AlertMe Energy monitoring kit is giving me OCD

Ten days ago, I installed AlertMe's Energy kit. It comprises of three items: a sensor that clamps over your electricity meter's power wire, a box of batteries that powers the sensor and sends the signal to a receiver, which is the third component, and which plugs into your broadband router. The signal is sent to AlertMe, whereupon you can view the data at AlertMe's website.

On your first visit to the site, you have to enter the code which is on the receiver unit in order for the system to know which data stream is yours. Then, after a few more configuration screens (oddly, not one to enter how much your supplier charges per kWh - you have to find this hidden-away setting on the website later), you get to the juicy part - your home's power consumption.

I didn't expect the sensor to be particularly accurate, or for the feed to be updated in real-time, but was wrong on both counts. The website's interface is clear and easy to understand. There are four icons, one which shows your current power consumption, a second displaying how much the electricity has cost you so far today, a link to graphs of previous usage and, lastly, a System link for monitoring and configuring your kit.

The most interesting, naturally, is the cost of the power used, as this gives you a hard figure for what you're paying. This is enlightening and, although I dislike the word, empowering, too. Until now, I'd had to wait for the bill to drop onto the mat every quarter to find out how much power I'd used, and therefore how many hundreds of pounds I owed for it. With the Energy kit, I could see from minute to minute how much the electricity was costing.

It may sound obvious, but although you might have an idea of which appliances use the most electricity, it's quite amazing to see concrete information on your screen which shows you not just how many watts are being used, but exactly how much this is costing. Until this information is real in your head, it's very easy to ignore it, and baulk at the bill when it arrived. The ability to view power consumption in real-time - and the cost - means you can start going about the process of cutting down your usage, and saving money in the process. (I could have lied and said I was only bothered about saving the environment, but let's face it, this is a nice bonus that comes from the motivation of having a little extra cash in your account at the end of the month.)

After the initial excitement of all this has subsided, I did a couple of tests just to see exactly what things cost. I discovered that, for example, boiling a kettle of water costs around 3p, while drying a load of washing in the tumble dryer increased the day's running total by around 30p. Testing the accuracy was easy, too, as you can the precise wattage being used by clicking on the main power meter icon. Noting the figure, which is shown to the nearest watt, I flicked on a 60W light and was amazed to see the power instantly increase by roughly that amount. Impressive stuff.

Better still, it's possible to view a graph of power use over time, so you can compare one day with another. For example, I could see two spikes of around 2kW between 12am and 6am one night, but nothing the next. Given that I'd set the dishwasher to come on during the night, I could deduce that was the source of the power consumption, particularly as I knew that it paused for around half an hour during its economy cycle.

AlertMe's graphs aren't particularly easy to see, as the line graphs are too detailed. Fortunately, AlertMe has partnered with Google to send the data to its new PowerMeter gadget. This means you can see a usage graph directly on your iGoogle homepage. PowerMeter shows area graphs, which are far easier on the eye. You can view the data by Day, Week or Month, with the latter two showing bar graphs to make it easier to compare overall power usage.

You can enter the cost of your electricity and currency, as well as view your current usage compared to a budgeted amount, so you can see, for example, if your usage is above or below last week's. I'm convinced that PowerMeter's 'Compared to others' graph is broken, though. For the last ten days, it's been showing my average usage as the same as a 1-bed apartment. Given I live in a 4-bed house, this can't be right, as I'm not that frugal.

However, this I'm a little worried that AlertMe's kit is giving me (and my wife, for that matter) OCD tendencies. Ever since I installed the kit, we've had the laptop signed in to AlertMe's website, constantly keeping a check on the power meter and current cost. We've even been turning lights off in every room except the ones we're in to see how much money it saves, and boiling only the amount of water we need, rather than a full kettle every time. That may be slightly laughable, or maybe we should view this frugality as obvious money-saving tactics we should have been employing all along.

