Re: [GLLUG] Comments please
On 22/07/2023 22:32, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: A great plan that involves merely making enemies of: - The UK government - Microsoft - The entire US health insurance industry I don't want to be negative about someone else's idealistic goal. It would be great if you succeeded. Cheers, Andy Making enemies of the three vested interests above would prove interesting The UK Government was signed up - effectively in perpetuity - to MS by Tony Blair (supposedly in return for a Belgravia house!). If we get a Labour government next time around, Blair will be the "power behind the throne", since the current incumbents of the Labour leadership are utterly without any sort of clue. However, if we get a Conservative government, things are likely to markedly change. Sunak and much of his cabinet are probably going to be replaced before the election (since they see this as the only chance of winning). Their replacement cabinet will certainly be open to the possibility of a change from the MS brokenware that government has suffered for years, and the idea of reduced licencing costs will be appealing in the straightened times we're likely to have to endure. Microsoft are no longer seen as the only credible software provider (by government). When I was working in local government ten years ago we were already replacing Windows-based machines with Linux machines, (usually Ubuntu). My department had several Unix-based servers (that had been in use since the early 90s), and these were changed to SUSE (in the first instance), and later to RHEL. These are still in use and regularly updated and properly maintained. They have had several hardware updates in recent years, but the OS has remained the same. The US health insurance industry has no real business in the UK. They do operate some of the insurance-based schemes over here (like BUPA), but these can easily be replaced with local schemes (as has already happened in some local government - BUPA were dropped in favour of Aviva and Vitality). None of the three listed above need to be an issue! CEH -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] scam phone call
On 30/09/2021 16:58, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: Hello, I have received a scam telephone call to my landline and caller display shows the caller as 0031625679475, a 13 digit number. Is this likely to be a genuine number from something like an IP digital phone? My sister has received several similar calls with long numbers starting with 003 00316 is a Dutch mobile number. It's unlikely to be genuine. Regards Chris -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] IT does cost
On 06/08/2021 12:31, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: To be honest I am so disillusioned with the level of corruption in government that I can't see how there could ever be a level playing field for open source software in this market. I used to work for a Government department, and realised that there was no hope whatsoever for FOSS when certain ex-Prime Minister was bought a Belgravia house by a large software company.. The persistent argument in Governmental Departments is that "there's a warranty with Windows". They also find that "Windows Sysadmins" are cheaper to hire than the likes of you and me, so the supposed economics of proprietary software win out every time. They simply can't understand the fallacies inherent in that viewpoint, and when questioned on the actual validity of any Windows "guarantee", they insisted that they would be able to "apply governmental pressure" to Microsoft to make them fix things! The degree of delusion in government is truly scary. I was at a demonstration of the vulnerabilities in Windows 7, provided by the "cyber security" bods from GCHQ. They broke into a few "password protected" Win 7 laptops and "secure" Blackberries, and recovered supposedly "secure" emails. At the discussion after the demonstration, the Minister present pointed out that the vulnerabilities "would allow Government to keep a watchful eye on all that's going on" - they WANTED vulnerabilities! When it was pointed out that anyone else would be able to break into those laptops, including "foreign actors", they said that they were unconcerned because "no major foreign power would be the slightest interested in the minutiae of British government"! No government IT project has ever come in on budget, and exactly none of them has worked as advertised. They have squandered £Billions in the last 40 years, and have achieved almost nothing. The NHS IT infrastructure has never worked, despite them throwing ever more money at the problem, and hospitals and GPs are still keeping all patient records on paper. They really are clueless/ Chris -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] IT does cost
On 06/08/2021 12:38, Marco van Beek via GLLUG wrote: On 06/08/2021 12:30, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: What warranty comes with Microsoft other than you can pay someone to look at the problem? There is a corporate entity that can be taken to court. Blame is not about warranty, it's about anyone other than me being to blame. It would be funny to see HMG try to take on Microsoft in court! Chris -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] IPv6 addresses
On 18/07/2021 15:26, Andy Smith via GLLUG wrote: Hello, On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 10:33:03AM +0100, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: My sister has a relatively new domestic BT broadband connection. The IPv4 address was expected to be dynamic despite BT claiming to have sufficient IPv4 addresses, while the IPv6 address so far has had a static /48 but dynamic /64. Is there a cost involved in providing a static address, or are UK customers considered to be incapable of safely using a static address? Perhaps it just allows them to charge extra for a "business" broadband. Correct, in most cases it's an artificial segmentation of the market in order to charge more money. There's no technical benefit and quite a few downsides. In some cases the ISP has more customers or is projected to have more customers than they have IPv4 addresses, so some of them have to be CGNAT, or CGNAT will have to be introduced soon, so it is wise not to let people get used to having a dedicated IPv4 address. There is no such issue with IPv6 so make the main prefix (in your example a /48) static is sensible. The end device /64s within that are often dynamic as a security/privacy measure though ideally this is controlled by the customer's equipment not the provider's. In Switzerland some can now get 25Gbit/s symmetric fibre with static IPv4, static IPv6 and HD TV thrown in, for about £50/mo: https://www.init7.net/en/internet/fiber7/ Cheers, Andy To upset people further - my nephew lives in Singapore, and has his home and office 'net connections at 4 Gb/s symmetric for around $7 / month each! When will we finally catch up? Cheers Chris -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Internet Data Rate
