There is also a video version of this interview for UK viewers (not sure if it will work for viewers outside the UK)
1,881 karma · joined December 25, 2012
...
<body>
</body>
</html>
Do sites like this point to a future where more and more web sites (not web apps) are built with Javascript frameworks? Is this a good thing? And can these sites acommodate all users? (Assuming they want to.)
[1] Some examples of sites that won't display anything if Javascript is disabled (even though they're most displaying text): http://googlecommerce.blogspot.co.uk/ http://googleandyourbusiness.blogspot.co.uk/
http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/videos/j/video-jacquard-weaving...
"I understand after reading the BBC's Price of Football survey why there is concern over the rising cost of watching football in this country but, for most Premier League players, it is not something they are ever going to worry about.
To be completely honest, during my 20-year playing career, I never once thought about how much it was costing fans to go to games.
Other players might have been different, but I did not meet any."
Bing's privacy policy is far from perfect, but it's more informative than Google's privacy policy. Here's an example extract from Bing's privacy policy
"We store search terms (and the cookie IDs associated with search terms) separately from any account information that directly identifies the user, such as name, email address and phone numbers. We have technological safeguards in place designed to prevent the unauthorised correlation of this data and we remove the entirety of the IP address after 6 months, and cookies and other cross session identifiers, after 18 months."
They also clearly tell you that wiping your search history doesn't mean erasing it from their search logs:
"For Bing Search in your browser, using the search terms you enter and the results you click, search history provides an easy way to revisit the sites and searches you've used before. You may clear your search history from appearing on the site by following the steps provided here or by going to the Bing preferences page noted above. Clearing your history removes it from the Search History service and prevents that history from being displayed on the site, but does not delete information from our standard search logs..."
http://www.microsoft.com/privacystatement/en-gb/bingandmsn/d...
Now compare that to Google's privacy policy which tells you nothing about whether your data is anonymised and for how long your data is kept. And all this from a company that does associate your search activity with your account (the one with with your date of birth, gender, location and possibly phone number). Remember too that Google arguably tracks and records online behaviour more than anyone else. Given the staggering amounts of data they collect, you'd think that would give them the impetus to be more informative about how they use your data, but it's quite the opposite. Their privacy policy tells you very little:
It means whatever Google explains it to mean. Google can either be vague about it, or they can be clear and informative. Google is the one collecting the data. Only they know what is captured and for what purpose. It's their responsibility to explain clearly what they track and record. All of the questions you pose are ones that Google can answer.
I disagree that strict wording prevents the evolution of the software. It might prevent Google from mining user data in order to build a profile of user likes and behaviour. But I consider this type of data capture and analysis to be extend beyond the boundaries of simply improving a piece of software.
They should do in my opinion. I find it depressing that so many people overlook or dismiss privacy concerns, particularly where kids are concerned.
The kids who are asked to use Google classroom have no choice in the matter since the decision is made by the school. That means they must sign up for a Google Account regardless of whether they want one. It's the responsibility of the adults to evaluate the impact of the software they choose. And privacy should be one of the top concerns for anyone evaluating software for educational use in my view.
Google's educational privacy policy [1] is carefully worded to state that they do not mine the content you upload to Google classroom ("Your data is yours"). What they don't state is whether they track the activities of school students and what this actually entails. How is that data aggregated? Who sees that data inside Google? Is the data anonymised? Or is it tied to an individual student?
Given that you must enter a date of birth to create a Google Account, Google is capturing very specific and personal details of thousands, perhaps millions of students. Over time, Google will have amassed a staggering amount of information about the behaviour and activities of these students and will continue to do so into their adult lives (if the students continue to use their Google Account).
If Google isn't tracking the online activities of Google classroom users, why do they not simply state that?
Grey squirrels are absent from most of mainland Europe (red squirrels are the native species). However, there is a small population of grey squirrels in Italy. The concern is that these grey squirrels may spread into other continental countries and affect the native red squirrel populations.
Earlier this year, Imperial College London revealed details of a study into the genetic diversity of Italian grey squirrel populations:
"Genotyping of grey squirrels sampled from Italy and the UK shows a direct link between genetic diversity and their ability to invade new environments."
http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcolleg...
For UK viewers, it's available on iPlayer until Friday 19 Sept. 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04hcthj/
For everyone else, someone's uploaded it to YouTube, although the last 10 minutes are missing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjuQofIleOg
It's available on iPlayer until Friday 19 Sept. 2014 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04hcthj/
Someone's uploaded it to YouTube, although the last 10 minutes are missing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjuQofIleOg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTjNkbLBEqg
There is a segment in the programme that starts at 4 mins 50 sec that explains how key fibre optic cables that connect the UK and US handle as much as 25% of all internet traffic. It also explains how relatively simple it is for GCHQ to insert an "optical tap" that allows them to capture the data that flows through the cables.
