Slashdot Mirror


Slashdot Updates

It's been a long time since I posted an update about Slashdot but a few recent changes warrant me doing it. You should see the OSDN Navbar atop the page now. I don't like it any more then many of you, so if you log in, there is an option to disable it. (Click the 'X', or look in Preferences:Misc) A few more notes follow including the lowdown on subscriptions, formkey bugs, and AC filters.

The formkey bug that was wreaking havoc all weekend was fixed. It was a mistake in seeding rand that was causing a small percentage of users to have problems posting. It wasn't a conspiracy designed to thwart anyone, just you. Man it was a pain in the ass. But it was squashed on Sunday (thank god).

Anonymous Coward filtering is now in place. It's not exactly finished, but it'll do for now. Essentially there is now a user preference that sets all AC posts to -1. This has been a very common user request for some time, so turn it on if you like. It's currently off by default. It's only a baby step: eventually there will be more fine-tuned controls for anonymous posts, as well as comment types. For Example: I'd personally like to assign a -2 penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most of them frankly just aren't funny at all. But humor is far too subjective to say that the moderation is unfair. Anyway, now everyone can decide for themselves. That should happen in the next few weeks.

Last up, I'm gonna talk a little about advertisements and subscriptions. Slashdot continues to grow: our traffic has increased by like 10% in the last few months, and simply selling the banner ads you see on top of each page isn't going to be enough to keep us afloat if we keep growing. And selling banner ads in 2001 is an awful lot harder then it was in 1999.

The change will be a different ad size on the article page. Currently we have the standard banner size on top of all pages, but soon the article pages will instead have those huge square things that you see on CNet or ZD. I know this will be unpopular with many people, myself included, but when we make the switch, we will also have some sort of subscription system where you can pay a fee to disable them honestly. (No I don't know how much yet!)

Just to shut down the conspiracy theorists, nobody is forcing us to make these changes: The navbar. The new ad formats. The subscription system. I could just say 'No' to changes like these. But Slashdot is now four years old ... and I want it to still be here four years from now. I hope you can understand the expensive reality associated with making this site happen every day for a quarter of a million readers.

Now flame me if you feel it necessary. Get it out of your system.

1,057 comments

  1. How much? by RollingThunder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Any ideas on how much de-advertising will cost?

    1. Re:How much? by david614 · · Score: 3, Redundant

      Yeah. I presume that you have looked at ars technica's approach to subscriptions so that you can make this work.

      You owe your readers early information on subscriptions. Otherwise, add busting software will make nonsense of your switch to ads plus subscriptions.

      Last thing.

      Those big mid-page ads on CNET are why I don't go there anymore.

      You better have a good explanation for why you think that slashdot folks are willing to tolerate them.

      D

      --
      ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
    2. Re:How much? by cloudmaster · · Score: 1, Redundant

      sites with big middle-of-the-page ads get images blocked by squid and perl. Slashdot's ads are explicitly allowed right now, but if they get big and/or obtrusive, they will be blocked as well. As they are, I leave them in (and even click them sometimes) in order to support the dot.

    3. Re:How much? by hexx · · Score: 4, Funny

      Last thing.

      Those big mid-page ads on CNET are why I don't go there anymore.

      You better have a good explanation for why you think that slashdot folks are willing to tolerate them.


      You don't have to tolerate them! Taco just said you can buy a subscription and disable them!

      And as unpopular as it is to pay for the things, people work on slashdot so we can all have fun reading it. And they have to make money too (god knows their stock ain't worth shit anymore).

    4. Re:How much? by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 2

      You owe your readers early information on subscriptions. Otherwise, add busting software will make nonsense of your switch to ads plus subscriptions.

      Let me second this. Please, Tac, please, Hemos, give us some information on the subscription service. I personally wouldn't mind paying a subscription fee for Slashdot, if it means Slashdot will survive into the future, but do let people opt in for a month or two before the nasty-ads show up.

      Worst case scenario, the nasty-ads will drive readership, and therefore costs, down. :)

    5. Re:How much? by Hacker+Cracker · · Score: 1, Redundant

      How much will it cost to de-advertize? How about nothing?

      If you use Opera that is. Simply press the 'G' key and viola! No ads!

      Ahhhhhhhhh...

      -- Shamus

      I Hate Ads!
      This space for rent! EZ terms!

    6. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you genuinely want to support slashdot in the long term then buy something. Sure, you're under no obligation to buy, but without any interest to buy you shouldn't be clicking those links. You're just lowering the clickthrough/buy ratio - and believe me when I say that advertisers watch that kind of data to see where they should advertise in the future.

    7. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Those big mid-page ads on CNET are why I don't go there anymore.

      I'm curious if you avoid reading the newspaper or magazines. Those tend have big mid-page ads too.

      Oh, well, you've probably crammed this AC post below your threshold .. saves the editors from marking it -1 Offtopic, I guess.

    8. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably cuts them all out with a pair of scissors before reading the paper.

    9. Re:How much? by dkh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Same here. Slash dot is one of the few places I allow the ads to come through on. Anything more obtrusive then the banner ads will cause me to block them.

      I would consider paying a subscription but it damn well be a payment on the order of what they lose from my not viewing the ads to begin with, ie no more then a few dollars a year (by that I mean 1 or 2), anything more then they aren't trying to recoup the lost ad revenue but are instead trying to make me pay for everyone elses use. I'm simply not willing to pay $20 or $30 a year for a dozen different web sites becuase they all discover suddenly that banner ads aren't cutting it (though they should point out to their advertisers that paying based on click through or some such is ludicris, newspaper, broadcast, bill boards etc are about building brand recognition and they don't expect everyone that sees an ad to suddenly visit the show room).

      Be interesting to see how this all shakes out:)

    10. Re:How much? by gehrehmee · · Score: 2

      The article says quite plainly that they do not know how much it going to be. There's your answer.

      With regards to the larger ads finding their way into our happy lives, I have to say that I'm gravely disappointed. If Slashdot's viewership is growing as the article says, shouldn't that mean more views and click-throughs? Doesn't it make Slashdot a higher-profile site, capable of charging more money for each view and click-through?

      I have no problem with a single ad at the top of the page. But I do worry that the Slashdot crew are underestimating the number of viewers that may use increasing ads as a perfectly good excuse to start using ad-filtering proxies like Junkbuster, (a GPL proxy available as source for *nix, or binaries for Win32 platforms).

      --
      "You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help" -- Calvin
    11. Re:How much? by Dinosaur+Neil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...as unpopular as it is to pay for the things...

      Try thinking of it as paying for the lack of something... I already donate once or twice a year to a college station (KVCU in Boulder) partly because I can't stomach the crappy programming on the various commercial stations around, but also because (except for 20 days a year for pledge drives) they don't run ads.

      Unless the cost is prohibitive, I'm willing to pay for the absence of banners...

      --
      "I'm a scientist! I don't think, I observe!" - Dr. Clayton Forrester
    12. Re:How much? by david614 · · Score: 1

      As you said...

      > You don't have to tolerate them! Taco just said you can buy a subscription and disable them!

      I believe I was anticipating the *fact* that slashdot readers are exactly the ones (myself included) that *will not* simply put up with an irritating imposition on their web browsing. I assume Taco knows this, which makes me think that the subscription fees will be "higher, rather than lower" than those at ars technica.

      That is why I want the information in advance, before those ridiculous (and predictably unpopular) ads poison the well of Slashdotter good will.

      Or do you think that we will all just put up with it in advance of some reasoned explanation regarding subscriptions?

      D

      --
      ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
    13. Re:How much? by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2

      Or, for that matter, Guidescope, an easier to use adbuster that Junkbuster helped get started. I'm oh so happy since I've switched over . . .

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    14. Re:How much? by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How is paying for the internet any different than paying for cable TV? You have to pay the cable company (ISP) to get basic service, and extra to see the premium channels which have no advertising. Sure, there are all those other channels, but they cut into movies at awkward times to show commercials. Only thing is, advertising on the net simply doesn't work. Keeping a site like slashdot up has got to be expensive (I'd estimate $20,000 a month in bandwidth alone) Plus the guys who work on slashdot have to be paid as well, it's not like they're moneygrubbing fools, but this is their job, they have to put food on the table somehow. It takes a lot more than a snazzy design to keep a successful site up nowadays. It takes real money.

    15. Re:How much? by Eil · · Score: 2


      I tried Guidescope back in the early days and didn't like it much. Most annoying thing was the floating control panel or whatever.

      I use good old junkbuster. The blockfile is abso-friggin-loutely huge, but I've only added 8 or so lines to my own. It's pretty rare that I come across a banner ad that it doesn't block (but can with 30 seconds of work).
      As for paying to view ad-free Slashdot... That's something I just might do. Not to get rid of the ads (dur, I have junkbuster remember), but to support the site. My only conflict on this is that as time wears on, I seem to visit Slashdot less and less in favour of other sites that are more focused on their respective topics.

      In light of this, I would probably subscribe off and on. Sub for one month, block the ads for a few after, and sub again here and there to simply show my appreciation. That's assuming the subscription is a monthly fee type of thing.

      Oh, and to the operators of Slashdot: I personally don't believe the OSDN bar is bad at all. I've been wondering when /. was going to display it. I don't think anyone can deny that OSDN has contributed a LOT to the community.

    16. Re:How much? by Xawen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe I was anticipating the *fact* that slashdot readers are exactly the ones (myself included) that *will not* simply put up with an irritating imposition on their web browsing. I assume Taco knows this, which makes me think that the subscription fees will be "higher, rather than lower" than those at ars technica.

      You are apparently also forgetting the *fact* that Slashdot readers are the exactly ones that are more prone to simply block the ads if the cost is too high. Taco knows the reader base, and isn't dumb enough to try to gouge us for something we can easily do ourselves. I for one am all for paying if the price is within reason. And I'm willing to bet that others feel the same.

      Give the guy a chance before you jump all over him. This site takes a lot of work and money. You can't expect anyone to pay it out of pocket...

      -J

    17. Re:How much? by krogoth · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least they're well targeted. You won't see a full-page ad on CNet talking about "vaginal yeast infections" :)

      --

      They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
    18. Re:How much? by kettch · · Score: 2

      Those big mid-page ads on CNET are why I don't go there anymore.

      Yes, they bug me too. I think that slashdot should do the same thing as the main OSDN page. OSDN has ads that are off to the side and fit into the margins. They also have little tiny ads that are placed in the upper corners in what would normally be whitespace. The ads on the right would probably fit inside the margin with the slashbox. One of the problems about putting ads in with the slashboxes is that some of those margin ads are quite tall.

      I dunno, anything but ads in the middle of the story.

      --
      Opportunities multiply as they are seized. --Sun-Tzu
    19. Re:How much? by silicon_synapse · · Score: 1

      In newspapers and magazines, it's obvious where an article stops and an ad starts (usually). When you put a quarter-screen ad (maybe exagerating a bit) in the middle of an article, it interferes with ease of reading the article. You have to read around the flashing, blinking splash of color in the middle of the page, and it's distracting. There's no easy solution. Websites don't have the real estate a magazine or news paper has.

    20. Re:How much? by tstock · · Score: 1

      Because of the fact that most slashdot readers have the know-how on how to block ads, expect prices here to be higher than on sites where the target audience doesn't have that knowledge.

      Seems like there are many here that still don't see anything wrong with blocking ads... Its a not the viewers right to block ads period. It is the same as stealing from a store because you think the price is too high.

      The people that view ads or pay the subscription here will have to pay for the ones that don't, it's that simple.

      In fact, part of the reason slashdot is hurting is probably due to the thousands of posts here saying "advertising is imoral, I am l33t, I block ads and you should too PS: download Mozilla, it makes it simple".

      arg!

    21. Re:How much? by pepermil · · Score: 1

      I was just wondering if you would share some of the sites you favor in place of Slashdot. I'm not about to give up Slashdot, but I really need more sources of detailed tech-related news to keep me busy (mostly so I can avoid doing homework).

    22. Re:How much? by dkh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The difference is that I pay one reasonable (relatively) fee per month for 50 or so channels.

      This is more akin to subscribing to a magazine. I used to subscribe to a lot of magazines. Then I discovered that I actually didn't have the time to get $30 or so of value from each one, instead I was simply skimming most of them. The result was that I greatly reduced the number that I subscribe too.

      The same will be true of web sites. If they think the competition was bad before, wait until users have to start making choices about what web sites they have time to get real value from.

      Note though, my first post didn't say I wasn't willing to pay for a _reasonable_ subscription and in my opinion that is now more then a few dollars a year to make up for my ad viewing.

      My choice here is even easier then the magazines however as I can filter the ads from my end if they aren't reasonable in their pricing.

    23. Re:How much? by The+FooMiester · · Score: 1

      Only thing is, advertising on the net
      simply doesn't work


      Here's my bitch about "online ads don't work"

      How many times have you seen an ad for the new Ford SUV, went out, and bought one, that very same day? That's what I thought.

      Secondly, What are most online ads for? What purpose does "punch the monkey" serve? "You've got a message waiting for you?" WTF? I have to admit, ads are getting better, more of them are targeted for the probable audience.

      Perhaps we should look back to the way ads were done in the past. There's no reason you can't pay for a site with ads, if you're smart. Newspapers do it(I mean, they put out the dead-tree versions, and sell them for the price of transportation, and so they're not "free", "free" newspapers have a bad reputation).

      X10: Might be more popular if the ads weren't so damn annoying. Kind of like the kids in the smucker's commercials. They get name recognition, but for all the wrong reasons.

      Name recognition is what people should be going for. Have the product up front, or an accurate description. The Scranton Times has a good example of what I call "Good Ads". They are of relevance to the site reader, spell out what they are for, and aren't intrusive. Kind of like the ads on /. I really don't have a problem with the block ads in the middle of the pages, either. Easy to read around.

      If you don't like looking at ads, I suggest you use lynx as your browser. Most of them just come up as click here

      --
      The previous has been a secret message to my comrades.
    24. Re:How much? by ByTor-2112 · · Score: 1

      Why doesnt someone add a feature to Mozilla that will not block ads but simply not display them. Heck even make one that "clicks through" in a background process but doesnt display anything :). Change your user agent and then continue on destroying NET ad revenue models.

    25. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How much? I'm sure there will be a poll question where you can express your preference...

    26. Re:How much? by david614 · · Score: 0

      I am all for subscribing, but alleging that ad-blockers are stealing is insane. What right do advertisers have to *my* screen real estate? Do they pay any part of my ISP fees?

      My computer -- read that *my* computer -- will only have data on it that *I* control. What next, laws against fair use of web based product -- oh sorry, we already have those.

      Darn...

      --
      ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
    27. Re:How much? by WowTIP · · Score: 1

      Viola? Like, in playing? :)

      Otoh, you could just use lynx. same effect. Almost...

      --

      --

      "I'm surfin the dead zone
      In the twilight, unknown"
    28. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, pay for some good content and pay more attention to what you read. You may pick up valuable tips on spelling and punctuation.

    29. Re:How much? by Evro · · Score: 1

      You better have a good explanation for why you think that slashdot folks are willing to tolerate them.

      Well, I don't mind them at all, and I think they're a trivial price to pay for everything Slashdot offers. And before you make your witty retort along the lines of "SUCH AS WHAT ? SPELLING ERRORS AND OLD NEWS?" just ask yourself... if there's nothing of value here, why are you still here? Popup ads are truly an annoyance, but what is wrong with larger ads? Maybe Flash ads wouldn't be appropriate for a linux-oriented site (I don't know if there's a flash plugin for Linux or not) but I have no problem whatsoever with CNET-style ads.

      Anyway, you asked why they thought "Slashdot folks" would tolerate the ads, and here's one reason.

      --
      rooooar
    30. Re:How much? by Xawen · · Score: 1

      Seems like there are many here that still don't see anything wrong with blocking ads... Its a not the viewers right to block ads period. It is the same as stealing from a store because you think the price is too high.

      What possible right (that I would be violating by blocking ads) does any site have to put pictures (over which I have no control) on my computer? I suppose it would be ok with you if I came to your house and painted a big ad for the porn shop around the corner on your siding because they pay me for every person that sees it. Or at least you wouldn't have a right to remove it, right? Let's put aside the fact that you paid for the house, the paint I used, and the ladder that I needed to do the painting.

      Of course there is nothing wrong with sites using ads to generate money, but saying that it is a violation of rights for me to block those ads is just plain stupid.

      -J

    31. Re:How much? by lewp · · Score: 1

      ... lowering the costs necessary for running the site and solving the problem. Hooray.

      I'm not going to get too pissed off about ads. I can pretty much just tune them out. It's not like everything else isn't covered with ads anyway (watched professional sports lately?).

      That said, I'd donate to /. in a second if that's what it takes to keep it afloat. I don't regularly donate to any other sites (though I read plenty that take donations), so I guess that says something.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    32. Re:How much? by anotherone · · Score: 1, Offtopic
      You won't see a full-page ad on CNet talking about "vaginal yeast infections"

      PUNCH THE MONKEY! PUNCH the MONKEY!! PUNCH IT!!!!!!

      --
      Username taken, please choose another one.
    33. Re:How much? by the_quark · · Score: 4, Informative
      I've seena lot of people say, "Hey, you guys are getting more traffic, doesn't that mean you're raking it in from more ads?"


      It ain't that simple.


      You've gotta sell those ads. And that's not so easy, anymore. If you don't sell an ad, serving the page is a cost, not a benefit.


      "But wait!" you say. "There's ALWAYS an ad at the top, so they're clearly selling them all!" Nope. You know all those Think Geek ads? And the NewsForge ads? And all the other adds that point to things OSDN owns? Those are all "house" ads that /. is throwing in there to help out the corporate parent, but that don't actually bring in revenue.


      So, if they're not selling the ads, now, more pageviews just results in more bandwidth costs, not more ad sales.

    34. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try thinking of it as paying for the lack of something...

      I tried thinking of it that way, but its even more retarded.

    35. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they're those big annoying Flash animated ones that give me seizures. Woohoo. :-)

    36. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm curious if you avoid reading the newspaper or magazines. Those tend have big mid-page ads too.

      My newspaper doesn't flash at me and make noises to try and get my attention. ;-)

    37. Re:How much? by onepoint · · Score: 1

      >> Why doesnt someone add a feature to Mozilla that will not block ads but simply not display them. Heck even make one that "clicks through" in a background process but doesnt display anything :). Change your user agent and then continue on destroying NET ad revenue models.

      Funny, I can see both sides of this arguement clearly. I side on the following.

      So you are all for killing whatever little ad revenue a site can generate. Without including the bandwidth issue, servers and hosting still cost money. Most people enjoy seeing the few pennies that a site makes every day ( might not be a lot but it give a very happy ( justified?) feeling). So without that feeling of joy why would you keep a web site.

      I can see the future of information ... going to the highest price, or the best funded, or the highly filtered.

      -Onepoint

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    38. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Mozilla has the same feature, but easier. Just press any key and wait and VIOLA! No Ads! No web browser either, because it crashed, but that's besides the point.

    39. Re:How much? by shrdlu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Really. Post how much. I'd be happy to pay a subscription fee. I also liked the idea of another poster about modding the advertisement up or down. Advertisers should be thrilled with that kind of feedback.

      Please, please, please. No pop up ads.

      --
      The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and a seal. (Mark Twain)
    40. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big mid-page ads won't make a difference on Slashdot, scrolling past screens full of useless junk is second nature here.

    41. Re:How much? by rosewood · · Score: 1

      Anandtech and HardOCP are much more PC Tech specific

      Stomped, Shacknews, and Blues for games

      k5 if you really want to waste time

    42. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Buy an X10 camera to record someone punching the monkey with vaginal yeast infections!

    43. Re:How much? by tstock · · Score: 1

      As far as I am concerned, if a publisher (say slashdot) puts up content expecting to get its costs covered by adding into the document some advertising code (image tag) and you block that part of the document, but still get the content you want... well you just took the cake and left the publisher to pay for the bandwidth and server costs.

      It is obvious that this was not the intent of the publisher, you just felt you could do this because you know HOW TO do this, or someone helped you (IE Mozilla).

      Say what you will, it may not be illegal but it's not right either. I never block ads, just stop going to a site if those ads annoy me (popups).

    44. Re:How much? by tstock · · Score: 1

      when I said, "right" I didn't mean legal right, but rather what your moral compass says.

      Sites dont "put" pictures on your computer, documents you requested, with content that you wanted to see, included calls to display ads in the format of images. If you don't want to see ads, go to sites that don't show ads. simple.

      Going to sites that depend on ads to survive, eating up their bandwidth/server resources and blocking their advertising is just wrong IN MY OPINION.

    45. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only isp I can get has a metered connection, so aren't the ones running the ads stealing money from me allready?

      I allready know up front that I am very reluctant to buy anything online, I never click on ads because that is generally a waste my time, meaning I have to pay even more than I allready do. (Approximately 50 to 150 dollars a month in internet bill) I'd also rather go to the competitor or simply do without if the ad is obtrusive, because it wastes my time and money.

      I understand that most americans has flat rates on their isp's and that it's just a few dollars more on top of this for them, but for me, I allready pay way more than I should to just be connected and I am not willing to pay more, and I will block ads that get annoying.

      It is no more different than going to the kitchen and make a snack during comercials on the TV. Allthough they try to get you to watch the ads, you are under no obligation to sit and watch them.

      And I am fairly certain that if you were to tape something you wanted to watch, you would fast forward through the commercials instead of watching them.

    46. Re:How much? by uglyduckling · · Score: 1

      How about having ads of a similar size to the existing ones, but at regular intervals down the page, maybe every 20 comments or so? That would be less obtrusive than one huge one.

    47. Re:How much? by orangesquid · · Score: 2

      Better yet, insert them as comments, and then users can have the option to automatically make Advertising Cowards be at -10 :)

      --
      --TheOrangeSquid Is it any wonder things seem so awry? We swim in a sea of confusion and don't have to think to survive
    48. Re:How much? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      I'm curious if you avoid reading the newspaper or magazines. Those tend have big mid-page ads too.

      No newspaper or mag add I have seen, flashes in an annoying/distracting way. If they did, I'd buy from another publisher.

    49. Re:How much? by AtariDatacenter · · Score: 2

      Bad accounting practice. Slashdot *should* be charging other OSDN departments for advertising space, even if it is "funny money". Just like IT charges against different departments, or the copy room does. It isn't anything different. If these are "free ads" then someone's getting ripped.

    50. Re:How much? by mitheral · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the web as it's supposed to be. The idea that sites should make a profit on the web is morally wrong IMHO. Maybe after the colapse of the commericialized Information Superhighway we can get back to peer to peer sharing of ideas and information. Call me elitist but personally I'm rooting for the collapse of AOL, MSN and thier ilk with the eventual hope that the September that never ended finally comes to an end.

    51. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck U

      U pig vomitous piece of goat fucking shit!!!!!

    52. Re:How much? by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I take it then that when you're watching the telly, and the adverts come on, instead of going to make a cup of tea or for a piss, you sit there staring at them intently?

    53. Re:How much? by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      Good. I'd gladly pay CowboyNeal for an ad-free /.

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    54. Re:How much? by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      Most people enjoy seeing the few pennies that a site makes every day ( might not be a lot but it give a very happy ( justified?) feeling). So without that feeling of joy why would you keep a web site.
      Umm...because I can? Money isn't the only reason you might put up a website...hell, in many cases, it doesn't even enter into the equation.
      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    55. Re:How much? by tstock · · Score: 1

      I go for Earl Grey yes. I don't block the transmittion of television ads from getting to my house no.

      I used to get my ad fix from adcritics.com, before they started showing popups. Now, I didn't just configure Mozilla to stop popups, I just stopped going there. This way I am not seeying popups AND I'm not getting a free lunch from them.

    56. Re:How much? by 5KVGhost · · Score: 1

      "Seems like there are many here that still don't see anything wrong with blocking ads... Its a not the viewers right to block ads period. It is the same as stealing from a store because you think the price is too high."

      That's silly. I suppose I'm also stealing from the networks if I get up to go to the bathroom during a TV commercial.

      Most advertising doesn't work the way that advertisers would like it to. That's true of any kind of media. People generally ignore advertisments, and very few people ever act on the, with the immediacy that marketers of banner ads seem to assume they should. Advertising hasn't failed on the web because people block the ads - it's failed because the implementation has been handled so poorly and because the expectations of the advertisers were unrealistic.

    57. Re:How much? by Eil · · Score: 2


      Mostly places like rootprompt, and The Register. If you go to rootprompt, there's a whole bunch of unix-related links in the links bar to the right.

    58. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think anyone can deny that OSDN has contributed a LOT to the community.

      Actually, they have pulled in and centralized a lot of the formerly rather independent energy in the Open Source scene.

      So that when they fail, it will all fail with them.

      I consider that the opposite of contributing to the community.

      Sorry, that's just what I think. I know I'm not alone.

    59. Re:How much? by spudnic · · Score: 2

      So when will we start seeing registered passwordz on crack sites for /.?

      --
      load "linux",8,1
    60. Re:How much? by spudnic · · Score: 2

      I'd be willing to pay a premium above the subscription price if all "Slow down cowboy" and lameness filters where disabled for my account.

      Geez that's annoying.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
    61. Re:How much? by i_m_sane · · Score: 1

      Do you own the house? If you dont you have no right to put a ad on the house. There is nothing stoping you from putting ads on your own house.

      If you own a website then you should be allowed to post ads on your website, these ads cover the cost of running the website and therfore are a nessesity. If you dont like it then start you own website...

      and then see how long it takes before you put ads on it.

      --
      Adam Sane sanity is a dirty job, but somebody has to do it.
    62. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does adcritics.com give you food for watching ads? Sounds like the ideal thing for homeless people. First they see the ads, then they eat, then they steal whatever has ben advertised since they can't afford it anyway. =p

    63. Re:How much? by spudnic · · Score: 2

      I know that I derive about the same amount of pleasure from participating in /. as I do from my Tivo. I paid $300 for that. Not only this, but /. helps keep me up to date on issues that affect my profession. It's hard to put a number on that, but I certainly think it would be worth as much as a yearly subscription to a paper magazine.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
    64. Re:How much? by spudnic · · Score: 2

      And then what do you do when /. has to shut down? A project like this couldn't just be taken over by a bunch of enthusiasts. I'm sure the hosting cost alone would make it prohibitive.

      Why try to cheat? You obviously like /. or you wouldn't be here. Isn't it worth it to you for them to stay around? I know it is for me.

      How would you feel if you struggled to keep something alive that you loved and all the people hitting the site blocked your only revenue generating system? I'd be really disappointed in humanity.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
    65. Re:How much? by the_quark · · Score: 2

      Oh, I'm sure that *do* charge OSDN funny money. I'd also guess that the business unit that is the smallest set of profit and loss accounting is OSDN. So, transferring funny money between OSDN sites doesn't improve OSDN's business unit profitiability. If OSDN doesn't achieve some level of profitability as a business unit, VA rings up the OSDN General Manager and says, "Your unit is unprofitable - do whatever it takes to make it profitable." In that analysis, /.'s house ads aren't going to prevent layoffs or simply pulling the plug. Or, they might be more "democratic" about it and simply tell every site in OSDN to lay off 25% of their people. Regardless, house ads don't help the /. crew keep their jobs long-term.

    66. Re:How much? by cloudmaster · · Score: 2

      If you genuinely want to support slashdot in the long term then buy something. Sure, you're under no obligation to buy, but without any interest to buy you shouldn't be clicking those links. You're just lowering the clickthrough/buy ratio - and believe me when I say that advertisers watch that kind of data to see where they should advertise in the future


      I forgot - this is slashdot, where everything has to be spelled out. If I click on a banner here, it's because the banner was interesting and I want to find more out about it. Therefore, the advertising is doing its job. The banners are usually thinkgeek banners, and I buy all kinds of stuff from thinkgeek - since I'm endlessly entertained by useless (or useful) toys and geeky clothing. Unfortunately, thinkgeek's shipping costs are about 5000 times higher than several other online merchants, so I don't buy as much from them as I would otherwise.


      Then again, why am I explaining my slashdot habits to someone who's too lazy to even create an account?

    67. Re:How much? by Hacker+Cracker · · Score: 1
      Quoth the poster:
      And then what do you do when /. has to shut down? ...

      Why try to cheat? You obviously like /. or you wouldn't be here. Isn't it worth it to you for them to stay around? I know it is for me.

      How would you feel if you struggled to keep something alive that you loved and all the people hitting the site blocked your only revenue generating system? I'd be really disappointed in humanity.
      What do you do then? Something else. I might feel bad (for a second) until I realized that I and many others around here were the ones who were supplying the bulk of the content.

      And who's to say that blocking ads is cheating? I feel absolutely NO obligation to view ANYBODY'S advertising. As a matter of fact, I feel it is my sacred duty as a thinking, rational human being to avoid them like the plague! Seriously, I don't understand why people are so willing to roll over when it comes to advertising. Advertising is not benign!

      As to how I'd feel if all the people blocked my ads--I'd feel like an idiot for relying on advertising to fund my site!

      Peace!

      -- Shamus

      Bleah!
    68. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      but I really need more sources of detailed tech-related news to keep me busy
      • www.firingsquad.com - hardware/games
      • www.tomshardware.com - more detailed hardware
      • www.kuro5hin.org - like slashdot, but you can see every story that's submitted and vote them to the main page if you think they're interesting. Oh, and everyone is a moderator
    69. Re:How much? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Punch it?

      I fucking shot it.... and it's STILL here!

      Where are the truth in advertising people when you need them... I demand $20 for every time I've punched that monkey. The lottery can't say "Buy a ticket and win $1,000,000.", they HAVE to say 'for a chance' or have an almost invisible disclaimer there.

    70. Re:How much? by Eil · · Score: 2


      Given the state of the economy and the fall of the dotcoms, I'd say many of those smaller independent sites would have fallen a long time ago without OSDN supporting them.

      That's what I meant by contributing to the community.

  2. As long as there are no X10 ads... by Robber+Baron · · Score: 3, Offtopic

    Otherwise we'll really have to hate you.

    --

    You're using her as bait, Master!

    1. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by cascino · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually I would prefer X10 ads - as another /. reader pointed out, X10 ads can be turned off for 30 days at a time.

    2. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      Wait until you close your /. browser.....

    3. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Scoria · · Score: 2

      Certainly, but they still use your CPU time to open your browser and close it (if the cookie is defined) with JavaScript.

      --
      Do you like German cars?
    4. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by jovlinger · · Score: 3, Interesting

      actually, with a bit of hand editing of the url, they can be turned off for any ammount of time. The argument controls how many days in the future the cookie expires. I personally went with one that expires in 3000 days.

    5. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Skyshadow · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Pft, I hate him already. While we're at it, I hate you, too. Hell, I hate everybody. Except Santa Claus -- he's okay in my book.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    6. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by thunderbird46 · · Score: 1

      But why would I want to go to X10's site to turn off their ads, when a simple "0.0.0.0 x10.com" in my hosts file will suffice?

    7. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by leeward · · Score: 1

      Or even turned off permanently in Mozilla. I have never actually seen one of these famous X10 ads.

      // Stop pop ups
      user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.open ", "noAccess");

    8. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love you, man. Now, can I have your bud?

    9. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      you know, I have blocked *.x10.com for more than a year on my PC, and I never seen an ad for their tiny camera!
      same things for the big ad square, I block a lot of ads sites, so I never see them.

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:As long as there are no X10 ads... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you think these ads are suspicious? They are always depicting hot and often times young girls. What exactly are you supposed to do with this X10 camera?

  3. Not so bad by MxTxL · · Score: 2
    I don't like it any more then many of you, so if you log in, there is an option to disable it.

    I didn't even notice it until i read that it was there.... but thanks for the option to disable.

    1. Re:Not so bad by Telek · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Oh I noticed, because I was in the middle of posting a comment and instead I wasted my time because I got a "this form doesn't accept the POST method" and my comment was lost. This happens far too often for my likings, then I saw this navbar at the top, and /. was apparently screwed because I couldn't do anything except for view the static homepage...

      For a site that preaches the values of open source, it sure is funny that /. can't seem to keep their site up for more than a week at a time without some sort of system failure.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    2. Re:Not so bad by gfilion · · Score: 1

      rm -f /bin/laden</i>

      I would say: cat /bin/laden | kill

      GFK's

    3. Re:Not so bad by Jaeger · · Score: 1
      For a site that preaches the values of open source, it sure is funny that /. can't seem to keep their site up for more than a week at a time without some sort of system failure.

      So you're volunteering to duplicate /. (maybe sea-colon-backslash) on a commercial solution?

      Regardless of the software, a site as complicated as slashdot isn't easy to maintain, especially given the load. (the statsbox reports 1,717,795 hits so far today. I have a feeling my box would melt under that load.) I say kudos to the /. team for pushing the envelope on how a news/discussion site should behave, as well as doing their best to ensure that slashdot is still here in four years.

    4. Re:Not so bad by mmontour · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      I would say: cat /bin/laden | kill

      Firstly, congratulations on winning this week's 'useless cat' award - in cases like this, you should redirect stdin on the second command instead of running an unnecessary 'cat'. Like this:

      kill &lt /bin/laden

      [And to bring this post somewhat on-topic, how about a Slashdot Enhancement so that a "Plain Old Text" comment will actually recognize a '&lt' character as a '&lt' instead of making me write it as '& lt'?]

      Secondly, the best version of this I've seen is:

      chmod a+x /bin/laden

      (That's "make /bin/laden executable by all" for you non-Unix folks).

    5. Re:Not so bad by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      I think it should be
      see-colon-enter
      instead. it would be a pretty gay site anyway.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    6. Re:Not so bad by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      rm -f /bin/laden

      I would say: cat /bin/laden | kill
      this command really makes no sence unless /bin/laden had a list of pids.

      rm -rf /bin/laden
      atleast makes some sense

      chmod a+x /bin/laden
      is my personal favorite.

      grep /bin/laden /usr/share/locale/afganistan && ps -ef |grep laden |xargs kill -9 && chmod a+x /bin/laden && rm -rf /bin/laden && nuke the fuck out of /usr/share/locale/afganistan

      there i just made that one up :)

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    7. Re:Not so bad by Cramer · · Score: 1

      It'd be better if it actually worked! What "misc. preferences"?

    8. Re:Not so bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you new to Linux?

  4. Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Twilight1 · · Score: 1

    VA strong arming OSDN yet again... turning it into a huge marketing machine and statistics generator for SourceForge.

    It may be necessary, but god... it is ugly... and when those big ugly square ads come along, I'm finally going to make the jump to junkbuster.

    --Twilight1

    1. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Twilight1 · · Score: 1

      ...and I would like to point out that I would gladly pay to see NO advertising... but only if that was truly no advertising. No blocky ads, no banner ads, no text ads. Of course, inadvertantly advertising something cool by posting a neat-o factor article about it would be fine.

      And I will shoot CmdrTaco the first time I hear him doing the Paul Harvy ad/testamonial. Good day.

      --Twilight1

    2. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, ugh. How dare a company try to make money. We should all just get anything we want for free.

      I suppose you get paid for the work you do? Ugh. capitalist bastard.

    3. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Twilight1 · · Score: 1

      Capitalism isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, unrestrained and unchecked capitalism is... hence the formation of monopolies and companies who exist to profit off of _depriving_ people instead of providing something.

      I have nothing against a company seeking to make money off of a good product or service. I have everything against a company who wishes to legislate extortion in able to make a profit. If your product can't cut it, well... the solution is not to pass law or use bad business practice to force a bad product and any "taxes" upon the people. Make a better product!

      Also, I want to point out that I did not directly attack capitalism... but the garbage spawned from it. While the need for advertising may exist, I believe our society has gone WAY too far in letting our lives become commercialized. I do not listen to broadcast radio, nor do I subscribe to cable... because there are too many commercials. I just don't want the web to become the same way. It may already be too late.

      And before you use the "so, you expect all this content and the resources it uses to be given to you for free" argument, see above. I would much rather give them my money than deal with horrible advertising for shit I do not want.

      --Twilight1

    4. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by lewp · · Score: 1

      And I imagine it's for people like yourself that they are providing that option. Yay, comrade.

      --
      Game... blouses.
    5. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So buy some ads and leave them blank, if you really want to help the community.

    6. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot is a victim of its own success. Back when it was run out of their college dorm it was much better. Commercialism fucks everything up.

    7. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because the people who knew about Slashdot back then generally had a clue, so there were actually some signs of intelligence in the discussions we had.

      Once the commercial media started touting Slashdot as the "water cooler" of the open source movement, this place went downhill fast. It was overrun by trolls, kiddies, clueless dolts, anti-capitalist crybabies looking for a bully pulpit, and professional flame warriors from usenet looking for a new forum to parade their egos in.

      I pretty much hate this place now, but I'm still here because no other site offers the same mix of geek oriented news.

    8. Re:Ugh... more blatant captialist garbage. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You live in a country ruled by captialists, if you don't get this I feel sorry for you, if you do why you whining about it? Don't like it, its a free country move. If you really don't like it, Iraq has a nice dictatorship happening where there is no captialism :).

  5. Themes.org Has Let Me Down by ekrout · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Regarding the link in the new Slashdot NavBar -- Themes.org Has Let Me Down -- Yes, they got hacked, and yes, they lost a ton of data, but that was many many months ago. It's ashame that us KDE folks have had to migrate elsewhere, but what else did the Themes.org folks expect. They provided a great service for many years, but were unable to continue it. They've been promising a new site for awhile now (there's actually a beta version up), but it's just been too long of a wait for most of us.

    --

    If you celebrate Xmas, befriend me (538
    1. Re:Themes.org Has Let Me Down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Aye, it be true. They are slack.

      I mean really. Themes and desktops for several environments, each with resizable screenshot and comment system. Oh, and polls options and front page news stories.

      If it's dead they should give it a proper funeral. If it's coming back they should set a date.

  6. shit. by garcia · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    formkey bugs have been pissing me off for longer than just the weekend. It happens at like 1 out of 3 posts for me. It is actually pretty annoying to be told you cannot post b/c you already did. Nevermind the fact that sometimes it tells me that I don't have enough in the post (I think that a 12 word sentence is plenty).

    Advertisements.. Eat me. "Slashdot is 4 years old and I want it here in 4 years." If the fucking traffic has increased 10% then that is just that much more money that you are making. Don't feed me this bullshit that I have to pay to get rid of them. The god damn subscription fee best be $1/yr or else you are full of shit.

    -- enough of my annoying crap --

    Funny posts -2? You said half the time they aren't funny (yes subjective..) yet more than 3/4 of the time they are funny. Assigning them -2 isn't much good, just remove them all together if you don't like them -2 is just going to make a 5 post a 3 and most people are still going to see it.

    As far as blocking AC's... I say put in a AC asshole filter. Only blocking the god damn idiots that post (anything w/your specified words).

    Thanks for keeping up the site for the most part you do a good job. I will pay $1/yr to remove the ads, otherwise you are making more money off me than you would if I just had the damn ads.

    1. Re:shit. by JMan1865 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If the fucking traffic has increased 10% then that is just that much more money that you are making. Don't feed me this bullshit that I have to pay to get rid of them. The god damn subscription fee best be $1/yr or else you are full of shit.
      Do you have any understanding of the nature of business? Sure, page hits have increased 10%, but advertsing rates have dropped 50-75% - hence LESS MONEY MADE. I know it can't be easy to have a site strong enough to withstand the ungodly amount of hits that the /. servers withstood on 9-11 - but it's going to take some money to keep this up.

      Deal with it people. If /. is worth it to you, pay for it. If not, bugger off. That will kill off most of the AC's - if they have to pay, no one will be an AC, and /. will increase its signal/noise considerably. A small price to pay for a bit more intelligent /.
      --
      I think the people above me are having sex - or they're sleeping restlessly and agreeing with each other a lot.
    2. Re:shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "Slashdot is 4 years old and I want it here in 4 years." If the fucking traffic has increased 10% then that is just that much more money that you are making.

      I would hate to ever see full sized ads, the banner is bad enough! But a 10% increase does not mean 10% more profit. Quite the opposite actually. That's 10% more strain on your network and equipment, but you'll be lucky if 1% click on the banner ads which is the money maker.

    3. Re:shit. by geekoid · · Score: 2

      There are other factors:
      Click through % has dropped dramatically. If /. could get everyone to click through 2 time a day, they probably wouldn't have to do this.
      Ad reveue is plummeting do to the economy.
      Finally, do you think /. could really operate on 250,000 a year?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    4. Re:shit. by NMerriam · · Score: 2

      Assigning them -2 isn't much good, just remove them all together if you don't like them -2 is just going to make a 5 post a 3 and most people are still going to see it.

      I assume from his tone that he is planning on making it customizable -- if you hate "funny", you could disable all "funny" posts, or you could just penalize them a point or whatever.

      I think just knocking off a point would be sufficient -- the only time I'm annoyed by funny posts is when they are the TOP posts on an article, while posts that are actually informative are 3 screens down below all the replies to the "funny" ones.

      I'd be perfectly happy to just be able to say that a "funny" post will be listed below other equally-rated posts...

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    5. Re:shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FUCK-ing aye. I'm resetting my homepage to cryptome. I get the same information I want, and no ads.

    6. Re:shit. by reynaert · · Score: 1

      If everybody starts clicking 2 times a day, and just ignore the site they get to, I think ad revenue will plummet even faster :)

    7. Re:shit. by jmauro · · Score: 2

      Since you don't have to pay to view the site, the site will be the source of many trolls. Most of the reasonable people will move on to somewhere else, while only trolls will remain since they don't really care what's on the page they'll be the only ones here. Site strength should have nothing to do with the number of adds sold, but the content and the community built around the site. When Slashdot sold out to Andover.net, it was to keep the site running because a bigger company would have the cash and resources to carry the site in the "bad" times. For the adds it all depends on where they are. I find the big ads even less interesting that the normal ones. Internet ads were over priced and based on some fictious statistic called clickthrough. I mean does TV have anything like clickthrough? Radio? Newspapers? I know billboards? No, none of those things had anything like clickthroughs. They're all about getting the name out there not how many people walked into the store on a certain date. Take my word, in a few months the AC's will be about all that's left.

    8. Re:shit. by p3d0 · · Score: 2
      If /. could get everyone to click through 2 time a day, they probably wouldn't have to do this.
      If this happened, clickthroughs would be even more worthless than they are already. This is a temporary solution.

      The reality is that a different revenue system is needed. Of course, if I knew what that was, I'd be rich.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    9. Re:shit. by damiam · · Score: 1

      I'd like to be able to display "funny" comments in threaded mode and everything else in nested mode - that way, you don't see the stupid replies to the "funny" comments unless they're funny themselves.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    10. Re:shit. by zsazsa · · Score: 2

      Funny posts -2? You said half the time they aren't funny (yes subjective..) yet more than 3/4 of the time they are funny. Assigning them -2 isn't much good, just remove them all together if you don't like them -2 is just going to make a 5 post a 3 and most people are still going to see it.

      Taco didn't make this too clear, but this was a hypothetical situation. You'll be able to score Funny posts +5 if you wanted to.

    11. Re:shit. by lewp · · Score: 2, Funny

      Some people have found this system already. It is called pron. For some reason geeks can reach their wallets more easily when their other hand is ...

      --
      Game... blouses.
    12. Re:shit. by Kamel+Jockey · · Score: 1

      Advertisements.. Eat me.

      formkey bugs have been pissing me off for longer than just the weekend

      I say put in a AC asshole filter

      Ok, so you don't like ads, and you abhor paying a subscription fee. Where do you expect these guys to get the money to make these changes you want?

      Ads have never bothered me. If your eyes are so easily distracted because of ads, you probably have other issues. But that's another story.

      I still will never understand though, why you people here are not only opposed to actually paying money for something they like, and why they are also opposed to online ventures finding other ways to get money when you people won't pay.

      --
      In case of fire, do not use elevator. Use water!
    13. Re:shit. by spudnic · · Score: 2

      formkey bugs have been pissing me off for longer than just the weekend. It happens at like 1 out of 3 posts for me. It is actually pretty annoying to be told you cannot post b/c you already did.

      I submitted this bug over a month ago after having it happen to me several times. It was closed because they said that I had screwed up and hit submit twice or something. I replied back saying that wasn't the case, but I was told that I didn't understand what I had screwed up.

      This is the first time I've really felt badly towards /.

      --
      load "linux",8,1
  7. That sound you hear... by dlittled · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...is 500,000 slashdotters clicking the "off" radio button for the OSDN bar -d

    1. Re:That sound you hear... by dimator · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seriously. If 99.9% of readers turned it the hell off, there was really no point in having it.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    2. Re:That sound you hear... by .milfox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What OSDN bar?

      Oh, but then again, I do browse text only.

      I hope that'd work for the big banners too. =) Pleeeeeese?

    3. Re:That sound you hear... by Tuzanor · · Score: 2

      since there is a huge bunch of lurkers that read slashdot, I would guess that there is still going to be a lot of people wiht it still there. Most of the /.ers that i know personally only read slashdot, they never post or anything. Taco said that only if you signup can you rid yourself of that thing.

      I'm going to give it a few days before i get rid of it. The normally take new things is to at least give it a chance. Think about it, as usless as it probably is, if people didn't stick to things they didn't like at first, we wouldn't have coffee, cigarettes, etc.

    4. Re:That sound you hear... by warrior389 · · Score: 1


      I like it... kinda reminds me of microsoft [microsoft]. "All products" ... "All OSDN" ... gotta wonder.

    5. Re:That sound you hear... by Yosho · · Score: 1
      if people didn't stick to things they didn't like at first, we wouldn't have coffee, cigarettes, etc.

      While you have a valid point, I don't think coffee and cigarettes are the best examples. I don't like either, but really, even if you do like them -- can you say the world would be a worse place without them? Particularly smoking -- most smokers I know will freely admit they wish they had never started. People smoke not because it's good for them, but because of the addictive drugs in cigarettes.

      --
      Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
    6. Re:That sound you hear... by ecampbel · · Score: 2

      Even if you don't post, it's still behooves to register since you can control how the front page look and the default way stories are sorted, so I'd imagine that most lurkers will eventually register.

      --

      Sig goes here
    7. Re:That sound you hear... by foo+fighter · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you view in light mode you won't see it at all anyway. I didn't know what the hell he was talking about until I cleared my cookies and viewed the page regular (ie bloated).

      --
      obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
    8. Re:That sound you hear... by mclearn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It would be interesting to see some stats about how many /.er's have the toolbar on after 'x' days -- in fact it would be interesting to have a compilation of stats in general:

      • Who toggles off Jon Katz
      • Average browse level
      • Average karma
      • Who has the Jenni-cam set up
      • etc.
    9. Re:That sound you hear... by juha0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      • Who has the Jenni-cam set up

      ...and how much watching Jenni's naked ass disturbs your everyday life?

    10. Re:That sound you hear... by tzanger · · Score: 2

      It would be interesting to see some stats about how many /.er's have the toolbar on after 'x' days

      I intend on keeping it there... not that I have ever gone to anything OSDN other than slashdot and k5 (which is not technically OSDN but....) Seriously though, that bar bugs you that much? Jesus, you must be one anal mofo.

    11. Re:That sound you hear... by droleary · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hell, I don't even see it because it's up there in banner ad space, which is completely ignored when scanning the page for content. Like the banner ads themselves, I think it will prove to be essentially useless even if people don't turn it off.

    12. Re:That sound you hear... by unitron · · Score: 2
      What OSDN bar? That thin grey thing at the top of the page that disappears as soon as you scroll down an inch? People think that's worth getting bent out of shape about?

      Maybe it's more of a problem/annoyance on other browsers or something, but it only took me a day or so 'til I didn't even notice it anymore.

      Now having to reload at 0 instead of -1 to get rid of the horizontal scroll is worth complaining about.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

  8. The X on the NavBar by jmorris42 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Har Har, very funny.

    Clicking the X on the OSDN NavBar just logged me off /. and it didn't wanna log me back in again.

    Using Mozilla 0.9.4 on RH7.1

    --
    Democrat delenda est
    1. Re:The X on the NavBar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can only turn it off if you are running IE 6.0.

    2. Re:The X on the NavBar by jmorris42 · · Score: 1

      That would be shocking.

      But for my money, it's just a bug, but it was too funny to pass up posting.

      --
      Democrat delenda est
    3. Re:The X on the NavBar by Glytch · · Score: 2

      *shrug* Works just like Taco said under a decent browser, like Opera. It's your fault for using something slow and buggy.

  9. Some contradiction here? by MongooseCN · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most slashdotters are advocates about retaining their privacy and personal information. Yet when it comes to other peoples privacy, ie Anonymous Cowards, it's just unacceptable. Those same people want the Anonymous Cowards modded down. Maybe someone posting as an Anonymous Coward has no choice. If they need to post something negative about the company they work at or an opinion they don't want people to know is theirs, then they have to post anonymously.

    Things need to work both ways here. Now go ahead and mod me down for "trolling".

    1. Re:Some contradiction here? by thehossman · · Score: 1

      Hopefully some distinction will be made between ACs who are just being pricks, and people who are logged in but posting Anonymously

      --
      -- The Hoss Man
    2. Re:Some contradiction here? by Telek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, however when the MAJORITY of people posting as Mr Anon Coward do so in order to post stupid or defamitory comments, FP/SP/TP/Xth Post comments or pictures of stupid ASCII art about goatsex, then things change considerably. Try reading at -1 and see all of the crap that is posted by these Anon Cowards and you'll get my point.

      I see absolutely no reason why someone can't post as a logged in user. If, on the rare occasion, they need to have their anonimity protected, then post as an AC or make a new account. If the post is legitimate then it will be modded up to where people can read it.

      Mind you, I personally see no problem with the system the way that it is.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    3. Re:Some contradiction here? by Omerna · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This looks like a good argument, and in theory I agree, but if you take the time to look at every AC comment, I'd guess 90% are crap/ flames/ pointless. I realize there are some legitimate posts, but they are vastly outweighed by the static. Anyway, if you're privacy is such a concern that you'll post as AC, why not create an account just for this purpose? I don't remeber the exact procedure, but becoming a member here only took a couple of minutes max. Not to big a time investment.

      --


      No sig for you.
    4. Re:Some contradiction here? by Phork · · Score: 1

      I would say that it is still possible to maintain your privacy and post from an account on slashdot, thats because slashdot doesnt use your real name. slashdot is psuedononymous(sp?), no one forces you to have you email address or website listed.

      --
      -- free as in swatantryam - not soujanyam.
    5. Re:Some contradiction here? by Surak · · Score: 5, Informative

      Most slashdotters are advocates about retaining their privacy and personal information. Yet when it comes to other peoples privacy, ie Anonymous Cowards, it's just unacceptable.

      How is this about privacy? The *only* piece of personal information you are *required* to give slashdot is a real e-mail address, which is required for validation purposes and for subscribing to the headline poster. (A few other things like messages were added with Banjo!)

      The address you give them doesn't even have to be your main address anyway. You could (any many people do) give them a hotmail address or whatever.

      Your posts can always get linked back to your IP address, AC or no AC, there's no way around that short of an anonymizer and there aren't too many of those around either. Besides anonymizers can't be trusted anyway.

      So if you're so worried about privacy, disconnect your computer from the Internet, get your phone shut off, and move into microbus and go traveling around the country, even then you wouldn't have complete privacy.

    6. Re:Some contradiction here? by theNeophile · · Score: 1

      Umm... it's been a while but I don't remember you having to give out you social insurance number to get a /. account. It's not an issue of privacy, it's an issue of not even being bothered to spend a minute to get yourself an account. (Paraphrasing some guys .sig) If you're post isn't even worth a pseudonym, I don't wanna hear it.

    7. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, many Anonymous Cowards make very valid points and it's a shame to filter them out just because they are AC.

      Hopefully moderation still applis to AC's that have been filtered so a good AC post can still reach a 5 (with enough moderation) even if it has been filter.

