Tim McNamara

nevver: The Internet is leaking, We are social

Wed, 09 Nov 2011 10:46:48 +1300

The Internet is leaking, We are social

Dropbox, Wuala, Spideroak - Free online backup storage reviewed

Sun, 26 Jun 2011 15:57:00 +1200

This post, we’ll be comparing three online backup providers: Dropbox, Wuala & Spideroak. Dropbox has recently encountered security problems, so what else is there?

If you notice any inaccuracies, please send through any corrections and I’ll update the post.

Overview

	Dropbox	Wuala	Spideroak
Free tier	2GB	1GB	2GB
OS support	+++	+++	+++
Mobile	+++	++	++
Mobile	+++	++	++
Security	?	+++	+++
Redundancy	?	+++	+++
Privacy	?	+++	+++
Security	?	+++	+++
Ease of Use	+++	+++	++
Capacity	++	+++	+++
Web UI	+++	++	+++
Unique points	Single folder	Public folders Trade storage Locally encrypted data	Locally encrypted data Supports open source

(Question marks remain for Dropbox due to its latest security concerns)

Pricing

Notes about the graph:

Dropbox only supports 100GB.
Prices are per month for an annual subscription.
Note that prices for Wuala can be substancially reduced, e.g. down to $0, if you share your own hard drive capacity.

About the products

Dropbox has been a clear leader in online storage. This is largely because of its simplicity. When asked about why it has been success a success, Michael Wolfe makes the point that the ideal backup solution would look like the following:

There would be a folder.
You’d put your stuff in it.
It would sync.

That’s about the limit of what Dropbox does. It focused on creating a simple, attractive interface with minimal, useful features. These include being able to create shared folders easily.

Wuala has a greater emphasis on sharing and security. In addition to being a pure backup solution, it enables you to share data securely with people you trust.

It encrypts your data, then uploads it into a global peer-to-peer network. In fact, rather than buying storage space, you are able to trade space on your own hard drive . This could be attractive where you have an external hard drive with free capacity. This peer-to-peer system creates instant, global redundancy for your data.

Spideroak also prides itself for its ability to keep your data secure. It uses central servers, like Dropbox to store your data, but maintains a ‘no knowledge’ approach. Your data is encrypted before it is sent to their machines and their staff don’t know your password to decrypt it.

Details

Cross portability All three providers support Linux, OS X & MS Windows.

Mobile All three providers support Android & iPhone. Dropbox goes further and supports Blackberry.

Web Wuala suffers ever so slightly in this space. In order to access your information, you need to have a web browser that supports Java applets. Yes, that’s every browser with an add-on. Wuala does this because the data is decrypted only by local machines. In their eyes, providing a pure web application would mean that they would need to be able to access your information.

Privacy & Security Wuala and Spideroak focus on security very heavily. For example, neither of them send your password to the companies’ servers. This means, it is impossible for them to ever look into files that you have stored in the cloud. Dropbox stores its data on the Amazon’s S3 service. This can make it susceptible to PATRIOT Act requests as well as illegal breaches.

Sharing All three providers allow you to share your information with others you know easily. This is usually achieved by clicking on an share option, then being given a URL to share with others.

One thing that’s unique to Wuala is globally shared folders. You can create folders which are public to everyone on Wuala. There are folders with Creative Commons music and videos, for example.

Ease of Use Dropbox is the easiest tool to use, which is why it’s so successful. A folder is created on your computer which you drag into.

Wuala is very similar. It gives you a drive though, rather than a single folder. Spideroak works by selecting folders in its interface. There is no drag and drop from your file manager.

Pricing All of the providers have simple pricing structures based on data stored. The most complex is Wuala, which also enables you to trade your own disk space in return for online storage.

Storing old versions All three providers store previous versions of files.

Installation Experience

I found Spideroak’s installation procedure a little confusing. It uses the term “Create a Device” when it means “Set up your computer”. When seeing “Creating a Device”, I thought that it wanted to partition a drive for its own use.

Three easy ways to get into the Semantic Web

Sat, 28 May 2011 21:33:27 +1200

So, you’ve been curious about this whole Semantic Web thing. Perhaps you would like search engines to put useful things up next to your links when someone searches for you. Maybe you’re interested by the possibility that smart bots could track down information from across the web via Linked Data to provide Internet users with the most up-to-date information possible from its original source.