Thus far, I'm uncertain whether this £70 kit is good value. On the one hand, it gives you information that's otherwise a mystery, such as the frightening amount of 'permanent' power being used by all those devices that remain on constantly like clock radios, PVRs, house alarms, fridges, freezers etc. On the other, though, is it going to enable to me to save any more money than I could by simply turning things off when I don't need them? That's a question I hope to answer in a month or two, when I discover whether we can use less power in December without resorting to ridiculous measures like trying to dry washing on radiators, or living in the dark.

It's like reading, but better

Like most children of the 1980s, I was raised on a nutritious cultural diet of MTV and video games. Naturally, this means I have a blissfully short attention span and I am easily distracted. Before I forget who you are and what I'm writing about or I rush away to gaze at the pandas grazing outside my window, I should point out that I'm not some illiterate chav. I love reading and the Web is full of interesting stuff to read from acres of news at Google News to the free, public domain books at Project Gutenberg. Unfortunately, reading a lot of content available on the Web is a royal pain.

A lot of content available to read online is free, but this is only made possible by advertising. Unfortunately, some websites are littered with lots of ads which clutter up the page. Chances are, they're also very distracting since a lot of them are animated and will run in a perpetual loop. Obviously, that content might not be free without advertising, but that doesn't give advertisers free reign to induce an epileptic fit when I'm least expecting it.

On top of it all, a lot of text online is poorly laid out in small, badly chosen fonts. I could just give up and read a magazine or a book, but that would be defeatism and if Margaret Thatcher and endless re-runs of The Mysterious Cities of Gold have taught me anything, it's that stubbornness always pays off in the end.

Readability is a handy little Javascript applet that makes websites much easier to read. Once you've chosen the page layout, font size and margin size to suit you at the Readability webpage, an applet is generated that is stored in your browser's bookmarks toolbar. When you come across a visually offensive webpage that you nonetheless want to read, just click the Readability icon in your toolbar and the webpage is instantly reformatted into a far more readable form. If you want to see the original layout, just reload the page.

As my pictured example shows, the reformatted page can be a vast improvement over the original. Readability doesn't always work, especially on particularly complex webpage layouts, but it's a handy tool to have nonetheless and is quicker and more convenient than using ad blockers and manually resizing text.

Now that I've solved that little quandary, I'd like to move onto my proposed solution for the long-standing animosity between Russia and Georgia over the breakaway territories of Abkhazia and South Oss… OMG! PANDAZ GRAZING OUTSIDE MY WINDOW!!!!1111111

How best to fit technology into our lives?

As someone who writes about technology for a living I obviously put more thought into my home's IT and digital entertainment set up than most people. Despite this, it's easy to fall into a pattern of use that's far from ideal. In fact it's far too easy to get caught up in the 'what' of computing, that being the empirical facts and capabilities of the technology, while sidelining the equally critical why, where and how.

To put it another way there are far more important factors when using a PC than what processor and operating system you use, or even which search engine and online news provider you prefer. Given the choice, do you like to sit at a desk when you browse the internet? Or are you happier plonked on the sofa? Do you prefer to work in the privacy of a study? But the dining room table is your only choice? Do you think that games must be played with a keyboard and mouse? Or do you prefer a joypad but simply can't get a decent stint on the living room TV.

Most of us live with one or more people, and so these questions come about by how those others like to use and enjoy the wealth of digital information and entertainment available to us. Long gone are the days of a single PC in the study (tethered to a modem) and a single TV in the living room (with just a handful of channels and a VCR). We now have far more flexibility with laptops, on-demand TV, wireless Ethernet and media streaming devices. It's not uncommon for every member of some households to have their own laptop, but at the same time we'd be loathed to entirely give up on shared experiences, like gathering round the living room TV to watch a favourite programme or look at some holiday snaps.

The technology is good – with the usual nod of sympathy to those in rural areas who struggle to get decent broadband connections – it's now a matter of how effectively we fit it into our day to day lives. This is much harder to advise upon than say the best laptop display, or the fastest desktop processor.

