I happen to know this case. And I happen to know security in hotels in general, and even in some in Austria in particular. Here's the problem, you're cordially invited to provide a solution.
You're dealing with people that are total computer illiterates. And I mean total. They maybe learned a thing or two about using them, they might even have managed to navigate an ECDL course which is basically a glorified way of saying "I can turn on a computer without it instantly exploding", but their expertise and actual training is in something completely different. Many of them actually do not like computers AT ALL. They much prefer dealing with people, else they would not have chosen that occupation.
These people are now chronically understaffed, overworked and stressed. They're supposed to greet people, hand them their keys, do bills, handle the phone and of course email. And no, simply hiring more people isn't possible, there are no more people you could hire. We're talking about a highly seasonal business where there are either too many or too few people available, hence no more want to go into the profession while at the same time during season you can't get anyone. Not even for obscene amounts of money.
On top of all this, you're dealing with... how do I put this nicely... a rather mafia-like system in place that keeps the number of companies that could actually offer solutions low. Most hotel software is crap. And most hotels would gladly choose something else, if they could. But for some odd reason those systems that are offered can be offered surprisingly cheap (it MIGHT have to do with some semi-public agencies (an Austrian concept, don't ask) that curiously prefer to fund and subsidize those products), while you would certainly not qualify for such subsidies. The cynic in me would add "at least 'til you find the right politician to pay the kickback to", but no, there is no corruption in Europe. None at all. Maybe in Italy, Spain and Greece, but certainly not in the "good" states in central Europe.
So, now you have the basics in, let the rest sink in too. Like a fluctuation that's CRAZY. Average tenure of your workers is measured in weeks. Months if you're lucky. Training them is money you throw into the chimney, for the benefit of whoever they work for next. So if you think that you could raise awareness and give your workers an idea what to look for, ponder whether you'll still have that receptionist after the season is over. There is zero security awareness among your workers.
Then the fact that you pretty much HAVE TO open every email you get, and that crappy spelling is something that doesn't faze you anymore because you're dealing with people from all over the planet, many of them wanting to boast just how well they speak your language when they actually don't. Some of them required to actually send you attachments for legal reasons, with the oddest formats you will ever encounter. In other words, the chance that some viewer for an esoteric format is installed and WAY out of date because nobody had a minute of time to update it in the past 3 months is likely.
The situation is not easy and I was actually involved in a similar case where pretty much every solution we came up with ended up being shot down for one of these reasons (and some more, but I don't want to bore you more than necessary). Hotels are rather complicated beasts to secure. Twice so in Austria with its very... special circumstances, legal oddities and seasonal requirements.
And you will go and make a system that the average computer illiterate can use? Because that's what you're dealing with here.
You can rest assured that some clever markedroid sold him this system for lots of Euros and he bought it because it was one of the few where he actually understood at least the basic concept of how it works. Unless you have some neatly designed plastic boxes that house those RasPis so they don't look like scary computer stuff, he won't touch them.
If entering a hotel room that isn't the one you're renting is your goal, the average electronic lock is more dear to you than the average mechanical one. Mostly because you don't even have to remake a key. All you really need in most cases is a strong magnet and knowing a thing or two about the lock.
You think they have computers. No. They have computer. Singular. They have one computer handling the door keys, the room booking, the emails and most likely the bookkeeping, too.
Why would you assume that a small hotel would have more than one computer?
So ignore YouTube and use one of the many other video platforms? That's the great thing about this, you actually have a CHOICE.
It ain't that easy when your ISP decides you can't see YouTube anymore and have to use his video service. Because for many people, it's this ISP or none.
And yet I can use the internet just fine without google, without twitter and without reddit having any kind of interference with whatever I try to do there, as long as I don't plan to use any service they offer.
Now please show me how to do the same concerning my ISP. Bear in mind that many people don't have the option to simply switch to another one, lacking any other ones.
Actually, people didn't pay for the 50 channels they wanted. They paid for the 50 shows they wanted. And this is not going to be any different. Be honest, all you "CBS all access" subscribers, who of you is watching anything other than STD? Possibly because of "I pay for it anyway, so I can just as well...", but NONE of these other formats is something you'd pay for.
I work in security and am the go-to guy for all computer related ailments a friend might have. I have seen my fair share of computers that were SO overbloated with crapware, adware and malware that they barely still started. And usually, I get called at the point when the final straw breaks the camel's back, but no second sooner. I have removed more ad-, helper-, and search-bars than many people could name. Usually from the same machine.
Yet these people, whose pain threshold is very obviously incredibly high, the very people that put up with an i7 browsing at P2 speeds while swapping like crazy because their browser is squeaking under the load of addons and browser bars that fill about twice the ram they have, these people have now started asking me whether and how to get rid of those video ads.
