Bloody Banks @BarclaysUK

Earlier this week Barclays blocked my debit card. You wonder what horribly suspicious activity prompted this? Well, I had the audacity to try and top up my Monzo card! I have been frequently topping up my Monzo card since I got it in April, indeed, that is almost all I have done with my Barclays card since then (except Costco, who don't yet take Monzo). And yes, I had done so a few times since the name change. How the hell was that suspicious?

Then they texted me saying they would text from some short code number and ask me to reply. Well, sorry, but I can't text short codes. Eventually, much later in the day I got a call and had to go through DTMF hell to convince them the transaction was fine. Pain in the arse.

Today however I noticed I was mysteriously £13k overdrawn! I had checked earlier today and was fine, so something was up and I had caught it within hours. The phone app and on-line banking did not say why.


I went in to the branch and asked, and they could see that some Danish Auction house had authorised over £13k as a "recurring transaction".

We used to do cards for broadband some years ago, so I have some clue on the retail side of this, and as I recall, a recurring transaction only needs the card number, not the expiry to CVV code. This is so that regular card transactions don't fail on renewal of the card itself.

This is clearly suspicious. For a start, why would an auction house need to charge on a "recurring transaction" basis at all, and also why would anyone charge so much on a "recurring transaction" basis anywhere. Had I used the card number, expiry, CVV, and verified by visa for an on-line purchase, then fine - I would not want it blocked - but this was not me!

It was not an on-line transaction, it was a "recurring transaction" (so probably just card number), to a foreign company that has never ever charged my card before, and for a large amount.

What twisted logic do the banks use that does not make that suspicious?

Then more issues - I am told that they cannot do anything until it appears on my statement. Well, I have told a Barclays representative that the transaction was not me - really that is all I should have to do. It is not me that has been defrauded here, it is the bank. I am just a bystander here and I have done my bit. However, they are insisting that I spend yet more of my time contacting them again once it appears on the statement.

Moreover, when it was the Monzo card I was able to answer their questions that day, and so presumably could have reported the transaction as fraudulent. So why can I not do so for this one?

As a retailer I would want to know right away, so why not allow me to report this now so they can be told?

I am not 100% sure what was asked by the person on the phone (that the bank tellers was talking to) but I suspect they wanted me to put money in the account to cover this. She had clearly got a good impression of my annoyance and explained that I would not be prepared to do that. Bloody cheek.

Then she cancelled my card. This seems pointless if all that was used is my card number. My new card is as likely to be abused in this way to defraud the bank as much as this one. I have not lost the card, which is what she reported it as (so she made a fraudulent statement to her own bank!). Indeed, if someone wanted to have a go at me, they could just work out my next card number but as a recurring transaction they may not even have to do that for it to go through in just the same way. (Update: Barclays have stopped doing that and new card is very different number).

So cancelling my card just causes me more inconvenience.

P.S. The Danish auction house are actually engaging with me more than my own bank!

P.P.S. In an effort to be constructive, after a lot of disagreement with Barclays on twitter today. What I think should happen is simple. I should (a) be able to see what is authorised but not yet on statement on app and web site; (b) I should be able to select and say "not me", perhaps with some dire warnings of being really sure and perhaps depending on levels of checks (e.g. chip&pin used?); (c) that should be the end of it as far a sI am concerned. I appreciate that Barclays may have to follow established rules on how to handle the issue, and dispute via Visa/Mastercard, and so on. But basically, that should all be hidden from me - not impacting my balance and not even shown on my statement. Only if merchant comes back with evidence it was really me should the bank ever need to contact me on the matter again. This could be done - the bank could do this all internally with no change to their processes when dealing with merchants or card processors. If people claim transactions are not them when they turn out to be, maybe the system then holds their balance at authorised until resolved in future as a black mark, but generally, the above system would be ideal. I could even live with there being an admin fee if I mistakenly claimed a transaction was not me.

Update: 1st October

The auction house cannot work it out - it was in DKK so not sure exact amount, and nothing with a card ending with the digits on my card. Odd. They did thank me for letting them know.

Has shown on my statement finally, and so I am on to Barclays now.

I am still on call with Barclays, and it has disappeared off my statement now - good job I took a screen shot. I did not know they were allowed to make statement items vanish like that - I would have expected a credit to appear to cancel it. That surely has to be bad banking practice to do that. Oh, and it has re-appeared!

