of your original text.

You use Vanish (e.g. via the Firefox plugin or their online page) to do that conversion, and also to convert jumbled text back to plain readable text - see the documentation (scroll down that page a bit).

Note that it doesn't do the conversion automatically - you have to manually select text, convert, copy / paste etc. And the online version UPDATE: (not tried the installed version yet) doesn't let you choose the expiry date / time, it's fixed at about 8 or 9 hours maximum.

UPDATE: another limitation is that you have to be online to do the conversion, either way (though the self-destruct happens automatically even if you're offline), and as it uses Vuze BitTorrent peer to peer systems on the internet, it may be slow if your ISP throttles i.e. slows down BitTorrent traffic. Also, at the moment you can set the expiry time only when using Firefox (in the extension options - Tools, Add-Ons, under Vanish Firefox Plugin choose Options, it's the last option. And currently the expiry is in 8 or 9 hours max generally, so no good for something which you want to remain readable for say a week or a month. Or even a day. But the technically minded, if they control a machine permanently connected to the Net, can increase this period.

I tried it with Thunderbird / Outlook emails too and it worked, at least to convert and then translate back the emails via copy/paste using the online converter.

Whether the self destruct works with Outlook etc I don't know, given the emphasis on the Vanish site on web services, but I'll try it again after the expiry period. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work in common email clients. UPDATE: that'll larn me to do a quick post. Yes you can copy / paste the converted text into Outlook, Apple Mail etc and according to the team it'll work.

It goes without saying that the person you send Vanish email etc to has to have Vanish installed on their own computer, or use the online Vanish service, in order to read what you wrote. And then do stuff manually.

I can't quite see people doing that, especially with Facebook Wall posts, but you never know..

The biggest usability point to me is that their instructions saying "Use http://vanish.cs.washington.edu/ to read this message" should link direct to the online translator or installation page (with the link to the online converter at the top of that page, not the bottom), in order to encourage people to use it - else many consumers may just not bother, or give up.

Comments / warnings

Remember, it’s only a prototype, so you use it “as is” without warranty, and please report any bugs you find.

And they warn about making sure that draft emails etc haven't been saved.

Also, of course, there may be regulatory "data retention" requirements to preserve certain electronic communications, so if you are obliged by law to keep stuff, I doubt you can get round it just by applying Vanish to your emails etc! (Though if the person who sent you email did that, maybe there's nothing you can do about it? Should you copy / paste the decrypted text and store it elsewhere anyway, if you're required by law to keep your communications? A different issue..)

My point is, if someone you send Vanish text to deliberately copies and pastes the unencrypted version before the expiry date, they'll still have a copy of the text. Vanish only guards against things hanging around forever accidentally, that's all I think it's meant to do; it won't work in the face of deliberate attempts to get round it. And the Vanish team acknowledge that too: but, as I said, that's not the purpose of Vanish. If secrecy / confidentiality is an issue, use encryption with e.g. PGP - ideally combine Vanish with PGP!

On a different matter, it's obviously still a prototype so not as user or non-geek friendly as it could be. See my point above about direct links for users. And maybe instead of using "Encapsulate" and "Decapsulate" for the menu items they could use "Wrap text" and "Read text". <- UPDATE: My bad, I based that comment on the screenshots, the plugin itself is now fine. But automatic conversion of the text on the fly would still be good.

But hopefully that'll come.

More information

See the Vanish overview which has other helpful links; for those interested, see also the full research paper Vanish: Increasing Data Privacy with Self-Destructing Data by Roxana Geambasu, Tadayoshi Kohno, Amit Levy, Henry M. Levy, and the source code.