Whatever the reason — getting started with the Semantic Web is a mental stretch. Thankfully, there are ways to make your information useful to machines without needing to know OWL, ontology or the rest of the jargon. Each of these three methods simply extends the HTML code that you already know.

RSS

RSS feeds have always been sematically great. In fact, by using RSS, you’re publishing your content as RDF, the Resource Description Framework. RDF is the main way that machines resolve resources’ ambiguity. They use URIs to do that. There are many Tims in the world, but only one lives at timmcnamara.co.nz.

Open Graph Protocol

The Open Graph Protocol is a way to get your data to completely simplify everything. Pushed by Facebook, it’s bound to get a greater following in the months to come as it’s simplicity to implement. One of the problems it immediately resolves is displaying your information correctly when it is shared on Facebook.

Take a look at this HTML snippet, representing the move The Rock:



  The Rock (1996)
  
  
  
  
  ...

...

What we’ve done here is define an og namespace, and then use it within meta tags. Pretty simple. Facebook has done something great here, making tags is now one of the easiest ways to get started with the Semantic Web.

Common Tag

Common Tag is an effort to make data able to be included into massive Linked Data stores, such as Freebase. It focuses specifically on tagging content. That is, for authors to add categories and topics to their content.

The idea behind Common Tag is to reconcile the problem of using different tags for the same thing. For example, if you’re looking for images in Flickr from New York, NY, they’re probably tagged nyc, new_york, newyorkcity and so on. Common Tag avoids this by providing a single, unambiguous reference.

Here’s a snippet representing the band U2.

U2

Under the hood, we’re using a technology you may have heard of - RDFa. The most important part of this snippet is the resource section. It is the unambiguous reference to the content that you’re talking about. However, the process is very similar to the Open Graph Protocol above. First, we define a namespace, then we use it in our HTML. There are several interesting things you can do with Common Tag, including declaring whether content has been tagged by authors or by users. You should read the Common Tag Getting Started Guide to learn more.

Three easy ways to use hard tools

Each of the tools we’ve described here allows you to use a different piece of the Semantic Web pie in bit sized pieces. By using the simple tools above, you’re actually using the very scary tools you’ve been avoiding:

RSS means you’re using RDF
Open Graph Protocol means you’re adding usable metadata to your meta tags
Common Tag exposes RDFa to User-Agents

Easy Competitor Analysis with Twitter

Tue, 03 May 2011 10:20:43 +1200

Twitter has Search

To get a sense of a competitor’s level of engagement, http://search.twitter.com is a great tool. To begin, just add a user’s name in the search bar. You’ll be greeted with every message to and from that account within the last 3 or so days.

The search interface makes it very simple to see exactly who is talking to your target company, what they are talking about and how your target company responds. In essence, you are privy to their complete interaction - meaning you’re well You can also get a sense of the type of Twitter strategy that they are using you can draw inferences about. Do they respond quickly? Are they informal? Is there a particular type of day that they tweet?

You can get a sense of what positive tweets are being sent if you include a smile emoticon, :), with your query.

“@timClicks :)” returns messages like: @timClicks Thanks so much Tim. :-). Thankfully, there are no results for “@timClicks :(“.

Remember, that it’s possible to analyse competitors that are not even using Twitter. Not having a Twitter account doesn’t prevent people from tweeting about you. Experiment by searching for trade marks, company names or governments.

Use personal customer accounts

Search is great, but it doesn’t give you a full insight into a competitor’s use of Twitter. They might be sending great deals to selected followers via direct messages, for example. To find out, create an account and become their customer. Do not impersonate someone or indulge in deceptive conduct. Instead, make some genuine enquiries. Carry out a few purchases. Assess their response.

Some questions to think about:

What is their tone?
Do they attempt to move you to more orthodox channels?
How much time are they investing in social media?

Your company needs to make the ethical decision about how far to take this strategy. It’s plausible that you could create accounts in many target demographics to interact with everyone in your industry. This is ultimately very close to breaching Twitter’s rules. However, as long as you are being genuine, it is highly likely that you will be able to gain large quantities of information about how your industry interacts with new media.

