I do not use Ramblings from a Writers Mind for direct promotions because it is not the raison d’etre of this blog.
These ramblings are about sharing knowledge and experience. They are about in-depth consideration, informative articles, about highlighting the good and bad regarding writing, publishing and indie authorship.
It is not a place for advertising.
Considering the above, the following may seem directly opposed to this ethos. But read on, you will see I am seriously designing something to help and aid writers and authors like ourselves.
What is more, I am asking for your views and feedback on this project, a project I have called, @Open24.
@Open24 is an online Amazon store, my online Amazon store. (which is Open 24 hours a day, hence the name.) But… it is a store with a difference, a difference which I think will be of use to you.
Allow me to explain…
I have been an indie author for several years. Years during which I learnt far more than I could have imagined when I began to pen my first novel, ‘The Abduction of Rupert DeVille’.
In the early days, I struggled to find high quality, comprehensive information on writing, authorship, formatting, publishing, and all the sundry things which are part of being indie.
Do not get me wrong; the information was there, in libraries, on websites and, of course, on Amazon. My issue was and, to be honest still is, finding it.
For instance, if I want a book which covers sentence construction, I will have to carry out several searches, scroll down, past many irrelevant publications to find something vaguely, possibly akin to my want. That is for one single book. If I want to compare it with other books or find something similar, I need to repeat the search all over again.
Before I start this post proper, I am not a conspiracy theorist, neither am I paranoid, even if they really are after me.
I simply want to make this situation crystal clear.
Unless you have been living on Mars, or never use the internet, you will have heard about a new European regulation which comes into full force on the 25th of this month, May 2018, called GDPR, (General Data Protection Regulation).
I have blogged about this in the past, most notably way back in December 2017, https://wp.me/p5nj7r-1fK and notified people of the huge effect this would have on ALL of us when it came into force this year.
Of course, the 28-member states of the European Union: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden and the United Kingdom, would all deny, collectively and individually, that GDRP is yet another step in the global creep towards state control of the Web.
But they would say that, wouldn’t they?
I am sure many, if not all of you, have heard about ‘The Monkey, Banana & Water experiment’ even if you are not familiar with the details.
Inside the cage hang a banana on a string from the top, then place a set of stairs under the banana.
Before long one of the monkeys will go to the stairs and climb toward the banana.
As soon as that monkey touches the stairs, spray ALL the monkeys with cold water. After a while another monkey will attempt to climb the stairs, with the same result, ALL the monkeys are sprayed with cold water.
Pretty soon, when another monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will prevent it.
Now, dispose of cold water and remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one.
The new monkey will see the banana and attempt to climb the stairs.
To this monkey’s shock, all the other monkeys beat the crap out of him as soon as he tries to scale the steps.
After a second attempt and another attack, the new monkey knows if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.
Next, remove another of the original five monkeys, replacing it with a new one.
The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked. The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment, with enthusiasm, because he is now part of the “team”.
Then, replace a third original monkey with a new one, followed by the fourth, then the fifth.
Each time the newest monkey takes to the stairs, he is attacked.
Now, the monkeys who are beating up the newcomer have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs.
Neither do they know why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.
Finally, having replaced all the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys will have ever been sprayed with cold water.
Nevertheless, not one of the monkeys will try to climb the stairway for the banana.
“Why,” you ask?
Because in their minds that is the way it has always been.
This, my friends, is how Governments operate, therefore we collectively accept these new rules with little resistance.
Take the introduction of ‘Speed Cameras’ in the UK. When first introduced they were called such.
The backlash of public opinion and media comments such as ‘Big Brother’ & ‘Nanny state’ along with vandalism and destruction of many of the ‘Gastco’ machines gave Government cause for a re-think.
In the year 2000, the system allowed local authorities to receive a percentage of revenue from their cameras. Local police and councils joined forces to form safety camera partnerships, picking out sites which the government would then fund.
Gatso camera numbers multiplied from 1,600 in 2000 to 4,737 in 2007
This caused another media frenzy and more arbitrary destruction, with the added claim these cameras were purely a revenue raising machine which bore no relation to road safety.
Anti-camera groups reacted by becoming more militant.
This was when the Government’s message changed from calling them ‘Speed Cameras’ to Safety Cameras’ and trotting out the know well-known mantra ” “It’s not about the fines or making money, but about reducing fatalities and injuries.”
Once this mantra became established ‘pressure’ groups of local citizens joined with the Government to install more ‘safety cameras’ as they were now ‘good’ for us. The revenue and money-making issues seemed to evaporate with this new dawn.
Since then Gatso have made way for the ‘Average Speed Camera’ and soon, not yet officially announced, the ‘tyre tread depth Cam’, that’s ‘tire’ for my American readers.
These cameras are embedded into the road surface and, with the aid of Lasers, that’s ‘Lazer’ in Americanese, The Treadcam reads if a car or truck that passes over it has sufficient tread depth.
Aside from just measuring the tyre tread depth, the device can also determine tyre wear patterns, tyre pressure, the tyre type and the axle load, at a cost of £43,000 pounds each, these machines will have to ‘earn their keep’.
But is anyone complaining, no, because we are all monkeys now and your Government knows this.
Which brings me back to GDPR, the new rules… read LAW introduced by the 28 Eurostates but, because of its far-reaching regulations affects just about everybody in every country worldwide.
Of course, YOUR countries own Government(s) could reject GDRP outright, but then that would set back their part of total internet control too.
THIS IS WHY.
Recent history has made it clear any direct attempt of any government to ‘take over’ the internet/world wide web would be met with much hostile resistance.
So, this is what is happening, this is the reason why no Government outside of the European Union is opposing GDRP.
“Unable to directly regulate the Net, it has become necessary to curtail, under various guises, the ability for the common man to exploit the internet’s capabilities.”
