.SE's ASEA did this on trains in mid-1980's
on
The Wi-Fi On the Bus
·
· Score: 1
It's a great story (ie, if the WiFi is reliable, across the trip to school), but we just want to point out that a similar "work on the trip" scheme was available to ASEA employees traveling from Stockeholm & the ASEA company town (whose Swedish name escapes me, for the moment).
Workstations - desks with FAXes, computers & phones, from all reports - were available on special passenger cars on each AM & PM train, so that staff could catch-up or finish-up as they commuted.
(Of course, this was before WiFi, so, FAXes would have worked via the mobile network.)
PS ASEA was the company that had the 1-person, doorless "non-stop elevator"... to go up or down, just hop-in (as the slowly elevator passed the hole in the wall, next to the elevator buttons.
Note: Be sure to hop out, ie, before the loop of elevator cars took you over the top of the vertical loop! (I suppose, if you didn't, a safety-device would stop the whole loop - eg, to preclude injury, but - in the process - stop the others, as they tried to shave a few seconds off their up/down travel time...)
"Second wise, minute foolish"?
Maybe... but at least they innovated in that era! (It might have saved some electricity, eg, in a busy building.)
Does any past ASEA insider have details of the (pre-'Net) net-savings (or otherwise) brought by either of these innovations?
Do any current [ABB] runs of the Vaesteraas train still offer such workstations, eg, with Internet connectivity, or other additions?
If Google or others sites are recording & selling our search keys, here's a solution:
- develop an application that - while our browser is idle -
selects BOGUS search keys AT RANDOM and sends
them to Google as if we'd entered them in real searches
Ie, feed Google a "noisy" stream of search keys, at about the same speed as we'd be sending them, if they were real searches.
I have no doubt that such an application would become very popular, very soon...
Any takers?
PS Are there any such applications in existence today?
(There's a Poll [on the first thread] on the Q of whether you feel that, an ISP [with] "too many" plan options may deter you from choosing any of their plans, as Barry Schwartz suggests in his earlier TED talk.)
---
First, some background from an -earlier- post (in the above thread; reply to the thread in which your comment(s) are most relavent):
In a TED talk, Barry Schwarz (author of "The Paradox of Choice") notes that:
- when there are "too many" alternatives to choose from, - fewer people will make a choice
(eg, where supermarket demonstrators showing many jams, fewer people buy any of the demo'd jams (By contrast, where just a handful of jams are demo'd, more people buy;
-or-
If [US] companies offer many mutual funds to employees; employees miss out on employer mathing-comtributions, of up to US$ 5,000.00, by not making a choice of fund.)
Extrapolating to WP Broadband Choice's tabbed-page with Internode's many (too many?) plans, I wonder:
How many people give the 'node a miss, eg, due to the "excess" number of Internode plans shown on offer there?
(My guess is that ISPs offer from several to many plans, eg, to keep Aussies focussed on analysing plans for the "best" deal for them, in part, so that they will have less energy to -demand- cheap, unlimited plans, such as are the norm, in many other countries in Australia's "class.")
--- Here comes the post, shifted from forum Internode:
--- (Although it was originally about Internode, feel free to --- read this post with -your- choice of ISP, ie, in place of --- "Internode" where it appears, & maybe let us know --- which ISP you're thinking about in any replies.;-)
[In WP's Internode forum] Simon Hackett [wrote]:
"[coming up with a new Internet plan] a lot of work and it has to fit in around some other major new project initiatives that are also in the pipeline"
With all due respect, Simon, I â" for one â" urge Aussie ISPs to redirect all the creative energy & programming/implementation time needed to dream up & implement YAPBP (Yet Another Pricy Broadband Plan)...to find better ways to deliver what Aussie customers know is possible (since so many other countries' ISP provide it, while we drool in envy that they got it right, while AU continues to lag):
- cheap, fast, unlimited, unrestricted Internet...not: you can use it for -this- (eg, watch TV -or- access -our- choice of files) purpose for free/cheap, but -that- (eg, research or remote medical imaging, etc.) usage is gonna cost you
For far too long, Aussie ISPs have hugged Telstra's "data allocation & penalty (pick one: huge 'excess' fee or get dial-up speed)" model.
Other Aussie ISPs are -starting- to help us to move to cheaper (if not cheap) unlimited plans, if only on an After Hours (during non-peak periods) basis.
Canberrans enjoy perhaps the -cheapest- AH-unlimited plans (speed "only" 2 Mb/Sec, eg, from their local ISPs that resell TransACT), paying from $20/mon for access to it all.
Why should such plans be reserved -only- for those living in Canberra (eg, pollies & C'th gov't officials & public servants)?
What is Internode missing that TransACT has got right?
Australia places very low for Internet cost-effectiveness & reach - with only costly broadband available to many, even in larger cities, such as Adelaide, etc.
Very FEW ISP plans offer genuinely (ie, unshaped) "unlimited" plans, and the ones who do either charge the moon for them (ie, if faster than 1.5 Mb/Sec) -or- they have speeds at / under the ADSL 1 speed of 1.5 Mb/Sec - ie, too slow to share in a larger family or modest university student house.
International students - even some from wealthy Indian families are giving even very fast Big Pond Cable plans Thumbs Down, because they do not "shape" after the meager 60 GB data limit (which, by the way, counts -both- downloaded -and- uploaded data), but "fines" or "penalizes" any use that exceeds their limit with a whopping huge Au $ 150 / GB "excess" fee.
So, while one pays about Au $ 130 / month for the first 60 GB, one's 61st (and any thereafter it) -each- cost an extra Au $ 150 !!!
Coincidentally...
