You want us online? You pay for it!

A quote has been making the rounds recently. Attributed to Martha Lane-Fox (founder of Lastminute.com and New Labour’s “Digital Champion”) on a BBC Radio 4 programme, the quote goes:

“I don’t think you can be a proper citizen of our society in the future if you are not engaged online”

OK, so there we have it. A statement from someone who works with a number of charities in the fields of Human Rights, Civil Justice and Disease Prevention. Someone who should understand that a large percentage of UK citizens care more about keeping their jobs, putting food on the table and clothing their children, than posting inane comments on Twitter and updating their Facebook status.

The quote also comes at a time when the Government’s own ‘Digital Britain’ report proposes a ‘Broadband Tax’ that everyone with a telephone line must pay – regardless of if they have broadband or not, or even own a computer!

I had hoped that the infrastructure of the digital age would be provided by a government and industry that realised that they were the ones who needed to invest in the future economic growth of the country, not it’s citizens – who have better things to pay for. Isn’t it a governemnt’s job to provide the economic environment for innovation, education and growth? Isn’t that what we pay them taxes to do?

If the broadband tax was levied on Broadband accounts – that would be slightly fairer. But, when it’s planned to be charged to everyone renting a phone line – something of a necessity if you’re old, infirm or live in an economically deprived area – then it is nothing more than a stealth tax in the middle of a recession.

I strongly believe in closing the poverty gap, in ensuring that the poorer are given a better opportunity to engage in the political process of this country. But when someone, with ties to the government, comes out with a quote that says your not a proper citizen unless you engage online, when the government actually plans to tax you for going online, then that doesn’t seem like the government wants the poorest to be engaged.

So, when someone feels like telling you that you’re not a proper citizen because you don’t have your own MySpace page, invite them ’round to your house, invite them to join you in the Job Centre queue, invite them to buy your weekly shopping or even better your phone bill or ‘Broadband Tax’. Ask them then, if they still believe its fair that those the government are meant to help the most, those who truly need economic aid and help, as citizens of this country, should pay for your faster iTunes download.

Santiago dreaming

When Pinochet’s military overthrew the Chilean government 30 years ago, they discovered a revolutionary communication system, a ’socialist internet’ connecting the whole country. Its creator? An eccentric scientist from Surrey. The forgotten story of Stafford Beer.

Time to update that firewall

The Times Online has an article about new powers police have been given to access home PCs.

Police set to step up hacking of home PCs

A very considered response from the ETA

The following is a really good response, from the Environmental Transport Agency, to my earlier post regarding carbon offsetting.

“Dear Mr Beynon

I agree with much of what you say in your blog; carbon offsetting is highly flawed – particularly when it involves planting trees.

As you know, we are a not-for-profit organisation that sells breakdown cover and insurance cover in order to finance charitable work.

Far from relying on offsetting as a means of establishing our green credentials, the ETA focuses on promoting sustainable transport and educating drivers on the environmental impact of transport in general.

Our projects includes: ‘The Real Cost of Motoring’ – analysis of the full costs of motoring as can safely be quantified in monetary terms; The ETA Car Buyers’ Guide -an annual survey of the environmental impacts of cars available in British showrooms (It considers factors such as noise, emissions, engine size and power); Green Transport Week, an awareness-raising exercise which is designed to engage as many people as possible in doing their bit to reduce transports effect on the environment; ETA’s Safer Car Campaign; The ETA launched the world’s first national car free day, which has now become a global event; Taxation – we helped persuade the government to increase taxes on gas-guzzlers and reduce them on smaller cars; Noise – we helped set up Britain’s new anti-noise campaign against increased air paths and noisy road traffic; Road danger – discussed with ministers the benefits of reducing speeds on our streets; Speed – we are a founder member of the Slower Speeds Initiative; Planning – promoted environmental issues into the planning process; and finally carbon offsetting.

The offsetting funded by the ETA does not involve tree planting. Our scheme involves replacing the indoor open fires used by people in the developing world in order to cook with far more efficient stoves – these reduce carbon emissions and have the added benefit of being much better for human health. This project would not happen if not for the funding from the offset scheme.

The principle reason we continue to offer the carbon offsetting scheme is not to assuage guilt, but rather raise awareness of the environmental impact of carbon emissions.

Kind regards

Head of Communications

The Environmental Transport Association”

and, after further dialogue:

“I know it sounds like a contradiction because our revenue comes in the main from motorists, but we do all we can to promote the alternatives – our members drive around 6,000 miles per year, which is almost half the national average. We obviously can’t take all the credit for that, but it does make them a good audience for messages about alternatives like cycling.

