Slashdot Mirror

Because the story submitter absent-mindedly forgot, here's the link to Playboy. ... Like you didn't know it already, lonely geek! (I bet all the images on the site are "mysteriously" pre-cached.)

- sm

Here is a link to part of the interview:
http://www.playboy.com/magazine/interview.html
FYI: 2 time Olympian High Jumper, Amy Acuff is on the cover.
Obligatory Dumb Question: How the flying F**K does a Playboy cover girl do the high jump? ...Oh wait, I answered my own question...

It is nice to see that my old engineering school has placed so high. They even topped out 1st in 2001, and 2nd in 2002.

Makes me proud to be a Wildcat on many different levels.

"American children are going to grow up thinking that women don't have nipples!"

{shrug} I grew up thinking they had staples across their midsection. No harm has come to me as a result.

Exploitive erotic channels such as Playboy TV are on digital cable or digital satellite.

links...
TechTV: http://www.techtv.com/unscrewed/funandgames/story/ 0,24682,3613860,00.html
Playboy: http://www.playboy.com/features/features/techtv/

its about time! I mean finally!

Does anybody know who won the voting on which TechTV chick should pose in playboy ?

Just so everyone knows: Charisma Carpenter is going to be in Playboy. More news as this story progresses.

I'm not really into pictures with bullshit site- and phonesex ads on them, but if the web is your choice...

Boobdex.com is a good start.
And I like the amateur pages at Voyeurweb. I get lots of goodness from Coolio's Babelog as well.
You might also spend some quality time at Domai or Kindgirls, which both have much free goodness.

If you're willing to put your money where your mouth is, Hegre-Archives is awesome, as are Quantum Proadult and Met Art. Playboy's CyberClub can keep a downloader busy for weeks.

Hardcore really isn't my area of interest, but holy crap, if you're even making jokes about pr0n, regular slashdotter NineNine has just the site for you

I use scripts to grab most of my smut, but I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the Mozilla extensions Linky and Magpie which combine to make my life as a pr0n browser much more pleasant.

I don't believe this necessarily creates consumer confusion. If I am searching for Playboy, but Penthouse wants to show me an ad - fine. They want to persuade me that their magazine is better than Playboy. Isn't that legitimate? Aren't companies supposed to be fighting for us, customers?

And if Penthouse wants to show their ad each time someone searches for Playboy, why the hell not? Trademarks were supposed to do a very simply thing - let the customer be sure that the product A is always made by the company X (unless they sell their brand or sell a division, or are acquired - suddenly nobody cares about consumer confusion, consumers be damned). This doesn't mean fucking losers own the word Playboy. They only own the exculsive right to call adult-related materials with that word. An ad for Penthouse doesn't usually confuse an adult person (unless it purposefully does), so it must be permitted.

P.S. Not that I care about any shit Playboy is pushing, whatever it is, fuck them very much.

"Some consumers, initially seeking Playboy's sites, may initially believe that unlabeled banner advertisements are links to Playboy's sites...Once they follow the instructions to 'click here,' and they access the site, they may well realize that they are not at a Playboy-sponsored site."

"Some consumers" - What percentage of people doing search for "playboy" or "playmate" are really looking for www.playboy.com ?

When I do searches, sometimes I use some word as a "seed." The intention is not to see sites with that keyword precisely, but to see under what category of Google they fall under, or to see what are the other related sites to my keyword. This then allows me to do a more thorough search of the various possibilities.

For example, if I had to do research on inexpensive or free email I would do a search for "Yahoo email" because I know Yahoo provides free emails. The Google category that it falls under is Computers/Internet/E-mail/Free/Web-Based/Y/Yahoo/ Once I get the directory path, I can trim it to get Computers/Internet/E-mail/Free/

Now the list that I see Computers/Internet/E-mail/Free/ is what I was looking for. I can now select "free email" providers that might provide more space than Yahoo, or better pop3 or imap facilities, or more features like throw-away emails.

My point is that even though I started off with "Yahoo" in my search, I was not looking for Yahoo per se.

So, when I type in "playboy" or "playmate" or "Playboy" or "Playmate" in the search box, I think it is presumptuous of Playboy.com and the Hefners to think I was looking for their site.