Interesting, it was my old card used, not this one! A card that is invalid.

So they have admitted that it was a mistake but still want me to faff with a "claim". I have explained on my recorded call that I will do so for my consultancy fee as I am helping them out where they have been defrauded.

But let's be clear here - a frequent top up to Monzo is flagged as suspicious, but a "recurring transaction"; from somewhere I have never purchased before; for a large amount; from a foreign merchant; using an invalid old card number; is just authorised with no problem. To be clear here, this was not just a transaction that was submitted without authorisation - it was authorised by the bank. Somehow that is not suspicious.

Update: 5th October

They have credited the charge at last. Paperwork just arrived - talks of experiencing fraud being worrying, and discusses "my claim".

They want me to declare "I confirm that at no time has the above numbered card been out of my possession". Well, no - it was out of my possession before I got it, and after I shredded it. Grrr.

Wow, Barclays actually retweeted my criticism of them!

Update: 9th Nov

They have taken the money out of my account again - I am fuming.

I got the business banking relationship manager on the case and now, 14:30, the account has been credited again. Seems they did not get the paperwork! They could have called, texted, emailed, sent a secure message, or written to let me know they were still waiting - but no, they just took £13k with no warning or explanation. So well done Ian for sorting it.


WoW Gold and Blizzard bank?

There have been some interesting stories of Bitcoin being declared a legal currency by some legislators / courts around the world. Wikipedia has an interesting page on the matter.

The problem is that Bitcoin is not like any conventional currency - it has no central bank or issuing or control authority in the same way as a "conventional" currency. It is not tied to one nation, like a "conventional" currency. That scares nations, obviously! It is pretty much anonymous. It works at a distance without needing any trust.

One of the classic issues though, if Bitcoin is to be treated as a legal currency, and the legal burdens that can imposed, is how you define it. You cannot have the law say "bitcoin" as there are already many other similar digital currencies like Bitcoin, so you need to be more general.

The danger with a more general definition is including something like World of Warcraft Gold in the definition, or points in any other sort of game. Some games have in-game currency which is directly bought and sold (exchanged) for "real" money and used to buy things in game. It could be used to launder money - buying virtual currency, passing it in game, and selling it, so legislators may consider it worthy of the same legal controls.

But in-game money, like WoW Gold, does not follow most of the rules of "real" currency. Making it subject to the legal controls of "real" currency would be a problem. In the game, vendors sell things for WoW Gold and that WoW Gold does not go to the vendor account or a "Blizzard account", it just goes. Similarly there are things in game the provide WoW Gold or goods that vendors will buy for WoW Gold and again that gold is just created by the game, it is just a number. Overall the game has some controls, and so there is an internal market for goods and gold (the action house). But most of the way WoW Gold works in-game would not be allowed if it was deemed a "real" currency, and Blizzard might have to become a formal bank even!

Until recently and buying or selling of WoW Gold for "real" money was not allowed in the terms, but even so there are web sites selling WoW Gold, and they still exist. Players using them could lose their account. But Blizzard actually created a real way to convert money to WoW Gold in the form of a WoW Token. It is purchasable in the UK for £15 and can provider 30 days game play. However, you can also buy and sell WoW Tokens on the auction house, and they currently go for around 68,000 WoW Gold, which is quite a lot. This means there is an exchange rate for WoW Gold in the real world. Blizzard have been cunning, the game rules don't really allow laundering money - one could put money in to buy WoW tokens, but one cannot get money out of the game - you can only sell for WoW Gold or use for game time, so hopefully WoW Gold would be kept out of legal currency legislation.

But it is a fine line for legislators to make a sensible definition.

On a side note, this did mean I could be slightly extravagant, and for two WoW Tokens I managed to buy a vanity mount, one of the most expensive in-game things, a Grand Expedition Yak at 120,000 gold.

P.S. my favourite comment...


Meeting a hero (@xkcd)

The comic xkcd has been a favourite of mine for many many years, and has a cult following especially amongst geeks. It is drawn by Randall Munroe, who used to make robots for NASA, and is apparently the second most famous physicist to move in to a cartoonist career who was born on October 17th.

As an ISP we immediately adopted that someone knowing the word "Shibboleet" had some clue, and that passwords should consider entropy as well as ease by which they can be remembered.