These people put up with EVERYTHING that doesn't outright nuke their PC. And they are now starting to install video ad blockers.
YouTube has stopped this annoying practice. At least on my computer.
This is basically the main problem here. People go out of their way to get rid of those ads. We have seen it with conventional online advertising that has become so invasive and annoying that even people who wouldn't have bothered otherwise have now installed adblockers. There are people who put up with dozens of error messages and popups when they turn on their computer, who put up with browser windows the size of a stamp because search bars and other "free" gadgets litter it and people who put up with their computer running like molasses due to the load of trojans filling it, but they install adblockers.
Can you imagine just how annoying something has to be for those people to get off their ass and actually start doing something?
This is how annoying ads have become. And pre-video ads are the same as full screen popups: You are hopeful to see what you're wanting, yet get held up by something that keeps you from going there. This is actually annoying enough to make people install relevant blockers to get rid of it. Even people who would put up with pretty much anything don't accept something like this.
The ad-well has been poisoned for conventional ads. Please don't ruin it for videos now, too.
Then you will not change anything. Given the choice in most couples the woman will spend more time home with the newborn than the man, making her less attractive as an employee.
There is no worse place for your ad than in front of some video someone wants to watch. Your ad could be the most topical ad ever, targeted perfectly for me and even about something I have been looking for for my whole life. And still my reaction to it would be negative. Why? Because it keeps me from getting what I want.
Not just like the ads interrupting shows that you watch. They may be annoying, but at least you already got a bit of what you wanted. That's more like someone calling during dinner. Annoying, but you're still chewing, you're still tasting your food, you're still more or less satisfied while you get annoyed. No. This is interrupting and annoying you BEFORE you get what you want. That's more like someone who stops you right after you're done cooking, preparing to sit down to enjoy your meal, looking forward to it and already salivating in anticipation.
This is the WORST kind of experience you could give someone. Your ad target already knows what he wants, thinks he is about to get it and this is exactly the moment you interrupt him.
This person will do anything to get rid of your ad. And he will not care AT ALL what your ad is about. He will not watch it. He will use every second of the time he has to watch it to look for ways to end it so he finally gets what he actually wanted.
Security runs contrary to the interests of the makers of devices who want to sell their devices to you, use them to spy on you and sell that data to whoever wants to pay for it.
This is no debate. A debate is two people trying to find a solution either side can work with. There is no debate going on, it's already decided.
This said, the reason is simply that most ISPs are also content providers, i.e. cable TV providers, and they see this very lucrative portion of their portfolio become obsolete. And they fight this tooth and nail. Let's be honest here, cable TV is the license for printing money. Once the cables are in place, once the customer is set up, there is near zero maintenance going on. Compared to internet, there is practically zero customer support necessary. You have fixed costs that you can distribute on your subscribers, and once that break even point is reached, every single subscriber practically means that his fee is pure revenue.
This of course only works as long as you have a sizable amount of subscribers. Due to said fixed costs, you NEED a certain amount of them to keep the machine going. There are other contractual requirements concerning subscribers attached to it, because networks want eyeballs. And if you cannot provide them, those networks will quickly consider you not worthy the hassle of dealing with you.
There is a reason why by now you can have deals where internet without cable TV costs even more than with.
And the trend worsens. People are fed up with "normal" TV where the programming occasionally interrupts the ad stream, where they have to be present at whatever odd hours the networks want to place their favorite shows and where increasingly time shifting becomes "outlawed". Streaming your favorite shows is simply more convenient, more practical, less of a hassle, less ad-heavy and most of all often by now even cheaper.
Cable providers cannot compete with that. So they remember the old creed: If you can't compete, cheat.
Being kept on the fast lane in that last mile IS in their best interest. The very last thing they need is Comcast to create a competing service that offers a better experience because they can cripple the competition. How long do you think YouTube will remain relevant if loading one of their videos feels like using a 33.6kbit line while the new ComCastTube delivers them at full speed?
And how long until Vevo and other "we have all your favorite teeny idol" content providers move over to the provider-internal video services?
And then it's over for YouTube. While it sure is a lovely place for content creators of every kind, their maybe 10k views per video just don't hold a candle to the billions of views (and ad impressions) current chart hits bring in.
Slashdot Mirror
I happen to know this case. And I happen to know security in hotels in general, and even in some in Austria in particular. Here's the problem, you're cordially invited to provide a solution.
You're dealing with people that are total computer illiterates. And I mean total. They maybe learned a thing or two about using them, they might even have managed to navigate an ECDL course which is basically a glorified way of saying "I can turn on a computer without it instantly exploding", but their expertise and actual training is in something completely different. Many of them actually do not like computers AT ALL. They much prefer dealing with people, else they would not have chosen that occupation.
