The Conjungo Blog

I’ve commented before on the phenomena of sites such as Facebook.com. I have to state that I originally thought that social networking sites are sad but I have been persuaded to join. The reality is we have to stay in touch with new technology and new methods of communication and marketing.

I originally didn’t think there would be much point in blogging but I actually enjoy it and find it quite cathartic. Twitter is another new phenomenon and one that I am currently exploring. Of course my natural instinct is that it too, is sad. But no doubt I’ll be persuaded otherwise. The fact is that I didn’t see the point of iTunes and tried to argue with my kids that they would be better off buying a CD that they could keep. The fact is they are right. A good friend of mine encapsulated it thus; If you buy an album (CD) do you actually enjoy all of the music or just some? If it’s ‘just some’, then why pay for the lot. If you like 5 tracks, download the 5 you like at 75 pence a pop. Save money.

I was sold.

David Cameron (AKA Dave ‘hug a hoodie’), made a particular remark about Twitter, perhaps wrongly and ill advisedly as Twitter has mass appeal. The reality is that Twitter has a great deal of influence not only socially but commercially too. It’s all part of disseminating information and viral networking. The search engines now are taking notice too so it’s important to not only be aware but also to be involved. I can’t say that I shall update Twitter on a hourly basis once I’ve taken the plunge, but then that’s because I don’t think my life is that interesting on an hour by hour basis to justify that type of regular information. I could be wrong – it does occasionally happen.

I have been informed that this type of media can help as part of you or your organisation’s SEO strategy. Such is its speed and impact that the news of Michael Jackson’s death was communicated via Twitter before it was broadcast by most of the traditional media.

However, one problem that Twitter et al have caused (albeit not deliberately) is that people will either spend too much time on it (i.e. work time) or make rather dubious remarks often about work. Not a good idea. I’ve seen the results. Best count to 10 and then again. The same thing happened with email. People would react immediately. Writing a letter would enable people to ‘cool off’. Unfortunately, once you made a posting on a site, it’s too late. Too late to withdraw, (more often than not) and too late to minimise the damage.

So with this in mind, I shall no doubt conservatively & carefully (with a small ‘c’) enter new realms. This doesn’t mean that I won’t be opinionated or even contentious.

I shall keep you appraised.

Apple released their quarterly results this week. For them, it’s been the most profitable quarter ever. Remarkable but true. Profits are up by a staggering 47%.

I won’t analyse the figures, you can read them for yourself if you haven’t already. Admittedly, much of the revenues came from the iPhone & Macs, both of which have a more consumer following, but it does show that it is possible to weather the storm and that people are still spending. Let’s face it these things ain’t cheap in any sense of the word. So people are still prepared to fork out for great design and good products. Yes, I know I’ve said it before. People are prepared to pay a premium for certain niche products to be seen with the latest technology or gadget. So Apple is a fashion item of sorts.

Incredibly clever marketing.

I suspect that the next quarter will potentially be a bullish one. Why? Christmas is on its’ way. Yes I hate to say it but all the shops are gearing up with their Christmas décor and have started selling lights, glitter and the usual paraphernalia. Well, I like it! Sure it’s a little too early but why not? It’s cheery! Of course for all you cynics out there who say that Christmas is too commercial these days, well it always has been at least in my memory.

But back to my point, Orange and T Mobile have merged and have now the concession on selling the iPhone. So Apple has found an even wider audience and no doubt there will be people flocking to sign up with Orange/T Mobile or whatever they’ll decide to call themselves. Of course people will also be buying iPods of various flavours and downloading music from iTunes & so the band plays on.

It will be interesting to see what the other tech vendors results will be like, especially as this quarter for many is their end of financial year. Those results will be out in January and might just set the scene for next year.

The great news is, and I hate to dwell on this, is that marketing does work. You can have the greatest product (regardless of type and market, SME, SMB, enterprise or Consumer) but if no one is aware of it then no one will buy. The most successful companies have always been marketing and sales led. There have been many great engineering led companies but the reality is that they tend to be more niche. To have both is a major plus. I guess that Apple actually have both.

If only I’d bought shares.

The latest buzzword or hype in our industry is that of ‘cloud computing’. It’s actually been around for a long time with a number of well known proponents of this supposedly new delivery mechanism, especially in the CRM space but I shan’t mention names unless of course they wish to become a customer. Let’s face it, all ‘The Cloud’ is, is the internet. (Yes, I do know that there are ‘private clouds’ but this isn’t the time or the place.) So instead of storing software, data or really whatever else you might wish, locally on your PC, office or server-room, you use some-one else’s platform. All you need is a web-browser, access to the internet and bob’s your uncle. Good old Uncle Bob.