The SNP proposed plan is to encourage skilled workers (from outside the EU) using a controlled points-based system. That's quite a different policy position to the EU where EU citizens can freely live and work in any EU country. I doubt many people in the UK would object to the skilled immigration policy the SNP proposes. But, of course, we need workers of all skill levels. I agree that the rhetoric from the UKIP and Conservative party on this subject (and the toxic British Press) is often alarmist and inflammatory.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04grp09/
The 60 minute running time meant the programme had to skim the surface for some topics. Nevertheless, I thought the programme was well-made and informative. Recommended.
Tracking is bad when you know little to nothing about what is being is tracked about you and how that information is used. While you might get targeted or personalised results as a result of tracking, that is likely just a small outcome of the data collected about you. Who knows what else is being analysed or number-crunched about your online behaviour? If you read Google's privacy policy, the most notable aspect is how little it tells you. Nothing about how your data is aggregated, who sees your data, how long that data is kept for, whether it's anonymised. Is the data collected to "protect Google and our users" (their words) used solely for that purpose? (For example, providing your date-of-birth for age verification and your mobile number for two-factor authentication.) Or is this information also used for tracking and profile-building? These are all reasonable questions to ask any company that tracks you online or asks for your personal information. But Google aren't giving answers. And Google arguably tracks online behaviour more than anyone else.
- display the heatmap first - have a prominent link saying something like: add your vote to the map. When someone clicks that link, ask them to enter their location (city or town and country), then ask them the same question the Scots will vote for in the referendum: Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes/No.
I think the auto-detect location causes too many problems and may have privacy implications if, as another poster says, you can identify quite precise locations.
What would be really nice would be a map similar to the Book Depository ("Watch people shop" map):
http://www.bookdepository.com/live
In this case, you would display a pop-up each time someone voted with the name of their town or city and whether they'd voted Yes or No.
http://vimeo.com/103907391 (3 mins long)
Many Linux users probably don't want to see a single model. They like the choice of being able to choose from different distributions and their own desktop model.
Ubuntu is probably the closest to being a consistent desktop environment and look how much grief they get from some Linux users over their UX choices. The open source model works for software, but it can't work for UX or design (at least I'm not convinced it can) because you can't design by commitee - any yet everyone wants a say in the UX.
Would it have been better for Munich to have specified open document or data formats rather than the choice of software? This is what the UK government has recently done [1]. The choice of software is up to the individual departments as long as the software can read or create the open formats etc. At least this gives you the choice of switching to dfferent software without being tied to a single vendor's closed-sorce document format.
[1] http://blogs.computerworlduk.com/open-enterprise/2014/07/hug...
Google arguably tracks online activity more than any other company. They propbably know more about your online behaviour than you do yourself. They have made tracking appear to be a perfectly reasonable and normal thing to do. They even have an OS (ChromeOS) that tracks everything you do from the apps you use to the web pages you visit, to even the documents you print (all routed through Google's cloud print service, even if your printer is sitting next to your ChromeBook). This isn't even done anonymously given that you have to sign in to use these services (you can't use a ChromeBook without signing in, using it as a guest limits what you can do). How many people would be happy to sign in to MacOS, Windows, Linux and know that everything they were doing was being recorded and tracked? Meanwhile, the tech community just gives Google the easiest ride possible on such matters.
I don't believe Google does anything remotely sinister with the data it collects. But it is a staggering amount of data that they capture. And if you read their lengthy privacy policy, it's notable how little it tells you. How is my data aggregated? Who sees it inside Google? How is it anonymised (if indeed it is - no mention of this in their privacy policy). Some of Google's services ask for very personal info: date of birth, mobile phone number. It's reasonable to want to know what Google uses this data for. Is is really just for security and verification? If they cared about privacy, they'd actually tell you. Their statements about privacy are always framed in terms of security. Yes, privacy is not possible without security, but security does not equal privacy. To me Google's attitude is summed up thus: we'll do everything to keep yoru data secure but we won't stop tracking you to death.
In the UK, you go to a cinema to see a film. Going to the theatre is understood to mean going to see a play/musical/performing arts.
From the report:
"Germany and the UK are the self-declared climate champions of the EU. However, Germany uses more coal to generate electricity than any other EU country, while the UK comes third in absolute coal consumption for power after Poland;"
Here's the 10 most co2-polluting thermal power plants in the EU according to the report
1. Bełchatów, Poland
2. Neurath, Germany
3. Niederaussem, Germany
4. Jänschwalde, Germany
5. Boxberg, Germany
6. Drax, United Kingdom
7. Weisweiler, Germany
8. Agios Dimitrios, Greece
9. Brindisi Sud, Italy
10. Lippendorf, Germany
Or you can read the summary from this Guardian report http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/22/germany-u...
