Slashdot Mirror


Let the Simpsons be Your Free ISP

Anthony Fuentes writes "Looks like Homer and company are getting into the free ISP business, click here for details. Offer applies to win32 users only." Probably because Homer uses Windows - and Internet Explorer, of course, because that's the only browser you can use with this service.

387 comments

  1. One word. by rob_from_ca · · Score: 3

    Doh!

  2. Repeat? by gregstoll · · Score: 1

    Was this posted before? I seem to remember seeing this a few days ago...of course, it could be the voices inside my head again...

    Check out Greg's Bridge Page!

    1. Re:Repeat? by Bad_CRC · · Score: 1
      yes. I'm fairly sure I first read about it on /. a few weeks ago. I think it was a post in a thread, though, and not it's own topic.

      I set up my parents with that service (through altavista, who also is just a front-end to 1st up) about a couple of months ago and it works pretty nicely for them. They can spend their 10-15 minutes a week online to check their email or do a little web browsing, and it doesn't cost them anything.

      No complaints from them, except when the time runs out on the ad banner and they get interrupted.

    2. Re:Repeat? by Esjion · · Score: 1

      Yes, it was mentioned in the comments for the article about the Simpson's 10th anniversary (from Jan 14).

  3. wasnt there an episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when homer tries to make money on the internet?

    1. Re:wasnt there an episode by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yea, then he tired to seel out to Bill Gates who had hired thugs trash his office. Rather true to life.... "Well, you didn't think I got rich by writing checks did you?" www.mcicet.com Leave a message!

  4. Buy 'em out boys... by fremen · · Score: 3

    Does this mean that Bill Gates is going to show up with goons and "buy him out?" Can it allow me to download nude pictures of Captain Janeway any faster?

    "Gee, they have the Internet for computers now! What will they think of next?"

    1. Re:Buy 'em out boys... by CleverNickName · · Score: 5
      If you click on the Signup Page, and look at the "small sponsor-oriented navigation bar", you can see that in order to keep your connection alive, you have to click on an ad to refill your "health meter"!

      I think this is only a good idea if you have one of those novelty, drinking birds that Homer used when he worked from home to keep clicking it for you.

    2. Re:Buy 'em out boys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fscking great way to increase your click-through rate. no, not the birdie, the health meter

    3. Re:Buy 'em out boys... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've used several of the free internet access services, and unfortunately all seem to use the same ad-based system. The reason they use Internet Explorer is in the ad bar itself. Each ad is just the standard web banner on top of a mini html page. The program then cycles through the web pages. I know this why? Well, Internet Explorer isn't as stable as those folks would like to believe. I often have blank image icons and messages saying "This page cannot be displayed" blah blah blah. However, you can use the connection just like any other connection (use any browser). I tried playing games... let's just say it is hard to snipe someone with a 700 ping...

  5. MMMmmm....cookies by Tsian · · Score: 2

    It seems quite fitting that homer uses ie. Afterall, he will he get to "doh" at the ever present crashes.
    On the same note, i wonder if homer recomends you accept cookies from strangers...
    ...what about apletts?


    1. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by Ryan+Taylor · · Score: 3

      Now, it should be known that I don't like MS at all. In fact, I am hopefull that we will see Gates and Balmer strung up. But in all objectivity, I should also note that IE4.0-5.0 under NT 4.0 has crashed on me once, /ever/. This excludes plugin related crashes (Flash is evil). I've seen Netscape crash quite regularly under Linux, 98 and NT. Back in the 4.0 days, I was a die-hard Netscape user, if only to protest MS's business practices. I switched because of crashes and have no desire to switch back. I realize your post was essentially just kidding around, but I think this scratches the surface just beneath a serrious problem in the OSS community. It seems that many of us have a knee-jerk reaction for anything Not Good For Open-Source. At some point it becomes just as detramental to our cause as genuine FUD. If we're constantly making desicions/opinions based on history and not the real facts, we're not doing any good for anyone. I realize again that you're probably just joking, and I'm not accusing you specifically of exhibiting the above traits. I just thought I'd speak my mind. An interesting test of my theory will be to see if this gets moderated up or down. =) Sincerely, Ryan Taylor

      --

    2. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right, and it'll be moderated down btw.

      Disagreement is bad. Must... main...tain...closed...mind.

    3. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by pen · · Score: 1
      Just like my experience with IE crashing, your experience with IE not crashing is but a personal experience. IE is only stable if your system is set up exactly the way Microsoft wanted. Personally, I had once-in-a-while IE crashes under Win95 OSR2, and way too many crashes under Win98SE. Under Win98, however, IE would not only crash, but it would have a "looped" GPF, meaning that the GPF message would reappear every time you tried to close it, leaving you no other option but a cold reboot. I have seen several other people report the same problem.

      Under NT4 and NT5, I've had no real problems with IE, except that IE5 refuses to use my proxy. However, I don't use IE very often anymore, as I use Opera for 90% of my browsing.

      --

    4. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by odaiwai · · Score: 2

      Windows 98SE sucks rotten ostrich eggs through the syphillitic pores of a dead badger.
      the only thing stable about it is the box, and even then, only when it's already fallen over.

      dave "And once you go FAT32 you're doomed, I tell ya, doooooomed!"

    5. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by Smack · · Score: 2

      Aha, the looped GPF. I hate that bastard. The funny thing is that I only get it with Netscape on my 2 machines. I guess everyone has different problems...

    6. Re:MMMmmm....cookies by Nastard · · Score: 1

      i think its os dependant. i use nt 4 at work, with ie 5. its never crashed, while the netscape i use there dr watsons VERY frequently.

      i use win98 at home with ie 5. again very stable. so is netscape actually, but im very hard disk space concious, and every time i install something ie5 would magically reinstall.

      i also use linux at home, and netscape has so far been rock solid.

      anyways, im sure lisa uses linux.

  6. Re:Second Post! by Mr+Spot · · Score: 0

    Uh, that's not second post...

    --

    Sigmenation fault.

  7. homer... by leiz · · Score: 1

    homer also has an intel cpu in his head.


    _______________________________________________
    There is no statute of limitation on stupidity.

  8. Mmmmm...ISP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arrrgrhgrghghhhh....

    Second post...woohoo!

  9. I'd be skeptical.... by Mike@Purdue · · Score: 1

    If Homer has anything to do with this, I'd steer WAAAAYYYYYYYYY clear. Imagine happily surfing along and all of the sudden your connection gets dumped. Give a quick ring to tech support, the line gets picked up, and the only thing that you can hear is Homer screaming at the top of his lungs, "Oh, the Humanity!"

    --
    Mike Liska, Electrical Engineering Technology and Computer Engineering Technology Undergrad, Purdue University.
    1. Re:I'd be skeptical.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROFL LOLLOLLOLLOLLOL OH MAN YOU'RE FUNNY

  10. Y com mantequilla tambien by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    coman mierda hijos de puta

    1. Re:Y com mantequilla tambien by hypergeek · · Score: 0
      Es el Señor Cobarde Anónimo, con el corazón de perrrrrrrrrrrrro....

      (It's Mister AC, with the heart of a dog...)

      Please, sir or madam, if you wish to say "eat shit, sons of whore(s)", please utilize a language that the majority of /. (and especially the moderators) can understand and appreciate.

      Muchas gracias, maricón.

      (Lovely... now I'm not sure whether I get marked "Informative" or "Flamebait"...)

      OTOH, people will probably keep trying to post in nonstandard languages... oh well... c'est la vie.

      --
      Stay up hacking each weekend. Sleep is for the week.
    2. Re:Y com mantequilla tambien by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about -1, Dork?

      or -1, Useless Post?

      i'd choose either of those for you
      probably the forner

    3. Re:Y com mantequilla tambien by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      er former

  11. Bill Gates episode by jonathanclark · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of the episode homer starts his own dot com business and Bill Gates comes to shut him down. :)

  12. These won't last. by TheDullBlade · · Score: 3

    There are lots of internet ad-based businesses coming out now, but I don't think they're going to hang around a lot longer. People just don't look at internet ads, and very rarely do they click on them. There is some chance of making money at it with a website that is cheap to run and has thousands and thousands of visitors per month, but there is no way is this advertising worth the cost of running and supporting an internet provider. Advertisers will learn this sooner or later.

    Follow this link for a good article on this.

    --
    /.
    1. Re:These won't last. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That article you mention is dated september 1997, we are in year..uhhhhhhhhh..??.. 2000 i think are we? yes, and lots of websites earn money with ads dude.

    2. Re:These won't last. by Insanik · · Score: 1

      Yes, a lot of websites do make money on ads, but not enough money to make running a ISP worth while. Most of these ad-based companies on the net are loseing money. They are just fighting for market share. So they can have more poeple see the banners. But...

      Tell me how many banner ads you click on or even notice. When I look at a page, I do not even notice the banners or the ads on the side.

    3. Re:These won't last. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is some chance of making money at it with a website that is cheap to run and has thousands and thousands of visitors per month, but there is no way is this advertising worth the cost of running and supporting an internet provider.

      Doh. I guess yahoo.com, cnn.com cost less to run than your average ISP?

    4. Re:These won't last. by Minty+Toothbrush · · Score: 1

      The business that they are in relies on the eventual click leading to an impulse sale, etc.

      This model has been proven successful.

      These systems have been hacked to remove such integrated spam.

      pro for end user: a free dial up connection
      pro for advertiser/provider: generated revenue
      con for end user: integrated spam
      con for advertiser/provider: hacks to system rendering it spamless; majority of bandwidth wasted (this is built into the service they provide, though)

      Should these providers find their niche, they will be a blight on future generations.

      Minty Toothbrush

      .oo.
      ..

      If an infinite number of monkeys typed at an infinte number of

      --


      If an infinite number of monkeys typed at an infinte number of
      computer keyboards, they would all be
    5. Re:These won't last. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I dont click to banners, but some people do i think. I look at some of them. Thats interesting, how much money does Slashdot makes selling banners? Thats a doubt slashdot owners could answer.

    6. Re:These won't last. by Rilke · · Score: 5

      Sure,click-through is low, but what's the click-thru rate on TV advertising? Basically zero. Few TV ads elicit an immediate response, but they manage to put the name of the product in your head.

      The real question is "how much do people notice those ads?" and studies on that are still inconclusive. For some unknown reason, early INet pundits thought that Web ads would be like infomercials, where you immediately call the 800 number (or click through) and order the product.

      But they aren't like that, and nobody should ever have thought they would be. Banner ads are more like billboards; they put the idea and name of the product in the back of your head.

      This idea of click-through has kept web ads restricted to web companies for the most part. But that's changing. We're already seeing significant web advertising budgets coming from the motion picture industry; there's a good chance other industries will follow.

      BTW, simpsons free ISP does more than just try to get banner ad money. It also advertises the Simpsons quite effectively.

      PS. Kinda hard to believe nobody patented the idea of ad-supported ISPs,isn't it?

    7. Re:These won't last. by treke · · Score: 1

      Not quite. I'm sure yahoo.com and cnn.com have thousands and thousands of visitors a day.
      treke

  13. This is odd.. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    I looked at the site, and didn't see any "Used with permission from 20th Century Fox" or similar boilerplate. Their little "bar" has a Fox link, but again, no licence information.