How could the Left come back this year?

Tue, 03 May 2011 08:07:00 +1200

I’ve noticed lots of angst in New Zealand’s Left. I don’t agree with it all. However, I’m really concerned that the next Parliament will be close to dysfunctional with lots of splinter parties. A strong Opposition will be vital to ensuring that the powers have recently been granted to the executive for Christchurch’s recovery are limited.

I haven’t heard hear firm policy consensus on how to respond. Last night, I jotted down a few things that the left would need to exploit if it wants to win this year’s election:

Some big-ticket items:

National builds prisons, we build schools
A vote for National is a vote for the far-right / Brash
A vote for us is not a vote for Hone Harawira
We will add democracy to CERA
We will keep your home well insulated

Lesser things to target specific demographics:

We will not cut off your Internet
No road user charges for electric vehicles
All new roads must include full cycle lane unless there is a strong reason not to
Provide a packet of seeds with native plants, rather than a standard leaflet
Foreign policy for New Zealand’s interests, not USA’s
Adherence to our flexible, adaptable unwritten constitution

I think that they should generally stay away from Working for Families and interest-free student loans. These are big pain points, but they’re expensive & New Zealand doesn’t want to become poor.

Also, the minimum wage really does seem too high. It’s keeping young workers out of the workforce. Very high youth unemployment will damage our country for decades. This is a hard one for the Left though, because lowering of the minimum wage seems like a punch in the mouth to workers.

Lastly, one of the political parties should think of a way to reconnect with Britain. This may sound silly at first, but the Monarchy could be a very important lever. While colonialism has been difficult for New Zealand, it’s also brought the rule of law, enduring symbols of nationhood, democracy, international access & wealth.

Photo

Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:38:40 +1200

Worried about peer-to-peer file sharing? Here's a peer-to-peer file system

Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:00:05 +1200

Worried about peer-to-peer file sharing? Here's a peer-to-peer file system

Aluminium cans & sodium hydroxide => power for remote...

Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:55:45 +1200

Aluminium cans & sodium hydroxide => power for remote controlled car!

Photo

Sat, 16 Apr 2011 10:45:40 +1200

http://unsuck-it.com

Sat, 16 Apr 2011 09:36:16 +1200

http://unsuck-it.com:

If you hate jargon and want a laugh, this is for you.

Photo

Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:45:06 +1200

Unconﬁrmed reports of 12 car pile-up in the Terrace Tunnel

Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:22:33 +1200

jackyan:

henrycooke:

Fuck. More on Stuff soon.

If true, I am not surprised. The sign says 60 but I frequently get tailgaters or overtakers there. Folks, it’s 60 for a reason. Someone might have started a chain reaction, and that is not cool for the innocent, careful motorists who got caught up in this.

Getting content to properly display in Facebook when shared

Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:36:00 +1200

One of the strangest bugs I’ve had to deal with was ensuring that content was “likeable” and “shareable” on Facebook. The Ushahidi platform is an amazing tool for sourcing data from the crowd in crisis situations. However, when we deployed it for eq.org.nz, there was a problem. When someone tried to share the link on Facebook, the blurb looked something like this:

The content of this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand License. To satisfy attribution requirements, include “Source: http://eq.org.nz” in your derived content. This website is provided as is, and your use of it is exclusively at your own risk. …

Fairly uninviting discovering us via social media.

In order to get around this, we actually introduced a paragraph tag that wouldn’t be rendered by browsers, but would be picked up by Facebook’s crawler. Our HTML source looks like this:



  The community-driven situation map of the 
  Christchurch Earthquake

As it turns out, like many things in life, there’s probably a better way to do it.

Introducing the Open Graph Protocol

Sidebar: graph means a mathematical graph, not a visual one. Now, if you studied mathematics or computer science at university, you may not have a clue what’s intended here. In mathematics, graphs represent networks. The upshot here is that computers can understand the relationships between all the bits of content on the web.

The Open Graph Protocol is a way to add metadata, content about your content, to Facebook. It uses the tag within HTML. Let’s look through an example from the Internet Movie Database:



    The Rock (1996)
    
    
    
    
    ...

...

