Virgin Media and its not so Superhub

There was a time when I would have recommended Virgin media to anyone. Their flagship product at the time, the 50Mb service, was fantastic for me. A rock solid service that never had any issues (other than at one time when BT cut through the fibre), gave me a guaranteed 5MB/s, and never had any noticeable packet loss or congestion.

Since Virgin have upgraded me to 100Mbps however, I have had no end of issues. Two faulty “superhubs”, an awful service during peak hours, and countless minutes of unhelpful customer service.

virginmediasuperhub Virgin Media and its not so Superhub

Using my own router and disabling the “Super”hubs built in functions has improved things – I am no longer getting the hub losing connection and resetting itself 12 times a day – but not much. Not to mention the STMs being introduced. One could conceivably hit their STM limit with only ~20 minutes of legitimate useage (eg Steam, ISO downloads etc), let alone pirated material.

The bigger issue here however is that Virgin are chasing headline speeds without actually being able to sell the capacity required; hence the new STMs on its flagship product, and countless threads on the user forums about unuseable connections.

The worst of it? I have been told personally that the support team have detected “over-utilisation” on my UBR, but it is 3% below their threshold to raise it as a problem with the network team. In other words, I am going to have to put up with a dreadful connection during peak hours (when I might, oh I don’t know what to play a computer game, or the other half might want to watch IPlayer on our Smart TV), and endure it getting significantly worse until they will even raise it as an issue.

Cheers Richard, cheers Usain!

1984 is finally here

I’ve never been foolish enough to think that, living here in the UK, I am totally “free”. I do however enjoy a good standard of life and am free, within certain restrictions, to pursue my life as I see fit.

The government will be able to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the UK under new legislation set to be announced soon.

Internet firms will be required to give intelligence agency GCHQ access to communications on demand, in real time.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17576745

So the government has finally come to legislate the ability to listen and monitor all private conversations, which makes one wonder how long it has been going on in ‘secret’. I wonder how many people have read or seen something like 1984, or V for Vendetta and then think that it would never happen.

It is a pretty drastic step in a democracy.–Shami Chakrabarti

Indeed it is, and it saddens me that my liberty and privacy is so cheap. And it further saddens me that I can do nothing about it.

Reebok Zigtech

Before I start this, let me state that it is not intended as a debate between barefoot/minimalist running and trainer shod running. Whilst I am a fan of BF/MR, I don’t practice it solely, and once my broken ankle is cured I aim to return to my practice of BF/MR once or twice a week and my main runs with my dogged trainers.

This post is rather about my amazement that trainer manufacturers are allowed to get away with what they do get away with, regardless of whether or not trainers are bad for you.

I came across a leaflet in my gym last night. I’d just sat on a spin bike for 50 minutes and then had a swim, so I was quite tired. Being tired leads to me generally being cranky, so perhaps I shouldn’t have read this leaflet, but read it I did. The amount of faux-science was staggering, and it worries me that people genuinely are taken in by this kind of language.

The leaflet was for a pair of what I think are supposed to be trainers. The tagline of the advert reads:

The Energy Drink for your feet.

The shoes are fronted by Lewis Hamilton, that well known distance runner, who I’m sure was paid a rather large sum of money to hold them up looking smug. And why shouldn’t he? The shoes he’s wearing are obviously engineered to the highest degree. The diagram inside shows how the sole provides “More Energy”, with the zig zag shaped sole absorbing the impact of your heel strike, sending a wave of energy along the length of the shoe. Right.

And strangely (according to the diagram anyway), the laces apparently provide an “Energy Boost”, designed to help your legs feel fresher.

What is Zigtech?
Feel the shoe with the energy boost, its unique sole propels you forward, while reducing wear and tear by upto 20% on key leg muscles.



I can’t even begin to say how stupid this statement is. How have they measured this 20%?

In addition to this “How does it work?” section..


  • Absorbs the impact of heel strike
  • Transforms each step into a wave of energy
  • Helps to propel the athlete forward with each step
  • ..contains a worrying statement (perhaps only worrying to someone who has read a lot about the debate between Barefoot/Trainer running, and the science involved). “Absorbs the impact of heel strike” sends warning signals to anyone that knows a modicum about modern running injuries, how the foot is designed, and heel striking is not ideal for running at all. Next “Transforms each step into a wave of energy”, er, I don’t know what to say to that. It’s bullshit. Finally “Helps to propel the athlete forward with each step”, funny. The human foot is perfectly designed to do just that, without all this “fantastic” technology.