I had the pleasure of a talk from him yesterday at the New Scientist event at Excel London. Yes, he did indeed kill the laptop doing the presentation with a bottle of water during the talk - well done. I took my 8 year old grandson, Bobby, and I am so kicking myself that I failed to say "We call him Little Bobby Tables" when Randall signed his book "To Bobby". That is how much I was dumbstruck by meeting a hero.

For a change, when meeting a hero, he was pleasant, and actually took time to talk to everyone that was there for the book signing. He even spoke to Bobby, and me, and he says he too has constant arguments on passwords and entropy even now. And yes, as he says of those with which he has such arguments: "they are all wrong".

I also learned a lot about the practical aspects of making a ball-pen play area in your apartment. You would not believe how many subtle issues there are - a good presentation.

Unifi/Apple getting worse

Having made some major improvements in this problem, it seems now to be worse since iOS 10 on my iPhone.

The problem is that roaming between Unifi access points on same SSID (which IPv6 present, which may or may not be a factor) loses connectivity - a lot of the time. It happens even when using Fixed IP config, so is not related to DHCP server itself.

It had got to being rare after latest Unifi update, but since iOS 10 it is most of the time now.

Trying upgrading Unifi AP firmware from to now. We'll see.

P.S. It has not helped!


Timers and thermostats

So, we have an oven, it has a simple to use and set timer. When I cook something (rarely) I always set the timer. Why the hell would I not. Yes, often I will not forget ,and will go to the kitchen just before it goes beep and turns off. But there is no harm out cost in having set the timer. Sometime I'll go to the oven and press the button just to check how much time is left - it is a useful feature.

Some people (mentioning no names) refuse to EVER set a timer on the oven. And then, when they cook something and go out, and come back to charcoal, they say "I did not expect to be that long". That is fine, no problem, but why not set a timer. If you are not that long, no harm done. If, even if 1 in a 100 times, you are longer, the timer saves your bacon (or in this case lasagne).

The same happens with TV shows. I have seen many minutes of agonising decision "shall I set this to record or not?" before going out, and considering if back in time to watch live or if not back in time.

The decision needs no time, press the fucking record button and if you are back in time, one button to delete it (or leave the Sky box to delete by itself so no effort at all). Seriously, why the decision? Why the dilemma?

When you have two choices, and neither have any "cost" but one has some saving if an unlikely event happens, then spend the "zero cost" option. Set the timer! Press record!

The other pet hate is that the same person does not understand how a thermostat works, and will set the car to cool to 16C and then when it is too cold, turn off the air-con. Only then to turn back on when too hot. Why the fuck not set the temperature at something with which you are comfortable, adjust to taste on the day, but set it, and leave it, please. What is worse is when the passenger (me) has sensibly done this on one side of the car and has to endure the air-con turned off for ages while the other side of the car warms up again.

Sorry, just general rant, somewhat hungry and really was looking forward to that lasagne.


Live TV interviews (Using DSLR with Skype on a Mac)

I have done quite a lot of live TV interviews on BBC, Sky News, and RT (Russia Today). If you want me to do a TV interview on anything Internet related contact the AAISP press office.

The first interview was with Sky News, and was in a studio. I had a few days notice. It was all very scary and new, but one can get used to anything. These days it is much more relaxed. RT tend to give a couple of hours notice.

Interviews with BBC were also in a studio. I have been in three different studios now. When RT called for an interview, with only a few hours notice, they suggested a studio, but then said "or we could use Skype". Well, I am not a Skype user, but a choice of install Skype or spend all evening travelling to and from a stupid for 3 minutes on air - I chose Skype.

It was pretty simple - install Skype, wait for a "call", and live TV interview.
  • I used the apple headphones as they avoid any issue with feedback or noise cancelling.
    • The mic is not that good, but was OK - probably better than the one in the screen/Mac.
    • Later interviews I had grown a beard and so the mic would make a scraping noise, not good
  • I used the in build camera in my Mac
    • It claims to be HD - I am not sure of the spec, could just be 720, and does not look that good
    • It is a tiny camera, so never going to be brilliant
    • It points at an odd angle, so I either had to tilt up the Mac (which showed all my ceiling lights behind me) to lower my chair stupidly low. I chose the latter.
After many RT interviews like this, for the latest (a couple of days ago) I thought I would try something better. We have some good audio/video kit now at work, and so I plugged in the Zoom H4n Pro via USB. It is obviously much better quality than the inbuilt mic or the headphone mic. When you connect USB it prompts for mass storage or audio, and so I picked the latter - as if by magic I now have H4 as a new audio input (and output) on my Mac, and Skype can see that.