Uh… what? Let’s look over things line by line.

This tells computer that the HTML uses the Open Graph Protocol. You can expand the pieces out: xmlns means XML namespace, og means open graph, and the weblink is just an official reference to the protocol itself. It’s actually a dead link, but will mean something to computers (e.g. Facebook) that know about the protocol.


    The Rock (1996)

This is actually an example of what we want to avoid. We have the title, “The Rock” and information about the movie together. This looks ugly when shared through social media. With decent metadata, we make </code> refer to just to titles. This would make for a much more pleasant browsing experience:</p> <pre><code> <meta property="og:title" content="The Rock" /> <meta property="og:type" content="movie" /> <meta property="og:url" content="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117500/" /> <meta property="og:image" content="http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/rock.jpg" /> </code></pre> <p>This is the meat of the example. Here, we describe to Facebook what to put on its pages. We have a link to the right URL, not some crazy long one. We have a link to the right thumbnail. We have the title in isolation. We’re also telling Facebook that we’re referring to a movie, which might make searching easier.</p> <p>However, we still haven’t solved our problem. We need to add one final piece:</p> <pre><code> <meta property="og:description" content="A renegade general and his group of U.S. Marines take over Alcatraz and threaten San Francisco Bay with biological weapons." /> </code></pre> <p>Success! Once you’ve added the <code>og:description</code>, it’ll be used. Sweet.</p> <h2>Doesn’t this already exist?</h2> <p>Yes. There have been other efforts in this area. The most common are known as [Dublin Core][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Core] and [FOAF][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOAF]. However, using multiple standards one one website is complex. You can see the result of when each of these standards are meshed together, on slide 16 of <a href="http://www.scribd.com/doc/30715288/The-Open-Graph-Protocol-Design-Decisions" target="_blank">this presentation</a>.</p> <h2>Diving deeper</h2> <p>The <a href="http://ogp.me/" target="_blank">Open Graph Protocol’s website</a> provides a great overview of the features. You can learn add to tell Facebook the location, how to describe your page as a product page or add contact information. There are client libraries for several programming languages and a few tools, such as Wordpress.</p> <p>Open Graph Protocol will follow a similar path as KML has in the geospatial field. When Google acquired Keyhole, there were several competing standards. With Google’s dominant market position, it was able to establish KML as the de facto standard. It is a simpler standard than competing alternatives. But, more importantly, everyone in the geospatial field needed to be able to talk to Google Earth and Google Maps. That’s where the consumers were.</p> <p>Open Graph Protocol will do a similar thing. There are other ways to add metadata to web pages. Dublin Core and FOAF have a long tradition in the semantic web community. However, Facebook can exert its market dominance to make this simpler standard adopted. Businesses finally have a reason to get involved with semantic content. That’s where the consumers are.</p> </article> <article> <h1>Hi Tim, <br /> I saw your presentation last night on NLP and Python. I had to leave straight afterward, but thought you'd be interested in these related sites I found recently (I'm not involved in either, just sharing).<br /> - http://extractiv.com/<br /> - http://topicmarks.com/<br /> <br /> Cheers,<br /> Ben<br /> @BenHealey</h1> <p>Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:58:24 +1200</p> <p>Hey Ben, thanks for these. Sorry for taking so long to respond. ‘Twas my first quest- only just noticed Tumblr’s notification.</p> </article> <article> <h1>Quick Tips for Developing for the Mobile Web</h1> <p>Tue, 12 Apr 2011 15:12:29 +1200</p> <p>Here, we’re looking at building websites that can cater for both ‘normal’ users as well as mobile devices.</p> <h2>Prepare for interruptions</h2> <p>Your application is not the only thing that your user will be doing. The most basic element of crafting a GUI application, that’s different from the web is making sure that there is an effective pause mode. Make sure that your code and data is robust enough. That</p> <h2>No <code>mouseover</code></h2> <p>With touch screens, there’s no mouse cursor. So don’t rely on a hover state to indicate that something will happen if it’s clicked. Buttons need to look like buttons now.</p> <h2>Higher resolution</h2> <p>Mobile screens tend to be smaller, but actually have a higher pixel count than many of your other users’ monitors. The problem with this is that those smaller form-factor devices will scale images up, because they tend to assume that your CSS style sheets are built with most monitors in mind. The upshot is that your raster thumbnails will look yuck to mobile users, but great to you. To avoid this, provide images that are wider than the HTML element’s <code>width</code>.