Adapting new forms of technology to work with our endlessly varied family dynamics and antiquated living spaces isn't going to produce a one-size fits all solution. However, over the next few weeks, as I reorganise my own limited living space to accommodate a child, I'm going to also try and cast some light on the issue.

Rise of the Zombie

After spending the late eighties and early nineties at the unfashionable end of the horror ghetto, zombies are now doing big business. We've seen zombie movies undergo a renaissance, while on the fringes of cult obsession you'll find zombie flash mobs, zombie proms and... oh yes: zombie games.

There's an obvious turning point for all this zombie action in the form of Capcom's first Resident Evil game (Biohazard in Japan), released on Sony's Playstation in 1996. Taking heavy atmospheric cues from Infogrames' polygon-based proto-survial-horror adventure Alone in the Dark (1992), Resident Evil was an instant classic thanks to tense gameplay, stunning level design and a zombie plague that seems to deliver nods to Romero's Night of the Living Dead and Dan O'Bannon's Return of the Living Dead films, with their zombie-making chemical, Trioxin.

In the same year, Sega's House of the Dead light gun shooter appeared in the arcades. From there, there was no looking back. Both games spawned numerous sequels and spin-offs.

In 2001, the fourth instalment in Sam Raimi's Evil Dead movie franchise came out. Starring the voice talents of the series' star, Bruce Campbell, Evil Dead: Hail to the King existed only as a video game, taking its cue from Capcom's hit survival horror titles. It was followed in 2003 by a sequel, A Fistful of Boomstick, which received rather more critical acclaim. However, the repetitive nature of its deadite-killing mayhem failed to win the love of gamers who weren't already die-hard fans of the movies.

Serious cross-pollination between zombie films and games had begun. In 2002 Danny Boyle's movie 28 Days Later (2002) gave birth to fast zombies and a new cult interest in the genre. 2002 also saw the release of the first Resident Evil movie. Zom-rom-com Shaun of the Dead, released in 2004, was spawned from an episode of British sit-com Spaced that was itself heavily influenced by Resident Evil 2.

The Resident Evil sequels continued their domination of the gaming charts, while a 2006 Capcom release, third-person sandbox action game Dead Rising, provided a significantly wider range of weapons than the company's hit zombie franchise, with less emphasis on plot and tension and more on baseball bat/chainsaw/lawnmower based zombie death.

All this carnage is great, but the majority of these titles (House of the Dead notwithstanding) have offered a singularly solitary gaming experience. It's just you against the zombies. While this helps with the apocalyptic feel of the games, the experience lacks the band-of-doomed-survivors vibe that features so strongly in pretty much every zombie movie ever.

And then there's Valve's Left 4 Dead. Released just a year ago, this co-op FPS shooter pitted four survivors against the undead hordes across four campaigns with five areas. There's a single player mode, in which you're backed up by three computer-controlled allies, but the real meat of the game is in online co-op. You can even play with up to seven other human beings in Versus mode, which pits the Survivors against the Infected. We loved it, despite our reservations about the limited number of campaigns. Valve obligingly released additional content and, within the year, a sequel.



We've been playing the full version of Left 4 Dead 2 for about a week now. It's more of the same, which is by no means a bad thing. The graphics are primitive compared to the majestic realism of games like Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, but that's hardly the point. Left 4 Dead 2 has bigger levels, new zombies with new attack patterns and, our favourite: melee weapons. You haven't lived until you've decapitated a zombie with a skillet (and if your reflexes aren't sharp enough to do so, we don't rate your survival prospects very far into the future).

In a world where even respected (*ahem*) computer journalists can succumb to the the call of the flesh, do you really think that you'll be far behind?

Ban Keith Vaz's politics

As Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 geared up for launch, you may have heard the distinct sound of Keith Vaz's knee jerking. Reacting to some basic information on the game's plot and a bit of leaked footage, the MP for Leicester East decided enough was enough and that this realistically violent game should immediately be removed from sale, lest our poor innocent children get their hands on it and be irreparably damaged.