    Is this ISP using the media and characters without permission? 1stup.com doesn't sound like a Fox affiliate, and could be in a bit of trouble if they've not worked out the proper deals.

    Anyways, it looks to be a standard "watch adds, receive free dialup" service.. And, like Altavista's service, it looks to be easily spoofed (just dialup, and have a little daemon pulling certain content :-)).

    Not that I condone that kind of activity.. I'm on a cable modem, after all :)
    ---

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:This is odd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ring, ring. Dork alert!

    2. Re:This is odd.. by QLMD · · Score: 1

      I looked at the site, and didn't see any "Used with permission from 20th Century Fox" or similar boilerplate. Their little "bar" has a Fox link, but again, no licence information.
      However, the offical Simpsons-site has a link to them (the big green button), so it should be offical...

    3. Re:This is odd.. by vectro · · Score: 2

      No, It appears that 1stup.com, which is a free ISP, has a cobranding service that FOX has subscribed to. 1stup uses the simpsons' logo, and FOX gets a cut of the profits.

      It's pretty thinly disguised though. Usually these cobranding things are more hidden - under the fox.com domain, for example.

    4. Re:This is odd.. by Captn+Pepe · · Score: 1

      Anyways, it looks to be a standard "watch adds, receive free dialup" service.. And, like Altavista's service, it looks to be easily spoofed (just dialup, and have a little daemon pulling certain content :-)).

      Sure, but consider who the service is being marketed to. Windows users only, probably the AOL/webTV crowd. Somehow, I suspect that the fraction of this demographic that is both capable of and interested in reverse-engineering their protocol to fake ad-bar feedback is negligible.

      --

      Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
    5. Re:This is odd.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And, like Altavista's service, it looks to be easily spoofed (just dialup, and have a little daemon pulling certain content :-)).

      Problem is, with current judicial precedent (and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act), the above could very well be interpreted as stealing a trade secret in order to obtain pirate Internet access. Can you imagine another flurry of injunctions and court summons being sent to people who have certain "daemons" on their web pages?

    6. Re:This is odd.. by Evro · · Score: 3
      NetZero (hugely popular in NY) can be altered so as not to display any ads by removing one dll file and replacing it with any file with the same name. I know at least 20 people who do this, and who find the ads so annoying that they probably wouldn't use netzero if they had to look at them.

      people always love getting something for nothing, even if it cost nothing to begin with...

      ______________________________________
      um, sigs should be heard and not seen?

      --
      rooooar
  14. The Catch is... by AT · · Score: 2

    The catch is you have to run an advertising bar. Worse, the advertising bar has a "health" meter that slowly decreases unless you interact with the ad bar. Run out of health, get disconnected.

    1. Re:The Catch is... by Mignon · · Score: 1
      a "health" meter that slowly decreases unless you interact with the ad bar

      Am I the only one that thinks this is really an evil Tamagochi plot here?

  15. You don't have to use Internet Explorer. by Rakarra · · Score: 2
    According to the site, you must have Internet Explorer installed, but you can surf with any browser

    Why do you have to have remote access services installed with NT?

    1. Re:You don't have to use Internet Explorer. by B1FFD00D · · Score: 0

      WHAT ABOUT MAC? IS EXPLORER AN ONLY WINDOWS THING NOW?

      I DONT WANT TO MAKE MY VIC-20 CLUSTER RUN WINDOWS NOW. MAC TOOK ME LONG ENOUGH TO RUN.

      --
      I LEFT MY CELL FONE IN PRISON! KAN U HELP???
    2. Re:You don't have to use Internet Explorer. by Caspuh · · Score: 1

      "Remote Access Services" is the NT equivelent of Windows 9x "dial-up networking", so you would need that to dial to the internet.

  16. thats naughty ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    can anyone crack that?

  17. I knew it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another story. Another Windows user bash. Can you accept that all windows user are mindless drones? That there is a reason to use it. (Hmm could that be apps?) Oh well. Slashdot has turned more into a editoral site than a "news" site. I guess this is the face they want to put forth to the masses.

    1. Re:I knew it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bother. If you get any replies other than this one, you'll get something like, "Oh, you're just an AC" or something equally stupid.

      This is the way "Slashdot: News for Narrowminds. Stuff to bash" is.

      Oh, and by the way, did I mention that your post is destined to be -1, Troll?

      Disagree and get moderated down. Agree or be an obvious karma whore and get moderated up. That's how it works around here. Morons galore.

  18. Specifically why advertising here is a waste: by TheDullBlade · · Score: 4

    Click-through value will suck mightily, as customers will be forced by the "health bar" to click through an ad or other button every once in a while, and will immediately return to their previous surfing. This will cost the advertisers money, as wasted bandwidth, not produce additional sales.

    --
    /.
  19. Another of Homer's wacky inventions by SiliconMage · · Score: 1

    You: "How many servers will you have? When will it be ready in Alaska?" Homer: "Can I have my money now?" When you use Homer's ISP, it takes you back in time to the pre-Microsoft era. Remember, any little change you make may effect the Microsoft Monopoly in the the present. (Does your petty codes matter after you die?)

  20. Re:First Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    nice tits

  21. Sounds like a call to hackers by jonathanclark · · Score: 2

    I wonder how they intend to stop hackers from hiding the health bar and sending it auto-click messages?

    1. Re:Sounds like a call to hackers by Pfhreakaz0id · · Score: 2

      Ohhh... you mean like my little VB program that fires up iWon.com every day and racks up my entries by clicking on random links......

  22. hmmm... by BobLenon · · Score: 1

    All i can say .. or quote is...

    Doh!

    --

    /* Lobster Stick To Magnet!*/
  23. heh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and upper management wonders why the engineering dept. considers them inferior.

  24. AOL 5.0 - FAQ uniformity? by joepeg · · Score: 1
    In the FAQ appears:

    Why do I have trouble using the software if I have AOL 5.0 installed?

    Welcome to the new addition to ISP based FAQ's all over the internet.

    --

    ZEN is a prime number in base-36

  25. Actually semi-reliable service... by Dr.+Nonsense · · Score: 2

    Well, in the free ISP biz, you get what you pay for...

    But I have found 1stup.com to be one of the more reliable free ISP services.. and I have experience with a bunch of them. Of course, your mileage may vary based on your location, dialup, and network traffic...

    I am using altavista's free ISP which is a co-branded 1stup.com offering. They have free tech support, and the one time after a new upgrade when I was having trouble with the behaviour of their software and the connection, the guy was very friendly, understanding, and helpful; they were also quite aware of the problem and it was fixed shortly thereafter. [note I do not work for them, have no connection with them other than using them as an ISP.]

    Lately, (for a month and a half) it has been the most reliable free ISP out of all the ones I have tried. And I have tried:netzero, yahoo-bluelight, freei.net... I also have experience with a friend's free-pc, which is pretty good, but since they no longer are offering free computers OR free access to new customers, that is kind of meaningless at this point.

    My personal suggestion is to try them all, starting with NetZero - NetZero has an easy 5-disk sneakernet install that is easy to download and install on a computer that does not have any access yet, and go from there..

    I'll be using free ISPs until I save up and/or decide to dive in for the Cable Modem or DSL line. And yes, I'm using windoze.

    1. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by NatePWIII · · Score: 1

      Have you given www.freewwweb.com a try. They don't have a silly pop banner. Its just like a regular ISP that you pay for.


      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      NPS Internet Solutions, LLC

      --

      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      www.haidacarver.com
    2. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stop spamming with your crappy ass free ISP, you fucking queer!

    3. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by gabrielm · · Score: 1

      try worldspy.net it's reliable, fast speed, hardly any busy signals. the catch is, you have to create your account using windows with IE4 (IE3 wouldn't let me in). once you create your account and use their fancy doodad setup program to dial in the first time it creates a dialup networking applet thing, with an almost random username listed. they use regular pap-authentication so you can dial in with it in linux/mac/fbsd or regular dial up networking in windows ;)

      --
      i thought I had no sig?
    4. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by NatePWIII · · Score: 0

      Take a valium or something. Better yet hop on one of those websites with Natalie Portman (why I don't know, but it seems to be a fad here at /.) and chill out for awhile. No one is spamming here we are just trying to give our honest input. Learn to respect the opinions of others and maybe you will get some respect as well. Would you say something like this to your grandmother or your boss??
      Let's try to make slashdot a better site, with less vulgarity and hate. I get embarrassed to come to this site when messages like this are present. Sometimes my wife likes to read over my shoulder, so cool it down a notch. Thank-you.


      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      NPS Internet Solutions, LLC

      --

      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      www.haidacarver.com
    5. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make slashdot a better site? This coming from a poster with the default score of zero... the irony is killing me.

    6. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No one is spamming here we are just trying to give our honest input.

      If you didn't keep harping on the same free ISP, this might be believable.

      Let's try to make slashdot a better site, with less vulgarity and hate. I get embarrassed to come to this site when messages like this are present. Sometimes my wife likes to read over my shoulder, so cool it down a notch.

      Oh please. You don't really care about the vulgarity. You're just afraid that once your wife figures out that nobody respects you, she too will cease to respect you, and start fucking the mailman.

    7. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by warpeightbot · · Score: 1
      Well, in the free ISP biz, you get what you pay for...
      Ummm, well, that's just the problem, isn't it? You can get your bitpipe for free, but you have to bow down before the altar of Redmond and pay them copious amounts of gold coin in order to make your computer run at all, and then you have to spend more money in the form of blood, sweat, and tears dealing with system crashes, eaten registrys, viruses, ad infinitum, nauseumque.... and that's just to get the chance to click on the stupid banner ads.

      No, thankee. Me, I pay for my bits, but my operating system, and several others like and unlike it, is free, my tools are free, my security needs are met in a timely manner, my computer doesn't get viruses or eat its (non-existient) registry; and I will soon be installing a (free!) tool to make my surfing more or less banner-free. (not totally so; there are a few sites whose banners I'm deliberately going to allow thru; this one among them, because I want Taco to be able to feed himself.)

      Yeah, you get what you pay for. I pay for what I want: a bitpipe, and good tech support for it (i.e. NOT the ILEC.... but don't get me started on that topic...). I don't have to pay for my OS, any of my software, or (in wasted bandwidth) ads I don't want. (As far as tech support for my OS, well, that's between my ears, mostly; I have a piece of paper with a Red Hat on it that says so.)

      I, for one, like it that way. YMMV.

      --
      Warp Eight Bot, RHCE
      (but not averse to *BSD or Be either)
    8. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      You have posted a "first post" comment in another discussion. For this crime, you will be submitted to the "AC flame of death" until such time as you are judged fit to post normally, or I get tired of sogging your sorry ass. Next time, think before hitting submit.

      [FLAME ON]
      gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! gabrielm is fucking GAY! He's such a fucking PUSSY! He molests little girls, the fucking PERVERT! He doesn't deserve the air he's fucking BREATHING! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE! What a fucking MORON! He's such a complete ASSHOLE! His parents must have been fucking CRAZY to produce such a total LOSER! He should just put himself out of his misery and DIE! gabrielm DIE DIE DIE!
      [FLAME OFF]

    9. Re:Actually semi-reliable service... by gabrielm · · Score: 1

      whats even funnier is that it's OH so true!

