I have many techy friends. They all have wifi. Which means, if I visit them, I have to go through a long and tortuous route to use their internet connection - because a combination of UK law and common sense make using encryption on your wifi really rather important.
I don't have this problem in hotels.
In hotels, When I try to use the wifi, they just intercept my DNS requests, rerouting me to a page where I can enter my credit card details. From this they can then give anyone with my MAC address access to the internet. It works well.
Why can't home routers do this?
When I go to a friends house, I should fire up my browser and get a login page. My friend can then either give me a guest password (which will give me access for a few hours), or give me a username and password of my own (to give me access whenever I want).
Now - this will only give MAC level security - which I guess isn't perfect 9although it seems to work for hotels), but it would also provide an easy route (over the web, once you've logged in) to provide all the other information needed to configure a computer to use the router's security features.
Showing posts with label website. Show all posts
Showing posts with label website. Show all posts
Thursday, 27 May 2010
Monday, 17 May 2010
Voting Survey
As I write this, the election is drawing near in the UK. By the time you read this it will have been and gone, and we'll be in a brave new world, totally different fromt he one before May 6th. Or something.
Right now, there are many websites which allow you to say how much to like particular policies. You make your choices, and the site tells you who to vote for. A sample of 1 (me) suggests they work fairly well.
There is also a campaign called Power 2010. Power 2010 is interesting, it set itself up as a policitcal pressure group without any aims, then got people to vote for the goals the group should have.
Power 2010 was broken - because the voting meant they would focus on the top 5 policies - even though only a minority of people may have wanted those policies - and there may have been noone that agreed with all five.
My suggestion is different: take the voting survey, but track how people answer. From this, you might be able to find 'clumps' of policies that many people agree with - or at least that more people agree with more of than they do with any existing political party. In essence, you could reverse engineer part politics and come up with a more attractive framework than the one presently suggested. And you may find new ideas - like liberty or small c conservatism which transcend parties entirely
Right now, there are many websites which allow you to say how much to like particular policies. You make your choices, and the site tells you who to vote for. A sample of 1 (me) suggests they work fairly well.
There is also a campaign called Power 2010. Power 2010 is interesting, it set itself up as a policitcal pressure group without any aims, then got people to vote for the goals the group should have.
Power 2010 was broken - because the voting meant they would focus on the top 5 policies - even though only a minority of people may have wanted those policies - and there may have been noone that agreed with all five.
My suggestion is different: take the voting survey, but track how people answer. From this, you might be able to find 'clumps' of policies that many people agree with - or at least that more people agree with more of than they do with any existing political party. In essence, you could reverse engineer part politics and come up with a more attractive framework than the one presently suggested. And you may find new ideas - like liberty or small c conservatism which transcend parties entirely
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Wiki-dating
Another approach to internet dating is to get rid of the computer.
Several of my friends are inveterate match makers. They look for ideal partners to pair up. This gives them satisfaction, and (apparently) some sort of meaning in life. I can exploit this for profit, right?
We've all seen "Hot Or Not". Why not have a dating site where you get to see the classified ads of one guy and three (random) gals, or one lady and three (arbirary) lads, and get to say "I think the best bet for this bloke or the wisest way for this woman is this one of the three". You could also say "Actually, I think these two are ideally matched"
And then you get to see
"Did I think the same as the rest of the crowd"?
and possibly, in the future, if that the guy writes to your choice of girl, you get points... and can ascend though a series of lables which mark out how good a match maker you are.
Meanwhile, the daters are using a dating website like normal. They see the ususal set of potential matches. But the matches are ordered, not by an algorithm based on a form they filled in (or their star sign and place of birth), but my what the people who are making the matching decisions suggest. You don't get matched by a soulless computer, but by people (and people have had centuries of evolution to get the art of matchmaking right. They probably know what they are doing)
And the final benefit of this idea? it could well go viral. Free advertising for your dating site. Which is what you need to draw people in.
Several of my friends are inveterate match makers. They look for ideal partners to pair up. This gives them satisfaction, and (apparently) some sort of meaning in life. I can exploit this for profit, right?
