carrierdetect.com

The 1980s were a great time to grow up if you had even the slightest interest in science and technology. On terrestrial TV we had amazing shows such as Tomorrow’s World, which managed to perfectly package the latest advances in science and technology for consumption by the average person in the street, or child even, and without being patronising.

Where Tomorrow’s World served to inspire by demonstrating what was possible and by highlighting that which was just within our reach, shows such as Take Nobody’s Word for It demonstrated key scientific principles via simple experiments that we could often easily repeat at home.

Now we have the likes of Scrapheap Challenge, but this is little more than a dumbed down and less ingenious version of another 80s classic, The Great Egg Race, and a pale imitation at best and that is pitched primarily at petrol heads. OK, so we also have Braniacs, but whilst science features much content is far from being educational or serving to inspire (unless you aspire to carry out research into which foods if eaten often will make you odorous, or plan for a career in caravan demolition), and what is worse it’s frequently sexist, and is often padded with laddish humour that is of little merit in terms of either education or entertainment.

Putting TV aside, in the days before the common domestic availability of the Internet if you wanted instant, free, long distance communications about your only option was amateur radio. If you wanted to get your hands dirty with computing you typically had the choice of a multitude of 8 bit micros which fostered the hacker ethic, encouraging you to write programs in languages such as basic and to get more intimate with the operation of your computer than most will ever get in the current day. With many people going as far as building their own computers from kits as they were simply unable to afford an off-the-shelf machine, and the BBC taking it upon themselves to build a standard, and by some measure affordable machine for the British nation, and which was widely adopted across its schools: the BBC Micro.

Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t for a moment wish the Internet away or suggest that we all go back to using a wide spectrum of primitive and frequently incompatible, and costly, home computers. But it’s sad to see hobbies such as amateur radio becoming largely the reserve of those in their later years, and home computing to become represented by a homogeneous, beige in colour and in experience, disposable and all too frequently hermetic platform.

However, my concern goes beyond nostalgia and a sense of loss for that which I held dear, and is for the future of a nation that is increasingly putting less value on science and engineering.  A little while ago I attended an open evening at the Culham research facility and was saddened to hear that there is a desperate shortage of people studying physics at university level. This was by no means the first time I’d heard that our universities were producing insufficient numbers of scientists, and have also heard it said that computing is becoming a much less popular area of study.

It is not that the 1980s were particularly a golden age, either in terms of research and innovation or the public’s interest in such things. There has been a healthy scene for amateurs who wish to tinker and experiment with electronics, radio and mechanical engineering etc. since the very genesis of such disciplines. Up until now, that is. The fact of the matter is that many, if not most technical topics are now widely regarded as “uncool”, and also tend to feature much less in the media. Generally speaking nobody fixes their car any more, or builds their own radio or computer, and very few have even a basic understanding of how many of these things work. Science is not for TV unless it is a spectacle of some sort — it has to be weird, whimsical or else just plain old dumbed down. And children don’t get Meccano, Technic Lego, model aeroplanes, chemistry sets or electronics kits for Christmas any more.

We want technology. But we don’t want to bother ourselves with how it works.

It is natural for technology to evolve to the point where the user need not concern themselves with the details of its operation. It is reasonable for people to desire automation, ease or lack of a need for maintenance, and for technology to increasingly encroach less on their free time. However, whilst we seek to wash our hands of the details who takes care of them? A desire for leisure and convenience taken too far will lead to an ignorant nation of incapables.

I don’t claim to have all the answers to this problem, but would suggest that a good start might be:

• The BBC recognising the problem, taking appropriate action and bringing back programming such as Tomorrow’s World, Take Nobody’s Word for It and The Great Egg Race. Not necessarily the same shows, but programming of a similar quality and which will serve to educate and inspire whilst entertaining.
• Recognition from the Government that this is a serious problem, and a commitment to a comprehensive and holistic plan of action to address the matter, e.g.: work with schools, increased investment in research and action to bring it most visibly into the public eye, national technology programmes a la the BBC Micro and support for amateur science, technology and engineering groups.