Telstra Big Pond is mentioned in this Australian program which explores Bankruptcy in Australia, eg, for the banc- rupcy that followed one of its customers' running up a not-so-large bill for Internet services:
While I do not condone running up unpayably large bills Internet (or other) bills, I consider the fee for "excess" data an obsolete holdover from Testra's (perhaps known as Telecom, then) earlier days as a undisputed monoply.
(Now - with well over 90% of Australia's telecommunica- tions market, including Internet services - Telstra is just the "de facto" monopoly... not a legislated one.)
I - for one - am obliged to choose a capped Internet plan - far slower and limited in allocated - as a hedge against the risk of forced bankruptcy, because Australia's ISP's have adopted Telstra's still outrageous and presently untenable "excess" fees, across its non-capped plans.
There are many more like me...
Counterexample: Here's a reason to live in Canberra
[ Australia's Moscow in 2009 ]
Remember when life seemed - by all reports - 'good' [only] in USSR-era Moscow - ie, for those permitted to live there?
I am sure that Canberrans - who can pay as about $20 / mon for even "unlimited" Off-Peak hours Internet (at 2 Mb/Sec) feel well looked-after, perhaps like those Moscovites of days gone by...
In Stockholm, no one questions one's usage, even on genuinely unlimited Internet accounts, ie, unless you're accessing unlawful content.
There, unlimited means umlimited .
I think it's a matter of rights of individuals & profits of companies.
Let's all try to get past this, eg, by reducing data costs (so companies don't have much to "lose" when users use what they will, of downloaded Internet data).
All this capping and "unofficial capping" seems to be causing more problems that it solves.
If tiny Stockholm (or Sweden) can sell symmetric, 100 Mbps / 100 Mbps, unlimited Internet service for ~ $11 / month, then let's find out how the other ISPs around the world can do it, in future.
BTW We're aware of Aussies, who use over 150 GB / month, albeit at 1.5 Mpbs, each month.
Hey, it's not like they pump out CO2 at untenable rates... they just find enough to keep their modems running most hours of the days of each month...
I lived in SE for 5 "winters" --(my little joke) and once tested the "Say, can I use your public [computer] terminal, please?" (I asked in English)
I was immediately taken behind the counter, a "read-only, restricted access" card was swiped in & I was given access to one of the Tax Office's computer terminals to use without (stated) restriction of any kind.
Although I was able to look-up inviduals' details, including income (as seen for local & state taxation purposes, resp.), the names of any children born out-of-wedlock were NOT available.
Try this next time you're passing throught SE.
PS: Alternatively, ask - in any Public Library - to see the (local) "Taxeringskalendar" It looks like a phone book, but - instead of tel.no's - you get two incomes (again: local & state taxations' view of income for the named individual).
ADSL 1.5 Mbps (down) / 256 Kbps (up) unlimited downloads (I guess that's the norm outside of Australia, but it's the exception here) It's only available from a few daring Australian ISPs; we pay Au$ 99 / month (there's NO setup fee, with a 24 month contract), but it's S-L-O-W...
For me, the worst of this (yet another) Aussie gov't act of idiocy (no less than a previous gov't's "Children Overboard!" scandal; I'm not trying to take sides here) is:
IT WASTES BLOODY TIME THAT COULD BE BETTER USED!
Not only will Conroy's dabbling with imaginary taps on the WWW-feed pipes leading to Australia slow the Internet for all (if filtering happens), but it take time from the National Broadband Network.
---
Call me cynical, but - just maybe - that is the whole idea of such a dim bureaucrat being placed into such a ministry's seat.
It probably helps Telstra to have such a dim-wit in the minister's chair.
But they're not the only ones likely to be tele- conferencing... many of their senior colleagues will (and - I feel - should) be queuing for the teleconferencing room / line, as well.
In fact, here in AU, there are serious proposals that tax payers fund teleconferencing systems - rather than costly overseas "study trips" for MPs.
It's part of a long list of better ways to reduce AU's rates of carbon emissions -and- improve our cost per Km travelled (even when driving a car), listed and discussed here:
Melbourne computer programmer, Geoff Hudson's
"The Manhattan Project for climate change"
So, in Australia, we have a few serious competitors (eg, MyNetFone), eg, offering low-cost ATA's (1-off price to buy it of under Au$ 20) and VoIP service plans (to anyone who knows about them) as low as Au$ 0 (ie, FREE) each month, ie, pay only for your calls ( Au$ 0.10 for up to 2 hours in each call you make to a normal Australian land- line; Au$ 0.15 / min for calls to Aussie mobiles); 1 DID no. incl'd.
Retailers offer higher-priced ATA's (even from same VoIP provider), or did... Most get ATA's directly from MNF at subsidized prices.
An early "visible" if more costly provider - Engine (or similar) - wanted you to buy an ATA for Au$ 150 or Au$ 99, a while ago, but have realised the futility of such high prices.
Engine also charged a monthly fee (now, about Au$ 10 / mon) plus somewhat more for calls.
MyNetFone seems to have been the most creative & versatile, eg, offering:
- software for Nokia cell phones that enable one to make/receive
calls either paying (high prices) for cellular privider's data
or - more recently & economically - use your choice of WiFi
provider (incuding your own home / office WiFi access-point)
as the (cheaper) source of data to support your VoIP calls
- support for softphones (theirs & others)
- cheap ATA's, some with routers WiFi and/or modems, ie, a reason-
able range of ATA brands & models, ususally locked to MyNetFone
- (for business clients) IP-PBX options (see their site for details)
Their low-cost call rates applied (as above), but any cell-pro- vider's data or other broadband data costs were - as always - yours to bear, along with them.