</p> <h2>JavaScript has won</h2> <p>There are a number of <a href="http://timmcnamara.co.nz/post/2572028367/why-javascript-will-rull-the-world" target="_blank">reasons why JavaScript has beaten other technologies</a>. Don’t cut against the grain.</p> <h2>And WebKit is still in front</h2> <p>If you want your iPad users to really smile, take some time to learn the <code>-webkit</code> CSS extensions. They’ll look great. And your tech soul will be happy because you’re using the GPU to do what it’s supposed to.</p> </article> <article> <h1>"There were more people who believed in the English Crown at the time of the revolution than who..."</h1> <p>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 09:46:57 +1200</p> “There were more people who believed in the English Crown at the time of the revolution than who believe in the Congress today.”<br/><br/> - <em><a href="http://t.co/P11nORM" target="_blank">Lawrence Lessig</a></em> </article> <article> <h1>The Cloud: what it is, where it came from & why it is here</h1> <p>Sun, 10 Apr 2011 16:31:00 +1200</p> <p>This post focuses on broadly why people are telling you that the cloud is the future of the world. I want to clarify things for you. I feel that there’s lots of confusion around this area. I can’t speak for others, but when I first heard it, I wondered whether the term “cloud computing” sounded like some form of euphemism.</p> <h2>What is the cloud?</h2> <p>There are two senses of the word that are used most extensively. First, there is there is the sense that consumers are being taught - applications that are delivered via the web. The second sense of the term is more technical. It refers to how companies purchase computing power. The conflict between these two senses is where most of the confusion derives from. That’s because, when people are first introduced to the term, are taught the first meaning. Then they prod deeper, only to be perplexed by technicians using the second meaning.</p> <p>The first meaning is an advertisng slogan. Here, cloud is intended to mean easy, light and free from installation. There are a few benefits to this for users. They never get interrupted with requests to update their software, they can often run the application from many devices or computers running different operating systems. Every time they run the application, it always runs the most recent version. All the operating system needs is a web browser, and they are plentiful.</p> <p>The second meaning is what makes IT managers smile. See, applications have been delivered over the web for a long time. But, they wouldn’t qualify as cloud computing in this sense. That’s because the companies running the applications would have been purchasing computers and hosting everything themselves.</p> <p>In order to get something onto the web, you need to have a server somewhere that’s hosting the application. This is fairly simple when you’re a startup, because you have negligible traffic. But what happens when you grow? As you expand, you may need to have servers in multiple geographic locations. But how many? If you get very big, very fast, your servers might simply break. But if your startup grows slowly, you’ll end up paying for services that you didn’t need. The cloud makes those problems far more easy to deal with.</p> <h2>Why did this whole cloud thing come about?</h2> <p>Blame Christmas shopping. According to the urban legend, Amazon had computers idling the whole year because it needed them for the Christmas rush. In order to service all of those orders, it needed to buy lots of extra hardware. Outside of December, this hardware would site idle. Amazon thought about ways to provide this idle capacity to the world.</p> <p>I also blame some things that I haven’t got evidence for, but seem to be sensible.</p> <p><strong>Internet browsers</strong></p> <p>They’re much better than they were. Most importantly, they contain far faster JavaScript interpreters, which means that applications are much more responsive.</p> <p><strong>Corporate security policies</strong></p> <p>It’s very hard to get a new software package into the enterprise. Security and procurement policies that are established to prevent new products to mess with the current setup. Corporate ICT contracts tend to have a set range of software. Adding anything new means adding a new item in the support contract. This can be conviently avoided by software delivered over via the web.</p> <p><strong>Speed of execution</strong></p> <p>Lots of tiny companies have introduced products into the market very cheaply. It’s <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110409/ap_on_hi_te/us_san_francisco_thriving_tech" target="_blank">now much cheaper to run a startup than during the 1999 tech boom</a>. They have been able to bypass traditional software distribution models and are run very efficiently. This creates a sense of panic in larger vendors, who are desperate to remove any advantages that smaller players exploit.</p> <p><strong>Peer pressure</strong></p> <p>Google, leading with Gmail, has demonstrated that it is possible to create very good software that generates huge revenue. There have been a flood of new norms established since Wikipedia demonstrated that the web could be a force of good.