These people are now chronically understaffed, overworked and stressed. They're supposed to greet people, hand them their keys, do bills, handle the phone and of course email. And no, simply hiring more people isn't possible, there are no more people you could hire. We're talking about a highly seasonal business where there are either too many or too few people available, hence no more want to go into the profession while at the same time during season you can't get anyone. Not even for obscene amounts of money.
On top of all this, you're dealing with ... how do I put this nicely... a rather mafia-like system in place that keeps the number of companies that could actually offer solutions low. Most hotel software is crap. And most hotels would gladly choose something else, if they could. But for some odd reason those systems that are offered can be offered surprisingly cheap (it MIGHT have to do with some semi-public agencies (an Austrian concept, don't ask) that curiously prefer to fund and subsidize those products), while you would certainly not qualify for such subsidies. The cynic in me would add "at least 'til you find the right politician to pay the kickback to", but no, there is no corruption in Europe. None at all. Maybe in Italy, Spain and Greece, but certainly not in the "good" states in central Europe.
So, now you have the basics in, let the rest sink in too. Like a fluctuation that's CRAZY. Average tenure of your workers is measured in weeks. Months if you're lucky. Training them is money you throw into the chimney, for the benefit of whoever they work for next. So if you think that you could raise awareness and give your workers an idea what to look for, ponder whether you'll still have that receptionist after the season is over. There is zero security awareness among your workers.
Then the fact that you pretty much HAVE TO open every email you get, and that crappy spelling is something that doesn't faze you anymore because you're dealing with people from all over the planet, many of them wanting to boast just how well they speak your language when they actually don't. Some of them required to actually send you attachments for legal reasons, with the oddest formats you will ever encounter. In other words, the chance that some viewer for an esoteric format is installed and WAY out of date because nobody had a minute of time to update it in the past 3 months is likely.
The situation is not easy and I was actually involved in a similar case where pretty much every solution we came up with ended up being shot down for one of these reasons (and some more, but I don't want to bore you more than necessary). Hotels are rather complicated beasts to secure. Twice so in Austria with its very ... special circumstances, legal oddities and seasonal requirements.
And you will go and make a system that the average computer illiterate can use? Because that's what you're dealing with here.
You can rest assured that some clever markedroid sold him this system for lots of Euros and he bought it because it was one of the few where he actually understood at least the basic concept of how it works. Unless you have some neatly designed plastic boxes that house those RasPis so they don't look like scary computer stuff, he won't touch them.
If entering a hotel room that isn't the one you're renting is your goal, the average electronic lock is more dear to you than the average mechanical one. Mostly because you don't even have to remake a key. All you really need in most cases is a strong magnet and knowing a thing or two about the lock.
You think they have computers. No. They have computer. Singular. They have one computer handling the door keys, the room booking, the emails and most likely the bookkeeping, too.
Why would you assume that a small hotel would have more than one computer?
So ignore YouTube and use one of the many other video platforms? That's the great thing about this, you actually have a CHOICE.
It ain't that easy when your ISP decides you can't see YouTube anymore and have to use his video service. Because for many people, it's this ISP or none.
And yet I can use the internet just fine without google, without twitter and without reddit having any kind of interference with whatever I try to do there, as long as I don't plan to use any service they offer.
Now please show me how to do the same concerning my ISP. Bear in mind that many people don't have the option to simply switch to another one, lacking any other ones.
An alternate fact, you mean?
Actually, people didn't pay for the 50 channels they wanted. They paid for the 50 shows they wanted. And this is not going to be any different. Be honest, all you "CBS all access" subscribers, who of you is watching anything other than STD? Possibly because of "I pay for it anyway, so I can just as well...", but NONE of these other formats is something you'd pay for.
In my experience, your partner is a minority.
I work in security and am the go-to guy for all computer related ailments a friend might have. I have seen my fair share of computers that were SO overbloated with crapware, adware and malware that they barely still started. And usually, I get called at the point when the final straw breaks the camel's back, but no second sooner. I have removed more ad-, helper-, and search-bars than many people could name. Usually from the same machine.
Yet these people, whose pain threshold is very obviously incredibly high, the very people that put up with an i7 browsing at P2 speeds while swapping like crazy because their browser is squeaking under the load of addons and browser bars that fill about twice the ram they have, these people have now started asking me whether and how to get rid of those video ads.
These people put up with EVERYTHING that doesn't outright nuke their PC. And they are now starting to install video ad blockers.
And that can be solved by bombing a country and making the people living there come to you?
That's "don't kill humans you know". But "don't kill humans" surely isn't part of our genetic program. As your examples show.