--- Skype on a mobile phone or Sony PSP or computer:
Mobile carrier (Hutcheonson?) "3" has offered Skype offers a GSM-based cellphone with facilitated, built-in Skype features; you can see it at Skype.com or Three.com.au.
With a SkypePhone in hand (a user who within range of "3"'s broadband network can talk to any computer or Sony PSP or Skype- phone based Skype-user... for 4,000 minutes / mon and/or sent up to 10,000 text messages / month (in Skype text chat mode), for an incredibly low monthly fee, even if you add-in a fee for the SkypePhone handset. Of course, it's Skype- (not GSM-) voice quality. But messages sent via Skype are NOT limited to 160 characters, as SMS chunks are.
Sony's PSP 3002 (AU-version) includes both WiFi & Skype (voice only; neither SMS (since it's NOT a GSM cellphone) nor Skype chat-mode text messages can be sent from a PSP).
If you bought a month or (cheaper, per mon) a year Skype "sub- scription," you get 1 or 3 DID no.'s based in your choice of any of 30+ countries, as well as 10,000 minutes of talk-time.
So, using such a subscription, you can ring any normal landline number - in any of the countries on the list (of 32+ lands), etc.
Of course Skype-to-Skype calls & chat messages remain free.:-)
---
In short, enough options, easy for the end-user to setup & main- tain (ie, if s/he's a bit of a geek).
#1 "to deposit INTO" - the agency deposits refunds/reimbursements into it
#2 is printed on cheques (hopefully, only genuine cheques, issued by holder's bank, but - these days - this is a risk; don't give this number out... ie, don't write a lot of cheque)
#3 I originally thought it might be harmless to let folks you have to write a cheque to, so they can see if they're likely to be able to cash the cheque, but I now think it poses a risk, eg:
Someone with #2, might like to know how LARGE a cheques it might be safe for them to write...
Of course, most cheques in Australia are marked "for deposit only" (eg, via 2 parallel lines, printed diagonally across each cheque), and that might be at least a bit problematic for most fraudsters...
So, I'm down to just #1 & #2, now (or a single credit card number, as in my earlier reply to my OP).
I would have thought that payments to the travel agency would be made via credit card (for cash-flow reasons) and any reimbursements might (for reasons unclear to me) have to go back via check account.
Using a credit card for money flowing in both directions might work in Australia (if not where the article's story it set), because - last time I checked - abuse of one's credit card here (without the holder's knowledge or authority) can't cost the card-holder more than, say, $50, and it might be less or even $0 (haven't checked... anyone else in Oz able to confirm or add to this?)
If having another's check book account number means that one can withdraw from it, here's an easy fix:
Each account gets (at least) 2 numbers:
1. to deposit INTO it, 2. another to write cheques to get $$$ OUT of it, & 3. maybe a 3rd to let vendors & banks (with a cheque in-hand) to check that the balance covers the cheque.
It would - with that structure - not matter that this web site's security is breached (at least for -that- particular account).
February 12 Wilkes-Barre's "Times Leader" newspaper article:
Judge picked to review Ciavarella juvenile cases
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker... Law & Order Reporter
The state Supreme Court has appointed a senior Berks County judge to review potentially thousands of cases that were handled by Luzerne County juvenile court judge Mark Ciavarella dating back to 2003. Read more Luzerne County Judges articles
In appointing Senior Judge Arthur E. Grim, the high court said it wanted to ensure a thorough review is conducted of all cases to determine whether a âoetravesty of juvenile justiceâ occurred under Ciavarellaâ(TM)s tenure, and, if so, to take whatever action is necessary to provide relief to the affected juveniles.
That relief could include holding new hearings, filing petitions to expunge their records or to vacate their adjudications entirely, the court said.
The court was prompted to act following the filing of criminal charges on Jan. 26 against Ciavarella and Judge Michael Conahan that alleged, in part, the judges profited from Ciavarellaâ(TM)s sentencing of juveniles to detention centers once owned by Butler Township attorney Robert Powell.
Ciavarella and Conahan are scheduled to plead guilty today to charges that they accepted more than $2.6 million in kickbacks in exchange for rulings that benefited the detention centers.
âoeWe are very pleased and applaud the court for taking the step of appointing a special master,â said Marsha Levick, an attorney with the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia, the agency that filed the petition that led to the courtâ(TM)s action. âoeJudge Grim is an excellent choice. Theyâ(TM)ve granted him broad discretion to fashion relief for thousands of kids, which is a critically important step in the process.â
The law center asked the court to review Luzerne County cases after data showed that more than 50 percent of children who appeared before Ciavarella in 2005 and 2006 were not represented by an attorney. The countyâ(TM)s juvenile detention placement rate was also significantly higher than the state average.
The Supreme Courtâ(TM)s order directs Grim to identify juveniles who were not represented by an attorney and those who were committed to the Pa. Child Care and Western Pa Child Care detention centers. Grim will then recommend to the court whether a child should be granted a new hearing, or whether to grant a petition to expunge their record or vacate their adjudication.
In deciding whether to a recommend a new hearing, the court directed Grim to consider whether the youth is still subject to jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
Levick said she expects most cases will be resolved by filing petitions to expunge records, because the vast majority of affected youth are no longer under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll and Luzerne County President Judge Chester Muroski vowed they will provide âoecomplete cooperationâ to Grim. Muroski said arrangements have been made for Grim to occupy a chamber in the Penn Place building to ensure he has full access to all files he needs.
3 Reader Comments
D R Lunsford said...