      --
      i thought I had no sig?
  26. Re:YASCBR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    hahah no shit

    Roblimo blows

    FUCK A ROBLIMO

  27. The article's predictions are quite accurate. by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    And the points it makes are still valid (read through his more recent articles, and you'll hear him say "told you so!" several times).

    Typical click-through rates have fallen to under 0.5%, and are continuing to fall. Advertising networks are shifting to pay-per-click systems, from pay-per-impression ones.

    And the vast majority websites which advertise make pocket change with it (I remember banner advertising network uses the slogan "it's found money!"). The reason so many sites advertise is because it's free and easy to do so, and if it brings in some cash, great! A very tiny proportion of them actually support employees and such producing the content. Profitable websites are mostly ones which leverage the work of others (no offense, but /. is just such a one; it's the posters who create 95% of the value).

    --
    /.
    1. Re:The article's predictions are quite accurate. by Mark+J+Tilford · · Score: 1
      < /. is just such a one; it's the posters who create 95% of the value).>>

      This reminds me of one of the articles on selfpromotion.com (disclaimer: I am not affiliated with said site in any way.) The author described his experiences with various kinds of internet advertising, and found that 'random' advertising gathered lousy clickthroughs, while advertisements on sites with related subjects did better.
      -----------

      --
      -----------
      100% pure freak
  28. Yet Another One by Captn+Pepe · · Score: 1
    This is just one of a whole slew of such businesses popping up these days. It's really not too surprising that it's only available to users of win32 -- it's by far the largest market, especially considering the fraction of MS customers used to putting up with such things as compared to, e.g., Linux/Be/MacOS/non-market-dominating-OS-of-choice users.

    You wouldn't really think that such services would make any money, but we all know that AOL made heaps of cash, even when the transition to flat-rate service was pinching their subscription-fee cash flow. If they can even provice comparable service to AOL, but for free, they might just do alright. Frankly, AOL's interface (esp. after v5) sounds plenty worse than an ad bar floating on my desktop. Sure, I wouldn't put up with it, but it's not exactly being marketed to me, either.

    Disclaimer: I'm on a school net, and hardly in need of a dialup ISP.

    --

    Quantum mechanics: the dreams that stuff is made of.
    1. Re:Yet Another One by vectro · · Score: 2

      Of course, one reason why they might not want to support Free Software like linux is that you could connect their bar to an X driver for /dev/null, and rig something so it would think you were interacting with it. Then you could use their service without viewing the ads, which would end up making their enterprise useless.

      Plus, linux users probably use more bandwidth on average. Though I'm surprised macs aren't listed for this reason.

    2. Re:Yet Another One by aliebrah · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure about this... a lot of Linux users (I am a happy Windows 2000 user) claim to use Lynx to browse the web because it is so 'fast' and 'convenient'. How they put up with such an abominable interface is beyond me, but they do. There has been a cool invention in the 1960s called a 'mouse'. Its useful for 'pointing' and 'clicking' - something many Linux users (mostly server admins) have not yet learnt to master, else they would know that pointing and clicking is MUCH faster than pressing a whole shitload of keys to do something.

      Back to the point: Lynx - no images - no bandwidth.

    3. Re:Yet Another One by Acronym · · Score: 1

      Lynx has a *very* nice interface IMHO. Show me another web-browser that is;

      a) usable over SSH where X is not available;

      b) operable with exactly four keys for most normal purposes;

      c) can be used where your system is so badly screwed that you can't get X to display locally.

      Anyway, there are lynx-alikes (eg w3m, links) which DO have mouse support.

      Thus, you lose graphics (which for certain sites is a distinct advantage), and plugins (which are very rarely have anything of interest anyway).

      Also, using the keys IS faster; it means you have to learn keystrokes, but I spent most of the summer using Microsoft Word as a secretary (audio/copy typing), and it is radically faster to use hotkeys than to take your hands off the keyboard. Mice are good for lowering the entry barrier to computer use, but they are no panacea.

  29. First Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you suck.

    1. Re:First Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i suck on big cocks and i like it hehe

  30. A truly frightening thought by Dannon · · Score: 2

    Consider the following: Bill Gates and Montgomery Burns, teamed up in the internet business....

    Burns: Who is that man, Smithers?
    Smithers: It's, ahhh, Homer Simpson, sir. The irresponsible network administrator responsible for the twenty system outages this week.
    Burns: Ah, yes. Keep up the good work, Simpson!

    ---
    To continue, please press any key.... Which key's the 'any' key??

    --
    Good judgment comes from experience.
    Experience comes from bad judgment.
  31. My Recommendation by NatePWIII · · Score: 0

    As far as Free ISP's go I would recommend Freewwweb.com
    I've been using them for over a year now at home and they haven't failed me yet. No charge, no stupid banner to steal your bandwidth, and a fast 56k connection.
    Free ISP's are old news, they're a dime-a-dozen anymore.


    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    NPS Internet Solutions, LLC

    --

    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    www.haidacarver.com
    1. Re:My Recommendation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please. Spare us the advertising.

      Thanks.

  32. Re:hah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you = dumbass

  33. Comic Guy from Homer's Internet Business episode. by Giant+Robot · · Score: 0

    CBG (Comic Book Guy) sits at his computer

    CBG: Oh, Captain Janeway. Lace: The Final Brassiere. Oh hurry up, I'm a busy man. Ugh, this high-speed modem is intolerably slow. (The download is interrupted by a banner advertisement) Hey, what the? Huh, the Internet King. I wonder if he can provide faster nudity.

    (scene changes to Homer's office)

    Homer: Welcome to the internet my friend, how can I help you?

    CBG: I'm interested in upgrading my twenty eight point eight kilobaud internet connection to a one point five megabit fibre-optic T-1 line. Will you be able to provide an IP router that's compatable with my token ring ethernet LAN configuration?

    Homer: (after long pause) Can I have some money now?

    oh the memories...

  34. Roblimo blows by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you are fired from /.!!

  35. Yeah! see quote from comment #60!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    from subject.

  36. Free ISP... only fools use or provide them by United+Fools · · Score: 1
    A free ISP named after a fool? Either the providers are fools, or the users are being fooled. See, fools are found donzens a day... Being foolish is becoming fashionable.

    Oh, wait... I forget I am a fool...

    --

    Fools of America, unite! Join the

  37. Re:Buy 'em out boys... (birdies) by chialea · · Score: 1

    there is a thing like the birdies -- or indeed several of 'em. I don't know much about them personally, but my boyfriend uses them with his free isp and get-paid-to-click services.

    might be worth it with a script like that. now all someone needs to do is figure out how to emulate the software for linux/bsd/mac/solaris/irix/xxxx :)

    Lea

  38. Who cares? by Nazrac · · Score: 1

    By merit of the simple fact that they are already on the web(how else could they view slashdot?), I don't think that most slashdotters have grounds for complaints. I know *I* have *my* internet access already, and it's cable. Why would I want "free"(except for the fact that you sell your privacy and soul to advertisers) internet access? You get what you pay for. TANTAAFL. Whatever. Get a damned job.

    1. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All that free ISPs are used for is anonymous surfing and spamming.

      BTW, www.nocharge.com is anonymous and no banners (not like that matters). Great for spamming heheh

    2. Re:Who cares? by Nazrac · · Score: 1

      >All that free ISPs are used for is anonymous
      >surfing and spamming.
      >
      >BTW, www.nocharge.com is anonymous and no banners >(not like that matters). Great for spamming heheh
      That's exactly my point. You can give them false info, from a public terminal, and have an account to freely abuse. Not that anyone with an IQ greater than that of a banana slug couldn't get someone else's account info anyway, but this lowers the bar by a large amount.

      As for spamming, PLEASE don't do it. I know my pleas will fall on deaf ears, but if there is any shred of humanity in you, STOP. The original spirit of the internet is being killed quickly enough by commercialization that your actions could hurt things a LOT more than you think.

    3. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you think I meant spamming Slashdot, then no. That's only doable (tolerably) on a high speed connection. Unless it's a bot (that works too).

      Basically, I use free ISPs for doing things I shouldn't be doing without getting in trouble. It saves a few minutes that it'd take to "steal" an account, and you don't hurt anyone's feelings (tee hee).

    4. Re:Who cares? by Nazrac · · Score: 1

      No, I didn't mean Slashdot. It's done a fairly good job of turning into shit on its own. Since I started reading it, in early 1998, it has steadily worsened in quality. I'm not just talking about the users, either. The editorial bias of this site is(I feel) much stronger than it used to be.

      But I digress. I am against spam in all of its forms. Really, I would almost prefer that you break into sites, so long as you didn't deface their web pages.

  39. AHHHHH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!! d0n7 5cAr3 mEz l1k3 d4t d00d!

  40. Re:fags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please do so. Do it like you did it here, daddy http://slashdot.org /article.pl?sid=00/01/22/0853212&mode=nested!!!!!! !!!

  41. And we thought Intel was OS-indifferent... by LocalYokel · · Score: 3
    As we all know, Homer's brain was replaced by the "powerful" Intel(r) Pentium(r) II processor about a year ago, hence the creation of the so-called "super" doughnut... Perhaps he's a fatality of the overclocking craze and has a fried core?

    --

    --

    --
    E2 IN2 IE?

    1. Re:And we thought Intel was OS-indifferent... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please, spare us the lame jokes.

    2. Re:And we thought Intel was OS-indifferent... by sundling · · Score: 1

      Maybe it is time he should upgrade his brain to an athlon. :)

  42. Quiero taco bell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    uhh.. mister babelfish thanks for traducing that to us, now we can laugh.

  43. ! 0wN j3W by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    pH345 M3 50b|iM0 !!

    1. Re:! 0wN j3W by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TELL US HOW YOU OWN US
      TELL US, PLEASE
      PLEASE TELL US OH PLEASE

      PLEASE SPAM
      PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

      SPAM LIKE YOUR DADDY TAUGHT YOU TO
      LINE AFTER LINE
      AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASPAM FOR US DADDY
      SPAM FOR US

  44. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think it's a .sig. Note the "---."

    Also, that's a bad quote of the line. While I don't remember the line exactly, it was way different from that (same idea though).

  45. Studies are not inconclusive. by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    Bad studies rate advertising on the web as good for branding. They ask the user to look at websites they wouldn't normally look at, and with no purpose beyond "evaluating" them. The bored user looks at the most interesting thing on the page: the banner advertisements.

    Good studies give people access to the web and let people screw around and do whatever they want (or at least give them realistic tasks to perform), while tracking which ads were viewed. The result: web surfers never even look at ads, unless they are really bored or the ads are cleverly disguised in a form the viewer hasn't seen. Believe the data.

    Claiming that because studies disagree they are, as a whole, inconclusive is a well known logical fallasy (the name of which escapes me).

    --
    /.
    1. Re:Studies are not inconclusive. by Rilke · · Score: 2
      Believe the data.

      I would, except that the link you provided didn't reference a study. The InternetWorld "study" was purely anecdotal. I'd be interested in seeing the studies you're referring to though.

      But I'm not denying that most banner ad campaigns are failures - so are most e-commerce companies. That doesn't mean there's no market there; just that it's brand new and most companies don't use it correctly.

