British government "colluding" with Phorm

..."simplify, then exaggerate" is a common journalistic approach. From what you've written above, I think you're trying to whip up a scandal when there isn't one at all! Seems all above board, based on what you've written...

Ah c'mon Simon, if local councils can use anti-terrorist legislation to check on what you are putting in your dustbin and we are all on CCTV 300 times a day, its really not a big stretch to imagine the UK Govenment wanting to snoop on your e-mails is it? Interesting to hear they have now dropped the idea of a single snoopers database though - preseumably they worked out the storrage costsd and decided to let the phone companies and ISP's to do it for them.

Healthy cynicism in all directions? This is getting a touch NotW for my liking... (more humour and less invective please - as per your large and largely excellent number of comments on the world of telecoms in the past)

Having said that, there are some real issues here that need to be societally addressed from an ethical standpoint and not from a commercial one. Please bear in mind that there is nothing new about the software, algorythms and metadata management deployed - these have been around for at least 20 years and are an integral part of many gaming envrionments - the issue is the use to which such psychometric analysis is put. In this respect the questions of legality and colusion become highly significant. With regard to discussions over whether or not the software is legal or illegal, it would be a bit naieve to think that governmental communications (particularly when devolved below the levels of mandarins) don't take on a life of their own that can be open to interpretation in whatever way anyone wishes to do so...

As an aside, if you want to see something much more scary, have a look at the US Republican party's BI system: VoterVault.

With all the scandal around Phorm and its association with DPI, I assert the need to better educate the broader industry and public that packet inspection technology (DPI) by itself is not bad nor evil. DPI can be a very good useful and good management technology to prevent and fix service quality problems that affect consumer's enjoyment of communications services. It can unique address serious security threats to end users, along with many other noble purposes.

DPI is like nuclear technology--it can be used for good or bad by the minds and hands that work with it. It is how the information that DPI passively collects is stored, secured, and used downstream that stirs the question of appropriateness.

When looking at the new 'Phoulplaythemanandnottheball' site, you will find no better example of how off-beam (to put it charitably) Phorm are.

It's represented on their site under 'This is how they work' as "Several individuals well known for their virulent stance on Phorm - including Alexander Hanff, Dephormation, Florence and Oblonsky – attacked the author in unsavoury and intimidating language."

But if you follow the link which Phouldeeds handily provide, you find no such thing.

Instead, you find Blackbeak initially presenting an 'Is Phorm so bad?' argument based on his natural disbelief that a respectable AIM-listed company (Phorm) would provide such a skewed and distorted picture of their system to the public, and that a major FTSE-100 company like BT would carry out illegal acts on its customers.

And then you see the people listed above, and others, using the most moderate language, sweet reason and the catalogue of unavoidable facts to try to help Blackbeak to see things as they really are.

And thus encouraged, and having looked up the many references given to him, and engaged in some very constructive debate with those who wrote the comments, he changes his mind, and writes a further article describing exactly what is wrong with Phorm; for which our protagonists thank him nicely.

No threats, no intimidation, not even any harsh words, and certainly no money changing hands; just logic and good information holding sway.

To anyone reading the Phoulandmephitic site, all you have to say is 'Please - follows the links they give. And then judge for yourself if it backs up their claims - or, as in this case, backfires on them.