Slashdot Mirror


Knock, Knock: Information Pollution Is Here

CowboyRobot writes ""Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases, appearing in various media to describe unwanted phone calls, faxes, emails, etc. Jakob Nielsen, known for his critiques of user interfaces has an article about the problems of unwanted instant messaging interruptions. Nielsen is respectable not only because of the clarity of his arguments but because he also cites empirical evidence, rather than just complaining. In the article he describes the current problem, then proposes a 'control panel' as a centralized interface to manage all the communications one would make via the computer."

211 comments

  1. really... by User+956 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nielsen is respectable not only because of the clarity of his arguments but because he also cites empirical evidence, rather than just complaining.

    I hate to sound like I'm just bashing the guy, but he's a huge hypocrite. I started reading his site back in the day, and after signing up, I got spam for years afterwards.

    "Information Pollution" my ass. Up until he decides something's bad and coins some clever term, he'll do it with no compunction.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, at least his spam is "usable".

    2. Re:really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree whole-heartedly.

      I attended a conference back in '98 where he was speaking on 'web usability'. None of his discussion, nor his website offer anything in the way of the user experience.

      If it were up to him, the web would be back to one column web pages that run on forever.

    3. Re:really... by realdddave · · Score: 1

      after signing up, I got spam

      I hate to sound like I'm just nitpicking you, but wouldn't signing up make it -not- spam?

    4. Re:really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Up until he decides something's bad and coins some clever term, he'll do it with no compunction.

      Um, yeah... What reason is there to not do something unless you've decided that it's bad?

    5. Re:really... by catbutt · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bash away. His site is simply awful. It is the ugliest site I have ever seen that says "web design" in the title. If "usable" means it has to be that drab, then no thanks.

    6. Re:really... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I started reading his site back in the day, and after signing up, I got spam for years afterwards.

      As a counterpoint, I have also been signed up for years, and have never got a single associated spam (I tag my email address wherever I give it out). Perhaps your email address was leaked someplace else around the same time you signed up with his site.

    7. Re:really... by Refrag · · Score: 1
      "Information Pollution" my ass. Up until he decides something's bad and coins some clever term, he'll do it with no compunction.
      Why would he have a reason to not do something if he hasn't decided it's bad yet?
      --
      I have a website. It's about Macs.
    8. Re:really... by whereiswaldo · · Score: 1

      Too bad this tit for tat couldn't be taken offline so that people trying to read the story-related comments could do so without crap filter overload.

  2. Control Panel? by Handpaper · · Score: 1
    As in : Start > Settings > Control Panel (> Internet Options, > Networking, >Add/Remove Programs...)?
    The tools are there already, even in Windows.All anyone needs to do is use them.

    1. Re:Control Panel? by Handpaper · · Score: 1
      OK, and regedit for the very annoying stuff.

  3. With all the spam ... by gulfan · · Score: 5, Interesting

    With all the spam on the Internet these days I find it harder and harder to find information on what I want. I was searching for information on teens in general for a project that my company was working on and majority of the results were adult related. When searching for products such as Cell Phones I'll be shown thousands of results for Antenna Boosters, Free unlocking Kits and more. Is anyone else having the same problems?

    1. Re:With all the spam ... by blugu64 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have been looking myself for information about MIDP and information on writing midlets, and all I can find on google when I search for java and cell phones is "FREE RING TONES" and other assorted ads. There is such a thing as information pollution, and ya I've got a problem with it.

      --
      "Personal ownership is a hallmark of conservative capitalism. And I don't believe I am entitled to anything that I did n
    2. Re:With all the spam ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      +4, god you /. people are so stupid. ever try searching with: cell phones -boosters -unlocking

    3. Re:With all the spam ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i remember when /. had people that knew the basics of using a search engine. use -free -ring -tones dumbass

    4. Re:With all the spam ... by Aussie · · Score: 4, Insightful
      all I can find on google when I search for java and cell phones is "FREE RING TONES"

      Yeah, that is becoming a real problem, any search for anything that is remotely connected to mobile/cell phones returns the dreaded "FREE RING TONES".

      Unless you go to the manufacturers site all you get is crap.

      Googles next challenge I guess.

    5. Re:With all the spam ... by The+Cydonian · · Score: 4, Informative
      Try Alltheweb. Zero porn content in a random search for teens.

