Top 10 bad IT decisions

In light of the UK government's ill-thought out and wrong-headed decision to support a three strikes and you're out rule for internet service providers, we thought we'd take a look at the history of stupid decision making in the IT field.

We've all had that 'oh no' moment, when you realise two things: you've just done something incredibly stupid and you can't take it back. Unfortunately, IT has the potential to make those moments a whole lot worse. As someone said: "To err is human. To really screw things up you need a computer."

So here they are, history as a lesson.

Honourable Mention: Thomas Watson's "five computers in the world" comment
Shaun Nichols: Former IBM chairman Thomas Watson was credited for saying in the early 1940s that "there is a world market for maybe five computers".

Though there is some debate as to whether the quote was ever actually uttered, similar comments attributed to other early computer scientists around that time indicated the belief that the total number of computers the world would ever need was anywhere from three to 10.

Regardless of the specifics, Watson's quote explains the mindset of the early days of computing, and suggests why it took so long for individual terminals and personal computers to really take off.

The thinking is better explained when one realises that at the time neither the transistor nor the computer chip had even been suggested, and computers were huge beasts that required immense amounts of time and attention to work. There really were fewer than a dozen entities that had the need and resources to develop and operate an old-fashioned vacuum tube computer.

Iain Thomson: Watson is certainly not the first person to misunderstand the potential of technology. When shown a demonstration of the first telephones the mayor of Chicago was so impressed he thought they would be vital in the future and that one day every city would have one. Alexander Graham Bell, meanwhile, wrote down a list of 10 uses for his newly invented phonograph and not one of them was playing music.

But what makes Watson's comment more of a head-slap moment was that he was the founder of IBM. That's what makes me a little bit suspicious about the facts and ensured that Watson only gets an honourable mention.

Honourable mention: Intel's Pentium III tracking system
Shaun Nichols: Back in 1999 Intel was gearing up for the release of its much-anticipated 'Willamette' Pentium III processor. The new chip sported a 1.5GHz clock speed that had gamers and enterprise users alike salivating. Unfortunately, it had another feature that drove consumers to break out the torches and pitchforks.

As the Willamette chip was being designed and engineered, someone at Intel thought it would be a good idea to provide each chip with a unique tag, and then use the information to gather data on the processor and track its use. IT managers could use it to track systems in companies too.

Imagine Intel's surprise when it learned that the public wasn't exactly ecstatic with the idea of their systems being remotely tagged and monitored at the silicon level. Customers revolted, privacy groups were up in arms and at the All Saints Churchyard in Oxfordshire one could hear a faint whirring sound as George Orwell spun in his grave.

Fortunately for Intel, the company was actually paying attention to what its users were saying and the tracking feature was abandoned, thus saving the company much criticism and keeping it out of our top 10.

Iain Thomson: In 1999 myself and other technology journalists attended a press conference given by Intel. There was much anticipation because Intel was about to reveal the details behind its forthcoming Pentium III. The press conference went well, the technical specs looked good and there were no blinding revelations.

Then the announcer started going over security and proudly stated that from this time forth every Intel chip would have a unique ID number stamped on it, and that it could be checked remotely. The company seemed to think this was a good idea. At the words "Any questions?" a sea of hands shot up and every single one of them was about the new scheme.

As the details unravelled it looked more and more of a pig's breakfast. Intel said it wouldn't use the system to find stolen chips – about the only thing it was good for. The software used to query the chip number was also hopelessly easy to hack. After a face-saving period the company backed down and our computer hardware remains untracked.