We are a nation of hobbyists, tinkerers and experimenters at heart, and the sciences, technology and engineering are long overdue a renaissance amongst the British public!

Share This

Tags: Innovation // 3 Comments »

I recently came across the rather cool Kickfire analytics appliance, which not only does hardware-based database query execution but is also based on F/OSS technologies.

Similar to the Azul Java compute appliance the secret is in the bespoke silicon which has been developed to do one thing and to do it well. When a job can reasonably be targeted to hardware and in doing so will execute much faster, why burden a general purpose processor with it and an associated software stack? Frankly, I think it is nothing short of ridiculous that we have data centres across the globe with millions, if not billions, of general purpose processors executing, with relative inefficiency the same tasks. It might be good news for hardware manufacturers and ISVs, but it’s bad news for the environment, CFOs and the armies of poor souls that have to manage spiralling complexity.

Of course there is nothing that new in the Kickfire and Azul appliances, nor in virtual machines and storage area networks and virtual LANs etc. And in fact many of these extremely popular and frequently hyped technology approaches of more recent years have their roots in the mainframe:

• ICL Content Addressable Filestore –> Kickfire
• IBM VM –> Xen &VMware etc
• DEC VAXcluster –> Veritas, Sun and F/OSS Linux clustering
• The Computer Bureau –> Cloud Computing

One of the major differences between then and now however is that we have a much greater degree of interoperability and with applications and data being much more portable. We are not, or rather we have the choice of not being locked into a single vendor.

I would suggest that to get round imminent scaling issues (SMP has effective limits and not everything works well across many cores) and to drive costs and energy consumption down we must do more research into what might be considered novel computing architectures. We need to stop saying “Oh, yeah but CPU is cheap”, and instead to think how we can optimise. It’s obvious that writing everything in assembler is not the answer, and it would appear that many of technological approaches that were displaced by the PC are now making a serious come back, and so we know roughly where to look.

So, let’s have more application-specific silicon, but which supports open applications. Bring back ancillary processors. Off-load the main CPU(s). Accelerate common functions. Put DES and AES etc on the die. Execute Java btyecode natively. And so on…

Share This

Tags: Classic Computing, Infrastructure as a service, Virtualisation, Innovation, Opensource // Add Comment »

A few weeks ago I was very fortunate to be able to make it along to the Linux Foundation’s annual Collaboration Summit. Fortunate not only because it is invite only, but due also to the financial crisis making travel somewhat trickier and transatlantic travel extremely difficult. Plus a few weeks later and it would have most certainly got the kaibosh due to the H1N1 influenza frenzy we are currently experiencing…My reason for attending the summit was of course down to work with the Linux Foundation FOSSBazaar work group, of which BT is a strategic partner. However, on the first day I did get treated to a bunch of keynotes and panels all related to the kernel, and whilst Linus himself couldn’t make it we were graced by the presence of leading figures such as core kernel maintainer Andrew Morton and Debian founder Ian Murdock. It was fascinating to get a brief insight into how a project the size of Linux is managed, and I tip my hat to the Linux Foundation for doing such an excellent job of bringing key people from the community together in order to facilitate collaboration around the kernel. We heard about Moblin from Intel’s Imad Sousou, and the move to bring the initiative under the stewardship of the Linux Foundation, had updates on kernel developmen, and were treated to a highly entertaining rountable entitled “Why Can’t We All Just Get Along” and featuring the Linux Foundation’s Jim Zemlin, Microsoft’s Sam Ramji and Sun’s Ian Murdock.