All cities need contrasting spaces. Even the medieval town or city was marked by narrow streets that led to an open piazza or square. The feeling of walking from a confined narrow space into a wide open expanse can give a feeling of exhiliration. It's something architects continue to use today inside buildings. Think of the walk through a corridor into the grounds of a stadium and the excitement it generates. Or the excitement of walking through a corridor in a theatre before you enter the large expanse of the auditorium.
The scale and proportion of buildngs in relation to one another creates a sense of enclosure that can either feel comfortable or uncomfortable. The author calls the extremely narrow streets "intimate" and they are in many cases, but they can also be claustrophobic (especially if you live in them).
For housing, not everyone will want to live in streets as narrow as the pictures in the blog post. Who doesn't prefer long views out of their window? (Preferably of some greenery) That doesn't mean building huge spaces between houses as is often the case in modern car suburbs. But there needs to be enough distance to psychologically feel you have a sense of privacy from your neighbours.
Here is a random Victorian street (in a very expensive part of London) that I think has a good scale. The road is not too wide. Cars are parked on the street rather than in garages. The houses are of fairly high density. This is a better template for housing than modern car susburbs in my view. But it won't be for everyone.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.556208,-0.165162,3a,75y,36...
"After two weeks, any associated information, such as your IP address, is stripped, and only the URL itself is retained." ( From: http://blog.chromium.org/2012/01/all-about-safe-browsing.htm... )
As a Firefox user, I really think it's poor form on the part of Mozilla to not provide any additional information or re-assurances on their website about the data captured and recorded by Google. Mozilla's slogan on their homepage is "Commited to your privacy and an open web". Being committed to privacy means being open and explicit about the data captured through their browser services, no matter how innocuous the data might seem. It also means presenting that information clearly and making it easy to find. People can then make informed choices about whether they want to use such services.
This is the sort of thing I would have expected them to have said:
"When you download a file from a web page, Firefox checks that the file does not contain a virus or malware before you save it. To check the file is safe to download, Firefox contacts Google to use a service they provide called Safe Browsing. Google checks if the file is harmful or safe, and sends this information back to Firefox (this normally happens in a few seconds). If the file is safe, Firefox will start the download. If the file is harmful, Firefox will block the download and display a warning message.
When Firefox uses the Safe Browsing feature, it needs to send Google information about your download. Google records the following information from Firefox: your IP address, the name of the file you are downloading, the address of the website, and [insert any other data recorded here]. [Also insert a re-assurance that Google does not keep a record of all your downloads against your Google account or against your IP address - assuming this is the case. Also explain how Google uses that info. and how long it's kept for etc.]
[Then finally explain how to switch off this feature if you don't want to use Google's Safe Browsing feature.]"
It obviously comes with lots of caveats and tells you nothing about the quality of life in a particular country. It's still quite eye-opening though.
Where are you on the global pay scale? (March 2012) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17543356
I'm probably in the minority, but I actually don't go to the cinema if I know the film is being shown in a small auditorium. It doesn't matter what the type of film is, I want to see it on a medium or large screen. I hate walking into an auditorium only to find a tiny screen - it ruins the whole experience for me. You also pay the same ticket price as the cinemagoers watching a different film in a much larger auditorium (with bigger screen).
I realise that cinemas can't fill their larger auditoriums with certain films, but some of the smaller auditoriums I've sat in have screens not much bigger than what a home projector will give you. Unfortunately, a lot of indpendent cinemas have some of the smallest screens I've seen. I'd rather wait for the DVD than pay for a paltry screen experience.
So yes, for me at least, a bigger screen, and a brighter picture does influence whether or not I would go to the cinema.
If you're in the UK, you can still watch the programme on iPlayer
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01lxyzc/horizon-201220...
Here's the accompanying article from August 2012: The power of intermittent fasting http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-19112549
Today (June 28) is the day that Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assasinated in 1914:
37 Days: Countdown to World War One http://www.bbc.co.uk/timelines/zgy334j
The new guidelines are much better than what they had before. The new visual design is also much better. However, some of the language used to describe the new design sounds inflated and a bit pretentious (it's ripe for parody!)
They've gone for a clear and uncluttered visual look. Hopefully, the next iteration of their guidelines will also include simple, clear and unpretentious copy.
An example of a really well-written design patterns guide is from the gov.uk site. It's not an equivalent of the Google design guide, but in terms of how to write guidelines and recommendations, it's the best example I've seen
https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/user-centred-design/resour...