Within all of that outpouring of Daily Fail-esque bilge, you may have spotted one or two gaping holes in Vaz's logic. First, the game is rated 18 by the BBFC, the official body given the job of deciding who gets to watch and play games.

In case you're reading, Keith, that means that only people 18 years or older (or adults, if you like) can buy the game. If parents buy it for their kids and let them play it, that's a failing on their behalf, not on the ratings system, so why don't you deal with that instead?

Secondly, the comments mostly come after some leaked footage showed a scene in the game where the player has to infiltrate a terrorist group by helping them mow down computer-generated passengers on their way through an airport. Ban this filth!

Only, that's not quite the point. You see, the scene is supposed to be shocking, painting terrorists in their true light. In any case, you don't have to shoot any civilians yourself and you can even choose to skip this entire level by following instructions in the warnings that pop up. I'm not quite sure what the problem here is: adult themes in an adult game.

What, precisely, does Vaz think that this game will do to people? Can he really believe that people will emulate what they've seen on screen, and that hordes of teenagers will storm Heathrow pumping bullet after bullet into tourists and air crews?

The answer is, yes he probably does. You see, a few years ago, Vaz decided to have a pop at Munhunt, claiming that the game was partially responsible for the death of Stefan Pakeerah, as his killers were influenced by scenes in it. The actual facts of the case were that the only person involved in the case to actually own a copy of the game and play it regularly was the victim.

The wider point is that Vaz and his type don't play computer games, so they're not really sure what they're arguing against. They don't and can't see that computer games are often pure escapist entertainment, allowing us to do things that are completely outrageous and unacceptable in real life. That's where the fun lies, but gamers can tell the difference between a game and real life. The only protection I think people need is from Keith Vaz and his particular brand of politics.

MovieStingers

Going to the cinema, especially if it's a multiplex, isn't as much as fun as it used to be. Tickets are extortionately expensive, especially if you live in London. The less said about the cost and quality of the food sold on the premises or the helpfulness and efficiency of the staff, the better.

Many multiplexes have been colonized by witless hordes of teenage chavs who think Scary Movie is the best flick ever and enjoy pelting their fellow viewers with popcorn while making farting noises. Your average multiplex is also highly unlikely to show any of those fancy, high-brow, foreign films with subtitles unless those subtitles are for Elvish dialogue.

One of the slightly less irritating aspects of modern cinema is the post-credits sequence, or stinger. These short scenes are shown after or during the end credits. They may tie up loose plot ends, hint at an upcoming sequel, or just be charming and/or humourous extras. Not all films have stingers though. Even if they do, is it worth sticking around for? You may want to see it if only to get your £12 worth, but you may also have a dying need to visit the toilet after working you way through that half gallon cup of Diet Coke.

Thankfully MovieStinger.com is here to help. This website maintains a large database of films, listing whether or not they have a post-credits sequence as well as detailing what happens during the scene itself. Readers can even vote on whether the stinger is worth sticking around for. Sometimes, it will even list the details of the song played during the end credits and provide a link to iTunes so you can buy it.

Best of all, there's a mobile version of the site optimized for smartphones so you can check its database on your phone as you finish your popcorn. Naturally, your phone will have been turned off during the film itself unless you want to risk my popcorn-throwing wrath…

Alan Lu

A moving tale of internet deprivation

The internet has existed for 40 years, believe it or not. That's not strictly true, but the first ever email containing meaningful data was sent 40 years ago so it's nearly correct. No longer a military lab experiment, today the internet is plumbed into almost every home in the UK and we're all logged on for more hours than we'd probably like to admit. Apart from me. For some time now I have been without an internet connection and it's been a surprising experience.