YouTube has stopped this annoying practice. At least on my computer.
This is basically the main problem here. People go out of their way to get rid of those ads. We have seen it with conventional online advertising that has become so invasive and annoying that even people who wouldn't have bothered otherwise have now installed adblockers. There are people who put up with dozens of error messages and popups when they turn on their computer, who put up with browser windows the size of a stamp because search bars and other "free" gadgets litter it and people who put up with their computer running like molasses due to the load of trojans filling it, but they install adblockers.
Can you imagine just how annoying something has to be for those people to get off their ass and actually start doing something?
This is how annoying ads have become. And pre-video ads are the same as full screen popups: You are hopeful to see what you're wanting, yet get held up by something that keeps you from going there. This is actually annoying enough to make people install relevant blockers to get rid of it. Even people who would put up with pretty much anything don't accept something like this.
The ad-well has been poisoned for conventional ads. Please don't ruin it for videos now, too.
Then you will not change anything. Given the choice in most couples the woman will spend more time home with the newborn than the man, making her less attractive as an employee.
This one is for free: Don't do it.
There is no worse place for your ad than in front of some video someone wants to watch. Your ad could be the most topical ad ever, targeted perfectly for me and even about something I have been looking for for my whole life. And still my reaction to it would be negative. Why? Because it keeps me from getting what I want.
Not just like the ads interrupting shows that you watch. They may be annoying, but at least you already got a bit of what you wanted. That's more like someone calling during dinner. Annoying, but you're still chewing, you're still tasting your food, you're still more or less satisfied while you get annoyed. No. This is interrupting and annoying you BEFORE you get what you want. That's more like someone who stops you right after you're done cooking, preparing to sit down to enjoy your meal, looking forward to it and already salivating in anticipation.
This is the WORST kind of experience you could give someone. Your ad target already knows what he wants, thinks he is about to get it and this is exactly the moment you interrupt him.
This person will do anything to get rid of your ad. And he will not care AT ALL what your ad is about. He will not watch it. He will use every second of the time he has to watch it to look for ways to end it so he finally gets what he actually wanted.
Found the person who never met a drug addict in person...
By telling people whether and how they may use public ground based on the whims of a private organization.
Is there a better way to promote their motto "We love animals. We hate humans."?
Read the bottom strip.
You might want to rethink that statement.
They say it moves the universe forwards.
So ... it's a supermassive black hole?
Can we nuke Comcast first?
I mean, even Churchill allied with Stalin to get rid of Hitler, even though he knew that "both pigs should be slaughtered".
Security runs contrary to the interests of the makers of devices who want to sell their devices to you, use them to spy on you and sell that data to whoever wants to pay for it.
This is no debate. A debate is two people trying to find a solution either side can work with. There is no debate going on, it's already decided.
This said, the reason is simply that most ISPs are also content providers, i.e. cable TV providers, and they see this very lucrative portion of their portfolio become obsolete. And they fight this tooth and nail. Let's be honest here, cable TV is the license for printing money. Once the cables are in place, once the customer is set up, there is near zero maintenance going on. Compared to internet, there is practically zero customer support necessary. You have fixed costs that you can distribute on your subscribers, and once that break even point is reached, every single subscriber practically means that his fee is pure revenue.
This of course only works as long as you have a sizable amount of subscribers. Due to said fixed costs, you NEED a certain amount of them to keep the machine going. There are other contractual requirements concerning subscribers attached to it, because networks want eyeballs. And if you cannot provide them, those networks will quickly consider you not worthy the hassle of dealing with you.
There is a reason why by now you can have deals where internet without cable TV costs even more than with.
And the trend worsens. People are fed up with "normal" TV where the programming occasionally interrupts the ad stream, where they have to be present at whatever odd hours the networks want to place their favorite shows and where increasingly time shifting becomes "outlawed". Streaming your favorite shows is simply more convenient, more practical, less of a hassle, less ad-heavy and most of all often by now even cheaper.
Cable providers cannot compete with that. So they remember the old creed: If you can't compete, cheat.
What "don't kill" tendency in humans?
Being kept on the fast lane in that last mile IS in their best interest. The very last thing they need is Comcast to create a competing service that offers a better experience because they can cripple the competition. How long do you think YouTube will remain relevant if loading one of their videos feels like using a 33.6kbit line while the new ComCastTube delivers them at full speed?
And how long until Vevo and other "we have all your favorite teeny idol" content providers move over to the provider-internal video services?
And then it's over for YouTube. While it sure is a lovely place for content creators of every kind, their maybe 10k views per video just don't hold a candle to the billions of views (and ad impressions) current chart hits bring in.
Hmm... can I still prefer the beast I know over the beast I don't even want to know? Because so far the internet is still quite usable.