This is epic sociopathy. A country where this can happen can't possibly live very long. Who knows what mountain of corruption in American justice underlies this tip of the iceberg? One looks at his neighbors and wonders - who are these people? What sort of country do I live in? Is anything real? Is there any level of depravity unexplored by modern Americans? -drl
February 12, 2009 at 4:36 AM
sunlight said...
clean their records? ha! get the check book out how about that?
February 12, 2009 at 6:38 AM
concerned resident said...
While I applaud the decision of the State Supreme Court in/re to reviewing previous sentencing of our county juvenilles, I am wondering: just where do the funds come from to cover Judge Arthur E. Grim's salary and related expenses for this project. Will Luzerne County be liable for any of these expenses?
February 14 Wilkes-Barre's "Times Leader" newspaper article:
Conahan got cash from pension fund Records show he withdrew $302,777 from pension account when he retired.
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker... Law & Order Reporter
Luzerne County Judge Michael Conahan withdrew $302,777 from his pension account when he retired in January 2008 â" an action that allowed him to retain nearly $94,000 in interest that might otherwise have been forfeited based on his guilty plea Thursday to federal charges, according to state pension laws.
Conahan opted to take the lump sum payment, which constituted $208,964, in contributions he made plus $93,812 in interest, in lieu of a higher monthly payment he would have been entitled to had he left the funds there, according to Robert Gentzel, spokesman for the State Employee Retirement System.
The action ensured Conahan collected the interest payments, which he would not have been entitled to recoup if he had pleaded guilty prior to his retirement and that plea resulted in the forfeiture of his pension, according to the stateâ(TM)s Pension Forfeiture Act.
That act states that any person convicted of a crime that is considered a âoeforfeitable offenseâ is entitled to recoup only the money he or she paid into the retirement system, Gentzel said. They cannot collect interest, which accrues at a rate of 4 percent annually.
That did not impact Conahan, however, because he retired on Jan. 15, 2008 â" just more than a year before the U.S. Attorneyâ(TM)s office filed fraud and tax charges against him and a co-defendant Judge Mark Ciavarella.
Conahan and Ciavarella pleaded guilty Thursday to charges of tax evasion and of defrauding the public of their honest services in connection with a more than $2.6 million kickback scheme.
In addition to the lump sum, Conahan has been receiving a monthly pension payment of $8,073.87 since his retirement. He would lose future payments if his guilty plea is ultimately deemed to be a forfeitable offense, but he would not be required to pay back the past monthly payments.
Thatâ(TM)s because forfeiture affects only money that is paid after a conviction has been obtained and the person has been officially sentenced, Gentzel said.
âoeThere is not a way we can reach back and recover prior payments. Forfeiture is prospective form the date of conviction,â he said.
The stateâ(TM)s forfeiture act requires the forfeiture of pension benefits for anyone convicted of certain crimes that âoebreach the memberâ(TM)s duty of faithful and honest public serviceâ if the crime was committed through the personâ(TM)s public office.
Given that definition, itâ(TM)s anticipated the offenses Conahan and Ciavarella committed will be considered forfeitable offenses. That determination has not been officially made yet, however.
Gentzel said the retirement system generally does not conduct that analysis until after a conviction has been obtained.
Conahan and Ciavarellaâ(TM)s plea agreements call for them to serve 87 months in prison and to pay an amount of restitution that has not yet been determined.
Federal forfeiture laws permit the government to seek a wide variety of assets, including pensions, to fulfill restitution orders. Whether Conahanâ(TM)s lump sum pension payment could be subject to forfeiture was not immediately clear Friday.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a great story (ie, if the WiFi is reliable, across the trip to school), but we just want to point out that a similar "work on the trip" scheme was available to ASEA employees traveling from Stockeholm & the ASEA company town (whose Swedish name escapes me, for the moment).
Workstations - desks with FAXes, computers & phones, from all reports - were available on special passenger cars on each AM & PM train, so that staff could catch-up or finish-up as they commuted.
(Of course, this was before WiFi, so, FAXes would have worked via the mobile network.)
PS ASEA was the company that had the 1-person, doorless "non-stop elevator"... to go up or down, just hop-in (as the slowly elevator passed the hole in the wall, next to the elevator buttons.
Note: Be sure to hop out, ie, before the loop of elevator cars took you over the top of the vertical loop! (I suppose, if you didn't, a safety-device would stop the whole loop - eg, to preclude injury, but - in the process - stop the others, as they tried to shave a few seconds off their up/down travel time...)
"Second wise, minute foolish"?
Maybe... but at least they innovated in that era!
(It might have saved some electricity, eg, in a busy building.)
Does any past ASEA insider have details of the (pre-'Net) net-savings (or otherwise) brought by either of these innovations?
Do any current [ABB] runs of the Vaesteraas train still offer such workstations, eg, with Internet connectivity, or other additions?
If Google or others sites are recording & selling our search keys, here's a solution:
- develop an application that - while our browser is idle -
selects BOGUS search keys AT RANDOM and sends
them to Google as if we'd entered them in real searches
Ie, feed Google a "noisy" stream of search keys, at about
the same speed as we'd be sending them, if they were
real searches.
I have no doubt that such an application would become
very popular, very soon...
Any takers?
PS Are there any such applications in existence today?
The 3rd line from the bottom was meant to say:
"Grow your business by attracting more (& not only geeky) customers."
At [Internode ISP's] Simon [Hackett]'s request, we're transplanting a post from WP Internode forum [to WP Broadband forum]:
From: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1280230
To: http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies.cfm?t=1280474
(There's a Poll [on the first thread] on the Q of whether you feel that, an ISP [with] "too many" plan options
may deter you from choosing any of their plans, as Barry Schwartz suggests in his earlier TED talk.)
