FaceBook still letting us down

I connected to some random site today and was annoyed and alarmed to see my basic FaceBook details (photo and name) appearing on the site. I had no prior connection to the site and didn't wish one.

In the past, it has been reasonably simple to prevent this type of thing, but because its a way for bussiness to make money Microsoft and other have been making it "Harder and Harder" to keep yourself "private" (or, as they will sell it, easier and easier to share).

I never wanted to really be a part of FaceBook but I have friends that did and I am there friend and joined for there sakes. I think I should leave for mine.

Tired of shit search results

I am so sick of wading through piles, and piles of shit to find what I am looking for. Google, have been quite good for not having too much "shit" but these days, everyone seems to have jumped on the Google waggon and succeeded in bogging it down with crap (though to be fair, the results are still superior). I feel sorry for Google really, they have some very good results generally, but they are searching "everything" and it seems sometimes theres more crap than good out there.

Its reached a crux point where I'm getting so sick of repeaters, advertisers, buzz-worders, re-posters, spammers and all the other web-based scum that is currently from the POV of search results pervading the internet (I don't resent mis-information even as long as genuinely delivered... its deliberate misinformation to support advertising that hacks me off).

Heres my list of "Waste of time Web Pages" for everyone else to add to their firewall block list (using httx so I am not linking to these **** and upping their hit count):

Site(s): httx://www.thebigresource.com/, httx://excel.bigresource.com/
Reason: Content Repeater (zero added value, lots of added ad's). Worse still they don't even repeat all the damn content, just the first post! >.<

Site: httx://www.eggheadcafe.com/
Reason: This website, whilst providing some usefull links, often justs forwards and repeats content from other sites. Better than most sites, this site does not provide enough value to be worth your attention (e.g. one is better looking for the source of its information).

Site: httx://www.canbal.com/
Reason: Content repeater.

If I could get enough people willing to sponser me, people who are simply looking for a search engine with ethics and veted content we could all bring our heads together and build a search engine whos content is 100% vetted and free of all the types of web-shit which makes searching painful (or maybe someone can post me a link to an existing one which is free from crap).

I can see all the things which makes this proposition tricky. It could never be an "exaustive" search engine with billions of pages indexed. It might be a "quality" search engine with 100's of thousands of "reputable" and "vetted" pages which provide "information" and "what it says in the tin" advertising (if any).

I'm a dreamer with this, and I know it.. the likely outcome is that shit=money. Whilst people are willing to pay to have their crap crammed down the throat of the consumer in any way (and whilst its possible to make money from this) I can't see it going away.

Give the internet back to Achedimia I say... they might sometimes be a bit stiff, but they deliver!

Personal Lessons

Reciently I've been having lots of signal issues with the o2 network which used to be fine here. After a few days with no improvement, I rang up to complain and was told there was a fault and it was down to be repaired.. good news I though, though frustrating still (there was a 72 hour turn around to repair, that sounded promising).

Waited a few days (well over 72 hours) and still having problems (though prehaps they were less exreeme? very subjective). The basic issue is that the signal kept dropping out, going from full strength to no strength to full strength (even though I wasn't even moving).

So, I try calling back, but line quality too bad. So I just decide to email. I get a reply back which was pretty useless as it more or less said "maybe its your phone" a definitive "the network is fine in your area, we suggest a phone replacement" would have been better.

Anyway, this isn't really why I am blogging today.

I was talking to the love of my life (and for those following my blog you will know who this is) and the phone starts cutting in and out again. She had said she was going to have some food soon before and I thought to myself (though didn't think much) I should suggest we go since the signal is awful and your about to eat. The way it came out was "I should go and let you eat since the signals bad". I regretted it the moment I said it, it seems simple enough but heres what the problem is:

1. It gives the impression that I wanted to end the conversation (wrong impression)



2. It furthur gives the impression that I am giving up on talking to her because of an inconvinence. That I am "giving up easily" therefore, that I might not care all that much (very wrong impression)



3. It did not consider her feelings in the matter of going or staying. It in fact did not consider anyone. It was inconsiderate.