      For example, why are movie companies suddenly pouring money into web ad research? Two words: "Blair Witch". And more importantly, there's more to web advertising than the banner ad idea. Free ISPs are one attempt, for example.

    2. Re:Studies are not inconclusive. by weave · · Score: 2
      ...web surfers never even look at ads, unless they are really bored or the ads are cleverly disguised in a form the viewer hasn't seen

      I used to believe this myself, until an experience this past week convinced me otherwise.

      I manage the web site for a local public transit organization on the side: DART First State. We sponsor Operation Snowflake at a local radio station. Operation Snowflake reports school and business closings when the weather sucks.

      As part of that sponsorship, we got banner ads on that operation snowflake page. Nothing big and exciting at all. Doesn't even offer anything.

      Well, on Jan 20 (a snow day here with 3-4 inches), traffic to the transit web site doubled and hit a new high which hasn't been seen since we were giving away free bus tickets for visiting the site last July. I greped the logs and found that more than half of the traffic could be tracked back to that banner ad on the radio website. Each visitor, once on the site, on average visited four other pages.

      Best I can guess is the following occured a lot:

      1. "Oh flock(), it's snowing out"
      2. "Let's see if my work is closed." Goes to radio web site
      3. "Doh, no such luck. But wait, there's an ad for DART. Maybe I'll take the bus."
      4. Clicks on banner to check out bus schedules
      5. "Doh, nearest bus to my house is five miles away. Hell with it, I'm driving."
  46. Re:Comic Guy from Homer's Internet Business episod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Haha, offtopic.

    Nice job, moderator.

    No, really. Nice trolling.

  47. My own take on the situation.. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

    He mentions negative margins a lot.. And he's right.. You do run Internet Junkbuster, don't you?

    "Typical click-through rates have fallen to under 0.5%, and are continuing to fall. Advertising networks are shifting to pay-per-click systems, from pay-per-impression ones."

    Which is much worse, as it forces users to load things without them really wanting to (in most cases).. Kinda like those popup windows you find on "shadier" sites, like Netscape.com. Portals? Basically repackaged push that doesn't require a special client.

    "The reason so many sites advertise is because it's free and easy to do so, and if it brings in some cash, great! "

    This is why things like Cybergold or AllAdvantage are starting up. Paying a person for advertising impressions.. They are trivially defeated, of course, as you can't ever trust a client on a nonsecure machine :^)

    What they don't seem to understand is that advertisements don't work, and never really did. Now adays, it's easy for a person who recognises a need to go out and find information on products. Need some way of turning off lights remotely, and don't like "the clapper" ? Simply go and find a site about .X10. No need to advertise, as most people will find the information themselves through a convienient search engine. So, if not to inform, what purpose do adds serv? They serv only to create want and need, and unless you're the mental age of a 10-year-old, they won't work on you.. Only the momentum of the "consumerism" of the 1950s through 1980s keeps people advertising in this day and age. I can't wait for it to die.
    ---

    --
    --
    Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    1. Re:My own take on the situation.. by BinxBolling · · Score: 1
      So, if not to inform, what purpose do adds serv? They serv only to create want and need, and unless you're the mental age of a 10-year-old, they won't work on you.

      I'm afraid you're being incredibly optimistic here. Can you realistically say that most advertising exists to inform consumers of a products' existence? I don't think so. How many people do you think are unaware of the existence of Coca-Cola? If they were to cut their advertising budget in half, would there be a significant drop in their brand recognition? I doubt it.

      Only the momentum of the "consumerism" of the 1950s through 1980s keeps people advertising in this day and age.

      In his book Democracy In America, Alexis De Toqueville commented on how pervasive he found commercial advertising to be in the US. He was writing in first part of the 19th century. Advertising has been with us since long before the 1950s.

      I can't wait for it to die.

      I can, but only because I'm afraid I don't have much choice about it.

    2. Re:My own take on the situation.. by Jett · · Score: 1

      Advertising will never end, it is an integral component of the current system. You take away the constant brainwashing and the drones will start to wake up. I really don't think they want the drones to wake up.

    3. Re:My own take on the situation.. by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

      "How many people do you think are unaware of the existence of Coca-Cola? If they were to cut their advertising budget in half, would there be a significant drop in their brand recognition? I doubt it."

      Which is why I said:
      "What they don't seem to understand is that advertisements don't work, and never really did. Now adays, it's easy for a person who recognises a need to go out and find information on products. "

      The Coke adds do not serve to inform the potential customer. The market has been saturated for years, and no one is going to leave their favourite brands because of that silly lady who sips an obviously marked cup of a certain fizzy beverage, and then expresses pleasure through cooing (gack, I want to retch just thinking of it). They merely serve to reinforce the belief by existing users that their choice was right. Another example of the same is that a survey found that people who had bought brand X of automobile felt a lot better watching advertisements about it (especially the overly positive ones). Advertisements no longer teach or inform, they merely reinforce consumerism. "Gee, it sure was great I bought that thing. I'm such a smart, sexy person for doing it. Look at the other smart, sexy people enjoying these same products. I think I'll go buy more, I feel soo good."



      "In his book Democracy In America, Alexis De Toqueville commented on how pervasive he found commercial advertising to be in the US. He was writing in first part of the 19th century. Advertising has been with us since long before the 1950s."

      I agree. However, back in the early 20th, advertisments were less instrusive (compared to now). Gee, was that an X automobile being driven by that handsome movie star in that movie? Wow, Neo sure does like X brand of cola. Hmm, what brand of cellphone was that again? Let's all go to the lobby, and buy more popcorn. The subliminal advertisements tell me to. Wow, time to reduce the amount of time spent on the episode -- more good commercials are comming along. (Speaking of commercials, have you noticed how US TV averages between 2.4 and 2.9 minutes vs 1.7 to 2.2 minutes of advertisement time on Canadian TV?)

      When some store (can't remember which) wanted to spread their name around the small city of New York, they purchased branded umbrellas and gave them to street vendors. This helped the vendors, who now had protection from the weather, and helped the consumers, who became aware of a new store that could serve their needs. Cities like New York couldn't have grown without ideas like that. Now, however, it's increasingly easy for the customer to evaluate their own needs, and select the appropriate solution with little effort. Without advertisements. If I go to a website to buy something, I don't need to see unrelated advertisements that waste my bandwidth and CPU time. A related products link could be tasteful, though.

      I'm hopeful that a nice device to screen out TV advertisements will be available soon. Look at the Tivo, it's certainly possible to do it for prerecorded programs. I'd certainly pay to not see commercials. Heck, I might even watch more TV... then again, it's increasingly banal bullshit (especially stuff like "Who wants to be a millionaire?"). Oh well, at least I can still watch the Simpsons.
      ---

      --
      --
      Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    4. Re:My own take on the situation.. by -brazil- · · Score: 1
      Can you realistically say that most advertising exists to inform consumers of a products' existence? I don't think so.

      Oh, but they do. Even perfectly sane and intelligent people who are totally convinced that they don't let themselves be influenced by ads are much more inclined to buy something if they've heard about it before, and prefer it to the unknown brand. Amn is a creature of habit.

      --

      The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
      --Henry Kissinger

    5. Re:My own take on the situation.. by BinxBolling · · Score: 1

      So, if not to inform, what purpose do adds serv? They serv only to create want and need, and unless you're the mental age of a 10-year-old, they won't work on you..

      Advertisements no longer teach or inform, they merely reinforce consumerism.

      We seem to be having a basic misunderstanding. As I see it, there are 3 possible explanations for the huge amount of advertising that is done:

      1. Because it informs consumers of products' existence.
      2. Because it enforces consumerism - i.e. convinces (via appeal to reason or gut reaction) people that they need to purchase your product.
      3. Because advertisers have been convinced that it is necessary, when in fact it isn't.

      I think we can agree that the answer isn't really #1 - only a small amount of advertising is justified for the purpose of informing consumers. In the comment I originally responded to, you seemed to be advocating #3 - you said that creating wants and needs only worked on mental-10-year-olds, and that advertising didn't really work. This is where my disagreement lies - I do think that advertising works to create wants and needs on the general public, and not because most members of the general public have a mental age of 10. Or at least, television and radio advertising works this way - mainly because it's so intrusive, compared to a banner or billboard, which someone can easily look away from.

      I agree. However, back in the early 20th, advertisments were less instrusive (compared to now).

      I do agree that there has been a shift in the common view of marketing in the last 50 years or so. There was a recent article in Newsweek whose existence serves as rather nice evidence of such a shift: The article was all about how Toyota was working to improve its image in the eyes of younger drivers - apparently the median age of Toyota drivers is fairly high. The article talked about how they'd hired a squad of hip young ad designers, about new designs they were coming out with, and so on - various people from Toyota commented, in an official capacity, on this new campaign. What's interesting here is that they are utterly shameless about the fact that they are attempting to manipulate people - they're happy to talk to Newsweek about their strategies for doing this. 50 years ago, I'm guessing that most companies would want to keep quiet about such strategies - letting it be known how consciously they were working to manipulate the consumer would lead to a backlash from consumers who didn't like being manipulated. But today, you can find articles like the Toyota one in any weekly newsmagazine.

      (Speaking of commercials, have you noticed how US TV averages between 2.4 and 2.9 minutes vs 1.7 to 2.2 minutes of advertisement time on Canadian TV?)

      Well, noticing this this would require that I own a television. ;) I got rid of mine a few months ago. And I never watched Canadian TV even when I had one. However, when in Brussels a year ago, I found it really interesting to watch US imports (specifically, the Simpsons) with all the commercials cut out. A scene would end with a minor cliffhanger, in a way that was obviously meant to be followed by a commercial. And then it would cut immediately to the following scene, with the cliffhanger's resolution.

  48. Re:TROLLIN FOR REVERSIBLE COMPUTING by Doug+Merritt · · Score: 0
    That doesn't even begin to work, to solve those issues.

    It is inescapable that full computational power requires increased entropy, in the general case. Just look at the most productive logic circuits known to be fully general, such as NAND, and you'll see that reversibility requires 1 state-save-bit to be saved for every output bit. Computations where 2 input bits yield one output bit are not reversible, in most cases, unless extra information is saved on every such computation.

    This means that, for every N cycles of operation, at best you can expect to store N bits in order to allow reversibility, for every N cycles of operation of a universal 2-input gate.

    A pentium probably uses...oh...let's say one million gates per clock cycle, on average. To make this reversible would mean saving one million bits per cycle.

    A gigahertz pentium (to be released later this year) would thus require a quadrillion bits of storage per SECOND in order to be reversible.

    When I have brought up this kind of objection over the last decade to fans of reversible computing and fans of low kT computing, etc, the usual rejoinder has been that the aim is not full reversibility, that's just a theoretical model that represents an unobtainable best case. A real world case would simply use all of these issues as a guideline, and would not truly be fully reversible nor would it actually attain these ultimate thermodynamical/information-theoretical limits. Instead, the goal would be to vastly reduce power, and/or clock, and indeed saved bits would be thrown away every so often (maybe once per second), and the system would enjoy the benefits of reversibility over short periods of time, not over indefinite periods of time.

    Ok. That may well be extremely useful.

    But that's still a far cry from the wilder claims that don't take reality into account: It is impossible to compute general functions (in any 20th century sense) with reversible computing that has finite memory -- as any real world system must).