---
First, some background from an -earlier- post (in the above thread;
reply to the thread in which your comment(s) are most relavent):
In a TED talk, Barry Schwarz (author of "The Paradox of Choice") notes that:
- when there are "too many" alternatives to choose from,
- fewer people will make a choice
Cf: http://www.ted.com/talks/langâ/eng/barry_schwartz_on_the_paradox_of_choice.html
(eg, where supermarket demonstrators showing many jams,
fewer people buy any of the demo'd jams (By contrast,
where just a handful of jams are demo'd, more people buy;
-or-
If [US] companies offer many mutual funds to employees;
employees miss out on employer mathing-comtributions,
of up to US$ 5,000.00, by not making a choice of fund.)
Extrapolating to WP Broadband Choice's tabbed-page with
Internode's many (too many?) plans, I wonder:
How many people give the 'node a miss, eg, due to the
"excess" number of Internode plans shown on offer there?
cf: http://bc.whirlpool.net.au/bc/isp-9/internode.htm
(My guess is that ISPs offer from several to many plans,
eg, to keep Aussies focussed on analysing plans for the
"best" deal for them, in part, so that they will have less
energy to -demand- cheap, unlimited plans, such as are
the norm, in many other countries in Australia's "class.")
--- Here comes the post, shifted from forum Internode:
--- (Although it was originally about Internode, feel free to ;-)
--- read this post with -your- choice of ISP, ie, in place of
--- "Internode" where it appears, & maybe let us know
--- which ISP you're thinking about in any replies.
[In WP's Internode forum] Simon Hackett [wrote]:
"[coming up with a new Internet plan] a lot of work and it has to fit in around some other major new project initiatives that are also in the pipeline"
With all due respect, Simon, I â" for one â" urge Aussie ISPs to redirect all the creative energy & programming/implementation time needed to dream up & implement YAPBP (Yet Another Pricy Broadband Plan) ...to find better ways to deliver what Aussie customers know is possible (since so many other countries' ISP provide it, while we drool in envy that they got it right, while AU continues to lag):
- cheap, fast, unlimited, unrestricted Internet ...not: you can use it for -this- (eg, watch TV -or- access -our- choice of files) purpose for free/cheap, but -that- (eg, research or remote medical imaging, etc.) usage is gonna cost you
For far too long, Aussie ISPs have hugged Telstra's "data allocation & penalty (pick one: huge 'excess' fee or get dial-up speed)" model.
Other Aussie ISPs are -starting- to help us to move to cheaper (if not cheap) unlimited plans, if only on an After Hours (during non-peak periods) basis.
Canberrans enjoy perhaps the -cheapest- AH-unlimited plans (speed "only" 2 Mb/Sec, eg, from their local ISPs that resell TransACT), paying from $20/mon for access to it all.
Why should such plans be reserved -only- for those living in Canberra (eg, pollies & C'th gov't officials & public servants)?
What is Internode missing that TransACT has got right?
In a sports-cent
In Canberra, ACT only:
Au $20 buys: ...Unlimited data usage - ie, during off-peak hours ...Reasonable speeds: 2 Mb/Sec (down) / 256 Kb/Sec (up)
Hey, why should Aussie ISPs be permitted to limit
their markets to a particular State or Territory, eg ACT,
in the first place?!?
(FYI: The ISP is "Velicity Internet"
and the Plans is "TransACT Big Gig ADSL" )
We found it using Whirlpool.net.au's Plan Search tool,
and (later) confirmed its attributes at ISP's web site.
For anyone wanting essentially unlimited (AH) Internet
service, Canberra's the place to live...
Australia places very low for Internet cost-effectiveness & reach
- with only costly broadband available to many, even in larger
cities, such as Adelaide, etc.
Very FEW ISP plans offer genuinely (ie, unshaped) "unlimited"
plans, and the ones who do either charge the moon for them
(ie, if faster than 1.5 Mb/Sec) -or- they have speeds at / under
the ADSL 1 speed of 1.5 Mb/Sec - ie, too slow to share in a
larger family or modest university student house.
International students - even some from wealthy Indian families
are giving even very fast Big Pond Cable plans Thumbs Down,
because they do not "shape" after the meager 60 GB data limit
(which, by the way, counts -both- downloaded -and- uploaded
data), but "fines" or "penalizes" any use that exceeds their limit
with a whopping huge Au $ 150 / GB "excess" fee.
So, while one pays about Au $ 130 / month for the first 60 GB,
one's 61st (and any thereafter it) -each- cost an extra Au $ 150 !!!
Coincidentally...
Telstra Big Pond is mentioned in this Australian program
which explores Bankruptcy in Australia, eg, for the banc-
rupcy that followed one of its customers' running up a
not-so-large bill for Internet services:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2009/08/ats_20090831.mp3
While I do not condone running up unpayably large bills
Internet (or other) bills, I consider the fee for "excess"
data an obsolete holdover from Testra's (perhaps known
as Telecom, then) earlier days as a undisputed monoply.
(Now - with well over 90% of Australia's telecommunica-
tions market, including Internet services - Telstra is just
the "de facto" monopoly... not a legislated one.)
I - for one - am obliged to choose a capped Internet plan
- far slower and limited in allocated - as a hedge against
the risk of forced bankruptcy, because Australia's ISP's
have adopted Telstra's still outrageous and presently
untenable "excess" fees, across its non-capped plans.
There are many more like me...
Counterexample: Here's a reason to live in Canberra
[ Australia's Moscow in 2009 ]
Remember when life seemed - by all reports - 'good'
[only] in USSR-era Moscow - ie, for those permitted
to live there?