    Finally, they’re made with Celliant™ fibres. These are a relatively new technology which are designed to take energy emitted from the body and recycle it through the skin, a claim Reebok say with “increase oxygen levels by an average of 7%”. Celliant fibres is a relatively new technology, and like many new scientific products is yet to be fully proved. I’m not saying this is nonsense, but there is very little scientific evidence to support these claims, other than surprisingly the company that developed this technology. To me, it looks like some psuedo-science nonsense that is being used to help sell more expensive running kit, but I’m happy to be proven incorrect on this.

    Finally? Whats possibly worse than all this “science”? Just look at them:
    reebokzigtech270lrg Reebok Zigtech

    I can’t imagine any serious runner ever considering these as being worth while. Which is probably why, in this country at least, they’re fronted by a Formula 1 driver who lives for sponsorship. Tsk.

    I’ve asked Reebok for evidence of these claims, but given that they’ve ignored far more noteworthy people than me in the past, I’m not waiting for a reply.

    Olympic Tickets

    It comes to something when I can’t even partake in the great big Olympic monopoly that is the ticket purchase, sponsored by Lord Seb Coe’s mates at Visa. Registering on the site in February I set up my account as instructed in order to get tickets for the 27th round of the shooting qualification elimination knockouts, or whatever events I probably wouldn’t want. I was unlucky in that I didn’t get any tickets for any of the events I’d selected (cycling, athletics, badminton, swimming).

    Now, given that the people that were unsuccessful first time round were supposed to get priority this time round I was somewhat dismayed to find out that at 8am (the website opened at 6am) absolutely nothing was available.

    So the “greatest” show on earth will be coming to London, 45 minutes away, and I can’t even purchase tickets, through the official sponsor Visa’s gateway, to a less popular sports qualification round. Great work LOCOG.

    The following article highlights just how ridiculous the situation is: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2010/jun/24/london-olympics-visa-card-tickets

    Astonishingly the site then goes on to tell customers how to apply for a Visa card, saying “the easiest way to obtain a Visa card is to contact your existing bank which will be able to help you to select and apply for a Visa card that most suits your needs. Alternatively anyone can purchase a Visa prepaid card from a Visa card issuer which can be used immediately. Please visit the Visa website for details.”

    I wonder how much Seb Coe got for that pretty little deal.

    Goodbye Dear Friend

    One of the most incredible feats of engineering has been axed as part of the Strategic Defence Strategy review, and what a travesty it is. A testament to British engineering ingenuity and skill, one of the greatest war planes ever to have flown, and just a down right beautiful craft. I can’t recall the amount of times, both as a child and an adult, that the Harrier took my breath away.

    Goodbye.

    Cryptic Christmas Quiz

    I’ll post the answers sometime next week.

    1. Carl had no song.

    2. You’ll have heard of this name for Christmas.

    3. Light part of music and learning.

    4. Precious metal or —-.

    5. Miser ordered “Go score”.

    6. Sinatra at home. Unusual scene for kingly gift.

    7. Reindeer sold out to the high street.

    8. Spirited Cheek!

    9. No soap with the trees.

    10. Sounds like the Queen’s job, darling.

    11. Thieves scram at this time of year.

    12. what did it cost king to hang this up?

    13. Stole item intended for Christmas decoration.

    14. Saint Laura upset at Roman winter festival .

    15. Bladed footwear found in desk at entrance.

    16. Initially found rime on several trees.

    17.S
    N
    O
    W

    18. Another Wise Man scrambled up elm next to a confused choir.

    19. Christmas, otherwise, without the 12th letter.

    20. Yuletide newborn’s bed is a garbled German trough.

    21. In satin seldom found on a tree.

    22. Beneficent monarch sews clean when confused.

    23. Yuletide mother is in army disarrayed.

    24. Excellent playwright provides happiness (not to women).

    Ideal Landscapes Ltd

    Over a month long of chasing has gotten me nowhere.

