Possibly crooked judge gets taken off case about definitely bad doctor

The court of The Hague is perhaps not known as the most even-handed in the world. This is the court where large, foreign media conglomerates shop for copyright jurisprudence. This is also the court that committed a crime in 2014 when it advertised for fresh judges, saying that women needed not apply. That was a clear case of discrimination based on gender, although I doubt anyone served even a day’s worth of gaol time for this.

So when this court dismisses a judge for being biased, that probably means something.

In an appeal in a case between Google and a doctor who had mistreated a patient, a judge was dismissed by the court over a possible conflict of interest, Emerce reported today. The plastic surgeon that this was about had been included on a blacklist, Zwarte Lijst Artsen, that bases its information on another, more opaque blacklist called BIG Register.

The people who run Zwarte Lijst Artsen run a companion blacklist on judges called Zwarte Lijst Rechters, which mainly focusses on judges who have helped absolve doctors from malpractice cases. As it happens, the judge from the initial court case, which was won by the doctor, was on this blacklist, so naturally Google appealed.

When it turned out that a judge in the appeal case also was on that blacklist, the court was unimpressed and unamused, and dismissed her.

At the time of the intial case, legal blogger Arnoud Engelfriet opined that the verdict was as expected and unremarkable: “Considering these facts, the verdict does not surprise me. I also would not call it trail-blazing.”

Engelfriets reasoning (refered to above by ‘these facts’) is a little bit hard to follow, so I won’t go into that here. Suffice it to say that if the BIG Register is so hard for average patients to find and peruse that judges see no reason to shut it down, and entries on another blacklist that is apparently transparent and usable are made hard to find, the court is basically saying that blacklists are de facto only allowed if they are unusable. And in my view that is not a fair weighing between the privacy rights of doctors and the rights of patients, and a neglect of one’s judicial duty.

The judge in the appeal case gave as an argument as to why she wasn’t influenced by the fact that she was on a blacklist herself, that the blacklist for judges wasn’t as impactful as the one for doctors. The court felt that argument irrelevant: “[This is not about] the possibility of a subjective impartiality, but about the objectively justified fear for impartiality”.

In other words, the court wasn’t so much worried that the judge might have a conflict of interest as it was that one of the parties would have the feeling that they were not being treated fairly.

The court will now have to appoint a new judge and then the saga of the plastic surgeon and her pals, the possibly crooked judges, can continue.

Test: scaling images up

I was playing around with scaling up images in The GIMP and stumbled upon a method (scale to larger than you need, then scale down to the desired result) that seemed to get exceptionally good results.

I wanted to find out if this was a fluke, so I ran some tests.

My conclusion appears to be either that playing around to find the right method is exactly what you need, or that more tests are needed.

Scaling images up means that if you have an image of a certain size (w × h pixels), you produce a version of that image that is larger (e.g. 2w × 2h pixels).

Unlike what Hollywood shows like to pretend, this does not lead to images of an equal aesthetic. Upscaling an image generally leads to ugliness, so it is your task to find the method that works best. If you have access to a larger original of the image you are about to scale up, it is almost always better to work from that original image.

Upscaling works by inventing new pixels. The algorithm must take guesses as to what such a new pixel would look like. Typically this works by using neighbouring pixels as hints at least somewhere in the process.

Illustration: how do you scale a 2 pixel wide image to a 3 pixel wide one? You could choose to only copy pixels, meaning that the ratio between the 2 halves of the image will become skewed, or you could choose to mix pixels, meaning there will be colours in the image that weren’t there before.

In the following, your browser may itself scale images up or down to make them fit the available space. I chose widths to scale to that should work fine with the current settings of my blog, but you may have to view the images separately to get a real impression of what they look like.

I started this test with two images:

– The source image, 300 pixels wide.

– The comparison image, 600 pixels wide.

Both images were produced by scaling down (method: cubic) from an approximately 1600 pixel-wide original.

The 300 pixel version would be the source of all the upscale tests, the 600 pixel version would serve as the control—as the ideal target.

All tests were performed with The GIMP.

The GIMP has traditionally had three scaling settings: none, linear and cubic.