4. If I had thought for longer, I would have realised that I really didn't want to go. To suggest going was supid and against what I infact wanted. To admit that "I should go, given the problems but would stay and only go if it cut out" was infact what I wanted and what was right.

So, as soon as I said this, she didn't sound very impressed (tone of voice). I don't blame her, she had gone to the effort to call me on a known bad line :(.

I was basicly a fool about it. I tried texted first then tried calling back but, obviously, why would she answer? Things will be ok, I know, we've been best freinds for long enough. I just need to store this up in my mind, keep it in my memory and not let myself do something this stupid again! :( Since right now I am sitting here missing her and wondering if she is now talking to someone else who won't go just because theres some line issues (and in the end alot of this is about me worrying about being perfect, because she is so perfect to me). I know she doesn't work like that really, but I think every girl (everyone?) does on some subconsious level.

Anyway, hopefully lesson learned. I'll just have to miss her until we can speak again :(. Also hope that she will want to "bother" to speak to me after it appeared I didn't bother to speak with her when it was a bad line (this is me being hard on myself now... I just miss her :()

Facebook getting out of hand

Now I'm normally not really bothered with FaceBook. I have some friends on there and it just works. Lately though I am so sick and tired of the crap they are pulling.

This post is for all the people out there who are really hating the way facebook is going. I would have done a nice bulleted list of points in complaint on FaceBook itself.. but *sarcasm* Oh wait!

"I can't now make any formatting using line returns with my replys to messages on Facebook!".

*ed. Thought this was systemic but just seems to be with replies. I can see possibly why (for text replies) but FFS only limit me if I choose a text reply.

This is the kind of "crap" FaceBook have been pulling lately changing what was good about FaceBook into whats good for FaceBook.

Well WE (the users) are good for FaceBook, so lets Campaign to have them stop f**king around with stuff that works and also to stop trying to suppress firstly our freedom of expression, secondly our choice for privacy, thirdly who and how we interact with and finally not abusing whatever we post in whatever whim way it takes them.

So, what am I talking about? (for anyone whos not really been using FaceBook or is new to it).

Well, here is a list of things FaceBook has done reciently:

• Made all profiles Public by Default without overly alerting the FaceBook users that this is the case (so you suddenly find yourself appearing on search engines with a whole list of your friends for the spammers to consume and enjoy).



• Disabling ability to post line-returns in messages replies (and posts in general, though not universally it seems).



• Preventing the creation of Groups without others of your friends as members.



• Automatically culling your friends so you only see news from friends you interact with on a regular basis (again choosing for you who are your friends).



• Makeing dumb and sometimes offensive suggestions as to who your friends are



• Assuming if your status is single you want to see 50 adverts for Dating ever time you logon (though to be fair they've always done this, but since I'm complaining lol).



• Changing the privacy agreement on an ongoing incremental basis to increase how much they can do with your own stuff (fortunately someone spotted the liberty taking option on your uploaded photographs and it got changed).

If anyone else finds this and agrees (or even disgrees) please post me some comments! =)

Business thinking is killing society! Here is why

1. Everyone needs to be able to earn money to live.
2. The minority of people have plenty of money.
 
The minority wish to keep their money so either seek to avoid spending the money or seek to have the money return to them either faster than they spend or at roughly the same level.
 
The majority do not have plenty of money
 
The majority need money to live on a day to day basis and work to earn money to live, the money they earn to live they spend on things they require (food, accommodation, friends and family). Since it is the Minority with the money, they ensure that for every bit of money the majority "earn" the majority spend it with them or another minority.

Everyone in theory wishes for better (more than they have). Therefore everyone tends, to some extent to behave in a similar fashion, which is:

• For as little as possible effort, retain as large as possible reward.

This is largely only logical and not in fact always motivated by wanting more reward than is fair or warranted(and besides, the minority people don't like the concept of fair because it limits their ability to exploit their position which is often hard earned or fought for so in some ways who can blame them).