Interesting general factoids gleaned included IBM’s approach to engineer reward. When they embarked upon their open source journey back in the late 90s they apparently discussed, for a number of years, whether to link developer performance to the number of accepted kernel patches, or to simply objectives being met. After some time they decided on the latter. I can see such an approach having the potential to be unpopular with human resources, but I completely agree with that decision. I also spent some time chatting with a kernel hacker employed by a major Linux vendor, who wore their shirt but made it perfectly clear that he scratches his own itch and is not owned by the vendor. A relationship he claimed was well understood by both parties and with both meeting their respective objectives. Of course I’m fairly confident that the vendor receives great value for money and that this can be largely attributed to both parties sharing a common itch. If this sounds like some kind of fairy tale world, where you are measured simply on meeting clear objectives as opposed to your performance in a convoluted HR-crafted gymkhana, and where you get to retain your own identity whilst simultaneously being passionate about your work and delivering for an employer, then it is. A glimpse of the future perhaps…

The FOSSBazaar work group meeting was spread over two half days, with one of them spent discussing items of general strategy and organisation. Key priorities for the next year will be raising awareness of FOSSBazaar, driving engagement with the forums and providing more focused material, e.g. tailored for the various enterprise stakeholders and possibly use case based too. We also hope to build a wiki for use in facilitating collaboration amongst partners and to aid the production of authoritative documentation. We believe that governance is critical to effective enterprise adoption of F/OSS, and without it adoption will be at best impeded and at worst has the potential to lead to holes in support, license violations and legal action. Therefore now that we have a group of very capable people assembled together who share the common goal of accelerating enterprise adoption, and a growing body of material and expertise to support effective governance, it is our duty to ensure that we seek to connect with those who are embarking on their F/OSS journey, whilst striving to advance the state of the art in governance.

At the FOSSBazaar work group meeting Michael Mahemoff and I (although Mike mostly!) presented TiddlyGuv — a BSD-licensed tool for supporting F/OSS governance that is based on TiddlyWiki and TiddlyWeb. The tool is still in its early stages and currently provides the capability for managing F/OSS license text and company policy information, along with commenting and access control (e.g. to ‘lock-down’ official text). Next up will be to add the capability to manage data associated with project engagements, e.g. results from due diligence process that we take groups wishing to incorporate F/OSS in a product through. Beyond which we hope to develop automated workflow and possibly even integrate to some extent with the FOSSology F/OSS licence (source code) scanning tool. Rather than go into any more detail I’ll link-off to a post on Mike’s blog since he’s leading development and can speak with a great deal more authority.

Lastly, I’ll be looking to this year further develop BT’s relationship with the Linux Foundation. We originally joined via the OSDL and an interest in Carrier Grade Linux, much later becoming a strategic partner of the FOSSBazaar work group in support of BT’s goal of exercising “governance in the clear”. However, it would appear that there are other Linux Foundation initiatives where we may be able to make a contribution and in return benefit from doing so, e.g. in terms of learning or strategy development etc. I hope to be able to post more news on this in due course.

Share This

Tags: Osmosoft, Event, BT, Opensource // Add Comment »

Two weeks ago it was once again time for the Society of Computers and Law’s Annual Lecture. I made it along to my first of these events two years ago. Well, to the SCL Scotland’s Annual Lecture to be precise, and this was given by none other than Free Software legal expert and key driving force behind GPL v3, Eben Moglen, who turned out to be an incredibly powerful speaker. The following year I attended the SCL’s Annual Lecture in London, where we were treated to an address by Stanford professor, lawyer, founder of Creative Commons, enemy of “Corruption 2.0″ and general protector of digital freedoms, Lawrence Lessig.

In keeping with their theme of hosting talks by world-leading protectors of the commons and legal system agent provocateurs, the SCL secured the services of Google Senior Copyright Counsel and general copyright nut (and I mean that in a good way) William Patry, whose lecture was entitled Crafting an Effective Copyright Law.

The lecture was given as a tribute to Sir Hugh Laddie QC, Patry quoted him on numerous occasions and I became increasingly sad to learn that he is with us no more. Sir Hugh sounded like he brought a sense of much needed sober reason to an increasingly out of control world of copyright absolutism.