Whilst waiting for the call on Skype I googled a bit to see if I could use the Canon DSLR camera as a web cam. I found a solution, which was very clunky, but worked. I have since seen some other s/w that supposedly works more directly with the camera, but not tried that.

The process is pretty simple though...
  • Install CamTwist
    • This creates a new web cam that can be used as video input on the Mac
    • It actually does (in this case) screen grab of the desktop - you pick a rectangle
    • Beware - it has settings for the web cam size that default to something tiny - you go in to a menu to set those (I picked 1920x1080) and restarted it and the apps using it
  • Run the EOS utility for "live view" on Mac screen
  • Point the CamTwist virtual webcam input window to the EOS live view window
    • This means a 4k video camera displayed on a scaled window on a small part of a 5k Mac screen, captured and called to present to be a 1920x1080 webcam. Messy, or what.
    • Be careful no other windows pop up over the live view at all as they will appear!
This is the end result (this was recorded using a camera pointed at a TV so is not that good).

As you can see, the video is not that bad, but something horrible has happened with the audio! I sound a lot more Micky Mouse than usual and I seem to be stuttering!

From what we can tell, when I plugged in the H4n it offered 44.1kHz or 48kHz. I just picked the default (44.1kHz). I can only assume something (maybe Skype) assumed it was 48kHz, and so processed the audio as higher pitched, but then kept running out of audio and so repeated a fraction of a second hence making me stutter.

So, I am trying to do better! I ordered a Blackmagic design Ultra Studio Mini Recorder which does HDMI or SDI to Thunderbolt. This is not that expensive but it is important to realise that it does not do HDCP so cannot capture from Sky, etc. It is find for a DSLR that has HDMI output though. It is worth getting a thunderbolt cable too and I had to get a mini HDMI to full HDMI cable to work with the camera.

This is not the end of the fun and games though.

First off, getting the camera to play ball...
  • I had to set the HDMI mode not to overlay the usual focus and settings controls. There is a menu for that.
  • The HDMI out is 1080, and can be 1080p or 1080i. I set 1080p (why not) and 50 fps.
  • The recording is separate. I did have set to 4k 25fps, but obviously that means some processing to get to the HDMI, and seemed to add a video lag compared to sound (even using cameras own mic). I changed to match HDMI 1080p/50fps. Seems better.
  • You still need the EOS utility to set live view - this allows you to lock the camera so it is actually mirror up and feeding video without timing out. Just setting video mode and not recoding soon stops. I could have recorded as well I guess. May be a nice idea next interview.
  • I may have to find a mains power adapter for camera to ensure the battery does not catch me out. Thankfully interviews are short, but sound/video checks first and so on can take time.
  • The EOS live view lets me play with focus and stuff as well, which is fun, so live I can change focus to another person - would be good if we had two people interviews and a camera operator.
So, with the camera working, I turn my attention back to audio. My plan was to either use the H4n via USB as before (but 48kHz this time) or use audio line out in to camera external mic. The idea of the latter is it means audio / video via HDMI so should avoid A/V sync issues.

Turns out A/V sync issues are a nightmare!
  • To start with, I was not sure how to test - I FaceTimed my son - he said sync was shit and audio like a second behind video.
  • Eventually I decided simpler to record using Photo Booth and play back to check.
  • I found audio ahead of video slightly in most cases, even when audio is direct in to external mic. I think I have managed to improve that a lot by changing video record mode to match the HDMI settings to minimise any processing being done.
  • It seems that actually the H4n on USB works just as well as via line out to camera, so USB will get better quality direct in to audio devices.
  • Unfortunately, at one point, I managed to create the huge lag with audio behind, but not quite work out how. So clearly, testing is needed before I go live.
I need a longer thunderbolt cable, and a USB extension lead. I am still using the Apple headphones for the audio output (talkback so I can hear interviewer). But I think I am ready for my next interview now - and I know to check my A/V sync before I start this time!


Sponsored schadenfreude?

I am slightly conflicted here...

A friend is doing something for charity. Man vs Hair II.

It basically boils down to him shaving if people sponsor him to do so.

This is what I do not understand in terms of the the psychology here.

If his friends wish to donate to charity, the do so, simple. He can quite sensibly encourage people to do so. For the record, and primarily so that I do not seem like an arse, I have donated to that charity today.