    8. Re:Some contradiction here? by Dirtside · · Score: 2

      I'd just like to point out that you claim that the people who say that, to paraphrase, "advocate retaining their privacy and personal information", are the *SAME* people who "want the Anonymous Cowards modded down". While I'll admit that both views are common enough on Slashdot, do you have any evidence that it really is the same subset of people who are demanding both things? How much overlap between the group of privacy advocates and the group of anti-ACs is there?

      I often see posts of this nature on Slashdot -- in an article about intellectual property in the Linux world, you'll see comments like, "You people are the same ones who said that IP is evil, and now you want Linux's IP protected!!" without ever proving that fact.

      I really wish people would stop claiming stuff like this. You're not trolling, you're just making an assumption without any data to back it up. (Not that I'm saying no such data exists; merely that you didn't collect it. For all we know, you're right -- it IS the same people, but no one's bothered to collate the data. You might suggest that *I* should do it, but then again, YOU'RE the one who made the positive assertion that the two groups coincide...)

      --
      "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    9. Re:Some contradiction here? by NMerriam · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There's no contradiction whatsoever -- you have every right to post an an AC, and taco has repeatedly stated that people will always be able to post as AC.

      That said, anyone reading will immediately consider anonymous information to be less valid than that which is attributed. In some cases, the inherent value of the information itself will overcome that initial doubtfulness.

      But to suggest that /. is somehow making ACs "unacceptable" is simply incorrect. they're letting the individual readers decide whether or not they (as an individual) want to read the Ac or not. He also made pretty clear that he's taking it beyond AC into the realm of other attributes, like modding as "funny". This seems like just another way to let the readers decide what they come to /. for.

      there are days when i browse at -1 to laugh at the asinine AC stuff, there are days when i browse at +2 because I don't have much time to spend. There are days where I'm annoyed that the three top rated posts are all "funny" rather than informative or directly on-topic. there are days when I'm not bothered by it at all.

      I personally think that Taco is doing as well as could be expected at trying to make everyone happy, which of course he can't. But he can give us more and more options so we can make OURSELVES happy.

      That said, the suggested large ads are a PITA, and after being on /. since nearly the beginning I think those will do more to drive off the readership than AC postings ever did.

      I suggest that they'd probably do better selling karma than ad space!

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    10. Re:Some contradiction here? by randombit · · Score: 1

      Most slashdotters are advocates about retaining their privacy and personal information. Yet when it comes to other peoples privacy, ie Anonymous Cowards, it's just unacceptable.

      What? Why? Did Taco mention something about being able to find out who ACs are from their posts? [checks back] Nope, he didn't.

      Those same people want the Anonymous Cowards modded down.

      And this affects their privacy... how? Anyway, it's an option. As always, you are free to view at -1 anytime.

      Maybe someone posting as an Anonymous Coward has no choice. If they need to post something negative about the company they work at or an opinion they don't want people to know is theirs, then they have to post anonymously.

      OK, that's great. So what does this example have to do with anything at all? They have every right to say something on slashdot (modulo Taco + co's rights to remove anything they don't happen to like from here - it is their boxen after all), but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen to them.

      Anyway, how hard is it to create a new user account "CorporateLeak999" and post from there?

      BTW, I would presume you have a problem with ACs currently posting at 0, and people with high karma having the ability to post at +2, right?

    11. Re:Some contradiction here? by geekoid · · Score: 2

      True, but it should be my option not to have to listen.
      If they need to post something negative about the company they work at or an opinion they don't want people to know is theirs, then they have to post anonymously.
      Because getting a second accout is soo difficult.

      This is really different then sending an anon. email to the boss. so you can complain.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh dear Mongoose, think about it for a second...

      An AC is no more anonymous than a registered user. What information does a registered account have? home phone number? physical address? nope... the only thing Slashcode ever asks from you is an email address and you can get one from yahoo mail in five minutes. An account allows a two-way conversation - and that's it.

      When logged in I am just as anonymous as I am when posting as an AC. Slashdot still logs the IP address of ACs, just like registered users. The only thing I don't have under an AC is a posting history.

      Come on - where's the extra anonymity of an AC?

    13. Re:Some contradiction here? by rnd() · · Score: 2

      uh... that's what moderation is for...

      --

      Amazing magic tricks

    14. Re:Some contradiction here? by rgmoore · · Score: 2

      I generally agree that the new feature isn't so hot, but my feeling is that it's more of an issue because it's unnecessary than because it's bad. Anyone who wants to skip the ACs because so many of them post penis birds and goatse.cx links can do so quite effectively by setting their threshold at 1 instead of 0. It's not as though the regular posts that wind up getting modded down to 0 (or come from posters with karma low enough to default to 0) are particularly worth reading anyway. OTOH, some AC posts are actually worth reading and get modded up, so setting all ACs to -1 will wind up removing some worthwhile comments. All in all a stupid setting, and one I plan to avoid.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    15. Re:Some contradiction here? by Dr.+A.+van+Code · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You err in assuming that the alternative to anonymity is total loss of privacy. Most slashdotters are pseudonymous, like yourself. All I know about you is that you are a "Software consultant in the Boston area." (mongeese.org wouldn't resolve.) And you freely chose to reveal that information. Also, I can see a list of recent comments you've posted, how they were scored, and I can even click through to see what you wrote, if I'm so inclined.

      The advantage of pseudonyms is that they protect privacy while still allowing a writer to build a reputation -- whether good or bad. And that allows readers to make informed decisions about whose words they want to read, and what biases those authors may have.

      Even if a slashdotter wanted to make some comments and not have them associated with previous comments from the same nym (perhaps they had revealed in the past that they are employed writing video drivers for OmniMegaView video cards, and now they want to blow the whistle on OmniMegaViews treatment of its gay employees), an easy option is open to them. Simply create two (or more) user accounts.

      Use one nym for posting work-related or technical material, another for comments that might be embarrassing in some way, and a third for flaming the trolls back to the stone age. Readers would have no way of knowing that the nyms all represented the same person in real life.

      "On Slashdot, nobody knows you're really CowboyNeal."

      I think, though, that it would be better to increase the penalty for AC's, rather than set them to -1. If one could, say, hit them with an extra -2 penalty, that would still let those rare AC comments that had been strongly modded up pass through. In any case, this would only be an option -- if you object to it so strongly, don't turn it on.

      P.S. The plural of mongoose is polygoose. ;-)

      --
      Good mfences make good neighbors.
    16. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, IP itself is not evil, but abusing it is. Right to privacy/ffreedom of speech via Anon Coward is not evil, but abusing it is.

    17. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You R a stupid pants hahahaha

    18. Re:Some contradiction here? by Ryandav · · Score: 2

      Absolutely right. We're supposed to be all about _choice_! I just set my filter level to the appropriate level and skim, FGS. It's only a vocal portion of / . demanding the removal of a Choice.

      why not just browse at +3 or 4 and Get Over It?

      --
      Check my Go-related blog for beginners: DGD
    19. Re:Some contradiction here? by Jeff+Probst · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Yes, however when the MAJORITY of people posting as Mr Anon Coward do so in order to post stupid or defamitory comments, FP/SP/TP/Xth Post comments or pictures of stupid ASCII art about goatsex, then things change considerably. Try reading at -1 and see all of the crap that is posted by these Anon Cowards and you'll get my point.
      to be perfectly honest and blunt with you, if slashdot had an option to only read posts at scored at -1 I would use it.

      slashdot used to be a place where important and interesting topics were discussed and genuinely important and interesting people such as Alan Cox, John Carmack and Bruce Perens would post and discuss.

      Today, slashdot is full of karma whoring bitches who post blindingly obvious comments to articles. The only people posting interesting comments to the articles are trolls such as egg troll, Trollman 5000, the sporks, cyborg_monkey et al. Their posts may be crude and unwelcome by most of you, but as a slashdot veteran being surrounded with linux wannabes posting blindingly obvious yet 'insightful' comments it is a breath of fresh air.

      You only need to look at moderation in the slashdot article Ask Slashdot: Opposing Open Source? to see what i mean: the article was all about opposing points to open source software, yet we had blindingly obvious karma whoring posts about microsoft's well known postition on the subject and the not-very-insightful karma whoring posts by a bunch of linux wannabes giving their un-valuable opinions, and yet whenever something new was presented, even in jest, it was moderated troll or flamebait.

      I want an option that allows me to browse only the -1 posts. These posts are the only insightful and interesting material being posted on this site.

    20. Re:Some contradiction here? by MrBogus · · Score: 2

      Actually, if you ignore the bottom third of the page (which is pure crap territory, AC and not), the AC content/crap ratio is usually far higher than 90%. In particular there's a AC poster called "--fred" who makes it worthwhile to cruise at 0.

      I think history shows that most moderators do not adjust their filters, or they don't feel like it's a valuable use of their mod points on ACs.

      --

      When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    21. Re:Some contradiction here? by chemstar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The author of the parent may be the only one to read this, in that it will never mod up. However, I concur to a great extent. Its almost as if pushing the correct shapes will drop the karma reward from the recepticle. Read: Big Brother, Microsoft sucks, etc. It is a shame, and the quality people with perhaps a stake in the forward movement in the industry (as well as the philosophy) move along, as the freshman computer science student and midwestern sys admin seem to jolly up, and allow little for original, if not current thought.

    22. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quite the interesting post coming from "a slashdot veteran" (in your words)

      Hmmm... you're right user number 459812, is a real veteran number. Not a bad little troll there yourself, until that part. :)

    23. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you.
      for what it's worth, other people appear to agree with me on this subject. here and here

    24. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      like many people here (particularly the trolls), i have multiple accounts.

      i read this site back in the day, my other UID is in the early 100000s which i only got so i could put the BSD topics on the side bar and change the layout so slashdot would load faster.

      FWIW, i wasnt trolling, although i do troll with this account every now and again.

    25. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Most slashdotters are advocates about retaining their privacy and personal information. Yet when it comes to other peoples privacy, ie Anonymous Cowards, it's just unacceptable.

      How is this about privacy?

      Well, there's privacy and there's Privacy. We all (should) know that if someone really wants to discover from whence a particular post came, it is possible. The value of AC is it does allow insiders to give away a little information, safe from casual discovery, without having to log into a "secret" account or create a fake hotmail account for the purpose.

    26. Re:Some contradiction here? by eean · · Score: 1

      Who the hell is MongooseCN? Who is eean? Really, everyone is just as anonymous, unless they choose not to be (like putting a link to their website up.) If the government wants to, they can get the IPs of an A.C. just as easily as they can a registered user.

      I think ACs are just too lazy to get a login or want to post something stupid and not blemish their karma while doing it.

    27. Re:Some contradiction here? by CLorox · · Score: 1

      It was more fun before. I would love to see the site continue on in prosperity, but it seems like a difficult line to walk. You don't want to drive everyone away with irritating ads and banner bars, yet you wanna at least break even. Maybe more slashdot merchandise would help :P

    28. Re:Some contradiction here? by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      As a person that hates the abuse typically dished out by ACs, I'd just like to state that I have "Show your real email address without cowering behind childish anonymity or obfuscation" checked and if you follow links from my info page I'm pretty much an open book.

      Hopefully this AC killer will let me read at +1 again without the screen filling with crap. That's right, I've been reading at +2, so how do all you pro-AC people who don't get a +1 Bonus on your posts feel about ACs now?

      (And yes, I'd like to ignore "+1 Funny" ratings when my pages are generated too.)

    29. Re:Some contradiction here? by theancient2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I see absolutely no reason why someone can't post as a logged in user.

      In my experience, posting anything negative about Linux will get you modded down. Posting positive things about Microsoft can also get you modded down, but not as often. The chances of getting modded down for this decreases for posts over about 2k and for posts that begin with "I know I'm going to get modded down for this...", but I've found that if you state an opinion that is contrary to Slashdot groupthink, you need to post anonymously.

      This post here, for example, is one that probably should have been posted anonymously, but in my little utopian world, I think I should be able to have an opinion without cowering behind anononymity just because a few monderators think anyone who doesn't like Linux is automatically a troll.

      I'd filter anonymous posts, but there are quite a decent ones out there. But most people on Slashdot seem to believe that if you're not being insighful and interesting, or if you post less than 5 lines of text, it's best to be anonymous.

      How to solve the problem?

      What we need is an "anonymous" checkbox, and then an "I'm an idiot" checkbox.

      Or a new moderation, "-1 Asshole." That way, if you don't agree with the poster, you can still mark them as Troll, but if someone is linking goatse.cx, you can mark them as being just plain annoying.

    30. Re:Some contradiction here? by TGK · · Score: 2

      That stated isn't the answer obvious? If the /coders have the time and will to do it why not simply force all AC posts to start at -1 or -2. This makes them need 7, not 5 points of moderation to reach 5. The result (hopefully) is that the less relelvant AC posts will remain in the dumpster of oblivion whereas the truely insightfull and interesting ones will filter up and be seen as they were intended.

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    31. Re:Some contradiction here? by Homewrecker · · Score: 1, Insightful
      That way, if you don't agree with the poster, you can still mark them as Troll

      And this fact is the biggest single problem with Slashdot. Since when does an opposing view equal trolling? Sadly, that's exactly what moderation is used for around here and until that gets fixed, stupid ideas like filtering ACs are a pathetic attempt at stopping the bloodflow.

      --

      --- Linux R00lz!

    32. Re:Some contradiction here? by Telek · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In my experience, posting anything negative about Linux will get you modded down. Posting positive things about Microsoft can also get you modded down, but not as often.

      I do exactly that all the time, and don't get modded down very frequently for it.

      but I've found that if you state an opinion that is contrary to Slashdot groupthink, you need to post anonymously.

      As long as you justify your position I have found that you can state whatever you wish to. As long as you don't post defamitory or just plain stupid comments I haven't had much of a problem expressing my opinion.

      Or a new moderation, "-1 Asshole."

      Does it really matter? The labels don't do anything anyways as everything is filtered on score instead.

      This post here, for example, is one that probably should have been posted anonymously

      Why? I see absolutely nothing wrong with what you're saying, you've stated a point and you're backing it up. I'd be surprised if you got negatively modded just because you were expressing your opinion, and indeed if you were for that reason then it would be incredibly hypocritical of the people doing the moderation, since we're all trying to fight for freedom of speech et al.

      I browse at 2, and I find that works out great. That means that either you're an AC who said something important enough to get +2 on it, you're a regular user who said something important enough to get at least a +1 on it, or you have a history of saying good things and thus you've probably got something interesting to say.

      Personally I find it pathetic that there are loosers out there who think that it's cool to get in the first post on a story or post stupid ascii art about goatse.cx, quite frankly I think they need to get a life, but unfortunately that's part of life here. I think that the current moderation system works, not perfectly for anything pro linux is bound to get modded up, and sometimes stupid/funny gets modded up as well, but usually the moderations are fair. If anything I'd suggest to remove the cap for moderation, allow it to go as high as you want, or at least maybe to +6 or +7, and possibly give the ability to filter/sort based on the description of the moderations since right now they mean really nothing. Especially since the last moderation sets the description, it's kinda pointless if you have +4, Interesting and then a -1, Overrated so your comment is now (+4, Overrated)...

      Ah well, this is but a news forum, I think we have more important battles to fight =)

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    33. Re:Some contradiction here? by scrytch · · Score: 2

      You have some valid points, but you don't see the ability to post anonymously being taken away, do you? Yes, there are AC's who make perfectly good insightful posts, there are AC's who can't post under a real account for whatever reason, and so on.

      But the majority of AC posts I read are simply crap. I've stopped metamoderating because I'm sick of reading posts about "towelheads" and "sand niggers". I browse at score 2 now, because if I didn't, I probably wouldn't read slashdot at all. I'm not going to tar all anonymous posters with the same brush, but hey, life just isn't fair sometimes, I don't owe anyone here my attention.

      > Now go ahead and mod me down for "trolling".

      Can we get a "-1 whine" for this incessant "I'm going to get modded down" nonsense? Grow a freaking backbone and burn some karma to express the occasional unpopular opinion without all this whining about it.

      --
      I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
    34. Re:Some contradiction here? by TGK · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As one of those Linux wanabes and a fairly recent addition to the slashdot community (1 year or so) I'd like to concur and respectfully disagree. I concur insofar as the statement that there is a groupthink mentality growing on slashdot which is dangerous to the vitality of the readerbase and is slowly changing the character of the site for the worse.

      I disagree in the assumption that all new users and linux wanabes are responsible for this. I for example try to keep my posts restricted to my personal areas of expertese (spelling not being one of those areas) and pure speculation. I don't post on the future trends in the open source movement because I simply don't know shit about them. I'm intersted to see what others have to say though... and I think I've learned alot from Slashdot in my year or so here.

      Now into that speculation. I've noted that Slashdot tends to be straying from what many consider its origional purpose to be. Most of the reader base sees this site as dedicated first and foremost to news about Linux, high tecnology, and science. Nonetheless, we've branched out. Articles on personal liberties (many of which really don't belong to "your rights online") and poltical developments grace these pages.

      Perhaps, other niche groups need their own slashdot? I've seen a few uses of the slashcode in various poorly frequented news sights, but nothing of the scope that Slashdot has.

      As a history buff myself, I'd be curious to see the reaction a site like, oh, say Pastdot would get :-)

      Point being, I think a lot of the AC posts and trolls we see here are a result of two things. 10 year olds with to much time on their hands, and people looking to discuss issues who really aren't part of this "community" or clique if you prefer. Perhaps /. has simply gotten to ideocentric to accecpt deviants anymore. Perhaps I'm just rambeling.

      --
      Killfile(TGK)
      No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
    35. Re:Some contradiction here? by Keith+Russell · · Score: 2
      If, on the rare occasion, they need to have their anonimity protected, then post as an AC or make a new account. If the post is legitimate then it will be modded up to where people can read it.


      I've never had a reason to check "Post Anonymously". (And I wouldn't say, even if I did.) How does Slash handle that? If you still have a +1 bonus, will it still apply? Does it truly become an AC post, or is it only masked to look like one?

      Another idea: Different thresholds for login and AC posts. ACs still have a chance, but are held to a higher standard.
      --
      This sig intentionally left blank.
    36. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i post as an AC(not very often) because im
      sick of having to maintain accounts on websites.
      slashdot is good that it does not require registration to do things. i can live with the
      OSDN navbar, i had a slashdot account a few years
      ago, but i guess they deleted it for inactivity. tried to login with my username/password and it said it didn't exist or something.

      so to cap ..many people(like me) post as AC because we don't care to register an account. we have enough accounts and usernames and passwords to remember. don't want more just to post on some site. and no none of my passwords are shared anywhere. and last time i tried(~2 years ago at least) cookie logins didn't work at all.

    37. Re:Some contradiction here? by theancient2 · · Score: 1

      They already start at 0 -- isn't that enough?

      AC posts tend to get overlooked by moderators who browse at +1. If 5 people think an AC post deserves a positive moderation, it should have a +5.

    38. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't log in to post anywhere as a matter of policy. I've provided my information to Slashdot in the past (pre-logins, assuming any of you remember that far back), and those posts are still out there.

      Every year or so, something new happens to Slashdot to make it a bit harder to use without an account. The index_F and related pages disappeared, then the defaults flipped over to threaded and threshold=1. So now instead of just 'slashdot.org' I have to keep a URL bookmarked that has my favorite mode and threshold parameters. The best part is how certain links (usually into the sections, ala BSD) drop either the mode, the threshold or occasionally both.

      It means a few seconds of my time to grab the right choices from the drop-down boxes and resubmit the form, but the resulting load on the db server and web server can't be pretty. Oh well, not my problem.

      I'd probably pony up a few dollars to the Slashdot operations if it could be done on a network basis.
      I run a proxy for friends and neighbors, and I'd want my entire netblock to have high-quality access sans cookies. We block cookies both in the proxy and in the browsers, so they won't work.

      You can get my money but you're not going to track me from page to page. Nope, not gonna happen. All you can do is see us in aggregate by IP sort of like the way TiVo sees you in aggegrate by zip code.

    39. Re:Some contradiction here? by theancient2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Whoever moderated this as a troll, I think, proves the point.

      If you challenge to the status quo, you're a troll.

    40. Re:Some contradiction here? by Matchstick · · Score: 1
      When I get moderation points, I almost always give them to the good AC posts because they're the ones that start at a disadvantage.

      If one is posting as an AC, presumably there's a good reason for doing so -- and that reason should correlate with the post being more interesting than most of the dreck you see here. Given that, all an AC needs is a point (or now, perhaps two) to make them rise above the noise and be heard.

      Still, perhaps the AC penalty could be implemented to only apply to AC posts that don't have any positive moderation.

    41. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If having an account is the same as being AC in terms of privacy, then why look down on a post for being AC? Why does posting under an account (that you claim is just as anonymous) make the post any more important?

    42. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Point being, I think a lot of the AC posts and trolls we see here are a result of two things. 10 year olds with to much time on their hands, and people looking to discuss issues who really aren't part of this "community" or clique if you prefer. Perhaps /. has simply gotten to ideocentric to accecpt deviants anymore. Perhaps I'm just rambeling.
      from what I can tell many of trolls that grace these pages are not 10 year olds. many have good jobs and grace these pages to let off steam weekdays. i know at least a few of the trolls i identified in my post (that is now moderated as a troll by a cheap-crack-loving moderator) have 9-5 jobs.
    43. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? Afraid someone might have something good to say? Just as you say "if a post isn't even worth a pseudonym", I could say "if a post isn't even worth a REAL name" or "if a post doesn't have a real first and last name, address, and phone number..."

      Really, where do you draw the line? WHY do you NEED to know who posted what? Shouldn't you be reading for the content and not the supposed author?

    44. Re:Some contradiction here? by maxpublic · · Score: 1

      How the hell could anyone be afraid of being exposed? Even if the puds at work know that you post on slashdot under account name x, you can always go and get account name y.

      There's no chance of anyone tracing back your account to reveal your real name. Therefore there's no dire need to post as an AC.

      If you're having trouble wrapping your brain around this one, think about it: I'm maxpublic here on this post - how the hell do you know whether or not I have a second, or third, or fourth account?

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    45. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      EVERYBODY should post at 0 and be modded up from there if deserving. So many times have I seen the "just burning karma" post that it makes me want to puke. So you get modded up a few times you're allowed to have high ranking trolls? WTF is with that? Why not just judge based on the content of the post and not the poster?

    46. Re:Some contradiction here? by Telek · · Score: 2

      Man I pity you for the world that you live in. Is all of that paranoia worth it? Do you think that you are that important of a person in order that companies will fall over themselves to track you by cookies? Is it that hard to log in each time that you go to view slashdot? Slashdot even gave you a URL that you can bookmark that will log you in so that you don't have to, so what's the big deal?

      I seriously don't understand why you would be so against cookies. Or tracking for that matter. Who cares? Do you think there is some huge conspiracy out there that wants to know what web pages you visit? Do you think that it *really matters* if someone else knows what web pages you visit? You wanna know, I'll tell you. I don't care, I'm not important enough of a person for anyone to waste their time tracking me to see that I spend x minutes a day on slashdot and y minutes a day looking at porn. What does it really matter?

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    47. Re:Some contradiction here? by Banjonardo · · Score: 1
      A few other things like messages were added with Banjo!

      What? I get more things added cause of my username???

      :-)

      --

      -----

      Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton

    48. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I prefer users with a post history. I look down on those that do not as I cannot see if they have been bad.

    49. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      you are completely right

      i read some of your other posts on this article, the one about prefacing a post with "i know i am going to get moderated down" is completely right. when i see a post like that i shudder and cringe, and if i have moderation points on another account I bitchslap it for being such a lame karma whore.

    50. Re:Some contradiction here? by snilloc · · Score: 1
      How hard would it be to differentiate "Anonymous /.er" from pure AC. Logged-in-AC could get different treatment from not-logged-in-AC.

      There could even be a system whereby the Legit-User-AC has his own karma, distinct (or not??) from his real karma.

    51. Re:Some contradiction here? by thehossman · · Score: 1
      I don't disagree with you, but if options are going to be added to let people selectively block posts based on criteria (like AC) then then the options should distinguish between true Anon Cowards, and registered users who are posting as AC to protect their anonymity. -- The former typically post links to (redirectors to) pictures of goat porn; the later typically post usefull comments that they don't want to get fired for -- if they don't, they'll get moderated down, and their karma will reflect it.

      (karma may not mean much now, but there's no reason it can't mean more in the future -- we're talking about future features after all)

      MongooseCN's orriginal point was that people value their own privacy, but are critical of ACs, ... All I'm saying is that I wouldn't check a box that treated all Anon posts as -1, but I'll gladly check a box that treats all posts by unregistered people as -9.9E+9

      --
      -- The Hoss Man
    52. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      there are days when i browse at +2 because I don't have much time to spend.

      At +2, eh? Except on articles where I'm legitimately interested in the topic, my threshhold never drops below +5, and even then there's a lot of crap.

    53. Re:Some contradiction here? by Malcontent · · Score: 1, Troll

      Actually you are wrong. Critizing linux get you modded up more often then down. Praising the stability of windows will always get you modded up as will any pro MS post. Try it sometime.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    54. Re:Some contradiction here? by q-soe · · Score: 2

      Umm no

      I think half the poeople posting as anonymous cowards are members who have karma they have earned thru posting hard and long and simply want to make a valid comment which they fear might get them moderated down - like not 100% supporting Linux or open source or not 100% condemming Microsoft/Intel etc.

      If you look at the number of posts below 0 you will find as i have that its about 20-25% of total posts and not all of those are anonymous - we have people who openly post racist and abusive material under user names (Ralph Jew Hater Nader springs to mind - he seems to be around a bit)

      The system works only becuase it has too - whilst people are afraid to post any dissenting comment for fear of being attacked for it they will post as anonymous cowards - thats all there is too it.

      I think (my opinion only) that we should get rid of AC and allow people to read anonymously but NOT post that wauy and we actually ban and close user accounts of people who are abusive and racist and intolerant etc - that way we would get rid of 90% of the crap right away

      but as i said its only my opinion

      --
      I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
    55. Re:Some contradiction here? by Carter+Butts · · Score: 1

      In my experience, posting anything negative about Linux will get you modded down. Posting positive things about Microsoft can also get you modded down, but not as often. The chances of getting modded down for this decreases for posts over about 2k and for posts that begin with "I know I'm going to get modded down for this...", but I've found that if you state an opinion that is contrary to Slashdot groupthink, you need to post anonymously.


      This seems to be a very common perception, but I must confess some skepticism on the matter. While I hear a lot of people asserting that posts which do not conform to some hypothetical "groupthink" line are inevitably modded down, I also note that many (not all, but many) of these same posts are themselves modded up.


      The problem, I think, is that it is actually very hard to tell precisely which posts are being modded up/down for what reasons, without conducting a more extensive analysis. If one were able to collect data on a large, random sample of posts, blind-code those posts for content, and add codes for additional factors (like discussion context), one would then be in a position to determine whether there is actually a major problem of "Slashdot Censorship" here. This would be a nontrivial undertaking (well, the coding would be nontrivial, anyway -- the actual analysis would be fairly easy), and I do not expect that anyone here will volunteer for the job. (Don't look at me -- I've got a thesis to revise! :-)) Without such a procedure, however, it is impossible to determine whether the alleged phenomenon is real, or whether it is simply the conjunction of selection and recall biases.


      In any event, I would recommend against trusting your intuition on this one. People aren't very good at this sort of judgment task.


      -Carter

    56. Re:Some contradiction here? by Telek · · Score: 2

      I think half the poeople posting as anonymous cowards are members who have karma they have earned thru posting hard and long and simply want to make a valid comment which they fear might get them moderated down - like not 100% supporting Linux or open source or not 100% condemming Microsoft/Intel etc.

      I am an avid defender of Microsoft and not a 100% supporter of Linux, take a look at many of my posts, you'll see. So then how have I been hovering around 50 karma for a long time now?

      Whenever I make a point, I have things to back it up with. I don't defame or make stupid comments, I just point out things that people tend to be overlooking. Sure, occasionally I'll get modded down for it, but I post enough stuff that hits +5 that I'm always around 50.

      And besides, as is stated in the FAQ, karma ain't your dick size, it means practically nothing. All it means is that you contribute more than you don't.

      Removing the AC account will do nothing. People will then just create stupid accounts to post crap in, as you have very well noticed. At least by having the AC method available we provide a convenient way to filter out the garbage. Quite frankly anyone who has something worth hearing shouldn't be afraid to say it. Pack up an account and have the courage to stand behind what you say. I think that the AC method is exactly that, a way to allow someone to post who is either (a) too "coward"ly to stand behind what they say or (b) just going to post crap anyways.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    57. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Another idea: Different thresholds for login and AC posts. ACs still have a chance, but are held to a higher standard.

      Isn't that why ACs start at 0?

    58. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For -1 only reading there used to be slashtroll.org but the owner has let it lapse.

    59. Re:Some contradiction here? by cadfael · · Score: 1
      I wish to respectfully disagree with the reasoning to your conclusion, although not so much to your argument. I have basically non-stop MetaModerated for about a month, and I know that every couple or three days, I get a page full of anon coward postings to deal with. Most of these (please, no, not all) are unmitigated crap that really shouldn't be bothered with.

      I would agree that keeping privacy for unpopular opinions and postings that are legitimately posted anonymously is a great goal. The current moderation system somewhat unjustly penalizes people for posting so. That is unfortunate. What is worse is the amount of crap that people post anonymously to a public forum where they choose NOT to respect the forum itself. Those abuses are the results of the automod down.

      I would say that there needs to be a technical solution, but I do not believe this to be a technical problem. Its a (sorry for being rude) moronic problem. If people are morons and post garbage, they screw up the system. However, if registered users post anonymously, and its not crap (based on history), then maybe it shouldn't be modded down. This still does not fix the problem, but maybe its a start.

      davis...

      --
      -- The Hollow Man
      Non illegitimati carborundum
    60. Re:Some contradiction here? by Theodore+Logan · · Score: 1
      It's very easy to obtain an account anonymously. Posting as an AC isn't going to protect your IP or whatever it is you're paranoid about anymore than posting from an account you signed up for using a random hushmail address, and it's not like you have to name your account after your real name and include your social security number in your user bio.

      AC's are people who worry about karma, or people who don't have the time or don't think it worthwhile to obtain an account, not people worried about privacy issues.

      --

      "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance" - Derek Bok

    61. Re:Some contradiction here? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 2

      It's not saying that ACs shouldn't be allowed to post. It's just a way of choosing not to read the AC posts if you don't want to. What's wrong with having that choice?

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    62. Re:Some contradiction here? by Ed+Avis · · Score: 2

      What we need is an "anonymous" checkbox, and then an "I'm an idiot" checkbox.


      IMHO the way to do this is to generalize the 'No Score +1 Bonus' checkbox. When submitting a comment there should be a drop-down list of initial scores.


      ACs get the choice of 0 or -1.

      Registered users can choose 1, 0 or -1.

      Registered users with bonus can choose 2, 1, 0 or -1.


      That would also solve the problem of having to be anonymous when posting something controversial or trolling (although myself I don't bother with that). If you are posting a blatant troll, but you just couldn't resist, then you could mark the score as 0 or -1 to start with. There would need to be some anti-whoring provision to stop people posting at -1 and picking up points from being modded up to a more sensible score.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    63. Re:Some contradiction here? by Idaho · · Score: 2

      to be perfectly honest and blunt with you, if slashdot had an option to only read posts at scored at -1 I would use it.


      Hey - could you mail this to CmdrTaco? Maybe he even reads this thread - if so could you please react CmdrTaco?

      At this moment I got moderator status. The problem is, I usually browse at +2 because I don't have time to read Slashdot all day (at +2 there usually are 30-60 posts, which takes plenty of time already).

      But I'm not changing this every time I become a moderator - reading 400 posts just takes too much time.

      However if there would be an option to browse -1 posts ONLY that would be cool as you could quickly browse through all the goatsex crap and first posts to look for interesting posts between all the crap, that have inadvertently been moderated down (or have been posted by interesting AC's).

      Maybe if there was an option to turn this on quickly on every article page, so you don't have to go through your complete preferences section everytime you want to change this option?

      Would be cool IMHO.
      --
      Every expression is true, for a given value of 'true'
    64. Re:Some contradiction here? by Fesh · · Score: 2

      Good point. I know I'd use a feature like that...

      --
      --Fesh
      Kill -9 'em all, let root@localhost sort 'em out.
    65. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I'm nobody important, just like most people. That doesn't change the fact that if a user profile exists, some marketdroid out there is going to try to exploit it. I doubt the actual Slashdot people that you see on the site (ala CT, Hemos, etc) would ever do anything remotely close to it, but remember that they are part of a much larger organization.

      Let's assume for the moment that everyone at VA is totally above-board and will never attempt to do anything with the tracking data. Now look at the stock. Assuming they live, they'll probably be eaten by another company. What happens then?

      I already got jacked because I bought some radio cards on Onsale once upon a time, who then dumped their data into Egghead, and THOSE twits let some moron get my American Express card. I never dealt with Egghead, but acquisitions gave them my data anyway.

      The trouble with data collection is not the present. It's the future.

    66. Re:Some contradiction here? by MrFredBloggs · · Score: 1

      Get two accounts. One normal one, and one for when you want to post something anonymously, or which would lose you karma (assuming you care).

    67. Re:Some contradiction here? by rnd() · · Score: 2
      let people selectively block posts based on criteria (like AC) then then the options should distinguish between true Anon Cowards, and registered users who are posting as AC to protect their anonymity.


      That is a very good idea. Someone should mod it up.

      --

      Amazing magic tricks

    68. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That said, anyone reading will immediately consider anonymous information to be less valid than that which is attributed. In some cases, the inherent value of the information itself will overcome that initial doubtfulness.

      And the people who believe this are idiots. How is a user created pseudonym any more believable then "Anonymous Coward"? I am frequently amazed when someones replies to a AC post with this logic.

      Reminds me of the time a few months back when I was playing Counter-strike and I encountered an obvious wallhacker. After switching to the cheater's team and observing him for a while to be certain, I got the admin's attention and let him know and suggested he observe the cheater himself. The admin refused to even observe the cheater because my player name was something juvenile(something like "Monica Lewinsky Sucks") and he said that I couldn't be taken seriously. So to show him how ludicrous his statement was I changed my name to Abraham Lincoln.

      Just because someone posts with an account name doesn't mean it is any more valid than AC.

    69. Re:Some contradiction here? by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 0, Troll

      "Try reading at -1 and see all of the crap that is posted by these Anon Cowards and you'll get my point. "

      My god- I didn't even consider that there could be people who don't browse at -1 flat.

      If you're not reading at -1 then you're not reading /. I am deadly serious! If you are broad-minded and intelligent then the racism, sexism etc. will not offend you- and you can enjoy all the running jokes and occasionally side-splitting remarks by ACs.

      Also- by not browsing at -1 you are saying that you trust the moderators not to mod good stuff down and bad stuff up. You trust the moderators? ahahahahahahhaahah. You would have to be a FOOL!

      graspee

    70. Re:Some contradiction here? by eXtro · · Score: 1
      Pseudonym's can be anonymous and yet still retain privacy. You only need an email address to get your password after account creation, so to make an anonymous pseudonym do something like the following:

      1. Create a throw away Hotmail account, lie about any geographic or personal data.
      2. Find an anonymous web browsing service, there are a bunch out there.
      3. From there create a new user on slashdot pointing at your throw away hotmail account.
      4. Retrieve your password, delete the mail, forget about the account. Better yet, post the account and password someplace so thousnand of script kiddies make use of it.
      5. Post your comments that require anonymity.

      Posting something as an Anonymous Coward that could get you in trouble is stupid, all it takes is a court order and the OSDN folks will bend over and give away all the information needed to track you down.
    71. Re:Some contradiction here? by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 2
      Perhaps, other niche groups need their own slashdot? I've seen a few uses of the slashcode in various poorly frequented news sights, but nothing of the scope that Slashdot has.

      I agree, it is becoming increasing apparent that interesting and valuable posts are being modded off-topic. Whilst many are OT their true value is not being realised.

      I been increasingly feeling that we need some additional areas to bleed off some of these topics to new sections, two obvious (to me) are IT Politics and IT Industry.

      Indeed a distinct and seperate FlameWars section, might also improve things by keeping the children occupied.

    72. Re:Some contradiction here? by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 2

      Your posts can always get linked back to your IP address, AC or no AC, there's no way around that short of an anonymizer...

      Are you sure? if so how?

      I've never had any indication that this was possible outside obvious routes of slashdot's SysOps.

    73. Re:Some contradiction here? by hawk · · Score: 2
      I don't see much hope. It's not as bad as the beginnhing of the perpetual september, but the slide continues.


      Slashdot use to be a good information source. Now it's *rare* to see any technical news that I haven't *already* seen in the Wall Street journal. I keep giving up, and then looking again when I'm trying to avoid something (such as grading papers :). I used to wonder about the folks who announced their departures but then stuck around, but I'm real close now.


      hawk, probably not long for slashdot, either.

    74. Re:Some contradiction here? by Telek · · Score: 2

      Well you see the problem is that of finding an acceptable signal/noise ratio. There is some stuff that I am missing by reading at +2 minimum, that I will agree to, but the S/N ratio gets exponentially worse the furthur down I go, and thus it isn't worth my time to read that low. I only have enough time to browse the top 20 or 30 comments usually, and perhaps more if it's really interesting.

      And no, as a whole I don't trust the moderators, but lately they have been pleasantly surprising me.

      --

      If God gave us curiosity
    75. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh. Maybe we could pay a "subscription fee" and be able to see who the logged in ACs are, and get ip addresses.

    76. Re:Some contradiction here? by NMerriam · · Score: 2

      I didn't say it would be more valid -- I said that a reader will give ACs less credibility until the AC has shown reason not to.

      Your entire example seems to have done more to support my argument than otherwise.

      The flip side (which I didn't go into, but has more to do with your example) is that someone with a clearly idiotic name, or with an identity that is known to be unreliable, will be assumed to be even less reliable than an AC (again, until demonstarted otherwise).

      This is why anonymous speech is protected by the Supreme Court -- sometimes, its necessary to be anonymous so as not to be "punished" for your speech -- but at other times, your real identity would only serve to prejudice those who would otherwise be receptive to your speech.

      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
    77. Re:Some contradiction here? by Surak · · Score: 2

      Well, duh...how do you think Slashdot's operators get it? The system keeps a log, right? Logs are very obtainable, especially if you happen to have a badge. Even if you don't you could always break into the box and steal it if you know what you're doing.

      For that matter, if you really know what you're doing, you could snatch packets traveling on the Net and correlate them with timestamps on slashdot posts. Not a simple matter mind you, but it could be done.

      Besides, its the people who know what they're doing that you have to worry about. Your average J. Random Hacker or Joe Sixpack Loser probably couldn't care less who posted what on Slashdot.

    78. Re:Some contradiction here? by spiralx · · Score: 1

      Cannibal Corpse, right?

    79. Re:Some contradiction here? by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Good, then I'll do a rare thing and NOT check the "no score +1 bonus" box so you can read this witty comment that has nothing to do with what you wrote:

      > For Example: I'd personally like to assign a -2
      > penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most
      > of them frankly just aren't funny at all. But
      > humor is far too subjective to say that the
      > moderation is unfair.

      Anyhoo, this is precisely the point of moderation -- if many people find something funny, it's probably funny to many others. It doesn't rely on the judgement of one but of many.

      Oh, and please add a user option to check as a default the "No Score +1 Bonus" box.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
    80. Re:Some contradiction here? by Fred+Ferrigno · · Score: 2

      I think (my opinion only) that we should get rid of AC and allow people to read anonymously but NOT post that wauy

      This is a horrible idea. Registration is a nuisance for the user, and I applaud Slashdot for being one of the few discussion sites remaining that allow new users to contribute without jumping through hoops.

      You'd probably say that registration is fairly painless and it's worth it for a site like Slashdot. And I'd agree, mostly. But too often I run into discussion sites where I want to post one little thing -- help someone along in their search, correct somebody on their facts -- knowing full well I'll never be back at that site again. If that happens to Slashdot, too many people simply won't bother to post, and Slashdot will be the lesser for it.

    81. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you are misreading /. -- It's very easy to post as AC (one check), and my guess is that most of the goatsex/flame stuff is from registered users of good reputation.

    82. Re:Some contradiction here? by Prior+Restraint · · Score: 2, Funny

      [Ultra-bizarre post in which user number 459812 refers to self as "a slashdot veteran", protests the "blindingly obvious" insightful posts in a manner virtually indistinguishable from any other protest of same, and is modded as insightful.]

      [Obligatory reply attempting to point out the irony of parent post, but self-consciously ignoring several inconvenient facts so that it can be modded as funny.]

    83. Re:Some contradiction here? by srand · · Score: 1

      I'm a mod and I read your posts, because one of them was at -1 and I figured it was because of your sig, because otherwise it wasn't a bad post. Of course than I started reading your other stuff. You got what you deserved.

    84. Re:Some contradiction here? by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 2
      Well, duh...how do you think Slashdot's operators get it? The system keeps a log, right? Logs are very obtainable, especially if you happen to have a badge. Even if you don't you could always break into the box and steal it if you know what you're doing.

      I'm personally not really bothered about 'official' logs, accessable to Slashdot's Ops, or even Badges.

      It's public logs, contain IP details, accessable by everybody including Prats & Loonies, that bother me. Your post implied that slashdot had some public logs, that I was unaware of.

      In the distant past when I first started using the net through compuserve, I appear to have offended some nonce (no idea who or why ). Who mail bombed me with pedo crap for over 3 months, whilst compuserve did nothing to stop it, so I finally dropped compuserve.

    85. Re:Some contradiction here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant
      "The only people posting interesting comments to the articles are trolls such as..."

      Re:Jeff Probst checking in... (Score:-1, Troll)
      by Jeff Probst on Tuesday October 16, @07:43PM (#2439248)

      With a tr0ll for all of you. This one was basically my first attempt at trolling as opposed to karma whoring.

      Click here biznatch!

      Not bad (I think) considering I wrote it on the fly in a ten minute break between work.

      --
      first probst bitches

  10. Flame! by Mofo_abc123 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    OMFG 0S0 L4M3, J00 LLAMA!

    Fewf, thats out of my system ;) seriously though given the state of things now, I'm glad that you guys are taking measures so that this site will be around for a while, keep up the good work

  11. Please using SSL on every bit that /. sends out. by Moray_Reef · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Please start encrypting every page that /. serves up. Just think how much chaff that will be for the FBI to filter out when they sniff (the ass of) every packet on the internet.

    --
    If you voted for Nader, THIS IS ALL YOUR FAULT!!
  12. Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by MidKnight · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I had some fleeting thoughts about posting a flame-inducing rant here about the unsustainable nature of "free" stuff (news outlets, software, ketchup, take your pick), the inherent greed of human nature, and other related topics. I'm a capitalist... so shoot me.

    But instead I'd like to just point out that Slashdot is an amazing accomplishment, and everyone who keeps it running deserves to get paid for it. The only people that will bitch about the (potential) subscription cost are the same ones whose posts I never read anyway.

    --Mid

  13. Re:OSDN Bar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    You are so full of shit I can't believe it.

    Give the guy a break. Are they supposed to pull the money for the servers and bandwidth out of their asses?

  14. Please inact a subscription service! by lkaos · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I am an avid slashdot reader. I get more quality reading material out of slashdot than alot of the magazines I subscribe to (ok, it doesn't beat playboy, but what does...).

    I personally have no problem paying a subscription fee.

    And to start the flames off, that navbar really really sucks. What a dirty little trick to try to boost revenue at thinkgeek...

    --
    int func(int a);
    func((b += 3, b));
    1. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by mmontour · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I think that users should be able to "pay" for their subscription fees with Karma points instead of cash (or some combination thereof). E.g. each Karma point could be worth 1/10 of the monthly fee.

      Most of the value of slashdot is in the user comments, and I think it is only fair to give a "free ride" to those who contribute the most highly rated content.

      Also, people who were bored with sitting at the +50 cap would have a way to reduce their Karma other than resorting to a week-long trolling spree. :-)

    2. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      If you really want to get people to pay, simply let subscribers exceed the Karma Kap. Or maybe subscribers could get some other benefits not available to non-subscribers, like being able to view others' Karma, extra filtering options, advantages when posting articles, or the like.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    3. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by foobar104 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, yeah, excellent idea. The higher your karma, the fewer/smaller your ads are.

      It makes sense, too. In theory, better content means more readers will visit the site, thereby increasing the "effectiveness" of the ads on the site. (I abstain from the argument of whether ads are effective at all.)

    4. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Good idea. Give Karma whores a reason to whore karma.

      Seriously I think it's an okay idea, but I don't think giving people the incentive to ruin discussion by whoring just so they can maintain their free subscription is a great idea.

      And it'd be nice if there was a similarily free option for the thousands of lurkers who just like to read the comments and don't post much.

      And I don't think Taco's ISP accepts karma points as payment. ;)

    5. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by singularity · · Score: 2

      I have been wanting a paid Slashdot for some time. Unlike many other people, however, I do not mind if all I get for the subscription are removed ads.

      I was one of the people who bought a shirt from ThinkGeek to help support Slashdot (pre-IPO). I do not want people getting things because they paid - I want it like it is now: You get things (+1 posting bonus, moderation) because of what you write, not what you pay.

      I already remove ads (iCab is a wonderful browser), but I would most certainly pay to keep Slashdot around (and keep me from stealing content, which is what I feel I am doing by removing ads)

      --
      - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    6. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by theancient2 · · Score: 1

      I don't mean to sound like a troll, but...

      once you have 28 or so karma...

      who cares?

    7. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by sporty · · Score: 1

      Along with the reading of material via the web, making it readable via say, forumzilla would be kick ass.

      --

      -
      ping -f 255.255.255.255 # if only

    8. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by mmontour · · Score: 2

      Oh, yeah, excellent idea. The higher your karma, the fewer/smaller your ads are.

      I wasn't thinking of a "state"-based system: if (Karma > 40) then no_adds; else if (Karma > 20) then some_adds; else spam_you_ragged;, although that could work too.

      I was thinking that you would "spend" some of your Karma to be free of ads for a block of time (just like you'd get by paying a cash subscription fee). Karma becomes largely meaningless once you hit +50 (though it still irks me when I get a comment modded to +5 then down to +4 overrated, and end up with a net -1 karma loss, but that's another rant). If Karma could be spent each month to pay for an ad-free subscription, it would give people an incentive to keep creating valuable content.

      Yes there are drawbacks. It might encourage "karma whoring", though that's more an issue with the moderation system and what the moderators choose to reward. Also, some jurisdictions would probably consider the Karma points to be "taxable income"...

    9. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by rgmoore · · Score: 1

      Apparently somebody does. The current Karma Kap was put in place specifically because there was a group of Karma whores who saw boosting their Karma as the most interesting thing to do on Slashdot. Capping Karma at 50 was instituted to make the game less fun- what's the point if you can't keep score- and seems to have been moderately successful. The most notorious Karma whores, like Signal11, seem to have given up, which was the point. I was being at least a little facetious by suggesting relaxing the Kap for subscribers, but I suspect that there are some people who might be willing to pay if extra, non-advertizing inducements were added to the basic advantage of not seeing advertizing.

      --

      There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

    10. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      o boy, would this make for some outrageous karma whoring! Every thread would begin with 20 +5, informative posts containing links just about everywhere.

    11. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by tf23 · · Score: 1

      There's a forumzilla plugin for slash2.1/2.2.

    12. Re:Please inact a subscription service! by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Given that the average high-karma person *might* be of higher intelligence, therefore ads targetted to them would sell for more to ad companies, Slashdot could sell general "hoi polloi" ads and "special" ads with BMW, much like stock market "ads" on This Week on Wall Street and Masterpiece Theatre.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
  15. flame on by cat_jesus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Now flame me if you feel it necessary. Get it out of your system.


    You she bitch of a goat's gizzard!

    You distasteful snout of an eel's bladder!

    Cat
  16. Why the OSDN banner? by wdr1 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Thanks for the update, CmdrTaco!

    I really don't mean this in any sort of negative tone, but why add the OSDN banner if you didn't have to, and you didn't like it either?

    Just curious,
    -Bill

    --
    SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
  17. Re:The new bar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Cmdrtaco: X will make less sense to blind folk. If you put a title="blah" attribute in your anchor tag for the X you can have proper description of the link :)

  18. Ads are not necessarily bad... by TheMacGenius · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...it's just the implementation of some of them that everyone hates. I personally don't mind ads at all as long as they are embedded into the page and not pop-ups or pop-behinds. You really want to make them effective? Figure out a way to target them a little better. Perhaps a preferences page or something. I have no interest in the latest rack mount system, so if you could figure out a way to hide that when I log in and show a tasty ThinkGeek caffeine ad instead, then your sponsor's ad dollars will be much better spent.

    1. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by Bonker · · Score: 2

      I agree. The big square boxes in ZDnet or CNet pages are really not that bad. I prefer them infinitely over the dread x-10 camera pop behind ad. And the all the flag companies that are attempting to profit from the disaster... *sigh*

      The in-page ads are even better at catching my attention, especially if they are well designed, or offer something interactive, like the HP graphing calculator add, or the Sun breakout ad from a little while back.

      The problem with the graphic calculator ad (which worked a lot like the 3d calculator from macOS for those who didn't see it) was that I spent all my time playing the controls, but never actually visited HP's site.

      How bout a mini-Tux Racer applet ad? I'd click if it meant I got to race Tux again.

      --
      The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    2. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by AnonymousNonCoward · · Score: 1

      "I personally don't mind ads at all as long as they are embedded into the page and not pop-ups or pop-behinds. " Aren't they called pop-unders? Am I the only one to not wonser why they're not called "pop-behinds"?

    3. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by will12 · · Score: 1

      Hay keep the ads in the page and i dont relly have a problem with ads, heck if you give me a way i will even give you info about what i like and dont like, but you rnt getting my snail mail address so dont ask

      --
      Peace, Freedom and Linux for all
    4. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      Ads are not necessarily bad...


      ...it's just the implementation of some of them that everyone hates.


      I agree. I don't mind an ad. I don't mind animated gifs, within reason (none of that flashing or whirling). But I hate stupid java tricks and Flash animations - they're considerably heavier in both proc time and bandwidth. And, of course, I'll block anything that attempts to track me.


      I can only hope OSDN doesn't go this direction along with the larger ads.

    5. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by reynaert · · Score: 1

      Figure out a way to target them a little better.

      That's kind of the problem. For targetted advertising, you need personal information of the target. Lots of personal information. And what is 90% of the Slashdot crowd bitching about?

      Actually, I would trust Slashdot more than any other company. And the UK some interesting law is coming in effect soon, which will improve the situation a lot (at least in the UK). (Yes, I know this doesn't apply to Slashdot. But it is a good development. And kind of on topic.)

    6. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by jesser · · Score: 2

      Aren't they called pop-unders? Am I the only one to not wonser why they're not called "pop-behinds"?

      They're not really either. They're pop-ups followed by the main window jumping in front of *all* other windows. They only seem like pop-unders if you limit yourself to using one browser window at a time.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    7. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by TheMacGenius · · Score: 1
      You wouldn't need that much personal information. Just a bunch of checkboxes like what you have right now in the prefs where you can hide the topics that you have no interest in.
      • Hardware
      • Software
      • Toys
      • Books
      • Caffeine :-)
      • Music
      Or perhaps break those down into even more specific categories. By default, you get all ads. Let the user check the ones they are not interested in, perhaps with a limit so you can't check everything. Presto! Slightly more targeted ads without giving up much more personal info other that the fact that I like caffeine! Let Taco do what he wants with that.
    8. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's just the implementation of some of them that everyone hates.

      Part of me agrees with you, and part of me (I am only slightly schizo) says it's too late. Ads have offended too much, and it's a religeous war now. No more ads for me, ever, if I can help it. I sleezeball-filter 'em out of websites, I fast forward through 'em on Tivo, and I don't even listen to radio at all.

      Scorched Earth. Kill their women and children, burn down their houses, poison their wells, and salt their fields. Ads had their chance to be civil and they blew it. I no longer recognize their right to exist, and I'm not going to think about it or listen to reason anymore; it's time for automated mass termination, with no remorse, no conscience, no thought. After I've sucked the marrow from the last of their bones -- after advertisers have been exterminated -- then maybe we can try it again. But none of the existing memeline can be allowed to survive to that point. Kill! Kill! Kill!