A few of the key messages from the lecture:

• We need not weak/strong, but effective copyright
• …not based on public feeling, but empirical evidence!
• Copyright problems are analogous to recent banking system problems: free market fundamentalism and a belief that actors will self-regulate and act in their own and public best interests
• Copyright is based on a belief of private ownership, however there is no natural right - it is simply statute…
• Regulation in public interest must be a pre-condition to copyright
• Governments have a responsibility to ensure copyright programmes are effective (argument that copyright is simply a government programme and thus they are responsible)
• Not copyeft! Copyright is valid…
• Policy makers are not demanding accountability, and are ignoring advice, e.g. the Gowers Report, where they did not dispute the evidence and instead chose to turn it into a vague question of human right (again emotion/public feeling over empirical evidence)
• We must reject any system that restricts learning
• Creators are consumers too - there is no black/white hat
• Copyright should be tort, as property comes with too much baggage and is based on exclusive rights and thus puts a huge burden on public to overcome

Apologies for any inaccuracies introduced due to either my poor transcription efforts or lack legal education! But, I think you get the idea… I think we are all getting the idea. Noises are increasingly being made in connection with the ineffectiveness of copyright, and it’s encouraging to note that it’s not just us Net liberals, but recognised legal giants and copyright experts.

Share This

Tags: Information, Event // Add Comment »

Today (24th March) is Ada Lovelace Day, and I, along with >1,500 other people, pledged to write a blog post about a woman in technology whom I admire. This turned out to be more difficult than I thought, not because of a lack of inspirational women in technology, but rather instead due to it being hard to pick one from the many. I could have picked Dame Stephanie ‘Steve’ Shirley, a British computing pioneer, founder of what was to become Xansa Plc and a past President of the British Computer Society, Dame Stephanie entered the nascent computing industry via mathematics, and had to adopt the name ‘Steve’ in order to help her get along in the male-dominated business world. Or I could have easily wrote about a past colleague, having been fortunate to have worked with a number of inspirational girl geeks. Although writing about someone who I knew would have perhaps felt a little bit weird…

As it happens I’ve failed, since I’ve decided to dedicate this blog post to not one woman, but the thousands of women who worked at Station X during World War II. For those not familiar with Station X this was the code name given to the top secret code breaking operation at Bletchley Park, which processed intercepted messages received by the network of ‘Y’ radio receiving stations. Shrouded in secrecy for decades after the war, much has since been written about the involvement of the key figures, such as for instance ‘Father of Computing’ Alan Turing and Post Office man and pioneer of computer design Tommy Flowers. However, the stories of the many women who contributed to the code breaking effort is rarely told. The thousands of women who with very little training adapted in short order to operating what was then cutting edge computing equipment. Who transcribed messages, with absolute precision punched codes into paper tape, and verified and interpreted codes. Who worked long arduous shifts, for very little pay and without speaking to a soul about their work. The women who were introduced to a secret world of codes, ciphers and computing, and then after the war rarely had the opportunity to build on these experiences.

I wonder what the ICT industry would look like today were these women given the opportunity to build on their experiences, and if they were publicly given credit for their work and their stories were more widely known. Would this have encouraged more women to join the profession? It’s impossible to say for certain, but I suspect it might have.

Share This

Tags: Event, Computer Conservation // 4 Comments »

Tuesday evening I attended a lecture at the RSA entitled The Public Domain: enclosing the commons of the mind, where Professor James Boyle talked about the subject of his recent book. I won’t go into too much detail here since you can download the entire book in PDF form via the last link, else watch his RSA address via the link before that. However, a few key points:

• Copyright law is largely based upon faith and very rarely empirical evidence.
• In the early 70s in the USA, when it was required to apply to renew copyright, 85% did not.
•  Most US works from 1923 onwards are under copyright, whilst frequently out of print.
• Many films in the Library of Congress are on nitrate film and crumbling, yet cannot be digitised due to copyright law and only researchers can view them. This is a cultural disaster!
• We tend toward intellectual property absolutism, seeing copyright and patents as the answer to everything. This is a major cultural issue.
• IBM is the world’s biggest patent holder, and yet today makes twice as much from F/OSS related services as it does from its patent portfolio.