‘None’ will try and fit pixels into new pixels, duplicating and discarding pixels where necessary. The result will look blocky regardless of whether you are scaling up and down. In my experience, the best use case for ‘none’ is when you are scaling up or down to exact halves, quarters, eights or doubles, quadruples, octuples et cetera.

‘Linear’ and ‘cubic’ are siblings, they mix pixels where necessary, with cubic doing this the strongest. Cubic is brilliant for scaling down.

I used two target widths: 400 pixels and 600 pixels.

(There is no 400 pixel control image, but I trust the 600 pixel image will suffice here.)

I applied the following tests:

none: scale up to the target width using scaling algorithm ‘none’.

lin: scale up to the target width using scaling algorithm ‘linear’.

cub: scale up to the target width using scaling algorithm ‘cubic’.

none + cub: scale up to more than the target width using scaling algorithm ‘none’, then scale down to the target width using scaling algorithm ‘cubic’.

Scaled to 400 pixels wide (factor 1.3)

Scaled to 400 pixels wide using ‘none’:

Scaled to 400 pixels wide using ‘linear’:

Scaled to 400 pixels wide using ‘cubic’:

Scaled to 400 pixels wide by scaling up to 600 pixels wide using ‘none’, then scaling down to 400 pixels wide using ‘cubic’:

Scaled to 600 pixels wide (factor 2)

Scaled to 600 pixels wide using ‘none’:

Scaled to 600 pixels wide using ‘linear’:

Scaled to 600 pixels wide using ‘cubic’:

Scaled to 600 pixels wide by scaling up to 900 pixels wide using ‘none’, then scaling down to 600 pixels wide using ‘cubic’:

My hope had been that the latter would provide the best upscaled images, but to be honest, I do not see much difference between scaling up with the linear setting and the method where you first scale up and over using none, then scale down using cubic. In fact, having done some pixel peeping I think that I prefer—for this test at least—the images scaled up using the Linear algorithm.

(Show here the difference between a linearly upscaled image and an image scaled up using the scale-over-then-down method.)

All images were saved at JPEG quality level 82, for no other reason than that is my default setting.

The difference between a cheapo ‘netbook’ and a high-end laptop is…

… about 450 gigabytes in storage.

[two screenshots]

I was looking for a cheap, small form-factor laptop on a comparison site that lists thousands of them and I found plenty of cheap ones.

When I made the two screenshots above, I had only selected a screen size, and I had sorted the results by price. The left side of the illustration shows Chromebooks and such, with storage between 16 and 64 gigabytes and prices around 150 euros. The thing I changed to get the results on the right (prices around 1,000 euros) was to set the minimum storage to 500 GB.

When I indicated I needed more than just a handful of bytes of storage, the prices sky-rocketed.

Now I know there are more differences than just storage between these two categories, but I don’t need a better screen or a faster processor to watch some videos, write e-mails and read blog posts. Storage would be nice though.

I guess if you want a cheap, small laptop with a decent amount of storage, you will have to swap out the SSD yourself.

American websites improved due to European privacy laws

An interesting side-effect to the introduction of the GDPR, the latest EU privacy law, was that (for Europeans at least) several American websites improved.

Instead of a dazzling and confusing cornucopia of banners and clickables, the sites of USA Today and NPR refocused on their stated goal, i.e. journalism.

See here for two examples:


Would you not much rather read the European versions of these sites than the American ones?

The one site that seems confused is Google:

This seems like a link to an article in the LA Times about that same publication suing the city of Los Angeles, but if I click that link, I get a message saying “our website is currently unavailable in most European countries.”

The LA Times has chosen that rather than making a version of its website that does not heavily infringe upon the privacy of its visitors, it will simply show nothing to Europeans.

This is the same Google that for some bizarre reason wants to fine-tune every aspect of my ‘search experience’, to the point that my search results are never the same as anybody else’s results for the same search phrase. Yet they are unable to filter out websites that refuse to show me relevant content.

Privacy audits and GDPR observations

The introduction of the European privacy act known as GDPR seems to have caused a flurry of work in the web development business, but oddly and unfortunately enough I seem to have been immune to this development.

So I decided that I would go through the process of improving one of my own websites, just for practice, and see what I could learn from that. Here is what I found.

So the GDPR is a law from 2016 that builds on earlier attempts by the European Union to anchor privacy as a basic human right for all its citizens. It is an extension, in a way, of the EU’s attempts to turn itself into a vast, wasteful, undemocratic political entity that enormously exceeds its initial scope. Initially the EU was to be an economic union that dealt with things like standardising on electric outlets and shoe sizes.

What the GDPR added to earlier legislation was a bite. From now on, offenders could be hit with significant fines.

Proponents of the GDPR like to claim that the law is based on the principle of privacy-by-design, meaning you need to structure your systems and services in such a way that people’s private lives remain private, and that if you want more from them, you need to get explicit and freely given permission. Let us see how that pans out, shall we?

In the past few months, unless you have been living under a rock, you have been flooded with privacy related messages. These tended to take one of two forms:

  1. The weak: “Please, please, please, please, please let us keep spamming you. We are begging you.”
  2. The strong: “Here is what will happen. You will give us permission to sell all your personal data to the highest bidder, or we will stop our relationship here.”

If the service needs you more than you need it, you would have gotten the former request. But if you need the service more than they need you, let us say the Googles and Facebooks of this world, they get to dictate the terms under which they use your personal data. That doesn’t sound like privacy-by-design to me, that’s just plain old neo-liberalism and greed at work.

So that is what the GDPR is, but for the proprietors of websites it is much more important to know how to comply. The catch-all case for GDPR compliance is, as you have seen, express and explicit consent. A website owner needs to identify all his uses of personal data, explain to a visitor what those uses mean, and then ask permission for those uses.

Luckily there are a number of exceptions where the rights of the proprietors would be unnecessarily burdened if they had to ask for permission. One such exception is a technical necessity: a website would not work if your user had the option of saying no. For example, in order for a web shop to work, you have to be able to ask the visitor for billing and shipping information.

Another exception is freedom of speech. If you are writing an article about someone, you don’t have to ask them for permission before you publish the article.

Keeping data around for legal obligations is a third exception.

The above nicely lays out how you perform a privacy audit. You make three lists:

  1. Which personal data do you process?
  2. For each of these data, which use do you make of them?
  3. For each of these uses, what are your grounds for having them?

Apart from this audit, there are other things you need to do that are beyond the scope of this posting. For example, you also need to determine if you export personal data to foreign countries. (For example, if you are in the Netherlands, do you have Facebook buttons on your website? These buttons collect personal data and Facebook is an American company.) And you also need to determine for each item how long you are going to keep it, and so on.

The meanings of several terms seem obvious at first sight until you are going to perform your audit and then they become vague and confusing.

Personal data are data that can be used to identify a natural person. The logical conclusion might be that nothing then is personal data, because on the internet nobody knows you are a dog. That would make the law toothless and so judges have been using a much roomier definition in which anything that comes close to identifying you can be personal data: names, e-mail addresses, IP addresses and so on. Look out especially for combinations of data. You might argue successfully that an IP address by itself is not personal data, but IP addresses are rarely processed in isolation.

There is a special class of data that gets extra protection, things like gender, age, sexual orientation and so on.

Processing refers to anytime you touch personal data. Collecting contact information is processing personal data. Storing contact information is processing personal data. Sending this information to your e-mail address is processing personal data.

In other words, both ‘personal data’ and ‘process’ are pretty broadly defined.

The website I have been auditing, and for which I have subsequently written a privacy statement, is a Wordpress-based website. Not everything that goes for Wordpress will apply to your website, but I believe several of the lessons I learned could be relevant to any website.

I have identified five elements of a Wordpress website that come into play. If I missed any, please note them in the comments.

  • Wordpress core
  • Plug-ins
  • Themes
  • Widgets
  • Embedded content
  • Hosting

Wordpress core is the base package that you get when you download and install Wordpress on a webserver. If all you used Wordpress for is publish pages and blog posts containing nothing but plain text, you would still be processing personal data.

Plug-ins are pieces of additional functionality created to plug into the Wordpress API (programming interface).

Themes determine the look rather than the functionality of your website.

Widgets are small, very specific pieces of additional functionality that run on top of Wordpress rather than hooking into it.

Embedded content is content hosted somewhere else, but mixed up with your own content. Lots of website owners will for example use the Twitter.com widget to quote tweets in their articles.

A web host is something your Wordpress site runs on top of, and web hosts can collect personal data too. For example, many classic web servers are set up to log every visit by storing the IP address of the visitor, the page they requested and the time of the visit.

There is a strong overlap between plug-ins, themes, widgets and embedded content, to the point where there really is not even that much difference under the hood between a plug-in and a template. The differences are mainly conceptual. For an audit, however, it is useful to treat these as different parts of your website, because your admin interface will typically present these four elements differently.

I spent about 23 hours auditing a fairly simple Wordpress website. In that time I also wrote my privacy policy. That is pretty insanely large amount of time, if you ask me.

Now for me this is business and those are 23 hours well spent, time that will pay itself back in future projects. But what if you wanted a place on the web for your digital soap box, a place for your rantings and ravings? What if I told you that before you set all that up, you were legally required to spend three whole days figuring out in how many (often inadvertent) ways you were going to violate your visitors’ privacy?

What is more, you are exposed to the same multi-million dollar fines as large, wealthy organisations are. So far I don’t now of a country ogrish enough to impose million dollar fines on private bloggers, but hey ho, these are strange times.

Would you still go ahead with that website?

So the GDPR is a huge impediment to free speech, and not only that, but it limits the speech of smaller, weaker parties such as private bloggers far more than it does the speech of large corporations. The GDPR is certainly annoying to the latter, but ultimately acceptable.

But there are caveats to that conclusion.

Breaches of privacy are in itself also huge impediments to free speech. If you are afraid to speak because you are afraid someone will come after you, you may be scared in staying silent.

(The thing is though, will the GDPR make much of a difference here? I do not expect the GDPR to make any meaningful difference to the practice of doxing for example. Twitter is as a processor under no obligation to halt the practice, and the doxers themselves can claim a free speech exemption.)

Also, this is a new law and things need some time to settle in. Wordpress has just released a version of its software that comes with a built-in privacy statement and for which it has already performed the privacy audit part of Wordpress Core for you. If you install no other themes, plugins and widgets, you are almost good to go. (You need to add some info about how you are going to secure your site, how long you are going to keep certain data and so on.)

So there is some hope there.

One man, 50 Bic pens

(An Experiment and a Fantastically Boring Tale.)

In 2011 I bought 50 pens in an attempt to stem the constant trickle of pen disappearances.

Like matching socks, ballpoint pens have this obscure, almost life-like ability to get lost just when you need them, and this seemed to be a good reason to buy way more pens than one man could chew on.

Last week I took a fresh pen from the box, because all the others had disappeared, and it would barely write. Dried up. I tried another from the box. Dried up. And so on.

I counted the dried-up pens I had left: 22.

So the result of this experiment is that a man can live on 28 pens before he must replenish.

A couple of caveats:

  • I regularly get pens from congresses and what have you, so the disappearance rate is probably higher than 30 pens over the lifetime of one Bic.
  • The period between when I bought my Fantastic Fifty and today neatly straddles the divide between when people needed a pen multiple times a day and when people did most of their stuff online or on their phones. In other words, my pen replacement rate has presumably slowed down.

Now for the good news: according to this selection of life hacks, you can bring a ballpoint back to life by using it to ‘write’ on rubber (for example, the sole of a shoe), and I can happily say, this works.

See also:

  • How long can you use a Bic before it runs out of ink?
  • At its introduction in the 1950s, the pen shown here was called the Atomic Pen, but as the Cold War wore on and the lure of a nuclear age quickly dissipated, Bic changed the name to Cristal. The hole in the cap was introduced in 1991 to prevent a user from choking after accidentally swallowing the cap. (NotASource)

Making complex PHP arrays viewable

When you want to study the contents of PHP arrays, for example when you ask the API of your favourite PHP CMS a question and it returns an array in which the answer is somehow hidden, you can use PHP functions like print_r and var_dump to display the array in a way that makes it easy to study.

Let’s say you define the following array:

$foods = array('plants' => array('fruits', 'vegetables'), 'animals' => 'meat', 'mixed' => array('pies' => 'pies'));

then running print_r($foods) will give you the following result:

    [plants] => Array
            [0] => fruits
            [1] => vegetables
    [animals] => meat
    [mixed] => Array
            [pies] => pies

This improves the readibility quite a bit, because the linebreaks, indentation and added information (brackets for keys, “Array” to indicate the type) all help you to visually parse the array.

When you have large arrays to study however, the usefulness of print_r or var_dump diminishes rapidly. It can get quite tricky to remember the indentation level of an array that spans more than a few screens.

This is where tools like Krumo come in; they will present (within a web page) an array or object (or any value really) within a collapsible format. Only when you click on a top element will it fold out to display its contents.

I needed something like Krumo, but since the latter clocks in at about 100 kilobytes, Krumo itself can become quite complex to work with if you want more than the basics. (Don’t worry if you were thinking about using Krumo, it is still unsurpassed at simply showing objects and arrays.)

Below, I present you what I came up with.

Read the rest of this entry »

Zakelijke bankrekeningen vergelijken in 2016 [NL/Dutch]

In 2011 betaalde je 7 tot 9 maal méér voor een zakelijke rekening dan voor een particuliere rekening.

Die verschillen zijn sterk teruggelopen – althans, als je een kleine, dienstverlenende ondernemer bent van het kaliber vertaler of adviseur. Zelfs dan betaal je nog steeds minimaal 2 tot 3 maal zoveel voor je zakelijke rekening dan voor je privérekening.

Het verschil wordt de laatste jaren gemaakt door bankrekeningen die speciaal op ondernemers met een kleine paymentservicesbehoefte zijn gericht. Hieronder een overzicht:

– Oogluikend privérekening (24 € p.j.)
Knab Zakelijk (60 € p.j.)
ASN Zakelijk (72 € p.j.)
Regiobank ZZP Rekening (75 € p.j.)
SNS ZZP (90 € p.j.)

Bij de vier zakelijke rekeningen zijn de eerste 1.000 reguliere transacties (het doen en ontvangen van overschrijvingen en het doen van PIN- en IDEAL-betalingen) gratis. Daarnaast ontvang je er een beetje creditrente, met uitzondering van (op dit moment) Regiobank.

Een winkelier daarentegen die wil dat zijn zakelijke bank alle paymentservices voor zijn rekening neemt, dus ook het storten van contant geld, het ontvangen van IDEAL-betalingen op zijn webwinkel en het ontvangen van automatische incasso, heeft weinig keus. Er zijn drie banken met uitgebreide opties, algemeen bekend:

ING Zakelijk
Rabobank Zakelijke Rekening

De vaste abonnementskosten hiervan beginnen rond de 120 euro per jaar. Daarnaast betaal je een klein bedrag per transactie.

Ten slotte heb je nog wat tussenvormen:

Regiobank MKB Rekening
SNS Zakenrekening
Triodos Internet Zakelijk
Van Lanschot Zakelijk

Hiervan is nuttig te weten dat de Regiobank- en SNS-rekeningen vrijwel dezelfde abonnementskosten hebben als hun ZZP-varianten (Regiobank is overigens net als ASN Bank een dochter van SNS), maar dat je daarnaast per transactie betaalt.

De Van Lanschot-rekening wordt niet prominent op hun website getoond. Ik vermoed dat deze vermogensbeheerder met name een zakelijke rekening aanbiedt, zodat hun klanten niet twee verschillende banken hoeven aan te houden. Hun jaarabonnement (rekening, bankpas en online bankieren) is dan ook het duurste van allemaal.

De vreemde eend in de bijt is daarmee Triodos: je betaalt hetzelfde tarief als de banken voor retailers terwijl je er een ZZP-rekening voor terugkrijgt. Misschien dat als iemand van Triodos dit leest, ze het me kunnen uitleggen.

In het bovenstaande heb ik waar ik prijzen heb genoemd, gekeken naar pakketten waarbij minimaal een bankrekening, een bankpas en online bankieren zijn inbegrepen. Bij de meeste banken kun je ook niet minder afnemen.

Kijk niet alleen naar de abonnementskosten

Wat mij bij mijn onderzoekje vooral opviel, is dat zakelijke rekeningen complexe producten zijn die niet makkelijk één op één te zijn te vergelijken. Dat is mede waarom ik niet overal de abonnementskosten noem. Als je een bankbehoefte hebt die ingewikkelder is dan het ontvangen en doen van hooguit enkele honderden overschrijvingen per jaar, dan ga je rekeningen al gauw vergelijken op het aanbod van overige diensten en de daarbij horende kosten.

Kijk dus niet alleen naar de prijs van een rekening, maar ook naar de omvang van het pakket. Producten die sommige banken goedkoop en andere banken duur of zelfs helemaal niet leveren, zijn: extra bankpassen, advies, transacties, automatisch overschrijven, zakelijk sparen, incasso, acceptgiro, gegevensexport voor je boekhoudpakket enzovoort.

Er is momenteel niemand die een goede vergelijking biedt tussen de verschillende diensten die een bank bij zijn zakelijke rekening aanbiedt. Vorig jaar vergeleek MoneyView de voorwaarden van zakelijke rekeningen, maar de resultaten zijn alleen in een heel summiere samenvatting te zien voordat je tegen de paywall opbotst. Hun document Criteria Product Rating Voorwaarden Betalingsverkeer is echter nuttig leesvoer voor wie wil zien waar je bij de keuze van een bank allemaal op kunt letten.

Mijn onderzoek werd bemoeilijkt doordat banken niet vermelden welke diensten ze niet aanbieden. Daardoor is het lastig uit te vinden of een dienst ontbreekt. ASN Bank en Knab zeggen bijvoorbeeld niets over periodieke overboekingen. Betekent dit dat ze die niet aanbieden? Of dat ze ze wel aanbieden, maar niet vermelden? Misschien vermelden ze ze wel, maar kan ik ze niet vinden, omdat ik de verkeerde zoektermen gebruik?

De zakelijke rekeningen heb ik vergeleken met het zakelijk gebruik van een (eventueel tweede) particuliere rekening. Deze heb ik Oogluikend Privérekening genoemd, omdat de banken weliswaar het zakelijk gebruik van privérekeningen verbieden, maar sommige banken het oogluikend lijken toe te staan.

Overduidelijk lokkertjes als starterspakketten heb ik uit mijn vergelijking weggelaten.

Wat nu als je eerst aan een goedkope rekening genoeg hebt, maar later meer payment services nodig hebt? Moet je dan overstappen? Knab wijst erop dat je aanvullende payment services bij derden kunt inkopen. Aangezien ik daar helemaal geen verstand van heb (ik voldoe zelf met gemak aan de ZZP-definitie), laat ik het aan anderen over daar iets over te zeggen. De naam Mollie hoor ik regelmatig voorbijkomen; via deze PSP kun je in elk geval online betalingen ontvangen.

De toekomst

Het landschap voor zakelijk bankieren zag er vijf jaar geleden heel anders uit. Vijftien jaar geleden was het wéér anders. Ik begon in 2000 voor mezelf, en toen kon je nog een gratis rekening bij de Postbank krijgen en waren de ING-rekeningen daarentegen (voor mijn gevoel althans) peperduur.

Het enige wat je daaruit over de toekomst kunt concluderen is dat die er heel anders kan uitzien. Dat kan een reden zijn om een bank met een uitgebreid dienstenpakket uit te kiezen of om juist om de zoveel tijd je bankierbehoefte opnieuw vast te stellen en tegen het aanbod van die tijd te houden.

Disclosure: als je zoals ik regelmatig voor reclame- en internetbureaus werkt, ligt er wel eens een bank op je bordje. Ik heb echter aan zoveel verschillende bankensites gewerkt, dat ik me niet kan voorstellen in dit artikel een bank al dan niet bewust te hebben bevoordeeld.

Meet the golden banana of discord


You know this graph, you have seen it before. It is a graph displaying a distribution.