The vendor community, if they haven’t already, are all gearing up for the new onslaught of a supposedly new era in computing. I just think we were doing this years ago in the age of the mainframe and while I hate to keep reverting to hackneyed phrases, ‘what goes around, comes around’.

So what is the key driver to this? Well, cost of course. The recession while being debilitating and destructive has offered new opportunities for those in IT. Companies, regardless of size are beginning to seriously consider cloud computing as it is a great way of potentially reducing costs, increasing efficiencies and lowering CAPEX.

My view, for what it is worth, is that it is the next step – the evolution of outsourcing. I think people have overcome the fear of leaving their technology in the hands of a trusted third party and paying for it as a service. Now the internet has matured and people are no longer fearful or paranoid about the web, cloud computing should become the norm for a great many organisations and certainly well worth considering.

If you think about it, most companies probably use some form of cloud computing methodology. We use a hosting company who provide us with the ability to bring Conjungo to your screens. They provide a 24/7/365 service. They supply the hardware, infrastructure, security, load balancing, software licences, the whole ‘kit and caboodle’. Do we rely on them? Absolutely! You don’t enter into these types of relationships without a great deal of due diligence simply because any problems would reflect badly on you or company.

So cloud computing presents technologist with a new opportunity to make money and customers with a new opportunity to save money. Win-win.

And so to finish on yet another well known expression completely off the cuff of course, the opportunity should leave many in the industry ‘on cloud nine’.

I’ll get me coat.

I recently read that Blockbusters needed to close some 960 stores in order to remain financially viable.

Of course this is not good for their employees but I have to state that I’ve wondered for years as to how long they could keep going. I’ve seen many similar film rental units go out of business and desperately attempt to change their business model from renting films then games to selling games, DVDs and games consoles while the answer lay under their noses….or I should say on their PC’s.

The problem is and I’m sure I’m very typical, is that I often used to rent a DVD at the weekend mainly for my daughters’ and failed to take them back due to being busy at work. (The DVDs not my daughters, that is. How their Mother would be cross.) I was therefore landed with a fine which was more than I had I bought the film for. And of course these companies, perhaps understandably, are pretty rigorous at getting their money. As a result, people get annoyed and the company gets a bad reputation and people think why bother? Especially as you can have films sent by post and return them by post and keep them for a fair old time. Way more convenient. 

Now there are media systems where you can watch films on demand and pay per view. This means that you don’t need to worry about going to the rental store and picking a film that everyone will be happy with (assuming that your family aren’t with you at the time), you don’t have to worry about returning it on time, you don’t need to worry about changing your mind three hours later when you’ve found the time to watch it…i.e. ‘I really fancy watching ‘When Harry Met Sally’ and not ‘Revenge of the Driller Killer Zombie Flesh Eating Zoids’. (I know - I made up the word Zoid, so it isn’t a typo.)

These systems let you watch the film in HD if required, rewind, fast forward, pause and replay as many times as you wish within a given period. Much, much more convenient.

Furthermore, you now have the ability to download films on the internet or use the BBC iPlayer which is also very good. ITV and Channel Four have their own versions, also very good.

So these rental shops I suspect have done too little too late and failed to embrace new technology and the world of the web which they should have done years ago. Of course you can’t always get on the TV media systems a film that has just been launched and is an exclusive with one of the rental companies, but that’s fairly rare and will change and frankly, so what, I’ll wait a week or so. As for buying a DVD. Well when they first come out they cost circa £17. Wait a couple of months and they’ll be available for £6. A couple of months further down the line, £3. You know, why would I rent a film that I really, really like and know that I’ll watch a few times if I can buy it for £3?

So, all companies should be at least thinking about how they should adapt to changing demand and how they can adopt new technology to progress their business. For many, I fear it may be too late.

Blockbusters people are always cheerful, friendly and helpful from my experience and I really wish them luck. I don’t have much sympathy with the management but they won’t get hurt, it’s always the store people that get affected. They might be closing all of these stores unless they radically change their business and delivery mechanism.

It pays to constantly review your business. Look at new markets, new ways to doing business. Finding ways of getting to new markets. Embracing new technologies. Planning for the future.