    9. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by BradleyUffner · · Score: 2

      The ThinkGeek ads are great, I actually look forward to seeing them sometimes because I can't always take the time to look at all the new geek toys that are out there. Sometimes I see something interesting and I click the ad and end up wondering around think geek for over 10-20 minuites. I don't mind if the ads will be like the think geek ads, the ones I dont like are the big flashy ones with the distracting animations that give me a headache from seeing them in my peripheral vision while reading the content. Ohh yeah, I didn't even notice the OSDN navbar until it was mentioned in the story.

    10. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by tf23 · · Score: 1

      >The ThinkGeek ads are great

      Same here. I don't normally check their site for new stuff. But the adds have caught my attention a number of times, enough so that I clicked on it and went looking at that product, and then others that caught my attention.

      In my mind, that is *exactly* how any advertising campaign should work.

      The OSDN navbar I did notice fairly quickly. Afterall, it's been on slash for a while now. It's only annoying in that it takes up valuable screen space, making me scroll more. That I don't like. But the thing at the bottom of the page, or shorten it up a lot.

    11. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by Matthaeus · · Score: 1

      How hard would it be for slashdot to keep track of which users visit which articles, and then target ads based on that? Or better yet, just assign ads to articles that relate to them somehow (i.e. Thinkgeek Caffeine ads for the chemical forumlae poll, AMD or TransMeta ads for the processor articles, Sony ads for the PS2 articles, etc.).

    12. Re:Ads are not necessarily bad... by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Pop-downs would be better still.

      Then, of course, when they're pr0n, they're pop-offs.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
  19. I want to help! by fm6 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I love popups! I'll take everybody else's!

  20. Subscriptions are (unfortunatly) the future... by ferratus · · Score: 1

    So it seems /. is next. It seems like in order to view quality content (and buzz off if you feel /. isn't quality, then go elsewhere), we're gonna have to pay.

    I don't mind paying for a site or two, but obviously, that's going to get readership down ALOT for most site. I wonder what will happend then....is the internet going to become literally an electronic version of what we can buy in stores ? I mean, there's always going to be personnal sites, but anything that contains "www.geocities.com" starts at -2 in my book.

    Hopefully, the really good sites will survive.

    --
    IP Therefore I am.
  21. Suggestion for users about the ads... by Omerna · · Score: 2

    Get an ad-blocking program. I have one that came included with my firewall (Norton Internet Security, think that's the name) and usually it blocks the all the ads. Sometimes it blocks legitimate pictures, but they're easy to call up. Instead of annoying ads I get nice white-space (BTW, ad designers, I'm more likely to glance at an ad if it's not overly cluttered, take a hint).

    Also, some specifics about the pay feature would be nice, especially cost...

    --


    No sig for you.
    1. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by czardonic · · Score: 1

      (BTW, ad designers, I'm more likely to glance at an ad if it's not overly cluttered, take a hint).

      Either Norton isn't doing as good a job as you say, or you aren't likely to look at ANY ads.

      --
      Takahashi Rumiko made beats! DON, taku, DON, taku. . .
    2. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Hrunting · · Score: 2, Troll

      Get an ad-blocking program.

      Yeah, that's great until the sites that you want to read go the way of the dodo because they depend on the click-throughs that their ads generate and that you're eliminating because you're more intent on preventing something from showing up than you are on actually getting the content you need.

      Not you personally, but the royal "you".

      Take a look at the world around you. On television, you see advertising, unless you're watching a premium service that you pay for, like HBO or pay-per-view. On radio, you see advertising unless you're listening to a station like NPR which is funded through user donations (and during fund drives, fundraising pleas work just like advertisements). Even movies have taken on advertising to supplement the rising costs of making movies people want to see. I'm not sure what made the Internet think it was going to be any different, but that attitude has caught up with its proponents and sites are failing.

      I really wish that rather than Slashdot taking on additional, large-scale advertising or premium payment, they move to an NPR-like member format, where Slashdot is "sponsored" by various individuals and companies. I have more respect for NPR than I do for HBO, and I hope Slashdot doesn't turn into "every other site", but rather becomes a model of a way to be successful and still maintain respect.

    3. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Omerna · · Score: 2

      Sometimes it's necessary to turn it off. When it's on, it's good. Most ads are blocked, and pop-ups are usually replaced by $-Save Now! in the header (Blue part at top w/ info about site). Norton deserves praise for what is, IMO, a good product.

      --


      No sig for you.
    4. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by czardonic · · Score: 1

      Take a look at the world around you. On television, you see advertising, unless you're watching a premium service that you pay for, like HBO or pay-per-view. On radio, you see advertising unless you're listening to a station like NPR which is funded through user donations (and during fund drives, fundraising pleas work just like advertisements). Even movies have taken on advertising to supplement the rising costs of making movies people want to see. I'm not sure what made the Internet think it was going to be any different, but that attitude has caught up with its proponents and sites are failing.

      Yep, and I ignore them all. I prefer to do my own research when deciding what to buy. The most common influence ads have on me is to steer me away from them because of their obnoxiousness.

      However, you are right, the Internet isn't any different. For every person who mutes the TV during ads, fast forwards to the actual start of a rented movie, or changes the TV/radio channel during a broadcast, there are many who don't because they can't be bothered or they actually LIKE the ads. As such, ad filters don't harm anyone. The people who use them aren't clicking the ads anyway. If anything, they HELP companies by not irritating customers who do not like to marketed to directly.

      Does this mean that some users get free content? Yeah. So? Like you said, it is no diffrent from TV or radio.

      --
      Takahashi Rumiko made beats! DON, taku, DON, taku. . .
    5. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That's Taco's problem -- not mine.

      I absolutely _loathe_ advertising. Cannot stand it in the least, and I go through a bit of effort to avoid it. I eagerly await the development of some sort of computerized glasses, so that I can filter it out irl. (kind of the reverse of those ads they have at baseball games now)

      Frankly, I've not even got any obligation to look at ads... filters are only slightly more complicated than closing my eyes when they're onscreen, and I don't see you advocating doing away with that.

      TV has faced the same thing for decades. They can put on ads, but they can't make people watch 'em.

      If /. can't support itself, let it go subscription. And then, because I have no desire to pay for a smaller community of posters who aren't compensated for the only good content around here, I'll take my business elsewhere.

      Slashdot's best interests are the furthest thing from my mind, in much the same way that I shed no tears as dot-coms melted down.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    6. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by srvivn21 · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure what made the Internet think it was going to be any different...


      The internet is different. Why is Slashdot successful? Is it because they have a horde of talented news hounds at their disposal? Famous people endorsing them? Massively expensive, and specialized equipment that only they can afford?

      Nope. Slashdot is sucessful due to user conrtibution. They filled a niche (and filled it well), and are now trying to find a way to not let that success crush them. Information is REALLY cheap to transport, and information is what slashdot traffics. If there was a way that slashdot.org could be a teir 1 provider, with a teir 2 provider in each state, and teir 3 providers in each city, and... You get the idea, just think of NTP or akamia. If this was possible, (and it is, just not efficient, yet) then the cost of actually running Slashdot would be almost non-existant.

      The same can not be accomplished with TV. Or movies. Or books. Not until they are available over the internet. And user submitted.
    7. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      The most common influence ads have on me is to steer me away from them because of their obnoxiousness.
      Is it just me, or are TV ads becoming much more obscure? For a start, I have cable so I don't see a lot of ads, but there's some weird shit out there like some ad that makes reference to Torval and Dean's Bollaro, but I have no idea what it's an ad for - maybe ice cream or something freezer-related. And there's some 3D chicken that does "the twist" that's advertising for one of the fast food outlets that sells chicken (which probably excludes KFC). Sure, I'm remembering that I saw these ads, but 10 times out of 10 I could not tell you what company or specific product they're for. Even the physical advertising in the stores is having the wrong effect on me. The Coke family have some really interesting isle signs that consist of a lit liquid-filled tube with air bubbling through it, but they don't make me want to buy a coke, they make me want to buy one of the signs, or possibly a lava lamp.

      Seriously, for sustainable income, ads are not the way to go.

    8. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      Will ask just one question. As an end user. Do you know the price of a connection/backbone that can handle Slashdot?

      If Slashdot didn't show ads, I would suspect who funds it.

    9. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Jon+Chatow · · Score: 2

      IWSTM that American advertising is catching up with the rest of the world - compared to European advertising for example, American adverts are terribly crass, obvious, and unrefined. I am told that British advertising leads the way, but whether this is actually true or not I'm not entirely sure. Sometimes advertising campaigns go on for /weeks/ before the actual product is talked about; I believe the idea is to engage the interest of the viewer. Of course, I have never bought anything due to an advert online, and don't really even see them unless I concentrate. Oh for the days of '95 when the Internet was 'clean'...

      --
      James F.
    10. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Enigma2175 · · Score: 2

      That "$Save Now" is actually another application. It is not replacing popups, it is generating its own popups. It can be uninstalled. I don't know what application it was installed with but it is very annoying, and takes significant system resources.

      --

      Enigma

    11. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      British advertising does lead the way....in being completely crap. The adverts you see on TV are absolutely awful. Not to mention irritating. With most of them you're never actually made aware of what they're advertising. You'll see an advert 30 times, and have it completely memorised, and then think "what the fuck is it actually advertising?"

    12. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by srvivn21 · · Score: 2

      Two things.

      One, that was the whole idea of having a multi-teir system. The top only supplies a connection to a limited number of children, who sully a connection to others. Hence, no single node is bearing the whole brunt.

      Two, mod_bandwidth. There are ways to control bandwidth usage. Have a subscription model where those who wish to pay are given a certain amount of transfer capability ($5/GB?) with no speed cap. Something like a pre-paid phone card. Those who don't wish to pay... They have to compete for a limited bandwidth pool (all non-payers have to connect through a 10Mb/sec connection).

      Value added, and self sustaining.

    13. Re:Suggestion for users about the ads... by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Ads bother me a lot more when I'm surfing with a modem than with cable modem. I don't see what the big deal is if you have high speed access. Yes, those pop-unders and pop-asides and whatnot are irritating, but normal banner ads aren't a problem.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
  22. Raise your hand if.... by Arctic+Fox · · Score: 2

    The formkey error bit you...
    (thanks for the fix /. crew)

    You "X"ed that OSDN bar on top...

    1. Re:Raise your hand if.... by jesser · · Score: 2

      *hand raised*

      I've also hit about 5 different "lameness filters", several of them many times, and I've seen several posts from ASCII-porn trolls that were probably created only to show they can get around those filters.

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    2. Re:Raise your hand if.... by atrowe · · Score: 1, Troll

      Exactly. Lameness filters do nothing but piss off the few legitimate users who are left. The only thing Taco is accomplishing by adding new filters, is to increase the crapflooders resolve to attempt to bypass those filters.

      Remember what Slashdot was like a few years ago? Before karma and moderation and lameness filters. The signal to noise ratio was VERY high, and Slashdot was the pinnacle of the budding open source community. Compare that to the Slashdot we have now, where 50%+ of the comments are pure crap, and inneffective filters are alienating the few responsible users who are left.

      Not good, Rob. You tried the moderation thing. It didn't work. It's time to drop it and move on to something new.

      --

      -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

    3. Re:Raise your hand if.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Attention ladies and gentlemen, moderators and honored guests, Adam Trowe is a KNOWN TROLL. He should be modded the FUCK DOWN and Michael Sims should ban his IP and send the FBI to his house to fuck him in the ass with a riot baton.

    4. Re:Raise your hand if.... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Hmmm...looks like he made quite a decent comment to me. But then again he had the audacity to criticise the hallowed Slashdot, and so he had to be moderated down as a troll.

  23. OSDN Bar was disabled for me... by Bonker · · Score: 2

    And I never set it one way or the other. Did some /.ers get a lucky draw of the hat or was this a db column add that defaulted to 'null' instead of 'true'.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:OSDN Bar was disabled for me... by jesser · · Score: 1

      I use light mode, and I haven't seen the bar..

      --
      The shareholder is always right.
    2. Re:OSDN Bar was disabled for me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yah dude, i second that. light mode, no bar.

  24. You're becoming bitter, Rob... by Bowie+J.+Poag · · Score: 0, Troll



    You're becoming bitter, Rob. What a shame. ;)

    --
    Bowie J. Poag

  25. Other membership benefits? by blogan · · Score: 1

    Will there be any other membership benefits? I mostly use lynx while I browse /. so ads aren't a problem for me. Perhaps have a membership for all of OSDN with perks at each site. Considering how much Slashdot's been down lately, I don't know if I'd get a subscription for just ads. Make new features that will make people want to pay, but nothing that excludes greatly the non-paying.

    1. Re:Other membership benefits? by jerkychew · · Score: 1

      Ars Technica implemented a "rewards for subscribers" service similar to the one you mention. It seems to work pretty well for them. Hell, they even got my subscription, and I'm a cheap bastard!

      -JC

  26. sort comments by threshhold and...type by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that we should be able to sort comments by the type(i.e. Funny, Insightful, Informative).

    1. Re:sort comments by threshhold and...type by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not only that, we should be able to browse at only a specific score. if we set the threshold to +2, we should have the option to see only the comments rated at +2, not 2+.

  27. How about some innovation? by haslup · · Score: 1

    Ok, so we knew this had to happen at some point, right? No other advertising-only seems to be doing very well, so why would slashdot survive? I don't think the t-shirt sales from ThinkGeek will cover the expenditures of a site that gets so much traffic (although more products with "#include " might help).

    So where's the innovation from the Slashdot readers? Yeah, we all hate the ads, but can we give Slashdot a viable alternative? Subscriptions are one, but that's boring and isn't likely to be a complete solution. I don't even think larger ads combined with a subscription will work, either...

    Throw out some other ideas -- micropayments? Just another way to do subscriptions, but it could be interesting. Depost $5 into your slashdot account each week, but be careful of how many headlines you click into for 5 cents a piece...

    Is there anything else? Or are web sites going to degrade down to a few sites owned by a few mega-companies that use them to provide a wee bit of news with a ton of ads promoting their new fall lineup?

    jason

    1. Re:How about some innovation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VA Linux wants to be a mega company...

      They just failed utterly...

      Mega Company, Failed Mega Compay, same difference.

    2. Re:How about some innovation? by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 1

      "Throw out some other ideas -- micropayments?"

      Yes throw that idea the fuck out.

      Oh come on now! You must know what /.ers think of micropayments by now!

      graspee

  28. Paid Logins by h2odragon · · Score: 2

    "de-advertising" blah. Give us who cough up real money endless moderator points... something. "Karma" made it all a game; EQ has shown how profitable that can be. If its not too expensive I'll pony up.

    1. Re:Paid Logins by KilljoyAZ · · Score: 1

      Give us who cough up real money endless moderator points... something.

      Hmm, money earning certain viewpoints a louder voice. Sounds a lot like Congress to me ;)

      --
      This .sig is currently on hiatus for retooling.
    2. Re:Paid Logins by Stauf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and hand power to our favorite mass-marketers.

      A system like this would only serve to make /. a viable place for spammers/mass marketers who would now be able to buy themselves a +5 bonus.

  29. Reality Programming by Marcus+Erroneous · · Score: 1

    Do what you must just don't Yahoo on us. It's been a good ride so far and I agree that you do a far better service by surviving another four years than by going the way of MyBoot.com ;) Make the adjustments that you need to to live in the real world but don't stop showing it a new way to skin the cat. Oh, and don't go respectable on us. :) Rock on Dudes!

    --
    You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Ghandi
  30. all ads gone? by jonbrewer · · Score: 2

    I'll pay more to get rid of the banners at the top. Serious. In fact, I'd pay $10/month for no images at all and some good, clean XHTML/css or XML/XSL. Give me more information, faster, cut all the ads, the lousy HTML formatting, and I'll gladly pay for it.

    Give the customer whatever s/he wants, and you'll stay afloat.

    1. Re:all ads gone? by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 2

      The problem with this is if you say I would pay site X $10/month to get rid of the adds. And you have more than 1 site that you read regularly, and I have about a dozen. Then you could end up with $100+ a month to not see adds. That is more than I want to pay.

      --
      Erlang Developer and podcaster
    2. Re:all ads gone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In fact, I'd pay $10/month for no images at all

      Maybe you should switch to lynx, it'd be cheaper :P

    3. Re:all ads gone? by Joystickit · · Score: 1

      d on Monday October 22, @08:20PM (#2463284) In fact, I'd pay $10/month for no images at all Maybe you should switch to lynx, it'd be cheaper :P Or just use Opera and turn images off...

    4. Re:all ads gone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd pay $10 if we could filter the people who are trolling for Opera, especially if they are pimping features that Netscape 0.9 and every subsequent browser already has.

    5. Re:all ads gone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think I would like the site to RETAIN HTML, and
      avoid the CSS quagmire, thank you.

    6. Re:all ads gone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not with one keypress, it doesn't...

  31. A few questions... by Stauf · · Score: 1

    #1 would have to be the obvious - how much?

    #2 would a subscription disable all ads (including those at the top of the page)?

    #3 apart from ads, what benefits would subscribers get? I realise this will depend on the price (i.e. I wouldn't expect anything more if it cost $5/year, but if I end up paying $10/month then I'd want something more)

    Apart from that - I do believe that adding a subscription may be necessary, I read /. almost everyday and I wouldn't be opposed to paying a small fee in the interests of keeping the site afloat.

    1. Re:A few questions... by Mr.+Sketch · · Score: 2

      I agree, I wouldn't mind paying a small fee to slashdot. I've been a reader for several years and I would hate to see the site go away. I do think the subscription level should be tiered. Maybe a 'standard' fee to get rid of the advertising bannars, and maybe a 'deluxe' fee to get some cool moderator controls (or some more perks than just removing the ads), and a 'premium' fee for something else, I can't really think of anything, maybe ability to peak into the submission queue and flag some as better than others (kinda like voting on the stories to be posted).

      I have no idea what the prices would be maybe $50/yr for standard (or maybe $5/mo=$60/yr), $10/mo=$120/yr deluxe, and $20/mo=$240/yr for premium.
      I would definatly pay $50/yr to help slashdot out, and getting rid of the ads would be a bonus :). Well, I kinda like the thinkgeek adds, since I don't check the site often I just wait for ads on slashdot to see what's new and cool at thinkgeek.

    2. Re:A few questions... by Stauf · · Score: 1

      Yeah, price is the issue here - I have no idea how much it should cost.

      As for extra perks - I like the idea of voting on the submission queue and why don't you give paying members a +2 bonus or something? That would eliminate problems you'd get from buying moderator points, and still keep paying customers happy :)

      Why not give those who pay real $$$ access to the archives? Or why not give a small discount at ThinkGeek or something (although this may defeat the purpose of making money :)?

      As for cost - maybe we should take a look at Ars for inspiration? Although /. may not be able to provide so many different services...

    3. Re:A few questions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about a subscription fee for like $30 a year
      which will also include a slashdot magazine mailed
      to you every 2 months or so (fees would be based on location I guess to cover shipping and whatnot)
      I just feel that if I have to pay for something I want something tangible out of it. As it stands
      slashdot's value is it's community who provide the articles, insight and discussion. The
      editors don't really provide much apart from managing this.
      And not to mention they could sell more ad space in the magazine. The magazines could
      also give the editors a chance to shine by actually doing some tech journalism. And they
      could use their spell-checkers. blah. Just my thoughts...

  32. Feature request: ignore karma bonus by Jaeger · · Score: 1

    One feature I'd love to see is a user setting to ignore the +1 bonus those with high karma get. I would usually rather read a low-karma user's comment that got moderated up by one point than an unmoderated high-karma user's comment.

    1. Re:Feature request: ignore karma bonus by Quikah · · Score: 1

      This is not a bad idea. Actually I think it would be best to disable the +1 bonus for moderators. That way you wouldn't have this problem.

      It took me nearly 2-3 years to get a bonus (20-25 karma I forget now), after that it took me about 2 months to get 40+. I don't post very often, maybe once every few days.

      --
      Q.
    2. Re:Feature request: ignore karma bonus by MrBogus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [METOO]I second that idea[/METOO]

      (posted at +1 in parody of all the crap which gets posted with the bonus.)

      Besides with the karma system having been around for so long, getting a 'trusted user' bonus doesn't mean that much any more.

      --

      When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    3. Re:Feature request: ignore karma bonus by shepd · · Score: 1

      >It took me nearly 2-3 years to get a bonus

      Wow. Took me a month (maybe two). I don't use it hardly at all, though.

      Maybe I need to stop posting. Have I hit 666 yet? :-)

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    4. Re:Feature request: ignore karma bonus by WNight · · Score: 2

      I agree, even though I tend to post with the bonus myself. I figure I might as well use it, but yeah, if all you need to do to get it is karma whore for a while it lowers the respectibility of it.

      What I suggested at one point was that ACs who were modded up to 1 would sort above logged-in users, and anyone modded up to 2 would sort above 'bonus using' users.

      I mean, it seems fair. My posts may be above average (hence worthy of a global +1) but an AC who got modded up to 2 probably has something more important to say than my post at default score.

  33. Problem with the -2 for Funny by cjsnell · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This feature could be a problem. If there was a +4 Informative post, I could mod it to +5 Funny and it disappears for everyone who has the -2 Funny feature enabled.

    A better solution: find the average of the ratings: If there are 4 Informative's and 1 Funny, Informative is how the post is rated.

    Chris

  34. Calm down by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    OK, reality has finally hit the last corner of the internet, /.

    I like slashdot, there I said it. It is like any other news source, and it need to make money. After years of readership, I actually trust the people who run /. far more then the edotor of any print newspaper.
    /. need to get money, and quit frankly I have no problems with putting an ad in a story. hhhm who else does that, let me think, oh yeah every newspaper oin the last 100 years. how many of you flame the newspaper because they dare sell advertising space?
    /. has problems, and run stuff I don't like from time to time, but most of the time its interesting.
    Pop-up ads I have a problem with. many employers will track that has more surfing.

    /. has finally done something I've wanted for years, and I can finally get rid of those darn AC comments.

    Now if /. would only get rid of Jon Katz, I'd be really happy. That was not intended as humor. Fortunatly i can just ignore his stories, so I tend to not complain too loudly. I wouldn't complain at all, but I'm sure he's sucking valuable resources from /.
    Bottom line: Good Job, keep up the good work, can't wait to see how the next four years go!"

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:Calm down by reynaert · · Score: 2

      Now if /. would only get rid of Jon Katz, I'd be really happy.

      Three steps:

      1. Click 'Preferences' (on the top of the page)
      2. Click 'Homepage' (again, on the top of the page)
      3. Now, in the 'Exclude stories from the homepage' section (a little lower), put a mark in front of JonKatz.

      Easy, isn't it?

    2. Re:Calm down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, he's blocking JK already, that's what he said. Problem is, like with ads, spam, etc, you can filter it all you like, but it still uses up resources. I'm sure JK is being paid some amount of money to 'write' 'stories' for /. (and I use those terms loosely), money that could be spent better elsewhere, so it doesn't matter whether you can block him or not.

    3. Re:Calm down by reynaert · · Score: 1

      If they are indeed paying him, they will probably stop doing so when they notice half of the Slashdot readers have him blocked out...

    4. Re:Calm down by supabeast! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You aren't the only one. Maybe now that /. needs money from something OTHER than advertising, they will stop posting Katz's crap because all the "fuck Katz" posts were generating a ton of clickthroughs.

      I for one will pay $50 if /. will immediately stop running stories by Katz.

    5. Re:Calm down by hereticmessiah · · Score: 1

      Hell, I'd be willing to pay to have him shot too.

      --
      I don't like trolls and mod against me if you like, but I'd prefer if you'd reply.
    6. Re:Calm down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You trust the people who run Slashdot? Then you're an idiot.

      The people who run Slashdot are known censors, navel-gazing "advocates" (read "fanatics") and JonKatz. They are held to no standards of journalistic integrity and most of them can't even spell, let alone construct a grammatical sentence.

  35. Nothing wrong with the navbar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But why the ugly colors?

    And while you are at it why don't you make the sucky html validate?

    Validator.w3.org remember, standards, does it ring any bells?

  36. OSDN is serious about this bar... by Omerna · · Score: 4, Funny

    Every time I click on the X I get logged out... I think they're saying it's the bar or no Slashdot for me. I can take a hint, I'll leave the bar : )

    --


    No sig for you.
    1. Re:OSDN is serious about this bar... by jamie · · Score: 1
      "Every time I click on the X I get logged out..."

      A few people got caught when I had to restart the servers... the page you get when that happens looks like a logout page. Sorry about that. Shouldn't happen again, assuming you are (again) correctly logged in.

      1100 people have already successfully turned it off so I assume that code is working, but if you still have problems, please file a SourceForge bug report. Thanks.

    2. Re:OSDN is serious about this bar... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 'logged out' symptom means the database is down. When you click on any dynamic page during this time, the closest available stand-in will appear instead.

    3. Re:OSDN is serious about this bar... by Kreeblah · · Score: 1

      > 1100 people have already successfully turned it off . . .

      I wish I was one of them. I keep getting the following error (and the /. SourceForge page no longer accepts anonymous submissions):

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:16:21 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.20 (Unix) mod_perl/1.25 X-Powered-By: Slash 2.001000 Connection: close Transfer-Encoding: chunked Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1

      OK

      The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.

      Please contact the server administrator, pater@slashdot.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

      More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

  37. Give me some targetted marketing by CyberKnet · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Give me some nice, tasty preferences in that misc section to tell you what type of ads I'd like to see.

    Much like slashboxes, in that none selected will show you the default selection, and some selected will show only those type. Also show the default selection if none of the selected types are showing at that given moment.

    I would be very receptive to setting those preferences. I think most other folk around here would too.

    --
    Video meliora proboque deteriora sequor - Ovidius
    1. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by gmarceau · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actully, lets push that idea farther. Double up with google in their quest for truly useful advertisements. Yes, let's strive for plainly useful adds, rather than merly unannoying.

      We have to create incensitives not to lie, myslead readers or unnecessarly annoy. Don't you just hate being technicaly-not-quite-lied to? Let registered users vote againts particular adds. Those generaly disliked will have a lower probability of being displayed.

      Hey! Moderations systems for adds!

      But lets not put it on the slashdot alone to come up with it. Community effort here we come :

      Start a source forge projet. Publish an probabilistic advertisement interface for slash. Let everybody implement it in any various ways they can think. Then, offer a selection of the best ones from the user preference page. "Whose add manager do you want to use today? Linus', RMS' or CmdrTaco's?"

      As time goes on, you drop from the list those that generate the innaceptable click-throught.

      I claim this converges to very useful advertisements, both for the advertisers and the readers.

      --
      This post was compiled with `% gec -O`. email me if you need the sources
    2. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by btellier · · Score: 1

      The people who post the ads are trying to introduce us to things that we haven't seen before or might not know about. If we are able to mod out the things we don't think we need we're not going to see anything new. Most of the people who come to this site are informed enough to look on their buying site of choice to find the latest and greatest gadget that they're interested in. Click-Thru's are mostly generated when someone sees something that is unique.. which you won't get if you only select /. ads that you're familiar with.

    3. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good point. as a marketer of banners I can say that the main focus of ads is to bring NEW ideas into people's minds, not rehash what they already know.

    4. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by MikeFM · · Score: 2

      I agree. I like Slashdot's current selection of ads because they are of interest to me more than of any other site so I actually click on them. If you could refine the targeting process and work out a deal with your advertisers to get a percentage of the money I spend at their sites then maybe you could avoid big nasty ads. I would hate to see Slashdot reduced to just another ad covered crappy site. If the site annoys me I won't use it anymore. I'm sure others agree. If I get a nasty popup ad I'm not going to come back. :)

      --
      At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
    5. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by Kragg · · Score: 1

      I think there's a business problem here.

      Advertisers pay for a number of views. If the number of people who want to see the ad is tiny, then (admittedly they chose the wrong place to advertise, but) they won't get their number of placements, and slashdot wont get the dollars.

      Though I guess there are workarounds. If there are ad placements available in categories you've specified then you get your preferred ads. Otherwise you get the default.

      The question then is how much effect it would actually have on the ads you see, and how you decide what ads to give when more than one is available. Someone who understands the business model behind advertising should adress this i guess! (Or perhaps this is slashdot's opportunity to make a working, targetted model that both advertisers and readers like... though good luck...)

      --
      If you can't see this, click here to enable sigs.
    6. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by [Mobius] · · Score: 1

      Ooo, I like that idea.

      Especially if the ad base was varied enough to include a wide range of products (preferably from respectable companies). I know I have certain geeky ideas/projects I would like to work on, but I just haven't had time to research starting hardware to hack. I'd actually like to see some ads for decent products. And if they were moderating or rated in a similar matter, that'd be all the better.

      --
      M
    7. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Uhhh, Unless you were kidding....

      People PAY for ads. You can't just go to one of your advertisers and be like "sorry, our readership didn't like your ads, here is your million dollars back."

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    8. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by Tomcat666 · · Score: 1

      Opera (ad-version) has this targetted marketing.

      Although I am always concerned about privacy, I trust Slashdot as much as the coders of Opera, and that's why I would give them information like where I live, how old I am, what subjects I am interested in.

      Ads can be really good with this type of marketing. The day I changed my Opera ads to my preferences, I found many things worth clicking on them. And this is what pays for my Opera license. I am German, and now I get only German ads... that's one way to improve my click rate: I have more interest in German stuff than in some Internet megastore on the other side of the world.

      Ad preferencing can be great for both users and admins, if they have enough interesting banners.

      Just don't sell my profile to DoubleClick. ;-)

      --
      Two Worlds - One Sun [Spirit]
    9. Re:Give me some targetted marketing by gmarceau · · Score: 1

      Well, on the web people pay per showing, don't they? You just wouldn't charge the bad advertisers as much.

      But this is just not a unique short-term/long-term dilema in advertising.

      I know local paper computer papers that swear every month to their readership they will never sell as many adds as PC-Magazine. Even though they would make more money that month, if they did, their discriminating readers would just plainly stop reading. Restraint is the right long term strategy.

      I know here an art weekly that carefuly refuses adds for shows they don't belive in. Therefore the adds somehow becomes part of the editorial content. As a side effect, the advertisers knows we will very carefully read their add, and are ready to pay extra once they make it throught the filtering.

      Yes you go to one of your advertiser and say : "sorry, our readership don't belive in your product (as represented in the ads). They voted againts it and you ended without much showings. Good thing, because you would probably would have wasted much more advertisement money otherwise. At least, now you leave with a free consumer survey!"

      I will agree, you would need balls and a vision to set up a system like that one - but isn't what you would expect from slashdot?

      --
      This post was compiled with `% gec -O`. email me if you need the sources
  38. here's some flaming for CmdrTaco.. by flikx · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Dammit Malda, there has got to be a better way. I can just imagine 50% of the user base firing up junkbuster just about now, but calling it dishonest. WTF??



    Last time I checked, this isn't ZDNet. Don't join the crowd!!!


    The subscription thing, that just might be a good idea.

    --
    One future, two choices. Oppose them or let them destroy us.
  39. paypal by skt · · Score: 1

    Why not setup some kind of paypal tipping system? This topic has been discussed many times here, and it is something that I would consider putting money into. It seems to me that asking for money that way on a purely voluntary basis would increase revenue (relative to asking for a donation to remove advertising).

    Otherwise, you risk making people angry at the forced, intrusive advertising and he or she will leave your site.. These types of sites remind me of Windows 'crippleware', where you have to register or give money to disable some annoying popup box or software limitation.

    1. Re:paypal by t · · Score: 1
      Even better, why not solve the "stories on /. sucks" rants by making a button where you can pay some user selectable amount per story. o.w. you have something like Disneyland where you pay a grotesque amount to enter the door, just to wait a godawful amount of time to ride the good stuff. Or you can ride the shitty stuff all day. Where's the democracy in that?

      btw, does anyone know if there's a goodwin-esque law for mentioning democracy?

      t.

  40. subscriptions? by orakle · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Taco, you gotta get off the crack man. Do you really expect that people are gonna pay for this? News for Nerds my ass! If anything, you might have a few people paying, a few people just tolerating the ads, and a VAST majority just filtering them so what good does it do you anyway? I personally don't mind the standard-size ads on the top of the page, Hell, i even click on them quite a bit because they're interesting. Those big ads in the middle of the page like some news sources are just downright annoying. Thats the kind of thing that drives me away from them, Especially when they advertise windows XP or the annoying shits like X10 that have a "pop-under" ad that just appears "under" your main browser windows so it catches you while you're closin it. Royal Pain. I Realize i'm rambling on and on, but whats next? popups? click-the-banners to enter like on warez sites? INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW.

    --
    unzip; strip; touch; grep; mount; fsck; yes; more; fsck; umount; make clean; sleep
    1. Re:subscriptions? by SnapperHead · · Score: 1

      Think about it this way. Banner ads pay around $0.10 per hit / click. How many banner ads have you clicked on since you have visted /. I personally, have clicked on ~5 total.

      If even 10 users each pay $5/month, thats still more money then they might have recived from banner ads from those users. Since my banner ads are filtered, I won't notice them. But, since I read /. quite a bit and enjoy the site. I might be willing to pay to get rid of those ads just to make sure the site doesn't go under.

      The point is, that regardless how small the number of users actually subscribe, it will still mean more income then just banner ads.

      How about creating a seperate section just for paying users. Or allowing paying users to contribute stories on there own, in that section. Of course, it would need to be monitored so there isn't just a ton of people submitting plugs for the company and what not .... just an idea.

      --
      until (succeed) try { again(); }
    2. Re:subscriptions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      banner ads pay per impression, very few still do the pay per click thing.

    3. Re:subscriptions? by SnapperHead · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected. I have not dealt with banner ads (From setting them up) in over 2 years, so things have changed quite a bit since then.

      I wonder if /. is still making money off it even though I have adzap on my proxy. (Its a squid redirector, works pretty damn good)

      --
      until (succeed) try { again(); }
  41. My take on the "decision" by MwtrV · · Score: 1

    I, for one, don't think Slashdot should go a subscription route (nor do I think it's completely possible) -- while I'm certainly not an avid poster or member of the community, I've probably been reading Slashdot since 1998 and I thus have some insight. What made Slashdot Slashdot? The open door it presented to anyone who was interested in the topics presented. Gaining new people would be difficult if the door was closed and -- this is where I do throw the flame -- I doubt a lot of people out there would be willing to pay for what is essentially regurgitated news.

    But, an even greater point, Isn't Slashdot focused on "openness"? I

    From a more positive perspective: if Slashdot did become a subscription service, it would serve to further attract more users to alternative web sites (i.e. Kuroshin.) So, in a way, it wouldn't be a *horrible* curse to the community -- it would actually bring about more of a variety in web browsing habits, perhaps.

    Also, I think it's very possible mirrors can be set up for a project like this.

    --
    mwtr / THIS SIG HAS BEEN PRAYED OVER AND MAY BE USED AS A POINT OF CONTACT (ACTS 19:12)
    1. Re:My take on the "decision" by damiam · · Score: 1

      kuro5hin is already a subscription service. They are offering their content free to nonsubscribers in the same way that Taco's proposing.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  42. And so it begins/Dead pool thread... by supabeast! · · Score: 1

    Ok, anyone who paid attention during the dotcom bust knows where this is all going to lead. So I suggest that in the name of bad taste, we revel in this by starting a dead pool thread. I will go first.

    Date that Pud will be posting that /. is dead and gone on FuckedCompany.com: January 1, 2002.

    The joys of having karma to spare...

    1. Re:And so it begins/Dead pool thread... by amblin · · Score: 1

      Add to that Freshmeat and Sourceforge, they will probably go down before /.
      The end is near and I don't like it one bit.

    2. Re:And so it begins/Dead pool thread... by supabeast! · · Score: 2

      I hate the whole thing, too. I plan to subscribe, and will push for my company to do so as well (We really, really benefit from FM and SF, so I can prolly get them to kick in some change...).

  43. At least make the navbar black. by DMouse · · Score: 1

    I know the theory about the navbar having to be the same across all sites. Its crap.

    Theme the navbar black, and give the X a box, the link to it being a close button is way to tenuous without it being button shaped. It looks like a link to some site called "X"...

    1. Re:At least make the navbar black. by T1girl · · Score: 2

      I'm looking at it on a small monitor right now, and the gray bar looks so dark it might as well be black. i'd have to squint to reqd 'ODSN', etc. much less even notice the X. Guess it's fittingly somber for a site that wants to penalize humor.

      What would Rain-in-the-Face do?

  44. -2 for jokes: by moogla · · Score: 1

    What I think taco meant was that he wanted an entire system where each user gets to assign their own "values" to various "categorical ratings" (depending on your prefs), and he would add more of these categories. He added, that personally, he would like Funny to be -2, so only the really fucking funny ones would show up. But to each his own, he was quick to add. I think this is a great idea.

    --
    Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
    1. Re:-2 for jokes: by DoomHaven · · Score: 1

      Yes, I would like to see that instead of just marking "funny" posts to -2. I mean, I could assign "overrated", "redundant", and "off-topic" moderations to "0" and ignore 95% of all stupid moderations.

      --
      "Don't mind me cutting myself on Occam's Razor"
  45. Better targetted ads, not popups or popunders by WillSeattle · · Score: 1

    I'd second this. I don't mind semi-relevant ads (although those flashing ones I get on Yahoo! really bug me, and that means I won't buy their products).

    I would like to be able to check a box that says SPORTS and then noone tries to sell me SPORTS.

    Because I'm just not interested.

    Will

    --
    --- Will in Seattle - What are you doing to fight the War?
  46. Changes Changes everywhere by Darkstorm · · Score: 2

    Well, I guess it had to happen evetually. With all the problems the economy has been having. I'd be willing to shell out a few $ to keep the adds out of my face.

    I'm also in agreement about a word filter. Somtimes the AC's actually have something good to say. But if I could restrict certain messages based on content that would be nice.

    --
    If ignorance is bliss, the world is full of blissful people
  47. Huh? by Leven+Valera · · Score: 1, Troll

    [blockquote]For Example: I'd personally like to assign a -2 penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most of them frankly just aren't funny at all. [/blockquote]

    And then what will those of us too stupid to post information about the article do for karma?

    --
    Woot w00t w007.
    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had mod points and slashcode would support it, I would mod you down to -2 :)

    2. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about "learn to use HTML, and forget those shitty UBB codes"?

  48. Extra goodies for subscribers??? by adoll · · Score: 1

    Hmm, and just like we could buy mulligans at the United Way golf tournament, can us subscribers get extra moderating ability? Or better yet, limit the moderating only to the subscribers? After all, we are the ones who are willing to put our pocket book on the line for the site...

    And the ODSN bar doesn't really bug me. The colours are neutral enough that they don't cause a problem.

    -AD

    1. Re:Extra goodies for subscribers??? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 2

      Or here's an idea: forget karma and moderation. Give the people who pay the most the highest scoring posts. How about $1 per point per post. If you really have something to say, it would be worth $5 to get a (Score:5, Platinum Plus) tag on it. With this business model, /. wouldn't need ad revenue at all!

    2. Re:Extra goodies for subscribers??? by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      Oh yeah... I can just see it now.......

      (Score:5, Interesting)

      F!R57 P057 !!!
      Look at my penis bird!!!

      -o
      ( )
      ===X=D

  49. Here's a long-term revenue solution... by Cutriss · · Score: 1

    Hold every website ransom and threaten to unleash millions of news-hungry geeks upon their servers unless they pay up hundreds, nay thousands of dollars in fees!

    This, also, has already happened...

    Shit...let's just do what we always do...Hijack some nuclear weapons and hold the world hostage. Sound good? Yes?

    --
    "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
  50. Subscription? by Wrexen · · Score: 0
    I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that a subscription service better do more than just disable ads. The editing here leaves a lot to be desired. In short:
    1. Use a spell-checker! It dose bother sone of us!
    2. Actually read the article before posting a link to it. By read, I mean, read, not "skim", not "make sure it's not goatse.cx", not "post and let a +5 comment tell you what it actually said"
    3. Some shred of discretion instead of posting anti-MS blabber attached to anything even remotely related to the company
    4. Link-checking. See #2. The article earlier about the football team blaming linux that was actually from a sports humor columnist? Hello?
    5. Reposting. I don't like to get deja vu when I read a news site, it makes me wonder if I'm senile


    This may be the new internet economy, but I think /.'ers want more than not-ads for their money
  51. I am the only one that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    would not pay a subscription to slashdot?


    A lot of the stories are pointless, as are a lot of the comments-this one being no exeption. I can't imagine many people paying for this crap. Another problem is that once people start paying for content site by site, where does it end. Maybe another of your favorite sites decided 'hey, slashdot charge,so we will' and before you know where you are, just accessing a few selected site is costing $100 month.

    1. Re:I am the only one that.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you're not the only one. I've been reading Slashdot since early '99 but I would never pay for it. And I don't click on ads either...

    2. Re:I am the only one that.... by Bobo+the+Space+Chimp · · Score: 1

      Old BBS's used to let people contribute money and become "patrons". Some had varying titles depending on how much you contributed.

      They could do that here, but allow, say, access to inline images (perhaps "registered" as used in a .sig), other HTML, whatever. The sky would be the limit, many things not even thought of yet.

      --
      I am for the complete Trantorization of Earth.
  52. I've a question by atrowe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Rob, I was wondering why there was no mention of the new ipid IP logging "feature" in Slashcode. I understand that this code was added to Slashcode to help stop lamers and crapflooders, but I, for one, am concerned about possible privacy issues that come into play when you start associating UIDs with IP addresses. Since Slashdot has historically been a major advocate of privacy and on-line rights, don't you think your readers deserve some sort of justification as to why you are tracking them by their IP address and banning IPs of users whom you have deemed to be "trolls". More info can be found here..

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

    1. Re:I've a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dat's a big dick in you mouf, bitah!

  53. Better Profiling? by thehossman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    In the interest of keeping slashdot alive and profitable, I'll be the first to suggest that the user info section should be expanded to all users to include more detailed self profiles (ie: gender, hobbies, job title, income, etc...) purely for the purpose of advertising.

    No, I don't really want that info showing up on my public page. Yes, it would suck if slashdot sold that info to spammers -- but Rob & Taco have earned my respect over the years, I don't mind giving that info out to a site I respect if the plus side is that they can make twice as much per Ad impression, and the downside is that the Ads I see are more specific for me.

    (It's not like my Topics prefs and slashbox customizations don't allready create a tight profile of my interests)

    --
    -- The Hoss Man
  54. Money by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A few random questions:

    How much does it cost per month to operate Slashdot? How much for the hosting, and how much in salaries? Just Slashdot, not the rest of OSDN.

    How much revenue is generated from the current banner ads? What are the rates charged, and what does that total up to per month?

    How much revenue is expected to be generated by the new obnoxious banners? What rates will be charged, and what's the projection for monthly revenues?

    How many ads does the average Slashdot reader see, and what does that translate to dollar-wise? What would be a fair amount to pay, to compensate for the loss of banner revenue?

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    1. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some how i doubt it's more than the 14 million bucks they pulled in last year...

    2. Re:Money by Sloppy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I just have to add a big "me too" to that.

      Slashdot should disclose the figures. My PBS station tells me how much the digital doodad that they are required to buy will cost, how much money they need to raise, etc. And they get taken care of, and I do my part.

      But if people don't see the numbers, they'll either think, "Well, my x won't be enough to help," or "Damn, with my x bucks, I'm practically shouldering the thing all by myself."

      Show us the numbers, Slashdot.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    3. Re:Money by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      OPB mentioned last week during their pledge drive that they pay about $800,000 a year to NPR; NPR charges them based on how many listeners they have (according to surveys and such). Of course, OPB also buys radio programming from PRI and other organizations, and television programming from PBS and others.

      Around 10% of OPB's radio listeners are contributing members. OPB gets 51% of their revenues from member contributions. Last week, 7,000 listeners pledged a little over $500,000.

      These are the kinds of numbers we should be hearing from Slashdot.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    4. Re:Money by 23 · · Score: 1

      You are asking for internals of a profit making company. You could just as well walk up to IBM and ask them. If you are not an important shareholder or member of the board, etc. why should they ever tell you? After all, if you'd really want to, you could go and read OSDN's (or wherever /.'s is published) annual business report for the most imortant numbers.

      PBS, NPR, etc. have to tell you, since they public non-profit organisations .

      /. will be offering you a (subscription-) product when the time comes and you can take it or leave it. But they have no (moral or legal) obligation to give you their internal calculation, in order for you to be able to decide.

      cheers,
      Roland

    5. Re:Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      read the SEC filing. it's easy. go here:
      http://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/srch-edgar
      and search for:
      VA Linux

      read the largest documents, they'll tell you more. good luck.

      scottgalvin.com

    6. Re:Money by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      If you are not an important shareholder or member of the board, etc. why should they ever tell you?

      So that they remain a profit-making company, instead of becoming a profit-losing company. I guess what I was trying to say, is that disclosing the figures gives people a reason to come across with subscriptions, donations, or whatever. Maybe sharing that information is unconventional for these types of companies, but breaking with convention sure beats becoming Yet Another dot-bomb.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  55. The "conservation" alternative by tmoertel · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Slashdot continues to grow: our traffic has increased by like 10% in the last few months, ...
    The Slashdot bandwidth situation seems a lot like America's oil situation: Just about everybody seems content to use more and more of both.

    But, rather than feeding this trend and turning to more-obnoxious ads to cover the increased bandwidth, why not turn to conservation-based approaches? In short, reduce the bandwidth consumed for each page.

    For example, a quick glance at the typical story's HTML reveals a lot of bloat, most of which could be removed by taking look-and-feel instructions out of the HTML and placing them into stylesheets. More than 10 percent savings seems realistic. And, unlike banner ads that have harmful side effects (such as annoyed readers), reducing HTML bloat has positive side effects like reduced download times and increased accessibility.

    So before turning to increasingly evil ads, why not try conservation?

    1. Re:The "conservation" alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These days bandwidth costs are minimal. Equipment and people are the most expensive. Shaving a few k off the main page (or even every page) will not gain that much.

    2. Re:The "conservation" alternative by Zachary+Kessin · · Score: 2

      I would guess that this would not really save very much. It may be worth doing but I would guess that the reduction in hardware and pipe that would result would not reduce costs all that much. I would guess that the payroll for all the folks who run /. is taking up the majority of the budget.

      On the other hand reducing bloat in the HTML might not be a bad idea.

      --
      Erlang Developer and podcaster
    3. Re:The "conservation" alternative by thogard · · Score: 1

      Data cost about $2/gig and how many 200kb pages do you look at a week?

    4. Re:The "conservation" alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although this would definitely save on bandwidth, those people running older browsers that don't support CSS would throw a fit.

    5. Re:The "conservation" alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're too lazy to upgrade, they can just change their default font. Problem solved.

  56. Paying for _community_ content? by SMN · · Score: 5, Troll
    I know that subscriptions seem to be the potential solution for many sites' money problems, but they are NOT appropriate for Slashdot.

    Now, take a site like Salon, which should have subscriptions. Salon creates its own content - and that's often unique and interesting content, and it requires the investment of a great deal of time and effort from Salon writers, many of whom actually go to work in a building and work all day.

    So how much time and effort - or other resources - does Slashdot invest in the daily operations of the site? Very little.

    Slashdot's content is entirely community-driven; it's all submitted by the users, for free. What do the editors have to do? Why, the horrible, grueling task of reading through user submissions, choosing a few to post, and relaxing as the site does its thing.

    In fact, it seems that the real cost of Slashdot is relatively small: the cost of servers/bandwidth, and a modest salary for the editors and administrators who do this as a full-time job.

    IIRC, Slashdot lasted years as Taco and Hemo's only job. This sudden need for money seems to go back to the Andover takeover; it's entirely a business decision. But unlike Salon, this isn't a business venture that requires huge amounts of effort, because the content is provided by users.

    So, let me get to my main beef: We already "pay" for the site by submitting content! Should Slashdot be profitting off our article submissions, and our comments? That's why I read the site, not because of the editors. If we keep the Salon analogy, essentially suggesting charging the "writers" rather than paying them. Maybe I should be paid by advertisers for submitting this comment, rather than the site?

    Now, if the editors would at least do their jobs well, I might reconsider - but I don't see fact-checking, I don't see anything done to stop all these duplicate stories -- heck, I don't even see spell-checking!

    If Slashdot even wants to consider this system, they should have completely open records. Show us all your costs, from servers to salaries, and your profit. Let us know that we're being charged this because of need, and not because of the avarice of a few businessmen over at VA.

    --
    -- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
    1. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Slashdot's bandwidth costs are relatively small? Relative to what, Yahoo? I'm thinking if you mistakenly got the cost of Slashdot's badwidth added onto your phone bill, you would be raising holy hell.

    2. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by sprouty76 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      How about if anybody who submits an article that gets accepted, they get a weeks free subscription, or something?

      That way, the people who provide the content in the first place get rewarded for doing so (i.e. they don't get adverts, and whatever other value gets added). Those who don't, don't. After all, if nobody submitted interesting content, slashdot would die.

      --

      No, I don't want a free iPod

    3. Re: Paying for _community_ content? by pbryan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree that to an extent, we are actually contributing to Slashdot by posting informative, interesting, humorous content. In fact, I posted a suggestion for rewarding good posters.

      However, Slashdot is providing a service, namely providing an organized space for this type of communication -- in a form that is informative, interesting and humorous. In many ways, this is more valuable to me than the opinion of one individual, filtered by the opinions of a couple of editors.

      The folks at Slashdot deserve to profit from their service. Banner ads are no longer viable. I'll wager ads don't defray the cost of bandwidth -- which probably runs tens of thousands of dollars per month.

      --

      My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

    4. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by SMN · · Score: 2
      Slashdot's bandwidth costs are relatively small? Relative to what, Yahoo? I'm thinking if you mistakenly got the cost of Slashdot's badwidth added onto your phone bill, you would be raising holy hell.
      That's certainly not what I said, but since your trolling gives me a chance to clarify, I'll reply anyway.

      Don't you think that the price of a highly-targeted ad on each page outweighs the cost of a few kilobytes of bandwidth? Ads on Slashdot are much more valuable than ads on some other sites because it's a fairly pure demographic - "News for Nerds." I've bought from Slashdot advertisers before, and I have no problem with the ads as they are now. The cost of bandwidth, relative to the "property value," if you will, for prospective advertisers, is small.

      I sure expect that the ads easily balance the bandwidth cost, and if not, the site needs to be redesigned in order to lower the bandwidth:advertisement ratio. God (substitute your prefered diety if you like) knows that this jumbled mess of a layout isn't encouraging me to pay for it. . .

      --
      -- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
    5. Re: Paying for _community_ content? by SMN · · Score: 2
      The folks at Slashdot deserve to profit from their service. Banner ads are no longer viable. I'll wager ads don't defray the cost of bandwidth -- which probably runs tens of thousands of dollars per month.
      Yes, they deserve to profit. However, if they were serious about wanting to profit, I don't think that release Slashcode, their content engine, for free was all too smart =)

      But I would disagree with you on how much the ad profit and bandwidth cost are. But that's also why I suggested that a subscription system should be accompanied by an open-book policy on Slashdot's finances, so if they do make this claim there will be no question as to where all the money is going and whether it's justified.

      --
      -- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
    6. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      How about being able to use Karma to avoid ads. Every day you visit /. you lose one Karma point. If you reach zero you start seeing ads. Since submitting stories that are accepted scores a bit of Karma that works well with your suggestion. Insightful comments that the community favours will also earn you ad-free days.

      To stop excessive posting in the hunt for Karma you could have it that every 5 posts costs a Karma point. That way people will need to be brief and positive or they start seeing ads.

      Of course, this all falls apart when ad-filters come into play, but you can't have everything.

    7. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Evro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Should Slashdot be profitting off our article submissions, and our comments? That's why I read the site, not because of the editors.