And this is why I think they have made a very weak assertion. Look at the wording of their assertion - It is littered with initially ...

"Some consumers,initially seeking Playboy's sites, may initially believe that ....

I think Playboy.com should be nailed on why they think everyone typing in playboy or playmate is looking for their site. And then, they must be made to prove that they are loosing revenue that might have come to them. Otherwise they are no different from RIAA which makes the assumption that every song that is freely downloaded would have been purchased by the downloader, and hence RIAA adds up the dollar values of the downloaded songs to come up with their "piracy related losses." BS. If I couldn't have downloaded the song for free, I wouldn't have even looked for it - let alone pay for the damn thing. To me, the situation for "playboy" and "playmate" searches is very similar.

So what do you suppose the women of Wal-Mart's music store will look like?

I wonder if this has anything to do with the women of wal-mart? Women of Wal-Mart (not work safe).

I can't believe no one mentioned it in the above comments.

What, just like playing Quake online? It's right out of friggin Lovecraft, and Trent Reznor did the soundtrack. Guess what; if you can still find a server you're likely to find 13 year old kiddies being annoying.

Make a popular game, and it's a safe bet that it'll eventually be overrun with 13 year old homophobic kiddies who think in terms of dominance while remaining unable to exert influence over women more substantial than the Playboy Centerfold or the latest [Boobies] link on FARK.

These are the same kids who read vampire novels and watch vampire flicks. These are the same kids who, 30 years ago, would have gotten their rocks off reading the adventures of Conan the Barbarian and Elric of Melnibone.

Why are they so prevalent in online gaming? It's simple: they're the ones with the most time on their hands, especially in summer when the public schools leave them the fuck alone for a few weeks.

Yesterday's Births:

...
Xing Tao Ming - 3.2 kg - M
Deng Fu Ling - 4.2kg - M
Bugs Bun Nee - 10.3kg - M
Jaz Jak Rab Bit - 10.4kg - M
Plae Boi Bun Nee - 8.7kg - F
...

"We feel like we'll only be able to provide better solutions to our clients like MSN," said Yahoo spokeswoman Diana Lee.

And then my thoughts turned to Playboy centerfold Diana Lee and...what was that again about Google?

Quoth the article: "But oh how the times have changed. The new Playboy Enterprises is all about class."

Uh, It seems IGN didn't turn their way-back machine back far enough while doing research for the article. Playboy has always claimed to have been about class, though there was a bit of a decline during the late 80s and the 90s. Two notable high-points of class are the two TV series and the Jazz Festival, but IMHO their class factor has been going downhill since August 1969. Apparently the TV show may be appearing again, so maybe they are trying to regain some of their lost class, but without a change in the current trend of their core content, I doubt this move will be very successful.

Pictures of adorably naughty round faced sex kittens and Catherine Bell.
That's all I want.

Pictures of adorably naughty round faced sex kittens and Catherine Bell.
That's all I want.

Erhm, if we're *trying* to find links between sites, it would seem that everything need only be two clicks away. You can always create a 'temp' site that exists only to link together any two arbitrary sites. So you have Gov.NZ links to here which links to some porn site

Not hard. Go back to finding links to Kevin Bacon :)

Those aren't great examples, but my point is that Playboy isn't particularly pornographic. College libraries stock Playboy microfilm for a reason, and it's not because it's pure porn.

Those aren't great examples, but my point is that Playboy isn't particularly pornographic. College libraries stock Playboy microfilm for a reason, and it's not because it's pure porn.

Those aren't great examples, but my point is that Playboy isn't particularly pornographic. College libraries stock Playboy microfilm for a reason, and it's not because it's pure porn.

Actually, there's been a braille edition of Playboy available since at least 1970. At least Playboy says so.

no, not all sites *i want to say*.

I recon it's like IRL: that every one should have the same opportunities like the other. Meaning that someone (a disabled, blind in this case) shouldn't somehow be discriminated someway (like not beeing able to access a public place, or site in this case).

From what I know this rule applies here in sweden to all public [access] places...and ends at your home.