My favourite saying for many years has been: ‘Question the answer. Challenge the norm.’ Used within reason, it works.

I discussed a couple of weeks ago briefly, the position with regard to Friends Reunited.

I mentioned in my blog that it had originally the ability to be considered what Facebook is today, at least in people’s perception and I stated that I would discuss at some point the reason why it has never achieved dominance in the market for social networking.

I believe that the original idea was great. Innovative and at the time, unique, but like many other companies failed to adopt and facilitate those market changes and address what people actually wanted.

It can be very easy for a company’s management team to assume what they think or perceive what the market and audience requires rather than actually finding out. This, more often than not, may be achieved through various studies and commissions but the most effective way is getting regular feedback from your customer base. Naturally, every business should be doing this. You should know exactly what issues and problems they face, what their customers expect, and how you might help achieve their company or departmental objectives.

You also need to ensure that you have a business model that is easy to understand and is of value. And for a website, it of course needs to be compelling, easy to read, use and navigate.

This, I believe is where Friends Reunited and many others have failed. The site became more complex, difficult to navigate and too many areas where people had to enter details that people don’t want to enter, at least not more than once.

Personally and I know that I am not alone, I hate filling in data and details about me, date of birth, full name, address, etc. because it’s time consuming and there’s always another site that will provide the same information without the hassle. I have seen in the last few years on my surfing travels with Conjungo tens of thousands of sites and it still surprises me (to say the very least) how the vast majority are utter garbage.

I won’t subscribe or give my data unless the content is valuable to me or of major interest and that it will continue to do so and I certainly won’t if I can find it easily elsewhere.

I want to be able to find key information and data quickly and easily. Finding an office of a potential supplier on many sites is a chore and so I go elsewhere. I am sure I am not alone. I don’t want to fill in a load of different boxes of my details. I want to send an email from my Outlook folder and not use their system, again, filling in my email address, phone, my comments, etc. I want to know their location and find a telephone number because frankly it’s easier for me to pick up my phone and make a call.

I don’t want to navigate a complicated site with way too much information on the first page that I have to wade through in order to find what I’m looking for. I don’t want to have to wait an age for some ‘Flash’ animation to appear with the wonders of new media of which I’m meant to be impressed. I’m not and I won’t be because 1) so what? 2) it doesn’t help me 3) it ain’t new or clever. 

If your website is about your company, have some details about the Management Team. I like to know who I am dealing with and if I ever have the need to, someone I can speak to. Sites that don’t have this facility worry me because I think, “what are you hiding?”. There must be issues or changes afoot. Worrying.

Make people’s life easier. Make your site accessible. Make your site and therefore your company easy to engage with and be seen to be willing to make life easier for your audience and potential customers. 

We here at Conjungo are passionate about the site and we welcome feedback, good or bad. We also have a list as long as a tall persons’ arm with changes and improvements that we want to make and not just for the sake of it. I think the day when we all agree that we have the perfect site is the day we should all resign.

At the risk of appearing old and ultra conservative, which I am not by the way (he says defensively), I have long appreciated that times are a changing, not only in the use of technology and how it is engaged but by the people that use it and how it permeates all of our lives regardless of age or demographic. But I’ve covered this before.

The problem I now have is what to wear at meetings and presentations. For many years in corporate life, the uniform was either navy blue or dark grey suit, together with a white shirt and conservatively coloured tie.

As the years rolled by we started wearing different coloured shirts and colourful ties, and that became the norm. Different styles of suits were acceptable too. Then the culture changed with the onset of US start-ups arriving in the UK and the trend became ’smart casual’.

‘Smart casual’ to me meant wearing a smoking jacket and cravat. Obviously wearing trousers, shirt and shoes were in order. My new uniform became chinos, polo shirt (with company logo emblazoned on the front), and for more formal events, button down oxford shirt, chinos and blazer. For very formal events it was jacket, shirt, chinos, etc. etc.

I have in the main tried to stick with suits because it’s easy. You don’t have to think too much when going to bed at 2am in the morning and getting up at o’dark thirty to catch yet another flight. But I always pitied my wife (but not in a condescending way because I was too scared) who had to ponder for hours as to what to wear, how wide the shoulder pads should be and how many cans of hairspray to use to back comb her hair and to completely destroy the ozone layer. 