But I do not understand the "sponsorship" aspect. If it is a good cause, give some money. If not, do not. Why is it that some person doing something that they would perhaps rather not do (running a distance, pouring water over their head, shaving, whatever) a reason to give money?

It seems people want to pay for someone else to do something they would rather not, so hardship, or some challenge (shaving is not a challenge, climbing a mountain is a challenge).

It seems we are creating a culture of paying for hardship. Paying for schadenfreude in fact. That is basically it. You would not sponsor someone to eat a cheese sandwich, as that is not something that is negative or humiliating or a hardship or challenge for them (unless lactose intolerant). You may pay to see someone shave a beard that has taken time to grow. You may pay to see someone run a long way. But why?

So this is using schadenfreude to raise money for charity - using the human desire to see someone else suffer as a motivation. This is even though charity is usually about stopping suffering!

Is this really what charitable organisations want to do? Is that morally correct? Is it ethical?

Anyway, do donate to that cause - it seems a good one - if you also want to experience schadenfreude then so do via his promotion, but why do that when you can just donate anyway and not humiliate someone?


Numbering plan

Some decades ago I managed to extract a 1,000 number block out of BT.

The way I did it was simple. Having "The BT Price List" I could see that "reserving a block of numbers" was free, so I applied for, and got an order confirmation for, a block of 10,000 numbers on my ISDN2 lines. I did it twice, in fact.

Obviously the order did not happen, so I complained to chairman's office, as one could, at the time, and settled for a 1,000 number block as resolution if it was a "nice" one. Initially only 30 were "live" and so paid for.

We have been plagued with wrong numbers ever since, but have some cool numbers. Later, 10 of the numbers were sold by BT to an estate agent, and so I grabbed all 990 remaining and ported out. We still get bogus calls for the estate agent on numbers they don't have!

You will have seen we have 01344 400 xxx, or a least 990 of them, on the A&A site. I personally have a block of 100 of those routed to me. Once upon a time they went to ISDN2 lines in my garage (now man cave), but now are all VoIP.

So, a long time ago I set up some direct numbers for myself and my wife at home, and my kids. Back then the kids actually had analogue phones in their bedrooms on an ISDN (Avaya/Alchemy) system. It was pretty recently that the old 5 pair analogue cabling was pulled out from the house. So, yes, from birth (mostly), my kids had direct personal phone numbers (and email addresses) assigned.

Some still use them to this day, assigned to a mobile SIM card or VoIP phone as well as ringing other mobile devices.

But today I realised I needed a 2nd level of numbering, and started assigning a number scheme within the 100 numbers I have for grand kids. Yes, I have a scheme to allow for up to 9 kids for each of my kids in the numbering plan. I am assuming that by the time I have great grand kids phone numbers will really be obsolete.

The crazy thing is that the 8 year old grandchild has a mobile phone, and a number (albeit locked down on who he can call or from which he can receive calls, or texts), and I expect my 3 year old grandchild will have the same very soon.

I must admit that such a numbering scheme is something I never imagined when I started in telecoms. But now, why not. Why not have numbering the family can understand.

Next step, email addressing schemes :-)



When the Statutory Off-Road Notification was originally introduced it was a fun set of new bits of legislation, but reading them carefully at the time it specifically allowed you to "notify" that a vehicle was off road, and hence remove some of the obligations for having the vehicle taxed and insured.

However, specifically, a SOR notice did not actually stop your vehicle having vehicle tax. It was, as I read it at the time, quite valid to have vehicle tax and be off road, thus removing insurance requirements. And if you only needed to be off road for a short period this was a lot less hassle, and could even be cheaper, than getting a partial vehicle tax refund and re-taxing when back on the road (and insured).

Back in those days you could easily prove you had tax as you had a real tax disk.

I can only assume they have changed the law, as it seems that sending a SOR notice causes you to get a partial refund of the vehicle tax and no longer be taxed.

I am trying to find my way through the minefield of the legislation changes to work it out, and see if one can declare a vehicle off road without cancelling/ceasing the road tax. So far I am failing to find the details that cover this specifically. The problem is that, without an actual "tax disk", they can say you are no longer taxed and you have no proof otherwise.

The reason this came up is my daughter did declare her vehicle SORN for a short period, in the middle of the year, having paid for a year's road tax in January. And was apparently unaware that this meant she no longer had road tax. After all, she paid for a whole year, why would she not have road tax for a whole year?