Here are a few examples (where it [should] applies): Schools, Banks, any-sort-of-Stations & transportation, postoffice, restaurants, airlines, airports, airplanes, companies (!$ms too), malls, the beach, ya' you get the idea...

..and I recon he sues the airline because he feels (somehow) discriminated that he can't use the same public site as you do... to book his ticket.
I interpret his claim as "all physical public [access] places with internet sites/service should comply by/with ADA".

So you can feel safe you won't don't get sued to have to modify your personal-p00rn site, nope : )
[*hum... wonder how this applies to PlayBoy.com, and the works...*]

MEN, of course, means Motorola, Ericsson and Nokia.

Who cares? I wanna see the WOMEN of Wireless!

I wouldn't be celebrating. Capitalism may be working, but book fans are getting ripped off.

This is my experience: I have been adding to my Robert Anton Wilson collection lately. In case you aren't familiar with him, he has written a large number of important and controversial books [fiction,non-fiction,fantasy]. He was also the senior editor at Playboy during the late 70's. Most of his books have been through multiple printings by various publishers. Two or three years ago I could have purchased any of his books in paperback for under $10. Now price-gouging season has begun. Some of my recent quotes: $25, $60, etc... These are prices for used paperbacks less than twenty years old. I lent and lost a copy of The Earth Will Shake a few years ago, but now I can buy a used copy for $65--I spent $10 for a new copy about five years ago.

I lamented this just the other day while in the local bookstore. Then the owner gave me some inside information: the book seller has been hoarding Robert Anton Wilson books with the help of the web. He has nearly monopolized this particular market; now he sells a small number each week for his cash flow.

That's my beef with capitalism. The "market" (really: anticipation of future sales) has caused a product to become scarce. Hence the outrageous prices. In the meantime it is impossible--without enough disposable income--to find most books written by this contemporary author. I don't doubt that the internet has opened up a lot of readers to a lot of authors, but the speculators are creating a scenario not unlike the end result of censorship.

So yes, it does piss off the book publishers. It also pisses off people who would like to buy books for a fair price to read them [newsflash: original purpose of books is for reading!].

Baby step: With a so-called "Centerfold".

Making links in random words in your post does not help readers find information any quicker when there's no discernable pattern in what they're for

And, this does nothing for other countries. And, this does nothing but group porn where it will be easier to find. For example, if I am wanting to go to the White House, but instead put in http://www.whitehouse.com, then I hit a porn site. Or, I can just put ".com" after phrases like "blowjob", "sexydancers", etc., and be fairly assured of porn sites. Now, just tack on ".prn" to any group of words in the english language? A kid won't be able to type in ".prn"?

What, like Tiffany? :)

Actually, John Romero's funding of Stevie Case's ("Killcreek") breast implants (see her Playboy spread) is probably what broke Ion Storm.

I bet he wishes they were refundable :-)

Has it occurred to you that th e y not only seriously harm readability, but that they are also totally fucking worthless since people will just keep using the same tricks that already work for obscuring [goatse.cx] links?

Damn you are dumb.

If I have a site describing how dreadful pornography is, I don't want some other twat coming along and linking words to sex sites.

It utterly changes the meaning of the text. I have nothing in particular against pornography or in fact people who hate pornography, i'm just using it as an example.

Oh and don't tell me that trojan/virus writers won't find this xml file to be a fantastic target for exploitation.

How stupid Microsoft are.

You know who's going to jump on this, don't you?

Charmin

Combine it with Playboy and you have a whole new protocol: PTP (Porn via TP)

HONEY?! What the *hell* were you looking at???

bunnies can shave just fine, as far as I can tell...

...pose for Playboy.

ie. is it goatsex that is leading the way?
Or is it plain Jane erotica?
Or do people simply not care as long as it's free?

That's the kind of metrics I care about. Maybe we could loosen the religious right's hold on America if we could show that, indeed, most people in this country are depraved lunatics. After all we are a D E M O C R A C Y right?

Steven

Looking at Romero's girlfriend I think you may be on to something. She has appeared in Playboy AND beat him at Quake.

Same here. Glad to see I'm not the only one thinking this way.
Lessee... route add 206.251.29.10 /dev/null ...or something to that effect.