GDRP is ‘for your protection and privacy’ just as Speed… sorry… Safety Cameras are for your protection and safety.
Imagine you have a car which you enjoy driving, only the government wants to control where, when and how you drive it.
Now, they cannot have an official sat next to you all the time and they can’t take it from you, so they make you pay a ‘Tax’ to use it on a road. Even so, they charge you more to drive on certain roads by way of a toll.
Then they insist on a Government test every year to ensure your car works. They make you insure the vehicle, so they can raise more revenue by way of tax on tour premiums.
Further taxation and duties become payable on the fuel you use.
Very soon pleasure driving is a thing of the past, you now only use your vehicle when it is necessary, and you have a much smaller vehicle because it is cheaper to run and maintain.
So, without touching your car the Government has controlled what type of vehicle you have when you drive it and where.
GDRP has taken us one step closer to Governmental control of the internet.
Because to control the Web there is no need to touch the Web, just everything and everyone around it, to stifle its reach and its use, to regulate everything associated with it.
What’s more, nobody will complain as it will all be for ‘our own good’.
Anyway, as those monkeys will tell you, “It’s always been this way”.
Like I said at the start of this post, I am not a conspiracy theorist, neither am I paranoid, even if they are really after me or control of the interweb.
Believe me, after all, I am an author.
Thank you for reading this post.
I hope you found this post both informative and entertaining, but not as entertaining as my fictional stories you can find on my own website, which is not, as yet, under the control or domination of one or more collective Governments.
The green lock means that the site has been issued a certificate and that a pair of cryptographic keys has been generated for it. Such sites encrypt information transmitted between you and the site. In this case, the page URLs begin with HTTPS, with the last “S” standing for “Secure.”
Sure, encrypting transmitted data is a good thing. It means that information exchanged between your browser and the site is not accessible to third parties—ISPs, network administrators, intruders, and so on. It lets you enter passwords or credit card details without worrying about prying eyes.
But the problem is that the green lock and the issued certificate say nothing about the site itself. A phishing page can just as readily get a certificate and encrypt all traffic that flows between you and it.
Put simply, all a green lock ensures is that no one else can spy on the data you enter. But your password can still be stolen by the site itself if it’s fake.
Phishers make active use of this: According to Phishlabs, a quarter of all phishing attacks today are carried out on HTTPS sites (two years ago it was less than 1 percent). Moreover, more than 80 percent of users believe that the mere presence of a little green lock and the word “Secure” next to the URL means the site is safe, and they don’t think too hard before entering their data.
What if the lock isn’t green?
If the address bar shows no lock at all, that means the website does not use encryption, exchanging information with your browser using standard HTTP.
Google Chrome has started tagging such websites as insecure. They might, in fact, be squeaky clean, but they don’t encrypt traffic between you and the server. Most website owners don’t want Google to label their websites as unsafe, so more and more are migrating to HTTPS. In any case, entering sensitive data on an HTTP site is a bad idea — anyone can spy on it.
The second variant you might see is a lock icon crisscrossed with red lines and the HTTPS letters marked in red. That means the website has a certificate, but the certificate is unverified or out of date. That is, the connection between you and the server is encrypted, but no one can guarantee that the domain really belongs to the company indicated on the site. This is the most suspicious scenario; usually, such certificates are used for test purposes only.
Alternatively, if the certificate has expired and the owner has not gotten around to renewing it, browsers will tag the page as unsafe, but more visibly, by displaying a red lock warning. In either case, take the red as the warning it is and avoid those sites — never mind entering any personal data on them.
How not to fall for the bait
To sum up, the presence of a certificate and the green lock means only that the data transmitted between you and the site is encrypted, and that the certificate was issued by a trusted certificate authority. But it doesn’t prevent an HTTPS site from being malicious, a fact that is most skillfully manipulated by phishing scammers.
So always be alert, no matter how safe the site seems at first glance.
Never enter logins, passwords, banking credentials, or any other personal information on the site unless you are sure of its authenticity. To do so, always check the domain name — and very carefully; the name of a fake site might differ by only one character. And ensure links are reliable before clicking.
Always consider what a particular site is offering, whether it looks suspicious, and whether you really need to register on it.
Make sure your devices are well protected: Kaspersky Internet Security checks URLs against an extensive database of phishing sites, and it detects scams regardless of how “safe” the resource looks.
I hope this highlights some areas you may not have been aware of. It’s always good to know ‘stuff’
Unlike many/most of my Ramblings I regard this post as something of extream importance, a possible game-changing innovation, one which has wide implications but also one which will be of particular interset for indie authors
As part of a broader effort to eliminate the ability to prointerest counterfeit inventory in the open digital advertising ecosystem, Ads.txt provides a mechanism to enable content owners to declare who is authorized to sell their inventory.
The mission of the ads.txt project is simple: Increase transparency in the programmatic advertising ecosystem. Ads.txt stands for Authorized Digital Sellers and is a simple, flexible and secure method that publishers and distributors can use to publicly declare the companies they authorize to sell their digital inventory.
By creating a public record of Authorized Digital Sellers, ads.txt will create greater transparency in the inventory supply chain, and give publishers control over their inventory in the market, making it harder for bad actors to profit from selling counterfeit inventory across the ecosystem. As publishers adopt ads.txt, buyers will be able to more easily identify the Authorized Digital Sellers for a participating publisher, allowing brands to have confidence they are buying authentic publisher inventory.
ADS.TXT HELPS PUBLISHERS
Counterfeit inventory comes in many forms, but it typically results in real media spend not reaching legitimate and deserving publishers. Ads.txt helps publishers reclaim control of their media, brand, and rate card. This means more of an advertisers spend can get to the domain owner through their approved sales channels, and not be wasted on counterfeit inventory.