At Computer Shopper we have meetings where we jot down ideas we think might spawn an interesting article. One of these ideas was for some unfortunate journalist to live without an internet connection for a month. We dismissed this idea for a number of reasons: it's been done (badly) before by other magazines and newspapers; it's unlikely to draw any unusual conclusions; and no-one wanted to live without an internet connection for more than half an hour. We fired the person who thought up that idea.

And then I moved house and found myself disconnected from the net.

I knew before I moved that my broadband options would be limited, particularly in the early days. I smugly prepared by buying a mobile broadband USB device. I would, in theory, be able to pick up email and do some light web browsing while waiting for BT to enable the phone line. Then it would be a matter of waiting for a broadband provider to enable an ADSL service. Only then would life resume as normal.

However, having lived in London for nearly 20 years, I'd become rather complacent about mobile phone coverage and cable TV and internet provision. I now live in the countryside, miles from the sort of facilities I'm used to. This means that mobile phones don't work very well, cable is not available at all and my local telephone exchange is not local loop unbundled (LLU). Not having an LLU exchange means I can only buy a slow and expensive ADSL service, in contrast to the fast and cheap services to which anyone who lives even slightly near a town can subscribe. I had inadvertently become the subject of an internet deprivation experiment.

Various colleagues came up with some resourceful solutions. "Just use a mobile broadband dongle," said Jim. "I can't get a signal," I sulked. "Ah, well then you need one of those new Femtocell devices. Who are you with?" asked David. "Vodafone," I replied. "Great, I've got a Vodafone Femtocell device here," he offered.

If you don't know, Femtocell devices act like your own personal mobile phone mast, providing a strong signal. They channel the phone conversations over the internet using your broadband connection. "Won't I need an internet connection for that to work?" I asked. "Oh yeah. Loser!" was the reply. "Try dial-up," someone smirked. "I don't have a phone line," I snapped.

For the next three months I prayed to and swore at my mobile broadband device, trying to coax even the slowest signal into existence. It was all to very little available and in the end I gave up. Even when the phone line was activated I had lost the will to even contemplate dialling up.

The phone connection was, in itself, an event far more exciting than I could have predicted. After weeks of surviving with only a signal-less mobile phone, it was like being the only living human in a post-apocalyptic world who, after 20 years of wandering, walks over a hill to find a thriving (largely female) colony of healthy and attractive people milling around in a friendly and accommodating fashion.

The lack of internet access had quite a serious impact on my family's life. It was very hard to locate the nearest GP, for example. Had I needed to find other support, perhaps in the shape of childcare, I would have needed to visit the local library. Which is where? I'll just look it up online. Ah…

Without the internet even finding local takeaways was hard, although that ultimately turned out to be because there aren't any in my part of the county.

Then, one glorious midnight, I managed to connect via my mobile phone and received an email announcing that the ADSL line was alive. Although on the way up to bed, I decided to see if I could log on. So, slightly drunk and crouching on bare floorboards in my pants (I include that image as a treat for all you loyal readers), I configured the basic USB modem and tried to connect. In seconds I was reconnected to life as we know it. It was then that it really struck me: we take the internet so much for granted that it is almost impossible to imagine living without it. Yet some people simply don't have access, for one reason or another. They are enormously disadvantaged, existing beyond what some call the digital divide. This is clearly a significant issue but I was too naked, elated and tired to pay it much more attention.

Now clothed, connected and relatively sober one can reflect on the problem more clearly. The internet is not just about Facebook, YouTube and late-night, ill-advised forays into porn. It provides essential access to local services and may one day be the standard vehicle for voting. Certainly it's the best source of information for those who have just moved house. It ought to come as a basic service, like water.

As we go to press there's talk about disconnecting copyright-infringing users in a 'three strikes and you're out'-style ruling. It's a daft idea akin to cutting off the water or electricity supplies of those who commit petty crimes. Maybe instead pirates should be forced to move into rural areas, where they can take their chances with over-inflated connection costs, unreliable mobile connections and a paucity of good Chinese takeaways.