--

The Phoenix main library has a Braille Playboy, believe it or not.

From the FAQ:
Does anybody really read Playboy for the articles?
The articles may not be the first part of the magazine most readers turn to, but judging from the letters we get, millions of Playboy readers also enjoy our award-winning journalism, humor and fiction. The only people who can rightfully claim to read it solely for the articles are the thousands of blind readers who peruse our Braille edition, which has been distributed by the Library of Congress since 1970.

OK, here's the Poynter Institute bolting a metal frame onto a browser-user's head and monitoring his every eye motion. Don't you suppose that all that intensive surveillance might just possibly have some small effect on the user's behavior? Like, all alone, without the head gear, what could be more natural than if he might have headed on over to playboy.com to spend a few minutes or even hours grazing among the bitmaps and multimedia.

Now imagine that this same browsing subject has a birdcage studded with electronic doodads bolted around his skull, and a variety of all-too-serious sociologists peering over his shoulder. I'd guess that under those circumstances our lab rat will spend a good deal more time perusing something serious and scholarly like that lighthouse for the investment class the New York Times, or even our own grave and stately slashdot.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

OK, here's the Poynter Institute bolting a metal frame onto a browser-user's head and monitoring his every eye motion. Don't you suppose that all that intensive surveillance might just possibly have some small effect on the user's behavior? Like, all alone, without the head gear, what could be more natural than if he might have headed on over to playboy.com to spend a few minutes or even hours grazing among the bitmaps and multimedia.

Now imagine that this same browsing subject has a birdcage studded with electronic doodads bolted around his skull, and a variety of all-too-serious sociologists peering over his shoulder. I'd guess that under those circumstances our lab rat will spend a good deal more time perusing something serious and scholarly like that lighthouse for the investment class the New York Times, or even our own grave and stately slashdot.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

OK, here's the Poynter Institute bolting a metal frame onto a browser-user's head and monitoring his every eye motion. Don't you suppose that all that intensive surveillance might just possibly have some small effect on the user's behavior? Like, all alone, without the head gear, what could be more natural than if he might have headed on over to playboy.com to spend a few minutes or even hours grazing among the bitmaps and multimedia.

Now imagine that this same browsing subject has a birdcage studded with electronic doodads bolted around his skull, and a variety of all-too-serious sociologists peering over his shoulder. I'd guess that under those circumstances our lab rat will spend a good deal more time perusing something serious and scholarly like that lighthouse for the investment class the New York Times, or even our own grave and stately slashdot.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net

The thing that pisses me off when I read about half ass games that get published is I wonder what was sacraficed to breathe life into this turd.

I wanted to see Babylon 5:Into the Fire. It was a game that was high on my "to buy" list. I had been to Sierra's site several times to check out the screenshots, mpg movies, and occasionally read the developer's .plan files.

As many of you know, Sierra fired a bunch of it's developers. The development staff of B5 (as well as the developers for Middle Earth) was given 30 days notice and the software was cancelled.

OH, but Thank God Sierra spared 3d Virtual Bullrider!! It was bad enough to see B5 axed, and the LOTR game killed with a major motion picture on the way - but I really would have gone fscking nuts if they had cancelled the Bullrider game!!!

So Daikatana sucks. It will soon be forgotten. At least John Romero could afford to buy nice tits for his girlfriend.

I spen more time thinking about great games that died than half ass ones heading for the closeout bin at Best Buy.

Free Boobs

just click the free month offer at the top and fill the bogus info in.

<//-------------//>
"I like /. but you can tell it was designed by programmers..."

And you browse Playboy.com with Lynx, sure.
__

Slashdot light is great, I remember when I first found out how to make /. come up in the fast mode. But if you really want to enjoy the /. experience the best possible way, get yourself a free copy of Lynx. It loads up fast even on a slow machine, and in terms of downloading pages, it's so fast it makes your eyes pop. If you're running Linux your distro probably has Lynx already, or if you're on a Win9x or NT box, you can even get a version for Win32, and it's really great. I mean, it's not ideal for every web page; it isn't what I'd use to browse Playboy.com, but for a text-based site like this one, you just can't beat Lynx.

Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net