Dishonour Fee

If Banks have the capacity to check your account balance for sufficient funds prior to letting you withdraw money from an ATM, why don’t they use the same technology to check your account balance for sufficient funds prior to accepting an automated debit request? Technically speaking, it wouldn’t be that difficult — it just requires a little will.

Unfortunately they don’t appear to have the will. The cynic in me thinks that it’s so they can charge you a $30 dishonour fee — but come on, it’s Banks we’re talking about here, they wouldn’t do something like that…

Google, Newspapers, Dinosaurs, etc

Duncan Riley has been doing a good job of trying to help the online newspapers stop naughty Google from stealing their precious content. As Duncan and others have pointed out regularly, preventing Google from profiting from their news is quite simple, it’s called Robots.txt and it’ll stop Google and other search engines dead in their tracks.

That’s right. Google will not index sites that have a valid Robots.txt file. What’s more, creating a Robots.txt file is very simple. So simple in fact that Ropert Murdoch, or indeed the most challenged of computer users could create one and upload it to their website.

But of course, the newspapers won’t do this. If they were to block Google then they would lose a significant portion of traffic. Yes, you see, these newspapers have a dirty little secret. Google is actually good for them. It drives traffic to their websites, which means they can serve up more ads, and make more money.

The newspapers appear to want to be paid some sort of royalty-free for allowing their news to be indexed by Google, and then they want to continue to make the money from ads which they already get from Google traffic.

Can’t. Have. Cake. Eat. Too.

The irony is of course that if Google actually went ahead and decided not to index content from these websites — to guard against any potential legal action, or to simply make a point — the newspapers would be up in arms about how evil Google is trying to suppress the free press… or something along those lines.

Did The Poms Cheat?

Well, yeah. They did. But the Aussies can’t blame the draw on that — and more than likely, they’ve used the same tactic themselves at some stage. They had plenty of opportunities to win the match and didn’t take them.

They’re just looking for some else to blame…

Windows XP, The New DOS

Windows XP is the new DOS. A piece of legacy software which hangs around forever and elicits a “I had no idea companies still used XP” reaction from the new IT guy, twenty years after it was supposed to be replaced by something better.

Why A Draw Is As Good As A Win, But Not Really

Despite all the odds Australia has managed to lose the 1st Test.

They didn’t technically lose of course, no, it was a draw, but they will feel like they’ve lost, and England, as they sit in their dressing rooms patting themselves on the back, will feel like they’ve won.

Such is Cricket. When you’re on-top for the whole game and then it finishes in a draw, it’s almost more deflating than if you had’ve lost outright by 500 runs. Losing when you should have fun, isn’t fun.

The unfortunate thing for England is this. Although they might feel like they’ve won this game, they haven’t got buckley’s to show for it in the way of individual performances. As a team they might well feel like they’ve one, but as individuals, they were all losers in this game, and are in very poor shape going into the next Test.

England should bring in Steve Harmison for the next game. Apart from Flintoff their bowling is about as intimidating as a decapitated rubber duck. With Flintoff at one end and Harmison at the other,  it’ll give the Aussies something to think about.

Ashes to Ashes, England to Dust

The only thing that will save England from a great walloping in the 1st Test is if the heavens open and large buckets of water descend onto the ground in an disorderly fashion for a decent part of the 5th day. Not the prettiest way to save a Test match, but England has clearly decided it’s their best bet.

Starting the 4th day with little hope of winning, but a good chance of getting a draw and some much needed momentum going into the 2nd Test at Lord’s,  England quickly made it clear that they weren’t much interested in doing anything other than sulking in the field and waiting for the rain to come and save them from the onslaught.

Opening the bowling with Anderson and Broad was a peculiar decision, given that the new ball wasn’t too far off and the pitch was a spinners paradise — which is handy, since you’ve got two full-time spinners in your team, for the specific purpose of bowling them on this dusty pitch… but never-mind, details, details.

