Running on empty and the shame of the dot-coms

(Predictably enough, we have received a press release from a teleworking specialist claiming that technology is the answer to this crisis. This sort of spiel always arrives when there's a train strike, or bad weather, or whatever. They're clever, these PR people.)

The Guardian newspaper carried a rather strange article about the issue on Wednesday. One of its reporters had called a few academics who said (or were prompted to say) that the crisis proves that technology and the net aren't as central to our existence as people had claimed. There's no way a microprocessor shortage would bring the country to halt, they argued.

First of all, that's a weird bit of one-upmanship (or one-downmanship, if you prefer). The academics were practically gloating that the 'old economy' had been proven to be so important.

Secondly, the Guardian didn't actually quote anyone who'd ever claimed technology was more important to life than things like gas, water, electricity, fuel... That's what happens when journalists are encouraged to find a new angle in what is clearly a square.

Having said that, wouldn't it be interesting to find out what would happen if the technology behind the world's major stock exchanges went down for a few days? Or if BT got fed up with all the criticism and went: "Well, if that's all the thanks we get, we're off. From now on, all our exchanges will be shut down and we're going to sell carrier pigeons instead."

Imagine if Cisco's routers got a bit tired and went on strike.

Oil vs. telecoms... I'd say they're both pretty important really. And it's not as if never the twain shall meet. The blockades were swiftly organised with the help of the net and mobile phones. News organisations have been able to get direct feedback from people around the country as they call in or email their experiences. And in a classic case of old economy meets new, a fuel price protestor hacked Opec's website and forced the organisation to close it down. Even blockades can be virtual these days.

B2B marketplace provider Mondus.com has lopped off its new media limb - from henceforth, it wants to be known, simply, as Mondus. The company doesn't want to be tarred by the 'fly-by-night' reputation of dot-coms.

It also said the change enabled it to cater better for local markets in European countries that would be confused by the dot-com moniker.

The latter argument isn't too convincing, but the former is interesting. Not all that long ago, Corel typified prevailing wisdom by adding a 'dot-com' to the corporate signage hanging proudly above its HQ. Co-incidentally (or not), its share price enjoyed a little boost at the same time.

And now Mondus is spurning its suffix. Seems a bit of an over-reaction to us. Not to mention a bit harsh: dot-coms have feelings, you know. (See http://www.silicon.com/a39332 )

US finance giant Western Union has suffered a wee security breach in which hackers stole details of 15,700 credit cards. The details were left vulnerable by good old human error. The site was hacked after routine maintenance left performance management files open to external access. (There have been no reports of fraud as yet. See http://www.silicon.com/a39551).

In unrelated news, a survey from Experian found that police fail to bring 90 per cent of reported cases of e-fraud to justice. The long arm of the law clearly doesn't reach into cyberspace. And there's Mondus chopping off its dot-com limb. Perhaps the police could use it as some kind of prosthetic (sorry, I think the relatively unpolluted London air is going to my head. See http://www.silicon.com/a39723 )

Another organisation which needs a bit of a dot-com makeover is the UK government. The Cabinet Office run Performance and Innovation Unit (PIU) conducted an audit, and found that the government will struggle to take advantage of new technology in bringing electronic services to citizens because of a culture of non-cooperation between its departments. Very few key services are currently online no websites currently in existence allow people to conduct transactions. (News this week that some citizens will be able to pay for their TV licences via high-street kiosks is a small step in the right direction - see http://www.silicon.com/a39549 ).

The report said the culture and complexity of government is to blame, with projects moving slowly and failing to cross departmental boundaries. To speed up the process of change, the PIU recommends the creation of an incubator unit within the office of the e-envoy to mimic the success of dot-com start-ups (the very people from whom Mondus is trying to distance itself.)

At least this week Tony Blair pledged to spend over £1bn in getting UK citizens, government and small businesses online, a plan which includes setting up 6,000 special centres to offer low-cost net access to the disadvantaged, and a series of online vocational courses. He also announced an 80 per cent discount on computer literacy courses.

But most of the money will go on wiring up the government itself, which should please the PIU.

Let's hope Alex Allan's replacement as e-envoy knows what they're doing. The government has opted for an open competition to find his successor, but four names have emerged from the pack. Ann Steward, currently director of e-government for the Cabinet Office Margaret Smith, director of business technology and delivery for Legal and General Jim Norton from the Institute of Directors and Rene Carayol, industry personality and former IT director of IPC Magazines.

Who do you think should get it? Are these the right type of people, or are others more suitable? Share your thoughts with the silicon.com community by adding a 'reader comment' below this article.

And finally, an apology to all you Scots. Last week, I mistakenly said that students study A-levels in Scottish schools. Obviously that's not true - they sit Highers. Sorry for the error: I'm eating a large slice of humble haggis as I write.

The Weekly Round-Up will be back next Friday.