I am sure that Canberrans - who can pay as about $20 / mon
for even "unlimited" Off-Peak hours Internet (at 2 Mb/Sec)
feel well looked-after, perhaps like those Moscovites of
days gone by...
Australia went through an embarrassing run up the filtering road "to protect children"
Lots of silly examples of inadvertantly (or intentionally, you decide) blocked safe sites
have already been published, arising from that boondoggle..
Now, nearby Malyasia wants to follow in AU's dusty trail...?!?
In Stockholm, no one questions one's usage, even on genuinely unlimited Internet accounts, ie, unless you're accessing unlawful content.
There, unlimited means umlimited .
I think it's a matter of rights of individuals & profits of companies.
Let's all try to get past this, eg, by reducing data costs (so companies don't have much to "lose" when users use what they will, of downloaded Internet data).
All this capping and "unofficial capping" seems to be causing more problems that it solves.
If tiny Stockholm (or Sweden) can sell symmetric, 100 Mbps / 100 Mbps, unlimited Internet service for ~ $11 / month, then let's find out how the other ISPs around the world can do it, in future.
BTW We're aware of Aussies, who use over 150 GB / month, albeit at 1.5 Mpbs, each month.
Hey, it's not like they pump out CO2 at untenable rates... they just find enough to keep their modems running most hours of the days of each month...
So, what about expat's, ie, US Citizens living abroad?
Is there a way to access the "restricted content" from abroad, for such a person?
PS When will the Internet cause all of these restrictions to evaporate, already?!?
I lived in SE for 5 "winters" --(my little joke)
and once tested the "Say, can I use your public [computer] terminal, please?" (I asked in English)
I was immediately taken behind the counter, a "read-only, restricted access" card was swiped in & I was given access to one of the Tax Office's computer terminals to use without (stated) restriction of any kind.
Although I was able to look-up inviduals' details, including income (as seen for local & state taxation purposes, resp.), the names of any children born out-of-wedlock were NOT available.
Try this next time you're passing throught SE.
PS: Alternatively, ask - in any Public Library - to see the (local) "Taxeringskalendar" It looks like a phone book, but - instead of tel.no's - you get two incomes (again: local & state taxations' view of income for the named individual).
Enjoy!
fastighet = building
aegare = owner
(loosely: "landlord")
ADSL 1.5 Mbps (down) / 256 Kbps (up) unlimited downloads (I guess that's the norm outside of Australia, but it's the exception here)
It's only available from a few daring Australian ISPs; we pay Au$ 99 / month (there's NO setup fee, with a 24 month contract), but it's S-L-O-W...
Help! I wanna move BACK to Stockholm... NOW!!!
Tax payers subsidize roadways, for cars that polute the air (harmful, in short-term) & emit CO2 (harmful, in log-term).
Internet lets people learn, etc. at home, which reduces the amount of both air pollution & CO2 emitted.
I'd prefer to subsidize the Internet, wouldn't you?
"Just in Time to respond to the World Financial Crisis:
Work-At-Home for Apple! No experience necessary!!
App Store is looking for a lot of part-timers.
Easy work: Just buy a computer game from EACH of our Store's vendors, wait a random amount of time; then return it for a full refund.
Every time you complete a cycle, you receive 49% of our handsome Apple Store commission!
'sure beats stuffing envelopes!!!
Apply Today!!!" :-) Satire, folks...
Nothing to see here...
Move along... :-/
For me, the worst of this (yet another) Aussie gov't act of idiocy (no less than a previous gov't's "Children Overboard!" scandal; I'm not trying to take sides here) is:
IT WASTES BLOODY TIME THAT COULD BE BETTER USED!
Not only will Conroy's dabbling with imaginary
taps on the WWW-feed pipes leading to Australia
slow the Internet for all (if filtering happens),
but it take time from the National Broadband Network.
---
Call me cynical, but - just maybe - that is the whole idea of such a dim bureaucrat being placed into such a ministry's seat.
It probably helps Telstra to have such a dim-wit
in the minister's chair.
TeleConference!
But they're not the only ones likely to be tele-
conferencing... many of their senior colleagues
will (and - I feel - should) be queuing for the
teleconferencing room / line, as well.
In fact, here in AU, there are serious proposals
that tax payers fund teleconferencing systems -
rather than costly overseas "study trips" for MPs.
It's part of a long list of better ways to reduce
AU's rates of carbon emissions -and- improve our
cost per Km travelled (even when driving a car),
listed and discussed here:
Melbourne computer programmer, Geoff Hudson's
"The Manhattan Project for climate change"
Transcript:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/ockhamsrazor/stories/2009/2514433.htm#transcript
PodcastMP3:
http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2009/03/orr_20090315.mp3
Audio runs about 13 min; its podcase ~6.3 MB
well worth a listen... if we could only get
Aussie MPs to consider it, we'd be right.
Re: Teleconferencing
If it's good enough for TV news and current
events, it's ready to be brought our, dusted
off & used in corporate & gov't circles...
ie, after suitable security enhancements are
added to otherwise fine models from the past.
Aren't you forgetting about the Net Neutrality issues, that could (if not do)
disrupt VoIP for some Canadians?
CBC podcasts mention a coming / recent gov't consultation, in which ISP's are
demanding that Net Neutrality not burden them any more, in future.
I managed to omit the cost for GSM + Skype service on a SkypePhone
At intro of the SkypePhone (from Australian "3"), one could choose:
- 24 month Au$ 29 Cap" plan (then, with a min. spend of Au$ 20 / mon)
- buy a Skypephone & use it on a Pre-Paid basis: Min. Au$ 15 / mon
The "$29 Cap" has since changed to have a $29 min. spend (but includes
more GSM service, each month).