    We had some work done to our garden, namely a tree to be taken down, the root to be taken away, and the tree to be logged into firewood, with the ground being levelled.

    The word undertaken by Ideal Landscapes (referred to as “Ideal” from here on in) was far from ideal. A catalogue of problems arose after allowing these people to undertake work for us. I guess I should start at the beginning, which is more then “Ideal” could do, as they undertook the work three days early. This wasn’t a massive problem aside from the fact that we had warned our neighbours of the impending work date.

    Whilst the tree was indeed taken down, it was also taken away, leaving us without the firewood. Now the tree was between 45-50 feet hight, and around 1.5-2 feet thick at the bottom. Admittedly the wood would have required drying, but that is exactly what we intended to do. Estimates for this amount of firewood amount to anywhere between £200-£500 that I’ve seen so far.

    Next, they did indeed take the root out, or some of it. I understand it can be hard to properly get rid of roots, so that is bye the bye I suppose. However, they were also to level the ground, something we spent the best part of a week doing.

    “Ideal” left refuse (that they were contracted to take away) not only on our garden, but on our neighbours garden. Fortunately she has been cool about the whole situation, and whilst we gave her a very nice bottle of wine to say thank you, we should probably make that a few more.

    And as a final insult, “Ideal” needed to bring in a digger to get the root out, and so had to take down the fence at the bottom of our garden. Far from safely re-attaching it, they simply cut the bolts holding it to the fence posts and left us with a future repair bill.

    We paid “Ideal” £475 (inc VAT) for this privilege.

    So we sent a letter, detailing why we were unhappy and what we wanted doing. No response. I phoned the number, which re-directs to a mobile, and after several attempts finally got through. Cue apologies, several promises to bring the wood round and sort the fence. Nothing about levelling the ground or getting rid of the rubbish, but I figured that was the best course of action. Of course nothing happened.

    I then opened a case with Consumer Direct, the public facing arm of the Office of Fair Trading & Standards, who advised me to send a letter again, recorded, citing the Sales of Goods & Services Act.

    So we sent another letter, this time by recorded delivery. This is where things started to get odd. First of all, Royal Mail said they couldn’t deliver it as no one was there to sign. Then a few weeks ago, we had an answer phone message from someone who said that they had lived at the address “Ideal” gave us, and that they had done so for over a year.

    A few things strike me as odd here: firstly why would you sign for mail that was addressed to someone you know used to be at your address, surely you would tell the postman and send it back? Secondly opening mail addressed to someone else is an offence, and thirdly, if this had been happening for over a year why would you still be opening that mail to send it back to the sender? And fourthly, they managed to get my first letter, so why not the second?

    I’ve spoken to the Insolvency Register to find out that they are a Ltd company and are not insolvent, so far so good.

    And so I’ve been trying to find out where this company is actually based. I looked up the company on companieshouse, and then contacted the south Cambridgeshire District council to try and find out what type of property is registered at the address “Ideal” gave us. Due to Data Protection regulations however, they couldn’t help me. So I contacted the Valuation Office Agency, who obviously couldn’t tell me who payed council tax on the property, but that the premises is registered as ‘Domestic’.

    As an aside – Ideal Landscapes by Design Ltd is registered to the above address on CompaniesHouse.gov.uk. It is a legal requirement to keep these details up to date, and an offence not to inform the register that your details have changed. So one way or another, “Ideal” have broken the law.

    Sadly, this is where my trail runs out, and Consumer Direct can help me no more.

    Edit:
    I guess I could turn to Anne Robinson..

    I can’t even tell dear old Anne about it because the Watchdog “Your Story” form is broken. Typical.

    Google – ‘We Screwed Up’

    Yes folks, it’s true, the great God Google is fallible. The only problem being that they have seriously broken the law this time.

    What really irritates me is that Sergey Brin is merely exercising in damage limitation. This would have come out sooner, rather then later, if Google hadn’t taken the step to admit it publicly, and things would have been a lot worse for the bastardscompany.

    They say they’ll now delete all the data they collected. Right, who’s going to watch them do it?

    This kind of thing is illegal, and anyone else doing it would face massive fines and a criminal record, within the UK, but because it’s Google, I’m betting they’ll get away with it.