Of course this is not the end game, the situation with copyright and patents etc is simply untenable moving forward and changes are afoot. The Internet, digital media, geeks and perhaps most importantly a generation born with the Internet will all serve to bring about a shake-up.

At lunchtime today I attended another RSA lecture, this time entitled The 1984 Miners’ Strike and the Death of Industrial Britain, where we were fortunate to hear an analysis of the strike, its handling and events leading up to it, from Lord Kinnock, then Coal Minister Lord Hunt and journalists David Hencke and Francis Beckett, whose book Marching to the Fault Line sheds new light on the strike. I must admit to having been fairly young at the time of the strike, and furthermore I’m eternally ignorant of politics. However, I do recall the atmosphere at the time, and I am becoming increasingly interested in the events which have shaped British industry.

There was consensus amongst the speakers that the complete failure of the strike could be squarely attributed to National Union of Mineworkers leader Arthur Scargill - a man who refused to compromise, and that Lord Kinnock described as posessing “suicidal vanity” and a leader that the miners did not deserve. He did suggest that Margaret Thatcher deserved him, and him her! However, Scargill played into Thatcher’s hands and gave her the vehicle she needed to push through her own agenda, weakening the trade unions and as the authors suggest signalling the death of industrial Britain. Lord Kinnock also drew our attention to information in the book which had been liberated thanks to the Freedom of Information Act, and which sheds light on the lead up to the strike, highlighting how Thatcher’s administration had been plotting in secret for a number of years in the lead up, and taking measures such as stock-piling coal at power stations.

Finally, it was interesting to hear how Lord Kinnock believed that had we not shut down our coal industry, at a cost calculated today to be £28.5billion, the then pace of associated technological development would have likely led us to ecologically acceptable methods of utilising the fuel today.

I must say that I’ve really enjoyed every RSA event I’ve attended, which admitedly is only 3 to date. However, now that I’m finally relocated to London, and my place of work is but a 10 minute cycle ride from the RSA House, I can see that I’ll be making it along to events there much more often.

Share This

Tags: RSA, Information, Event // 1 Comment »

As an ex-electronics engineer, hardware geek and a strong advocate of free and open source software, it should come as no surprise that I get more than a little excited at the prospect of open source hardware. Late 2007 I got my hands on a prototype of the Openmoko hardware, a Linux smartphone platform for which the schematic diagrams and CAD files are readily available and free to use, thus enabling anyone with suitable manufacturing facilities to make their own or a derivitive, and without the need to license IP. Whilst undeniably very cool, the open source paradigm has permeated to even further down the device stack, to the silicon itself, and this is what I get most excited about…

Semiconductor fabrication is pretty much the reserve of major industry, with the start-up costs being way beyond the budget of most, if not all experimenters, and likely also a great many educational institutions. However, thanks to hardware description languages (HDL) and the wonder of reprogrammable logic devices such as field-programmable gate arrays, just about anyone who can afford a computer can experiment with the design of complex on-chip digital systems. In a little over 20 years the FPGA has gone from a capacity of circa 9000 logic gates to millions, with HDL models evolving in complexity to encompass cutting edge processor designs and things such as system-on-a-chip interconnect. Of course there is the small matter of technical skill, and as I understand it learning a HDL and putting it to good use is not for the faint hearted.

The team that I’m part of, Osmosoft, has a remit that includes open source advocacy and demonstrating the far-reaching benefit of taking an open approach to innovation, and this includes sharing data and use of open web standards etc. However, whilst this does not start and end with software, it would be difficult for me to justify spending a lot of my time learning a HDL (not to mention it would be a *lot* of very extremely hard work), and even armed with such skills producing a new work that served as a powerful demonstrator would be a fairly tall order (it hurts just thinking about it)!