So what actually comes about is everyone becomes a "player" in this ridiculous game. This is all fine as long as we have a referee, which is where the government is supposed to sit. The Government owns the bank and should always be the biggest employer (have the most outgoings) and should have the least monetary incomings (all the incoming to the government should really be the efforts of the people for it). They should be the ones underwriting all our pay checks and ensuring that people can live. In this way this "non-player" keeps the system balanced (in theory).

The problem comes when the referee tries to be like everyone else. That is to say, the government looks to be "profitable" monetarily speaking (rather than placing its profits in progress of the people). Government shouldn't work like a business because all business can only continue profitably in the current climate if there is a renewable source of income in the economy.

The goal of business is as follows :

• Through an investment in goods, people or services to receive back more money than you pay out. To, therefore, make a profit.

The only way "everyone" can possible make a profit is if, ipso-facto, someone or something (or collection of such) are making a loss (unless money is infinite, which was the role of the government to make this effectively so). In the past, the government was the source and sometimes the sink for all money. This is still in theory true today, but then why is the government "borrowing" billions from the tax payers future and why is the government in "debt"? Partly I suspect its propaganda to get more from the people, but mostly they have bought into the game (stopped running the game). NO you CANT play the game AND run the game. If you play the game, it becomes a free for all and all money evaporates because everyone on the whole play field tries to profit (that can't happen so...).

Everyone has to lose (or some smaller set of people lose really badly. It won't be the minority who lose in the end). What they have done by "taking it from the future tax payer" is pretty much "virtualised" inflation ("oh no, we aren't spending beyond our means. He's (pointing into the crowd) going to pay you in 5 years time" what do you think will really happen?).

Solutions? I can't see one. We can't go back to the old system, it can't account for life. Moving into the "StarTrek" era would be nice, but that doesn't account for some people (e.g. the StarTrek era requires world cooperation).

What I would dearly love to see is an "owning up" but to own up would be to cause a collapse of the system. Systemic collapse is never good, even for a corrupt and evil system (leads usually to rioting, fighting or war). This system is bad, but it's not truly evil.

I guess though, the one thing that's clear in my mind, is the government needs to operate quietly (at a continuing loss) for the people. Perhaps splitting the government into two, one part that seeks to profit (the services part of the government) and one part which will continually run at a loss (the provision for jobs and income).

Amazon are Fanstasitc, Highly Recommend them

I was thinking about my last post and that I spend a good amount of time "complaining" on this blog. I realised that I don't enough praise whats good.

Amazon are GREAT the provide an excellent service, they are safe, efficient and really seem to listen to customer feedback. They don't overly spam me with advertisements and they have always delivered on the goods (and on the rare occasion I have had problems I've always been left satisifed with the resolution).

I highly recommend if you have shopping to do, check out Amazon's website.

I'm sure though for most people this is really apparent, but I just wanted to take the chance to praise something good.

Browser Features Override from Web Scripting

I want to make everyone aware of this dangerous ability provided within Microsoft Internet Explorer (and possibly other browsers) with a correctly coded browser script it is possible to "hijack" default browser shortcut keys (such as CTRL-N (New Window). CTRL-F (Find) and replace the standard behaviour with a scripted behaviour).

THIS IS A HUGE SECURITY LOOP HOLE.

Imagine, you search on Google and alight upon a likely looking search result. You goto that page and then decide you want to move to a new browser window, you hit CTRL-N and, unknown to you, the script on the page intercepts your request and opens up a new window in its own script injecting its scripted functionality into the new window (perfectly possible). Now, unless your very familiar with the working of your browser your not aware your still in a page controlled by scripts from your previous page. It would be potentially dangerous to proceed to login to your email.

It admittedly would be hard to make an "exploit" which would not be noticable by someone familiar with browser technology but easy to trick the non-technical user.

This kind of irresponsibility I find really annoying. Having these kinds of features. An external source should not be allowed to override innate features of your browser (for example, although pages should have the ability to know when they are closed. They should not have final executive control of wether the close can be allowed, the page should mearly be notified of proceedings and proceed to obey the user.

However, theres money in taking control away from the end user and theres loss in fixing it.