I recall a ‘kick off’ meeting in Boston where all the execs, I was told by my CEO and boss, that we had to wear the ‘uniform’ and a baseball cap in order to set the tone. Uniform was OK but I’m not a hat person and tried to explain this. He was a typical New Yorker and wasn’t in the mood to argue (he was and still is a great guy and someone I learned a great deal from), but suggested that I try one on. I did. He immediately agreed that I shouldn’t wear one primarily because I looked like ‘Bubba’ and all that was needed to set off this outfit would be a some dungarees and a piece of straw dangling from my mouth.

When I became director of a large Plc, Friday was designated as ‘dress down day’. I had to send a memo explaining what smart casual was and indeed what I expected because we still had customers coming to our offices and seeing a crowd of people wearing football shirts and other items of clothing made from man made fibre did not only look bad but it was also a fire hazard…

These days I’m still at a loss but better wear a suit just in case I actually turn up to a meeting and I’m the only one looking casual. My only compromise is that occasionally I won’t wear a tie and that is only at Sunday lunch.

The point is that times of course change and that is all part of life and progress but I now have to worry for hours regarding my attire, too smart, too casual, too in between. It is actually very important because it is all part of an attitude and a sense of professionalism. I hate being late. I hate people being late for me especially for meetings. I appreciate the need to take notes, to set an agenda and objectives and to summarise actions etc. That is an area that should not change but sadly from what I can see, so often does.  

For those of you reading this blog and assuming that I am ultra conservative in the true sense and politically, you’re very, very wrong I’m actually a Whig. I rue the day when emancipation became accepted.

There used to be a phrase, ‘cash is king’, i.e. that while it was perceived that having a platinum or even better a ‘noire’ credit card was flash and showed you had actually ‘arrived’ meant that you didn’t necessarily have the money to back it up.

I like to think that I coined the phrase ‘content is king’ but I didn’t and in fact what it should state is ‘he who has content is king’. Of course for those of you who are desperately politically correct; please free to say ’she who is content is queen’. This, of course could lead you into no end of trouble as it leads to a natural conclusion. I’ll stop at this juncture.

So, what do I mean by this adage? Well, if you have a great website with fantastic, high quality, interesting content, you are creating value. That’s the wonderful thing about sites such as You Tube and MySpace because all they do is provide a platform and the user who is also the audience, chooses to add whatever they feel is interesting. Of course what one person considers ‘interesting’ can be embarrassing to another. But that, I guess is half the fun.  However, neither site is making money or at least profit. They were highly valuable because they have zillions of viewers and that of course is what advertisers like, or you would think so. Friends Reunited was worth a fortune but recently sold for £25 million even though it was originally purchased by ITV for £175 million in 2005. It could have and should have been where MySpace is now from a popularity perspective. However, if you’ve ever been on the site you’ll understand why it’s been a dismal failure in recent years. I’ll cover this one off in another blog.

Very recently, Rupert Murdoch was complaining that the internet (in essence) is not a level playing field for the media especially as players such as BBC let their audience have their content for free. Of course the BBC is funded by us so we’re already paying for it. Murdoch’s empire is funded by advertising and subscriptions. Ironically, Google, the bastion of the internet age whose motto is ‘don’t be evil’, is designing a method that will enable News International and other similar sites to be able to capitalise on their content by providing (I presume) some form of payment gateway. Readers will pay for the content that they read perhaps according to popularity, volume and length of article.

I don’t really have a problem because the BBC utilises a different business model to the vast majority of sites and why shouldn’t people pay for good content? Actually because the web was meant to change that. Content provided free to read becomes as I stated earlier, more compelling as a result. However, as we all know, ad revenues are down and more companies are turning to the web and this year more will be spent on ads on the internet than on TV or indeed traditional publishing medium. So the premise is, why pay if you can get pretty much the same information for free?

I still think that perhaps the business model is fundamentally flawed and as with any iconoclastic process needs to be challenged and ultimately changed. I stick to the premise that we at Conjungo have always held dear; great, useful and contemporary data will generate interest, a wide and relevant audience which can be capitalised on. Of course, social networking and other new media sites would contend this, but then frankly you need to know who your audience is and what demographic they are from. If you know that, you have a viable business. I suspect that these other sites would struggle with that.