We've all seen "Hot Or Not". Why not have a dating site where you get to see the classified ads of one guy and three (random) gals, or one lady and three (arbirary) lads, and get to say "I think the best bet for this bloke or the wisest way for this woman is this one of the three". You could also say "Actually, I think these two are ideally matched"
And then you get to see
"Did I think the same as the rest of the crowd"?
and possibly, in the future, if that the guy writes to your choice of girl, you get points... and can ascend though a series of lables which mark out how good a match maker you are.
Meanwhile, the daters are using a dating website like normal. They see the ususal set of potential matches. But the matches are ordered, not by an algorithm based on a form they filled in (or their star sign and place of birth), but my what the people who are making the matching decisions suggest. You don't get matched by a soulless computer, but by people (and people have had centuries of evolution to get the art of matchmaking right. They probably know what they are doing)
And the final benefit of this idea? it could well go viral. Free advertising for your dating site. Which is what you need to draw people in.
Monday, 22 March 2010
Dating For Introverts
Computer dating took a new lease of life when the internet came along. It won't surprise me if, in a few years time, we get some figures suggesting some large portion of the population met their partners through dating websites. And while there are many popular websites, and they seem to be doing their jobs just fine, occasionally I think of new varients on the theme.
My favourite is Introvert Dating
As an introvert, this style of dating matches how I would like these websites to work.
To begin with the sites would be much the same as existing sites. You would enter a profile, save it and then be given a list of potential matches. However you would not choose to contact one of the matches, you would just signify that you are interested in them - or that you are not interested in them (maybe you give a star rating to help the recommendation engine... but thats outside the scope of this idea)
Now, once you have said you are interested, you are moved up the list of people your potential partner is matched with. The potential partner cannot see you are interested in her, but you are moved up on her list (and then sorted by either computer generated relevance, or by how many people you have said you are interested in - if you are interested in a lower percentage of yourt choices, you are moved up in the object of your affection's list)
Your partner may then decide she is not interested in you... if so, you vanish from her list of potentials, and you never hear anything more. Moreover, you are happy because you have never had to tell her that you are interested in her.
But if your partner clicks the "I'm interested" button, she gets told "He is interested in you too. Would you like to send him a message?" and is given the option of getting in touch.
So you only ever write to people you know are interested in you.
And what about those people who say "I'm interested" in everybody, just to see who is interested in them? Well, if someone is already interested, but the checker never chooses to write to them, then there is no problem - the interested person never knows anything has happened.
And because they are interested in a high percentage of their matches, they will turn up lower on the list of people interested in just a few others - and so be leess likely to be seen.
My favourite is Introvert Dating
As an introvert, this style of dating matches how I would like these websites to work.
To begin with the sites would be much the same as existing sites. You would enter a profile, save it and then be given a list of potential matches. However you would not choose to contact one of the matches, you would just signify that you are interested in them - or that you are not interested in them (maybe you give a star rating to help the recommendation engine... but thats outside the scope of this idea)
Now, once you have said you are interested, you are moved up the list of people your potential partner is matched with. The potential partner cannot see you are interested in her, but you are moved up on her list (and then sorted by either computer generated relevance, or by how many people you have said you are interested in - if you are interested in a lower percentage of yourt choices, you are moved up in the object of your affection's list)
Your partner may then decide she is not interested in you... if so, you vanish from her list of potentials, and you never hear anything more. Moreover, you are happy because you have never had to tell her that you are interested in her.
But if your partner clicks the "I'm interested" button, she gets told "He is interested in you too. Would you like to send him a message?" and is given the option of getting in touch.
So you only ever write to people you know are interested in you.
And what about those people who say "I'm interested" in everybody, just to see who is interested in them? Well, if someone is already interested, but the checker never chooses to write to them, then there is no problem - the interested person never knows anything has happened.
And because they are interested in a high percentage of their matches, they will turn up lower on the list of people interested in just a few others - and so be leess likely to be seen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)