Tuesday, June 10, 2003
Testing, testing
This week's Computer Weekly reports on trials of 'chip and Pin' retail systems being run by shops and other retail outlets in the Northampton area. Chip and Pin allows debit and credit card transactions to be authenticated by cardholders inputing a personal identification number rather than by requiring a signature. Such systems have been used by many European banks for a considerable time (retailers often require independent ID too, such as a national identity card).
So what's my gripe? CW reports the implementation director for the project - covering 1,000 outlets and 200,000 cards - as saying: "The key aim of the trial is to educate users and gauge their reaction - the technology has already been thoroughly tested by retailers and their suppliers [my bold] before the trial went live."
However, when we read on, we find that: 'feedback from customers is already leading to subtle changes in the chip and Pin systems and processes operated by retailers"..."Consumer feedback is also helping retailers overcome some of the inevitable teething problems with the technology"...."some customers felt the Pin pads were not private enough, requesting a visor around the number keys"..."There have been some issues with the positioning of the keypads"..."The general expectations was that staff would put the card into the reader, meaning all the customer had to do was enter their Pin. However, feedback from Safeway and others has told us that consumers are keen to stay in control of the whole process"...
I'm a little amazed that machines have clearly gone into production and major assumptions made with such inadequate 'testing'. Time and money undoubtedly could have been saved. It's clear that there has been no user input at any stage before manufacture and pilot rollout of these systems, so how the project's managers can claim they had "tested the technology thoroughly" before this trial beats me. Or perhaps they believe that 'testing' means testing lines of code or somesuch.
7:22 PM|
link to this item
Friday, June 06, 2003
Victory for the righteous!
Lo! I've come over all biblical.
The Register today reported that the original Barcelona.com decisions have been reversed by the US Court of Appeals, reversing the original WIPO UDRP decision and the later Virigina District Court decision (which just mimicked the WIPO decision).
I am really glad for Joan Nogueras and his wife. They have been through hell since 2000. Joan has fought and fought and fought in the US courts following the original WIPO decision by a frankly dubious Chilean lawyer, despite having no money.
To obtain the original decision in its favour, the Barcelona City Council did things which were frankly unimaginable (by non-paranoid people) and definitely despicable (I have documentary evidence). I doubt that this entire waste of Barcelona citizens' tax funds (a very expensive international consultancy was employed in several countries) will be reported in the Barcelona press - such failures never are (I speak as a former long-time resident, who spent far too much time as a reporter speaking to politicians): most of the newspapers are filled with press releases from the very same institution, with some even having their printing presses paid for by the government, so always 'unaccountably' shy away from spilling the beans when the editors gets on the case. But Joan is one of those guys who doesn't fear any evil, wherever he walks, and even when it comes from the his own press.
Hooray for Joan, his wife and the kids (and for Shahab and all the rest of the team too). A good bottle of champagne (some occasions call for something more than cava) lies waiting...
Of course, the bizarre thing about the UDRP process is that there's nothing to stop the Council from launching yet another case against Joan, sending us all back to square one - others have done the same in that position. Let's hope the Council finally sees sense, and that ICANN finally addresses this loophole in the process.
US Court of Appeals decision (2 June 2003): http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021396.P.pdf
Some of my original articles on barcelona.com:
Industry Standard: Geographic Domains on Shaky Ground
Public Finance: What's in a name.com?
There was one in The Guardian too, but the night editor cocked up the editing, making it look like PwC were working for Joan, and they never were, so I don't post that link..
There was a lot that didn't come out in the press at the time, that IS and others did not want to report (for fear of seeming unbalanced)....I'm going to have another rummage back through my file of incriminating correspondence from the Barcelona City Council people, for old times' sake.
1:49 AM|
link to this item
Set the Controls for the Heart of the Pun
(PUN = 'People Using New technology'?)
So, why didn't I ever get a job as a sub-editor on The Sun?
Anyway, cross-disciplinary conference plans forge ahead, and many show interest in proposals, so can't be all bad. The postponed conference planning meeting is now to take place on Saturday 5 July, in the Photographers' Gallery cafe in London, 1-4pm. Let me know if you wish to attend, just so that we can keep an eye of space/numbers, and so that I know you're lurking in there with interest and ideas.