Finally, I mentioned the Google motto because it annoys me. I fully appreciate that Larry Page and Sergey Brin are multi-gazillionaires and I am sadly most definitely not, (in fact my net worth is probably whatever lose change is down the back of my sofas) and having read their history/bios I do admire them. That said, the choice of corporate statement while different than the usual;

“We at HUGE Corporation strive to achieve the highest possible standards, ethically & morally for our customers, shareholders and people who work for us, whom we hold so dear and attain the highest possible value so we can get incredibly rich, powerful and then retire to a home on a private, secluded island.” (I don’t disagree with this by the way).

In comparison, “Don’t be evil” is just a little trite. If it were anyone else we’d all laugh. My kids could do better than that. “Don’t be naughty” or “Don’t be silly”.

Actually I made those up.

This week marks the 8th anniversary of 911. When I hear debates in the media there is always someone who quotes the much over used and frankly hackneyed phrase ‘ one mans’ terrorist is another mans’ freedom fighter’. For want of another unprintable phrase…nonsense. It was the act of cowards who chose to destroy the lives of nearly three thousand people, their families and friends. Of course such activities are not new, the numbers and methods were and still are frighteningly cold blooded and too much to comprehend.

My parents’ generation used the phrase that they could always remember where they were when JFK was assassinated. Our generation will talk of 911. I certainly remember where I was, in Germany about to board a plane. A colleague phoned to tell me as I was going through security about the tragedy. I thought it was a sick joke until I got to the lounge to see a throng of people gathered around a large TV watching events unfold. I soon boarded the plane and like everyone else was confused, unable to understand what was going on and frankly terrified as they fuelled the plane while the passengers were on board for security reasons. When we neared Heathrow, I recall that they diverted planes round London via the Docklands and I remember as our plane banked and headed towards Canary Wharf the look of terror on the passengers’ faces as they, like I made a massive but thankfully wrong assumption.

I can not tell you how pleased I was to get home to my family and friends, all of whom were worried about me and other members of our family/friends who like me travelled a great deal. One of the terrible frustrations was that rather like 7/7, when I was stuck on a train, it was impossible to find news on the internet because of the sheer volumes of users and likewise with mobile phones, so this of course exacerbated the situation. My daughter was at the time 5 years old but still remembers the events and how worried everyone was.

The loss and impact on our lives and especially for those that suffered directly has been immense. It was ironically, planned and devised over the internet, using web mail, texts and other methods of modern communication that would leave little evidence of the plot. Ironic? – because the internet is always touted as a force for good. A way which people regardless of age, race location etc. can interact and communicate, find and share information and progress the way in which mankind chooses to conducts itself.

Alfred Nobel didn’t (allegedly) fully appreciate how his new ‘technology’, dynamite, would be misused. Nor indeed did Robert Oppenheimer with the invention of the atomic bomb. We think that they were both naïve and perhaps we are with internet usage. Indeed, Oppenheimer famously said:

“When you see something that is technically sweet, you go ahead and do it and you argue about what to do about it only after you have had your technical success. That is the way it was with the atomic bomb.”

We need to ensure that new technology is used for good causes, as a positive force for change and progress but also being mindful of how technology can sometimes be used for the wrong reason.

So summer (for what it was worth) is nearly over. The holidays are for sure pretty much at end and so I shall start writing my blog in the knowledge that I have a better chance of getting an audience than in July and August when many people are on their holidays. The last thing they want to read on holiday is a blog, let alone a diatribe about technology. Frankly, the last thing I want to do on holiday is write a blog, let alone about technology. And so parents’ minds turn to buying new school uniforms (for their kids in case you were wondering, it’s not that kind of blog…), pencils, books and a whole raft of other necessary equipment that munchkins need in order to progress their education. Of course for those that are starting ‘A’ levels, or whatever they are called these days, and degrees, their poor parents have to fork out for a PC or laptop.

Technology has always been viewed as a great enabler, a tool that (and I hate the term but it works), that leverages efficiency and reduces the mundane, routine office and paperwork based tasks. My first ever thesis was manually typed on an electronic typewriter (by me). Any mistakes meant that the whole page had to be re-typed. I can’t recall whether ‘Tipex’ was banned or perhaps I just wanted to have perfectly typed text. So any typos, spelling mistakes or bad grammar would lead to a form of typing rage. One of my friends had the good fortune in that his mother was a senior PA at a large bank. I knew she was senior because firstly he told me but also she had access to a word-processor. These were rare and incredibly expensive. You could pretty much buy a new Porsche 911 for the same price. So he had the advantage of sending every week (by post of course), to his mother the latest chapter of his handwritten work. A few days later he would receive a beautifully typed and paginated document. Any changes that needed to be made could be done easily because his work was stored on a disk the size of a tractor tyre.