Keen to get a little hands-on with open source hardware, and to build something that demonstrates the extent to which an open approach to innovation can be adopted, I decided the thing to do would be to build as open as possible a ’stack’ and based on foundations of an open source CPU. Since as far as I am aware there are no open source CPUs available off the shelf as an ASIC, that is to say hardwired in silicon, it would need to be a CPU coded in HDL, synthesized to a bitstream file and targeted to a FPGA (a good excuse to play with reconfigurable computing too). To that end I obtained a development board designed for the GPLed LEON 32 bit SPARC v8 compatible processor, and for which a Linux port exists. The board provides standard I/O such as VGA, serial and keyboard etc, has both RAM and flash storage and of course a FPGA which will host the CPU and associated logic. On power-up a bitstream file compiled from HDL is loaded by the FPGA from local flash memory, and the FPGA configures itself according to the system model that had been laid out in the HDL. Where a CPU is hosted in the FPGA this may then in turn boot an operating system from flash memory.

The plan is as follows: Linux (GPL) will execute on the LEON processor ‘core‘ (GPL), with the Apache httpd (Apache License) running on top of Linux, and in turning servicing web requests by serving a TiddlyWiki (BSD) to remote clients. And just for completeness we will probably provide the TiddlyWiki content under a Creative Commons license, with said content likely being a description of the configuration and additional reading on the licensing and technologies involved.

So far I’ve got the FPGA dev board housed in a small custom made enclosure, and done some very minimal testing to confirm that the board works. Next up will be to build a Linux filesystem image, download, boot and test. Following which rebuild the image with Apache httpd and TiddlyWiki, images and any other content baked-in.

More on this adventure and on open source hardware is to come. In the meantime, if you haven’t already you really should check out Opencores.

Image top-right: The Gaisler GR-XC3s-1500 LEON Development system.

Share This

Tags: Linux, Project, Osmosoft, BT, Devices, Opensource // 2 Comments »

Last Thursday I attended a seminar on EMI computers, organised by the Computer Conservation Society and held at the London Science Museum. This was the 3rd computer history related event I’d attended, with the first two being part of celebrations for the British Computer Society’s 50th anniversary. I don’t think I’ll ever tire of learning about the development of computing, as whilst I find the possibilities in the future that lay ahead of us extremely exciting, I’m also fascinated with the developments that led us to where we are now at.

There is of course a certain romanticism to the early days of computing, be it blinkenlights, huge tape machines, memory so big you can count the bits or codes punched into cards. However, there is also a real and current value to having an understanding of that which went before and an appreciation of the factors that led to the decisions made along the way, and conversely a blind faith in perceived current best practise can be dangerous. Note for example that:

• Certain approaches may have been abandoned as a result of dependencies being unmet at the time, perhaps due to limitations in another area of technology.
• Certain other approaches will have been tried and abandoned for good reason!
• Technology trends, like fashion and trends in music, are often cyclic. E.g. mainframe -> distributed computing -> consolidation (mainframe-like minicomputers/virtualisation/cloud computing).

Therefore it follows that armed with a knowledge of the past, it may sometimes be possible to save valuable time when working on current problems.

Such practical utility aside I believe it is vital that knowledge, software, and wherever possible physical artefacts pertaining to the history of computing are preserved, in order that they might be available for study by, and for the pleasure of future generations. All too often conservation does not become a concern until much has already been lost, and this is certainly true of computing, an area of science that is still relatively very new, that has evolved at a fast pace and which has little place for obsolescence. An old car can still provide utility and old furniture can similarly be put to use, yet an old computer takes up valuable space and it rapidly depreciates in value as it is quickly rendered obsolete by newer generations that are orders of magnitude more powerful. Outmoded and out of fashion domestic appliances might be unwittingly archived in a loft, and found from time to time in a forgotten corner of a garage. 30 ton mainframe computers however, are rarely lost and rediscovered many years later.