      Well then don't pay them and then the site will eventually go away and you'll be happy then, right? Can you possibly imagine the cost (in both time and effort) in running a site of this size? I am sure the ISP bill is in the 5 digit range every month. So you don't want to pay them because you only like the comments. Isn't that like cutting off your nose to spite your face?

      If you don't like them then just send your check directly to Exodus. Really, your comment shows an immense lack of understanding for the Slashdot editors. While I will be among the first to concede that Slashdot has numerous problems, the manner in which you belittle the efforts of the staff sickens me. I can only hope at some point in the future someone calmly and rationally explains to you how something you've worked very hard on is absolutely worthless and tells you that you don't deserve any compensation for it, in fact, you should be paying them for subjecting you to it.

      Let us know that we're being charged this because of need, and not because of the avarice of a few businessmen over at VA.

      First of all, public corporations are legally obligated to do what is in the best interest of the corporation. So this is a ridiculous claim. Secondly, what do you want them to do? Take pictures of themselves starving? Measure their waistlines day by day so you can see just how much weight they're losing? Or for a less dramatic example, do you want the site to only be up 12 hours a day since they can only afford to pay 50% of their ISP bills?

      Tell me honestly: was your post intended to be a troll, or are you just stupid?

      --
      rooooar
    8. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by DrSpirograph · · Score: 2, Funny

      We already "pay" for the site by submitting content!

      Oh, our mistake, we'll just send that content to the bandwidth providers and I'm sure they'll accept it in place of payment.
      As will the landlords and grocery stores used by those who maintain slashdot.

    9. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by singularity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >We already "pay" for the site by submitting content!

      Huh? Since when is content an acceptable form of payment?

      You also seem to be missing the difference between Slashdot and Salon - paying a subscription to Slashdot will, based on everything I have ever heard CmdrTaco say about it, never change the *content* you are able to read, but rather things around the content.

      The last I checked, running an ad off of Doubleclick was never considered "content." If you pay the subscription, you lose the ad - YOU DO NOT LOSE CONTENT.

      So you are not paying for (user-provided) content.

      You also mention the difference between in pre- and post-Andover takeover. You seem to trace differences back to this purchase without considering other possibilities. Is is not possible that Slashdot grew enormously during this time and, as a result, hosting costs went up as well?

      >Let us know that we're being charged this because of need, and not because
      >of the avarice of a few businessmen over at VA.

      Let us not forget the other thing - based on everything I have read, there will never be a *need* to pay the subscription fee. It is a choice.

      --
      - (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
    10. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Falsch+Freiheit · · Score: 2
      IIRC, Slashdot lasted years as Taco and Hemo's only job. This sudden need for money seems to go back to the Andover takeover; it's entirely a business decision. But unlike Salon, this isn't a business venture that requires huge amounts of effort, because the content is provided by users.

      You seem to forget about the major change in the business environment /. exists in since that point in time. Back when they ran it by themselves, the "unfounded exuberance" about all things Internet made advertising revenues quite high. These days the cost of banner ads has dropped down to something reasonable for advertisers, but not even enough for websites to keep running on. The Andover takeover was right before the end of all that exuberance and ridiculously high ad-banner prices.

      Also, of course, there's the aspect that /. has expanded since then, so there's more resources needed to run the site. (More people, more servers, more bandwidth to pay for, etc.)

    11. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by XorNand · · Score: 1

      Interesting idea, but realize that your suggestion wouldn't exactly sit well with potential advertisers. You're essentially developing something that *they paid for* into a punishment of sorts.

      Secondly, they want to target the regulars, the people who are active in the Slashdot community. The people with zero karma are more likely to be occasional surfers passing by. On the other hand, the people who spent their lunch break here everyday, are much more likely to support /.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    12. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      But I consider advertising to be a punishment. It certainly feels like it. I even recall during discussions about ads saying something like "If I buy a computer, I should get a 'get out of jail free' card that prevents me from seeing ads about computers" -- note the implication that ads are like going to jail, a punishment. And I'd rather that the regular contributors to /. aren't punished, while the leaches are.

      Regardless, good content is more likely to keep me coming back than crap ads are going to drive me away. Lack of interesting content is why I gave up on Plastic, not the excessive advertising and sponsored stories.

    13. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by q-soe · · Score: 2

      Sure no problems

      Get rid of anonyous coward and everyone has to post as a member - and this would also require policing to knock off the troll posters, the racists, the homophobes etc etc.

      But that misses the point - Karma is earned by contributing to the community with meaningful comments - the system has its flaws (ive commented on them before) and is dependent on peoples opinions but it sort of works ok at this point in time - the problem is that what you are proposing is that the karma earned is what helps you avoid seeing the ads - but you lose karma when you post and when you look at the site OK

      What happens in the following circumstances under this system.

      -You post a reply which is well thought out but critical in any way of Open Source ?
      - You post a comment about something good in MS (it does happen)
      - you post a comment criticising someone else for justified reasons

      These are just a few
      You likely would be marked either troll or flamebait on each of these examples based in many cases on the bias of the moderator, its a fact of the system and one i dont like but ive learned to live with as i have the trolls (still hate racists tho) - the moderators are unpaid and volunteers.

      I would pay for slashdot - a small amount anyway (im not in the US so for me $10US is a large amount) and i would also put up with the ads.

      The fact is no matter which way we cut it and no matter how much we proclaim open source and free information it still costs money to deliver the information to people - whether its a printed pamphleyt or a web page.

      Slashdot has grown in the past 4 years since i started visiting here - some of the changes are not for the better but overall its a great site - and i dont mind paying if the option is no /.

      But i wouldnt use it under a system such as this - the moderators would need to be trained and have a standard code of conduct - i dont want people deciding if my comment is postive of not (and some of the best posts i have ever seen would NOT be considered positive)

      --
      I refuse to argue with Anonymous Cowards - if you want a discussion get an account....
    14. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that says it all, I have nothing to contribute except I agree 100%.

    15. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Monkeyman334 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I agree completely. I run Open Source Web Design, it's made almost completely by the users. Hosting is provided by Trae and our IRC channel is on Open Projects. We'd never ever do a subscription service. We don't provide anything except some programming talent and design moderation. And all we get from it is a warm fuzzy feeling. We're stuck with banner ads or donations. We'd give up before switching to subscription.

    16. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by RugRat · · Score: 1

      Show us all your costs, from servers to salaries, and your profit. Let us know that we're being charged this because of need, and not because of the avarice of a few businessmen over at VA.

      Wow. Imagine a world where people were only paid based on need. What would happen to any financial incentive to innovate? Yes, there are other reasons people may have to innovate. None of these put food on the table, a roof over the head, or clothes on the back.

      For an interesting analysis of payment based on need, try reading Atlas Shrugged.

    17. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by eyez · · Score: 1
      Slashdot's content is entirely community-driven; it's all submitted by the users, for free. What do the editors have to do?


      Pay for the Bandwidth and Hosting? After all, That's what this is about- You submitting content and posting comments is informative, yes, but as for the cost? Don't think you're helping there, As all you're doing is adding to the cost.


      In short, i see your argument coming off as "I give you my time, effort, and hits, so in turn, you should pay for it out of your pockets."

      --
      get 0wned. irc.w30wnzj00.com
    18. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by squaretorus · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you take the Salon analogy your on track, however, I think a better analogy is the coffee shop.
      I don't go to the coffee shop to drink coffee, I go to have a natter with some pals. I find their company more valuable than the environs, but WITHOUT the environs we would be unable to meet up during the day as there would be nowhere to go.
      In order to make use of the facility we buy coffee. Or beer in a Pub. We also choose the nicest available place to have coffee, and sometimes pay extra to sit there - but thats cool - thats a free market!
      Now, maybe my analogy sucks - but thats how I see the web. ALL of my favoured sites operate on community originated content. But some sucker has to provide the coffee shop for us to meet in. Why shouldn't the Gunters of this world make a bean or two.
      Personally, I don't mind if Taco etc make a good whack of cash, so long as they make sure this thing stays good. But then, if they don't we all bugger off and their back to being sad lonely spods! ;-)

    19. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is what I have been thinking, along with most people I come to slashdot for the comments. Articles are fine but there are better places on the web if you just want to read about hardware/linux etc..

      Most of the stories are submitted by readers, as are all the comments. Imagine if we stopped coming because of ads or whatever, suddenly there would be less to read, because theres less to read aswell as the ads even less people will visit. The result is slowly slashdot goes down the drain.

      Look, see here I am adding content to the site again, I should be allowed to run ads in my comments :-)

    20. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by DoctorNathaniel · · Score: 1

      The problem is: on average, the community content ain't worth a nickel. No one would pay you for the above editorial, I'll bet. (Not that it isn't appreciated of course.)

      The fact is that some money must flow. If you don't want to pay, that's OK... just watch the big ads.

      Alternatively, we could just allow /. to sell our comments to print magazines and use the proceeds to run the servers. But my bet is that it all winds up on the bargan rack of the Salvation Army store.

    21. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by SMN · · Score: 2

      I never said that those owning and operating the site aren't entitled to earn some money; I just think that they're making plenty, and Taco's claim that they need subscriptions because their costs are too high is total bunk. Frankly, if they said "we're going to start charging because we want to profit more," I'd be happy -- but don't give me any of this "traffic is up 90% and we won't be around in 4 years otherwise" crap.

      --
      -- Imagine how much more advanced our technology would be if we had eight fingers per hand.
    22. Re:Paying for _community_ content? by tswinzig · · Score: 2

      I love people that think like you do. No, not really.

      It's very simple. Slashdot provides you a SERVICE. They are a BUSINESS. If you don't want to pay for a subscription, then suffer through the huge banner ads. If they don't make enough money to keep the site running and the workers happy, slashdot will DISAPPEAR.

      If you don't like the idea of not being paid for your "content," then DON'T SUBMIT IT.

      Obviously you like what slashdot provides, or you wouldn't still be reading it.

      End of story.

      --

      "And like that ... he's gone."
  57. What about selling the news Feeds? by The_Myth · · Score: 2

    How many sites get a news feed from here to post the headlines on their site? Could /. charge a subscription to those or vice-versa those news feeds that appear in the boxes on /. (Linux Games, Sci-Fi News) could they not charge to have hose available?

    Just $0.02 worth

    --
    The MyTh - I am a figment of the Imagination - [Im Probably even not here]
    1. Re:What about selling the news Feeds? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent idea, then perhaps news.com and zdnet and the register could buy their links back ;)

  58. The Anonymous Coward thing... by neema · · Score: 2

    I really don't think this is a good idea. While I agree that most ACs are idiots, I have seen some pretty insightful, interesting or funny AC posts. On top of that, adding a -1 to all AC posts will make it very easy for them to be browsed over by moderators (many don't follow anything below their thresholds) and will essentially weed out the good posts along with the bad.

    Perhaps a massive amount of censoring is needed. While Slashdot, in my eyes, has a reputation for not censoring much, an AC post can be that exception. How about no cusses, especially nothing with "is gay" in it, nothing with the names of any of the Slashdot guys in it (I hate seeing "CMDRTACO EATS NUTS") and most DEFINATELY not anything with the word goat even in it. Not even anything that rhymes with the word goat.

    And if a legtimiate user is angry about the censorship (and would be using the privelage of no censorship to an apprporiate degree), well, he/she can get an account. It's fairly easy.

    1. Re:The Anonymous Coward thing... by sprouty76 · · Score: 2, Funny
      ... and most DEFINATELY not anything with the word goat even in it. Not even anything that rhymes with the word goat.

      What, like "bloat" ? Uh-oh, that's almost any article about Microsoft out then...

      --

      No, I don't want a free iPod

  59. Hypocritical whores by Zico · · Score: 2

    I hope the new Slashdot advertisement system is a terrific reminder for everyone the next time Slashdot editors are bitching about subscription services and why MyFavoriteWebsite® is EVIL for making me pay for the free content they serve up.

  60. At the same time, it's not all ACs by moogla · · Score: 1

    There are a ton of trollers who have accounts whose karma is in the shitter. They just cycle through them while to posting blocker is in effect for bad behavior, and post offensive material.

    I think it is an option to explore, and that's why he's making it a user preference. We should add as a moderation guideline that says: "Browse with AC deductions off"

    --
    Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
    1. Re:At the same time, it's not all ACs by MrBogus · · Score: 2

      It seems to me kinda pointless -- if you don't want to see AC and troll account posts, you can filter at 1.

      The regular accounts that are participating in obvious trolling/flamebait will eventually get modded down to -1 also, so if you want to read those, you'll have to lower your threshold.

      The only thing this seems to accomplish is to reduce the editor load of moderating AC posts from 0 to -1 Offtopic -- something I suspect is done more for automagic IP banning purposes than to improve the readers' comment fitering options.

      --

      When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
    2. Re:At the same time, it's not all ACs by CyberKnet · · Score: 2

      The only thing this seems to accomplish is to reduce the editor load of moderating AC posts
      Doubtful. Editors dont moderate posts, People do.
      something I suspect is done more for automagic IP banning purposes than to improve the readers' comment fitering options
      Also highly doubtful. IP banning is tracked and implemented by site. Anyone from banned site X cannot post. User IDs dont even come into the picture.

      --
      Video meliora proboque deteriora sequor - Ovidius
    3. Re:At the same time, it's not all ACs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll just point out that the FAQ is out of date. Ask an editor, or check the metadiscussion at trolltalk.

  61. ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your gonna start charging for this shit you need to get your own content first ok toughnuts.

    I'm not paying for someone to collect a bunch of links, half of which are crap anyways.

    1. Re:ummm by omega9 · · Score: 1

      I'll gladly pay a fee for what Slashdot provides me. I've mentioned this site as a valluable resource to friends and have said countless times that, to me, it's worth it weight in quarters (sorry, gold is reserved for much more important things).

      For me it's not the issue that, for the most part, Slashdot is just referencing stories at other locations. It's the service of compiling those stories together so I don't have to go searching for them. (I also enjoy the community of people that gather here.)

      It's hard for me to see how it's any different then many other things we take for granted. When you purchase a new home, I bet if you did enough research you could buy all the supplies, hire a crew, and play a major personal role in the construction of your house. Not that that's bad, there are many people who find enjoyment in that very thing! But for the majority, it's much easier to have all those things handled for you and only have to decide on a bottom line. Resources of all kinds are available to all kinds of people for however you may choose to use them. But if you find it better to pay, or otherwise compensate, someone to do it for you, that is also your choice. I prefer to spend my time in such a way that I am unable to constantly hunt down interesting stories on a regular basis. Slashdot does it for me and does it well in my opinion and I am gratefull.

      On the other hand, there are probably many of you that either have more time to look for interesting news, or, more likely, are just more effecient at it than I am. If you are satisfied with having to do the searching yourself I am not here to argue with you. On your way to finding your own news you are more likely to come across other interesting stories that people like me would miss, a sacrifice I am willing to make considering I can barely keep up with Slashdot.

      Don't flame me simply because you disagree with me. Remember, you can only expect freedom in an ammount alloted equal to that which you give others.

      --
      I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
  62. Why I don't like Junkbuster by Shook · · Score: 2, Interesting
    OK, some adds are annoying. But I find most web ads like banners and pop-unders to be more bearable than pages and pages of ads in a newspaper.

    I feel like many of these sites are providing me with a cool service or interesting reading, and the least I can do is glance at what their advertisings are offering. Often, if I really like what a site has, I will click on the ad out of pity, and sometimes read what they have to offer.

    This is how capitalism works. If you like the site, and you are even slightly interested in the ad, click on it. Both the site's owners and the advertiser deserve at least a shot.

    1. Re:Why I don't like Junkbuster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      (ever had one of those days where every comment's argument is tired and easy to pull apart?)

      Actually, what you've described isn't capitalism at all. If everyone clicked the ad but didn't buy there would be no demand for advertising. Downloading ads or clicking-through out of duty won't fund any company in the long-term and it's most definately not capitalism.

      Buying products via ads and informing the company that you came to them from Slashdot will support Slashdot in the long-term.

      Giving money directly to Slashdot will also support them.

  63. Funny is funny... by fm6 · · Score: 4, Funny
    I'd personally like to assign a -2 penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most of them frankly just aren't funny at all. But humor is far too subjective to say that the moderation is unfair.
    In that case, why is "funny" even a moderation option?

    This is a bad option, even if we all agree as to what you can laugh at. "Funny" is the one excuse you have for modding up a post that's really offtopic or trollbait.

    1. Re:Funny is funny... by sulli · · Score: 2
      "Funny" is the one excuse you have for modding up a post that's really offtopic or trollbait.

      Which is exactly why it's there! I for one would give Funny posts a +1 bonus, and -1 all the Informatives, some days.

      More seriously, I would love to see arbitrary bonuses and filtering. Let me add or subtract points for any moderation choice; high mod totals; poster's karma; +1 bonus [used / not used]; on my Friends list; on my Ignore This Person list; and so on. Could be fun.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    2. Re:Funny is funny... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's really funny is the moderation of this post.

  64. Mouths to feed, bills to pay. by dinotrac · · Score: 2

    Here's hoping that you the new ads and/or subscriptions so that they don't fundamentally alter the nature of the site.

    Y'all are smart folks. I hope you find a way.

    There's a certain honor, I suppose, in falling on your swords.

    But only when it's meaningful.

    There's also honor in finding ways to survive.
    Not only that, it feeds the kids.

  65. Re:It's funny, but it's true! by Talsan · · Score: 1

    I don't know about anyone else, but I've sworn to never buy an X10 product after the countless hundreds of popup X10 ads I've seen.

    But the Proxomitron has taken care of them for now! All hail the pyramid!

  66. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by Dirtside · · Score: 2

    Hear, hear. Slashdot, for all its faults, is still a wonderful site that I check virtually every day. Kudos to the /. team for keeping it going all this time, and for (so far) not (really) selling out. Hooray !

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  67. Subscription?! by Maskirovka · · Score: 1

    At some point in the future, the FBI or 'orifice of homeland security' will go on yet another hacker hunt, and guess who's logs they'll want? Yep, Slashdot's.

    How would this effect me with a subscription? Well me ol Daddy used to say "if you hang out with pigs, you smell like pigs". To put it another way, if I get picked up for something unrelated, and they look me up in their database and see that I subscribed to a 'terroristic newsgroup', it might just have some unholy consequences (like the diff between $2,000,000 and $5,000,000 bail(tm)/jack).

    I'm probably being way paranoid, but in the unlikely event that I'm not, I hope this is something the subscription scheme will address. Or maybe some moderators will think I'm trolling and mod me into oblivion :P

    Maskirovka

    The .gov confiscated my .sig:P

  68. Now all we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is a *BSD dying troll, but changed to the Internet is dying...

  69. Well isn't this a dilemma... by Hacker+Cracker · · Score: 2

    On the one hand, you have /. which supplies the servers and seeds for discussion, while on the other you have the readers who supply the bulk of the content.

    Seems like there's no clear cut line to draw here...

    -- Shamus

    This space for rent! EZ Terms!

  70. Using junkbuster is dishonest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    we will also have some sort of subscription system where you can pay a fee to disable them honestly.

    Ok, I'm grateful for Slashdot and all the hard work you've put in. I know it's not free. But someone who does not download an image is not cheating you (or anyone else) out of anything.

    And if junkbuster users are dishonest cheats, I can only imagine what you think of lynx users!

  71. Question about AC filtering by Sheldon_Brown · · Score: 0, Troll

    Rob, could you take some time to discuss the recent changes with respect to storing IP profiles for every user, banning users, banning IP addresses, and banning entire subnets? Judging from the current updates posted to Sourceforge, it looks like you are working not just on filtering ACs but also on pre-filtering of logged in users, that is, preventing abusive users from posting. MySQL.pm in particular now contains this interesting code fragment:


    #logem' so we can banem'
    $self->sqlInsert("abusers", {
    uid => $uid,
    ipid => $ipid,
    subnetid => $subnetid,
    pagename => $script_name,
    querystring => $query_string || '',
    reason => $reason,
    -ts => 'now()',

    and

    $submission->{subnetid} = getCurrentUser('subnetid');


    Could you discuss who in particular you are logging and banning? Specifically, is it just those darn Windows advocates, or are you broadening the scope? Personally, I would really appreciate it if you could subnet ban those people for life.

    Thanks,
    -Sheldon.

    --
    "A coward is incapable of causing destruction; it is the prerogative of the brave" - Mahatma Ghandi
    1. Re:Question about AC filtering by michael · · Score: 1

      Errr, as the code is commented just above the part you pasted:

      # logs attempts to break, fool, flood a particular form

      That is, the people who are attempting to break, say, the comment posting form and post 500 comments at once are logged and may be banned by IP if they try hard enough.

    2. Re:Question about AC filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      hey michael shut down any other censorship sites lately?

  72. Funny -2? Sad, really. by ktakki · · Score: 2

    A post can be informative or insightful and funny at the same time. It's something I strive for because 1) it's effective for getting a point across and 2) it's best not to take anything too seriously (least of all yourself).

    Certainly, there are posts modded as "Funny" that do not deserve the label, not so much that they're unfunny or juvenille, but that the moderator made a bad or wrong choice among the +1 options, or hit "page down" without restoring focus to the page body or scroll bar.

    I doubt that meta-mod catches all these mistakes.

    Rather than assess a -2 to "Funny", why not just do away with the option altogether?

    Ironic that this "feature" (read "bug") should be considered when the second front-page article (Disney) bears the Pythonic Foot of Humor.

    Moderation Totals: Informative=2, Funny=3 Total=-2.

    k.

    --
    "In spite of everything, I still believe that people are really good at heart." - Anne Frank
  73. But please don't... by The+Bungi · · Score: 5, Interesting


    One thing that absolutely pisses me off about the CNet and ZDNet ads is that they make the browser unusable and choppy untill you scroll them away. Don't put those there. Use simple images or light-weight animated GIFs.

    Use PayPal. You have a solid, reliable reader base of what, half a million users? Create a yearly "pledge" drive similar to NPR stations. Get 1/10th of people to give you $5-50 bucks and you're all set. If you can't even get that, then the "community" doesn't deserve web sites like this.

    Ads will kill readership, period. It's sad, but true. And because of the fact that you've given away the code, there are tons of options out there that will fill the void (for a while at least).

    1. Re:But please don't... by thunderbird46 · · Score: 1

      This is a great idea! FreeRepublic.com uses a similar model. The site has NO ads -- much of its support comes from fundraising drives about 4 times a year. I think they raised something like $70,000 last time around, and FR is orders of magnitude smaller than Slashdot in terms of readership.

    2. Re:But please don't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One problem - FreeRepublic.com is actually a .org, whereas Slashdot.org is actually a .com.

      It would be like when Guy Cabillio had a fundrasing drive for SCTV.

    3. Re:But please don't... by SaDan · · Score: 1
      Ads will kill readership, period. It's sad, but true. And because of the fact that you've given away the code, there are tons of options out there that will fill the void (for a while at least).

      Slashdot never should have been bought out or made part of a larger company. Sites like this should be run by people in their spare time and with spare money.

      Ads will kill this site. Subscriptions to get rid of ads will only piss off people, and make them go to other sites.

      You (people running Slashdot) have to make a decision. Either make it 100% subscription based, or 100% ad based for your revenue. A combination of the two will be a disaster.

    4. Re:But please don't... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      One thing that absolutely pisses me off about the CNet and ZDNet ads is that they make the browser unusable and choppy untill you scroll them away. Don't put those there. Use simple images or light-weight animated GIFs

      Do you really want to know who to blame for that?

      Macromedia

      Go to their site, can complain to them about the total lack of basic user controls for the flash player. Like: no mute, no way to fully stop animation. And the fact that they give the designer the option to remove the 'play' and 'loop' options from the right click menu. So even if those functions did fully stop the animation, the user still might not be able to stop it if the desgner thinks he's some elite asshole and knows what's best for you.

      Honestly... Some of those flash adds are so fsking annoying. I actualy open a window, and re-size it to cover the offending add. I never do that to static adds.

      I don't mind static adds, or even animated adds (gifs or flash) that can be stopped or only play once. But there is no excure not to provide a way to stop an animation from running. It's unaccpetable, and such a blatent example of bad useablity if I ever saw one.

    5. Re:But please don't... by doom · · Score: 2
      I've been reading slashdot using lynx for a few years now... have I been screening ads "dishonestly"?

      I think there's a slight whiff of hypocrisy here.

      Anyway, I'd like to say that I'd be willing to donate money to keep slash afloat, but I'm afraid I'm probably not. I've been losing interest in slash for some time, and I'm already a parasite in a lot of ways (I cruise with a +3 cutoff, but refuse to moderate).

      Here's some suggestions for y'all though... got bandwidth problems? (a) Switch to a peer-to-peer system or (b) switch from http to nntp. Details left as an exercise.

      Ad supported media is a broken concept. Making the ads bigger will just make it more broken.

  74. what is /. worth to you? by Lawmeister · · Score: 2
    I saw a post here from someone that said a buck a year would be their threshold to remove ads. I figure that a banner ad at the top would still be alright (I actually even click on them from time to time - 'specially for the thinkgeek stuff), but those huge ads that end up being flash/etc in the centre of the article would have to go.



    A buck or two max per year should provide enough additional revenue (say, 10% of the 500,000+ users) to keep the lights on, no? Oh wait, there are VA shareholders now too, aren't there. Guess subscription will be higher than a couple bucks.


    Damn.

    1. Re:what is /. worth to you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      do you expect everyone to work and put up financial risk for free, or only companies without shareholders?

  75. Re:OSDN Bar by swordboy · · Score: 1, Troll

    Give the guy a break. Are they supposed to pull the money for the servers and bandwidth out of their asses?

    I actually don't mind the bar (and I haven't disabled it). My comment was based on the observation that taco doesn't want it there. Looks like he should have thought harder about selling out during the good times. I have no doubt that slashdot would be without it if the site wasn't "0wn3d".

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  76. Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by BrookHarty · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Without my daily humor of slashdot posts about beowulf clusters, and comander taco jokes, I'd rather just read ZDNet. lol

    But on the side note, If Slashdot wants to make money, how about more news? I mean, 6+ articles a day? And some not very interesting. How about more tech news, Also how about having 3 bars, 1 on each side. How about adding a stock ticker?

    Why not make /. into a portal? Team up with someone to provide services so you dont have to recreate the wheel.

    BTW, if your currious what I think a portal is, stocks/news/weather/tv listing/cartoons. Maybe not in that order.

    1. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by reynaert · · Score: 2

      BTW, if your currious what I think a portal is, stocks/news/weather/tv listing/cartoons. Maybe not in that order.

      • Stocks? I don't care about stocks :)
      • News? Slashdot already has news for nerds, stuff that matters. That's all the news I want to see on Slashdot. I mean, there's already so much boring news in RL...
      • Weather? /. has readers from all over the world, and the world is an awful big place :) And I already hear it on the radio and TV. And if I really want, I can just look outside (you know, outside? The non-MS windows?)
      • TV listings? There are an awful lot of channels out there, and I already have eurotv.com. (See above.)
      • Cartoons? I have a daily checklist of twenty cartoons. Some of them quite obscure (you know, readership measured in dozens...). If Slashdot could get them all on their site, do it! (Right now I'm using some perl scripty to put them all on one nice local page)

      Seriously tough, portals failed big time. You know, dot com crash etc?

    2. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by John+Q.+Public · · Score: 2, Informative

      If Slashdot wants to make money, how about more news? I mean, 6+ articles a day?


      Actually, you can change your prefs now to include more news... just choose the 'Collapse Sections' checkbox on your homepage prefs.
    3. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by SevenTowers · · Score: 1

      But on the side note, If Slashdot wants to make money, how about more news? I mean, 6+ articles a day? And some not very interesting. How about more tech news, Also how about having 3 bars, 1 on each side. How about adding a stock ticker?

      Having more hits is the worst thing that could happen since scaling infrastructure will cost a lot more than the added ad revenue.

      Why not make /. into a portal? Team up with someone to provide services so you dont have to recreate the wheel.

      Portals are also quite lame for they attract more of the "unwanted" elements that roam the internet. Becoming a major service provider (which is what a portal those) also incurs additional costs which have to be repaid with advertising. Look what happened to Yahoo.

      BTW, if your currious what I think a portal is, stocks/news/weather/tv listing/cartoons. Maybe not in that order.

      Slashdot is a place for geeks, nerds, people who know what RTFM means. Providing weather information and such will not increase the amount of hits because people who need that kind of information already get in on their M$N or yahoo homepage. The additional info would be great for the people who already visit slashdot regularly, thus defying the purpose of adding it to get more revenue out of ads.

      --
      Imperium et libertas
      Autocracy and freedom
    4. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      Portals didnt fail, the idea of people of getting something for free failed. Even /. is going to charge (For non-ad viewing)...

      A couple years down the road, expect to see more portals charge, and the content go up. With your monthly charge includes download of mp3s, viewing divx movies, reading full length ebooks, jump start on buying tickets from ticketmaster, stocks and inside info..

      The Internet needs to grow up a little, and subscription based services need to flourish. (humm, .net anyone?) Fileplanet knows this, they are now charging you for quick and fast download. If not wait in line. Whats your time worth? After a full day of work and RL, only a couple hours to tinker/read quite allot.

      ATTWS gives away free unlimited walled garden Internet access, you can upgrade and get email and the ability to surf anywhere. Do people upgrade for the full services? Yes. Expect to see this type of free/extra services everywhere.

      *side note, Stocks and Stock news, I guess im just getting old, kids college funds, bitch about points and interest. But I still kick ass in CounterStrike. :)

      -
      Nectarine 100% DemoScene Radio 24/7 - tune in/get down

    5. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by Zog · · Score: 1

      You know what would be *really* great about the portal idea?

      Discussions on ads and cartoons and stuff... Even discussion on stocks could be pretty useful from time to time.

      Granted, I think that sould be purely an option (see the sidebar stuff), as I like /. for content - turning it into a bunch of boxes with colors would be a bad bad thing.

      Flame away ;)

    6. Re:Slashdot without Funny posts is like, boring... by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      That post wasnt even flamebait....

  77. Don't Buy Something - Send Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with that theory -- if you really like the program, then buy something advertised -- is that I would much rather eliminate the middle-man and just pay for the stinking site.

    I used to be Amphigory, but I pissed taco off. Go figure.

  78. Here some revenue ideas by geekoid · · Score: 2

    buy userfriendly. Merge both product together. You'll get the revue from both, but you'll be able to cut costs buy combining equipment and losing some staff.
    You should at the very least look into it.
    A lot of UFies come here already so the bandwidth need wouldn't be a straight add.
    Yes I do expect to get paid if you implement this idea. But I will only charge you $10,000USD.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  79. I As Well by citizenc · · Score: 1

    Their product is very interesting -- a small, wireless camera is actually a neat idea. However, I refuse to purchase anything from the company purely due to their advertising tactics. They alienated me.

    1. Re:I As Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not small, it's not "wireless" (it requires you to plug it into an outlet) and it's quality is horrible.

    2. Re:I As Well by Keith+Mickunas · · Score: 1

      Keep in mind that X10.com and X10 components are not one in the same. Many manufacturers make X10 products now. So you don't have to boycott all X10 components, just boycott X10.com.

    3. Re:I As Well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but you can use it to look up girls' skirts!! I NEED THAT -- Thank You X10 popup people! I would have never figured out how to surreptitiously take panty pics without your annoying ads!

    4. Re:I As Well by maxpublic · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hey, those cameras are great for recording myself, my wife, and our various partners engaged in lustful orgies. A camera for every angle, straight to the computer to be recorded and cut for later viewing pleasure. Woohoo!

      Max

      --
      My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?
    5. Re:I As Well by hawk · · Score: 1
      >Their product is very interesting -- a small, wireless camera is
      > actually a neat idea.


      That's what they sell? From the couple of ads that got past me before getting junkbuster working, I assumed they sold naked women . . .


      hawk

    6. Re:I As Well by spudnic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Interesting? Now what would REALLY be interesting would be a link to your FTP repository! ;)

      --
      load "linux",8,1
  80. Not quite fixed yet by xercist · · Score: 1

    Slashdot Updates
    [Slashdot.org] Posted by on Monday October 22, @04:50PM
    from the it's-been-awhile dept.

    So, uhh, who posted that exactly?

    --

    --
    grep "xercist" /dev/random ...you'll find me in there someday
  81. Parent Links? by cosyne · · Score: 1

    Am I just insane? Was there some time in the past where clicking the Parent link after a post would bring up a new page displaying the post which was being replied to (regardless of moderation), and all the other replies to that post? If that used to work, why the hell doesn't it work now? I regularly read posts which reply to a previous post, where you need to read the previous post to get the context for the post in question, and where the previous post has not been modded up. Changing my threshold just loads all posts at that thershold and the ones i'm trying to read get collapsed to their titles.

    you know, i probably am just insane. but i still want a simple way to get context for out of context replies. owell

  82. How much does it cost to run Slashdot? by splattertrousers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    People might be more willing to pay for Slashdot if they understand why it costs so much to run it.

    (Not me, but I'll happily look at big-ass ads as long as there's no popups or Flash ads.)

    Since /. is just a bunch of links to articles on other sites, you don't have to pay for writers. The code that runs the site works and is open-sourced, so you shouldn't need to pay anyone to maintain that anymore. Hopefully your servers are maintained by whoever provides your bandwith. So I can see the need for maybe one full-time employee, a couple people to help out at night or something, plus whatever it costs for all the bandwidth and the server hosting.

    So what's the actual cost breakdown?

    1. Re:How much does it cost to run Slashdot? by kawaichan · · Score: 0

      Um.... Do you know how much do all those freaking servers cost???? You need hundreds of servers to get Slashdot running the way it is running. What about bandwidth? You need some huge pipes to get the speed going. May be we should start donating servers to /. :)

      --

      kawai
    2. Re:How much does it cost to run Slashdot? by splattertrousers · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      Um.... Do you know how much do all those freaking servers cost???? You need hundreds of servers to get Slashdot running the way it is running. What about bandwidth? You need some huge pipes to get the speed going. May be we should start donating servers to /. :)

      Huh? Hundreds of servers? Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

    3. Re:How much does it cost to run Slashdot? by david614 · · Score: 1

      I agree whole-heartedly with this. Within the bounds of propriety - (after all, this is a for profit business - traded publicly on the stock exchange) - we would all gain from a better understanding of the real costs of running slashdot.

      I for one am more than willing to subscribe, but only if I know that my subscription will make some difference.

      D

      --
      ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
    4. Re:How much does it cost to run Slashdot? by krow · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually hardware wise we are pretty trivial (and currently we have capacity for twice what we are doing on an average day). So 9 2U 2ways, plus 3 Intel based 4ways.
      For a site of our size that is not a lot of Hardware at all. Looks at sites even smaller then us and they will normally run on more hardware then what we do.

      --
      You can't grep a dead tree.
  83. Re:Funny -2? Sad, really. by kawaichan · · Score: 0

    Agreed but most of the times are just plain stupid. It's a shame that people are not respecting the system.

    --

    kawai
  84. Slashdot subs & funniness by FatAssBastard · · Score: 1
    I think it's interesting that people don't seem to have a problem paying a monthly fee to have magazines and newspapers delivered to their house, which ALL have big, color adverts everywhere, yet when a site they spend lots of time on (/.) wants to ask you to pay to avoid the ads, they get their panties all in a knot.

    Regarding Rob's comment about -2 Funny, he was being facetious, folks. It's not a feature he has planned. Just take it easy, now.
    --

    --
    /.: why the hell am I here?
  85. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Userbase submits articles, userbase comments on articles


    slashdot=userbase
    slashdot-userbase=nothing


    Pissing us off seems like a bad idea!


    *by user I mean people who contribute stories and comments, not just passive viewers'

  86. Why this is a good change by at-b · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Funny how things change. About a year or two ago, people would have been up in arms about any changes to Slashdot that would commercialize it to such an extent. The OSDN 'brand building' bar, the upcoming large ads, the mere thought of a paid subscription model, etc.

    Sure, information wants to be free. But it's NOT free as in beer.

    As an aside, anyone notice how hard VA is trying to move people towards Newsforge? The banners exclaiming that Newsforge has twice as many news stories per day as Slashdot and LinuxToday combined? Now the brand building banner, etc? To me, this smacks of at least partial desperation; trying to create something that people will recognize and flock back to, even if the parent company should go bankrupt.

    Sure, Slashdot is popular. Lots of people read it. But it is also becoming more and more stigmatized as the battlefield of business-ignorant fanatics. People who are worthless to any business, thus advertising to them is less productive than, say, advertising on a big, serious-looking site, with a more professional-looking design. With less hysterical stories about losing our rights to privacy and pirating music, and more stories about, for instance, "Caldera target[ting] developers with latest workstation", which is an actual Newsforge headline.

    One of these two sites is somewhat appealing to business, and thus to advertisers. One of them is easier to sell as serious newsmedia. One of them has a heavy editorial hand, columns, and no negative image of being filles with Linux fanboys and other unwashed freaks.

    The other one is Slashdot.

    Somehow, I feel that OSDN is trying to direct as much traffic towards its more 'serious' site as possible, leaving Slashdot as a more 'hobbyist' site than anything else. Obviously they can't do anything directly about it, or those aforementioned fanboys (yeah, I'm one of them) would screaming bloody murder. But it can 'integrate' Slashdot into its OSDN thingee, adding bars, and big adverts, and subscription programs, and watering it down from its original incarnation.

    Sure, it's necessary to survive economically, to some extent. But ultimately, Slashdot doesn't pay. It takes quite a lot of hardware, and SIGNIFICANT bandwidth. How much do you think VA makes on those Thinkgeek banners? To make up for the black hole of cash that is /. they either have to get the rabid fanboys to subscribe (big fat chance), or accept the new banners. As the fanboys will still read Slashdot (blah blah webwasher blah modified hosts blah), the more business-focused clients will possibly refocus on Newsforge over which OSDN has a lot more control.

    But then maybe it's just a mad conspiracy theory.

    And let me repeat: information may want to be free, but that's NOT free as in beer.

    1. Re:Why this is a good change by Roblimo · · Score: 5, Informative

      "But then maybe it's just a mad conspiracy theory."

      In a way it is a conspiracy. NewsForge exists in large part because of advertiser demand for a "serious" Linux and Open Source news site that would appeal to people who have the power to sign purchase orders, combined with endless reader email asking us to turn Slashdot into more of a news site.

      But everyone at OSDN *likes* Slashdot in all its anarchic glory. I've liked it longer than 99% of all current Slashdot users (note my UID), and I don't ever want to see its content change because of corporate pressure.

      Hence NewsForge. Think of NewsForge as a trick to get our bosses to leave Slashdot alone instead of trying to turn it into something it was never meant to be.

      - Robin "Roblimo" Miller
      Editor in Chief, OSDN

    2. Re:Why this is a good change by KingKurly · · Score: 1

      ...so I guess that makes me part of that 1% that has liked it longer than you? ;)

      --
      It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
    3. Re:Why this is a good change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      But everyone at OSDN *likes* Slashdot in all its anarchic glory. I've liked it longer than 99% of all current Slashdot users (note my UID), and I don't ever want to see its content change because of corporate pressure.

      Not to get into a pissing match, but a lot of us liked slashdot before the uid's became almost compulsory for a post to get viewed. Maybe it's just nostalgia, but I liked slashdot before uids altogether.

    4. Re:Why this is a good change by Roblimo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Me too. But that was a much smaller Slashdot. Back then there were what? 100 posts a day on a big day? Rob Malda wrote something almost every day, not just once in a while. It was a little club on an Internet that wasn't yet completely commercial.

      Heck, KingKurly and I were listening to WHFS (Baltimore/DC radio station) back then, before Jake Einstein sold it and the new corporate owners canned his son, Damien Einstein, because Damien stuttered and they didn't like that even though he was/is one of the greatest alternarock and freeform "I make my own playlist" DJs ever.

      I'll be 49 this October 30, and I'm nostaligic about a lot of things, including an Internet where no one really worried too much about making money.

      On the other hand, I was listening to the local NPR station this morning and suddenly, there was a familiar voice -- sounded just like Rob Malda -- talking some sort of shit about using giant Lego robots to invade Afghanistan, and I cracked up. The idea of Rob on a national radio show was sort of funny in itself, and having him being taken seriously by an NPR commentator with a smooth voice was even funnier, -2 all the way, you might say.

      So things change, in some ways for the better, in other ways not. Yeah, some of us long for the "good old days" of Slashdot or even of Chips 'n Dips, and in some ways I was happier then, too, but in other ways not.

      At least we're trying to hold the line on Slashdot ads as best we can in today's overhyped world, and still trying to get the most interesting people we can to interview (I just emailed RIAA Pres Hilary Rosen yet again -- some Slashdot interviews take a *lot* of time & persistence to arrange, you know) and all that. More story submissions, more users, more comments all the time. I suppose that's success. But it's an ever-increasing workload, too.

      I think I will stop spouting and go to bed now. It's almost 11:30 p.m. and I've been up and working since 6 a.m. and I'm tired. :)

      - Robin

    5. Re:Why this is a good change by educated_foo · · Score: 1

      NewsForge exists in large part because of advertiser demand for a "serious" Linux and Open Source news site that would appeal to people who have the power to sign purchase orders,

      I hadn't looked at newsforge before, but it looked identical to slashdot except for different colors, fewer posts, and more (obtrusive) ads. And it looks like we're losing that last one soon.

      /s
    6. Re:Why this is a good change by slamb · · Score: 1

      How much do you think VA makes on those Thinkgeek banners?

      if I had to guess, I'd say quite a bit. Thinkgeek is one of the few advertisers that probably gets an awful lot of hits from the Slashdot crowd. They sell physical objects (no piracy even possible) that a lot of the Slashdot crowd wants. Plus, those items can be much harder to find elsewhere. It's a winning formula for advertising on Slashdot.

    7. Re:Why this is a good change by TeachingMachines · · Score: 1

      The previous post by Roblimo should be modded up, man. People are clamoring for a change in the content of Slashdot in addition to the changes in looks/features. IMHO, that would be a rather large mistake. Sure, maybe the site would be around in four years, but would it really be Slashdot?

      Just my two cents.

      --

      The Death Penalty: Killing people to show others that killing people is wrong.
    8. Re:Why this is a good change by zerocool^ · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      nite robin =)

      ~z

      --
      sig?
    9. Re:Why this is a good change by magg · · Score: 1

      In a way it is a conspiracy. NewsForge [newsforge.com] exists in large part because of advertiser demand for a "serious" Linux and Open Source news site that would appeal to people who have the power to sign purchase orders, combined with endless reader email asking us to turn Slashdot into more of a news site.

      There has to be a better way to make money than subscritions.. I'm going to subscribe, but it does not feel right. The readers submits stories and so on. Is /. ment to be profitable or nonprofit?

      Maybe you could start selling info about your reads to companies targeting us? I'm sure most of us would participate in different questionares etc.

      But everyone at OSDN *likes* Slashdot in all its anarchic glory. I've liked it longer than 99% of all current Slashdot users (note my UID), and I don't ever want to see its content change because of corporate pressure.

      BTW, do you reckon I could sell my /. uid at eBay? hehe

      Speaking of old days, which one of you guys visited The Gathering in Norway in 99? You should come and promote your site more often ;-)

      --
      magg
  87. Donations? by theNeophile · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Has anyone thought about setting up some donation system? I'm sure a lot of people would choose to give more money to eliminate large annoying banners for everyone then they would just for themselfs. Or if there already is a donation system in place draw more attention to it (I don't know of one, and if people don't know of it they can't donate). Without of course being annoying about it, IMO sites begging for donations on every page is as annoying as ads. Then again, maybe I'm just overestimating peoples generosity.

    1. Re:Donations? by zerocool^ · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I also thought of another reason a donation system would be a good idea...

      If you have a donation drive like twice a year, like a telethon, only the crippled kids are the servers, and the old guys tapdancing are rob and jeff, i think it would go over great. Why? Because with a donation system, you're not REQUIRED to pay. You can slack and not pay. But since its voluntary, i think you'll get more generous response. Only people who want to pay for it will pay for it, but they'll pay for themselves and others on principle. AND they'll kind of have this inner satisfaction that they are helping save slashdot. If its not the monthy bill, instead a donation, it makes it seem so much more noble, and even the geeks here can appreciate that.

      In general though, if it has to be a subscription, i won't pay it if its month to month. I want to pay once a year, like $50 or whatever. Get it all out of the way at once, so i only bitch about it once, and then forget it for the other 11 1/2 months.

      Also, if i'm required to pay for it, i want to make sure i can be logged in at all times. It's been happening lately that i can't log in, i try and it just redirects me to the home page, and then i have no ability to change the threashold on the comments.

      But, see? I've just proved my point. People who pay a fee that are required to pay it are in a position to make demands, they want higher quality service and more privilages. People that donate, they just feel content that they've helped keep it alive.

      For instance: If we were required to pay for the Jerry Lewis telethon, if it was required for citizenship, then we'd all start to wonder where the hell the cure was for these kids was, even if we only paid $2 a year. Since its a donation basis, we just go and pay our $10, and say "i'm helping out, and that feels good. Poor kids."

      subscription is the fastest way to get a demanding and critical audience that actually has the power they threaten they have.

      ~z

      --
      sig?
    2. Re:Donations? by Dooferlad · · Score: 1
      If you have a donation drive like twice a year, like a telethon, only the crippled kids are the servers, and the old guys tapdancing are rob and jeff, i think it would go over great.
      OK, but I want to see Rob and Jeff tapdancing :)

      Come on! This has to happen! Rob and Jeff host a telethon webcast[1], complete with slow, soft focus pictures of the Slashdot servers with CG smoke coming out of them... of course since they will be in the same place to get behind a web-cam together to do this show they could do another Geeks In Space! *g,dr*

      [1] I know this will cost bandwidth, but stick with it, my story gets better.

      Dooferlad
  88. Changes were bound to come by slardy · · Score: 1

    I guess these types of changes were really bound to come sooner or later, and we all want to see slashdot grow and this is apparently best for the site's growth. As far as having these HUGE banner ads, I dont think it's sooo bad, we'll get used to them eventually. I hated when slashdot first displayed the banners on the top of all pages, but I've grown pretty used to it and i acctually often pay attention to it! So as long as we dont start seeing any flash advertisements (god save us all) on slashdot, I think we will all survive :) The nav bar however, I have a little problem with... ITS UGLY AS HELL! cant we get a prettier navbar like they have over at freshmeat.net? With significant changes like this coming up I think it would be a great idea to give /. a whole new look. I think it's really time for a redesign, I'm sure alot of people out there would HATE this idea, I kind of like this look too and wouldn't like to see it go totaly, but I think it's time for a change.

    --
    http://www.nu-vision.org
  89. Funny Posts by CokeBear · · Score: 5, Funny

    Speaking of Funny Posts, I'd like to be able to filter out everything but.
    Sometimes, I just want to read the posts modded "funny"... Slashdot can be the best source of humor anywhere.
    I wish I could filter out all that "Interesting" and "Informative" crap, and make it my own personal humor site.
    Something to brighten my day between issues of TheOnion.

    --
    Reality has a liberal bias
    1. Re:Funny Posts by warrior389 · · Score: 1

      I agree. I posted the same request before but was never modded up. As a graduate student in CS, I often find myself hiding in the corner with my laptop after 3 hour long lectures, frantically searching for those rare but satisfying "5, Funny"s

      So, I second this... how about a "Funniest First"

    2. Re:Funny Posts by thePfhitz · · Score: 1

      ditto here - i'd love to have an option like this ^_^

    3. Re:Funny Posts by RedWizzard · · Score: 2

      How about having preferences to set the scores that various moderations cause? Then you could set "Interesting" and "Informative" to 0 or 1, Rob can have "Funny" on -2 and so on. Also I'd like to be able to set the default scores for types of users. Maybe I don't want to have the +1 bonus for high karma apply.

  90. ad space by Alien54 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    There is plenty of space for ads along the left edge and right edge, and when you have long threads that becomes very usable. That is likely where you would want them, since the longer threads are the more interesting read.

    You could also do what the register does, and have stories "sponsored" by certain companies with their color scheme and logo incorporated, etc. Or have companies sponsor sections in this way for a day or two, or a week or two.

    You could also have half height ads on the main page, in the spaces between the stories.

    So there are lots of options before doing the big ass boxes in the stories

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    1. Re:ad space by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I would love to see Microsoft sponsored stories on Slashdot.

    2. Re:ad space by tartley · · Score: 1

      >> have stories "sponsored" by certain companies

      Isn't that the first step down the slippery slope of losing editorial objectivity?

      At first, it makes no difference. Then the well-intentioned editor thinks "I'll do a good job on this story because it has a big-name sponsor and might get a lot of readers". Then the tired but well-intentioned editor thinks "I'll rush this story off quickly - it hasn't got a sponsor, so maybe no-one will read it." Eventually, it has become the norm to only run stories that are approved of by big media cartels.

      To all /. folks - Love your work.

    3. Re:ad space by Eil · · Score: 2


      Nice ideas, but keep in mind that Slashdot (and probably Slash, at heart) isn't nearly as flexible with page layout as The Register is. Register webmasters can throw in ads and boxes and stuff at will, but Slashdot probably[1] can't because their engine isn't flexible enough for that.

      1. I say probably, because, well... in 4 years Slashdot has had the same exact look and layout. I always presumed that this was because it was simply too hard to change. Yes, I've seen web sites that use the Slash engine look radically different from Slashdot, but Slashdot is a much bigger beast to keep stable.

    4. Re:ad space by reynaert · · Score: 2

      in 4 years Slashdot has had the same exact look and layout.

      And thank God for that. I like the Slashdot layout, and there is nothing wrong with it (in both appearance and 'usability'). The Slashdot layout has pretty much become a trademark. People expect it. They don't want it to change; just look at all the negative comments on the OSDN navbar.

      Oh, and if you claim Slashdot always has the exact same look, you obviously don't read the BSD stories ;) (although that's probably a big hack :)

    5. Re:ad space by Alien54 · · Score: 2
      Yes, I would love to see Microsoft sponsored stories on Slashdot.

      Actually I had that thought too.

      but then, why not have a place where people can vent when they like...

      wait, they do that already.

      --
      "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
    6. Re:ad space by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      Actually, if you disable the Slashboxes there is no space down the right.

      While I'm talking about disabling stuff, I think that everyone should turn off the icons and if you don't use the Slashboxes turn them off too. Remember, a quarter of a million people rendering and downloading stuff they don't need or use wastes a lot of money that the /. crew don't necessarily have.

    7. Re:ad space by Nailer · · Score: 2

      And thank God for that. I like the Slashdot layout, and there is nothing wrong with it (in both appearance and 'usability'). The Slashdot layout has pretty much become a trademark. People expect it. They don't want it to change; just look at all the negative comments on the OSDN navbar.

      The dark green text on the dark grey (gray for USAmericans) is quite difficult for those of that stare at our monitors 24 hours a day and have difficulty reading in some cirsumstances.

      Please lighten the grey color. Thanks.

      Changing the turquiose for blue would be nice too...

    8. Re:ad space by chromatic · · Score: 1
      It may have been difficult to change in early versions of Slash (sorry Rob, but I read 0.9 and it hurt my eyes), but modifying the templates is super easy in the current version.

      One of the design goals was to have HTML that degraded gracefully back to the 3.2 specification. Not that it validates, but it works reasonably well on all sorts of browsers. It'd be nice to see CSS get rid of the nested tables... but Malda probably wouldn't go for it.

    9. Re:ad space by rho · · Score: 2

      Read Slashdot in "light" mode. It is wonderful. It's like I wish every web log was. It's almost, dare I say, perfect.

      Trust me on this -- once you eliminate the awful HTML-hackery that makes Slashdot such a dog's breakfast, you'll never go back.

      --
      Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
    10. Re:ad space by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      in 4 years Slashdot has had the same exact look and layout.
      And thank God for that. I like the Slashdot layout, and there is nothing wrong with it (in both appearance and 'usability'). The Slashdot layout has pretty much become a trademark. People expect it. They don't want it to change; just look at all the negative comments on the OSDN navbar.