To say that England’s performance on the 4th day was lacklustre, is an understatement. One got the feeling that they’d rather be at home, eating ice cream, and playing on their XBOX, rather than playing Test cricket. If only they weren’t International Cricketers, they could have taken their ball and gone home. But alas, they are International Cricketers, so we had to witness two sessions of fully grown men, sulking like School children — who’ve just been told off for stealing a cookie — wishing that the rain would just bloody well hurry up and arrive already.

England: it’s time to stop sulking, drink some concrete, and harden the f**k up.

Turnbull, you goose…

From theage.com.au today:

“The case that Mr Rudd misled the house about the communication is not sustained,” he told ABC Radio on Tuesday.

An election before the end of the year is looking even more likely.

Google Trims The Fat, Gets Serious

January 14th, 2009, marks the day that Google grew up.

In a coordinated series of blog postings Google announced its intention to scuttle a number of its poor performing products, let go of some staff and close some of its offices — showing that in 2009 it intends to focus on keeping costs down and make money. A wise decision in the current economic climate.

Some of the announcements from Google:

Danny Sullivan has a more detailed round-up of today’s changes at Google.

Who knows what 2009 will hold for tech companies, but it goes without saying that whatever happens will be closely tied to what happens in the general economy.

There is (was?) a bubble in Silicon Valley — a bubble of innocence — and unfortunately 2009 looks like the year that will pop it.

Internet Speeds In Australia

Not only is broadband expensive in Australia, but it is also slow. Slow, as in painfully-slow. In comparison to other developed countries like America, Sweden, Japan, South Korea and so on, it is appalling. But what is really annoying about all of this is that it is not necessary — our Internet connection speeds are stuck in the 90′s because Telstra has a near complete monopoly on Australia’s broadband infrastructure and they aren’t afraid to use that advantage for profit and anti-competitive purposes.

As Stilgherrian explains in today’s Crikey, Telstra has the means to provide faster and cheaper broadband, but unless someone tries to compete with them, they won’t increase speeds or lower prices — without real competition, they have no incentive to.

How does Telstra do it quicker? By quietly stashing away its secret weapons, ready to be unleashed when a competitor tried to deploy their own big guns. Remember how Telstra didn’t sell ADSL2+ broadband, even from exchanges where equipment was already installed, until ISPs like iiNet started selling their own ADSL2+?

Confused about Australia’s broadband infrastructure? From the Telstra entry Wikipedia:

Due to Telstra’s position as Australia’s incumbent telecommunications provider, Telstra Wholesale is the incumbent and dominant wholesaler of ADSL services to other Internet Service Providers. Telstra installed the first DSLAMs in exchanges prior to 2000, and began wholesaling access in late 2000.[21] Telstra Wholesale has a comprehensive network of ADSL DSLAMs (the largest in Australia) and allows competitors access to each Telstra DSLAM at ADSL1 speeds.

So because Telstra owns the broadband infrastructure they can wholesale sell access to it to other companies — other companies which then sell the broadband connections to retail customers — but, not content with simple wholesale sales, Telstra has another division which sells these same broadband connections directly to the same retail customers. Which raises the question, how do you compete in a market where the biggest player owns all of the pieces on the board?

As Duncan Riley suggests, Telstra’s retail and wholesale arms must be separated for the common good.

Structural separation, as I’ve always argued is the only solution. Telstra retail and wholesale must be split for the common good. If we have the capacity to provide 100mbps connections in capital cities now, it SHOULD BE PROVIDED NOW, not in a year or two when Telstra decides to use it to undermine the competition.

They should absolutely be completely separate companies. The current setup is completely anti-competitive and is a disservice to the Australia public. Broadband is a utility and the Government should make sure that it is managed like one.

Can we stop living in the dark ages now?

My Favourite Podcasts From 2008

I got into podcasts in a big way in 2008. I find them a great way of ensuring that I go outside for an hour+ long walk or run everyday — even when it’s -11 and snowing as it was today. 

All of them are highly recommended!