Computer conservation is not just about the preservation of physical artefacts, but software, documentation and the knowledge associated with the development of computing. There is often much important detail to be found in the stories accompanying developments, and many a fascinating else amusing anecdote too. These stories must be preserved, and without wishing to surround morbid, before it is too late! Many of the pioneers of early computing have already left us, and with them important stories will have been lost.

On a cheerier note, a few EMIDEC facts and figures from the day:

• A graduate in the 1950s starting as a programmer would earn £725/year, and on commencement attended a 3 week course serving as an introduction to programming.
• A basic EMIDEC 1100 would set you back £250,000, had 1024 words (36 bit) of core store (RAM!) and could do binary/decimal/sterling conversions in hardware.
• The much larger EMIDEC 2400 interfaced to peripherals via a switch unit, which allowed certain peripherals to operate together without the need to route via the main processor (e.g. for copying media).

The Computer Conservation Society do an excellent job of preserving historic hardware and software and related knowledge, and organising excellent events such as the seminar on EMI computers. For anyone with an interest in the history of computing I’d strongly recommend joining. Members of the IEEE may also be interested in subscribing to the Annals of the History of Computing. For those in, around, or ever planning to visit London, you really must make a trip to Bletchley Park. Just 30 minutes North of London you can find the site of the British WWII code-breaking effort, one time workplace of Alan Turing and now the site of Britain’s National Museum of Computing: home to the awe-inspiring labours of love that are the Colossus and Bombe rebuilds, along with a great many classic mainframe, mini and personal computers.

Share This

Tags: Event, Classic Computing, BCS, Computer Conservation, Mainframe // 2 Comments »

“A banker is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain“, said Mark Twain, and I couldn’t agree more. No, I’ve never had much love for banks. They are the cornerstones of our increasingly unfathomable economic system, upon which we are all utterly dependant, and yet they are not government agencies but instead answer to shareholders, playing fast and loose in a desperate bid to stay on top, and proven over time to be shockingly unaccountable. To a banker most every opportunity to generate revenue appears to be fair game, be it disproportional account fees, ludicrously fragile financial products or plain old downright unethical investment.

So, with the obligatory and somewhat generic anti-bank rant dispensed with, on to a personal experience.

I don’t have an overdraft facility on my current account, or rather I didn’t ask for one, but then I noticed one day when logging on to internet banking that I all of sudden had a -£150 facility. “Oh”, I thought, and when subsequently my current account became £12.52 in debit for <24 hours I thought this not something to be concerned about. I could have transferred back some of the funds that I’d been regularly moving into a savings account, but decided against this as I knew my salary would be credited the next day. So it was with some surprise when I discovered a few days later that a £22 commission charge had been levied to my account. “Commission?”, I thought, “Commission for what?!” On calling Barclays I was informed that this was for making use of my Reserve Facility, and that I would be charged £22 plus interest every 5 days that the facility is in use. I was also informed that I had a default overdraft of -£10 on the account, meaning that I’d actually been charged £22 for having used £2.52 of the Reserve Facility for <24 hours. That I transferred slightly too large an amount from my current account to a savings account (also with Barclays) is admittedly my own fault. However, I still have major issues with the bank’s behaviour:

• Don’t give me credit when I don’t ask for it
• Don’t insult my intelligence with dishonest financial products. This so-called Reserve Facility is nothing more than an extremely expensive overdraft facility!
• Don’t default to giving me the worst product available - I know I’m eligible for a regular overdraft facility. As far as I am aware we are not engaged in war, and I really don’t have the time nor inclination to check your every move just to make sure that you are not trying to trick me

After speaking for some time with a “manager” at Barclays I was informed that the situation was out of her hands and that this charge could not be removed, despite my explaining that as a matter of principle I would be changing banks if it were not. Furthermore she refused to acknowledge that this Reserve Facility was in essence dishonest, claimed that the bank had written to me in connection with its application to my account, and went on to explain how it served my best interests by preventing me from incurring multiple fees resulting from direct debits etc being returned unpaid. As I explained to her I would much rather run the risk of incurring, say £40 in fees, resulting from 5 such claims for payment being returned, and where the bank has conceivably had to do additional administrative work, than to pay £22 for borrowing £2.52 for a little over 12 hours via a credit facility that had been applied to my account without my consent. Without this unwanted, and indefensibly expensive facility, I would have been alerted to the fact that I needed to transfer funds from my savings account as the ATM refused to provide me with cash.