      As much as I admire the geekyness of the /. layout. There are still things that really bug me, that I think should be changed. And I don't mean whacking 70kb images everywhere. I mean things like spacing between the top and bottom of posts, padding around the sides etc.
      One thing that really bugs me. Is that the .sigs are the same size and color as the post. Quite oftern, it's hard to tell if a .sig is part of the post or not.
      Kudos to /. for not using pixels to define the size of the fonts (unlike alot of heavy text-content-based sites. Currenly...IE doesn't re-size fonts defined in px when you hold down CTRL and use the scroll wheel.

      I personaly think it would be worth the effort, for the /. crew to go over the site, and make it work with CSS. No more tables. More layout options, and user could make there own layout (/. would save a CSS file with the use info, or fetch a CSS file from a URL). It would also make it easier to change the layout/fix bugs in the future. And would take a load off the servers to.
      People who don't want CSS or anything, could either dissable it there browser, or in their user prefs.

    11. Re:ad space by DickBreath · · Score: 2

      ...but Slashdot is a much bigger beast to keep stable.

      Are you trying to imply that Slashdot is stable?

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    12. Re:ad space by Eil · · Score: 2


      Of course not, I was implying that it would probably be much less stable if Taco & Co began meddling with "unneccessary" things like look and layout.

  91. Multi-site kind of deal (OSDN) by moogla · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps slashdot could convince OSDN to do a network wide subscription, such that newsforge, themes.org, slashdot, freshmeat, etc. would all let you see adless version of the pages (with extra features maybe) if you pay a monthly/annual fee. That would rock. I'd pay $20/yr for that. (But no more, I mean, I pay less for magazine subscriptions)

    --
    Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
  92. Curious about the stats.... by Sara+Chan · · Score: 2
    What are the stats for Slashdot? For example, number of active (by some definition) user accounts, number of distinct IPs/day, total hits/day, etc.


    Slashdot is the only real chance we have for news freedom. Thank you.

  93. Suggestion: Karma Discount? by pbryan · · Score: 2

    An interesting scenario would be for people who contribute to the value of Slashdot to get a reduction on the number and/or size of banner ads they receive, possibly defraying the costs of subscribing to Slashdot.

    --

    My car gets 40 rods to the hogshead, and that's the way I likes it!

  94. Dude... by meepzorb · · Score: 2

    ...you dont know me from Adam but I've been lurking and posting for over 3 1/2 of those four years.

    You are all doing what you need to, given current circumstances. Just do it with class, and taste, and fairness.

    :M

  95. Why not custom ads? by jesser · · Score: 2

    I gave Google $50 by advertising my site under several low-traffic keywords for a month. Even though that didn't give me any revenue (my site is free), I'd do it again, because it was fun and it allowed me to support a site I love. Why can't I do something simliar on Slashdot -- for example, advertise my site on Mozilla stories?

    I'd also like to see ad moderation. If people like your ad, it gets displayed more often, at no cost to you. This would encourage advertisers to put up ads that don't annoy readers. There could also be a discussion forum (sid) for each ad, allowing readers to give public feedback to the advertisers, and encouraging karma whores to visit advertisers' sites.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  96. Huge Square Ads. by redcliffe · · Score: 1

    I wouldn't pay 5cents for a million Huge Square Ads. I will NEVER EVER buy ANYTHING(even if it's the last item in the world) from those who pay for those ads. Those extra big ads will be useless, because everyone will hate them and ignore them.

    Personally if I see something I like in the banner at the top of the page, I'll go and have a look at it, and see what I think. But huge big ads taking up space and ruining layout I will never look at. I think that most people here would think the same.

    David

  97. all i can say is... by da+groundhog · · Score: 1

    JUNKBUSTER
    (which can be found at www.google.com)

    sorry taco :)

    --
    "...through this door all my dreams come realities, and all my realities become dreams..."
  98. Hey man by redhotchil · · Score: 1

    I like X10 ads! Man those camera chicks are hot!

  99. Here's a concept: mod the ads by mikosullivan · · Score: 5, Interesting
    There are several threads here pointing out that ads aren't necessarily all bad, and that if they're on topic they might be even less bad.

    So here's an idea: mod the ads. Users may voluntarily mod the ads based on how much they think the ads provide any value-add to life.

    --
    Miko O'Sullivan
    1. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by gmarceau · · Score: 1

      Dam, You beat me to the karma

      The unix way : let them be small and modular. Interestigly enough, web site could be built with the same objective. Let the advertisement moderation system be modular, user-selectable, and user implementable.

      --
      This post was compiled with `% gec -O`. email me if you need the sources
    2. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by Sludge · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think this is a smart idea. In the more corporate world, when I sign up for things, they give me the option to "value-add" my name to mailing lists, and to receieve "product notifications".

      In this pessimistic anti-marketing community, perhaps it could be done well to reverse this, and instead of saying what you like, say what you hate. Mod DOWN the bad stories.

      As an aside, I would pay for Slashdot if they hired a lawyer to give legal commentary on relevant stories. I'm not pretending to have a business model where this would work. However, it would be far more educational and enlightening if a comment about SomeBadCompany's lawyers taking candy from a baby could have a few quotes from relevant law.

      And no, I'm not even American. But, I still think it would be interesting.

    3. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by fragbait · · Score: 1

      I think this is a good concept, but some people are so much a free web zealot that they will mod the adds down just to mod to adds down.

      Besides, I can just hear the advertiser now......"You want me to pay you what to have the potential for my adds to not be seen?!?"..

      --fragbait

    4. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by jargon · · Score: 1

      Now this would be an interesting idea for a site. That is the sort of Value Added Service that I'd probably be interested in as well.

      The EFF already provides a legal hotline for issues; someone with that kind of background would make an interesting columnist here.

      This might not be perfect for slashdot, but could make a nice other slashsite. The advantage here would of course be readership. It would be very strange if there were another slash site as popular as slashdot...THAT is a test of the company writing OpenSource model.

      Cut down on some IANALs, anyway...

      --
      /dev/psychic: No medium found
    5. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would be useful if they could hire a good lawyer, open-minded, but with firm convictions and the ability to think independently, rather than a yes-man paid to spew out arguments in favor of one opinion or another.

    6. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by Sludge · · Score: 2
      This might not be perfect for slashdot, but could make a nice other slashsite. The advantage here would of course be readership. It would be very strange if there were another slash site as popular as slashdot...THAT is a test of the company writing OpenSource model.

      I'm not sure that this strays too far from what slashdot has become. Obviously it has no place in the "neat toys" stories that Cmdrtaco posts, but slashdot's ink is quite frequently used up describing legal conundrums. Large amounts of space are given to uncertain frustrations from the readers.

      To me, it seems like an obvious feature suggestion. Even the slightest amount of legal information is modded up to +5 in a short amount of time.

    7. Re:Here's a concept: mod the ads by garver · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't banner ads already have a moderation system? Its called "click throughs."

      Now, if you throw in some personalization, then you might have something.

  100. What I want to know by redcliffe · · Score: 1

    is why they sold out to VA Linux in the first place. In Australia for less than $AUD250 and 13.9cents a MB, I can get an SDSL connection that could easily handle the same sort of traffic as slashdot. Why didn't they just keep /. to themselves, instead of giving heaps of profit and control to VA Linux?

    David

  101. quarter million users ? by Cedric+C.+Girouard · · Score: 1


    If only half of those 250,000 users were to donate 1$ to slashdot, it would make 125000$ which IMNSHO covers the costs of colo for a while. Hell. For 125000$ I can get me a couple of T1 for a year...


    Now, factor in 250,000 readers each chipping in 10$ for a year. We're talking money here... Some 2.5M$. Which should cover for slashdot, and slashdot jr. and the whole family.


    Simple maths.

    --

    Marriage is considered capital punishment for the theft of a goat in some third world countries...

    1. Re:quarter million users ? by david614 · · Score: 1

      This is the same kind of "simple maths" that produced phony dot-com valuations and business plans.

      I have no idea what it takes to keep slashdot running, but I am sure that it is more expensive now that VA runs it than it was when the guys started the site.

      That said, they should set the subscription rate at what they need, and see whether the slashdot "community" is willing to pay its own way.

      --
      ELITISM: It's always lonely at the top. Uninvited company is rarely welcome.
  102. What About Caching? by istartedi · · Score: 2

    Slashdot used to cache, so that when I hit the back button on my browser the old page was still there. If I wanted to see the new comments all I had to do was hit refresh.

    Now /. runs the script when I hit back. This has to be putting an additional dynamic load on your servers. Ummm... are you sure this doesn't account for your increased traffic? :)

    Maybe it's just an IE issue. I've gone through all the settings in IE and I don't see how it could be on my end. This is especially bad for me because I'm stuck with a modem and can only get 28.8 because of the crappy phone lines. PLEASE bring back caching if you can.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:What About Caching? by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      That sounds like a problem with your browser. I always get old pages when I back-arrow, unless I either explicitly refresh, or run out of memory.

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    2. Re:What About Caching? by tapper · · Score: 1

      IE 5.0 and up:
      Tools > Internet Options
      General Tab
      Temporary Internet Files > Settings
      "Check for newer versions of stored pages"

      Maybe this will help you. /. has no control over caching on your local machine.

      --
      A wise man once said... nothing.
    3. Re:What About Caching? by istartedi · · Score: 1

      Yep. That did it. Among other things, Nimda resets some settings. Even though I am Nimda-free now, I guess that was one of the things it whacked... although I could swear I checked it before... /me rescans...

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    4. Re:What About Caching? by istartedi · · Score: 2

      Ooops! I guess I spoke too soon. I have it set to NEVER check for new pages, and it still doesn't cache. Dunno. Don't ya love computers sometimes?

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  103. Banner ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What possible reason do you have for making the banner ads bigger? I will never click on banner ads. I don't care if they're 468x60, 640x480, or 32x32. I will never click on banner ads. Making them bigger is only going to annoy users. I will never click on banner ads, no matter how obtrusive they are. In fact, the more annoying they are, the more likely I am to not click on them. I will never click on banner ads. We can now turn off that stupid navbar thing; can we turn off the banner ads? I will never click on them; why not? It would actually save you bandwidth. Your only motivation to force people to see huge banner ads even when they will never click on them must therefore be to annoy them into clicking on them or to make them pay for your "content" (10-15 links per day and maybe a sentence added, and the occasional essay -- really worth my money).

    Therefore, I will never, ever click on banner ads here. images.slashdot.org re-added to the Junkbuster proxy. All your banner ads are reduced to a white rectangle with a little X on them. Have a nice day.

  104. how much does an ad cost? by syzygysucker · · Score: 0

    I've always wondered. $10 a day? $100 a day?
    $10 a week?

    1. Re:how much does an ad cost? by syzygysucker · · Score: 0

      Never mind, decided to resist my natural slackful state and found it
      here

  105. Look & Feel update? by dood · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hey, I understand about all the ads, but how about a look and feel update to /. ? I'd say it's well overdue.

    Any plans?

  106. collaborative filtering by rnd() · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why not use collaborative filtering in tandem with traditional moderation?

    With collaborative filtering, each slashdotter would view posts that were moderated up by other slashdotters who had similar preferences in the past.

    There was a great site called moviecritic.com (which unfortunately has since been shut down due to budget limitations) that used collaborative filtering to recommend movies. I found it incredibly useful, and discovered some great movies that I never would have watched otherwise.

    With collaborative filtering, stories could also be 'recommended' without forcing the user to rule out entire categories of stories. The beauty of collaborative filtering is that it does not assume anything a priori other than the fact that if two individuals have shared common preferences in the past, they are likely to agree again in the future.

    Traditional moderation could be accomplished simply by tallying the votes that each post received.

    mmm

    p.s. I'd be glad to help build this functionality into slashcode if there is sufficient interest.

    --

    Amazing magic tricks

  107. Don't believe all the lies people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Direct qoute from VA Linux annual report:

    "OSDN business segment increased $12.6 million, or 605.5%, from $2.1 million in fiscal 2000 to $14.7 million in fiscal 2001."

    Slashdot is of course one of the most popular parts of OSDN.

    So please explain how an increase of 12.6 million dollars to a whopping 14+ million you made off OSDN justifies the shit you are pulling?

    Your annual report gives you away, you liar.

    1. Re:Don't believe all the lies people by kawaichan · · Score: 0

      Is it the profit or just the reveanue (SP)?

      --

      kawai
    2. Re:Don't believe all the lies people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well Slashdot made 14 mil, but VA Linux lost 100 mil or so, so it didn't help much in the big picture. Apparently what is happening is VA is hoping to keep the whole company afloat by squeezing every last penny out of slashdot.

  108. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So when Slashdot is a paid service, will I get a refund when Taco adds another hundred bugs and calls it an "update"?

  109. Auction time! by yesthatguy · · Score: 1

    Need money? Auction off unused low UIDs on Ebay or something. That way people can support /. and get something they feel is useful out of it. Maybe you can re-do the first 100-UIDs on a "who pays us the most" basis, so someone who donates lots of money can get UID 1 :)

    --
    Yes! That guy!
  110. Throwing Mud, etc by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    Well me ol Daddy used to say "if you hang out with pigs, you smell like pigs".

    There are these old rules:

    1. Never throw mud at a man with a gun
    2. Never stand next to a man throwing mud at a man with a gun
    Of course, it wasn't originally mud, but you get the idea. and it is practical advice.
    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  111. Re:lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    VA Linux Annual Report

    Of course VA Linux as a whole is bleeding cash like a stuck pig, but slashdot is pulling it in hand over fist more than most dotcoms in this market.

    Slashdot/OSDN made 12 million more than last year, in the net revenues section of the report it shows that OSDN is the only profitable part of VA Linux, in fact the money it generated increased 600%.

  112. Re:Funny -2? Sad, really. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, "the system" is user moderation. It just so happens that most of the users have a pretty unsophisticated sense of humor. (Not to mention what the FAQ says about funny posts.)

    Anyway, the really good sarcasm usually gets +1 Insightful, +1 Funny, just because the moderators don't know the meaning of either of the words 'funny' or 'insightful'. It would be a shame to blackhole the witty stuff down with the stupid stuff.

  113. The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by Girf · · Score: 5, Funny
    Apparently CmdrTaco had a lapse in thinking..

    Slashdot doesn't need banner ads or subscriptions. If Taco wants cash all he has to do is start selling karma.. Just think: Karma-whoring with a credit card.

    Who here wouldn't pay a few extra bucks for a little more karma?

    After that, he could introduce credit-card moderating.. $10 and you can take that pro MSFT comment from +5 all the way down to -2!

    --

    Apathy -- The state of numbness of the mind. When you are apathic, you can think.

    1. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by Wakkow · · Score: 1

      He joked about this at the Linux World Expo, SF. Some type of semi-exponential way of charging for it.. Let the first 25-50 be affordable and everything past that just get expensive. Why not?

    2. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by jhanson · · Score: 1

      This is a great idea, now for just a couple bucks, people can get their goatse trolls up to +5. Lets see how fast this would curtail slashdots growth.

    3. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by Anonymous+Bullard · · Score: 1

      How about using the three-layered scheme that 92.7% of all statisticians favour:

      Scum level: cowards searching for content amongst humongous animated MSFT ads... (collected personal information may or may not be sold to greedy capitalists)

      Hardy students level: The registered non-paying bullards seeing less intrusive and non-offensive ads but ads nevertheless.

      Geeks w/ cash level: for a small voluntary donation there will be no ads but adundant karma bonuses instead. The sun is guaranteed so shine even where it normally doesn't.

      Of course, it would be a lot simpler if the slashcrew simply sold corporations positive mentions (and biased moderating) like other companies with traditional journalistic integrity such as ZD.

      --

      Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?

    4. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by shaper · · Score: 2

      Selling karma would make slashdot too much like the "Real World" where moneyed interests get to speak more loudly than the poor. When I first read this idea I laughed. On second and third sobering thought it made me quite uncomfortable.

    5. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by steveha · · Score: 2

      $10 and you can take that pro MSFT comment from +5 all the way down to -2!

      I have always wanted to see a jukebox where you could pay a dime to shut off the currently-playing song.

      Which reminds me of a story... at a pizza place they had a jukebox, and they gave the staff there some quarters to put in the jukebox and play music. (The quarters were painted, so they could be recognized and returned to the staff for re-use instead of being counted as revenue.) The staff was supposed to use these to play a few songs so people would notice the jukebox was there, and play more songs. Well, one day they took all the quarters they had, and put them all in at once, and selected the song "Whip It" (by Devo) over and over and over. Dozens of times in a row. "Whip It" for something like two hours. I'm glad I wasn't eating there at the time.

      steveha

      --
      lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    6. Re:The Get-Rich-Quick Scheme Taco Should Have Used by Maxthemax2000 · · Score: 0

      "$10 and you can take that pro MSFT comment from +5 all the way down to -2!"

      I takes 6 people to dig a post from -1 to 5, One person shuld not be able to send it back so AC posts are ranked beter

      --
      No Sig
  114. new ads by spectatorion · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I do not currently filter slashdot's ads (as i do for just about every other site's ads...where would i be without mozilla?) because they are at the top of the screen, are relatively unobtrusive, and are actually sometimes relevant to my interestes. I will not, however, stand for those disgutsting CNET/ZDNET-stle ads. They are just eyesores, and no amount of cool ThinkGeek merchandise can make them worth looking at. So, if you [slashdot management types] think you'll be making more money with bigger ads, think again. You will just be offending lots of customers and making people like myself (who don't mind your current advertisement scheme) start not looking at ads at all. That said, I hope other readers are stupid enough not to care.

  115. Re:Isn't there a way that /.'s bandwidth requireme by Grimster · · Score: 1

    I could give about 20GB a month in traffic, hey I know it ain't a "great deal" of bandwidth but it's something!

    Hell I could probably go 40 or 50GB of traffic.

    --
    --- www.f-theocean.com
  116. Click Effective by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1


    Yeah, that's great until the sites that you want to read go the way of the dodo because they depend on the click-throughs that their ads generate and that you're eliminating because you're more intent on preventing something from showing up than you are on actually getting the content you need.


    ...


    Take a look at the world around you. On television, you see advertising, unless you're watching a premium service that you pay for, like HBO or pay-per-view. On radio, you see advertising unless you're listening to a station like NPR which is funded through user donations (and during fund drives, fundraising pleas work just like advertisements).


    One of the worse things to happen to the Internet advertising industry was the "click-through". Somehow, advertising is not effective online unless it generates an immediate responce. In all other, more traditional, forms of media advertising... there is no such immediate responce demand. You don't have advertising campaigns scrapped because there were no phone calls within 5 minutes of a TV or Radio add spot. Advertising simply does not work that way.


    In trying to attract advertising funds away from older media formats, Internet advertisers have set themselves up to some all-but-impossible to meet requirements. Its no wonder they're failing.


    On an unrelated note... you noted the increased advertising showing up in theatres. We all get to hear about box office takes. I find it hard to believe advertising in theatres is required to offset the cost of those movies. Its showing up simply because we've become used to advertisements and the theatre offers a captive audience. In short, theatres do it because they CAN, not because they MUST.

    1. Re:Click Effective by jiheison · · Score: 1

      Somehow, advertising is not effective online unless it generates an immediate responce.

      This was another one of the spurious claims of the internet revolution. Instant responses to ads and detailed information on the ad clickers (and viewers) were to be had by all.

      On that unrelated note, I have it on relatively good authority that the reason for high box office prices is that the theaters are getting shafted by the studios. Basically, they need to pass on the shaft to the viewrs in the form of high ticket and concession prices. (This may be BS, I don't know for sure. On the other hand, I have no problem believing that Disney, Sony etc. are responsible.)

    2. Re:Click Effective by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 2


      This was another one of the spurious claims of the internet revolution.


      Yep. And I want to say it was DoubleClick that began to push this (though I don't have links to back that up). It was a really stupid thing to do.


      On the second note, I'm actually not referring to the cost of a ticket. I meant the box office takes reported weekly on those movies. They're not all blow-out winners. But there's often a good return on the investment.

  117. Not a good idea... by moogla · · Score: 1

    The slashdot.rdf/xml thing is quite useful. Many people use it to update news tickers on their desktops or to flush out a homepage. It's not something they give permissions for other sites to use. People would get pissed if that went away, because of course if they actually wanted to read the article in full, they'd have to go to the site. That is how slashdot plans to make money anyway (site visits).

    Let the news feeds stay free.

    --
    Black holes are where the Matrix raised SIGFPE
  118. Voluntary micro donations. by OoSync · · Score: 3, Interesting
    There are a few web comics experimenting with voluntary micro donations: i.e. paying whatever you feel appropriate when you feel the site deserves it. The site I'm most familiar with is Penny Arcade http://www.penny-arcade.com (mind the hyphen, its important). They have a status bar at the bottom of the page and give a free hi-res wallpaper to those who donate. You could email Tycho and Gabe to find out how their system is working. With .5 million viewers, many of whom will honorably donate, keeping the site more free from the larger ads.


    I also like the idea of a subscription system for OSDN, so that I can avoid ads in all OSDN sites. Of course, the economics and technology consideration may outweigh this possibility.


    As has been iterated before (but never enough), I really like /. and I hope you guys have much continuing success. I'm hooked and I'll pay if necessary. Keep up the good work.

    --Outta' Sync

    --

    I always get the shakes before a drop.
  119. I don't mind paying a subscription... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and most of the other users on /. probably won't as long as it is no too high. I think $15 month is about fair, anything more and people will not pay.

    1. Re:I don't mind paying a subscription... by jmerelo · · Score: 1

      Really? You'd probably loose most of the foreign-geeks-without-a-credit card crowd...

  120. How about... by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 2

    Hey, Rob!

    If you're looking for features, how about adding either a page for Poll Suggestions, or adding "Poll" to the topics in submit.pl?

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  121. Ummm... by BillyGoatThree · · Score: 5, Insightful

    First, thanks for the notification of new features.

    Second, thanks for the tips on how to disable them. 8^)

    Third, "Slashdot continues to grow: our traffic has increased by like 10% in the last few months, and simply selling the banner ads you see on top of each page isn't going to be enough to keep us afloat if we keep growing."

    Doesn't the fact that increased traffic causes you to lose money faster tell you something?

    Maybe your objective shouldn't be to keep growing. Maybe it should be to have a quality website. Remember back when you were in college and you wanted a cool site? You had one. Now you've got a semi-clueful corporate site--that's still rare, but nearly as fun as before.

    And don't give me a bunch of guff about "who's going to pay for it". If you have no money, you run a smaller site. The quality is still the same.

    --
    324006
    1. Re:Ummm... by slashdoter · · Score: 1
      Maybe your objective shouldn't be to keep growing.

      Who says they are trying to grow? When a site gets to the size of slashdot it can grow on it's own. no adverts doesn't mean the site will not grow, good content is cause for the site to grow. One day some years ago I found the site thanks to a referance on another site, that is happaning more now than it happend then. Short of letting the site go to hell I don't think Taco could stop it if he wanted to.

      --
      Does anyone actually have a Java program designed to control air traffic, or for the operation of a nuclear facility?
    2. Re:Ummm... by ghack · · Score: 1

      True. True. True.

      If I see any of those box ads on slashdot I will leave and never return. Period. Remember: it is slashdot.ORG .ORG as in organization. this is NOT slashdot.COM, although that is what it is slowly becoming. Maybe you ought to completely sell out now and save us all time.

    3. Re:Ummm... by ErfC · · Score: 2
      Doesn't the fact that increased traffic causes you to lose money faster tell you something?

      I don't run /., of course, but it tells me that bandwith costs money, and more traffic requires more bandwidth. It also tells me that the cost of bandwidth goes up faster than the ad revenue goes up when traffic rises.

      If you have no money, you run a smaller site.

      If you have no money, it means nobody can see your site because your servers are melting and you can't afford to upgrade them. It means you pay someone for bandwidth and hit their monthly N GB transfer limit in about 30 seconds. I guess the site might start to shrink after a while, if nobody can get at it, but that'd take a while. (The site goes down for days at a time, as it is; I bet traffic hardly drops even though no pages are coming out!) One option would be to just unplug the site for a few months, then plug it back in and don't tell anybody. But as soon as word got out, traffic'd spike back up pretty quickly -- you'd slashdot slashdot!

      --

      -Erf C.
      Cthulu always calls collect...

    4. Re:Ummm... by fragbait · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If you have no money, you run a smaller site.

      So....how does this work?

      "Please don't come to our site. No really...don't. We don't have enough bandwidth to handle the traffic."

      or maybe...

      "Please stop giving us our content."

      How can you "run a smaller site" when at any time of the day, millions of trained monkeys can attack at any moment? This makes me wonder how much bandwidth is consumed by robots refreshing the page to get first posts. Now relate this to running a smaller site...even if you deny them access you still have to waste the bandwidth for the denial.

      --fragbait

    5. Re:Ummm... by Zog · · Score: 2

      But there's one thing you have to remember about the web and customers:

      You cannot efficiently control who sees your content and who uses your bandwidth. Take the /. effect, for example. It's not too crazy of an argument that a lot of people have lost their sites because they were linked to /. and got slammed more than the server[s] could take. So they lost.

      So basically, apart from allowing specific IP addresses and things of that sort, there's no way to control who will read content - if users like the content, they will come back, and new users will gradually come; if users don't like the content, they will leave.

      The 'size of the site' (as you call it) therefore cannot be controlled: users want to see it, so they do; there is no reasonable way to get around it.

    6. Re:Ummm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...thanks for the tips on how to disable them.

      Well, gee, finding that X in the top left corner sure was unintuitive. It only works the same way as all the other X buttons on all your windows and on all the other slashboxes. Now get down on your knees and suck Taco's dick.

    7. Re:Ummm... by wugmump · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, no! It IS slashdot.com! Try it!

      --

      "It's OK, my sheet's got a hole in it!"
  122. This is a joke, right? by jesser · · Score: 2

    Currently we have the standard banner size on top of all pages, but soon the article pages will instead have those huge square things that you see on CNet or ZD.

    Slashdot is a geek site. We know how to block ads if it becomes necessary. Instead of making the ads more annoying, make them more interesting. Allow readers to support Slashdot -- and get other readers to keep their eyes on the ad space -- by creating a mechanism through which readers can post joke ads and ads for their personal sites. Create discussion forums for the ads, where readers can comment on the ad, the company, or the product. Allow readers to vote for their favorite ads.

    --
    The shareholder is always right.
  123. Another way to avoid the navbar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have your Homepage Preferences set to use "light" HTML, the navbar never even shows up!

  124. Slashdot's Missed Opportunities by arbours · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Slash had/has a great opportunity to take advantage of all the geeks consistently coming here.

    With a captive audience, why didn't you guys write an auction service, like ebay, or a classifed ad section, for a fee. You have a community of people, you are well known, take advantage of it. You have scalability experience. Over the last 3 years you could have really built something. And ebay has proven this to be the best way to make $$ over the internet.

    I doubt ads anymore will help you - good luck. you remind me of netscape. they had millions of people going to their home page daily, and only belatedly realized they could create a portal service like Yahoo. They blew it, and finally died. They would still be huge today if they had woken up.

    alex

    1. Re:Slashdot's Missed Opportunities by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And ebay has proven this to be the best way to make $$ over the internet.

      Actually I'd say it's a distant second to pr0n...

    2. Re:Slashdot's Missed Opportunities by btellier · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine the backlash from the Slashdot community if they came out with a pay service? They post stories all day about the evils of closed-source money-grubbing enterprises all day long. If they actually tried to charge people for some of their services they'd be crucified.

      In my opinion, Slashdot is doing the right thing by not going the way of the Internet portal. Not only is the entire idea flawed (just look at Yahoo's stock price), but the creators have never been about the Almighty Dollar. They want to get interesting stories out to the geeks who find them useful. We trust Slashdot to provide the unadulterated news because they're NOT some corporate entity who is only in it for the money.

  125. Re:It's funny, but it's true! by hurricanej · · Score: 1

    I don't know about anyone else, but I've sworn to never buy an X10 product after the countless hundreds of popup X10 ads I've seen.

    Same here. I'm in the market to buy some products like those sold by x10. Can anyone recommend some products like those nifty remote controllable devices sold by x10 (not just the cameras).

    -hj

  126. I wonder if the FBI will subpoena... by Noxxus · · Score: 1

    ....subscriber records to Slashdot in the future:

    Agent Smith: "He has a Slashdot subscription on his credit card records, must be one of those libertarian dissenter types...can't be trusted, you know. We'd better take him in for questioning."

  127. Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if you're so worried about privacy, disconnect your computer from the Internet, get your phone shut off, and move into microbus and go traveling around the country,

    When you say this in a story about slashdot, it is Insightful.

    But when you express the exact same opinion in a story about the FBI, it is a Troll.

    This is why some of us feel there's just a little hypocrisy going around here.

    1. Re:Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all of the rest of us realize that the moderaters aren't all the same people, all the time.

  128. how about a paypal tip jar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    while i'd probably subscribe if slashdot were to move to a subscription plan, you'd probably get more money out of me if you put a tip jar in front of me... no matter how easy you make subscribing, subscriptions are always a pain.

  129. sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The add user script isn't working.

    It keeps saying that my username is already taken, so i tried: alslsdkfjsdkfj as a username and it said that it was taken... :(

  130. Option to mod down non-subscription posts? by slamb · · Score: 2

    I would actually like to see subscription.

    But: I'd want to get more value out of it, and I don't just mean not seeing banner ads. I want to see:

    • Logged-in anonymous posts. I.e., you click "Post Anonymously" and the post still displays as being posted by "Anonymous Coward". However, it is tied to your account for karma adjustments (both you can specify the post's karma with the +1 bonus and the moderation of the post affects your karma), the reply/moderation tracking feature, and your subscription status.
    • No-subscription penalty. An optional (it must be optional!) penalty for non-subscription posts similar to the anonymous coward one.

    The idea being that I could set it to not moderate AC posts down at all but moderate non-subscription posts down. Every post I see either would have a real person's identity behind it (which I can't necessarily see, but the idea is they are accountable) or have been moderated up significantly.

    In other words, if the subscription feature is done well, it could be a way for us to improve the signal-to-noise ratio as well as support the site and avoid banner ads.

  131. It's not just humor that's subjective by Curt+Cox · · Score: 1
    Everything is subjective. I would really love to see a moderation scheme where:
    • everybody "moderates" whenever they want to
    • "moderation" or "scoring" is done along multiple axes -- funny, interesting, informative, etc...
    • the scores of posts that you haven't scored, are based on how people who "score things like you do" scored it

    I know this would chew up a bunch of CPU time, but I think it would be worth it. There are diamonds burried in the mines, but I need a better way to find them. Your diamond is my coprolite.

    Since spend/waste far too much on /., I would be perfectly willing to pay a modest fee. Then again, I'm in the 10 percent who pledge to NPR.
  132. My thoughts by Danger+Fan · · Score: 1

    I never really post, but I think this is a good topic to post to....

    Do what you feel is necessary. I don't like huge banner ads, like most people, but this site is one of my favorites. If things need to be done in order to keep it up and running, so be it. I think what you've done is great, so keep up the good work.

  133. Subscriptions should add value by Carnage4Life · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Some people will hate me for what I'm about to say but liek CmdrTaco said, I'd like Slashdot to be here in four years. So here goes:

    Subscriptions that eliminate banner ads do not add much value for the purchaser especially in a technically savvy crowd like Slashdot where users that know how to install and configure JunkBuster to get rid of ads abound. For subscriptions to be valuable source of revenue then the people who subscribe must get a considerable amount more than the people who don't to make it worth it. Suggestions I can think of right of the bat
    1. Subscribers can get an @slashdot.org email address or web page with no dynamic content.
    2. Subscribers get better comment filtering functionality (e.g. I want to only see posts that have been moderated up even if it's from 0 to +1).
    3. Subscribers automatically get the +1 posting bonus without having to get up to 25 karma.
    4. Subscribers can get alerts if people respond to their posts.
    5. Subscribers can see what the new comments have been made to a story since the last time they read it (kuro5hin has this functionality)
    6. Only subscribers can customize their front page.
    7. Only subscribers can post comments.
    8. Only subscribers can submit stories.

    A lot of the ideas are probably unworkable but they are put there to give an idea as to the kind of things that people are more likely to pay for than not.
    All of these may seem distasteful but considering that VA Linux probably doesn't have much longer to go I think the Slashdot folks need to take a long hard look at how they're going to keep financing the site if they still want it to exist in four or five years.

    Flame Away.
    1. Re:Subscriptions should add value by interiot · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Agreed. If you've ever listened to an NPR pledge drive, you know that they usually give away a token gift in return for your pledge. Even though people understand that it's really the right thing to do, they feel a lot better about getting something extra (even if it's small) for their money.

      That said, I'd like to throw in another value added suggestion: a usenet feed of slashdot, so you can sort it, slice and dice it with whatever client or script you choose. The main objection to that has been lack of ad revenue, but now the person is paying, so why not? It might even cut down on bandwidth costs.

    2. Re:Subscriptions should add value by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Subscriptions that eliminate banner ads do not add much value for the purchaser especially in a technically savvy crowd like Slashdot where users that know how to install and configure JunkBuster [junkbuster.com] to get rid of ads abound.
      Slashdot continues to exist. That enough value? Jesus Christ, do you have any idea how much the server hardware, bandwidth, and expertise to run this site cost in a month?
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    3. Re:Subscriptions should add value by sllort · · Score: 1

      Subscribers can get an @slashdot.org email address or web page with no dynamic content

      This is a great idea. I would pay a yearly fee for a web-configurable forward that would allow me to forward someaccount@slashdot.org to whatever email address I was reading that week. I have yet to find a reliable web service to do this.

      Set this one up and you will have a winner. We don't need email@slashdot, just a forward.

    4. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Stauf · · Score: 1

      I actually really like this idea - it means I can block Anonymous Cowards and other people I don't want showing up - It'll also mean I can do decent searches and filtering of posts.

      But how would we work it so that only registered users get to post? Maybe we'd be required to add a password to each and every post (the password would have to be filtered out server-side). Otherwise someone could just set their address to that of a /. member and post away... (just plain e-mail verification won't work for some users, like me, who have a different e-mail address at work and home and read Slashdot at both...)

    5. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Ouroboro · · Score: 1

      Suggestions I can think of right of the bat

      4. Subscribers can get alerts if people respond to their posts.

      This is already available. Check your messaging preferences.

      --
      When I want your opinion I will beat it out of you.
    6. Re:Subscriptions should add value by krokodil · · Score: 1

      now we are talking! Usenet feed is first thing mentioned
      for which I would pay to slashdot.

    7. Re:Subscriptions should add value by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2

      I agree too.

      Here's another feature I'd like to see:

      The ability to filter on ANYTHING. For example, if one day I only want to see stuff that has been modded as "funny" You are using a SQL backend. I don't see why this isn't already an option. Give us real dynamic content, dammit.

    8. Re:Subscriptions should add value by extra88 · · Score: 1

      Abosolutely. Real mailboxes cost real money for storage of email, more clock cycles for email composition screens, cookie managment, email managment, mail filters (tho' filters would be nice on a forward as well), etc. Plus if /. actually stored mail they'd have to dump their cheesy, insecure authentication for something beefier with SSL.

      A forwarding system would be another line in (paid) user prefs, a sendmail box to handle the forwarding, bandwidth for the email and some management of the box. There would certainly be some expense to it but it would probably be enough of a draw to more than pay for itself.

    9. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Kris_J · · Score: 2

      I'd seriously consider subscribing if it meant I could access the submission queue, like Plastic does for people with over 50 Karma. Or maybe it's "did", I haven't been back there for weeks.

    10. Re:Subscriptions should add value by BubbaFett · · Score: 1

      I was with you until the part about the posting bonus. Somehow your opinion is more worthy if you pay to be heard? I don't buy it. :)

      But yes, exclusive functionality features would be cool! I think there are plenty of new things that can be coded to make it worth it without yanking existing functionality from those who don't pay up.

    11. Re:Subscriptions should add value by wdr1 · · Score: 1

      I like the NPR analogy. If I saw it in terms of paying for the ability to hide ads, I probably wouldn't sign up. (For me at least, it's easy enough to tune 'em out.)

      However, if it's more explicitly given with the intent to keep Slashdot around, I'm all over it.

      To go with the NPR analogy, I think special only-available-to-doner's gift should be given at each level. It'd become a badge of pride around other geeks. :-)

      -Bill

      --
      SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
    12. Re:Subscriptions should add value by pomakis · · Score: 1
      I (mostly) agree with all of the things on your list except for this one:

      3.Subscribers automatically get the +1 posting bonus without having to get up to 25 karma.

      Posters should have to earn a +1 posting bonus by reputation. Paying for a posting bonus would be akin to paying a professor to slip you a few extra marks on an exam.

    13. Re:Subscriptions should add value by extra88 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      As a longtime reader, I'm very wary of any subscription option which makes a current feature subscription-only. The biggest concern with any subscription plan is it will drive away all the readers and with a community site like /. without the readers, it is nothing. Some of the newest features,

      1. I like the idea of a @slashdot forwarding address (real mailboxes are too expensive to run well). I don't know what you mean by "no dynamic content" on a web page
      2. There are lots of good ideas for better filtering but few seem to have wide popularity. They'd have to implement a lot of options to please enough subscribers.
      3. Buying a +1 is a bad idea, having $x of disposably income has no bearing on the quality of one's posts. The point of moderation is to help the audience find their way to the best the community has to offer. Monkey around with that and you hurt the quality of the site.
      4. This is a recently implemented option, and a very good one. Despite my first comment above, I think this is new enough to be changed to a subscribers-only option without hurting the draw of the site.
      5. A good idea, anything that helps me get past what I've read between reloads is good.
      6. This goes too far in voliating my first point about changing the non-paying user's experience of the site. Providing subscribers *addtional* options is a better idea.
      7. Bad idea, watch the number of comments drop like a stone with the number of readers and ad revenue close behind.
      8. I know little of the story submission process to really know what impact this would have. My impression is the majority of stories do not come from repeat submitters so you'd be cutting off most of the stories that make it through.

      What does Slashdot provide readers?

      1. Editors of the story submissions which could be improved at the low level, spelling, fact checking but is under-appreciated at the high level submission selection. IMO Kuroshin's process is different but not better than Slashdot's small group.

      2. reader comments which are highly variable in quality but not short on "good" ones

      3. A backend and interface which makes reading and commenting fairly easy. If you've been around long enough, it's easy to remember when the signal to noise ratio was better but its seemingly easy to forget how crappy most community web sites were to read and participate in. Slashdot has shared this beyond its own domain not only through Slashcode but also through inspiring countless clones with similar look 'n feel.

      Granted, spawning the Slashdot Way for community web sites is something that's done. I don't expect Slashdot to be the source of the next major advancement in, well, anything, technologically. Rather, I expect it to maintain its standards, incrementally improve technologically, and try to remain "relevant."

      How much I would pay for a subscription to Slashdot naturally depends on what's offered. My measuring stick is my Wired subscription. I pay $12/year for Wired. It's filled with a buttload of ads and it's not as good as it used to be but it's permanent, easy to look at, cheaper than it used to be, and a decent number of those ads are interesting/informative/funny. I could see myself paying that much for Slashdot. However I haven't paid for online content yet so it's hard to be certain.

    14. Re:Subscriptions should add value by grammar+nazi · · Score: 2
      Just forward emails to grammar_nazi@slashdot.org to my *real* account and send me a /. Tshirt and I'll subscribe.

      I'd pay more if I could get my first name as a UserID, but that was taken a long time ago. How about auctioning off unused accounts with cool names? Or renting the unused accounts that have cool names. You wouldn't be taking anything from the free readers if you were renting mike@slashdot.org or ben@slashdot.org to other users.

      You don't have to like it. It's just an idea.

      I'd pay 5 bucks to ban an IP address. That's right! Put a few Troll comments from a few troll bastards on a page and I get to select one and click 'Ban XXX_sporks IP address' button. I'd start by banning those bastards with the WWWWWWWWWW stretching across the screen.

      Overall, Slashdot is still a good quality website. The number of insightful comments and intelligent posters hasn't gone down, it's gone up. Unfortunately, the amount of noise and trolls has also gone up.

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
    15. Re:Subscriptions should add value by bob · · Score: 1

      I think a pretty good example of this is Silicon Investor. Anyone can browse around, but only paid members get to post. Also, paid members can pass notes to each other in private. You can set your own bookmarks for other subscribers so that you can check what so-and-so posted today. Also, on SI, threads last forever. You can choose to show only threads with recent activity or you can dig around in -- and post to -- antique threads that haven't seen activity for years. You also can in effect set up a kill file -- every post has a little hyperlink "Ingore this person". @siliconinvestor.com email is available. They have deals set up with brokerage houses and various other information sources. For example, you can get a free premium membership sponsered by National Discount Brokers if you want to set up an account there. Premium members also get access to an advanced search engine.

      It seems to me that /. could create such premium content and services to justify a subscription fee. I should think that the private message passing would be quite popular -- you can contact a poster in private without knowing thier real email. The "Ignore this person" links would be quite useful. There could be premium slashboxen with various functions; e.g. stock tickers, auto-refresh (or perhaps streaming video) Jennicam :-), /. member-only "blue light specials" at Computer Geeks, registration-free links to the New York Times, better searching and filtering, member-only ftp sites for the latest distribution ISOs, mozilla builds, etc.

      But I really don't think that I'd pay just to get rid of ads. Also, I serioiusly think that there should be free lifetime memberships for charter subscribers -- say, anyone with a UID lower than maybe 100 or so ;-)

    16. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Mr.+Piccolo · · Score: 1
      6. Only subscribers can customize their front page.
      7. Only subscribers can post comments.
      8. Only subscribers can submit stories.


      Oh, so what you want to do is turn Slashdot into Congress, where you can't be heard unless you pay the appropriate fee.

      AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

      I don't think so.

      Dumbass.
      --
      Glückwünsche, haben Sie Slashdot ermordet, indem Sie zum korporativen Druck beugten und Subskriptionen einlei
    17. Re:Subscriptions should add value by CTho9305 · · Score: 0

      the one thing I dont like about that is
      . Only subscribers can submit stories.

      I think that the priviledge to submit should be given to everyone.

    18. Re:Subscriptions should add value by mike_g · · Score: 1

      But how would we work it so that only registered users get to post?

      Just set up a newsserver that requires a username/password combo. There are already a few subscription based newsservers in business. This is actually one of the better ideas I have heard so far.

    19. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Andreas(R) · · Score: 1

      Subscribers can get an @slashdot.org email address or web page with no dynamic content.

      -Awesome suggestion!

    20. Re:Subscriptions should add value by kchayer · · Score: 2
      * Subscribers automatically get the +1 posting bonus without having to get up to 25 karma.
      ..
      * Only subscribers can post comments.

      Here's a great way to make some money: how about selling karma!

      --

      "I say consider this day seized!" -Hobbes
      "Tomorrow we'll seize the day and throttle it!" -Calvin
    21. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right. And the working environment sure doesn't help matters. I'll bet Anne Tomlinson's replacement didn't come cheap.

    22. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.


      Except that we can tell from your UID (~200,000) that you definatly haven't been on for 5 years. Did you change your handle when you started getting modded down (-1, Anal Retentive)?

    23. Re:Subscriptions should add value by extra88 · · Score: 1

      I hadn't thought of the problem of selecting the @slashdot address. In my case I'd be tickled to have my userid@slashdot but userids can have illegal characters for email addresses. You could swap characters as in your example, underscore for space, but it doesn't address the problem of some userids making for crappy email addresses. Probably a lot of old-timers would be happy but it would be a dis-incentive for newcomers to subscribe if their chances of getting the email address they wanted was small.

      Of course Slashdot != AOL or Hotmail so the odds of getting the address you want are a lot better.

      As for killfiling comments based on poster's IP seems like a bad idea. You'd have to have the IP stored in the comment/s record, where it could potentially be extracted for nefarious reasons. You could also potentially connect an anonymous post with a non-anonymous post.

      I would think killfiling userids would be a lot easier. Of course when people repeatedly create accounts to troll, you could never keep up with your killfile. There would probably have to be a cap on the number of userids in your killfile list. I cap would be less annoying if the page which listed your killfile show how many days had past since the user had posted. That would simplify removal of a discarded userid from your killfile.

      Perhaps you could achieve the same effect by having the option to set comments by users with low enough karma to -1.

      The determined troll will always find a way so it's important to not screw up the whole system in an arms race against them.

      On a more positive note, you could add a "Buddy List" so particular users stood out in a thread. A buddy's userid could be in a different color and if a buddy commented on a story, there could be a "B" displayed next to "Read More" on the front page.

    24. Re:Subscriptions should add value by riggwelter · · Score: 1

      * Subscribers automatically get the +1 posting bonus without having to get up to 25 karma.


      Oh, is that why I have that?

      I had wondered ;-)

      --
      Listening for the sound of the coming rain...
    25. Re:Subscriptions should add value by aegilops · · Score: 1

      An excellent suggestion. However extend this by incorporating some of the other ideas about targetted ads. I.e. your subscription charges vary depending on the amount of business you do with the affiliate sites (not just click-throughs). That is, I often have browsed Think Geek because I like their product range, but have yet to make a purchase. So what's the value of their ad? Zero (at this stage) other than fostering a positive feeling towards them as a vendor. So I may well be buying something from them in the future, but at this stage they haven't derived revenue from their ad. If Slashdot and ThinkGeek (or others) could sort out the user ID link (Hey! Let's use .NET!) then the model would work. Similarly, who hasn't bought something from Amazon?

      Consider also allowing subscribers to choose no ads at all (incurring top dollar subscription charges), targetted ads (price varies depending on business with other sites as detailed above) or generic ads. Use that suggestion about customising Slashboxes with the advertisers. Moderate adverts by the loyal faithful. Pull ads that simply irritate everyone. Good quality, non-intrusive targetted ads don't grate on your soul.

      Finally, make it a Slashdot poll. Just do something that people can live with and don't lose critical mass.

      Aegilops

    26. Re:Subscriptions should add value by dgroskind · · Score: 2

      Slashdot already offers good enough value to pay for without giving subscribers any additional privileges.

      Encouraging as many thoughtful people as possible to post enhances the value of the service. Therefore, saying only subscribers can post comments, only subscribers can submit stories, and subscribers get a posting bonus reduces the value of service from what it is now.

      Besides those three, the other features might warrant an additional charge above the subscription fee. These features would require additional development and thus justify charging the readers who want them.

      A Slashdot poll of which new features people want and were willing to pay for might be in order.

    27. Re:Subscriptions should add value by mce · · Score: 1

      Continued existence only is an "added value" of an subscription service if it actually happens and would not happen otherwise.

      If sufficient people leave slashdot because they do not want to swallow the larger ads, these ads do not save the site, even if one of those pays more than one traditional one. This, they might in fact might cause the site's downfall. (Hey, I'm not predicting anything, just analysing a mechanism.)

      Exactly the same reasoning holds for subscriptions.

    28. Re:Subscriptions should add value by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

      Yes, but unfortunately, they know they're screwed either way, because the vast majority of the Slashdot community, no doubt because their parents still pay the bills, deeply and fervently believe that 'information wants to be free' and 'selling is wrong' and 'profit is for Microsoft, and Microsoft is EVIL.' Oh, and they consider it a great personal triumph that they can download a piece of software that can interpret HTML and not render certain parts of it. Go you 1337 h4x0r5. And yet quite a few of them have no problem, according to the other comments, with paying 20 bucks a year for a subscription to a glossy magazine of ads, with the occasional article.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    29. Re:Subscriptions should add value by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      I dropped almost all of the magazines I used to subscribe to BECAUSE they became ad factories with only a couple of crappy articles. I don't object to the existance of ads, but I avoid sites with blinking, moving, "punch-monkey" style ads. My objection to subscriptions is; where will it end. I might be willing to pay a modest fee for a quality site(does /. count?), but I'm NOT willing to pay a seperate amount for each and every website I visit!!

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    30. Re:Subscriptions should add value by malda · · Score: 1

      No no no no! You can't have @slashdot.org email adresses - my account would get swamped with ads for laser printer toner! And like Taco, I don't even own a laser printer!

      Malda

  134. Subscription to remove ads by nomis80 · · Score: 0

    Let's get real. A subscription that only removes ads will not be interesting to anyone. The kind of subscription that is interesting is subscription that adds content. Take for example The Economist where many of the interesting articles are reserved for subscribed users. I'm sure that they get a lot of subscriptions. But it would be hard for Slashdot to reserve content to registered users (and nobody here would like it). So my point is that Slashdot should add content/services to registered users, not remove it from unregistered users.

    hmmm... *thinking*

    I KNOW! SELL KARMA!

  135. Why do not all links have the brackets? by Dirtside · · Score: 2
    Recently, /. was modified so that anytime someone posts a hyperlink, like this one to some FREE PORN!!!, it will show the ACTUAL URL in the link in brackets after the URL. (As you can probably see, that link does not have free porn, but rather, sadly, goes to Microsoft.)

    However, I've seen a number of sigs on /. (such as the one linked here http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22890&cid=2463 195) that do NOT show the brackets. Why not?

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
    1. Re:Why do not all links have the brackets? by jamie · · Score: 1
      "However, I've seen a number of sigs on /. ... that do NOT show the brackets. Why not?"

      Because I've been busy and haven't gotten around to running the addDomainTags() code on all existing signatures and then adding them back into the system. Users who haven't changed their sigs have gotten grandfathered in, for now. It's a temporary reprieve, we'll get around to them eventually :)

  136. Sinking feeling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Somehow this makes me really depressed. First DMCA, then 9/11, then SSSCA, now /. I know banner and subscriptions aren't all that evil, hell I would pay myself. But somehow it seems as if its one more step down the road toward that bright, happy Orwellian future. I know, no direct connections...and yet....
    /. was something that I have looked toward as the brightest and best point of rebellion against big government, greedy corporations, dumb profiteering politicians, and most of the other things wrong with the world. Somehow it feels as if it too, is now going over to the other side, succumbing to the inevitable financial realities.

    If I may indulge in a quote:
    The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away. Fear will keep the local /. readers inline, fear of this VA battlestation.

    ...

    Do not be too proud of this financial terror you have constructed. It's ability to destroy the free internet is insignificant next to the power of Open Source!

  137. Slippery Slope by Single+Serving+Jack · · Score: 1

    Well, Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, congratulations. I can only guess that you have been told by corporate that these changes need to occur. Of course, if my cynical supposition is wrong, please let me know.

    With that being said, I don't *mind* paying for something of value. Clearly, I think Slashdot has value because I visit this site everyday. However, what will you offer for a subscription? Is it merely advertising elimination? If it is, then the subscription better be pretty damned cheap (less than $10 a year, just a guess).

    I'd have to agree with other posters as well, the minute you have pop-ups, or the advertising gets too intrusive, I'm dropping Slashdot like a rock. Wouldn't it be the ultimate irony if CmdrTaco had to use pop-ups after ranting about how much he hates them?

    Like most folks that visit Slashdot, I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt.

  138. Slashdot should run on donations by H.+Camper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I agree with your comments regarding how a "community content" site shouldn't run on subscriptions. What it SHOULD run on is donations.

    I had a hand in running a site that cost about US$700/month in bandwidth charges. All content was provided by the site's community, and the whole thing was paid for by that same community (no ads!). The site was IMPORTANT to that community, so important that the money was always there.

    Is /. important to the /. community?

    It's important to me. I read /. every day, though this is the first time I've posted. I'll send in a donation a lot quicker than I'd buy a subscription.

    I don't need to know the costs, and I don't think I'll be buying 'accountability' (I know what a miserable job running a site like this can be).

    I just need my /. I'm willing to pay to have it. /. should ask for donations. I bet you'll be surprised at how much $$$ comes in.

    1. Re:Slashdot should run on donations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The principle difference between /. and true community sites is that /. is a for profit enterprise with a literally endless need for more profit. Where a community site needs only raise enough to pay for servers and bandwidth, a for-profit site needs to pay for servers, bandwidth, SourceForge, ThinkGeek, Ferraris, and (if possible) a hostile takeover of Microsoft.