So, in Australia, we have a few serious competitors (eg, MyNetFone),
eg, offering low-cost ATA's (1-off price to buy it of under Au$ 20)
and VoIP service plans (to anyone who knows about them) as low as
Au$ 0 (ie, FREE) each month, ie, pay only for your calls ( Au$ 0.10
for up to 2 hours in each call you make to a normal Australian land-
line; Au$ 0.15 / min for calls to Aussie mobiles); 1 DID no. incl'd.
Retailers offer higher-priced ATA's (even from same VoIP provider),
or did... Most get ATA's directly from MNF at subsidized prices.
An early "visible" if more costly provider - Engine (or similar) -
wanted you to buy an ATA for Au$ 150 or Au$ 99, a while ago, but
have realised the futility of such high prices.
Engine also charged a monthly fee (now, about Au$ 10 / mon) plus
somewhat more for calls.
MyNetFone seems to have been the most creative & versatile, eg,
offering:
- software for Nokia cell phones that enable one to make/receive
calls either paying (high prices) for cellular privider's data
or - more recently & economically - use your choice of WiFi
provider (incuding your own home / office WiFi access-point)
as the (cheaper) source of data to support your VoIP calls
- support for softphones (theirs & others)
- cheap ATA's, some with routers WiFi and/or modems, ie, a reason-
able range of ATA brands & models, ususally locked to MyNetFone
- (for business clients) IP-PBX options (see their site for details)
Their low-cost call rates applied (as above), but any cell-pro-
vider's data or other broadband data costs were - as always -
yours to bear, along with them.
--- Skype on a mobile phone or Sony PSP or computer:
Mobile carrier (Hutcheonson?) "3" has offered Skype offers a
GSM-based cellphone with facilitated, built-in Skype features;
you can see it at Skype.com or Three.com.au.
With a SkypePhone in hand (a user who within range of "3"'s
broadband network can talk to any computer or Sony PSP or Skype-
phone based Skype-user... for 4,000 minutes / mon and/or sent
up to 10,000 text messages / month (in Skype text chat mode),
for an incredibly low monthly fee, even if you add-in a fee
for the SkypePhone handset. Of course, it's Skype- (not GSM-)
voice quality. But messages sent via Skype are NOT limited to
160 characters, as SMS chunks are.
Sony's PSP 3002 (AU-version) includes both WiFi & Skype (voice
only; neither SMS (since it's NOT a GSM cellphone) nor Skype
chat-mode text messages can be sent from a PSP).
If you bought a month or (cheaper, per mon) a year Skype "sub-
scription," you get 1 or 3 DID no.'s based in your choice of
any of 30+ countries, as well as 10,000 minutes of talk-time.
So, using such a subscription, you can ring any normal landline
number - in any of the countries on the list (of 32+ lands), etc.
Of course Skype-to-Skype calls & chat messages remain free. :-)
---
In short, enough options, easy for the end-user to setup & main-
tain (ie, if s/he's a bit of a geek).
Practicing medicine based on CEB doesn't seem
any different from doing Evidence-Based Medicine.
What good is there in changing the name to CEB?
EBM seems more likely to be acceptable to people,
ie, once they understand what it entails and how
it works.
Each sounds to me like Science having greater in-
put to the practice of medicine... not a bad idea!
#1 "to deposit INTO" - the agency deposits refunds/reimbursements into it
#2 is printed on cheques (hopefully, only genuine cheques, issued by holder's bank, but - these days - this is a risk; don't give this number out... ie, don't write a lot of cheque)
#3 I originally thought it might be harmless to let folks you have to write a cheque to, so they can see if they're likely to be able to cash the cheque, but I now think it poses a risk, eg:
Someone with #2, might like to know how LARGE a cheques it might be safe for them to write...
Of course, most cheques in Australia are marked "for deposit only" (eg, via 2 parallel lines, printed diagonally across each cheque), and that
might be at least a bit problematic for most fraudsters...
So, I'm down to just #1 & #2, now (or a single credit card number, as in my earlier reply to my OP).
I would have thought that payments to the travel agency would be made via credit card (for cash-flow reasons) and any reimbursements might (for reasons unclear to me) have to go back via check account.
Using a credit card for money flowing in both directions might work in Australia (if not where the article's story it set), because - last time I checked - abuse of one's credit card here (without the holder's knowledge or authority) can't cost the card-holder more than, say, $50, and it might be less or even $0 (haven't checked... anyone else in Oz able to confirm or add to this?)
If having another's check book account number means that one can withdraw from it, here's an easy fix:
Each account gets (at least) 2 numbers:
1. to deposit INTO it,
2. another to write cheques to get $$$ OUT of it, &
3. maybe a 3rd to let vendors & banks (with a cheque in-hand) to check that the balance covers the cheque.
It would - with that structure - not matter that this web site's security is breached (at least for -that- particular account).
February 12 Wilkes-Barre's "Times Leader" newspaper article:
Judge picked to review Ciavarella juvenile cases
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker ... Law & Order Reporter
The state Supreme Court has appointed a senior Berks County judge to review potentially thousands of cases that were handled by Luzerne County juvenile court judge Mark Ciavarella dating back to 2003.
Read more Luzerne County Judges articles
In appointing Senior Judge Arthur E. Grim, the high court said it wanted to ensure a thorough review is conducted of all cases to determine whether a âoetravesty of juvenile justiceâ occurred under Ciavarellaâ(TM)s tenure, and, if so, to take whatever action is necessary to provide relief to the affected juveniles.