    The conclusion is that reversible computing may gain efficiency, but cannot break limits in computational power (that is, cannot change the apparent fact that P != NP).

    Perhaps quantum computers can give that, if entanglement can be solved.

    Cheers, Doug

    --
    Professional Wild-Eyed Visionary
  49. Re:TROLLIN FOR REVERSIBLE COMPUTING by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trolling a troll is never funny.

    I'm sorry. You get an F. And an S, for Stupidity.

    Thank you, come again.

  50. how by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how is this funny

    this is dumb not funny

  51. what so great about it ? by serialk · · Score: 1


    nothing original or creative in it ?

    1. Re:what so great about it ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nothing.

      this is just another lame ass, buttfuck article by Roblimo.

  52. Isn't really an ISP, seems to me. by Asparfame · · Score: 1
    It looks to me as if they just provide http access. I don't know how they can do that exactly, but the FAQ says usenet doesn't work, so I don't see why anything else would. Furthermore, they wouldn't get any benefit out of the banners if you were using your access to play quake or something.

    Side Note: The FAQ also says that all traffic is monitored so they can "tailor" their advertising banners. That probably doesn't sit too well with folks around here.

    This is pretty base commercialism on the part of the Simpsons. They seem to have lost any counterculture satirical edge they may once have had. Now they're just another plastic lunchbox.

    --

    There's no reason for a sig here.

    1. Re:Isn't really an ISP, seems to me. by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      >>They seem to have lost any counterculture satirical edge they may once have had. Now they're just another plastic lunchbox.

      My my.. how quickly people forget. The simpsons were never about counterculture. As soon as they came on the air (way back in '90), we were bombarded by t-shirts, hats, toys, and yes, i had a plastic lunchbox. Anyone remember the "bartman"? Matt Groening never had a problem selling all this. If anyone, it is Fox that has become more restrictive of the simpsons products as their popularity has skyrocketed. I love all my simpsons junk. I don't particularily want the ISP, but i say, give it a shot. Its an interesting theme.

  53. That episode PISSED ME FUCKING OFF!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's NO SUCH THING as "token ring ethernet," what kind of crack is that fat mother smoking???

    Shows like that are a BAD INFLUENCE on our children. They'll grow up and get MCSE's and think that "token ring ethernet" is a real thing.

  54. Re:Your the dork here! by TummyX · · Score: 0

    If you want to call anyone a dork, make sure you say "You're" and not "Your".

  55. Roblimo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hahahaha Roblamo ROFL hahahaha ROBLAMO LOLLLOLLORLFLORLFORLFO

    Roblamo!

  56. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, I did say "you're" (as in "you are").

    Dumbass.

    By the way, you're a dork too.

  57. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just noticed the subject.

    That's really weird. I didn't type that.

    In any case, you'd think you'd be smart enough to see that, considering how in the body I wrote it correctly, that might have been a typo.

    But I didn't write that. Wonder how that subject got in there. Hrm. Weird.

  58. Q2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:Q2 by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      Hey, Q! Someone is dissing you and your continuum...

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  59. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, yes I did!

    OMG I HAVE MULTIPLE PERSONALITY DISORDER.

  60. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I could swear I didn't, but I did.

    I didn't even write the first one. I WROTE THE SIG ONE. Oh man. I am gay!

  61. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    jizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

  62. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sex-o-MATIC baby

  63. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MMMM YEAH SHOOT IT ALL OGER MY FACE @%$@#

  64. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOUR ALL DORKS

  65. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOUR ALL THE REAL DORKD

  66. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a

  67. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    b

  68. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c

  69. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    d

  70. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    e

  71. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    f

  72. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    g

  73. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h

  74. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i

  75. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    j

  76. !z j00r n@m3 50b|im0���� by broot · · Score: 0

    I !n7 7hiNk 5Ø L@m3R!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  77. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    k

  78. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    l

  79. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    m

  80. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n

  81. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    o

  82. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    p

  83. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    q

  84. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YOU GUYS ARE Q: UEERS

  85. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    r

  86. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    s

  87. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    t

  88. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    u

  89. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    v

  90. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    w

  91. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    x

  92. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    y

  93. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    z

  94. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was fun! :)

  95. Important Slashdot question, please help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I saw something interesting in the "Random" Slashbox, but I accidently clicked through to something else before I could click on it, and now it's gone.

    I know where was some kind of "Slashdot Cheesy Portal" site, something like http://slashdot.org/cheesyportal (that's not it, but it was something like that) that showed EVERY Slashbox on one web page. Does anyone PLEASE have the URL of that site? I really need to find that Slashbox again!!!!

    1. Re:Important Slashdot question, please help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off!

  96. fUx�r Al3R7!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    j00 5uXØrZ!!!

  97. Not really by zyqqh · · Score: 1

    Case study: shareware. It has existed for over two decades until being effectively over-shadowed by opensource. Hordes of cr4ck3rz were churning out cracks on a regular basis. Did that stop anyone from writing shareware? Not really. The average consumer never really delved into the black-hat world, never heard of (let alone used) the cracks, and really didn't care less about a $20 fee for a decent piece of software.

    Same is happenning with the banners. Yea, there're some of us out there messing with little mouse-movement macro utils and variations thereof to turn off annoying ads. So what? Ten times as many users will never have heard of these techniques. And even if they had -- the advertisers wouldn't notice until much later, and they'd still pay for click-thrus. The whole system, it seems to me, rests on two basic human characteristics -- laziness and stupidity. No, scratch that, just one -- laziness. The rest is being too lazy to go out and learn how to get around the minor annoyances which are the banner ads.

    --
    // zyqqh
  98. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah..funny

  99. G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:G by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MONKEY MONKEY

  100. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually I said fun, but funny works too!

    tee-hee-hee

  101. Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....or ELSE.

    1. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck yeah!

      I'll jam a stick in your uretha!

    2. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1

    3. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2

    4. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      3

    5. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      4

    6. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      5

    7. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      7

    8. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      8

    9. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      9

    10. Re:Answer the question..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      10

  102. VIC-20 BEOWULFS by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

    *chuckle*

    Probably the only post on the page that made me laugh....

    --Joe
    --
    1. Re:VIC-20 BEOWULFS by B1FFD00D · · Score: 1

      THANK U. THEY ALL KALLED ME A "TR0LL". THEY DONT LIKE FUNNY STUFF HERE

      I L00KED AT Y0R PAGE AND I DIDNT THINK IT WAS THAT K00L EITHER HEY U R0TE THAT K-RAD "IM14U2C" TEXT SCROLLY WITH THE GL0BE AND THE CASTLE--IT WAS K-K00L AWESUM!

      U SHUD HAVE THAT ON UR PAGE AND THEN ITD BE K-RAD K-K00L AGAIN ID RUN IT 0N MY VIC-20 BEOWULF FOR A SCREENSAVUR BUT IT G0ES TOO FAST :(

      --
      I LEFT MY CELL FONE IN PRISON! KAN U HELP???
  103. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns.

  104. Roblimo is an asshole - three dumb stories high. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid freaking moron.

  105. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    aa


  106. Re:Roblimo is an asshole - three dumb stories high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid freaking moron.

  107. Re:Roblimo is an asshole - three dumb stories high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stupid freaking moron. Stupid freaking moron.

  108. Yeah baby. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stup id freaking moron.

  109. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    aaaaaa

  110. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    aaa

  111. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    aaaaa


  112. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    aaaaaaaaa

  113. I FOUND IT!!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Cheesy Portal page is here:
    http://slashdot.org/cheesyportal.pl

    The Article I was looking for was here:
    http://www.32bitsonline.com/news.php3?news=news/ 200001/NB200001212&page=1

    Hooray for the Cheesy Portal!

  114. Re:homer has an intel cpu in his head by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unfortunately its a 4004

  115. (Free ISPs and) other "deals"... by locutus074 · · Score: 3
    Interesting. Makes me wonder why I haven't seen http://www.freedsl.com/ on Slashdot yet. :)

    If I'm not mistaken, Gateway and others have, for a little while, at least, been giving a year's worth of "free" access with the purchase of certain models from them.

    Like many others around here, I don't expect this trend to disappear any time soon. How many co-branded credit cards are there, anyway?

    One positive thing about their service is that although you have to use Win32, you get a choice of email clients, which is more than I can say for MSN (yes, I fell for that trap). You see, I didn't like the way Outlook Express handled replies (the Right Way (IMO) is to put the reply and signature after the quoted text), so I downloaded Netscape and gave it a try. Imagine my surprise when it failed to connect and retrieve my email! I checked and compared between the MS and Netscape, and the only significant difference between the two configuration screens was an option for something called Secure Password Authentication. I later found a HOWTO-like document telling how to access MSN from Linux. (I became interested in Linux after I got my computer and fell for the trap.) It turns out that UUNet actually provides the connectivity. A couple items in the document explained things, though:

    If you've ever looked at your internet address, you may have noticed that it ends in uu.net. Now we know that we don't have to deal with any proprietary Microsoft protocols (at least to connect).
    and (near the end):
    Well, you should be able to enjoy most of your MSN account now. You can't get your email yet because thats hidden behind Microsoft's SPA.
    Things seem to be turning out all right, though, as I've just started a new job at an ISP (and get free access (even DSL after I've been there a little bit!)), and MSN has been unable to charge my credit card (tee hee!). (They haven't mentioned anything about the $400 yet. I've got to check my contract, though, after that Slashdot story a couple weeks back -- one of the postings told of someone in Columbus, OH who was able to get out of his contract with no strings attached!)

    Alas, I fear I've started to ramble. Perhaps a combination of sleep deprivation and caffeine OD.

    --
    This post brought to you by the elements N, H, C, and O, and the alkaloid caffeine.

    --

    --
    We have fought the AC's, and they have won.

    1. Re:(Free ISPs and) other "deals"... by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

      "Interesting. Makes me wonder why I haven't seen http://www.freedsl.com/ on Slashdot yet. :)"

      Noveltly.

      The Simpsons (r) branded free ISP is a novel thing. FreeDSL is not novel, just interesting. However, judging by the website, this is more targetted at the marketters and advertisers with wonderful statements like:
      "our service will offer direct access to a large high-speed Internet audience supporting general network advertising, content affinity, and demographic targeting."

      Translation:
      "We will monitor the browsing habits of the people, so you'll know if they're into those 'special interest' items. And thanks to content affinity and the broadband, you'll be able to push large, streaming media of your 'special interest' items in action in order to entice them to buy.."

      Yeah, I love being a captive audience.. Considering reliable broadband is available for 40$ Cdn (28$ US) in the form of Cable Modem access through a local @Home monopoly, I don't think it's really worth it..
      Linux can easily provide protection from the @Home portscanning via ipchains :)
      ---

      --
      --
      Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
  116. TROLLIN FOR THE EULER TOUR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Linear space complexity.. certainly this can be used for your silly AND gates?

  117. Cheap Linux SOB's (jk) by LocalYokel · · Score: 1
    You cheap ass Linux people think everything should be free, don't you? You commie bastards deserve to pay through the nose for Internet access.

    Now that I've ensured a few -1's, I'l be serious for a moment...

