It’s been a while…
Posted by David Hurst in HigherSites®, New Launches on June 3rd, 2010
Man! I have been busy recently. Too busy it would seem to devote any time to my blog and its regular train of 17,000+ unique visitors per month. The thing is, exciting things are happening in my business life which are keeping me very busy, and unfortunately cannot be disclosed yet. Expect some interesting announcements for HigherSites in the next few months.
In the meantime, we have finally got around to updating our website, so please have a look and let us know what you think: www.highersites.co.uk
I will get back to writing soon…
Plastic bags - the greatest evil the environment has ever known? Or, just a bag?
Posted by David Hurst in Current Affairs, Rants on April 28th, 2010
Shopping has changed. No more do courteous sales assistants ask you if you would like a bag. You are either expected to remember to bring your own, or buy a “bag for life”. Enter the acute discomfort of asking for a bag, only to be met with a frown from the eco-sensitive sales assistant, or an additional charge.
This is all part of some Government mandate that shops cease to provide plastic bags. As per usual, no sensible thought or recourse to proven science has been applied before shoving out pointless legislation. Indeed most of the data and statistics that exist regarding plastic bags and their damage to wildlife, ecology and marine habitats, are widely inaccurate or mis-reported.
The reality is that plastic companies had produced both bio-degradeable (degrades in the ground) and oxo-degradeable (degrades in the air) plastic bags long before this nonsense was introduced. Taking Tesco as an example, their plastic carrier bag will start to degrade after about 18 months and will be completely degraded in 2 years. I can confirm that this is 100% accurate. I have an old Tesco carrier bag in my garage that is starting to degrade and it literally disintegrates if you touch it. If one of these bags finds its way into the environment, it will degrade. This has significant benefits in particular for marine mammals. Fair enough, the oxo-degradeable bags won’t degrade in landfill, but that’s not really the point.
On the other hand, the big plastic/vinyl bag for life carrier bags are neither bio-degradeable or oxo-degradeable.
Sometimes I remember to take bags with me when I go shopping. Certainly, when we do our major household shopping each month, we take our own bags. But if you’re out and about and need to buy a few items for lunch, you may well be in need of a bag, and you shouldn’t be forced to pay for one, or be treated like an eco-villain for taking a fresh one.
These new degradeable plastics use very little energy to produce, when compared to the bags with the supposed longer life. They are made from a by-product of oil refinement that would be otherwise burnt off. They are easily recyclable, completely re-usable, not to mention lightweight and strong. If we all used plastic bags, and recycled them properly, this would be an ecologically sound proposition.
The problem is human laziness and the propensity of the powers that be to deliver over-the-top legislation that simply bludgeons the problem and turns it into a slightly different problem. It’s nothing more than an over-reaction to inaccurate data, rather than a well thought out and scientifically relevant policy. I will continue to use, re-use and recycle my plastic bags, thanks very much.
The Digital Economy Bill - now law
Posted by David Hurst in Current Affairs, Issues on April 13th, 2010
I along with many thousands of my fellow citizens registered my objection to the Digital Economy Bill with my local MP. Specifically, I was extremely concerned that this bill would be rushed through during the wash-up period - where outstanding legislation is passed into law prior to a general election - without a proper debate and consultation. I raised my valid concerns with David Laws MP, and received a 3 page letter back from him. You could be forgiven for thinking that he actually gave my objection serious consideration, but alas the letter was clearly a standard response to this issue, and frankly it was poorly put together. It seemed to focus its message on music and video piracy, and appeared to me to be written to perpetrators of such theft. I object to being lumped in with this bunch - I buy all my music, video and software legally.
The part of the bill which bothers is me is that Internet users accused of copyright theft (note “accused” not “convicted”) can have their connection de-activated. This is not a step forwards at all. It is loosely aimed at preventing file sharers from sharing illegal content, but it will not prevent it from happening at all. What will actually happen is that innocent Internet users will be targeted by criminals in much the same way that senders of spam operate. Computers will be hijacked by a virus and become part of a botnet controlled by the criminals. The unsuspecting user will then begin hosting illegal files without any knowledge of it happening, and end up with having their Internet access removed.
Another problem is insecure WiFi networks, and there are still loads of these around. The hacker can sit in a car outside your house, hop on to your WiFi and download whatever they want, in your name.
The bill is cobbled together and has no protection for innocent users. It has been rushed through without due democratic process. It’s the same with all of these things: the Government proposes some piece of idiotic legislation; the people object; the Government does it anyway. Some democracy!