Now, I can understand that some people may well want to declare SORN and request road tax be stopped and partly refunded - maybe that is what she inadvertently did. The "form" that DVLA have is an "application" of some sort and not simply a "notice" now. Something to try and find out for sure, and next time only send the notice, and not apply for the vehicle tax to be stopped.


How not to do WiFi?

Update: read to end - whilst it was unusable, they have somewhat redeemed themselves with the support.

I am in a caravan park, Hendra, in Newquay. Don't ask! Sandra and myself and our grandson (whilst his parents are on honeymoon). Yes, I know, slumming it. Very reminiscent of the holidays we had when first married with our kids, so nostalgic in a way.

They have WiFi on site by a bunch called "Camping Connect".

Now, I appreciate that providing WiFi for a physically large site is a challenge, but actually that bit they have managed. The WiFi signal seems good. I also appreciate that Internet access for a large bunch of people on a site is a challenge.

But there are things you should not just get wrong like this. It is scarily bad.

The access has a voucher system, and they do a number of days and number of devices, and you can buy on-line on the captive portal. So far so good, and pretty bog standard.

The Internet access is via a simple BT back-haul connection, no idea how fast, but in principle not unusable.

The problem is that whatever kit they have handling the double NAT going on and the authorisation sessions is very very broken. A single TCP session is lucky to last a minute before being dropped, same for a UDP (VPN) session. I cannot ssh or VPN using it. But maybe they are just expecting people to use the likes of FaceBook and Twitter.

They have a FaceBook page. It mentions what one would assume is a twitter account @CampingConnect but that is not actually on Twitter. Well, it is now, and is me...

But even such simple things are badly broken. After a few minutes they stop working. Indeed all https stops working. To fix you have to go to an http page which is redirected to a "You're online" page...

Then, once you have that, your https will work again. It is just massively broken trying to do anything.

Seriously I have had more reliable Internet using a 2400bps sat phone on a ship, and way more usable Internet at 30,000ft on a Virgin Atlantic flight.

Some updates...

Their DHCP is messed up. It answers a broadcast and issues a 300 second lease with 134 second renewal but then does not answer the unicast renewal requests so the client has to give up and rebi d. This could explain losing connection we very couple of minutes and perhaps the portal reset if tied to DHCP at all. No, it is worse, it is replying sometimes, but rarely to unicast or broadcast which means I am often losing IP totally and having to try daIscover many times and then request many times to regain an IP. The wifi signal is fine so looks like just bad network kit. No, it is more complex. It is not replying to a lot of the DHCP requests, unicast or broadcast - so often losing IP totally for minutes at a time.

This morning there is nothing working, no replies to DNS and no routing at all!

I am guessing double NAT as the wifi is on a /22 but a second RFC1918 appears before the BT DSL link, so probably a bog standard BT router doing one lot of NAT and their portal/access doing another.

Update: they called - and have whitelisted the MAC on an AP. Now ssh stays up (yay!), VPN seems to connect but does not work, and the connection is so poor I cannot even use vim. I give up.

Update: they called again - looks like lots of noise/interference, so they are going to change channels around. I am surprised that I did not know I could use ALT and the WiFi icon on a Mac to get details!

Further update: pretty usable now after much juggling..

Conclusion: The support staff tried - the service in the caravan was hampered by WiFi - so more APs would be needed I expect to do better. The service at the club house was very different, and difficult to use. Overall some key things I may have needed to do on a laptop this week would not have been possible at either location. Poor, but they tried.


My daughter got married

Yesterday, my daughter, Jacqueline, got married to Chris.

It is the first time I have had to do the whole father of the bride thing - riding with her in an antique VW camper van to the church, and giving her away.

Even though I was in it - with little help from James and Mikey we managed to video the service, and the speeches. We also got some drone video and stills in the grounds of the hotel where the reception was held (St. Anne's Manor, Wokingham). We had a magician to entertain the kids, and he was very good (Fred in the shed). In fact, most things went perfectly and I think everyone had a good time.

I'll leave them to decide what other videos they want to post where, but this is my father of the bride speech for you amusement - all done off the cuff :-)

NOTSCO (Not TOTSCO) One Touch Switching test platform (now launched)

I posted about how inept TOTSCO seem to be, and the call today with them was no improvement. It seems they have test stages... A "simul...