</p> <p><strong>Web scale</strong></p> <p>Many web companies experience exponential growth. The problem with that is that to provision new servers exponentially. Dealing with the scale required to serve many millions of requests a month is pretty hard for a team that was used to having a few thousand users a few months ago. Sometimes, it’s just great to be able to offload that work of handling that growth to companies that build their own power stations to run their data centres.</p> <p><strong>Maturation of web frameworks</strong></p> <p>Over the last decade, a number of tools used to build websites have matured. These tools include things like dealing with databases, databases themselves, how to sharing of source code within teams, through to systems that told you authoritatively where to locate your images in your application directory. It all helps.</p> <p><strong>Agile software methodologies</strong></p> <p>Although it can look like a bit of a fad, agile has made a huge impression in the world of software development. If nothing else, it has produced a culture shift that allows companies to release products as ‘beta’.</p> <h2>Why will the cloud be successful?</h2> <p>Remember the two senses of the term cloud computing we discussed above. The second sense is what’s most interesting here. That’s because the benefits to software producers are far more immediate than software users.</p> <p><strong>Pay for what you use</strong></p> <p>Companies now only need to pay for what they use, not what they think they’re going to use. Resources are typically rented now on hourly contracts. This is great for most web applications, because they have a cyclic demand curve. An internet dating website is likely to experience peaks during the evenings. By purchasing most of its computer power for those few hours of the day, it’s possible for the save lots of cash over the long run.</p> <p><strong>Sharpened focus</strong></p> <p>Using cloud computing systems, software developers can specialise on developing software. They don’t need to worry on configuring servers, upgrades, temperature, disaster recovery and more. All of this is taken care for them.</p> <p><strong>Scaleability</strong></p> <p>Cloud systems tend to be configured in a distributed manner. This means that resources can be allocated on-demand. If your site experiences massive load, more resource can be quickly allocated to you.</p> <p><strong>Ease of distribution</strong></p> <p>Once upon a time, companies needed to sell software as if it were a physical product. Publishers needed to secure distributers in each markets. Those distributors would need to find retailers to sell the product. Those products came packaged in boxes. Inside the boxes were CDs, that contained software that would run on your computer. With the shift into cloud computing, none of that remains true.</p> <p>In fact, the cost of distributing a company’s software is absorbed by the users. They pay for the bandwidth to use the service.</p> <p><strong>Ease of support</strong></p> <p>Software companies only need to support a single version of an application. This is a fairly big deal. Managing multiple versions of software is complex and fustrating. Not only does it mean that your programmers need to be fluent in multiple versions of the same thing, but so do your help desk staff, your documentation writers and your sales team. With applications delivered via the web, there is a single version for everyone. This means that it still makes sense for businesses to change the way things look or behave sometimes, even if there are gripes from some users.</p> <p>As an interesting aside, even when it looks like there are multiple versions of software being sold, such as professional and educational editions, they’re probably the same thing under the hood. Often, there’s just an internal switch in the that turns functionality off for the cheaper product line. It’s cheaper to spend money to arbitrarily weaken one piece of software than maintain two products.</p> <p>You’ll notice that web applications tend not to provide extra features for the premium version. Instead, they provide support for more users, more storage or more support. In this way, they get to add price discrimination without the complexity required to maintain multiple versions of the software.</p> </article> <article> <h1>"The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited..."</h1> <p>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 18:53:05 +1200</p> “The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by the obvious realities. We need men who can dream of things that never were.”<br/><br/> - <em>JFK</em> </article> <article> <h1>Video</h1> <p>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:45:06 +1300</p> <br/><br/> </article> <article> <h1>Me talking about the http://eq.org.nz at #UPShake</h1> <p>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 17:36:06 +1300</p> <br/><br/><p>Me talking about the <a href="http://eq.org.nz" target="_blank">http://eq.org.nz</a> at #UPShake</p> </article> </main></body></html>