On 13/05/2020 13:23, Marco van Beek via GLLUG wrote: On 13/05/2020 13:20, John Winters via GLLUG wrote: P.S. I've found in the past that the best way to get one of the slot-in plates is to ply a friendly BT technician with tea and chocolate digestives (plain chocolate obviously). WARNING: Do not feed them after midnight. They turn into Virgin Engineers... That's Virgin "engineers"! FTFY -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Internet Data Rate
On 13/05/2020 11:01, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: Hello Frank, You could find that you get an improvement by using a replacement lower front panel VDSL filter for the incoming BT NTE5 termination box which will block the data from entering your internal telephone wiring. It will bypass the line filter in the standard box, which destroys the balance between the wires, and replace it with another after the data has been isolated, preventing your telephone wiring from acting as tuned aerial stubs. I'll completely agree with that! Last year, I put a good quality line filter on to my brother's phone line, separating the VDSL signal where it entered the house. I also introduced an extra choke in series with the bell capacitor in the master socket. His data rate was almost doubled! Chris -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Downside of FTTP
On 04/12/2019 16:24, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: On Wednesday, 4 December 2019 16:07:25 GMT you wrote: On Wed, 4 Dec 2019, 15:50 Chris Bell via GLLUG, wrote: Hello, Someone has posted a message on a local forum that his Redcare link to ADT was cut without any warning from BT when he was re-connected by FTTP. ADT have offered an upgrade for £1,711. -- Hi, Do you have a link to the forum? A quick google of "Redcare link to ADT", says it is a GSM link, so should not even touch the FTTP. I don't have Redcare or FTTP, as I use alternatives, so I don't really know how Redcare connects. Kind Regards James I think that Redcare may run over a standard line in a similar way to ADSL. A local company had several telephone lines, with ADSL on one and Redcare on another. Unfortunately the company did not which line carried which service, so there was confusion every time there was a line fault, with the BT engineer only sent to fix a fault on a particular (wrong) line and unwilling to touch anything else. I can confirm that Redcare was conveyed over ordinary PSTN lines as short, noisy data bursts. These were so large that they would cause induced interference to adjacent lines, wreaking havoc with Fax transmissions and putting bursts of horrible noise into the ears of unsuspecting subscribers! Businesses that I know who had Redcare installations reported that it was largely useless - burglar and even fire alarms would frequently be ignored! Chris H -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
Re: [GLLUG] Internet Utopias Survey
On 22/11/2019 20:16, Chris Bell via GLLUG wrote: On Friday, 22 November 2019 19:51:16 GMT John Winters via GLLUG wrote: That rings a few bells. I've written some FOSS software for schools, but in my experience of dealing with school IT people their knowledge of IT is generally slight to non-existent. To make matters worse, there are some big suppliers to schools who really prey on this deficiency. They very much rely on schools having no-one capable of calling out their bullshit. A friend was asked to set up a server and some desktop computers in a local junior school. The school had a contract with a major education "provider" which required their IT system to be provided and maintained only by that company, and the school was not allowed to access the system, so the new computers were to be a totally separate independent system and hidden from the contractor. I've recently been in exactly that situation! The school want to teach the basics of computing to 8 - 11 year-old children and purchased a boxful of Raspberry Pi 3B boards and cases for them. They also bought a boxful of power adaptors, and initially used their existing USB-connected keyboards and mice from their contractor-provided PCs. I constructed a Raspbian image with a few educational extras for them, and taught the three teachers and the teaching assistants how to use "Etcher" to write the cards. I also gave them a brief tutorial on getting the SBCs connected to the wi-fi network. All of them have joined their local LUG and this has given them more knowledge and abilities that they can pass on to their pupils. I had to open up the school wi-fi network since the contractor had locked it down to only allow connection of "approved" machines (ie: the ones they'd supplied) and they charged £120 per machine (plus call-out charge) just to simply add an over-priced computer to the network! Shortly after my changes, the contractor visited the school and fortunately didn't notice the changes to "their" routers (their "engineers" are of the "monkey see, monkey do" variety), but we decided that discretion was a good idea, and now the school has a second "pupils" wi-fi network! The contractor-provided PCs are mostly gathering dust now. The children really like having their "own" little computers and have taken to proper programming very quickly. The original PC-based computer "education" was to have consisted fo lessons on using various MS "Office" packages - hardly a proper computer education! -- GLLUG mailing list GLLUG@mailman.lug.org.uk https://mailman.lug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug
