An SIA passenger has been charged US$1,171.46 for using the inflight Internet on a flight from London to Singapore.
Jeremy Gutsche, a Canadian entrepreneur, purchased the 30MB package for US$28.99 but he busted the 30MB limit. He claimed that he used the internet mainly for work emails between naps and just viewed 155 pages.
His article about his experience has been picked up by several media around the world.
This is not the first time we hear about bill shock although most of the bill shock stories come from data roaming and not inflight internet. But they are mostly the same. User either didn’t sign up for the package or exceed their allocated limits.
SIA offers 2 price plan for their inflight Internet: volume-based at US$9.99 for 10MB and time-base at US$11.95 for 1 hour.
Personally, I think SIA’s price plan is ok. After all, you are accessing Internet at an altitude of 39000 feet. It is unfair to say that SIA is overcharging for their internet.
The problem here lies with the user. Jeremy claims that he only send a 4mb email and view 155 pages. It is unclear what are the file size of the 155 pages. If the file size is small, then I doubt the inflight Internet charge can chalk up to $1200. I guess most likely something is running in the background. Maybe his computer is doing some system update? Or maybe there is a malware in his computer and it is sending data without the owner’s knowledge.
You would assume a CEO of a website would know more about this sort of thing. No use complaining about it after you receive the bill. It is clearly a user error.
Counting the number of pages view is a terrible way to gauge data usage. And you are assuming that’s the only thing that your computer is doing. If you don’t know exactly how much data you will be using, I suggest you subscribe to a time-base package instead.
More than 26,000 turn up at The Speakers’ Corner for Pink Dot 2014. Despite the opposition this year, the event went on without a hitch.
Instead of just the usual Pink Dot, a Blue Heart appeared in the Pink Dot when participants turned on their torches at about 8pm.
This is the 6th year Pink Dot is being held in Singapore. Pink Dot is a non profit movement started by a group of individuals who care deeply about the place that LGBT Singaporeans call home. Last year, more than 21,000 people turn up at Hong Lim Park.
Let’s hope someday everyone will have the freedom to love without discrimination.
I’ve blogged about this last November. Lately I notice a lot of people are getting letters from Data Register Pte Ltd (formerly known as Company Register Pte Ltd) again. The letter goes something like this.
The letter above might seem like a official letter from a Government agency but it is not. It is actually just a marketing mailer.
This letter is not from Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA). ACRA had issued two public alerts in November last year and January this year saying that ACRA has no links to Data Register Pte Ltd.
You are not obliged to register with the Singapore Company Register database. It is actually ok if your company’s information is deleted from the Singapore Company Register database. This database is different from the BizFile database managed by ACRA.
Do note that there is a S$490 annual fee if you choose to register with Singapore Company Register database. My advice to all business owners is to read the letter carefully.
Singapore is currently in the midst of its longest-ever dry spell, where rain has not fallen for 27 days between Jan 13 and Feb 8. According to NEA, the dry weather will probably persist into the first half of next month.
But luckily for Singapore, we still have a healthy level of water in the reservoirs. This is because PUB has increased the amount of NEWater it injects into the reservoirs and the desalination plants are working at near full capacity. These two sources were aable to provide 55 per cent of the water demands. Imported water from Malaysia make up the remaining water demand.
As a results, there is no need for Singapore to implement water rationing. The last time Singapore had water rationing was back in the 1960s.
According to PUB, water consumption has increased slightly last week. The agency will send advisories on water conservation methods. Companies are being encouraged to switch off their water features while Town Council may reduce the frequency of their cleaning using water.
I think we should give credits where credit is due. PUD did a great job by making sure Singapore have enough water supply during this long dry spell. All thanks to the forward planning with NEWater and desalination plants. Good job guys!
I’m sure by now most of you have read about the alleged dog abuse case at Pasir Ris Camp. Mindef released a statement saying that they have completed the investigation and found no evidence of dog abuse. Straits Times reported that the NSF who send the video to Animal Lovers League was punished. The NSF’s father wrote a Facebook post saying that the dogs were being abused.
Some people asked why did Mindef punish the whistle blower but not the officer.
The NSF was punished for unauthorized video recording and unauthorized disclosure of information to 3rd party. What he should have done is report the matter to his commanding officer. If the commanding officer don’t take action, then report to the next person up the chain of command until action is being taken. He should not have send the video to an external party. I believe unauthorized video recording in camp carry a heavy sentence. However, the NSF was given 21 days of suspension of leave. I think Mindef gave him a lighter sentence since he did it to save the dog.
As for the officer, Mindef and AVA conducted an investigation and found no evidence of dog abuse. That’s why the officer wasn’t punished. Because there wasn’t any abuse. If the NSF’s father have any evidence of dog abuse in the camp, he should contact Mindef directly and request that they re-investigate the case. We keep hearing from Animal Lovers League saying that there is dog abuse. My question is, where? Are they able to provide any photo evidence of dog abuse or any medical checkup from vet?
Mindef however showed us a photo of someone bitten by the dogs in camp. If you scroll through the tons of comments on Singapore Army Facebook page, you will also see some comments from Paris Ris camp personnel saying that they were almost attacked by the dogs.
So we have evidence of dogs attacking human but no evidence of dog abuse.
A lot of people were saying that the way they tie the dog in the toilet is cruel. Personally, I think they could have restrain the dog in a better manner. But bear in mind that these are soldiers, not train animals rescuers. They do not have the proper equipment to catch and confine a stray dog until AVA arrives. Thus they use whatever tools they have in camp to do the job. I believe they tried their best and without ill intent. They could have done better but I wouldn’t call it dog abuse. After all, AVA did perform a medical checkup on the dog and found no signs of abuse.
Some people said that Mindef and AVA are trying to cover up. My question to those people is, Why? Why would Mindef want to cover up for an officer when the whole incident has gone so public? And why would AVA agree to cover up together with Mindef? What is so special about this officer that Mindef and AVA are willing to risk their public image to protect him?
There are several reported cases of dogs attacking people in the camp. If the officer didn’t take any action and someone get seriously injured by the dogs, Mindef gets the blame. I agree that the way they catch and confine the dog could have been done better. But keep in mind that they are not trained to do so and there is no evidence that they did it with ill intent. All they wanted to do is to protect their men from being attack by the dogs again.
And until now, nobody, not even Animal Lovers League, is able to provide concrete evidence of dog abuse at Pasir Ris Camp.
The Singapore Computer Emergency Response Team (SingCert) have issued an alert to more than 80 websites hosting providers after their sites were found to be defaced. The hosting providers were notified yesterday at 11am so that they can investigate and take the necessary actions. It is reported that 3 of the hacked websites belong to the Singapore Reformed Party.
No government sites were among those affected.
SingCERT also urged businesses and individuals to take the necessary precautions to enhance their cyber security, and visit GoSafe Online to seek assistance.