      IANAL, but it may even be unlawful in the US for a business enterprise to solicit donations.

    2. Re:Slashdot should run on donations by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      I'll send in a donation a lot quicker than I'd buy a subscription.
      Umm, why? When they amount to the same thing.

      I like what the Penny Arcade crew have done. Each month they have a new bit of artwork that they give to people who donate money that month. If I like the artwork I "buy" it by making a "donation". I've also bought a couple of T-shirts from them. It's not a subscription, but it might as well be.

    3. Re:Slashdot should run on donations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that isn't a donation, you are buying something in that case. A better example would be if they made all content freely available, and then setup some kind of account you could deposit money into (purely voluntary). The money would be used to keep the site up and running and pay for maintenance/bandwidth. Anything that is left over could either go to another service (maybe slashdot, if it were setup the same way).

    4. Re:Slashdot should run on donations by hetz · · Score: 1

      Do you really belive that it can be possible to operate slashdot, which is pretty big in terms of hardware, programming (all done by slashdot staff), maintaining, checking the stories submitted, managing the whole complex - all by donations??

      Dream on - if this site will run by donations, then it wouldn't be able to run for a month! Do you know what the amounts of money it needs? how much does OSDN/slashdot pay to Exodus? the hardware maintenance?

      --
      nah, no sig... move on..
    5. Re:Slashdot should run on donations by tf23 · · Score: 1

      >What it SHOULD run on is donations.

      Are you high?

      Slashdot is run by a corporation. How the hell are they going to forcast their annual budget with *donations*?

  139. Filtering unmoderated comments by RavenDuck · · Score: 1

    I'd personally love to see an option where I can view only positively moderated comments, rather than browsing at +2 and seeing all the posts from users with the karma posting bonus. Often, especially for stories with hundreds of replies, an AC who gets a +1 to be modded at 1 will be more worthwhile reading than a random comment posted by a karma whore with an automatic bonus.

    Yes, I realise that the +1 bonus is supposed to reward those who contribute, but meta-moderation doesn't crop them efficiently enough. So once you have that karma cap, all those people who browse at +2 will keep seeing your useless comments until someone wastes a mod point modding you down (wastes because the discussion often benefits more from modding someone up than down).

  140. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by bryan1945 · · Score: 1, Troll

    I agree, though I'll add the following:

    The only people that will bitch about the (potential) subscription cost are the same ones who will never pay for it anyway.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  141. self-selection vs. community by renard · · Score: 2
    Dear Cmdr Taco,

    I would like to caution you and the Slashdot crew against allowing too much self-selection by your readers, as this will break the uniformity of experience that Slashdot currently offers (same scores for the same posts, for everyone) and thus be detrimental to the community at large.

    As it is now, your readers can change their browsing threshold, but they cannot reorder the ratings of posts - that is left exclusively to each story's moderators. Now, that may be annoying at some times and for some readers - I recall a "funny" Dmitry Sklyarov post (deliberately not linked to here) that nearly made me sick - but it is part of what makes Slashdot a community, more than just a News source.

    When I first started reading Slashdot, I had no idea what was going on. Acronyms flew, the jokes were obscure, and people made repeated reference to issues and articles I had no knowledge of. Reading the posts and seeing what posts were rated highly allowed me to gain a sense of the community over time. What I found wasn't always to my liking or even, necessarily, pleasant, but it was an honest reflection of your readership/postership - and there's something to be said for that.

    To anticipate the first round of responses, what I'm talking about here is not groupthink (although some of that undoubtedly goes on). On the contrary, I have found that well-reasoned dissenting opinions are reliably among the top few posts on a story, with the system as it is.

    So I urge you to think carefully before allowing your readers too much power of self-selection of posts (even against AC's).

    Sincerely,
    Renard

    1. Re:self-selection vs. community by Kris_J · · Score: 2

      I would like to directly oppose this posters views. Nothing nasty, I just believe that the pages should be heavily customisable and a combination of personal prefernce and community moderation should be used to generate pages I read. Basically I'd want to use the community rating system to remove noise and my own settings to pick the signals I enjoy.

  142. Annoying Ads != More Money by smartin · · Score: 2

    I'm confused by this one. How does making ads more annoying and in your face map onto more money for /.? Do advertisers pay for more screen real estate or is there some magic formula that says that an ad is worth more if it is more in the way of the reader. When are advertisers going to learn that associating their products and corporate image with a feeling of annoyance in the consumer does not sell more product.

    I for one would be willing to pay a reasonable amount to support /., say in the range of $50/year.

    --
    The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
  143. No Flame - But wake up by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2

    But if a site gets 250,000+ hits a day and can't find a way to partner with someone who has a product (or line of products) that people want to buy.....then whose falt is it??? This place would move high tech hardware toys (cutting edge MP3/home audio/tivo type stuff) at a more succesful rate than chocolate commercials on a richard simmons cruise.....I am talking stuff that even the Japanese would be in awe over....They always get the new shit....

    --
    (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
    1. Re:No Flame - But wake up by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      I wonder what ThinkGeek's click-through rate is...

  144. Why not do a poll and see how much money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    could be raised by getting rid of Jon Katz. I reckon you could make a fortune. I personally would pay $250 NOW if you promised to get rid of him.

  145. All about sacrifice... by Blowit · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Learn to use less bandwidth. The easy trick here to reduce bandwidth is to reduce your pipeline to the Internet to a smaller, less expensive pipeline. Yes, it will lag during peak hours, however, people would rather wait for the content to show up than to see it disappear completely.

    Another thing is to modify the comments list to work in a frame or subject basis by limiting to the first 100-200 words of a comment. Soem comments go on for miles on end and therefore are useless. Should a comment have a rating of 0, only post title, +1 = 50 words, +2 = 100 words, +3 = 200 words, +4 would be whole comment.

    This would help reduce your bandwidth use, allow you to get a smaller pipe, and live longer in this hellish economy.

    It is called content management... And if you can't learn to manage your content delivery system properly, then yes, you can not survive in the future.

    --
    *Headline News* censorship shuts down the Internet! More at 6PM!
    1. Re:All about sacrifice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are assuming this is an issue of lack of $$$. Quite the opposite. Basically VA's PHB's think they can rape /. users, nothing to do with /. using too much bandwidth. /. makes 'hella plenty cash.

  146. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  147. What about a distributed model... by edthered · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ..something similar to napster, where subscribers give a little of their bandwidth/diskspace in exchange for keeping /. relatively free of the capitalists? I would much rather give space on my box instead of money, it just "feels" better.

    --
    Cutting edge is sharp, avoid contact.
  148. Subs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think a rate of $15-20 a week would be resonable

  149. Automated story telling page? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What the heck is the slashdot automated story telling page? Neat little red image btw.

  150. How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by John_Booty · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bitching about bandwidth costs? Then please look into stylesheets; you could easily save 35% in bandwidth costs. As the above poster noted, stylesheets are the way to go.

    I love Slashdot, and I'm willing to pay for it because I know it costs money to run a website and ads aren't cutting it these days. However, they're basically throwing away the bandwidth they would like us to pay for. The HTML produced by Slash is crap, frankly.

    I used HTML Tidy to automatically convert the page to stylesheets as opposed to old-fasioned obsolete HTML formatting tags. The old version of the page was ~230K. The new version of the page, using stylesheets, was ~160K. That's a ~43% bandwith savings, right there, with little effort. If you include images, there's still a 35% reduction in bandwidth.

    Also, have the Slash crew explored Apache's on-the-fly zip compression abilities (it's a separate module, I don't know the name)? It eats CPU power, obviously, but HTML can be compressed by 90% or more when zipped. The cost of more web boxen would be more than paid for by the bandwidth savings, I'd wager... especially if Slashdot is getting free hosting from it's parent company.

    Bottom line: I'll pay for Slashdot's content, but not for lazy Slashdot coding. If you want us to pay for bandwidth, show us you're using it as efficiently as possible. Because you're not right now. You're like a guy begging for food with a sandwich sticking out of his pocket... I just DON'T wanna hear it. And yes, I know there's other costs associated with running the website besides bandwidth, and the ad market is shit right now.

    --

    OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    1. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by funky+womble · · Score: 1

      Damn right. Stylesheets make a huge difference on anything using tables and font tags. And reading Slashdot on a dialup gets a lot more pleasant if you're connecting through a gzipping proxy (junkbuster-zlib for example - horrible http support and the filtering's not a patch on Proxomitron, but it does gzip). Not too sure about yet more Apache modules, I think front-end accelerator boxes is the way to go (perhaps Oops with a plugin could do the gzip magick - got to be easier than starting from scratch). Even better, offloading the crappy 33k dialups like mine onto lightweight cache boxes drops the RAM load of the Apache-perl servers like nothing else.

    2. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by John_Booty · · Score: 2

      Yeah, seriously. If a web site was your livelyhood, wouldn't you have that code and your boxes tweaked out to like the Nth friggin' degree? That's why I look at the HTML produced by Slash and I'm like, "uh....???"

      Now, I don't claim to know anything about tweaking out Apache, PHP, MySQL, or anything else, maybe they're got them humming, I dunno. I'm only commenting on the small piece I'm qualified to comment on. :)

      --

      OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
    3. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by serps · · Score: 1
      Also, have the Slash crew explored Apache's on-the-fly zip compression abilities (it's a separate module, I don't know the name)? It eats CPU power, obviously, but HTML can be compressed by 90% or more when zipped. The cost of more web boxen would be more than paid for by the bandwidth savings, I'd wager... especially if Slashdot is getting free hosting from it's parent company.

      You are probably remembering mod_gzip. It's pretty nice as far as savings go (approx 80% savings on text/html, equating to about 20-25% on the typical image-heavy page), but it does slow your server down somewhat. Without tweaking, it cut my apache server(1.3.x) down to about 130 flat html pages per second from the IIRC 750 or so it was pushing out. (Was an old processor, so YMMV) You could do better than that if you spent some effort on it (putting tempdir into ramdisk, etc) but the point is that most of the work is CPU-intensive, which doesn't impact your speed much if your bottleneck is your I/O. Besides, CPUs are cheap.

      I recommend mod_gzip; it's a simple way to cut your bandwidth on 90% of sites without shooting yourself in the foot. I can't vouch for /. though: I'm pretty sure their kung foo is stronger than mine :)

      --
      "Einstein argued that [...] God is not capricious or arbitrary. No such faith comforts the software engineer." ~ Brooks
    4. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by shri · · Score: 2

      It's mod_gzip from Remote Communications. You can also get dedicated hardware to manage compression from Packeteer.

    5. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · · Score: 1
      Exactly. I've made this point quite a few times before in disscutions about CSS/HTML. I really hope that the /. team will seriouly consider changing over to a CSS based layout. The pros far outweigh the few cons.

      I also think you could get even better that 35% saving. By this simple line:

      <style type="text/css"><!-- @import "http://some-users-server.com/slashdot.css" --></style>

      The user could download a slashdot CSS file, shove it on a server somwhere, and then set the URL in the users prefs. This would take heaps of the server, and the user could also customize the layout a bit. Even if the users didn't download the CSS file, it would still stick in their browsers cache.

      Once you start to learn how to use CSS, you realise that you don't even have to put CLASS="foo" everywhere, saving even more kbs. Only have to name key parts, since you can tell the borwser to make any P under a DIV with ID="bob" to render a different color, than a P under a DIV with ID="joe", not need to have a CLASS="foo" for each P.

    6. Re:How Much Bandwidth Stylesheets Can Save You... by jrboynton · · Score: 1

      Excellent points. We need for someone to show the world how to do a website well. You would think Slashdot is a likely candidate.



      The first thing is that ads should really add value. The current value-subtracting ads are completely ridiculous.



      Beyond that, yes, cut down on bandwidth costs. mod_gzip is nice, but with a bit of cleverness you wouldn't have to gzip on the fly for most of the pages you send out. For example, put ads and what-not into iframes, so static elements are stored on the server gzipped, and dynamic elements are done separately. You might want separate versions of each page for NS4 and small or very old devices. Preprocessing is very cheap.



      Even the length of urls matters when you have a lot of them on the page. Use the base tag, and then abbreviate like hell: href="/c.pl?s=99999&t=1&cs=0&m=t&p=9999999#9999999 " saves 39 characters per link, for example.

  151. Finances and software by PhiRatE · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ironic that here in the middile of tech obsession nobody has thought about trying to get software to solve these financial issues.

    The reason the Slashdot guys don't know what they'd charge for a subscription is because they don't know. They can't know. Any value that they choose is going to be based on several factors over which they have no control:

    1. The number of people who will actually subscribe
    2. The number of people who will leave
    3. The number of people who will continue reading slashdot with ads
    4. The number of people who will continue reading slashdot with ad blockers
    5. Price of bandwidth and hosting
    6. Banner ad cpm value

    In addition to that, there are factors over which they have limited control:

    6. Amount of bandwidth used

    Put that all together and in the human world you have what is called a hunch, or a guess, or any other term which indicates that you really have no idea and everything could go to shit inside of 5 minutes.

    The natural human solution to this is to look at near-worst-case scenarios and attempt to budget for that happening. The best people at this are in the insurance industry. These are called Damn Good Guesses, but they're still guesses.

    The major problem with the future is that the further into the future you look, the less accurate your guess is likely to be. Guessing banner ad prices 20 seconds from now, armed with current prices, isn't a big risk, and you're not likely to be off by much even if you get it wrong. Guessing 2 years from now is near impossible.

    So what we need is a way of taking all the unknown variables and guessing rapidly, in short increments, using good solid math principles, in order to determine the value of those variables we do control (cost of subscription, bandwidth to release).

    In essence, a floating, self-insuring market run by a well written software agent that would take account of the various costs, the insurance probabilities involved in failed predictions, and how well it can limit the release of bandwidth, and set subscription prices based on that.

    Effective tools placed in the hands of users would then let them take advantage of this by limiting the value range within which they are willing to subscribe, and see transparently the decisions being made by the software and the basis for these.

    Essentially creating a resubscription process in which users automatically resubscribe every day or maybe even hour or less, and in which the code is open and its behaviour displayed for those who wish to look, it can act in the best interests of both the site, the owners and the users, keeping prices at their lowest practical point while still making a set amount of money for the owners, covering the bandwidth costs and insuring the site against price shocks in the future.

    There is the technical expertise around to achieve something like this, and I think Slashdot is a perfect testing ground for this kind of software. The combination of a couple of hot-shot financial guys and a bunch of good programmers could provide software that could keep any number of valuable internet sites afloat in a world so volatile that any number of valuable sites are falling down due to bad guesses on the part of their management.

    --
    You can't win a fight.
  152. Disturbing OSDN Bar Entry by dragonman97 · · Score: 1

    I don't exactly want to bring up holy/flame wars, but I am slightly disturbed to see the other site (k5) in the OSDN combo box. I am surprised that OSDN pushed to get that in. I guess it was allowed for fairness, but that's almost as bad as the Microsoft ads in Linux Magazine. Additionally, I see that there is no longer an OSDN box on the left, it seems to have made the left column a few pixels thinner.

  153. at least he's honest about it... by vsync64 · · Score: 1
    I'm wireless on my Visor now, so I'll keep this short, but it's a lot less offensive when Taco:
    1. explains the situation, instead of just implementing the New Policy
    2. gives us an option to support the site in other ways (I would pay for ZDNet, too; that is, if they let me, and if their site actually had content like their magazines used to, before they switched to mindless accolades for anything Microsoft)

    I'll gladly pay for Slashdot, provided that the fee is reasonable and on a month-to-month basis. Oh, and that they do something about that WWWWWWW crap, without introducing even more URL breakage. And while they're at it, fix the existing breakage.

    --
    TO BUY A NEW CAR WOULD MAKE YOU SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE.
  154. keeping anonymity while regulating trolls by warrior · · Score: 1

    A simple system -- let registered users mod up their anonymous posts with their karma points at time of posting.only up to standard '1' level of course.

    --
    Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
  155. Re:OSDN Bar by BryanHughes · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So, you are saying that the bar sucks? Yeah I agree... that bar sucks.

  156. The ultimate hypocrisy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The premier Open Source site can't stay afloat without charging $$$$... ohh... woe is me...... maybe Linux should take some notes.... and it might be here in four years....

    Ha....ha...ha....ha...ha..ha...ha...aha...ha...a ha ......ha..a.ha.....ahaha....ahhahaahaaaaa.

    Dumbass, cocklicking D33bian 3l33ts

  157. Re:Please enact a spell checker! by MikeyNg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sorry, couldn't resist. I don't believe that even enact is properly used.


    But hey, a spell check WOULD be useful, and would it really be that difficult to pipe it through something? OK, yeah, extra computing power and extra expense. But hey, that'd be one of these k3wl extras!


    Seriously though, I have no problem with subscription, as long as it's done right. Being able to turn off ads if I pay for it sounds like a decent idea. Actually, if I could target ads to myself through the preferences, that may not be a bad plan either, and I'm sure the marketing folks would eat it up.


    --
    Where the wind blows, the tumbleweed goes.
  158. Pay for what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That'a as silly as paying for napster!
    pay to share my files?

  159. Animated ads by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2

    You know, I never really minded banner ads. And I still don't, since they get scrolled easily off the top of the page as I start reading.

    But when they started being animated gifs, and then later flash. UGH. I disabled animation, and because of that had to miss some instructional stuff done with animated gifs. Distracting me from the stuff I am actually here to read really isn't the way to get me to buy your product. I've actually discovered some neat stuff through the ads here (thinkgeek, etc). But they could really do without the damned animation.

    Not that slashdot will not allow animated ads in the future because of my post or anything, but I just needed to get that off my chest.

    1. Re:Animated ads by Peyna · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This is the reason why they are unaffective, and therefore, websites need to find an alternative for funding. You know, sort of like if commercials on TV were 1 second flashes of a logo, and all you had to do was blink to ignore it, they wouldn't be very profitable, thus we are given 15/30/45/60 second ads instead. Radio is the same way, if a commercial consists on 1 second of a guy saying "Pepsi" and that's it, no one is going to care.

      rather than complaining that we don't want big annoying ads, we should be finding ways to make the Internet more profitable for businesses without them.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:Animated ads by epopt · · Score: 1

      I concur. If Slashdot could do well simply to institute some editorial rules about ad content: by insisting on no blinking, flashing, animating, moving stuff, they could go a long, long way to making the larger, more intrusive ads more palettable to the readers. I don't object to advertising per se, but I do object to movement in my peripheral vision while I'm trying to read.

      --
      -- Remember that we live in a world where all the really big decisions are made by people with short attention spans.
    3. Re:Animated ads by SCHecklerX · · Score: 2

      rather than complaining that we don't want big annoying ads, we should be finding ways to make the Internet more profitable for businesses without them.

      This site excluded (as we are pretty much the reason the site exists in the first place), isn't it the business's job to figure out how they are going to make money? Why should we care? If I own a business, it is my job to figure out how to make a profit with it.
    4. Re:Animated ads by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2

      Lame...If you can't catch someones attention with 1 frame of 300x60 (or whatever) then what makes you think that flashing more drivel in multiple frames is going to get someones attention. I have been saying for a long time that ads are a needed evil, and I can live with them...but I second the guy at the top of the thread that says animated gifs have to go. (For a page like /. -- I think it would make it's audience more akin to click tasteful ads..ala google...-- the old "you catch more flys with honey...." phrase would work here...)

      --
      (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
    5. Re:Animated ads by Peyna · · Score: 1
      If you care enough about a business that you get goods/services from, and you want them to stick around, you just might care enough to help them out when they are in need.

      Sort of like going to the local Mom&Pop grocery stores instead of Marsh or Kroger or whatever your big name one is. But if that Mom&Pop grocery store was having trouble, you can bet that their community would rally rehind them and find ways to get support for them if they were good enough at what they did. Why should the Internet be any different?

      --
      What?
  160. cheesyportal by renard · · Score: 1
    How about more tech news, Also how about having 3 bars, 1 on each side. How about adding a stock ticker?

    Poster apparently has never found his/her way to the Cheesy Portal (TM).

    Enjoy!

    -Renard

    1. Re:cheesyportal by BrookHarty · · Score: 1

      Actually I did find cheesy portal. I like http://www.freshnews.org/ better for that.

  161. Now if... by Sgt_Nikon · · Score: 1

    ...they could only nail down that hof bug with the blank most active poll.

  162. how about a usage counter? by thogard · · Score: 2

    For any user thats logged in, add up teh size of the data sent and keep a running total for each user.

    1. Re:how about a usage counter? by Kris_J · · Score: 2
      A CPU counter would be cool too.

      Quite frankly, I'm happier to spend time optimising my use and reducing the cost to /. of my using the system than I am to pay to see ads go away. Mind you, I have the time, I don't have the money. Also, I already filter ads.

  163. i'll pay by hawwy · · Score: 1
    almost every single day i spend 5-10 minutes reading slashdot.

    on the morning of sept 11, it was the only site that was able to deliver news. being at work, it was the only available news source period.

    so i'll let the folks that run the site deal with the administrative/technical/editorial issues, and i'll keep reading it as long as it's got decent content.

    pretty simple

  164. It's hardly surprising. by TightByte · · Score: 1

    It's hardly surprising to find ourselves at this juncture. What we face today has after all come about as the result of Slashdot's evolution, and evolution doesn't stand still at any given moment even though it may seem that way, since by contrast it appears to move forwards by leaps and bounds rather than a steady pace.

    Slashdot is now 4 years old. That's an amazing acomplishment right there. On the other hand, I think we can all agree that what we come back for everyday - what we came here for today - is fairly different from the Slashdot of four years ago. We've come a long way - and a lot of people have climbed aboard along that way.

    Now, is it so far-fetched to think that this growth is exactly what prompts the change? I don't want Slashdot to change anymore than CmdrTaco (or the rest of you) do, but it makes perfect sense that it must. I'd even claim that it's a little naive to think that rising popularity - for any website - won't, in the long term, spell change, and not necessarily for the better.

    In the face of the announced changes, some shrug and carry on while others threaten to leave. I'm left hoping that nobody feels cheated and that those who leave realize what is happening and why.

    And who knows. Maybe if a large enough portion of the crowd that visits Slashdot regularly feel offended by the changes and decide not to come back, then the aforementioned growth will subside and the problem goes away (snap) just like that!

  165. Subscriptions would help a lot... by The+Man · · Score: 2

    I think slashdot should require subscriptions in order to post comments. All the trolls and crapflooders would go away, and then the traffic would be back to reasonable levels...which could probably be supported without any additional revenue, but hey. I like the idea if for no other reason than that it keeps out the losers. 5, maybe 10 bucks a year. Let's not get crazy here. No ads, and you get to post. Simple as that. Read-only static content with normal banner ads, free.

  166. Learn from Google by mal0rd · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Instead of making slashdot less attractive by putting tons of bandwidth hogging, annoying, internet congesting, unwitty, untargeted, etc banner ads, use text ads. Google serves many more people a day then /., and I'm sure that they have more costs, but they don't need banner ads. In fact I have seen reports that Google is the most succesful search engine in terms of money making.

    I love text ads. I click on ads on Google more than any other website because they are targeted and easy on my eyes. Banners with cycling images make you wait to see what the ad is for.

    I'm not sure what the costs of slashdot are that are increasing, but I'm sure that there are effective ways to reduce them. Is it the server load? If you use technologies that are more efficent or pass the processing onto the client ( like XML, XSLT, and CSS ) then it would be less cost to you. Also using text ads would decrease load.

    On another note: I think that a better, more streamlined, ad free slashdot would be worth a few cents a day. I suggest if you move to a pay system (which I would love) then use a micropay system. Something like $0.03 per page load. It is the fairest way to go, and would encourage people to start reading slashdot because there wouldn't be a commitment.

    1. Re:Learn from Google by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2

      Here, Here. Mod this guy up. I don't mind ads that are text based and have some taste. Everyone needs to eat...but these damn flashing animated pieces of garbage need to go. Is there some way to turn off multi frame graphics? Google has the right idea...Slashdot seems to be eating hypocritical crow -- why must they "do the norm and start throwing out bandwidth hogging spew"....If you are going to be on fuc*edcompany.com -- do it with some pizazz...Go out with your OWN failed business model....Copying someone elses mistakes is so yesterday.

      --
      (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
    2. Re:Learn from Google by epine · · Score: 1

      I'm getting tired of reading comments mired in funny money reality. Advertising is an expense, not a revenue. People who buy products which are promoted through costly advertising are willingly subsidizing the vendor.

      I guess the premium is less painful when it doesn't look like a subscription fee.

      Advertising is porn. The babe on the Corvette makes us feel sexy, so we pay an extra $15 for an inferior product. What is it about hot chicks that causes men to reach for their wallets? Whether it's a hooker or whatever the hell X10 sells, what's the difference?

      I remember when I came to /. to find out which database program to use. The scorn heaped on Postgres was of a particularly inferior quality, the positive comments especially well informed. That's what /. is worth. I don't understand how hanging strings of colored triangles around the parking lot is going to carry the day.

      Google has entirely the right idea: matching the form of advertising to the sentiments of its users.

    3. Re:Learn from Google by mike_g · · Score: 1

      In fact I have seen reports that Google is the most succesful search engine in terms of money making

      I believe that is from licensing deals, not from ad revenue.

    4. Re:Learn from Google by dlittled · · Score: 1
      I suggest if you move to a pay system (which I would love) then use a micropay system. Something like $0.03 per page load.

      While that sounds good, there are a lot of problems associated with it. First of all, you can't charge for loading the front page. OK, so you only charge for loads of comments pages. But now you're changing how often and when people load pages (i.e. only after serveral high-modded comments accumulate).

      If a system like that were to be implemented, you would have to change the "price" based on the number of comments. Maybe .00001 ($.03 is ridiculously high) for a page with 5 +3 or greater comments, and .0001 for a page with 25 +3 comments to encourage people to load pages before lots of comments are generated.

      It is the fairest way to go, and would encourage people to start reading slashdot because there wouldn't be a commitment.

      Seems to me like any sort of pay-per-view system is the worst way to attract new viewers. If you're looking to attract new people, an ad/subscribe-no-ad system would make more sense.

    5. Re:Learn from Google by P3zZ · · Score: 1

      I agree with this too - after years of using the Web I find myself immune to banners.

      On Slashdot, I don't think I've ever clicked on the banner, but some the "Think Geek" items in the bottom right box have definitely caught my eye on several occasions.

      If the ad is intersting you'll be, errm, interested in it - even if it is delivered in text.

    6. Re:Learn from Google by sl3xd · · Score: 2

      Yes, google does load a lot of pages. It also has several thousand servers to do it for us.

      Slashdot needs server space & the bandwidth for it as well.

      All of it costs $$$. Lots of it. We know how much a cable/modem costs. Multiply that cost by several thousand, and you might get a clue how much SlashDot actually costs to run.

      --
      -- Sometimes you have to turn the lights off in order to see.
    7. Re:Learn from Google by Saeger · · Score: 2
      Advertising is porn.

      Right on. And at its base, advertising is mental engineering; boobies are just one of the best means to that end (for guys anyway).

      Anyway, my problem with 99% of all advertising isn't that it's evil propaganda, it's that the market is getting so crowded that those who succeed in screaming the loudest to get my attention, usually don't deserve it, because most of their money is necessarily spent on marketing vs. the actual product/service; and you end up paying more for less (even after economy of scale takes effect).

      So, even if TheProduct(tm) is worthwhile to you, it makes more sense to skip the middleman reseller, and go to the source -- or failing that, buying the word-of-mouth best alternative.

      Google is about the only advertising I'm receptive to -- everything else I scorn. At the extreme would be car commercials (selling nothing but emotion), and the recent "U.S. Flag & Cipro" email spam (paranoia leeches) -- makes my blood boil!

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    8. Re:Learn from Google by sulli · · Score: 2

      Micropay system? Pain in the butt if you ask me. I'd gladly subscribe to the tune of $5-10 per month. What can I say? I'm a junkie.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    9. Re:Learn from Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google's primary income stream is not google.com. They make their money selling content to Yahoo and others. Google.com exists for stealth marketing reasons only and probably loses money.

  167. User Comments on Ads by owenc · · Score: 1

    I think all ads should have a "comments" link below them, so that when they are clicked on, people can see what other users think about the product/service being hawked... At least that would be somewhat useful to potential buyers.

  168. Text Ads in Comments? by kawaichan · · Score: 0

    What about that? I remembered someone pointed this out just a couple of days back. It's not too annoying and people might actually read it.

    --

    kawai
  169. How much? Nothing! Details inside. by empesey · · Score: 1

    Simply route all slashdot advertisers to localhost. I've rerouted all the common ones and have been living 99% banner-ad free for years. And I certainly wouldn't pay for something that I do can for free in 2 minutes or less using notepad.

    Before ad advocates starts yelling, "Foul, foul", I don't buy things advertised in banner ads anyway.

    Here's an example.

    127.0.0.1 www.x10.com

  170. No offense ... but by Helmholtz · · Score: 2
    I've been a "Slashdot regular" (interpret that how you like) for the last four years. While there have been many changes that I've not been exactly thrilled with, they've all been only minor annoyances, and I've simply shrugged them off.

    If, however, Slashdot is to become nothing more than a ZDNet/CNet/TechTV style site, then I'm afraid I won't have much use for it anymore. I enjoy a site where I can see a nice mixture of "latest news" and interesting articles/opinion pieces that wouldn't be considered "newsworthy" of other newsy sites. I understand you don't intend to change the content, but, call me cynical, I don't see how it can't if the only blood that keeps the site alive is revenue.

    I hope this new child manages to keep the Slashdot marriage together, but in my experience such choices rarely achieve their intended effect.

    --
    RFC2119
  171. Subscriptions by digitalgiblet · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I'd definitely pay a small amount ($5-10/year) to have /. without ads. As I type this and watch that blinkin', stinkin' thinkgeek ad at the top of the page, I realize that banner ads have ALWAYS been annoying and I would definitely pay SOMETHING to get rid of them. Just not a lot...

    But I'd be willing to pay more if I could pay one bill (as much as maybe $50/year) if that gave me a list of 5-10 different sites with no ads.

    The last-best hope for content sites (in my opinion) is to band together and sell "all you can eat" group subscriptions. One payment, lotsa sites for one year. Hey, you want the Geek Package for $50 or the Porn Package for $200?

    Personally I wouldn't go for micropayments. Too much thought involved to decide if I want to click a link. Give me one reasonable yearly rate, just like a print magazine.

    As for the one comment I read about not wanting to pay for community sites, just remember the golden age of BBSs. People DID pay for community content, BUT very few people got rich! It was definitely something they did because they loved it.

    To me the big lie of the dot-com era was that anyone who could sling some HTML/Javascript/Perl could expect to get rich, rich, rich. Fine. That is simply not true. A FEW people with really good business ideas will get rich, but that doesn't mean that lots of people can't earn some money. Not bloody much, mind you, but some. Sure the readership of /. would plummet if they required a subscription, but they might still make more than they can make from ads in the current economy...

    One last comment. For all those Human Torches out there in /. land who cried "Flame On!" at the merest suggestion of subscription fees, do try to keep in mind that no matter how much Taco and co. love running the site, at the end of the day they have to eat.

    Simple math: 0 revenue - x expenses = 0 /.

  172. I'll pay $5-10/mon US for /. NNTP gateway w/o ads. by Dast · · Score: 2

    I'm suprised nobody has brought this up. I would be willing to pay something like $5-10/month for an nntp slashdot gateway without ads. I want to make sure I am clear about this: no ads attached to messages. TACO: for this service you will get my money.

    I know gnus has a makeshift /. backend, but last I tried it, it didn't work and I don't feel like messing with CVS gnus. I want a clean, reliable nntp gateway that doesn't depend on parsing html. Don't bother putting more ads up on the main site, because people will block them (including myself).

    Just my 0.01999999999999.

    --

    This sig is false.

  173. Open source out with the dot com bust? by dave-fu · · Score: 1

    Yes, open source as a hobbyist development model can and will persist long into the future, and I'm sure that there will be fun and exciting products as a result of it.
    That said, now that the heady, greedy days of the dot com boom are long behind us, it's high time to re-evaluate the position. Money isn't growing on trees and being plucked from the asses of VCs star-struck by that beautiful three-letter phrase (IPO, IPO, IPO!) so much that they can overlook that little thing called "a business plan."
    Internet advertising is the redheaded stepchild of the marketing family. Old media ads have no need to justify themselves with inanities like "click-through"; they know their demographic and their real estate is mindshare, that precious commodity which they assume that they're purchasing with their ad dollars, regardless of whether or not this purchase translates into a product purchase immediately or down the road. The internet is a fickle bastard: people gravitate towards the warez model of "buy none, get one free" and so there's the propensity towards stealing everything we can. To wit: the inevitable linking to archives.nytimes.com anytime they've got an article up because registration is such a chore, whereas from the threads further up, one gets the impression that merely providing a name and e-mail address is as simple as could be. Hmm. To wit: proxies, ad-killing bots and specialized hosts files that insure that our precious bandwidth isn't eaten up by ancillary ads that might keep the sites afloat, but then again if we don't click on them and buy something might not even if we do see them. Hmm.
    Ah, open source. Communism reborn, and who can hate that? Not the watered down Leninism that the Soviet Union ran through in short order, but honest-to-goodness communism. Take what you need, give what you have. Beautiful. A touching sentiment.
    Also impossible to be a commercially viable entity when human nature comes into play. If we can get our content ad-free we will, even though it means economic hardship and possibly the closing of the sites we visit and love (or love to hate, as the case may be) and if we can get our software cost-free, without the dirty stigma of clicking through porno banners to find the 3rd word of the 4th paragraph to get entry to L33t b0b'5 h0u53 0f w4r3z, all the better. I whip up a weekend project that is derivative but I'm proud of and off to Freshmeat with you! Maybe even Sourceforge! Take it! Share it!
    I'll pour a few hundred hours of blood, sweat and tears into it! Shiny new! Everyone wants it! It's hot!
    But how do I parlay it into a commercial venture when everyone can get it for free and fix it up as they want? Hmm.
    Open source is a lovely idea with lofty goals, and as long as talented, motivated, intelligent programmers buy into it, it will generate impressive results. Unfortunately, there's a very finite number of talented, motivated, intelligent, ascetic programmers out there who will buy into it.
    OSDN's changing business strategies faster than you can say "we're a B2B play now!" (read: brushed up that resume yet?). If bigger ads or a subscription service to a website who doesn't give a whit about the quality of its journalism and doesn't know the meaning of the word "editing", relying on constantly inflammatory agitprop to woo its readership are the order of the day, then I'll just stick with Ars Technica and memepool (both topical, informative, and normally journalistically objective), thanks. Slashdot's been a fun little ride, and like many other things, peer moderation was a sexy little idea, just unfortunate in that it pretty much disintegrated into ugly mob rule groupthink. Scene, not herd.

    --
    Easy does it!
    This comment has been submitted already, 276865 hours , 59 minutes ago. No need to try again.
    1. Re:Open source out with the dot com bust? by SomeOtherGuy · · Score: 2

      As much as I hated reading through that rant, I find it hard to punch holes in it. Whatever happened to "information was meant to be free...", hell I would gladly live without Katz if it meant not having to stare at flashing banner ads....Have some dignity and take a hint from google....(people can appreciate text based/hyperlinked ads...) Hell if I could only count how many times a /. story has lead me to purchase something....If it's money that makes the world go round then so be it, I have spent my fair share on real life products that I heard about, read about on the internet -- hell my family has done 100% of our Christmas shopping online for three years.....And I can gladly say that no stupid add has suckered me in --- if I am shopping I know where to go or at least google can lead me in the right direction....if I want news well that is getting a little harder to find..

      --
      (+1 Funny) only if I laugh out loud.
    2. Re:Open source out with the dot com bust? by tdye · · Score: 2

      Old media ads have no need to justify themselves with inanities like "click-through"; they know their demographic and their real estate is mindshare, that precious commodity which they assume that they're purchasing with their ad dollars...

      This may sound a bit offtopic, but:

      'They' really are buying mindshare. I thought I was basically unaffected by advertizing, and that I'd resisted the influence of TV commercials. I moved to Ireland this month, though, and I've discovered that I've been fooling myself the whole time.

      Yesterday, I spent 3 minutes looking at various brands of laundry soap, trying to determine which one to buy. Finally, I realized that what I was really doing was looking for a brand name I recognized. I almost bought a brand that had the same color scheme as my old brand. The thing is, I had no info on which one worked best, because I'd never seen commercials for any of them, and that's how I knew which one to buy in the states.

      I've discovered that I've developed many more opinions through TV ads than I ever thought I had. It's actually pretty unsettling.

  174. Sound business model? by Hollins · · Score: 2

    I sympathize with your plight, but I have to wonder about a business model contingent on squeezing more ad revenue from the internet demographic most likely to employ advertising filtering.

    Best of luck.

    1. Re:Sound business model? by Coz · · Score: 1

      *shhhhhhh*

      You know that, and I know that, but the kind of people who buy that ugly advertising... THEY don't know $#!+, do they?

      --
      I love vegetarians - some of my favorite foods are vegetarians.
  175. How paranoid are you ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well the fuck is the following:

    The Fucking U.S. needs more emailadresses
    using for their shitty Carnivore SHIT
    FUCKING SHIT.

    And now they have bought slashdot.

    Why the fuck else there is an advertisment like
    "press on X, removing the OSDN-line,
    you need to login ?"

    Slashdot shit has done much steps
    in Microshitredmond shit

    I hate you

    FUCKERS !

    FBI has to die !!

    Fuckers !

    You suck.

  176. Slashdot update suggestion by Wolfier · · Score: 2

    Comment out the lameless filter code until your server passes the Turing Test.

    Thank you.

  177. Have a vote... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's a suggestion for cutting expenses:

    As the next poll, have a vote which is the most annoying/clueless editor. Whoever wins, gets fired.

    You could even double your savings by have a "timothy and michael" option. (Since the question is really which one of those two will win. ;)

    -The Big AC

  178. So, after 4 years.. by shankark · · Score: 1

    this was all Taco wanted. The moolah. A long gestation period, but with the popularity that /. has, I'm sure it could be a money-spinner.

  179. Got way more brains than Salon by RandomPeon · · Score: 2

    I used to enjoy occasionally reading Salon. Then they started doing this "Salon Premium" crap - some of the stories would be avaliable only if you subscribed.

    This seemed all fine and good, cause for a couple days about 20% of stories were flagged "Premium" and I was considering a subscription. All of a sudden, every article worth reading became "premium". And I wasn't supposed to notice? Result: potential subscriber got horribly pissed off. Now you don't get my $30 or even the ad revenue I'd generate.

    Slashdot is going about this the right way: be aboveboard, keep content free, and hopefully make the price for a subscription reasonable given the previous price - $0 to $30 is a big jump, $0 to $5 isn't so much.

    1. Re:Got way more brains than Salon by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      "...the right way: be aboveboard, keep content free, and hopefully make..."
      I know some of the stories recently wouldn't have passed the lameness filter imposed upon the comments, but calling /. "content free" is a bit much.
    2. Re:Got way more brains than Salon by tdye · · Score: 2

      I have also stopped reading Salon. Granted, I really only read it because I disagree with the political slant of the site and I like to see the view from the other side of the aisle...

      Unfortunately, that view is now permamently obscured by giant banners and a privacy fence. When I started feeling like I was reading Salon through knotholes, I stopped reading.

      I hope /. won't be a repeat of Salon.

  180. OSDN Nav Bar Isn't that bad by loconet · · Score: 1

    Nah...I don't mind the OSDN Bar at the top, since i'm always scrolled down somewhere in the middle of the page, so I really can't see it, but .. why don't you make it look prettier ie: like the one in linux.com?

    --
    [alk]
  181. Syndicate content by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I believe that's the term used to describe selling your news and so forth to other sites/services. /. needs to find a way to sell its stories and high rating comments to other sites. (They the other sites have to worry about revenue, not /.)

    Perhaps "features" could be created by taking the base story and any posts that add significant information and those features could be sold. Sort of a "Premium Slashback".

  182. Re:This is nothing more.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think that within a year both OSDN and Slashdot will be dead. The economy just won't support this kind of crap anymore. I won't cry any tears.

  183. Market existing innovation. by ShaunC · · Score: 2, Interesting

    >Yeah, we all hate the ads, but can we give Slashdot a viable alternative?

    How about forking a commercial version of Slashcode?

    I'm dead serious; surely there are people who would be willing to register an enhanced or optimized version at a reasonable price. I've paid to license both WWWThreads and vBulletin, and those are just message boards. A full featured content management system like Slashcode ought to fetch a decent registration fee. Throw a professional installation into the package and I guarantee there will be buyers.

    I love open source as much as the next guy, and I've written my share of giveaways. But "free as in beer" doesn't put food on the table. Beer either, for that matter. And it sure doesn't pay for the bandwidth and colo overhead incurred by a site with this much traffic. Being generous with your code is nice, and it gets your name out there in a positive light, but the Slashdot crew don't need the publicity anymore. They need to keep the bills paid.

    Shaun

    --
    Thanks to the War on Drugs, it's easier to buy meth than it is to buy cold medicine!
    1. Re:Market existing innovation. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be hilarious. Closed source coming to save Slashdot's ass.

  184. Subscription fees by ninewands · · Score: 1

    Well, I already have a few sites I subscribe to, and if the rates are reasonable, it would probably be worth it just to get rid of the trolls.

  185. OSDN bar by Vx1 · · Score: 1

    Well that just sucks, I thought Slash dot was the one place where stuff like this would never happen as much as OSDN has helped the developer community I dont aggree with having it here, yea you can get rid of it, but not on all browsers like OSX IE 5.1.3 it does not go away and netscrape 478 under osx, I am sure it goes away fine on other browsers but hey what can I say, it's there now and the slash dot update plugin for osx 10.1 does not function now because of the new bar call me crazy but , it has not been a very enjoyable transition. anyway - you guys need the doe so ... anyways I rather have the bar than the alternative Long Live SlashDot!@!#!

  186. You mant to save money, fix your database by Srin+Tuar · · Score: 1
    Upgrade from mysql to postgres. (be sure to
    get a recent version- the older ones were not
    so good.)


    A site of this size would be able to run its dynamic content without as much cpu power (or be
    able to scale larger)


    Of course im not counting development costs- time and trouble mostly...

  187. Da** skippy by whizzmo · · Score: 1

    MOD this guy up. This is the most informed comment this thread has seen yet.

    --
    nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain
    Whizzmo
  188. It didn't delete - error by nodrip · · Score: 1

    HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2001 03:08:11 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.20 (Unix) mod_perl/1.25 X-Powered-By: Slash 2.001000 Connection: close Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
    OK
    The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
    Please contact the server administrator, pater@slashdot.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

    More information about this error may be available in the server error log.

    --


    -- "The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
  189. smarter filtering by educated_foo · · Score: 1

    [stuff]

    Subscribers get better comment filtering functionality (e.g. I want to only see posts that have been moderated up even if it's from 0 to +1).


    This would just be valuable, period. I read at +3 so that everything I see is at least good enough to be modded up by one. This has the unfortunate side-effect of making it next to impossible to see anything posted by an AC or without a bonus (like this...), since it would have to get 3 mods. Switching down to +2 to try to see more detail means putting up with a bunch of "me, too" posts by regulars and karma whores that entered the system at +2.


    The best solution would probably be to just get rid of karma-based posting bonuses entirely, and rely only on moderation for scores. Regular posters would probably effectively get a bonus anyways, since looking at the author is a faster (lazier) way to moderate than actually reading the content of a post. And moderators should be browsing at 0 or -1, so it's not like this would make moderation more work than it is now. Reputation-based bonuses are annoying enough already.


    (end rant)


    /s

    1. Re:smarter filtering by milo_Gwalthny · · Score: 2

      I like the +1 for Karma. In fact, I would even go further: there are some posters whose comments I would like to see no matter what the rating. I would like to be able to add posters to a list so stories are flagged where they post and comments are automatically shown. I would pay (a little) for this functionality.

      --
      Milo
  190. Several points by thejake316 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    #1 congrats on dancing to the beat of the K5 drum. What's next, voting on all submitted articles? Stories that are more than 30 words?
    #2 I know of several ISPs that will host a site like this for about $50/month with a 3 gig transfer limit per month. There's CJ "original poetry" sites that make about that, and amazon affiliates that have hymns and guitar tab for hymns that make almost double that! Granted, that doesn't get you a rack full of NFS and mysql servers and a SAN, but you wouldn't need it if you correct point 3:
    #3 This "software" sucks. If half the people spent half the time they've spent on this perl mess devoting their effort to Nuke and PHP, Nuke would be incredible. Nuke is about 50 times better than Slash now, it could be much, much better with lille effort.
    #4 Taco and friends need to get more honest with themselves. VA is dead, the bubble has burst, internet advertisers have figured out that ads on sites like this never were worth what you all were asking. This is business karma, folks, the market is modding your CPM down to (-1 Overrated).

    Don't worry, you guys can still get honest jobs when VA goes belly-up, I hear there's still a couple shops out there who have perl programmers on the payroll. Or, you could go back to school. Take an English class or two if you're thinking about a foray into anything resembling journalism again.

    --
    AC's cheerfully ignored
  191. Disabling the navbar by Snowfox · · Score: 2
    You should see the OSDN Navbar atop the page now. I don't like it any more then many of you, so if you log in, there is an option to disable it. (Click the 'X', or look in Preferences:Misc)

    I don't see a Preferences:Misc - I've only got the old category options. Am I missing something here?

  192. ads by sewagemaster · · Score: 1

    the ones on cnet and yahoo are pretty bad.. but the worst ones are the flash ones that espn uses sometimes... or the java applet ones.... not to mention the X10 popups... of course they can all be disabled by mapping to bogus ip address locally on /etc/hosts or c:\windows\hosts... but hey what can you do

  193. http://slashdot.org/users.pl?op=editmiscopts by whizzmo · · Score: 1

    ...but it's broken right now anyway.

    --
    nuclear presidential echelon assassination encryption virulent strain
    Whizzmo
  194. LOL. Editorial objectivity at Slashdot? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wake up, man.

  195. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by PCM2 · · Score: 2
    I'd like to just point out that Slashdot is an amazing accomplishment, and everyone who keeps it running deserves to get paid for it.
    I agree completely.

    So where's my cut?

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  196. Who are we kidding? by Vspirit · · Score: 1

    me thinking.

    if this was any other larger community site, be assured you would find it covered on slashdot in either a post or an article.

    Many of us concider /. as one of the last outposts of the digital frontier.

    But who are we kidding, most of all ourselves I should say.

    Before today, Slashdot, to me, would be a community which strongest urge was to protect values,
    not profit.

    But I kid you not. The values of idealism has just been bought by the need of capitalism.

    So what is now different about /. ? The atmosphere made /. different.

    Now /. are no different than any other community/content/media site.
    The content is still the data - like other sites.
    The framework/atmosphere is now for profit not for value - like most other sites.

    Who are we kidding?

    Take a look at history.
    Evolution of civilization.
    Evolution of trade/economy.
    Evolution of ideas.
    Evolution.

    Evolution happens due to a change, not complete replacement - that would be revolution.

    Even Microsoft wanted to make a change.
    In their youth, Bill Gates and Paul Allen and comrades, saw IBM as one of the big evil
    dominant corporations controlling innovation. Now MS themselves has grown into an IBM of the past.

    The new breed /. and the likes, house many dreamers with a desire to change. This time IBM
    wasn't the big active opponent (yet silently they at some are concidered belonging to the passive
    group) - Microsoft is.

    Now in what direction are /. moving ? = towards economical survival secured by the massive supportive ressources they have build as a oart of the anti-XdominaX movement. An inevetable path
    in a world based on economics, and any world at all where there are differences and changes.
    Have no doubt. There will be a day, when /. itself will be be challenged if it survives the move
    from amateurism to professionalism. Which I believe it will. I for one will probably contribute to make it happen.

    ..notes from inside the outside. oct 23. 2001 by Casper Andersen

  197. Spelling? by pgpckt · · Score: 2

    If I pay, can I be assured the editors will (god forbid) edit their work. Like, for example, spell checking, or grammar checking, or even both? Why would I pay for editors who can't edit properly?

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
  198. ah, that explains a lot...thanks. by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 3, Funny

    And here I was being paranoid, or thinking I was getting there at least, but this explains it:

    From CmdrTaco:
    I'd personally like to assign a -2 penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most of them frankly just aren't funny at all. But humor is far too subjective to say that the moderation is unfair. Anyway, now everyone can decide for themselves. That should happen in the next few weeks.
    Well, you got your wish CT, any funny comment that I've seen and made, reguardless of content has been modded down (probably including this one, too).

    Don't believe me...browse at -1 on occasion.
    Too many "Why was this modded down" posts are cropping up... or rants on the subject.

    You are correct that "humor is entirely to subjective", so, we'll be objective about it and hunt down people by name and mod them down no matter what. Seems to be the case.

    Ever since my (only) accepted submission of "MS extensions" being another piece of the monopoly they have...things have gone to hell and a handbasked.
    Ironically, what I had written on the subject was being an "interesting notion and plausable" and my words were ignored but the slashdot spin put on it was all that was needed to bring about being modded down reguardless

    Aw, gawd, I hate it when I answer my own question, but it took this subject to make it clear.
    I post a story.
    Story Accepted.
    Story posted + /. spin villifying Microsoft.
    Moose gets villified.
    Moose gets modded down at every turn reguardless of content/intent.

    Let me be the first to say, that I have never, ever trolled.
    Yes, I have strayed offtopic during a post (who hasn't on occasion), I've had rants that are/were/could be flamebait (when you are pissed, you really don't care).
    I've apologized (and gotten modded down in the process...my, how nice).

    Personally I find the quote from CmdrTaco disturbing, almost as bad as trying to "legislate morality"...we all know how well that works.

    Think about it: a -2 for being/trying to be funny?
    Dang, but why not just say "try to crack a joke and we will censor you".

    The ultimate irony here is in "trying to avoid becoming the things/people we "hate/dislike" only to look and see we have turned into just that. (i.e. if /. moderators can silence a few people that are not trolling, is that any better than Apple/ms/disney lawyers silencing "the little guy")

    I think my sig says the above in the fewest words possible and more to the point.
    (even more ironic is it was one of the funniest lines in the monty python film it came from)

    Moose.

    --
    Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
    1. Re:ah, that explains a lot...thanks. by dbCooper0 · · Score: 1

      Right On, Dude. I'm not a veteran, but have been similarly burned. Don't even think of emailing an editor....geez.

      --
      db
      Cig:
      ôô
      /`
    2. Re:ah, that explains a lot...thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wish I had mod points so I could mod you up because you're absolutely right. Moderators are unaccountable (don't get me started on that joke called meta-mod) and punishing people because they don't like them.

      Will it the abuse ever be stopped? Not bloody likely...

      Posted AC to prevent said assholes from further killing my account (and a big FUCK YOU to said assholes).

    3. Re:ah, that explains a lot...thanks. by eyez · · Score: 1
      Think about it: a -2 for being/trying to be funny?
      Dang, but why not just say "try to crack a joke and we will censor you".


      This is extremely unfair. It's not like he's suggesting something mandatory- The -2 penalty to comments would be a USER PREFERENCE... a more proper comment on it would be to say "Try to crack a joke and we will allow users to filter your comment out of their view!"


      This kind of flexibility allows the reader to control which /. posts they are reading- if this is unfair, why don't we just abolish moderation altogether?

      --
      get 0wned. irc.w30wnzj00.com
    4. Re:ah, that explains a lot...thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very true.

      Immediately after the WTC bombings, the US govt. wanted to bomb the Taliban and Afghanistan. When other countries wanted to take an iron fist against terrorism, US talked of bilateral talks and peace. Where was peace then?

      When I posted this notion after the WTC bombings, I was modded down as troll. Why? Because some "patriotic American" was hurt? Where was the sense of judgement? Isn't that statement true? Aren't people is India and Russia dying because of terrorism? Why did the US not wait for 10 years to talk it out, as India has been doing for 50 years?

      If such wacko judgements are to be commended, the slashdot content is going downhill. Sorry about the rant, but it is true.