I couldn’t blame him frankly; given the opportunity I would have done the same. I didn’t even think of asking my father if I could ‘borrow’ his PA. Too late now.

My point is this; it wasn’t that long ago that technology was pretty much out of the realms of most peoples’ and organisations’ budgets. These days, unless I’m pretty much mistaken, all companies have some form of IT. This means that regardless of size and budget, companies can produce professional documents, budgets etc. This gives the market to some extent a ‘level playing field’ so you won’t notice (as long as the user is reasonably capable) whether a document has been produced by a multi-national corporation or a bloke in a bedroom.

I have always said that Conjungo gives companies within the ICT arena the chance and capability to compete with larger ‘players’ because even though a small company might not have huge budgets or capability for complex marketing programmes and SEO strategies, Conjungo can achieve all of that for a fraction of the price to run traditional programmes.

Finally, a thought. We take it for granted that kids have access to technology. Naturally at school but what about those kids whose parents really can’t afford to buy a laptop for their child. It is easy to say that you can buy one for a few hundred quid. Many, many people just don’t have that disposable income if any at all, least of all now that many are jobless. According to the e-learning foundation, 2.5 million of the most disadvantaged schoolchildren in the UK are still living on the edge of our digital society with home access to a computer and the Internet a seemingly inaccessible dream.

So maybe, just maybe, from a social perspective ICT is not a great leveller but an inhibitor because it wasn’t that long ago when all you needed for a good education were great teachers, encouragement and a few pencils. That’s no longer the case and as a result are we discouraging those that can’t afford technology regardless of the price despite the fact that they may be incredibly bright? Perhaps I’m being naïve and those that really want to achieve, will, but it is at least a point that needs to be considered.

I rest my case.

For a number of years I ran a company that had created software used to monitor people’s computer activity across a network and the internet. It was fantastic software and while it might seem ‘old hat’ now, it could achieve what none of the competitors could do at that time.

It would alert in real time against any given criteria of words so if for example the word ’sex’ or ‘bomb’ was used, an alarm would be flagged. You could achieve this against most apps such as email, webmail, chat, attachments including PDFs. You even see exactly what the user was seeing e.g. a film, web page etc. Furthermore you could generate an audit trail of who sent what to whom, when, how etc. You could also search historic data for compliance purposes against users, keywords etc. Very, very clever stuff indeed.

Unlike traditional ‘blocking’ software it wouldn’t alert and stop an email with the word ‘Essex’ in because it picked up on the letters ’sex’ as the problem we found with Government, was that some departments needed to search on a term such as ‘breast’ purely for medical reasons, but access was blocked so while a disciplinary offence in some departments it was actually a major requirement in others.

At the time, monitoring people’s activity at work was sometimes considered politically incorrect and potentially a breach of human rights. I was interviewed many times by quite often some very well known journalists and accused of encouraging censorship. My belief was that people can do what they like at home on their own PC, but at work, well wasting time surfing for porn was in my book not acceptable especially when you consider that directors can be held personally responsible for the behaviour of their employees. This means that a director could be held liable for a defamatory email sent from one person to another.

It seems only fair that a company takes reasonable measures to protect itself and directors. More to the point, if such measures had been taken by MCI and other companies in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, then perhaps many peoples’ pensions would have been protected by the criminal events that then transpired. There is always another story and if you can prevent a wrong-doing, that can only be for the good.

I have believed in the ‘free market’ and in the least amount of regulation as possible. Unfortunately you can not account for people’s behaviour. We’ve seen that with banks in very recent times. Without regulations people will lose out. It pains me say but unfortunately we have no choice. The problem is how far do we go to legislate against certain behaviour? We’ve seen the problems with too little legislation but too much legislation can be an inhibitor to business.

The Chinese government has decreed that all new PCs should be installed with filtering software to ensure that users will behave in a certain way.

Frankly, like most right minded people I think this has gone too far. To prevent certain actions and activity is appalling. The UK government backed down on its plans to monitor and record all of our emails even personal ones. The storage alone would have been vast let alone the political ramifications. That said; don’t kid yourself as we are perceived to be the ‘Mother of Democracy’, as we are the most heavily monitored country in the world. But I guess we still have the choice to say and behave (within reason and the bounds of the law) as we wish. 

You can of course read more about this subject in ‘Go Understand Content Filtering’. It’s a good read.