    I wouldn't feel so left out with their Windows-only support. There are a couple of "free" computing options out there. In one corner, you can get a free computer by locking yourself into a three year contract of paid dialup access. In the other, you can get a free dialup ISP of your choice by paying for the entire computer.

    Either way, you have only two free beer choices -- skunky or skunkier. Financially, free Internet seems like the better option, because you'd recoup the $400 "rebate" in half the time of a three year, $22/mo. contract. OTOH, AOL and Compuserve aren't quite as annoying about advertising as NetZero and company, but you also get locked into a contract for an inferior service with poorly specified upgrade options to DSL, which they aren't doing (much of?) anything with, or AOL/Time Warner cable access.

    Dialup sucks anyway. The only thing that would get me to go back to using dialup (spare necessity) would be ~$50/mo., so I could have a separate phone line and a Win9x dialup box so I could have a cool "@TheSimpsons.com" email address. It's likely that free Internet businesses are struggling to get revenues of $15 per head just to cover their costs, so I doubt that's ever going to happen.

    --

    --

    --
    E2 IN2 IE?

  118. Guess what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    abab

  119. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

  120. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.abab

  121. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.abababab

  122. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.abababababab

  123. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.abababababababab

  124. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.abababababababababab

  125. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    ca ca

  126. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    caca

  127. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.


    ca caca ca

  128. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.caca

  129. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.cacacaca

  130. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacas.cacacaca

  131. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacas.cacacaca

  132. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacas.cacacacacaca

  133. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacas.cacacacacaca

  134. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacaca

  135. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacaca

  136. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacaca

  137. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacaca

  138. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac a

  139. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acaca

  140. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacaca

  141. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacaca

  142. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacaca

  143. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacaca

  144. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  145. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  146. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  147. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac a

  148. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acaca

  149. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacaca

  150. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacaca

  151. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacaca

  152. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacaca

  153. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacaca

  154. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  155. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  156. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  157. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  158. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  159. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaca

  160. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aca

  161. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacaca

  162. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacaca

  163. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacaca

  164. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queercacacacacacacacacacacacacaccacaas.cacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac acacacacacacacacaca

  165. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    caca

  166. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacacaca

  167. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacaaca

  168. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacaaca

  169. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacaaca

  170. G MEANS "GAY", Q IS GAY, HORSES EAT HAY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  171. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacaaca

  172. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaaca

  173. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaaca

  174. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacaaca

  175. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aaca

  176. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aacacaccacaa

  177. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aacacaccacacacaa

  178. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aacacaccacacacacacaa

  179. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    cacaccacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacacac aacacaccacacacacacacacaa

  180. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns, Roblamo is a dork, and you're all queers.

    GuessGuess what? Q owns. Yes, yes he owns. Guess what? what? Q owns. Yes, yes he owns. Guess what?Guess what? Q owns. Yes, yes he owns. Guess what?

  181. Use linux anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have a similar service in Australia that requires you running a win32 client advertising bar which floats on top of everything (but you don't have to click on it). It has unlimited time and access with no limitations otherwise. I simply run the client with WINE and manage the window into oblivion.

  182. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h

  183. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h h e h


  184. touchung... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck you.

  185. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h h e h
    h e h


  186. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h




  187. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h





  188. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    heh h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h h h e h
    e h






  189. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h

  190. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h

  191. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h

  192. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h h e h


  193. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h




  194. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h h e h





  195. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h h h e h
    e h





  196. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    h e h h e h
    h e h h e h h e h h e h h h e h
    h e h
    e h





  197. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns. :)



  198. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns. :)
    !


  199. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns. :)
    !

    !

  200. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Q owns. :)
    !

    !!

  201. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .

  202. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..

  203. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...

  204. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....

  205. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .....

  206. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .......

  207. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ........

  208. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .........

  209. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..........

  210. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...........

  211. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ............

  212. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .............

  213. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..............

  214. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...............

  215. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ................

  216. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .................

  217. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..................

  218. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...................

  219. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....................

  220. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !.

  221. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !..

  222. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !...

  223. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !....

  224. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !.....

  225. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !......

  226. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !.......

  227. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !........

  228. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !.........

  229. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !..........

  230. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !...........

  231. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    !............

  232. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownsh

  233. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownshgshqhfownsh

  234. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownshgshqhfowgshqhfownshnsh

  235. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownshgshqhfowgshqhfownshgshqhfown shnsh

  236. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownshgshqhfowgshqhfownshgshqhfown shnshgshqhfownsh

  237. Q owns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gshqhfownshgshqhfownshgshqhfowgshqhfownshgshqhfown shnshgshqhfownshgshqhfownsh

  238. Ad-based companies by dbarclay10 · · Score: 1

    I hope this doesn't work, I really do. Then maybe these corporations will look at their other ad campaigns(TV, Radio, print). Then they'll probably realize that they've saturated the market. Nobody watches ads any more. We've completely tuned them out. At least I have. Then maybe they'll send those billons on improving their products, so they won't need to tell people how good it is - they'll already know.

    --

    Barclay family motto:
    Aut agere aut mori.
    (Either action or death.)
    1. Re:Ad-based companies by b10m · · Score: 1

      Well, in The Netherlands we have several "free isps" right now. The connections is way below average. In The Netherlands we have to pay phone costs each minute you're online (except for cable modems), so it's a pretty clever move to keep the customer waiting all day for his 3K website. As far as for the adds I don't know. I could think of a mailbox full of spam, but who cares ? Just don't use their email, but sign up with a free POP3 server anyways. That way, these people are spamming their own servers *evil grin* ... So this Homer thingy is nuthin' new I guess ...

  239. Not quite correct by blj8 · · Score: 1
    Actually, the info in the article was not quite correct. You have to have MSIE because the banner software uses MSIE's libraries, but you can use any browser you want.

    If anyone is interested in learning more about free ISPs, you can visit The FreeNET List Home Page or The USA's Free ISPs page

    1. Re:Not quite correct by Inoshiro · · Score: 2

      " You have to have MSIE because the banner software uses MSIE's libraries"

      Ahh, so it will be vulnerable to whatever proxy you set IE to use, ne? The problem with these programs that use the IE API for web stuff, is that the API doesn't expose the proxy setup to the program... A very trivial man in the middle attack is very easy to setup in this situation. The thing is, do you want to show your own little ads, or do you want to simply return a blank, transparent gif?

      I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader :)
      ---

      --
      --
      Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
    2. Re:Not quite correct by Clockwrkz · · Score: 1

      Why not just use junk buster as your proxy running on localhost? That would just show the junkbuster graphic instead of the ad.

  240. Also Available,.. by pen · · Score: 1
    Also available, Gay.com free Internet access, Senior.com free Internet access, AltaVista free Internet access... basically, they just slap a different logo on it and sell it.

    Explanations here:


    --

  241. Re:That episode DASHED WELL IRRITATED ME!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There's NO SUCH THING as "token ring ethernet," what kind of crack is that fat mother smoking???

    Yeah! This is disgusting! And all the people are drawn in Yellow. And do they really expect us to believe that someone can withstand that many knocks on the head.

    Although thats not the worst offender. I saw this cartoon called Road Runner. The physics in that were shockingly inaccurate. At one point, the road runner - Who I believe was the title character - even managed to walk along air without any support.

  242. Well, yeah. Banner ads are what I'm talking about. by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    But free ISPs like this one run banner ads. What they run is even worse than banner ads: they're banner ads with forced click-through.

    A better example of effective web advertising is affiliate programs. Give people valuable content, then try to sell them something related to that content right there, integrated with the content.

    This post is another example. I'm advertising the link at the bottom of the post, and getting a pretty damn good click-through, at that (my apologies, BTW, to people who anyone who went through the previous evil link, which I will now erase from my memory to go on with my life). Not by spamming, but by posting the best stuff I can come up with and still have something to say (my karma has doubled since last week).

    In the last few days, I've put up more posts on slashdot.org than in the last few weeks before that, because I've got a new web page that I want to promote. Usually I have to slap my own hands to keep myself from wasting too much time slashdotting, but for the moment I consider it productive. (yes, there's a certain irony to this which you'll understand if you look at my site - my site with banner ads, and broken ones at that... ^_^ )

    --
    /.
  243. Is it just me... by the_tsi · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or are virtual ISPs starting to seem even scarier than the ``monopolistic'' media companies?

    -Chris

  244. Damn, missed my point again. by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    I keep hitting that reply button instead of the preview one...

    "Believe the Data" was the title of the article, not a suggestion regarding the article.

    --
    /.
  245. You are missing the point. by Jett · · Score: 1

    The ISP itself is an add for the Fox TV network and for it's show The Simpsons. Who would use such an ISP but someone who had heard of the TV show? Now thing, you live in some hick town, everyone you know is getting on the internet. You see this ISP, hey what do you know IT'S FREE! I just have to click on a few ads, no big deal. And hmm, it's called The Simpsons like that TV show. And pretty soon you are watching that TV show or your kids are watching it. Not to mention the fact that many free ISPs keep track of what sites you visit. Data mining for whoever has the cash to pay for the data. It would be nice if we could figure out a way to make the internet free to anyone and everyone without the evil that corporations bring.

  246. Where's the Profit? by Squeamish+Ossifrage · · Score: 5

    The advertiser-supported ISPs are going to have a hell of a time staying in business. A quick look at the business model:

    Income: Web Advertising rates. Common rates for a banner add are in the 1 to 10 cents per "eyeball", or pair thereof, depending mostly on how well-targeted the ad is. Absent very sophisticated (and rare on an ISP level) profiling, the ISP cannot really identify what the user is interested in, in order to carefully target ads. Moreover, the free-ISP user demographic is likely to be mostly internet newbies, which is the kiss of death for an e-commerce site. So it's very unlikely that a free ISP will be getting more than 1 cent per ad. Click-throughs can be worth as much as 25 cents in some cases, though it's likely to be much less, especially since a forced click-through doesn't signify real interest and is therefore less valuable to the advertiser than a voluntary click-through. Porn sites, which often use pop-up windows to essentially force a click-through, rarely get more than 3 or 4 cents per click-through. And porn is very profitable. Posit a maximum of 5 cents per click-through of revenue.

    Expense: Based on Earthlink's SEC filings, and the data of other companies (including my own employer), it is generally accepted that about $13 per user per month is the minimum cost for an unlimited time or > 15 hrs per month dialup account. That covers only direct costs, not advertising. Moreover, that level of efficiency requires on the order of 1 million users. Cost per user looks more like $20 per month for most smaller companies. Further, it tends to cost about $15 - $20 in initial costs (including advertising) to get a user. 18 months is a fairly average length of time for a user to stick with an ISP, so the ISP *must* recover its initial investment within that time to make a profit. Given the annoyingness of ads, it's unlikely that a free ISP will have a better retention rate. Let's suppose J. Random Free ISP is doing about $15 per month, at best. Further, they need to recoup $18 (to be simple) in 18 months. So they need $18 per user per month to break even. Add another 10% to make it sufficiently profitable to bother, and you need $20.

    That's 2,000 ads or 400 click-throughs (or some combination thereof) per user per month. At best. Our average unlimited-time user logs about 15 hours a month. At that rate, the free ISP needs to serve each user 125 adds an hour (or 24 click-throughs) to break even. That's a pretty weak proposition. I wouldn't put any money on it.