  199. Features I Demand if I pay by pgpckt · · Score: 2


    * Stories can be rated higher then +5

    * Users can gain more then 50 karma

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
  200. Oh, well. . . by KPU · · Score: 0

    Could you tell me the new ad sizes and addresses so I could add them to my proxy filters?

  201. Proxy Filtering by KPU · · Score: 1

    Can you tell me what the dimensions of the ads will be? How about the server hosting them? I need to keep up my record consecutive slashdot days without any ads. Time to add to my junkbuster filters.

  202. Merge top Rows by nullrun · · Score: 1

    Why don't you merge the top two rows on the page? Bring the links at top left down to the left of the banner, and the search down on the right? I know you have thought of this but...

  203. Re:DEPTH CHARGE TO CMDR TUNA TACO !!! SUCK IT!! HA by toupsie · · Score: 1

    Amazing, how much time did you waste on this troll?

    --
    Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
  204. I am happy to pay for slashdot by HappyPerson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I understand as a website why ads are necessary especially for one the size of slashdot, I am happy to pay a fee to keep from seeing them and still supporting your great site.

    I think the net has a anti-payment mentality which unfortunately breeds the kind of annoying business model which we all detest. A few bucks isn't going to kill anyone and still allow this site to be a nice place to read.

    You guys are doing a great job and it is appreciated.

    Thanks
    Happy Person

  205. I wood pay by digit · · Score: 1

    I wood pay $5 a month.

  206. Now really, by wrexsoul · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think that myself and many slashdotters are up on "a good cause" enough to be willing to pay for a subscription. Heck, I know that TheGIA once made a request for money, not even a subscription system, and got tons of money just from people who readi t and enjoy seeing the content.

    If even the 1% of hardcore slashdotters payed for a subscription, it'd be more money than one could ever generate through ad banners.

    If there's anything about the open source geek community, it's the adhesive-like properties it shows, especially for people who routinely give so much for so little. So I think if Slashdot did such a thing, its financial troubles would most likely be indefinately alleviated.

    Go Slashdot, I support you wholly.

    --
    - WrexSoul
    \/.
    vvv

  207. The AC Solution by nebby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In response to all the bitching about ACs, how about setting up two things:

    1) Make it so you can post anonymously, but must be logged in. Ie, (like on half-empty) your karma is still affected and there is still an internal link to your post with your account, but nobody knows who you are.

    2) Make it so there's an interface in slashcode to contact anonymous individuals (perhaps anonymously as well? :)) .. slashdot would be a third party. Since they wouldn't have an email address displayed when posting anonymous, this would allow a user to send them a private message.

    This way ACs who are posting crap will eventually bottom out in karma and post at -1 and have the potential to be flamed on the /. private message system (which is better than nothing, I'd guess.)

    --
    --
    1. Re:The AC Solution by sulli · · Score: 3, Insightful
      1) Make it so you can post anonymously, but must be logged in. Ie, (like on half-empty) your karma is still affected and there is still an internal link to your post with your account, but nobody knows who you are.

      Bad, bad, bad idea. Lots of people post stuf AC because they KNOW their identity won't be revealed - about their employers, or Scientology, or other such. Without AC this won't happen. I'll gladly take 100 goatsex posts for the few good posts that come from ACs.

      And yes, I routinely post AC. It's because I don't want it on my users.pl page. Sometimes it's a flame, sometimes it's a joke, sometimes it's on a hidden sid I don't want to show off, but whatever: I think the ability to do this is one of the things that makes /. great, and they should definitely not kill it.

      And when I get bored, I read at -1. It's funnier than you think sometimes.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    2. Re:The AC Solution by acroyear · · Score: 2
      You really can't do that and have it be truly anonymous. If the database under slashdot kept ANY information connecting an AC posting with the person who posted it, that info could be used against the AC. If Netscape & JWZ couldn't hold back the "really bad attitude" against a subpeona, then VA won't have (and wouldn't use) the resources to resist a legal subpeona demanding the evidence that connects an AC with his post that is being used against him or his employer or slashdot itself.

      The only protection an AC, and Slashdot, has is to be able to honestly and truthfully say "That information does not exist and never did."

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    3. Re:The AC Solution by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

      Um, there's a checkbox right under this text area labeled: "Post Anonymously"

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    4. Re:The AC Solution by nebby · · Score: 2

      Well, one could argue it's not truly anonymous now, anyway. A little investigation of web logs could determine anyone who's posting AC from the same PC as a user account. You can get an IP address, which can in some cases lead to who you are. Between an IP address and the context of your message (ie, a angry Netscape employee) .. a cunning manager might be able to pinpoint you. But you are right, somebody who wants to leak a government document could potentially come from a unique IP, post once, leave, and never be heard from again.

      The internal connection in the DB between the poster and the post would be severed after a day or two once moderation is done and any private messages are sent to the user. This way, VA can't come a month down the road asking about who posted comment #12345, the link is severed and there's no longer any information. This is only slighly less "anonymous" than the system currently is. It would be banking on the fact that any legal action looking to unmask a certain AC could not take place within two days or so of the post itself.. which I think is pretty much guarenteed.

      --
      --
    5. Re:The AC Solution by acroyear · · Score: 2
      But you are right, somebody who wants to leak a government document could potentially come from a unique IP, post once, leave, and never be heard from again.

      Government documents are rarely something that someone would "leak" through Slashdot. In reality, it would be internal memos and information from a company, a "Trade Secret", that in most states loses its value entirely once its leaked.

      But the "unique IP" isn't the best way to hide, as that IP would just be assigned to someone else later. In reality, the issue of tracing someone gets more difficult by IP Masquerading and IP redirecting firewalls. The rest of the world sees everything coming from my company as coming from a single IP, even though we have XX number of machines and users behind the wall. If enough of them read slashdot on a regular basis (and in a software development house, that's common), then it would be impossible to trace the post to an individual.

      This way, VA can't come a month down the road asking about who posted comment #12345, the link is severed and there's no longer any information.

      I don't see that as working. If the information WAS there but isn't, then the means by which the Gov could affect things are still there: the court or the feds could order Slashdot to stop the deletion in the future to try to catch the AC in a future post. No, in reality the best solution is to just not have that information saved at all, period.

      A court order to implement a logging of ACs and traces that doesn't already exist is far easier to resist legally than a court order to enable a logging technology already built into the system and merely "disabled" or having short-duration logs.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
  208. Best way to show ads .. by popeyethesailor · · Score: 2

    Put them in the list of comments ! Make them the FP if you like, but it should be in the comments !
    I would imagine most /.ers read even -1 posts, so having it as a comment would give a lot of visibility ...
    If there was a way to tailor ads to the Story, that would be welcome too! Google-style again..
    This step should also hugely decrease the annoyance value.

  209. If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go away by Nailer · · Score: 2

    I'm tired of all this `hehe, being knowledgable folk we can install junkbuster, adzapper, or whatever other banner blocking ad proxy of the week, so it doesn't matter if Slashdot has ads' talk.

    So? There's a bloody great big difference between your being able to do something and that something being ethical. If Slashdot has ads, and you don't want to look at them, then don't look at Slashdot.

    The ads are part of the content. Hold up your end of the bargain and look at them. If you don't like animated flash or GIFs, complain to Slashdot. Don't try and seperate them. We know you're wonderful and very clever and deserve a pat on the back for being able to use Squid, but in exchange for the bandwidth, code, forums, and edited and compiled content you're viewing, if Slashdot expects you to look at ads in return, you should, or don't look at anything all all.

    If I remember correctly, this is the same site where everyone railed againt MS Smart Tags (and rightly so) for daring to change the content of your web pages. How is this different?

  210. Somebody call Don Meredith... by mellonhead · · Score: 1

    The Party's Over
    © Willie Nelson

    Turn out the lights, the party's over
    They say that all good things must end
    Let's call it a night, the party's over
    And tomorrow starts the same old thing again

    What a crazy, crazy party
    Never seen so many people
    Laughin', dancin', look at you, you're havin' fun
    But look at me, I'm almost cryin'
    But that don't keep her love from dyin'
    Misery calls for me, the party's over

    Turn out the lights, the party's over
    They say that all good things must end
    Let's call it a night, the party's over
    And tomorrow starts the same old thing again

    Once I had a love, undyin'
    I didn't keep it, wasn't tyrin'
    Life for me was just one party and then another
    I had to have my party wine
    Broke her heart so many times
    And then one night, she said sweetheart, the party's over

    Turn out the lights, the party's over
    They say that all good things must end
    Let's call it a night, the party's over
    And tomorrow starts the same old thing again

    And tomorrow starts the same old thing again

  211. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by jred · · Score: 1

    I had some fleeting thoughts about posting a flame-inducing rant here about the unsustainable nature of "free" stuff (news outlets, software, ketchup, take your pick)


    You know, I've noticed that they no longer have stuff like ketchup & mild sauce in the bins at fast food restaurants anymore. & I just thought it was going to suck to have to start buying all my sauces.
    --

    jred
    I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage...
  212. Contridiction? by pgpckt · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First, it is said:

    "I don't like it any more then many of you, so if you log in, there is an option to disable it."

    Then:

    "nobody is forcing us to make these changes: The navbar. The new ad formats. The subscription system. I could just say 'No' to changes like these"

    If you COULD have said no, and you HATED the changes, why did you say YES?

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
    1. Re:Contridiction? by gorgon · · Score: 2
      CT answer your question in the very next sentence.
      But Slashdot is now four years old ... and I want it to still be here four years from now. I hope you can understand the expensive reality associated with making tthis site happen every day for a quarter of a million readers.
      You may not like the answer, but he definitely addresses this point.
      --

      And I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners.
      Berke Breathed
  213. If Slash wants to stay profitable.. by GrEp · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If slashdot wants to stay alfoat in the dotbomb world it should understand why it is popular:
    1. The only annoying advertising is a thin banner ad, no popups, and if you scroll down it doesn't stay there. i.e. CLEAN INTERFACE

    2. Katz can be filtered through the user preferences.

    3. CmdrTaco and friends do a decent job of highlighting a wide variety of tech/geek news sources, not just what the parent company shoves down their throat.

    Hey, advertising revenues are down. Deal with it. You have a company that turns a profit. Don't get greedy and it will stay that way. If you need to shell out for more hardware and bandwidth for ISP support do so, but don't let that lead to bloat. Slashcode could be always be tweaked to save computing resources, but it is mature and doesn't need more bells and whistles.

    --

    bash-2.04$
    bash-2.04$yes "Don't you hate dialup connections?"| write USERNAME
  214. PURELY technical concerns. by NNKK · · Score: 1

    my only real problem with the big ads, is that they SLOW THE HELL DOWN out of my browser, PLEASE try to find a way around this for the love of god!

  215. "This hurts me more than it hurts you..." by Hagabard · · Score: 1
    My parents use to say this to me before they use to whip me with the plastic race track that was part of a set to my Matchbox Racecars.

    Now, if you've ever been whipped by one of those, you would know the if the subject line to this post was uttered prior to the beating you would never trust that person again.

    I know this will be unpopular with many people, myself included,..<snip>...I could just say 'No' to changes like these...

    I find it hard to believe that if Taco said "No" to these changes it'd actually make a difference as to whether it was implemented or not. VA Linux has a slew of unhappy stockholders and they only give a shit about one thing which is profit.

    Goodbye, Slashdot...

  216. The Ads on ZDnet won't work here. by thesolo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you are planning on using the exact same ads, that is a very stupid thing to do--most of those ads use flash/shockwave, which is EXTREMELY annoying, and can't be stopped. At least with Gif89a you could stop the f'ing thing! The worst ones have sound too.

    Considering how many *nix geeks are on this board, along with how many run Lynx, etc., how effective will those ads be, really? Yes, I will pay to get the hell rid of them, but I think that plan might backfire.

  217. Re:Subscriptions would help a lot... by Kris_J · · Score: 2

    This reminds me of The Well -- anyone know how financially healthy it is?

  218. OT: Lynx for browsing /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I gotta say, on the one hand, Lynx is ok for browsing Slashdot.

    But links is a hell of a lot better.

    Added bonus: If you're using it in an xterm, even inside a screen session, you can use the mouse to click on hyperlinks instead of using the keyboard to scroll past the million hyperlinks you're not interested in.

  219. FLAME, aka "Lameness filter encountered." by Shadowcaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yea right.
    Ads? Damn annoying, but they have their place, if used within reason. I trust the folks running the show here have a good sense of reason. Right?

    Subscription? Also annoying, but to a smaller degree. Provided there is *NEVER* anything 'blocked' to non-subscribers, and that the fees are reasonable, then again I do not see a problem.

    As for the OSDN bar, it's ugly, but it's small and not too intrusive at all. So I'm planning on leaving it alone. :)

    As an aside, I tried a smaller subject and got a "Lameness filter encountered." message. My subject was greater then three characters, which is what that filter should be. :/

  220. Face it, the numbers don't work. by kawika · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pull a napkin out of the holder and write down some numbers. Let's say the servers and bandwidth are $10K a month. Add four employees at $72K/year including benefits and overhead for another $24K. That's $34K of expenses each month. Revenue? Banners are going for about $2 CPM net--if you're lucky--after commissions and fees. Assuming you can sell 16 MILLION page views you can break even for the month.

    The OSDN media kit says Slashdot gets 30MM views, so no there's no problem right? Just sell all your ad inventory and you can CLEAR $30K each month after expenses. Bzzt, wrong. The Internet is swimming in ad inventory, you'll have a hard time selling that many banners at a good price. It's a buyer's market, so you either overdeliver to whatever advertisers you can find to please them or "remainder" your ads to a low-cost ad network. Ad networks like Tribal Fusion are offering sites sub-$1 CPMs, and sites are taking it because there's no better offer.

    Advertisers are demanding the big obnoxious billboard ads or popups and they're getting it because sites are desperate for money. You can get a net $10 to $20 CPM on some of them! These new ad formats are all that seem to be selling lately. You either get with the program or do without ad revenue.

    Some people are talking about how things will get better once the Internet ad market recovers. What makes them think the current prices are too low? Internet page views continue to increase even if the rate is slowing, so we're faced with more ad inventory instead of less. And how can an advertiser justify the price? If I'm selling a gizmo for $20 and buy banner ads on this site, I can expect best case maybe 0.1% click-throughs or one click for every 1000 impressions. If I pay a $4 gross CPM for the ads then it costs me $4 per click-through. Even if one of every 10 people who click through buy something--unusually high in my experience--it costs $40 to get one person to buy a $20 product. I need something more like a $1 CPM for this deal to make any financial sense.

    If you don't like my numbers make up your own, but the bottom line is that nothing short of a bug in Microsoft Excel is going make Slashdot look wildly profitable.

    I speak from experience here. The site I work on has been through all the money making schemes in the last 18 months--affiliate programs, Paypal/Amazon donation boxes, banner ads, big Cnet-style ads--and none of them work. We're not even covering our very meager expenses.
    Next stop, subscriptions?

    1. Re:Face it, the numbers don't work. by thejake316 · · Score: 1

      Let's say the servers and bandwidth are $10K a month. Add four employees at $72K/year including benefits and overhead for another $24K.

      The following is not flamebait: THIS SITE SHOULD NOT COST $24K/month! There are providers who will give you GIGS of transfer a month for $250/month on 4 NICs (good for at least 200K concurrent connections with GOOD software and well-formed pages)! There are not 4 people here who DESERVE $72K/year for this site! You know why? THERE IS NO ORIGINAL CONTENT ON THIS SITE other than what is POSTED. One guy using good "storytelling" software (which Slash isn't) and outsourcing the server/bandwidth should be able to admin and edit a site like this in his spare time.

      --
      AC's cheerfully ignored
  221. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your $0.02 is in the mail.

  222. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by Kris_J · · Score: 4, Informative

    I finally got around to creating a hosts file like that when I was working at a company that had IE locked down so hard that you couldn't even turn off animated GIFs. I strongly recommend it as a solution, or at least a start. Here's my little collection (Note, it kills almost all CNET images);127.0.0.1 localhost 127.0.0.1 active.macromedia.com 127.0.0.1 ad.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 m.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 ln.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 ads-c.focalink.com 127.0.0.1 adfarm.mediaplex.com 127.0.0.1 js-adex3.flycast.com 127.0.0.1 us.a1.yimg.com 127.0.0.1 ad.iwin.com 127.0.0.1 ads.mindsetnetwork.com 127.0.0.1 a1444.g.akamai.net 127.0.0.1 image.linkexchange.com 127.0.0.1 ads.web.aol.com 127.0.0.1 adremote.pathfinder.com 127.0.0.1 a.r.tv.com 127.0.0.1 adsrv.news.com.au 127.0.0.1 images.ads.fairfax.com.au 127.0.0.1 ads.msn.com 127.0.0.1 ads1.sptimes.com 127.0.0.1 ad.au.doubleclick.net 127.0.0.1 global.msads.net 127.0.0.1 au.a1.yimg.com 127.0.0.1 ads.x10.com 127.0.0.1 eur.a1.yimg.com 127.0.0.1 utils.mediageneral.com 127.0.0.1 ads.ad-flow.com 127.0.0.1 ads.gamespy.com

  223. How many salaries can be paid with $70k? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    70k x 4 = 28000...perhaps everyone at OSDN runs a fundraiser to see if they're getting paid that year?

    Seems pretty useless to me...

  224. Huzzah! by blueg3 · · Score: 1

    My take on it: if banners are those irritating flashing ad banners or "hit the monkey" or nonsense like that, I'll filter them. If they're text, I'll either ignore them or *maybe* click on them.

    If I had to pay less than a few bucks a month to read Slashdot without evil banners (as opposed to non-evil banners, which exist), I'd do it.

  225. Probably because... by Hobobo · · Score: 2

    If they did all that Slashdot would be mighty bloated.

    And besides, I don't think the Slashdot folks are in it for the money.

  226. 30 days and you need to go back ... by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    Still, after 30 days the ads will be back, allowing you to go back to their site and see their "newest" ads/products in the whiletime.

    Of'course you can always put the cookies on a later date in the year 2099 or so ...

    (at that time we won't have popup ads anymore but a talking (ad) robot selling a mute switch from X10!)

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  227. I want my LYNX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >Although this would definitely save on bandwidth, those people running older browsers that don't support CSS would throw a fit.

    Yes. This would make my Vaxen very angry. :-)

  228. Bad Mathematics by hereticmessiah · · Score: 1

    Funny posts -2? You said half the time they aren't funny (yes subjective..) yet more than 3/4 of the time they are funny.

    1/2 + 3/4 = 1? Um, no! That doesn't quite add up there.

    --
    I don't like trolls and mod against me if you like, but I'd prefer if you'd reply.
  229. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow. A half-inch bar at the top of the page, and it generates over 400 comments. This shows how some people spend their time.

  230. For those of us who run Mozilla... by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1

    ...could you please stop serving images from the same hostname as the ads?

    --
    Help us build a better map!
    1. Re:For those of us who run Mozilla... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They do that on purpose dipshit.

  231. Re:How much? -- what about peer to peer hosting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If increased operating costs (due in part to increased traffic) really is at the heart of the need for increased avertising, what about decentralizing the hosting responsiblities? Could /. be turned into a peer-to-peer web site, where participants run /. servants of some kind? I know it sounds crazy, but it's just a thought.

  232. I really don't mind if there are enough ads by unauthorised · · Score: 1

    I have been used to any big ad appeared on any sites, including cnet, wired. I just wonder why there is no such big ads here in Slashdot.

    --
    Why not call me?
  233. Why not start a magazine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most newspapers and magazine have moved to the internet, how about slashdot moving to paper. At $4 dollars a pop I really think you could supplement what you have here and maybe expand.

    1. Re:Why not start a magazine? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's only one problem...

      Slashdot doens't actually have it's own content, it just leeches off other sites stories.

    2. Re:Why not start a magazine? by Clint+Trollwood · · Score: 0

      I know I'm going to get moded down for this but...

      This is very true. Slashdot really needs to get their own content if they ever want this pay service idea to ever take off. I'd love to see some more inspiring articles by Jon Katz and a few in depth reports of security holes in Microsoft products.

  234. be careful Mike O'Sullivan... by Technodummy · · Score: 2

    those creepy ad people might come out and hug you ;o)

    this is one of THE best ideas I've ever seen posted on Slashdot.

    the biggest flaw of most online advertising is that it has a complete lack of targeting to an audience. in the 5 or so years I've been online, I have seen very few sites that do proper advertising, targeted to the audience it attracts.

    not only is this a good idea for slashdot, but for online advertising in general. do you think those x10 camera ads would still be around if they could be modded down?

    advertisers do need to know when they're being moronic... as an example, most spammers advertise services in the USA, IF for some reason I read my spam and thought it sounded like a great offer, I'd be unable to take it up, as I'm in Australia. most of it is more simple than that though... weight-loss ads on anorexia sites... expensive membership ads on freebie sites...

    the web shapes itself, you KNOW the banners to ThinkGeek are popular... and since when has advertising been popular? since it gave you some USEFUL information

    when the advertising is useful, I'll actually start noticing it, and maybe some more of the great free websites will survive...

  235. Re:Reality: Love it or Hate it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So where's my cunt?

    Check between your legs...

  236. Big Ugly Ads by sanity_slipping · · Score: 1

    I thought server costs were the problem, but you plan to fix it by placing huge ads in all of your articles? Hehehe. How's that supposed to help? They sure seem to take up a lot of bandwidth on MY end!

    Moreover, those huge ads have been known to crash my computer about 50% of the time that I view ZDNet.. I know Slashdot caters mainly to Linux users, but don't forget about us pitious crashable Windows users!
    ---------

    --
    I can feel my sanity, beyond my reach and slipping...
  237. is there a place to donate money to Slashdot? by Technodummy · · Score: 2

    if there isn't, how do you know it won't work?

    if there is, it needs better visibility

    1. Re:is there a place to donate money to Slashdot? by sulli · · Score: 1

      Yes. Buy shirts, mugs, soda, and other crap from ThinkGeek. I often buy stuff there, and I like to think that some of it helps out slashdot.

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
  238. slashdot should have pay-only content by Ramen+Weasel · · Score: 0


    How does this work? That's easy. There is a famous research company which sells it's reports on a subscription basis (for big, big bucks) and delivers primarily via the web these days. And they're wildly successful (as in "in the black") doing this.

    The thing that you're missing is that slashdot's subscription service may also have subscriber-only content. Which is important. And makes it much more what that other company does.

    Simply put, it is in the best interests of subscribers not to share proprietary info with all their friends. It's a tragedy-of-the-commons situation simple enough even your average luser gets it. Subscribers want to continue receiving very high quality content. They know that if that content isn't profitable it goes away.

    Here's the big crucial clue everyone has missed so far: there is a difference between buying a virtual good -- like an e-book -- and subscribing to a a virtual service.

    If you can rip off an e-book, and yeah, more or less you come out ahead. You got what you want. Authors rant about how if you don't pay for the one you want now, they won't be able to afford to make the next one. But, as everyone knows, that's a crap shoot. Just because an author wrote a book you liked doesn't mean you will necessarily care about the next book. Authors too numerous to mention have let their readers down on sequels. So the market is not terribly responsive to their pleas.

    But a subscription is a relationship . You front your money with the belief that you will regularly get high quality content. If you don't think you will get sufficiently good content over the life of your subscription, you don't subscribe. And because it is a relationship, the other side can pull the plug if you cheat. But even more importantly, it is in your best interest to make sure that the company fulfilling the other end of your subscription-contract is still around to do so!

    If you deprive the company with whom you have a subscription-contract of paying customers, they are going to stiff you the content you expect to get. Real simple.

    Unlike with stand-alone good, in a subscription model, the seller has hostages.

    Sure, there will be people who rip off a small number of articles. At my afforementioned client corp., they chalk such things up to good publicity, and just don't sweat it.

    As far as security goes, the answer is to not have rigorous security. Tell people what the rules are, and if them break them, kill their accounts, no refund. If one name/password pair were to show massive simultaneous usage to multiple diverse IPs, don't you think they'd pull the plug?

  239. Re:Spelling? (you must be kidding) by dbCooper0 · · Score: 1
    Your own post is an oxymoron, moron.

    Case in point:

    * Stories can be rated higher then +5

    * Users can gain more then 50 karma

    If you don't see the error, ASK TACO! (He's been chided about it more then ^H^H^H^H than most...)

    --
    db
    Cig:
    ôô
    /`
  240. A good index is worth more than its content by ynotds · · Score: 1

    The vast majority of content, even that which finds its way through Slashdot's submission filter and moderation, is best thought of as grey space from both a design and an information perspective.

    The information you can gain by just perusing a well presented threaded index, especially one where the overwhelming majority of items are posted with "known" nicks, greatly exceeds what you usually gain from reading rants like this one.

    While I find /. a sufficiently interesting approach to keep coming back, there is also something unsatisfying about the feature creep in the main index which obscures the cut and thrust of the generally hurried "discussion" of each topic.

    Katz aside, who has long been clearly the best writer on the Net, I would much rather pay for a good index than for any amount of content.

    I just don't know whether I've reached the point of needing to pay to hide from advertising.

    --
    -- Our systemic servants do not good masters make.
  241. Flood Me With Ads by VB · · Score: 1


    Look, I'll pay when it's worthwhile, but since we don't even have pricing, I'll do my part. Post them banner ads as big as you like. Not even a problem.

    I'll just filter it out (mentally, or some other way), and those who can't can pay the fee.... once we know what that fee will be...

    --
    www.dedserius.com
    VB != VisualBasic
  242. impending domain name change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    slashdot.org --> cashdot.com

  243. /. has been sucking for a while by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    will all these changes make it suck less? probably not, maybe they should post less geeky news so that people who have a life might be a little bit more interested...

    who cares about LOTR, star wars, japan animes, star trek... not me...

  244. Re:Spelling? (you must be kidding) by pgpckt · · Score: 2


    ...Then again, I am not the editor, am I? I expect editors to spell correctly, don't you? The fact I made a mistake may mean I am not a good editor. However, I don't think it is too much to ask that the professionals check their work for spelling and grammar mistakes. That is why they are the editors and not me :)

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
  245. A Good Cure for Slashdot Addiction by Tom7 · · Score: 2


    Hopefully this will cure my slashdot addiction and I can get some work done. =)

    (PS: Slow connection mode rules! No ugly green, no navbar!)

  246. I get to pay for the priviledge... by dstone · · Score: 2

    ...of researching, submitting, getting rejected, and finally commenting on posts by other paying users? That seems a little perverse. Lay the ads on me, baby, cause I ain't paying to post, read, and discuss what I'm contributing in the first place!

  247. +1 Hell Yeah! by crisco · · Score: 2
    In other words, thats a good idea.

    I'll subscribe and still watch the ads, moderate the good ones and click through the relevant ones.

    --

    Bleh!

  248. Fix defects? Who us? by sohp · · Score: 1

    Too bad nobody took advantange of this update to actually fix some of the defects in the current version of slashcode. The misattributed comments defect, or #of posts in the threshold on the dropdown not updating, for example. Or maybe the not-so-uncommon situation where you can't log in but the only indication that there's a problem is that instead of getting your customized page you get the default slashdot page, or maybe This Defect

  249. +1 Hell Yeah! by crisco · · Score: 2
    Another good idea!

    There are probably two or three stories a day that don't get posted but are worth reading. The rest, well, there's a reason they don't get to the sections or the front page.

    Just take a look at the -1 stuff, I'm sure the submission queue gets a bit of that also.

    --

    Bleh!

  250. Opinions on the "new" Slashdot by Andreas(R) · · Score: 1

    -Anonymous coward filter: Great!
    -The new OSDN-top: Doesn't match pages layout: ugly!
    -Suscribtion fee: This is NOT acceptable in an OpenSource world! I suggest Slashdot's users grab the SLASHCODE, and register the domain www.freeslashdot.org. 'Cause Slashdot should be free!"

  251. Re:Why Oh Why? by Clint+Trollwood · · Score: 0

    Is this not a valid question? I ask a simple question and I'm moded down already?

    You mods need to unfuck yourselves!

  252. Fine-grained auto-moderation: a good thing by steveha · · Score: 2

    This is a bad option, even if we all agree as to what you can laugh at.

    Dude, he is saying he wants a -2 penalty, not that Slashdot will assign a -2 penalty for everyone. He is talking about an option you can turn on and off. He will turn it on. You will leave it off (the default, I'm sure, will be off). This would be one of many such little preferences.

    Fine-grained control over how articles are ranked would be a good thing. For example, suppose you hate the "overrated" moderation; there could be an option to change "overrated" from a -1 to a zero (no change). Or suppose you read Slashdot only for the humor; you could set the "funny" moderation to +2 instead of its usual +1. CmdrTaco will set it to -2 instead of +1. It's a good thing.

    We can do even better than tweaking scores from moderators: we can tweak scores based on the articles themselves. Wouldn't you love a filter that can adjust score based on the user name? Anything posted by John Carmack gets an automatic +3, and anything posted by steveha gets an automatic -2. You ought to be able to read a really cool article, and click on a button to assign a bonus or penalty based on the user name who wrote it. And of course you should be able to use a regular expression in the user name; I remember a while back when some idiot kept creating new accounts and posting under them: "PenisBirdGreen", "PenisBirdBlue", "PenisBirdBlack", etc. etc. I would have been grateful for the ability to auto-moderate any post from a user whose name includes "PenisBird", or for that matter any post whose signature included the string "PenisBird".

    My only fear is that all these fancy features, running on the server, will drive up the server load even worse for Slashdot. Maybe you should only get these features if you are a paid subscriber.

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
  253. I could go on at length, but I won't by Laplace · · Score: 2
    Just to shut down the conspiracy theorists, nobody is forcing us to make these changes: The navbar. The new ad formats. The subscription system. I could just say 'No' to changes like these. But Slashdot is now four years old ... and I want it to still be here four years from now. I hope you can understand the expensive reality associated with making this site happen every day for a quarter of a million readers.

    Keep making changes like this and Slashdot won't be here four years from now.

    --
    The middle mind speaks!
  254. Junkbuster no more! by blackcat4 · · Score: 2

    I've been reading slashdot for years now through junkbuster to get rid of the annoying ads. I always feel a little guilty for doing so but really can't stand the flashing, cycling, obnoxious ads. If slashdot offers a subscription service to remove the ads, I'll gladly sign up. Finally there will be a way to _not_ see the ads and _not_ free load.

  255. Hi, how are you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I send you this penis bird to get your advice:

    <O
    ( \
    X
    8===D

    See you later. Thanks.

  256. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Aren't hosts files much slower than, say, junkbuster?

  257. Why I used to post AC by uberdave · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I used to post AC because all of the nicknames I tried to come up with were already taken. I don't use foul language in my posts, nor do I fan any of the flame wars. I always try to be insightful, or humourous, or contributory in some way. I've had some of my AC posts get modded up to +3.

    I think that it is a shame that many useful posts get missed just because someone was either too lazy to log in, had forgotten their password, was on another machine, or (like me) lacked enough imagination to come up with a cool nickname.

    ACs should post at 0. If a comment gets modded up or down it should be because of it's content, not because someone is anonymous.

    (Actually, Slashdot was anoying there for a while because the defaults were ACs post at -1 but read at 0... I couldn't read my own posts.)

  258. Money Making Oppertuniti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot would be smart to create a freelance section similar to elance.com. The type of people who come here and that fact that at least 5% of them know whats going in technical areas means that money could be made by shaving off a slice for the andover fund.

    thanks

  259. Here's an idea... by espilce · · Score: 1

    Most of the posts have been focusing on ways to get people to pay for content either already available on the site, or for some added goodies. I think a much better plan than just charging for functionality or information is to think up something tangible that people want to buy (this might get in the way of ThinkGeek, but oh well). Zophar's Domain tried this recently by opening the "ZD Store" from where they sell video games and accessories. This store is pretty much run by one person from his home, and they seem to be generating some decent revenue. This is because they have been able to sell their goods at same as retail or even a little cheaper, and their users would much rather spend the same amount of money or less, and at the same time support a good web site, instead of supporting a shitty retail chain like circuit city or worst buy.

    So I guess what the people at slashdot need to do is figure out what we want to buy from them (and there's only one way to find that out, isn't there? tell them!). Maybe something like "type up a letter to someone in the US government regarding (insert current way we are being fucked over) and for 5 bucks slashdot will snail mail it to them." Not only do you support slashdot, you support its cause, and you never even have to get your ass out of your chair.

    they could also sell standard stuff like T-Shirts (I'd buy a "Fuck the RIAA!" (or DMCA,MPAA,SSSCA, whatever) shirt), pins, mugs, bumper stickers, whatever else you people tend to waste your excess money on.

    another idea is to donate money to slashdot to keep them running, and slashdot will donate a portion of that to various organizations like the ACLU, etc.

    just a few thoughts that might be helpful, I figured they were much needed since other slashdotters tend to enjoy bitching about this well maintained, FREE ACCESS web site than thinking up ways to keep it going.

    --
    :q!
    1. Re:Here's an idea... by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 2

      That hasn't worked and will never work - people will go to a few selected sites where they know they can find good prices and a large number of products when they're interested in purchasing something. ThinkGeek would be the place to go when someone wanted to buy geek T-shirts, Amazon the one for books, price comparison sites for electronics... It's nonsense to offer products for sale to an audience not interested in buying anything at the moment (and I don't want to buy stuff when I read news online - and when I do want to buy something, I want to do it consciously).

      --
      "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  260. ARRRRRGH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    No! If you delete cookies, they come back. This is a BAD BAD BAD BAD BAD idea.

    Sorry.

  261. Ironic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I find it extremely ironic that the "I want everything for free" crowd seems willing to pay for Slashdot.

  262. Use popup when moderating by Kraft · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seeing everything from modding ads to new payments schemes has been discussed today, I will add my tiny suggestion for improving slashdot.

    When I am a moderator, I find the pull-down mod system terrible. I like modding, but I don't want to spend all day on it. What sux is this: I view a story, see a good post and change the pull-down to "interesting". However, I don't want to go aaaaall the way down to click "moderate", because it takes 2-3 seconds of my life for the page to reload - and then I can't find where I got in the text. So I keep reading, just in case I spot another mod worthy post. If I see a sub-thread which isn't expanded, I can't go in there, cuz then the uncached page would forget the post I wanted to mod when I go back. Too often I end up going on a mod rampage, and just mod down trolls, but I would really prefer just to immidiatly vote for a post I saw, without getting disrupted.

    Any solutions? You bet! If you check out half-empty, the solution chosen there is simply a small button or link for every vote option. Click on any of them and a little window opens in the background, which handles the modding. It's beautifully simple and solves all the problems mentioned here. It even stimulates modding.

    --

    -Kraft
    Live and let live
    1. Re:Use popup when moderating by srvivn21 · · Score: 1

      Here's another possible solution: right click on the comment number of the post that you want to moderate, and open it in a new window. When I see a thread that isn't expanded, but I think there might be something of interest in it, that's what I do. I with you, in that I hate loosing my place in a thread.

      I havevn't been a member of Slashdot long enough to have the honor of moderation (but I do Mete-moderate every day that I am on), so I don't know if this would work. If it obviously doesn't work (but I can't see that, as I haven't seen the moderation method), I'm sorry for wasting your time.

  263. No---really by Hugonz · · Score: 1

    No, really. Gimme a PayPal option (I live in Mexico) and I'll gladly pay for /.

    But I sincerely will hope the site gets even better...

    Hugo

    250 000 hits * 10 USD = 2.5 MILLIONS!!!!!!!

    1. Re:No---really by PinkFloyd · · Score: 1

      Rather than waiting to pay for slashdot, why not just make sure you always click the banner at the top of the page? And encourage your friends to do so. It's a much faster way to generate income for the slashfolks.

      --

      The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face.
  264. How long before you are selling karma? by Mike+Connell · · Score: 2

    Yes, the cat has got my tongue.

  265. It's not so simple by poemofatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    because the internet is a cooperative network. For instance, say a site wants to do business on the web. They want you to visit, but they don't pay for the cables or the routers or for your hardware or connectivity costs. They pay for their own bandwidth and you pay for your bandwidth to visit them. Both sides are already paying money to be able to visit the site. So there's no clear line between between who pays for whose real cost.

    Same with viewing a site. Your user agent may or may not display (using your cpu cycles/monitor,etc.) exactly what the publisher wants you to see. It all relies on cooperation. Now this is very different from other business models, and so people get upset when a site changes its formats. Why? because they are not involved. They don't know what is a real operating expense and what is a plan to pay for unwanted expansion. maybe they'd rather have the site load slower and charge less, or maybe they want lighting speed at a premium. We dont see any expense reports or business plans and have no control over the future of the site. It's as if a partner suddenly changed the rules of the game without consulting you. That's fine in a brick and mortar world where you take it or leave it, but on the net it doesn't work, since I can always tell my user agent to not display the crappy iframes. My hope is that there's a chance that those sites which involve viewers and give them some control over site development/business plans/ subscription rates will have an audience of cooperative visitors. Others will get their ads blocked. But the consideration has to be earned in any case, and does not follow just because the webmaster really really wants you to view the ads.

    --

    When in doubt, have a man come through a door with a gun in his hand.

  266. Damnit . . . It's /voluntary/! by himi · · Score: 2

    The -2 for funny moderations won't be site-wide, it'll be user specific. /You/ get to choose whether or not to do it, it's not forced on you.

    Go back and reread his post before you start coming up with crap like this.

    --

    My very own DeCSS mirror.
  267. No fucking shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus Christ on a Pogo-Stick, some people are dense!

  268. Already adfree, but will subscribe by kris · · Score: 2

    Being a webwasher user for several years now, Slashdot already is adfree for me and always has been, as has the rest of the internet. In fact, with icons turned off and Konquerors superfast table rendering, the site is completely text based and fast as hell for me.

    Still I like the idea of a subscription system and I certainly will subscribe if the fee is reasonable. Also, I would like to see unobtrusive, nonblinking, nonanimated text ads that are related to the article category and me preferences somehow. Do the Google thing, be nonstupid.

  269. Re:Spelling? (you must be kidding) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus! Like your work is in perfect order all the time.

    I sincerely hate people like u, congrats.

  270. These phone charges are outrageous. by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 2

    After all, I make and receive phone calls.
    It's about time these phone companies stopped charging and started asking for donations I feel.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  271. ^^^^^^^^JOKE^^^^^^^^ up here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    LOL, but this joke escapes the vast majority. Too bad

  272. Simple rule. by Mathness · · Score: 1

    If I see an ad for something, I simply make a mental note to never buy it.

    Case in point: McD, haven't been there since 1991.

    --
    Carbon based humanoid in training.
    1. Re:Simple rule. by kramit · · Score: 1

      You do not like any ads anywhere?

      This is an issue I have thought about and discussed with my wife on many occasions. My gut feeling is that for the most part, I like ads. Ads (attempt to) pay for content and keep things somewhat free.

      Now, I go the other way on spamvertisements. I WILL NOT purchase anything spamvertised. HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE.

      But, with out commercials, there would be no broadcast TV as we know it today. Ads on web pages are supposed to serve the same purpose. The verdict seems to still be out on if it works, but the current numbers say they do not (at least to the same level as TV commercials).

      In general, I tend to ignore MOST ads on web pages unless something REALLY gets my attention, which is rare.

      BUT, guess what site I tend to click the most ad banners on? Slashdot. The ads here are very targeted and at least for me, tend to get my attention more times than not (Penguin Computing 1U Servers). And guess what? I like them! They are ads that I feel good about clicking and possibly making purchases (Free Dimitry Tshirts, RackSpace.com).

      (For the record, one non geek ad on news.com has gotten my attention and mouse movement more than once and it was one of the worst of all kinds of ads, a flash ad. The Absolute Vodka ad. Slick. Real slick. Then again, I also willingly watch Jack in the Box commercials instead of skipping them with my Tivo)

      And I think that is the trick. When ads can be so well targeted that they can in some ways be usefull content, they can actually add to the experience and not detract from it. Personally, I would not complain if there were a bunch of ads here for nifty gadgets and other things I would already be interested in purchasing (DVR's, Mp3 players, Compaq PDA's running Linux).

      Then again, if we start seeing nothing but porn banners, Ads for national gym chains, VA Linux, The Backstreet Boys, and links to classmates.com, there will be a lot of people quickly installing ad filtration software.

      My wife and I have argued many times about the place of ads in our society. I used to tease her that if MS made an offer, I would let them plaster my car in exchange for car payments when I was still paying for it. She would snarl her nose and look at me if I was insane.

      Not much time later, there were articles in the paper about 'car wraps' where many owners of NewBeatles where getting paid the equivelent of new car payments for allowing their cars to be plastered with Yahoo! logos. (Funny thing, she seemed to like most of the wrap jobs we saw on the streets, but she still says having a baby tatooed with an ad in exchange for its college tuition is a no no).

      I do wonder how far it could go and how bad it would be if it did. Could ads possibly subsidize goverment services the way SinTaxes subsidize state taxes in Nevada? Could wrapped city buildings and police cars lower our taxes? And would we want to live in a world where we could not blink with out seeing yet another advertisement.

      All I do know is that from past experience around here, the slashdot crew will most likely set a good example for everyone in the way that they handle the ads. I hope to enjoy them as much in the future as I have in the past.

      -----Kermit
      Brought to you by the Microsoft Natural Keyboard Pro

    2. Re:Simple rule. by tdye · · Score: 2

      How do you wash your clothes?
      Or your body for that matter...
      What do you eat?

      Absolutes are always dumb!

    3. Re:Simple rule. by Mathness · · Score: 1

      Not all products have ads.

      Take "Netto" (a Danish chain of stores), most of what they sell never have ads, and therefore is more inexpensive, than most other stores.

      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
    4. Re:Simple rule. by Mathness · · Score: 1

      I have nothing against ads. As long as they stay out of the context of what I am reading. Banners at the top of the page are ok, but in the text is just plain annoying.

      I think TV would have been better without ads, most of the channels with commercials interrupt the flow of the program/movie. The programs which tend to build the show around ad breaks, are even worse.

      I gave my television set away a couple of years ago, I found TV to be a waste of my time, and I have never regretted it. And no I don't have a radio either. I can find what I need to know on the Internet, and the occasionally newspaper.

      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
    5. Re:Simple rule. by Schpoonk · · Score: 1

      True, but to be honest, I'd rather get 20 pop-ups per click than buy all my food from Netto. The last time there was a vegetable in Netto, it resigned.

      --
      www.onlinescam.com - May contain nuts
  273. ISAGN by rasilon · · Score: 1

    for www.isthisadcrapornot.com

  274. I want 'funny' things modded by yatest5 · · Score: 1

    down, because I'm a miserable fucker who can't get laid.

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37
  275. GUIDESCOPE is the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Screw Junkbuster... Guidescope is an Active Ad removal system based on Junkbuster... Get that at http://www.guidescope.com/ *Nix and Windows supported.

  276. filters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh my god... how are you going to implement the filters? there must be a hunderds of them.....

  277. Taco by ozbon · · Score: 1

    My personal feelings on this are that Taco's been damn good to at least tell us what's going on.

    Yeah, the advertising changes suck, but there'll be the option to subscribe, and get rid of them. I'll do that - I don't paying a reasonable amount to keep Slashdot up and running, and if the sub helps (as well as taking out the bloody ads! :) ) then I'm all for it.

    I think that probably these changes will be for the better in the long run - however, /. is no different from any other community, it hates change, and will always be part of the "The old way was better" mindset when it comes to the /. site - considering we're supposed to be all geeks and interested in the way the web develops, wouldn't it be better to say "Ok, we'll give it the benefit of the doubt, see how it goes, whether it develops or not" before flaming the hell out of it?

    Anyway, that's my viewpoint - like it or not.

    --
    I say we take off and nuke it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure...
  278. a few comments... by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ... from someone operating a web site with ~ 8 mil. PIs/month:
    • AFAIK it's true that most sites with significant traffic have a hard time selling even 10% of their ad space
    • it makes no sense to drown your users in banners that aren't even paid - just show an empty banner code so that they don't need to use WebWasher etc. on your site if they don't mind 5% or 10% of the pages having banners
    • click-through rates can be 5% with Google's system - it's important to learn from this: low cost, cost-effective, very targeted - that's the future. Try to offer a system for your customers that can be effective with a very low initial cost (e.g. a simple system to buy ad space only on pages in the Apache section). Offer text-based ads the greedy, short-sighted users who want everything for free and no ads too can't remove easily.
    • before you do it secretly, offer it as a service: "advertorials", paid news items for selected customers. Don't accept just anything, but new hardware etc. released by some companies can just as well be announced in a manner that earns slashdot a few dollars. It's not as if users didn't suspect the slashdot staff getting paid for some of the articles anyway.
    • subscriptions are what everyone who operates a large web site wants , but don't do it alone. Get a few other interesting sites for the same audience together and offer a "premium" package with some extra content first (web mail, notification service, no ads, whatever).
    • don't laugh: advertisers still have an obscure obsession with paper, so if you can provide content that can be printed without looking too silly, do it. Slashdot could have a monthly issue printed with the submitted articles and a few links and sell it together with a CD containing all the comments for that month and a few goodies (the latest Mozilla, updated Debian packages, security announcements, whatever). It's not a big investment (keep it that way!).
    And, do it at your own risk. :-)
    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
  279. Funny posts by stud9920 · · Score: 1
    I'd personally like to assign a -2 penalty on any comment rated 'funny' because most of them frankly just aren't funny at all
    Well I guess moderators will have to give me a (+5,Funny) in order for the "+3" readers to read this...
  280. Avantslash - a plug by Mr_Silver · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Well since this seems to be the best place to plug it, I'm going to do so with AvantSlash.

    AvantSlash allows you to read Slashdot on your Palm or WinCE device through AvantGo.

    You could point Avantgo directly at the slashdot website, but you'll find that due to the sheer mass of links, your limit will be reached pretty quickly. You could point Avantgo at the palm version of Slashdot at http://www.slashdot.org/palm but it has a number of problems. Here is what Scott Tringali had to say about it on kuro5hin:

    First of all, this is a great example of how not to write a Palm version of the site, and here's why. Offline readers depend on "link-depth" to traverse a site. However, their Palm version breaks each story into a random number of small chunks. So, you can't just page-down to read a long story or a bunch of comments- you have to click on lots and lots of links. A real pain. Lots of small links makes sense on a slow online connection, but it's awful when you have more bandwidth available, as your desktop PC or an offline browser.

    Additionally, it's restricted to 10 comments, not a threshold. That's boring. I'm sitting here in Jiffy Lube picking my nose, I wanna read some funny trolls and flamewars!

    Finally, using /. in "light" mode doesn't work either. There are too many useless links on the front page. I don't care about the advertising or the FAQ or all the other stuff: I want the stories and the comments. Basically, the readers I use so far have no way to "prune" sections of the tree you don't care about. This causes the site to be gigantic and not fit into the paltry 8MB of your typical handheld, or, it fits, but it so big as to detract from its usefulness.

    Finally, someone did the right thing: AvantSlash takes the page, filters out all the crap you don't care about, and doesn't break it up into a thousand chunks so it's readable.

    If you're interesting in downloading avantslash or can provide a public URL for others to use, please check out http://www.custard.org/~richard/avantslash

    Thanks for listening.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    1. Re:Avantslash - a plug by jamie · · Score: 3, Interesting
      AvantSlash apparently crawls the site in a very unfriendly manner and its server (or the public one that we know about anyway got itself IP-banned for that. We tolerate robots as long as they're nice, gentle robots.

      We're always interested in making our site more readable on different platforms. There's some good criticisms in the above comment. We need the suggestions to be more specific if we're going to address the issue.

      Better yet, send us patches -- this code is open-source you know. Normally, we'd take a look at how popular those pages are, decide where it goes on our priority list, and when we get to it we'll get to it. But if someone sends us well-commented patches and explains why they're an improvement so even our mostly-non-Palm-using little brains can understand, this'll get bumped a lot higher on our priority list.

    2. Re:Avantslash - a plug by Mr_Silver · · Score: 2
      AvantSlash apparently crawls the site in a very unfriendly manner and its server (or the public one that we know about anyway got itself IP-banned for that. We tolerate robots as long as they're nice, gentle robots. We're always interested in making our site more readable on different platforms. There's some good criticisms in the above comment. We need the suggestions to be more specific if we're going to address the issue.

      Hi, I looked into this. I think that part of the problem was because the older version (1.4 and less) didn't use cache-control properly to ensure that pages weren't crawled when they were already pretty fresh.

      v2.0 solves this problem and is rewritten from scratch. Although the owner of the site hasn't updated the code despite repeated efforts to contact him.

      However, if you're talking about the way pages are pulled then this is not down to Avantslash. It simply takes a request for a /. url, grabs it, reformats it and then sends it back to Avantgo. The actual decision of what pages to visit is down to Avantgo and not Avantslash.

      Finally, whilst I'm an advocate of open source I don't have the skills or the understanding to just be able to sit down and hack out a patch to fix the multitude of problems with the palm version of slashdot.

      If I had a couple of months of free time to sit down, install the code, set up a bunch of test pages, figure out how it works and then generate a patch then I would, however things like job, beer and women tend to stop that sort of thing!

      Don't get me wrong, open source is great. But the myth that on massive projects people can just dip in and submit a bunch of changes without knowing how the code works, is just that.

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  281. Subscription Service by hoofie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I work for a company who's primary business is more and more based on providing web content. We have a mixed free/subscription service (20%/80%). Our model is not the same as Slashdot in that we provide a lot of our own content and our target market is rich (i.e. Lawyers). No subscription gets you news and some basic information. Subscription payment gets you full customisation rights, protected content and even specialised linking to our material.

    Business websites are VERY expensive to run - ask anyone who has been in the IT business for long enough - and slashdot is part of a company, like it or not, and there is no way on gods earth Slashdot makes any money.

    If Slashdot needs larger ads, big deal - its still free so stop complaining. If you REALLY don't like it, then go and start your own Slashdot.

    However if you want to start charging for a subscription, you have to then offer some kind of content which is UNIQUE to paying subscribers, and that means authoring your own content. Otherwise, whats the point of paying to see re-hashed material ?

  282. A sad day by jmce · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These are very sad news to read in the morning. With very few exceptions, I have been a daily Slashdot user for a very long time, perhaps from almost the beginning. I have recommended it to lots of others. I have regarded Slashdot with a level of respect difficult to describe. I have participated as editor in one of the many slashdot-inspired fora.

    Today I wake up and become afraid that soon the cluetrain may not stop here any more.

    Yes, I am aware that getting advertisers is not as easy as it once was. Yes, I am aware that bandwidth is far from free. Could other sources of expense here be replaced by voluntary work? Are we talking about supporting Slashdot survival expenses or about OSDN profit levels? Perhaps OSDN is unable to consider those questions separately. Perhaps Slashdot participants and readers can.

    In spite of all the differences between participants here, there seems to be something very strong which we can call a "Slashdot community". It seems to me something too precious to scatter, and I suggest a lot of reflexion before Slashdot becomes simply another site adopting obnoxious ephemeral fashionable advertising tactics like huge ad images.

    Maybe I am wrong, but my view is that those ads can only be good from the greedy point of view of those interested in short term profit but with no respect for the future of the places where those ads are shown. For those simply buying and selling with no regard for content and communities, huge WWW ads may be the winning strategy of the day. For those with a genuine interest in ensuring the future of a site and its community, I believe the same ad strategy can be suicidal.

    Having started to use Mozilla, I now have the habit of disabling banner ad viewing. But I never considered doing that for Slashdot. In fact, contrary to my practice on other sites (where I automatically ignored the ads even before blocking them), I have even followed your banner ads a lot of times; they worked as specialized ads on a specialized magazine. But do not expect this atitude to remain the same if Slashdot starts using the kind of intrusive ad specimens we have seen at online trade rags. I will certainly try to block them.

    Considering that we are talking about Slashdot, maybe the above (viewing ads now, blocking them later if they become huge) is a common attitude among many of your readers. Yes, perhaps many others do not know how to block ads with proxies or don't have a browser which makes that easier. But can Slashdot afford to alienate those with the minimal "level of technical expertise" needed to block ads?

