Saturday, 28 February 2015

Orange Wednesdays ends and the internet is very upset


http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2015-02-25/orange-wednesdays-ends-today-and-the-internet-is-very-upset


Orange Wednesday's 2 for 1 cinema deals that had been going on for over ten years came to an end on the 25th February 2015. Mobile company EE announced it's plans to end the deal last year as it said that "customers' viewing habits had changed". In reaction to this, apps such as UsherU have been created, in an attempt to replace Orange Wednesday's with finding cinema deals in your area.
  • Orange Wednesdays were created in an attempt to increase cinema visits during the quiet weekly periods. It also allowed Orange customers a 2 for 1 main courses with complimentary appetizers at Pizza Express restaurants. Both the cinema ticket and meal offers only required a text ticket from Orange, which is entered at point of purchase. 
  • Orange offered "Orange Wednesdays" from 2003 until 2014. This enabled any Orange customer to apply for 2 for 1 cinema tickets at participating cinemas, by text message.
EE's decision to stop Orange Wednesday's, will cause a large reduction in the amount of cinema goers (especially teenagers) due to the ever increasing price of a ticket. When the deal first began in 2003, the average price of a cinema ticket was £4.43, which has now greatly increased in 2014 to £6.53, and more than £13 in London. On top of the price of the ticket itself, many cinema goers deem it necessary to buy popcorn and drinks whilst they are there, to complete their cinema experience. This can mean a very high bill once you've come out of the cinema, which can feel very disheartening, especially if the film you watched didn't turn out to be very good. With ever increasing film piracy online, as well as companies such as Netflix providing viewers with the ability to stream movies instantly, EE's decision may be the start of the end for cinemas.

Saturday, 14 February 2015

Samsung smart TV policy allows company to listen in on users


http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/samsungs-new-smart-tv-policy-allows-company-to-listen-in-on-users-10033012.html
The new privacy policy for Samsung’s smart TVs allows the company and its partners to listen in on everything their users say. The policy states: “Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition.” It makes clear that the tool can be turned off through settings, though that will stop the voice recognition working entirely and Samsung will still continue to collect data about how people use the TV. The privacy policy has drawn much controversy though, because it has been compared to a passage in George Orwell's book 1984, in which it reads: “Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by [the screen], moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.”

Disturbing: The once-humble TV is now a powerful machine that has the ability to earwig your conversations on the sofa as part of the set’s voice command feature
  • The company says it stores this data and, under its privacy policy, states that it can share it with ‘affiliates and vendors
  • And it’s not just television sets. It emerged that millions of Britons are being spied on by Microsoft’s voice-activated Xbox games consoles, which can listen in to everything around them. 
    In its privacy policy, Microsoft states that it is ‘only interested in your voice commands to Xbox, which we capture along with any ambient background noise. If you give Microsoft permission, we record commands whether you are online or offline’.
It has become increasingly more obvious that as technology evolves faster and faster, and becomes more prevalent in our everyday lives, it appears as though it comes at the cost to our privacy, meaning that unless we become paranoid enough to have to switch all of our devices at the mains, we could be listened in on at any given moment, sharing our lives with other people, even if we may not want to or are aware of doing.

Clare's Law: 1,300 domestic abuse disclosures made

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30977759

Under Clare's Law, otherwise known as the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, men and women can request information about whether their partner has had a history of domestic violence, or third parties such as friends or relatives can make requests if they are "concerned". Police and other agencies including social services then consider whether releasing information on someone's past is "necessary, lawful and proportionate" to protect someone from their partner. Reasons for information not being released include a partner not having a record of abuse offences, or there being no "pressing need for disclosure" based on the information found. Polly Neate, chief executive of charity Women's Aid, said: "Any woman asking for a disclosure under Clare's Law is clearly already concerned about her relationship, and should be referred to a specialist service so she can get support with her concerns, even if no disclosure can be made."
Clare Wood was murdered by George Appleton at her home in Salford in 2009

  • There have been at least 3,760 applications under the law so far - resulting in the 1,335 disclosures. The true totals are likely to be higher, as three police forces did not release their statistics.
  • Outside the four forces involved with the pilot, Lancashire had the highest number of disclosures at 146, while Norfolk had the lowest, with five.
Woman protecting herself from a blow from her partnerI think that Clare's Law is an extremely important event to have occurred, and will prevent people from unknowingly staying in relationships with dangerous partners. However, it could make people with a past of domestic violence become isolated, by ending relationships because of it. But, personally, I think that isolating former domestic abusers is a small price to pay for protecting the lives of their vulnerable partners.