For an intro to what this confab might be about, see
http://www.louiseferguson.com/other/conference.htm
1:24 AM|
link to this item
QUERKY <>?@#
Loved this on Matt Jones' blog:
'And yet-to-be-knighted Steve Jobs on tablet PC's and the non-demise of the keyboard:
" There are no plans to make a tablet. It turns out people want keyboards. When Apple first started out, People couldn't type. We realized: Death would eventually take care of this."'
I'd totally agree on the tablet PC front, having spent some months last year in close proximity to quite a number of these odd devices, in the name of academic research.
But as far as youngsters being more competent typists than oldsters, I'd beg to differ. I'm doing fieldwork right now that's bringing to light a lot of one/two-fingered typists. and they ain't that old. But there are plenty of over-50s who can really hammer the keys.
What has struck me over the last few months is that
- some organisations have only just got rid of the typing pool, which used to be full of women
- everyone is now required to be a typist (every the night time security guard), male and female
- Americans (male and female) get taught to type at school, but we Brits don't
- Americans in London are the fastest typists I know (the men particularly)
If the QWERTY keyboard is here to stay - but software is so ephemeral - how come kids in UK schools get to learn Excel, but don't get taught how to touch type?
The Open University is about to remedy this for its students, apparently, by putting students through a particular typing tutor - an idea dreamt up by one its its American lecturers, horrified at the lack of keyboard skills in the academy on this side of the pond. Perhaps school is the appropriate place to teach this really useful skill - alongside other skills such as reading, writing and 'rithmatic.
1:02 AM|
link to this item
Monday, June 02, 2003
Gerrymandering online
I have elsewhere on this blog - even in the last week - expressed some cynicism about the government's interest in obtaining the views of its citizens, via the Internet or by any other means, and so its fundamental interest in promoting online forms of participation.
I wasn't exactly surprised when last year the bulk of individual e-mail addresses disappeared from the Office of the e-Envoy's website. Today I just looked at Danny O'Brien's blog, only to find that he has had to write a letter to Beverley Hughes, complaining that ALL the full submissions to the consultation process about the Entitlement Card routed via the STAND campaign (the only one that received any publicity and that didn't involve the download of a bandwidth-squeezing monster file) were treated as a SINGLE submission.
This strikes me as some kind of online equivalent of gerrymandering. I spent a good hour drafting my text, and I know many, many others did likewise. But our submissions simply do not count at all, as all the 5,029 full submissions via the STAND website count as only one submission, and the 2,000 submissions made via the 'official' channel count as 2,000, allowing Ms Hughes to declare that the majority of submissions were in favour. And then they complain that people are losing interest in parliamentary politics....
Danny's letter to Ms Hughes can be read in full on Oblomovka.
The BBC reported the story last Friday.
9:31 PM|
link to this item
Accountability for accessibility
Steve Winyard of the RNIB states that while the government did consult - some 18 months ago - with the organisation before implementing the new PIN pad system in all UK post offices, it then ignored the RNIB's advice and bought some off-the-shelf cheapo terminals. Hence all the problems we are now experiencing, with disabled users unable to manipulate said devices (small keys, poor display contrast etc etc) and so unable control their own finances.
The result: the government will probably end up continuing to accept passbooks for the forseeable future, and there will probably be replacement terminals in the not too distant future. Money wasted? Don't ask me. But I'd dearly like to know some more about who ignored the RNIB advice and why. Only by making the system accountable is the government going to stop making the same old mistakes and achieve some measure of progress. I'm aware there is an Associated Parliamentary Group for Design and Innovation (APGDI), but I'm not aware that it extends its remit to interaction design......although it certainly should.
4:52 PM|
link to this item
Atomic?
I've always been mystified that whichever site I'm looking at my stats for, the International Atomic Energy Agency URL always appears among my top-30 referrers. Regardless of the the subject matter of the Web site. Should I set my paranoid conspiracy-theorist switch to 'ON'?
Anyone who can clarify will receive a pint next time we coincide.....
4:41 PM|
link to this item
|