    1. Re:Where's the Profit? by ej · · Score: 2

      Don't worry... The free ISP's can always sell personal information to other companies. It seems that many companies are interested in people's surfing behaviour. This already happens in the Netherlands.

      --
      I've got nothing to offer but confusion - throwing muses
    2. Re:Where's the Profit? by Squeamish+Ossifrage · · Score: 1

      Ok, My math must suck. $15 + $1 does not equal $18. It equals $16. Scale my numbers back accordingly, and I don't think it changes the point, but still .... oops.

    3. Re:Where's the Profit? by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 2

      Hmm... if it costs about $13/user to provide 15 hours/mo of ISP service, then how can Galaxy Internet Services afford to let me be online about 180 hours a month for only $9.95?

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    4. Re:Where's the Profit? by Accelerated+Joe · · Score: 1

      You make a mistake in thinking of cost on a per-user basis. These businesses don't care about ad-per-user ratio, but the ad-per-modem ratio. If you don't refresh your "health" bar, you'll just get booted for someone else who actually will have to put up with ads.

      --
      They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security
    5. Re:Where's the Profit? by Squeamish+Ossifrage · · Score: 1

      The short answer is - I don't know. It's posible that they've managed to get their costs substantially lower than what I've seen elsewhere. It's also possible that their average user in your price bracket uses the net little enough that their lack of use ballances out your use. Or it's possible that GIS is willingly losing money on that particular pricing option in the hopes that its marketing value will lead to long-term benefits that outweigh the immediate costs. Who knows?

  247. I can see it now. by Chas · · Score: 2

    Steve Ballmer walks into Bill Gates' office.

    *Ballmer* We've succeeded in grinding the competition into the ground again today sir. We've even added a half-dozen brand new annoyances to Windows 2000!

    *Gates* Excellent Smithers^H^H^H^Good job Steve.


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!

    --


    Chas - The one, the only.
    THANK GOD!!!
  248. Who's selling, who's buying, and what? by Squeamish+Ossifrage · · Score: 2

    Some services are motivated by generosity, personal enthusiasm, and other altruistic goals. I'm not talking about those.

    For-profit corporations do not willingly lose money. If they're not selling something to you, they're selling you to someone. Would you rather be they customer or the product? Which do you think gets better treatment?

  249. Re:Your the dork here! by b10m · · Score: 1

    Ermm actually a .sig should be "-- " So that's 2 minus signs and a space. Not 3 minus signs and a dot.

  250. not his user info by delmoi · · Score: 1

    Normaly, a sig is on every post. If you click the little link that says 'user info' you will see that it is not on every post. Therefor it is not a sig.

    The only conclusion I can draw here, is that you are an idiot

    [ c h a d o k e r e ]

    --

    ReadThe ReflectionEngine, a cyberpunk style n
  251. A British Perspective: X-Stream by dod1 · · Score: 1
    Here in the UK we have had a choice of many 'free' ISP for several years - 'free' as in no monthly call costs, we do have to pay for the calls though... Many of these 'free' ISPs operate on getting a cut of what we have to pay for the call.

    The first free ISP here, X-Stream (unfortunatly w32 clients only), though was and is funded through advertising, taking up a couple of lines at the top of the screen.

    They have also been trialling free phone calls for the past month or so, supposedly 24/7 access, although I have only had success during evenings and weekends...

    One simple way to bypass the ads is by using W98SE's Internet connection sharing - the adds only appear on your host, the clients displays are clean!

  252. A British Perspective: X-Stream by dod1 · · Score: 1
    Here in the UK we have had a choice of many free ISP for several years - free meaning no monthly ISP bills, we do have to pay for the calls though... Many of these free ISPs operate on getting a cut of what we have to pay for the call.

    The first free ISP here, X-Stream (unfortunatley w32 clients only), though was and is funded through advertising, taking up a couple of lines at the top of the screen.

    They have also been trialling free phone calls for the past month or so, supposedly 24/7 access, although I have only had success during evenings and weekends...

    One simple way to bypass the ads is by using W98SE's Internet connection sharing - the adds only appear on your host, the clients displays are clean!

  253. Banner hiding software by alessio · · Score: 1

    How many slashdotters use tools like JunkBuster, SleezeBall or others to cut banners and don't see any advertisment *at all*?

    Maybe time for a poll? :-)

    --
    "It is more complicated than you think" (The Eighth Networking Truth from RFC 1925)
  254. Actually... by TheDullBlade · · Score: 2

    yahoo.com averages over 300 million hits per day (at least it did recently; maybe they went downhill since google started?).

    --
    /.
    1. Re:Actually... by treke · · Score: 1

      Damn.... that's a lot of hits :)
      treke

    2. Re:Actually... by pen · · Score: 1
      Yep. And typically, ad companies pay $0.001 per view. which means $1 for 1000 hits. Which means 300,000,000 hits == $300,000.

      Per day. :)

      --

    3. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I read recently that Yahoo's effective advertising rate (total ad revenues/number of page views) was just under $5/thousand. So they're bringing in around $1.5 million/day on ad revenues.

      When people ask me about advertising, I tell them that they can expect an effective CPM of about $1-2 (that's about what I make, and is typical for all but the largest or most targeted sites). So for every thousand ads you show, you'll make $1-2. That's enough to discourage most people.

      I lived off of ad revenues from my web site this last year and the year before, but the income is going south. I have the same traffic I had a year ago, but only half the revenue. The cost per view is going downhill, and the clickthrough rate is going down with it.

  255. I think this is AltaVista by fastpage · · Score: 1

    I dunno about the US, but I believe all the dialups for Canada are identical as those that Altavista uses. I know they are identical for my area code. And the fact the website is called cobrand.1stup.com makes me think it is they have just repackaged everything and slapped the Simpsons on it. At any rate, I've already circumvented the advertising for Altavista so if you're gonna post about free isps tell me about one I don't have yet. And yes it works under Linux. But they're useless to me what I need is free cable modem access. I hope that free dsl stuff comes to Canada.

    1. Re:I think this is AltaVista by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't suppose you might be nice enough to tell us how to use these services with Linux and/or skip the ads? Some of us can't get anything better than modem...

      If you don't wanna say it in public, please mail me the answer: realluzzer@hottmail.ccom

      Btw: There are no double letters in my mail address. You'll need to remove them to mail me. :-)

  256. Ad Targeting by micahjd · · Score: 1

    I dont think that I have ever even looked at an ad in a search engine, or any other general-audience web site. However, web sites that target their ad banners to their specific audience will have much more effective banners.

    I think a good example of this is slashdot. All the banners I have seen on slashdot have been geek or linux oriented.
    Some companies, like ThinkGeek, I clicked on because their banners looked neat (and who doesn't want a 'grepmaster' mug?) and I'll probably buy something from them.
    Other banners, like the one for AIBO, put the product name in my head, but I would never actually buy one.
    Then there are banners for stuff that you would buy, but you already have one, like computers from Penguin Computing. It would be much more effective if they could sell in computer stores alongside the windoze PCs, but that is a very exclusive market.

    --
    -- 2 + 2 = 5, for very large values of 2
  257. simpsons, schmimpsons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whilst watching the Simpsons, i like to eat hot tasty GRITS Get them from WWW.GRITS.COM for all your grits needs!!!!!

    hurry now, get 'em wile they're hot!!!

    Customer testimonies:

    Bubba, NJ:
    "Gee bob, these grits sure are tasty!"

    John Carmack, TX:
    "quake 3 arena 'n hot grits is all a texan boy needs!!"

    Anonymous coward, SD:
    "MAE LING MAK, NAKED AND PETRIFIED!!"

    God, HV:
    "Thou shalt not spill thy hot grits into thine lap"

  258. I hate Freewwweb by Rurik · · Score: 1

    I have been using them for the last few months, besides the busy signals, which I can put up with, their technical support is POS. I accidently went over my *2meg* quota, and suddenly lost all access to my mailbox. Any attempts to connect, to check my mail or delete old mail, results in a "Connection broken by host".
    Their $15/incident live tech support is laughable, but it took 3 emails (the final being very stern), and over a week of no email (and everyone receiving messages that my box is over quota) before they contacted me back, at my work email, saying that they can wipe all my mail out.

    As of this date, I still have no email access.

    And don't get me started on NetZero. Their nav bar had serious memory leaks, and would lock any of our computers solid if we ever went into command.com.

    There has yet to be, IMO, a reliable free ISP. You can't live off advertising forever.

  259. They should have called it what it was in the show by cokane · · Score: 1

    Remeber that episode when he started the company super-hyper-mega-cyber-power-net? They should have named it that, from the show, then it would have been funnier.

  260. Gramatic errors vea software bugs by Felinoid · · Score: 1

    Ok this from the daemon (correct spelling) of typographical errors...
    [Daemon as in Unix background program NOT demon as in biblical evil being]
    Anyway :)
    It is posable the problem is in Slashdot not the poster...
    Keep in mind ANY CGI has to do some filtering and transformation to keep crackers from sending garbage...

    --
    I don't actually exist.
    1. Re:Gramatic errors vea software bugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      um a daemon is a server not a background program. WTF is a background program?

      Its better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're an idiot, than to open it and remove all doubt.

    2. Re:Gramatic errors vea software bugs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A background program is a program the runs in the background... :)
      Like a daemon or a TSR or a driver...

      Not all daemons are servers...
      For example.. PPPD, fetchmail and fetchpop are daemons but they are not servers...
      fetchmail and fetchpop are clients... pppd is a driver...
      Sence servers don't need direct monitoring they run in the background.. it's easyer that way...
      But many drivers and some clients also run as daemons...
      a "Daemon of typographical errors" would probably be a prank type program... like kaoskeys for Dos.. and not any kind of server

  261. Junkbuster script by StarFace · · Score: 1

    Hey if you are looking for a good junkbuster script there is a pretty effective one posted in the Tuning section at linux.com.

    --
    V
  262. Re:Your the dork here! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So does "fucked up"

  263. If you like spam (not the tm), you'll love 1stUp by SlydeRule · · Score: 2
    From 1stUp's Policy on Subscriber Information :

    Disclosure of Subscriber Information

    Much of the subscriber information we gather is provided to 1stUp.com's sponsors in exchange for their financing of your ad-subsidized Internet service. Of the subscriber information we collect, only individualized information on the dates, time and duration of your online sessions is not subject to such disclosures.

    It sure looks to me like they reserve the right to sell your name, address, e-mail address, etc.

    Contrast this with the policies for NetZero, FreeI, FreeWWWeb. In fact, FreeI doesn't even collect personal identification data in the first place.

  264. More evolution in action. by ben_ · · Score: 1

    Crack the software that runs the ads.

    Set up a daemon that fakes a click on every nth advert.

    Surf for free indefinitely.

    In fact - even better, generate a Linux client that fakes the clicks, run that on your firewall (you do have a firewall system, right?) and use your desktop box for regular surfing.