And so it is after 17 years of banking with Barclays that I am currently reevaluating my options, and I will be making the switch to a new bank at some point over the next few months. Whilst this episode may be seen as fairly trivial I believe it to be endemic to Barclays approach to business, as it would seem that barely a month passes by without their behaviour or a financancial product being called to question. They are no strangers to controversy.

Barclays are by no means alone in their sorrowful approach to financial conduct, and it is well understood that the exceedingly poor current state of the economy can be squarely attributed to the wreckless behaviour of the financial industry at large. As I see it the fundamental problem is this: banks should be putting far less effort into innovation in financial products! It should not be a constant quest to see who can devise new schemes to extract money from the high street customer, nor a race to see who can concoct the most convoluted vehicles for fiscal gain. Schemes which leave the customer feeling tricked and untrusting of the bank. Vehicles which serve the interests of a handful of people by promising to apportion them a disproportionately large share of wealth, and which when they fail do so in a grand fashion, are difficult to unpick and leave entire nations picking up the pieces in place of the few who stood to gain had they not failed.

A few additional, quite simple, observations:

• Banks should be boring and monotonously reliable
• Customers should not have to second-guess the bank’s every move. Trust should be a given!
• Banks should not be allowed to sell-off a mortgage on the cheap after a client has defaulted on one repayment, to an unregulated business such as a hedge fund that will move fast to repossess and sell the property for a quick profit
• Savers should be able to sleep sound at night knowing that there will be a predictable income from their savings
• People should not be aggresively marketed debt, and there should be an end to the automatic allocation of reserve facilities and ever increasing credit limits etc.
• Investment bankers should be making ethical investments in investment vehicles which offer a reasonable degree of transparency
• All actors must be held accountable

Without wishing to turn this into any more of a rambling rant than it already is, I’d like to also point to the TV adverts for banks and their financial products, and to suggest that now is the time to finally put a stop to singing, dancing and otherwise comic bank managers. This approach to marketing has, in my opinion, always been ill-advised: I don’t want a bank manager to grin like a slobbering incompetent half-wit, nor to dance, prance, sing and tell jokes. I want them to advise me, with a sober expression, how best to manage my finances. So, given that the banking fiesta is drawing to a close, perhaps we can live in the hope that the mess which remains to be cleared up will finally put a nail in the coffin of those dreadful TV adverts. To be clear: more than simply something which I find aesthetically displeasing offensive, I believe that all too often their jovial and whimsical nature is echoed in the ethical conduct of the very banks they are intended to represent, and that as such, in the context of the current far reaching financial mess of their making, they serve purely to add insult to inury.

If you want glamour, pursue a career in music, TV, Hollywood or whatever. If you want to innovate, work in science, medicine or IT etc. If you want thrills, join a circus or become a racing driver. If you work in finance, be trustworthy, dependable, predictable and… boring.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom and the current mess and past ill-advised behaviour will hopefully help to shape our economic future. Lessons must be learnt! And I take great pleasure in noting how, as is so often the case, the future lies in the past… Take for example the Beverley Building Society, which offers two products: retail savings accounts and mortgages, using funds from the former to enable the provision of the latter. Providing tens of thousands of mortgages and yet at the time of writing only 7 of which are in arrears!

Share This

Tags: Stuff // 1 Comment »

It was brought to my attention yesterday, that an article which I wrote for the UK Unix User Group on “The Growing Need for F/OSS Governance”, and which went out to the UKUUG membership in print before Christmas, is now available to all online.

Share This

Tags: Osmosoft, BT, Opensource // 1 Comment »