If you squint, it resembles a golden banana.

In the text adventure world they hold yearly competitions. In fact, the largest of them, IFComp, is currently underway, and the way it works is that everybody who wants to can be a judge. You’re supposed to play a game for up to two hours, give it a score between 1 and 10 and move on to the next.

At the end the scores are tallied and the game with the highest average wins. Often, the way the scores are distributed per game is more or less according to a normal distribution. A game that gets mostly sixes will also get some 5s and 7s, almost no 4s and 8s and only rarely scores outside that range.

Other games work differently. Players either love them or hate them and the result is that scores will be distributed not around their averages, but along the edges. Being of a certain bent of mind, the text adventure community has embraced this occurrence and named an award after the shape and, I believe, the colour of the way these graphs were originally presented – the Golden Banana of Discord. The prize (a stuffed plush banana) has been awarded since the year 2000 and is actually given to the winner of the IFComp entry with the highest standard deviation—the distribution of scores doesn’t have to be banana shaped.

I have taken to calling every banana-shaped distribution The Golden Banana of Discord, because I believe the name serves its purpose well and deserves recognition outside the text adventure community.

I said that you know this distribution. Remember the last time you looked for hotel or restaurant reviews online? Check out a bunch of them and you will start seeing golden bananas all over the place. Had a pleasant evening? Here’s and 8, sir. Hair in your soup or your waitress didn’t smile at you? A 2! Giving low marks on online review sites is often the only way a patron can regain some control over their ruined evening, regardless of whether the restaurant is otherwise well liked or universally despised—in the latter case the owners have a dozen fake e-mail addresses which they use to write glowing reviews about their own restaurant.

Last year's Golden Banana winner, SPY INTRIGUE, with its none-EU-approved banana shape among two games with beautifully normally distributed scores. Source: IFComp.

Last year’s Golden Banana winner, SPY INTRIGUE, with its none-EU-approved banana shape among two games with beautifully normally distributed scores. Source: IFComp.

Completely useless overview of mobile phone brands in the Netherlands, May 2016

An obscure need to know led me to create the following overview of mobile phone brands in the Netherlands. Since I got relatively little use out of it, I figured I’d share it here. Maybe it will find some use after all.

Caveat: I didn’t need a very precise list, so please don’t use this is as the basis for your hostile take-over or master’s paper.

By way of summary introduction (TL/DR: TL/DR) I will note that there are four-and-a-half network operators in the Netherlands who all have their own brands of mobile phone providers. T-Mobile (German), KPN (Dutch), Vodafone (British) and Tele2 (Swedish) have their own network. The half-network provider is Liberty Global plc, who do own their own frequency, but need to cooperate with Vodafone to make it work. (Things got too technical for me after this.)

Then there is a whole raft of companies and brands that provide mobile telephony and that use the networks of others. I did some quick Googling but found no indication that the network quality is any less if your company has to rent their access.

The list is not complete by any stretch; it is simply based on brands that sounded familiar to me. As it turns out, all the companies large enough to own a slice of the network spectrum sounded familiar to me, so at least there’s that.

T-Mobile brands:
– T-Mobile
– Ben
[- own network]

KPN brands:
– Simyo
– Telfort
– Hi
[- own netwerk]

Vodafone brands:
– Vodafone
– Blyk
– Hollandse Nieuwe
– Sizz
[- former brand: Libertel]
[- also owns the Belcompany chain of mobile phone shops]
[- own network]

Tele2 AB brands:
– Tele2
[- since 2015 own 4G network]

Liberty Global plc brands:
– Ziggo
[- formerly UPC]
[- uses the Vodafone network]
[- has a 4G license]

Youfone brands:
– Youfone
[- owned by the same people that own NL Energie]
[- uses the KPN network]

Simpel brands:
– Simpel
[- founded by former T-Mobile employees]
[- uses the T-mobile network]

Note that I assigned nationalities to various companies, but the global trend is to have different headquarters depending on where the legal, financial, fiscal and labour environments are the most profitable. If a large company waves a national flag these days, you must start from the assumption that this is a branding exercise, not a heart-felt statement of loyalty.