    Of course I prefer to pay directly for something I consider important than seeing it flooded with ads and (with a false impression of low or zero price) paying through advertisers.But would annoying ads really be the motivating factor for doing this? Maybe yes, maybe no. There is always the risk that what is perceived as the annoying entity is Slashdot itself, not the ads by themselves. And then Slashdot expenses with bandwidth may become lower for a sad reason: less participants. "Participants", not only "readers"; contrary to what a TV ad a few years ago menaced, here in slashdot with some kinds of advertising there will be "a lot less news". And people to read them.

    There is something I once thought of for Slashdot-like fora which could be much more interesting than huge banners, but I do not have a clue about its commercial feasibility: there could be special articles inserted among the normal ones, but clearly marked as beeing payed by advertisers. In these articles a company would say whetever it wanted about its products; they could just contain mindless marketroid speech or (much more appealing to Slashdot participants) interesting technical info about the stuff they are trying to sell. Ideally, one would also be able to comment on these articles as for any others.

    At its best, it would not be advertising-as-usual. It would involve more than an art department and some content-free sentences. But is advertising-as-usual the best way to reach this audience?

    I also hope Slashdot will be here another four years, and many more. I just hope that the expensive reality associated with making this site happen will not become less expensive because of less readers. And, even more important, because of less participants.

    1. Re:A sad day by Armin+Herbert · · Score: 1

      Very impressive statement, I completely agree with it.

      I don't filter ads, but I have no special reason why I don't. I'm surfing the web about 8 hours a day for my work, and I got used to ads. They don't bother me if they aren't huge and don't try to catch my full attention.

      There are only two sites where I look at or even click on the ads: slashdot and german newsticker Heise Online. Both have ads which are informing or sometimes funny.
      I hope /.'s upcoming "new size" will not make me forget about this and ignore the ads. Because then, slashdot will be nothing but just another site full of ads - there are lots of them, I don't need another one.

      In german language there's a saying: "Fewer is often more". I think this will also apply to your advertising revenues.

  283. Navbar is OK. by vandan · · Score: 1

    I don't see the problem myself. It's small. It's useful. You can turn it off.
    Actually, I'd even ask: can we have an option to make it hover at the top instead of scrolling off the page?
    Other changes are OK too. I would rather see Slashdot get a bit more commercial than non-existant.
    Crank on!

  284. Where are the figures?? by musicmaster · · Score: 1

    I miss any figures. It is difficult to talk about money when Commander Taco only talks about it in general terms. Would it be possible to be a bit more specific? For example: how many people have a job at Slashdot?

    The big square advertisings that Taco wants to add puzzle me. The homepage has a format where such adds would destroy the layout. And the pages with the comments are simply too big for such advertisement to have much effect.

    1. Re:Where are the figures?? by omega9 · · Score: 1

      See, now you're starting to take this in a direction that several others are. You're acting like you have a vested personal interest in the inner workings of Slashdot. To be quite frank about it, it's not the business of anyone here how many, or who, is employed by Slashdot. In fact, you're pushing it to far in the wrong direction.

      We, as readers, visit this site for news, community, and silly humor without paying a cent to Slashdot. Well, personaly I have purchased several things at ThinkGeek which I discovered first through Slashdot banner ads, and would like to hope that Slashdot sees some revenue out of that. But for the most part, we essentially show up here and do what we want and get pissed if it doesn't work.

      Now suddenly the idea of subscriptions comes up and you feel entitled to know who exactly is employed and what their daily expenses are. What are you, a fucking share-holder? No, you're the complete opposite. You come by and take (read) all the time, and only give (post) when you feel like it. Tell me, what is it that makes you think you deserve this site on your terms?

      We're all starting to look like a bunch of idiots. We're so proud of ourselves preaching about open-source, free software, open standards; but none of us seem to embrace it as a true lifestyle, only when it means we can get free software. Wasn't one of the dreams to "start our own web site, and what if we could make money from it!"? Now some of us have gone and done it, but since they're not doing it the way we want well we'll just tell them who's boss.

      $20/year? Hell, I'll give up more then that to keep /. alive. How much is it worth to you?

      --
      I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it.
    2. Re:Where are the figures?? by hether · · Score: 1

      Poor reading comprehension. It said:

      Currently we have the standard banner size on top of all pages, but soon the article pages will instead have those huge square things that you see on CNet or ZD.

      Let me repeat - the article pages will have the new ads. This sentence giving the impression that this will not change the layout of the front page.

      --

      Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.
  285. Slashdot self-sufficient ? by juha0 · · Score: 1

    Most interesting news in Slashdot seems to be about Slashdot.

  286. Change is good. by Anton+Anatopopov · · Score: 1
    Change is a good thing. Too many people don't like progress. I remember when slashdot didn't have any ads at all. But the quality of the site was still as good as it is now.

    Everyone knows bandwidth is not free. We should all realise that someone has to create the content that we consume.

    Now, I am not sure whether a subscription scheme is a good idea or not, but surely most people will not have a problem with bigger ads, since most of us either ignore them, or run one or other of the filtering proxies such as Junkbuster or WebWasher. Let's just hope andover.net don't find a way around that :-)

  287. National Public Slashdot by doggo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Slashdot is one of the few web sites I'd actually pay to read. Even if it still had (unobtrusive) ads after pay. Though I'd prefer that there were none if I pay. (Before you have a stroke and capitalize all your letters flaming: you'll note that you pay for Rolling Stone, and you still get ads. You pay for cable TV and you STILL get ads.)

    Just like NPR, these people gotta make a living. Putting on the Slashdot show costs money. It's gotta come from somewhere. So we pay for a subscription. Big deal.

    A lot of people here spend a lot of energy bitching about what they get for free. They bitch about Linux, They bitch about BSD. They bitch about Slashdot. Frankly, I'm sick of hearing it. I'm grateful for Linux, and being able to get an operating system for free. And I'm grateful for getting as much content (and don't forget slashcode!) and opinion as we get from Slashdot for free.

    So basically, when it comes time to pay, I'll pony it up and hope Taco/Hemos/Cowboy Neal/etc. can take a nice vacation.

    And if the $20.00 a year is so distasteful to you, you can always read this ad-free page.

    1. Re:National Public Slashdot by PinkFloyd · · Score: 1

      <JOKE>
      Just so long as they don't interrupt my /. viewing 4 times a year to do pledge drives like PBS does.. :)
      </JOKE>

      --

      The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face.
  288. Hobby by oddo · · Score: 0

    What you COULD DO is turn it once again into a hobby activity, not something you should expect to make money out of.

    The money from current banner ads should more than enough pay for hosting services.

    Or?

    --
    give me bongo
  289. Re:Spelling? (you must be kidding) by pgpckt · · Score: 2


    My work *isn't* perfect all the time. Then again, my title isn't EDITOR! The editors make mistake after mistake after mistake and I don't believe they are trying. A simple spell check program would go a long way to helping, but the editor's comments often fail to pass even that test. I am sorry you hate people that expect people with the title of editor to actually edit. Call me irrational.

    --
    Lawrence Lessig is my personal hero.
  290. Self-regulating by BillyGoatThree · · Score: 2

    My urge to visit a site is balanced by the frustration at it's speed (among other things). If /. had less bandwidth, only those people who could stand the slow speed would come. And once those other posers are gone the speed would increase again. Attracting more posers but also decreasing the speed repulusing more posers and increasing the speed.

    Self-regulating. If the admins have patience and wish to aim for quality instead of size.

    --
    324006
  291. Sponsored Stories? by yfarren · · Score: 1

    Please dont do this. I have wondered at time if Slashdot already accepts sponsored stories, I am betting it doesnt. I sure hope not.

    I think as soon as you start acception "sponsored" stories you lose at least your percieved journalistic integrety, if not your actual integrity. How far is it till the latest oracle benchmark starts appearing every to week, with oracles happy colors? It gives the editors a bias, which otherwise doesnt exist. Not that the editors arent biased based on thir expirience. Still, their expiriential bias is diffrent than the expirience of getting paid more.

    I accept the need for sponsorship, and am happy to have ads appear as they must to continue running /.. But sponsored stories? It just seems that that would do away with at least the percieved reliability of the site.

  292. 10% bandwith growth... by suss · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slashdot continues to grow: our traffic has increased by like 10% in the last few months

    Did you take the whole WTC disaster (11/9, remember?) into account? I'm betting every news-site has seen this increase (or more!).

  293. Help Slashdot Make Money: Click on a banner ad by rnd() · · Score: 2
    If you want to help Slashdot make money, click on a banner ad.

    This way, Rob and the crew will be able to demonstrate that "ads on Slashdot get clickthroughs" thereby increasing the ads' value and generating revenue for Slashdot.

    --

    Amazing magic tricks

  294. EXACTLY by squaretorus · · Score: 2

    You have a community of people, you are well known, take advantage of it

    This is the truest thing on /. all year. You guys have a bunch of relatively wealthy young dudes and dudettes coming on here everyday. Give me something to buy while Im here that I want, and am willing to pay for.

    I go to the coffee shop for a natter, while Im there I buy coffee. I come here for a natter, but you don't have any coffee - you must have SOMETHING worth selling.

    Do an ASK SLASHDOT about this! What, as well as an eBay or a geek dating service would people pay for??

  295. Well shit... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

    ...isn't there some agency that funds art or journalism? Would it help to go non-profit? Do *all* my tax dollars go to the war against drugs, peer-to-peer computing, and for supporting corrupt regimes overseas?

    Goddamnit...we have to solve this damn problem, and it doesn't look like anybody has any ideas. Is there a number of a dollar amount that can be tossed out? What is slashdot's membership size?

    $/subscribing members == ???

    What about a distributed mirroring technology? I have a T1 at work (I work at a major university) and would be glad to provide what bandwidth I can without being fired (hell, we blow money around here like there's no tomorrow anyway). This has got to end...maybe there needs to be a "United Way" of the net...a big fund that people can contribute to (tax-deductable of course) that keeps decent projects afloat.

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
    1. Re:Well shit... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

      or how about just using the pragma cache directives to tell browsers to cache each page at *least* 15 minutes...so every time I hit the back button it doesn't go to the server again?

      --

      It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  296. Subscriptions: what's realistic by njdj · · Score: 1

    I'd pay $20/year for access to /. , if:

    1. I got totally ad-free pages,

    2. Everybody had to pay for access.

    Is is enough? Are there enough people who agree? /. needs to know.

  297. ...and allow comments by aecolley · · Score: 1

    What a great idea. Also, why not allow the posting of comments about each ad, much like the comments to the /. polls?

    How terrified would advertisers be by the possibility of public criticism (taste, truth, value for money, quality, competition) of their ads being readily available to the ad's audience?

    1. Re:...and allow comments by mikosullivan · · Score: 2
      Cool idea!

      How terrified would advertisers be by the possibility of public criticism

      The good ones might welcome it.

      --
      Miko O'Sullivan
  298. Last nail in /. coffin by Etyenne · · Score: 3, Informative
    The change will be a different ad size on the article page. Currently we have the standard banner size on top of all pages, but soon the article pages will instead have those huge square things that you see on CNet or ZD.

    One word : unacceptable. These make me sick. I can understand the need to make enough money to keep the site going, and that's fine, but nothing is gonna make me endure that. Sorry.

    Maybe I will buy a subscription to disable the ads, but I wonder. The quality has gone down the toilet since Andover had been taken over by VA. Considering these "reorganisation", we can wonder how low /. is gonna go. Who would pay for another ZDNet ? Not me ...

    Now about the replacement :

    • Ars Technica : Good technical stuff, very diversified. Especially, the discussion section, "Ask Slashdot" on steroids.
    • Rootprompt : Unix-only, high volume.
    • Kuro5hin : Less technical but more socially oriented discussion. Very high discussion level (but a bit too US-centric, IMHO).

    Unfortunately, none of these can give me EVERYTHING I want to read at the same place (like /. used to do). I will miss that.

    --
    :wq
  299. Alternatives by LinuxHam · · Score: 2

    I browse with Junkbuster because I've decided that I can do without Slashdot. I like it, but I don't NEED it. It's been fun over the years, but it has degraded. Like the day AO-13 was launched into orbit, the controllers calculated exactly which *day* it would re-enter the earth's atmosphere. And they were right.

    With places like Yahoo! and MSNBC saying "post comments on this article", I think we will all just disperse and find similar functionality elsewhere. The name escapes me right now, but there's a site that specializes in providing free headlines by XML. All you get are clickable URL's to content on other sites. Put the headlines on our own sites, and we'll all get referrer credit with Yahoo.

    --
    Intelligent Life on Earth
    1. Re:Alternatives by PinkFloyd · · Score: 1
      I think you mean moreover.com.

      Alternatively, you can check out XMLTree.com

      --

      The face of a child can say it all, especially the mouth part of the face.
  300. Of Slash and Slashdot by ajs · · Score: 2

    I tried to post earlier, but waited forever on the "preview"....

    There are several things that I think would help Slash and Slashdot, but bottom line: I'm an avid reader and poster. Please keep it going. I'll happily pay up to about 1/3 of what I pay for cable TV. No-brainer. Slashdot is worth it.

  301. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by Sir_Real · · Score: 1

    what do I do with this? Is this in /etc/hosts/deny?

    Sorry... But I can't be the only one who doesn't know how to benefit from this last post... ;)

  302. Re:If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go a by radja · · Score: 2

    >The ads are part of the content.
    No they're not, just like advertisements in newspapers aren't.

    >Hold up your end of the bargain and look at them.
    Bargain? What bargain? and what end? I dont remember signing any contracts. And I'll choose what I look at, just like in real life..

    > If you don't like animated flash or GIFs, complain to Slashdot.
    I don't have flash installed, because I dont like flash. I don't have to complain to /. about that.

    >Don't try and seperate them.
    I also use lynx regularly. then I dont see ANY banners. I guess you'd probably call using lynx 'stealing'

    >if Slashdot expects you to look at ads in return, you should, or don't look at anything all all.
    Good thing /. doesn't expect me to view ads. If it did, it would require one of the graphical browsers.

    //rdj

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  303. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eh?
    You seem to have missed out the gentlemen with the Christmas Islands domain purveying disturbing proctological imagery... ;-)

  304. Monty Python quote correction by cgrayson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's repressed, not oppressed.

    1. Re:Monty Python quote correction by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 2

      ah, I stand corrected. Thanks.

      Maybe it has been said before, I don't know I'm still reading the feedback (800+ comments at 1+, oye).

      It has been pointed out that the moderation system is subject to abuse. True, the same abuse as AC comments at times, but this is the exception, not the rule.

      Personally, I think it is becoming the "rule" at times.

      Look at the system if an AC posts something that is modded as a troll, their account is subject to suspension, posting limits or some such thing.
      Is there any way to point out moderator abuse?
      Nope. Think it does not happen? Heh, I offer my self as an example.
      But lets face it, moderation (and metamoderation) is a thankless job...a fact some of us forget (even stated in the moderator guideline, IIRC) from time to time.

      What I've tried to do is put this in perspective.
      Now as hard as it may be to believe, I a far from perfect. I know, I know, but it is true.

      With that in mind, follow me on this:
      (If there is anything I've omitted or gotten wrong, tell me, I'd love to hear it.)
      Moderation is a thankless job, as I stated before, so, to all the moderators, thank you.
      I mean it, people who moderate keep us coming to slashdot again and again because most moderation is done in an intelligent fashion.

      Like any good manager, I've pointed out what is right, now is time to point out what is wrong.
      The Moderation system ain't broke, it just needs a little fixing. How about limiting the number of mod points for negative scores? say, 5 positive, and 2 negative?

      Metamoderation, thankless job, thanks to metamoderators, too. (I've metamoderated almost every day for years...yet I've been give mod points..what, once? twice?...It was a 'thrill' and a privelage).
      How about before giving mod points you have to metamoderate 5 to 10 times?
      And this is rather obvious, it is silly really, if you go to the metamod page, the names are blanked out, yes? However if you click on the context link...you see the name of the 'person' who made the comment. This also leaves it subject to misuse/abuse.

      If we can refuse to metamoderate, why can't we refuse to be modded up/down/at all?
      Or, at the very least, have the opportunity to say "WOAH" and have the /. crew, or have metamoderation not for just the comments, but for the moderators themselves and the comments they moderate.

      This makes sense to have moderators doing what they do best, or like to do, but with a "safety net" in metamoderation (anyone can do it, correct?) to look and say, "hey, moderatorX, moderates person Y down all the time reguardless of context"...not cool, unless person Y is an obvious troll.

      I don't know really besides "Funny", "over-rated" and perhaps "flamebait"...should be changed to rant, perhaps...all should have a mod total of 0.

      Why? For the simple reason, as CmdrTaco stated, funny is subjective...I agree... subjective opinions should have no value in a moderation system. One could also argue the same about insightful/interesting et al, but "positive" things being argued against seem hollow somehow.

      Now, if you will excuse me, I have to go change my sig, it is incorrect.

      "If I am right. I am right. But, *if* I am wrong, show me I'm wrong"

      --
      Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
  305. How about allowing damn avantgo clients to connect by svallarian · · Score: 1

    I'd be happy if slashdot would quit killing the login for the various avantgo scripts that strip down slashdot into a palm-readable (sizewise) format.

    --
    I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
  306. Web Ad Blocking under Linux/Unix, Be, Mac and Win by Tolomak · · Score: 1



    http://www.ecst.csuchico.edu/~atman/spam/adblock .s html

    http://www.accs-net.com/hosts/get_hosts.html

  307. From the not-helpful department... by Hard_Code · · Score: 2

    ...ok, here's a brilliant suggestion I'm sure nobody has thought of - would merely simplifying the HTML of the site save some precious bandwidth costs? I mean, even if you just shave off a few percent of size on the web pages, wouldn't that save a lot of money? Lowercasing tags is rumored to aid compression too - which brings us to .gz - Netscape at least can unzip/read gzipped files: would the trade off in cpu for dynamically gzipping save money?. How about allowing people to disable what they don't want to see...e.g. I have rarely ever used the whole Sections bar on the left, and don't use most of the other links on the left either. I suppose I could switch to the Lite version, but I'd think even a small reduction of Normal-mode size would lead to a little savings. Hell, halve the topic icons.

    Anyway, that's my non-helpful naive suggestion. Damn, I'm probably just wasting more bandwidth posting this.

    --

    It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
  308. Send me a bill by guibaby · · Score: 1

    Hello am I on the air?

    Oh.

    Long time listener, first time caller. I'd just like to say how much I like your show.

    Just send me a freakin bill for cuttin ou the ads.

    --
    Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels.
  309. Let's fork Slashdot! by Graspee_Leemoor · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I suggest if the hypocritcial /. staff start getting us to pay for slashdot, we do what they would advise us to do if it were software:

    We fork it!

    Someone register www.freeslashdot.org before someone at /. ip squats on it.

    graspee

  310. not at all by hawk · · Score: 2
    > Yet when it comes to other peoples privacy, ie
    > Anonymous Cowards, it's just unacceptable.


    There's absolutely no ontradiction there. Experience (dating to long before slashdot) has shown that someone willing to be identifried generally has far more to say than someone hiding behyind anonymity. There's a *huge* difference between saying that someone shouldn't be able to be anonymous and saying that as a group, they're not worth my time to read. They have no underlying right to *my* time.


    > Things need to work both ways here. Now go ahead and mod me down for
    > "trolling".


    "redundant" would be far more accurate, or "ovverrated." Still, "troll" or "flamebait" would be appropriate for this tired old argument. Best of all, though, would be "karma whore," as the combination of a misstatement of reality, tired old hack, and speculation as to being moderated is another tired old combination . . .


    hawk

  311. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by why-is-it · · Score: 2

    what do I do with this? Is this in /etc/hosts/deny?

    No, it would go in your /etc/hosts file. If you use m$ nt4.0, it goes in c:\winnt40\system32\drivers\etc\hosts
    (Could they have picked a less intuitive directory?)

    Anyways, the way it works is that your system will typically check the hosts file before doing a DNS lookup. So, when the your system trys to load an ad from one of those servers, instead of going to the net to get the ad, it finds a hosts entry and trys to pull the data from the loop back interface (127.0.0.1). Since there is no web server operating at that IP address, it puts whitespace in the place the ad was supposed to go.
    Voila!

    --
    *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
  312. Re:Man, I love calculus by LighthouseJ · · Score: 0

    Wait till you get to second order non-linear coefficient ordinary differential equation...

  313. Why not show an AC's IP if modded way down? by ryandlugosz · · Score: 1

    Here's an idea: Why don't you set it up so that if some AC's post gets modded way down (because of goatse.cx or other flaimbait) their IP address is posted along with their stupid post? I envision a little Special Ops team of slashdotters that would spend all of their free time hacking these peoples' boxen. This little force would eventually convince lamers that they don't want to post stupid shit on \. They would be fuxored if they tried & they'll know it!

    1. Re:Why not show an AC's IP if modded way down? by sulli · · Score: 1

      What a dumb idea. Just wait until Scientology gets a hold of those IPs, or RIAA, or any of the other bad guys we trash on a regular basis. "Anonymous" has to mean "Anonymous!"

      --

      sulli
      RTFJ.
    2. Re:Why not show an AC's IP if modded way down? by ryandlugosz · · Score: 1

      You're missing my point - the IP of an AC would be posted if their post was an abusive one. I agree that people should be able to post completely anonymously if they'd like. The only time this would be used is on abusive posters - i.e. Not flaimbait, but goatse.cx

      The idea here is to have some kind of weapon against the people that are posting with the sole intent of destroying the good conversation. The "Post a Message" page would have a little warning on it that says "you are free to post whatever you'd like, but if you're obviously trying to destroy a conversation we'll post your IP next to your message." The community would be deciding two things here - 1) Is this post an obvious attack on the forum AND 2) Is this serious enough that I'm going to send the script kiddies after this guy.

      All message boards and forums say "your IP is logged" but none of them ever do anything with said log. This is just taking it a step further.

      I know that you could use some sort of proxy to post abusive messages with to avoid having your IP posted, but that inconveniece may be enough of a deterant to cut down on abusive posts.

      -Ryan

    3. Re:Why not show an AC's IP if modded way down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the IP of an AC would be posted if their post was an abusive one.

      then it would be subject to subpoena. I'm still prettiy sure we don't want this feature.

  314. the needed new category by hawk · · Score: 2
    is "just plain wrong," for those wildly factually inaccuratethings that come up on such a regular basis . . .


    hawk

  315. Submitted Story refusal. by Martin+Spamer · · Score: 3, Interesting
    One impovement I'd like to see a reason for the rejection of submitted stories.

    I've submitted about a dozen stories/links over the last year, most have been [IMHO] good quality, and some have been 'Bang On Target', yet I've only had one accepted. e.g.

    2000-10-24 09:13:06 UK Employers gain e-snoop powers today (articles,news) (accepted)
    2001-01-24 11:09:08 Interactive Digital Television casestudy. (articles,tv) (rejected)
    2001-02-28 15:22:44 nCube doubles size of worlds largest VOD System. (articles,news) (rejected)
    2001-03-08 22:15:04 Amazon Security hole (articles,news) (rejected)
    2001-04-09 13:17:24 PS2 & STB Convergence (articles,news) (rejected)
    2001-04-09 13:22:41 Update: PS2/STB Convergence (articles,news) (rejected)
    2001-05-04 13:02:10 'Tractor beam' technology advances (articles,news) (rejected)
    2001-08-24 16:59:15 J2EE vs' .NET (developers,news) (rejected)
    2001-10-11 12:38:02 Microsoft astro-turf EU investigation. (articles,news) (rejected)

    In too many cases (all above) I've also seen a similar story posted within days. So it's not the stories themselves, so why are they being rejected? I think if we've gone to the effort of contributing we deserve at least a basic explaination.

  316. Adds in articles? by Mike+McTernan · · Score: 1

    some sort of subscription system where you can pay a fee to disable them honestly.

    I'm sure that there will be a spate of software that dynamically removes the adds as slashdot passes through a proxy server, if the existing pile of add-blockers don't work already.

    You can't fight the geeks!

    --
    -- Mike
  317. Re:It's funny, but it's true! by ShavenYak · · Score: 1

    You can buy X10 compatible devices at Radio Shack, but I bet X10 still makes money off licensing fees and such.

    --

    Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!
  318. Big ass ASCII banners by yerricde · · Score: 1

    I mostly use lynx while I browse /. so ads aren't a problem for me.

    Now watch Slashdot throw up big ass ASCII banners for users of Lynx, Links, and w3m. Note that this would be asymmetric: they can post ASCII, but you can't because of the lameness filter.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  319. Missing the point by volpe · · Score: 2

    We already "pay" for the site by submitting content!


    Yes, but Slashdot can not exactly use that content to barter with the electric company, the ISP, the hard drive vendor, etc...

  320. Inevitable by Paul+Ferris+(chromev · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The cost of hosting a fairly small web site is pretty cheap (approaching free, but not, of course).

    The cost of hosting and running something like Slashdot.org is way more than a lot of people are willing to admit to. Banner advertising might work, but from personal experience, I can tell you it ain't always enough. Worse, it can lead to tempatations from what I've seen.

    Let's just say that it's time we grew up. Those of us who grew up without the web remember getting two types of magazines -- Free ones (trade rags) and subscription ones (going the route of the dinosaur). The really expensive ones were sometimes the best. The trade rags -- do I need to remind people what kind of dross was found in them?!? Crappy reviews and huge payola were often the norm. A rare voice like Nicholas Petreley could be found from time to time.

    Why do a lot of people fail to realize that some things are going to be worth paying for? We like to think that advertising will just do it, but the God's honest truth is that it's just not doing it. It might be different if web advertising were more intrusive (like TV advertising, for example) -- but it's _not_ -- it's one of the things that makes surfing the web a pleasurable experience. If we had to watch (even catchy) flash movies every time we tuned into a web site, we'd freak.

    CmdrTaco, Hemos -- I applaud your bravery, and I'll consider the cost of your ad-removal. Oh, and thanks for Slashdot.Org and your hard work.

    --Paul Ferris

  321. How much does Slashdot actually 'cost' to run? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it meant to be a 'for profit' or 'for the hellavit' org?

  322. One Voice by Outland+Traveller · · Score: 2

    This story seems like it's asking for opinions, so I hope no one will mind too much if mine happen to be redundant.

    I know that someone else has probably said all these things, but I don't have moderator points ans so I can't emphasize the ones that I feel are important.

    - One thing I'd really like to see, more than new features and new advertisements, is better stability. It seems that every other day I reload slashdot and get the generic page instead of the one I've customized in my user settings. Eventually if I keep reloading I get my custom page. This started happening two months ago and has been an ongoing problem ever since on ALL the machines I browse slashdot from, regardless of their internet bandwidth. If bandwidth is the issue, then reduce the complexity of the html and find technical ways of speeding up the dynamic code.

    - Putting more obnoxious advertisements in front of people is a terrible idea. If you need to raise money do some creative (or even not-so-creative) fundraising. There is still a ".org" in slashdot. Since slashdot has traditionally been a community site instead of the usual corporate media outlet, why not try typical community forms of fundraising such as pledges (with hat and T-shirt prizes), donors, etc. Reward people for their generosity by keeping up a list of donors at various levels like libraries do. I have to admit that if slashdot wants to behave like C-net, I'll probably start looking elsewhere. I know that slashdot is owned by a public company, but that doesn't mean that it can't have a concept of "we're doing good enough". Too many companies kill themselves trying to grow beyond their natural market instead of serving it.

    - Sticking more ads in front of people (especially this audience) is simply going to increase ad filtering.

    - I don't have anything against subscriptions for no ads at all, but I'm against increasing the amount of ads for non-subscribers.

  323. CSS crashes Netscape 4.x by yerricde · · Score: 1

    bloat, most of which could be removed by taking look-and-feel instructions out of the HTML and placing them into stylesheets.

    Kuro5hin's readers discussed doing something similar but rejected it because not only does Netscape 4.x not render CSS unless you have popup ads turned on, but it also crashes when fed some perfectly valid CSS. Many of Slashdot's readers do not have a powerful enough computer to run Mozilla or Konqueror.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  324. Why /. can't learn from Google by ubernostrum · · Score: 1

    Yes, Google does display ads on their site, but Google also makes money from licensing their engine to people (how else do you pay for ~8,000 boxen and billions of hits? Not with ads.)...with Slashdot that's not possible because the code is free.

  325. Ads by hether · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IMO, the new ads will be no problem as long as:

    - the ads remain relevant to the site like they are now. I actually click on these. I'd say /. is the probably the only site where I regularly take notice of and even respond to ads.

    - the ads stay in one place on the screen so eventually they scroll off. I abhor the new flash ads that float around the screen, make noises, follow your cursor, etc. Ads that scroll with a page are bad enough, but when they take over my computer that's pretty damn unacceptable. For examples of what NOT to do, check out scifi.com, especially on their message boards.

    As for the new bar at the top, perfectly fine! Doesn't get in the way, not too ugly, and could even be useful.

    As for a subscription, I would pay, but not anything more than a few dollars a month. I would be more responsive to a place where I can donate when I have the money. As one other person mentioned, if you had a pledge drive, like NPR or PBS, I think you may find you'd have enough dough to scrap your new ad plan and even take a nice vacation.

    --

    Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.
  326. .25 million? by glowingspleen · · Score: 2

    Is it just me, or is that a low number? I really suspected a LOT more users than that...and yes, taking into consideration that not everyone creates an account...

    But wow, I would expect more esp. knowing the power of the /. effect.

  327. Slashdot = Ads = More Slashdot? Sounds good to me! by bluephone · · Score: 1
    Sure, I'm not FOND of ads, but I sure as hell an fond of my daily /. so I'm more than willing to put up with some ads. Maybe more readers should try to look at things from CmdrTaco's point of view. This place costs MONEY. Today, that money stuff is harder to come by. So we deal with some ads. We get the same thing on TV. We'll live with it.

    Keep up the good work guys. Just ignore all the whiners.

    --
    jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
  328. Re:How much? Nothing! Details inside. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone know where Opera gets it's ads from, or how to find out? I find that webwasher et al filter about 50% of the free Opera ads, but I don't know how to figure out (easily) the IPs for those that get through.

  329. Anonymous Cowards by Syberghost · · Score: 2

    You should make it so that ACs are -1, UNLESS the post has been moderated up, in which case it'd be shown as it's true rating.

    That option would allow AC posting to do what it is supposed to do (allow people to post information that could get them in trouble) while still allowing us to filter the jackasses.

  330. Revenue by Alsee · · Score: 1

    If you want to make money on the internet, do it the same way as everyone else. Sell pr0n.

    Heck, you've got the perfect demographic. Who buys more pr0n than Net-geeks?

    P.S.
    Be sure you include an extensive Redhead collection!

    --
    - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  331. OT: mail services by kiwaiti · · Score: 1
    This is a great idea. I would pay a yearly fee for a web-configurable forward that would allow me to forward someaccount@slashdot.org to whatever email address I was reading that week. I have yet to find a reliable web service to do this.

    Did you look? There are services that do this for free, and reliable, too. I've been using www.gmx.net for ages, they've got a huge market share in .de (so they need to have some infrastructure) and only once did they lose mail stored there (well, that's once too many, but you said you just want a forwarder, which they provide).

    Of course, they don't give you an @slashdot.org address, which would still be a nice idea :o)

    Kiwaiti

    --
    Member of the Legion Of Microsoft Haters
  332. Re: Paying for _communism_ by dollargonzo · · Score: 1

    hmm, interesting scenerio indeed, as yuo mentioned; however yuor division of resources is rather inappropriate. You are saying that good posters (namely people that are involved, and spend time and contribute to the community), should get a reduction in price / number of banners they see; and that people who are legitimate users (not ACs) that post @ -1 and the like...who dont contribute much...should get full price? it seems to me that those users will not CARE about the banners at all, and the subscription will end up being rather pointless anyway. ppl need to come up with something that generates profit NOT by inconvenience (as banner ads are) but BY want / need. If /. used any of the 10^google business tactics to sell ppl stuff or get them to pay $$ because they WANT to, then the community will benefit.

    On the other hand, look where communism turned out? *cough* the moto is "we pretend to work and they pretend to pay us"... the community thrives on ppl working and contributing to it (essentially the size etc. of /. ), but gets its $$ from ....wait a minute: what money!!!! the community's profits recirculate into the PLANNED economy to continue survival of the system. as soon as the communists realized that they needed actaul MONEY instead of just community labor, stable inflation went to hell, and the ruble went to hell too, resulting in the end of communism.

    /. is the same...the ppl running the site are realizing that they need actual money to survive, so they start charging people for random ammenities, such as relief of the system's pressure, aka the larger banners. (sounds to me like tax reduction for helping the government). the ppl running the site need to either suck it up and continue with their very useful and so far effective, community practices, or get what they have coming-- think 1991.

    --
    BSD is for people who love UNIX. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft.
  333. Toolbar by sulli · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Am I the only one on /. who actually likes it? It puts Search in an easily accessible place, which can't be bad.

    Now what I would like is a customizable toolbar, a la the slashboxes. That way the trolls could have a link straight to goatse.cx at the top, and I could add some other OSDN and/or news sites I like to read - could be useful.

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Toolbar by gooberguy · · Score: 1
      I couldn't even find the search box until I finally looked near the banner ad, which most people ignore.
      I bet the next ./ poll will be:

      How much do you want to pay for ./ per month?
      • $.50-1
      • $1-2
      • $2-5
      • $C0W80YN347


      D/\ Gooberguy
      --


      Karma: Meh (Mostly from meh.)
    2. Re:Toolbar by andy@petdance.com · · Score: 2
      How much do you want to pay for ./ per month?

      None! It should be free! I've always had it for free, and I expect it should always be so!

      Why should I have to pay for my current directory?

    3. Re:Toolbar by zonker · · Score: 0

      i personally don't mind it there, but as for a search box, Opera has one right in the browser. check it out...

  334. Corporate Subsidiary Slashdot by kels · · Score: 1

    I give money to NPR because they are a nonprofit corporation that I am happy to support. I am not going to donate money to a for-profit corporation out of the goodness of my heart. If the shareholders of VA Linux want to make a profit from me, they will have to provide me with a service that I am willing to pay for, not come around jingling a cup twice a year to beg for money.

    I can see the donation model working to support the expenses and personnel of a non-profit website, but it's not a very good business model for a corporate one, which is what /. is now. Why would anyone want to "donate" money to stockholders? Value-added subscriptions are another thing entirely. I can't say that I like them, but I would pay for one that I saw was valuable enough (though I've pretty much stopped reading Salon since most of their news went subscription only).

    --
    "I believe that the cult of the particular brings only death - for it bases order on likeness." St.-Exupery
  335. the banners the colors by sewagemaster · · Score: 1

    will the new banners have the turquoise color that matches with everything else in this awesome-colored-themed site? ;-)

  336. Keeping /. alive: several thoughts by CodeShark · · Score: 1
    Hopefully by the time I post this, at least part of it won't be too redundant, but here goes anyway:
    1. Hopefully being a subscriber would have some little perks, but I would be glad to subscribe to /. anyway, because I ignore probably 95% of the banner ads which I see, which means that 95% of the page views I am getting aren't making money for CmdrTaco and crew who have put together a hellofa good site.
    2. I would also be happy to fill out some kind of preferences survey so that the folks selling the click throughs at OSDN can get more $ per. For example, if my preferences show that I always ignore X banners, but often click on Y banners, I make $$/yr, etc., then an advertiser whose banner I do see and click through has already got a higher likelihood of a buy, so they should pay more for the click.

      If the banners are served by a different machine than the text, a second cookie could store some of these prefs so that all of the OSDN sites I visit should get the same higher value for the click, right?

    3. I would also love to subscribe to a /. magazine, but frankly haven't figured out how the crew could get something like this started without a huge investment in folks to market the ad space, or without taking on additional liability (i.e. editorial staff and legal staff) because a mistake or unidentified plagarism in the print game can hurt you in the pocketbook a whole lot more than just by pulling or changing a link or text online.
    4. The last thing is something the /. crew might be able to do now, or maybe is even part of the current system: a comment mode where only comments rated at a certain level or higher, or which have been modded up at least once display full text, with unmodded responses displaying only the title. Seems like it would reduce the amount of text to be sent out without diminishing the quality or requiring more page views for folks browsing at 0 or higher.

    What do y'all think?

    --
    ...Open Source isn't the only answer -- but it's almost always a better value than the alternatives...
    1. Re:Keeping /. alive: several thoughts by robi2106 · · Score: 1

      I believe ther already is a level setting in your preferences that only shows "33 below your level" for the number of posts below the level you set. That works great for filting out kiddiez.

      I also wouldn't mind a more targeted add space. I don't need adds for super huge mainframes / enterprise level SW due to my college guy budget. But adds for cheap deals on hardware, adds for neat books / sci fi, etc I would welcome.

      robi

  337. Subscriptions.. by Ogerman · · Score: 2

    Great.. now we'll have k1dd13z running around saying "|)00|)z!! p4j33rz0r |\/|y 31337 (0113c7i0|\| 0f 57013n 51454|)07 4((0u|\|7z!!!!!!!!"

    But serious, there are better ways to keep /. going other than subscriptions. Target advertisements more (user preferences), reduce bandwidth by cleaning up your HTML and dumping unneeded images, let go of some staff (c'mon now.. /. can nearly run itself other than maintenance and posting stories), and put up a /. paypal donation box or something.

  338. not to nitpick or anything ... by nerp · · Score: 1

    actually that's my only reason for posting this (... to annoy you and make things generally irritating)
    ;)
    anyway, CT just said "quarter of a million readers" -- that's 250,000 not 500,000.
    But if you want to go further I suppose not everyone reads everyday or whatever ...

  339. Run it as a charity by geekinexile · · Score: 1

    As a high priest of a religion (we'll call it ixlam) with an obvious deep aversion to capitalism, why don't you just ask for donations and limit the size of slashdot to what the donations will support?

    I'm sitting at my desk worrying about a layoff that is going to hit thousands of my colleagues and quite possibly me. At this time, your spoiled brat whining about taking some simple steps to bring in revenue is tough to take.

    Your ambition makes you want to grow Slashdot. There's nothing wrong with that, entrepeneur's who create something valuable should feel that way. But you also want to be a priest, above such tainted worldly evils as advertising and subscriptions. Frankly this epic inner conflict is boring. Give it up, one way or the other.

  340. You are confusing \. with a non-profit... by geekinexile · · Score: 1

    operating with federal funds. Thus comparison to national PUBLIC radio and the PUBLIC broadcasting service are sense-free.

    If you are willing to pay the fee or suffer the ads to get the content, do so. If not, not. Otherwise a PRIVATE entity needs no other response to this nonsense than "buzz off". Stronger wording optional

  341. Idea for a new ad network! by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 2

    I've actually got an idea for a new ad system - derived from this user's posting. It miraculously triggered a few neurons in my gray matter, and I came up with an idea.

    Here we go.

    Ad networks set cookies, and use these to track users. However, since the cookie is set, why not allow the user himself to modify his info? Every few ads, put up a striking one that says "personalize this ad!", and allow the user to access his/her cookie, and add/inspect personal information. Let them tell you what they're looking to buy in the future.

    Also make sure to tell them that other ad networks don't give them this option, but try to infer the information through spying on them.

    Anybody think "honest ads" can fly? Or have this been tried before, and I'm just an unoriginal developer too late for the mating season?

    --

    Stop the brainwash

  342. I have thought about it... by cr0sh · · Score: 2

    I have always wondered - what if /. went subscription - or what if Andover/VA went under, and /. wasn't there - what would I be willing to do to get my /. fix (and let's face it - it _is_ a drug for a lot of us)?

    Yeah, I click the banner ads from time to time - sometimes just to see what the product is, other times because the ad seems interesting - sometimes just to give a penny to the crew.

    Would I be willing to pay for /.? Do bears shit in the woods? Of course I would pay!

    k5 started a pay model, but I don't find them to be worth paying for, not yet, anyhow - but they still rake in about $300/month for new subscriptions so far, which isn't too bad (though I bet it costs more than that to keep /. going). I think I would be willing to do $10.00/month just to read /.

    I like the idea of pledge drives, though - and a "sponsor wall" showing high pledges, etc. I also like certain other suggestions bandied about by others.

    Think about this - please!!! Don't just go with the bigger banner ads, but be original and creative instead!

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  343. Please include t-shirt or hat with subscription. by Pinback · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Please combine the subscription offer with a t-shirt or hat. That way I can offer some small financial and moral support to slashdot.

    Or maybe a coffee mug.

  344. Magazine ads are part of the draw by raindog2 · · Score: 1

    Sure, I skip the Microsoft ads in PC magazines and the perfume ads in entertainment magazines, but at least part of the enjoyment I get out of reading them is the 'interesting' ads. They're the ones that include details about the product they're selling without laying on the buzzwords. Compare that to banner ads, even many on slashdot, that seem to be pitching a particular product but take you to the advertiser's front page without explanation.

    Also, notice how ads in magazines NEVER look like this: "Is Your Credit Card Company Ripping You Off?", "Punch The Monkey And Win $20", "Is Your Internet Connection Fast Enough?", or "You have ONE message waiting."

    1. Re:Magazine ads are part of the draw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just want someone to start sueing these stupid companies.

      "I punched the monkey and didn't win $20. False advertising!"
      (ruling: wording must be changed to "Punch the Monkey for a Chance at $20" or "Just click the damn ad, we don't check anyway!")

      My credit card company sues them because they AREN'T ripping me off and so it's misleading advertising. The company counterclaims that "McDonalds could say 'is your burger chain selling you crap?' without misrepresenting Burger King". McDonalds and Burger King sue them for defamation.

      I answer "Yes" to the question "Is your internet connection fast enough?". Further repeated attempts to force the question onto me are met with a suit for harrassment. In a strange twist, the penalty for their activities is the limiting of their entire company to one 9600 baud modem. Former pissed off internet surfers telephone continuously to ask them - "is YOUR internet connection fast enough?"

      After answering the one message waiting, and yet still being bugged about it, I sue the company for providing a faulty online messaging service and severely inconveniencing me by not correctly deleting/blocking the message when I instruct them to.

      Meanwhile, in e-mail spam:

      The "You have won a holiday or a computer" people are defeated on claims of misuse/abuse/misrepresentation of the Verisign trademark and logo on sites that are not approved and do not implement proper security features. They are also brought up on charges of spamming and harrassment after attempts to use those FBI and Whitehouse addresses that everyone who's not stupid enters onto their forms. In addition the state lotteries commission forces the site operators to provide holidays to everyone they were promised to. Everyone who has ever operated one of these sites is bankrupted for the forseeable future.

      The 'enlarge your package - guaranteed' people are brought up on their guarantee and sued.
      The 'free cable' people are tracked down for providing copyright circumvention devices.
      The people that keep sending out stuff in Chinese suddenly realise that most of their mailing lists don't understand the messages, explaining their resulting lack of response.
      And people suddenly realise that Snow White and the 7 Dwarves is actually quite a disturbing concept, and stops opening up unexpected e-mail attachments, virtually halting the virus' spread overnight.

  345. Re:If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go a by Nailer · · Score: 2

    > No they're not, just like advertisements in newspapers aren't.

    You haven't provided any justification there at all. Ads aren't part of the editorial content, but they are most definitely part of whatever publication, and an important one, seeing as without them the newspaper wouldn't be brought to you. Republishing newspaper content without ads would be similarly unethtical.

    > Bargain? What bargain?
    Your eyeballs for their content, in case this wasn't obvious. There are bargains and transaction in mary parts of society where contracts aren't included. You didn't sign a contract which said you had to pay for the newspaper either.

    > And I'll choose what I look at, just like in real life.
    Again: republishing newspaper content without ads would be similarly unethical.

    > I guess you'd probably call using lynx 'stealing'
    If you're disabl;ed, which most users of text based browsers are (hardcore CLI geeks aren't as common as you'd expect) then fine, the site has an obligation to make its content available to you. Otherwise, certainly - if you're viewing a site which is brought to you by ads and you are stripping that part of the content, then yes.

  346. Get rid of "Funny" moderating. by crashnbur · · Score: 2

    I've never thought that humor should be a quality to be looked for when moderating anyway. If something is so gosh-darn funny that it needs to be modded up, someone will mod it up as "underrated" or otherwise. Simply put, I don't think that funny things that contribute in no other ways are useful for discussion.

    Besides, funny things are generally "interesting", so why not come up with another adjective for modding up or get rid of "funny" altogether? Just a suggestion.

  347. After pondering for a while... by Blowit · · Score: 1

    I think Slashdot should unincorporate itself from VALinux and become a non-profit organisation.

    As a non-profit organisation, you can issue tax credits to people and companies who become a member or advertise on Slashdot, get lower priced rates from your vendors (since most vendors offer non-profit pricing levels) and at the same time, any profits left over would be distributed evenly as credit for the next renewal.

    Being a non-profit informational organisation, you are entitled to some government grants to further the non-profit organisation.

    We can consider Slashdot as a library of information should Slashdot start mirroring other site's information similar to what Google is doing. And therefore, could be allowed to get some credits as a public library.

    any thoughts on this welcomed.

    --
    *Headline News* censorship shuts down the Internet! More at 6PM!
  348. What happened to the WAP site? by Doug+Neal · · Score: 0

    Maybe a bit offtopic, but before Slashdot got upgraded to version 2 a while ago I used to be able to get the stories on my phone with WAP, which was pretty cool. But it doesn't work anymore :( Is it coming back?

  349. More Interesting Ads by ll5 · · Score: 1

    How many of you know exactly where to look for caffiene, t-shirts, and mp3 devices? My point is everyone who reads /. has been exposed to the thinkgeek banners hundreds if not thousands of times. The ads actually work too, though I am far more likely to type in the url for thinkgeek than I am too click on a banner. There is such a thing as overexposure. I think we need more variety in ads, not bigger ads for the same damn things we have seen countless times. Hey Taco, why not post the stats for the percentage of people who have turned off the OSDN nav bar?

    --
    Wanna get high?
  350. How to support /. without subscribing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can you, the average slashdot drone, help to keep this site alive and kicking? How can you keep the tentacles of corporate advertisers from gripping yet more tightly this site, gnashing their parrot-like beaks into the proverbial collective soft underbelly of CmdrTaco and Hemos, spewing forth blood and goo like so much bodily odor from Tom Christiansen?

    ADVERTISE! YOU! Yes, YOU! ADVERTISE! (It's fucking cheap.) You, the dateless wonder in Romeoville, Illinois; you, the buck-toothed programmer in Liverpool; you, the Falun Gong wannabe proxying in from China -- YOU CAN FORCE YOUR FELLOW SLASHDOTTERS TO READ YOUR STUPID CRAP WITHOUT BLOCKING IT! No filter can save them; no bromide can soothe them. MEEPT, are you there? Sweet MEEPT, this could be your return! THERE IS A GOD, AND THIS IDEA IS HE.

    Possible ads:

    "Are you part of the Jim Larois experience? Jim Larois -- He'll change the way you think about new paradigms!"

    or...

    "Oh, Terri, pick up the phone...pick up the phone, pick up the phone...OH! OH! OH, TERRI! OH! I'M IN HELL! AAAAAUUUUGGGH! PICK UP THE PHONEAAAaauuugggghh..."

    or...

    [Your inside joke here.]

    And, such and such.

    Or better yet, buy NO ADS on slashdot. Pay money for them to keep the greasy, slightly calloused mitts of information technology plutocrats off the site. And it's not like you have a significant other to spend the money on anyway.

    Cheap advertising. "The New Depression -- It'll change the way you think about mass poverty!"

    Jesus Christ on a fucking pogo stick, this idea rules. I should patent this.

  351. It's not much by Water+Paradox · · Score: 2

    It's not much, but you just lost me as a reader of Slashdot.

    Thanks for all the fish.

    -Jared

    sorry you sold out. when you start asking
    me for money, for something i enjoy, is
    when i hit the pavement. never sell out. bye.

    --
    information is immaterial
    1. Re:It's not much by gmccon · · Score: 1

      From Jared's Profile:
      i am a servant of jesus christ.


      Hmmm. Ok.

      when you start asking me for money, for something i enjoy, is when i hit the pavement.

      Hey, Jared, wwjd?

      Do you tithe to whatever church you attend? Do you enjoy church?

      You're being a bit hypocritical, imho.

      No, the funds for a subscription won't go to charity work, but they probably will ensure that Slashdot and the people who work hard on it will be around for people to enjoy.

  352. We can flame you, Taco,... by tve · · Score: 1

    ...but are you full of love?

    --

    If there is hope, it lies in the trolls.
  353. Bring on the flames... by CobesTheGreat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    But sales of advertisments are hurting. If it means having slashdot for longer, I wouldn't mind obtrusive ads, as long as I could pay a little bit a month to turn them off. They would probably make more from people paying to not have them, than they would from them clicking them.

    --

    --------------------------------------
    58.0% slashdot corrupt
  354. Re:If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go a by radja · · Score: 2

    Not reading certain parts, like ads, is NOT the same as republishing. The reason why I cite newspapers, and the fact that ads are not content is because, under dutch law, ads need to be labeled to distinguish them from content. Ads are not content by law here. I also dont feel guilty for not reading certain stories that don't interest me, and I would be very surprised if you did.

    //rdj

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  355. PPPoE and OpenBSD by kipple · · Score: 1

    I've seen your comment about SOHO firewalling [http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=21454&cid=0&p id=0&startat=&threshold=3&mode=thread&commentsort= 1&op=Change], and I've seen that you couldn't figure out the whole OpenBSD-PPPoE stuff. A friend of mine had the same problem, and he solved it by removing the GRE stuff from the kernel. Perhaps it may help you, although it's kinda late and you may not be interested anymore.

    Why am I writing you here? 'cause the other discussion has already been archived, and there's no mail on your userinfo, and I'd never trust a website. sorry for bothering you here, please moderate me down.

    cheers

    --
    -- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
  356. Oh, the humliation! by fm6 · · Score: 2

    Modding me up as "funny"! Now that's cruel!

  357. Last Post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah final post here in sercret lets see if this gets moded down on a nearly dead thread. Hey mods can browse though the last 30 articles can they?

  358. Re:If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go a by Nailer · · Score: 2

    I agree. There's nothing wrong with not looking at something. But using Junkbuster I look as as republishing. I mean content as in the items conatined as part of he known distribution - you seem to be talking about content meaning editorial content.

  359. Re:33 below your level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, they have the mode the original poster was looking for. Threaded, highest scores first, threshhold set at 1 seems to work well. Although when moderating I jump back to show 'em all (trolls, flamebait, etc.) in various sort orders.

  360. Re:If you don't want too look at ads, simple: go a by radja · · Score: 2

    ok.. basically this is how I look at it..
    for the example, I will use a magazine that also has ads.

    open the magazine on the index page.
    What's on the index page? all the content.
    What's not on the index page? easy.. ads aren't. They may be in a separate list, usually on just about the last page. This is how I look at content vs ads, and I'm pretty sure this is not a unique view.

    //rdj

    --

    No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
    --Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
  361. FUD rating by Martin+S. · · Score: 2


    I'm thinking that adding a FUD (-1) option to post scoring to help counter the increasing amount of M$ astroturfers disrupting slashdot.

  362. whine whine whine by gmccon · · Score: 1

    Geez, cut Taco some slack.

    I read Slashdot. I enjoy Slashdot. I don't even have a newspaper subscription...but I'm sure as hell going to get a Slashdot subscription.

    'nuff said.

  363. isnt ad filtering software 'theft'? by nmanz · · Score: 1

    Think about it... the sites that show ads gain revenue from them. When you visit a site with ads, in a way they are giving you a service in exchange for viewing the ads. When you filter out those ads you are literally stealing from them. Its the same as cable theft and so on isnt it...

    And I am not going to believe all that crap about ads slowing people down. Most people have at least a 33.6 connection, which is quite enough to surf a site like slashdot with ads enabled.

    Its not as if slashdot is forcing you to buy stuff, all they are doing is asking you to at least glance at the ads...

    ah well.. so much for my two cents. now flame me!!