Although it does not count as a campaign, we developed and sell a cycle insurance product that amongst its benefits includes third party insurance and a breakdown service just for cyclists – by giving cyclists the same level of cover and service that is traditionally enjoyed by motorists we hope to play a small part in the revival of cycling.

Kind regards

Head of Communication”

You are powerful

Protect the Human

FOSSy on a Friday (in-joke…)

After posting on Open Source yesterday, it got me thinking about how the current economic climate could help promote the benefits of Free and Open Source Software.

I found this article by Cory Doctorow on how Free and open source software lets you laugh in the face of recession.

Masks, Lasso and the Gimp

With PhotoShop doing a Kerry Katona and bloating like crazy, the new Gimp 2.6 should be considered as a serious contender to the graphics package crown – especially when it’s free.

A new, sensible, interface and a slew of additional tools, along with some handy tips, should help you decide if it’s for you.

Should companies and agencies start reviewing more free, Open Source software in light of recent financial news?

When police go stupid.

A recent article, posted by Bruce Schneier and brought to my attention by a friend, highlights how individual police officer intelligence seems to have dangerously declined.

Bruce has been writing about the current security situation for a while, demonstrating how the public should not be depended upon to discern the difference between a tourist and a terrorist, for example. He rightly stated that it should remain the role of the police and anti-terrorist officers to decide if an individual is behaving suspiciously or dangerously. Well, it seems that Bruce may need to revise his statement…

The Cambridge News article illustrates the blurring line between misplaced public paranoia and fear and the police’s increased jobsworth attitude and lack of common sense.

It makes an important point that’s relevant to any industry. In IT, for example, consider the new security framework in Vista. By requesting the user to continuously confirm that they want to allow software to run with admin rights, they become accustomed to just clicking the ‘Yes’ button without considering the repercussions; they stop thinking about what that really means. By employing paranoia instead of a measured aproach we risk missing out the step that forces us to think about what we’re doing, making it even easier for a ‘real’ risk to slip through unnoticed.

By avoiding common sense and simply labelling everything”wrong” that don’t fit a too-strict set of rules, the police risk diluting the very purpose of what they are doing and not seeing the suicide bomber for all the WMDs.

• The War on Terror: the Board Game is available at Firebox.com.
• Bruce Schneier is an internationally renowned security technologist and author who writes at Schneier.com.
• Ashley Argile is an old friend, ex-housemate and software developer.

An e-mail to the Environmental Transport Association

Dear ETA,

I am a member of the ETA and recently received a mailing through my door advertising ‘Carbon Neutral Insurance’. In it the ETA offered to help ‘offset’ my carbon emissions.

I firmly believe that carbon offsetting is a fraud. It does nothing to mitigate carbon emissions, it simply allows certain organisations to profit from people’s guilt at not reducing their pollution.

An FT article in 2007 exposed the fraud that is carbon offsetting, finding:

- Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

- Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

- Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

- A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

- Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

(‘Industry caught in carbon ‘smokescreen’’ by Fiona Harvey and Stephen Fidler, The FT, April 25 2007)

Furthermore, scientist James Lovelock, who has been investigating and coming up with REAL solutions since the mid-sixties, said in a recent article:

“Carbon offsetting? I wouldn’t dream of it. It’s just a joke. To pay money to plant trees, to think you’re offsetting the carbon? You’re probably making matters worse. You’re far better off giving to the charity Cool Earth, which gives the money to the native peoples to not take down their forests.”

(‘Enjoy life while you can’ by Decca Aitkenhead, The Guardian, March 1 2008)

The ETA should look seriously at its mission in this regard. It has got it seriously wrong. Instead of convincing people to pay a ‘Guilt-fee’, it should instead be looking at ways to help people ‘actually’ reduce emissions.

I attempt to do everything I can to realistically reduce my impact on the planet; a part of that is selecting my purchases from and membership of organisations very carefully, based on what I believe to be their actual and claimed sustainability. I chose to join the ETA in protest at the support other breakdown organisations give to road expansion plans. I am now reconsidering my membership of the ETA, but it may come down to the lesser of many evils.

Yours,

Kevin Beynon

Links:

• ‘Industry caught in carbon smokescreen’ the FT
• ‘Enjoy life while you can’ the Guardian

Jamie Oliver stole my Pasta Bake recipe.

That was my recipe in that advert!