    And yes, this is (sort of) about evolution. These companies have set up an environment which is subject to exploit by those who live within it. Learn to exploit that environment better and you'll survive better :-)

    --
    ben_ the technologist and platform agnostic
  265. Nevermind ISP... its webmail too by danford · · Score: 1

    Nevermind that they're an ISP or ads or whatever...

    thesimpsons.com is a craptacular webmail client too... just cancel the download and goto mail.thesimpsons.com

    Doh!

  266. This service is PSI by mdvkng · · Score: 1

    The Toronto dialup numbers are the exact same numbers as PSI Canada, my former ISP.

  267. Random usage-pattern questions by Tackhead · · Score: 1
    Brings to mind another question -- ignoring clickthroughs, for a dialup ISP, what's their breakeven point on a heavy user? That is, if they're budgeting for 15h/month/user, how much are they losing when a binary leech starts slurping down 100-150 hours per month? (Assume 100h == roughly 1G traffic on a dialup link)

    For an ISP with a good newsfeed, that's probably all local traffic from their NNTP server to the dialup user. For an ad-supported ISP, that's probable all remote traffic to a third-party NNTP (or NNTP-via-HTTP, I'd guess through a server presenting decoded binaries as downloadable URLs to the end-user) provider.

    My guess is that both ISPs are losing money. But which one is losing it faster, and why? (The big ISP, despite all the traffic being local, or the "free" ISP with clickthrough revenue, but having to pay for all the offsite traffic *and* probably not having the installed base of lines to support as many leeches as the pay-ISP?)

  268. "Internet, Eh?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.CompuGlobalHyperMeganet.com/

  269. free the simpsons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Just so you know, this sort of thing is trivial to use under Linux, at least if their junk POPs would connect right in this area).

    You can sniff their login packets with two systems and a small man-in-the-middle utility. As you'll discover, your login is:

    somebody@1stup.com

    your password, and don't abuse this... is constructed from the function MD5(MD5("someone"+"somepassword")) (ie, the 32 character digest, in _all lowercase_ letters) And if you can't find the MD5 code, and write the 30 or so line program to use this -- I don't want you killing it for everyone else

    This is not theft -- if they offer FREE internet, then they'd better make sure that it is still FREE no matter what client someone wants to use... or not offer it to begin with.

    Advertising supported internet is a braindead idea.

  270. Re:Actually... (300 million hits) by dubner · · Score: 1

    A good part of that 300 million hits per day could be generated by the clueless users who have Yahoo installed as their homepage.

    I used to work for a division of Hewlett-Packard that has a counter on their Intranet web startup page. The standard, IT-installed browser (IE) would be configured to start up on that page. That gives IT some impressive bragging rights to page usage, value of their content, LAN traffic, etc. as one office worker after another started IE each morning and went somewhere else. Every "Open a New Browser Window" command would prop up IT's position. Heck, every one of the many system-wide failures would be good for more "hits".

    What's that old saw about "statistics don't lie, but ..."?

    --
    Joe

  271. Re:Buy 'em out boys... (birdies) by Kintanon · · Score: 2

    there is a thing like the birdies -- or indeed several of 'em. I don't know much about them personally, but my boyfriend uses them with his free isp and get-paid-to-click services.

    might be worth it with a script like that. now all someone needs to do is figure out how to emulate the software for linux/bsd/mac/solaris/irix/xxxx :)



    I hacked up a quick program in Delphi (doing one in C++ now) to keep Alladvantage fooled for me. It takes about 30 seconds to make something that will move the mouse from the top of the screen to the bottom, click the banner, and start over. Works real well too.>:)

    Kintanon
    Shameless plug follows:
    www.alladvantage.com
    EBS-939
    Sign up and kneel to the all powerful lord of rampant consumerism! All hail the dollar!

    --
    Check out JoshJitsu.info for Brazilian Ji
  272. Here's how... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >how is this funny
    >this is dumb not funny

    You are talking about your own post here, right?

  273. Heavy user? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >100-150 hours per month

    That's nothing man, I logged 300 hours online in August, mostly downloading stuff I needed for school. :-) I average about 200 hours online a month.

    I guess my ISP hates me. They keep disconnecting me, and then my script kicks in and I'm back online...

    But that's OK, it says in my AUP that this activity is OK. As long as I don't download more than 50 Megs a month... :-)

  274. Re:Your the dork here! by QuMa · · Score: 1

    Hmmm, it does have a nice ring to it.

  275. Good point, good alternative by Ryan+Taylor · · Score: 1
    Yes, I would be willing to concede quickly that IE causes major problems under 95-98, but then again, what doesn't? I find that a surprising percentage of the device drivers included with those OS's will cause system instability, not to mention third party drivers.

    I also should mention that while I haven't used Opera extensively, I haven't had any problems with it. One last thing I left out of my previous message: I have high hopes for Mozilla. Long live the lizard!! =)

    Sincerely,

    Ryan Taylor

    --

  276. Misrepresenting the Truth? by mrwhite · · Score: 2

    What Slashdot said:


    Anthony Fuentes writes "Looks like Homer and company are getting into the free ISP business, click here for details. Offer applies to win32 users only." Probably because Homer uses Windows - and Internet Explorer, of course, because that's the only browser you can use with this service.


    What the actual ISP page said:


    You must have a copy of Microsoft Internet Explorer, version 4.0 or higher, to access the free Internet system, but you may surf the web with any browser. Click on the following link to download the latest version of Internet Explorer.


    Wow... there's a difference. Slashdot reports that Internet Explorer is the only browser you can use with this service, where the actual page says that you can use any browser to surf the web, but you must have a copy of IE 4.0. Maybe because Microsoft bundled additional libraries with IE 4.0 in the form of a service pack? You think?


    I object to this editorialization of "news". Why does the news on Slashdot have to be anti-Microsoft? "News for Nerds"? Or "News for Linux users"? Why don't we call it what it really is? I run Linux on a dedicated Linux box. It's really stable, hasn't crashed in 3 months. Linux is nice, I like it. But face it: it's a cheap Unix hack. That's all it was designed to be, that's all it will ever be, until they make it "user-friendly." "Intuitive". It's not, and no one can successfully argue with me.


    So let's start being a little less biased in reporting "news", shall we?


    - Burton Simmmons
    mrwhite@d198-192.uoregon.edu (linux box)

    1. Re:Misrepresenting the Truth? by X-Nc · · Score: 1
      ...it's a cheap Unix hack. That's all it was designed to be, that's all it will ever be, until they make it "user-friendly." "Intuitive". It's not, and no one can successfully argue with me.

      Ah, you're one of those kind, huh. Nothing anyone can say will change your mind so why even try. The only thing I want to comment on your post is that in the world of usability design and ergonomic interfaces the WinXX GUI is one of the worst at being "user-friendly" or "intuitive". It's only user-friendly to people who have never known anything else and it's never been intuitive to any degree. There's even been more than enough proof of this in data studies that show how it takes as much time and money to train someone on WinXX as it does to train them on CDE or MWM. The Mac Finder is really the best user interface as far as intuitiveness and friendlyness goes.

      So, next time you want to yell the "Misrepresenting the Truth" banner, try doing some research and actually learn what the truth is first.

      ---

      --
      --
      If I actually could spell I'd have spelled it right in the first place.
    2. Re:Misrepresenting the Truth? by mrwhite · · Score: 1

      Did you even ready my post? I was talking about what Slashdot said and the difference between that and the actual facts!


      So, next time you want to yell the "Misrepresenting the Truth" banner, try doing some research and actually learn what the truth is first.


      I yelled "Misrepresenting the Truth" because that's actually what was going on. Notice you didn't dispute the fact that Linux wasn't user-friendly. Thank you for that... I'm right, am I not?


      I won't dispute the fact that parts of the WinXX GUI isn't "intuitive." But no where in my post did I say that it was, or that I was even a Windows user. You just assumed that was the case... I wonder why? Perhaps because you've been taught to hate Microsoft, and anyone who defends them is evil? Ya think?


      So next time you want to ignorantly flame someone, try reading what they wrote...


      - Burton Simmons
      mrwhite@d198-192.uoregon.edu

  277. Re:Your the dork here! by orangesquid · · Score: 2

    Wow, this AC reminds me a lot of Homer... I doubt many others would spend nearly as much time replying to their own comments. I think the AC's a bit smarter though, Homer probably couldn't have gotten all the way through the whole alphabet ;-)

    ---
    Oh no! This is an _illegal_ sig! It has three dashes instead of two!

    --
    --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
  278. A better word for it :) by Atomic+Punk · · Score: 1

    Since it requires windows
    shouldn't that be "Win-DOHs!" ?

    1. Re:A better word for it :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A nice picture for it: http://1.e-dada.home.pages.de/

  279. Really Bad/Wierd Idea, Free ISP, Ha by sammyc/. · · Score: 1

    I think the entire idea of free isps is good but 1stup.com is stupid. Did anybody notice that when exicte realsed their "Free ISP Service" it turns out to the be the same as the Simpsons one. "WOW" Also what the heck is that "health meter" at the side, "Refill by clicking an ad"? Whats stupid is that most of these services say 56k free. When sometimes I get 19k. If anyone has used netzero, one of my friends has "cracked" it so now there is no bar with ads. Goes to show you that "Free ISPS" will make no money or lose it.

  280. point by slakhead · · Score: 1

    no one will probably read this or it has already been mentioned but i noticed that they DO use php3 which is pretty good anyway. it suggests that they rent complete micro-sellouts.

    plus the simpsons rock.

    "Sure Marge. Everything looks bad when you REMEMBER it!"

  281. Re: IE by Tsian · · Score: 1

    Actually, i am a windows user, and find it to be a good (yes i did just say that on slashdot) OS. as for IE, while it is much more stable than ever before, i am quite ofter confronted with illegal operations during and at the shutdown of IE.
    However i must admit that IE is faster and in many ways better than netscape (tho whether this is due to good coding or hidden api's i can not say).

  282. A new business Model: iFreedom.com by kbahey · · Score: 1
    Hmm...Interesting analysis, but Earthweb seems to be biased against free ISPs?

    Any way, there is a different way of doing it, which is used by companies such as iFreedom which has a patent pending software and business model, and cover USA and Canada.

    I use them in the Greater Toronto Area, and they are good, except that they suffer busy signals at times.

    They give you Windows software (just like any other Free ISP), but the differences are:

    • They force you to click thru every 20 minutes of surfing, otherwise the connection gets dropped. By this, they guarantee that ever user will generate a click thru and not just an ad view.
    • They will not eat up a big portion of real estate during your surfing. They only pop up a screen every 20 minutes for you to click thru. I have used AltaVista's Free ISP and they really waste a big portion of the screen, and mess up the icons on the desktop and the windows coordinates. Much of the same applies to Juno and others.

    Of course, there is no Linux version (and nothing for any other operating system except Windows).

  283. Re: Only one crash? by CodeShark · · Score: 1
    But in all objectivity, I should also note that IE4.0-5.0 under NT 4.0 has crashed on me once, /ever/.

    Lucky you, I guess. I work with a number of sophisticated sites and IE 5.0 with NT 4.0 and the latest service pack crashes an average of three times a week to as often as three times a day. [Just a guess, but the commonality seems to be that the Microsoft JVM gets confused if you have more than one java enabled page open in a window at the same time.]

    Not that Netscape 4.7 is any better in terms of crash frequency, but Explorer doesn't win any extra points at all in my experience.

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...