That relief could include holding new hearings, filing petitions to expunge their records or to vacate their adjudications entirely, the court said.
The court was prompted to act following the filing of criminal charges on Jan. 26 against Ciavarella and Judge Michael Conahan that alleged, in part, the judges profited from Ciavarellaâ(TM)s sentencing of juveniles to detention centers once owned by Butler Township attorney Robert Powell.
Ciavarella and Conahan are scheduled to plead guilty today to charges that they accepted more than $2.6 million in kickbacks in exchange for rulings that benefited the detention centers.
âoeWe are very pleased and applaud the court for taking the step of appointing a special master,â said Marsha Levick, an attorney with the Juvenile Law Center in Philadelphia, the agency that filed the petition that led to the courtâ(TM)s action. âoeJudge Grim is an excellent choice. Theyâ(TM)ve granted him broad discretion to fashion relief for thousands of kids, which is a critically important step in the process.â
The law center asked the court to review Luzerne County cases after data showed that more than 50 percent of children who appeared before Ciavarella in 2005 and 2006 were not represented by an attorney. The countyâ(TM)s juvenile detention placement rate was also significantly higher than the state average.
The Supreme Courtâ(TM)s order directs Grim to identify juveniles who were not represented by an attorney and those who were committed to the Pa. Child Care and Western Pa Child Care detention centers. Grim will then recommend to the court whether a child should be granted a new hearing, or whether to grant a petition to expunge their record or vacate their adjudication.
In deciding whether to a recommend a new hearing, the court directed Grim to consider whether the youth is still subject to jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
Levick said she expects most cases will be resolved by filing petitions to expunge records, because the vast majority of affected youth are no longer under the jurisdiction of the juvenile court.
District Attorney Jacqueline Musto Carroll and Luzerne County President Judge Chester Muroski vowed they will provide âoecomplete cooperationâ to Grim. Muroski said arrangements have been made for Grim to occupy a chamber in the Penn Place building to ensure he has full access to all files he needs.
3 Reader Comments
D R Lunsford said...
This is epic sociopathy. A country where this can happen can't possibly live very long. Who knows what mountain of corruption in American justice underlies this tip of the iceberg? One looks at his neighbors and wonders - who are these people? What sort of country do I live in? Is anything real? Is there any level of depravity unexplored by modern Americans? -drl
February 12, 2009 at 4:36 AM
sunlight said...
clean their records? ha! get the check book out how about that?
February 12, 2009 at 6:38 AM
concerned resident said...
While I applaud the decision of the State Supreme Court in/re to reviewing previous sentencing of our county juvenilles, I am wondering: just where do the funds come from to cover Judge Arthur E. Grim's salary and related expenses for this project. Will Luzerne County be liable for any of these expenses?
February 12, 2009 at 12:43 PM
February 14 Wilkes-Barre's "Times Leader" newspaper article:
Conahan got cash from pension fund
Records show he withdrew $302,777 from pension account when he retired.
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker ... Law & Order Reporter
Luzerne County Judge Michael Conahan withdrew $302,777 from his pension account when he retired in January 2008 â" an action that allowed him to retain nearly $94,000 in interest that might otherwise have been forfeited based on his guilty plea Thursday to federal charges, according to state pension laws.
Conahan opted to take the lump sum payment, which constituted $208,964, in contributions he made plus $93,812 in interest, in lieu of a higher monthly payment he would have been entitled to had he left the funds there, according to Robert Gentzel, spokesman for the State Employee Retirement System.
The action ensured Conahan collected the interest payments, which he would not have been entitled to recoup if he had pleaded guilty prior to his retirement and that plea resulted in the forfeiture of his pension, according to the stateâ(TM)s Pension Forfeiture Act.
That act states that any person convicted of a crime that is considered a âoeforfeitable offenseâ is entitled to recoup only the money he or she paid into the retirement system, Gentzel said. They cannot collect interest, which accrues at a rate of 4 percent annually.
That did not impact Conahan, however, because he retired on Jan. 15, 2008 â" just more than a year before the U.S. Attorneyâ(TM)s office filed fraud and tax charges against him and a co-defendant Judge Mark Ciavarella.
Conahan and Ciavarella pleaded guilty Thursday to charges of tax evasion and of defrauding the public of their honest services in connection with a more than $2.6 million kickback scheme.
In addition to the lump sum, Conahan has been receiving a monthly pension payment of $8,073.87 since his retirement. He would lose future payments if his guilty plea is ultimately deemed to be a forfeitable offense, but he would not be required to pay back the past monthly payments.
Thatâ(TM)s because forfeiture affects only money that is paid after a conviction has been obtained and the person has been officially sentenced, Gentzel said.
âoeThere is not a way we can reach back and recover prior payments. Forfeiture is prospective form the date of conviction,â he said.
The stateâ(TM)s forfeiture act requires the forfeiture of pension benefits for anyone convicted of certain crimes that âoebreach the memberâ(TM)s duty of faithful and honest public serviceâ if the crime was committed through the personâ(TM)s public office.
Given that definition, itâ(TM)s anticipated the offenses Conahan and Ciavarella committed will be considered forfeitable offenses. That determination has not been officially made yet, however.
Gentzel said the retirement system generally does not conduct that analysis until after a conviction has been obtained.
Conahan and Ciavarellaâ(TM)s plea agreements call for them to serve 87 months in prison and to pay an amount of restitution that has not yet been determined.
Federal forfeiture laws permit the government to seek a wide variety of assets, including pensions, to fulfill restitution orders. Whether Conahanâ(TM)s lump sum pension payment could be subject to forfeiture was not immediately clear Friday.