The Internet and the World Wide Web has been built by the people of this planet, for the people of this planet. It owes its life to numerous clever programmers who have devoted their time, often free of charge, to making it better for everyone. For the UK Government to suddenly decide they have the right to govern the Internet in the UK, is just as disturbing as the Chinese Government’s approach to controlling Internet use.
I don’t know how to stop copyright theft, but the kind of ill-considered approach set out in the Digital Economy Bill is not the answer.
The Digital Economy Bill is, in my opinion, nothing more than a sinister attempt to start monitoring and policing our Internet use without due cause. As per usual, the people that get burned as a result won’t be the actual criminals at all. Piracy and copyright theft will not disappear. The people that want to do this stuff will just invent new cleverer ways to circumvent the authorities and the real problems will remain unaddressed.
A sad day for the Internet.
Experienced PHP Developer Vacancy in Yeovil, Somerset
Posted by David Hurst in HigherSites®, Job Opportunities on March 30th, 2010
Due to a staff member relocating, HigherSites is currently in urgent need of an experienced PHP developer to join our busy team here in the South West. We offer a fun working environment and plenty of variety in the work we do. We serve clients from small businesses right up to global brands and government departments.
Required Skills - we will only consider candidates with the following:
- Advanced object oriented PHP5 skills
- Intermediate to advanced SQL with MySQL
- Good customer skills and the ability to visualise projects from the user’s viewpoint
- Good CSS skills
- The ability to write well structured and tidy code
- Able to work as part of a team, showing initiative and commitment to deadlines
- At least 2 years’ commercial experience
- The ability to hand-code a whole page with nothing more than Windows Notepad (we don’t expect you to work like this, we just like to know that you can)
Preferred Skills - we will give preference to candidates with the following:
- Good Javascript and experience with MooTools, jQuery or similar
- OS agnostic - happy to work on Mac, Windows or Linux
- ZCE qualified
- 4 years or more commercial experience
Salary commensurate with experience.
Please email david at highersites dot co dot uk to apply or call Rob or myself on 01935 426958.
B Road - what does the ‘B’ stand for? Bumpy? Broken? Bad?
Posted by David Hurst in Motorcycling, Motoring, Rants on March 29th, 2010
Regular readers of my blog will know that I am a keen motorcyclist, and there’s nothing we motorcyclists like more than a far-reaching ribbon of ultra smooth tarmac. Britain has some amazing rural routes with lovely bends and fabulous scenery, but it doesn’t have too much of the aforementioned high quality roads. Indeed, our rural B roads are only resurfaced on average every 79 years. This is just about twice as long as the recommended resurfacing interval of 40 years. In fact, our road network is now in need of a whopping £8.5billion spend just to bring the road surfaces up to a minimum standard.
This is hardly just an issue affecting bikers. Poor road surfaces increase the dangers to all road users and increase the damage inflicted upon our vehicles. Sadly, the powers that be choose to spend their time and money focusing on speed limit reductions and enforcement that have no discernable impact on road safety. Even as we speak, there is a campaign afoot to reduce the speed limit on rural roads to 50mph. Given that the majority of road traffic accidents on rural roads occur at speeds below 50mph or above 60mph, this change will make no difference to accident statistics. Rural roads will likely be difficult to police anyway, unless (as I suspect) the change is just an excuse to bang up a load more speed cameras. All this limit change will do is cost money and ruin our landscape. At the moment rural roads are by default set at National Speed Limit (60mph for car or motorbike), whereas if they are set at 50mph, there will need to be vast numbers of speed limit signs installed. This represents a vast expense and an unnecessary blight on our beautiful countryside. In most cases, the roads themselves dictate the naturally safe speed limit and this is often well below 60mph.
The Asphalt Industry Alliance (AIA) believes there to be more than 1.5million potholes in need of repair on UK roads. This figure has been dramatically affected by the recent cold weather, and is only likely to increase as winters become more extreme, and funding for road maintenance continues to be cut. As with many things in life, prevention is far cheaper than the cure. This is certainly true in the case of road re-surfacing, where basic re-surfacing costs about £14 per square metre, whereas full reconstruction costs a whopping £70.
How much does the government net from road tax? £47billion! More than enough to maintain our road networks in exemplary condition and vastly reduce the number of road deaths and accidents as a result. The problem of course is that most of this money goes nowhere near the roads.
When will you sit up and take notice of the sad state of neglect of our rural roads? Will it be before you round that corner on your bike only to be met with a giant pothole that sends you and your bike sliding down the road or into oncoming traffic? Will it be before you hit that broken surface in your car and are unable to brake effectively causing a collision with another road user?
Why is the transport network so low on the agenda?