      (Of course, helps that I switched the Offensive Content Filter to 'on')

    6. Re:With all the spam ... by myowntrueself · · Score: 2, Informative

      With google, if you go to the 'advanced search' you can give keywords that should not appear in the results.

      This is very useful for removing crap *cough*blogs*cough* from the results.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    7. Re:With all the spam ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try adding " -ringtones -boosters" (without quotes) to the end of your google search.

    8. Re:With all the spam ... by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

      i've had trouble writing aps for my phone because i cant read midlet without giggling

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    9. Re:With all the spam ... by lurker412 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah. I've been unemployed for a while. If you want to search for jobs you need to remember to include -blow in your query.

    10. Re:With all the spam ... by NickFitz · · Score: 1
      I was searching for information on teens in general... majority of the results were adult related

      I know what you mean. It's obvious they're not teens, so why call them that?

      And why say "amateur" when they mean "ugly"?

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
  4. Control panel would have too much control by beni1207 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even very effective spam filters today (SpamAssassin, et. al) still produce false positives sometimes. I don't want any and all electronic communication coming to me to be subject to some Internet Control Panel's idea of its usefulness to me - what happens when my boss sends me an email and it gets rejected by the control panel and I never see it? I do use SpamAssassin myself but still have to check the junk folders from time to time because it occasionally sticks stuff in there that I really did need or want to see.

    1. Re:Control panel would have too much control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think if it was integrated with WhoIs, and ARIN, with a friendly clear interface, a solid wizard, and complete html help. Link some of that to the internet topology, and I think there is a winner in there. Yeah, it consumes the recipients reasources, but for the most part I would guess the loads would be reasonable. Put a new service in there to provide one host one vote for spam/not spam for ISP's and there customers I would think pretty effective dynamic blacklists that last for 7 days or so (like typical ip address leases) could put a monsterous dent in the amount of spam that gets routed.

      Especially if you can use excess cpu power to go ahead and look at what people voted as spam, and make decisions about blocking url's, domains, or even ip blocks referenced by them. (being smart to maintain a nice always good list like media companies, other isp's.) While a joe job might still be a pain in the ass, the fact that the damage would last about 7 days for a smaller company, and not at all a larger entity that might well have the resources and desire to hunt people down and sue or (preferably) kill them.

      I say service, because why not generalize it. Horrible fake websites clogging google and mucking up your results? Add a right-context option to vote it as a bullshit fake useless site, the email problem can likewise be solved by returning either a url, or domain to the service with a vote. If you're searching for rabid chimp amputee porn, chances are nothing would happen, but if your searching for something else, and google-bombing is getting in your way, as well of that of many other customers, google might well return the url, but clicking on it could return a fast, and simple explanation of why they think it's mostly bogus, and possibly return a way to go there regardless of what your contemporaries think.

    2. Re:Control panel would have too much control by Alan+Cox · · Score: 1

      It isnt the control panel that you need. No matter how much junk you reject you get too much useful email. In a business there is a cure for it. You make it *painful* to write too much email. Simple supply/demand economics. Give people a limited number of emails per day based on actual work need, and the ability to request more, and guess what happens. .. Email goes relevant.

      Its an experiment done multiple times with the same results, and similar effects are achieved by charging per email received between departments in bigger businesses.

    3. Re:Control panel would have too much control by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Give people a limited number of emails per day based on actual work need...

      A few anecdotes:

      A problem I get (and sometimes contribute to) is the quick shoot from the hip email, and two minutes later a postscript, and 10 minutes later a recantation and quite different position. Or working on correcting a long document someone sends me a separate email for every single correction instead of combining the dozen or more total into one.

      Eudora had a feature that was supposed to reduce flames by rating your messages by key words to detect hostility, and popping up an advisory or delaying sending. A bit too Big Brotherish and not popular though.

      Every now and then you read about companies where email is blocked except for one or two periods in the day; this is a generally a good idea. If something is really urgent you should just phone anyway.

    4. Re:Control panel would have too much control by zby · · Score: 1

      Is there some report (I mean with actual data) available about this experiment?

  5. Earlier Discussion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This topic was discussed several weeks ago on Slashdot. Here's a link to the article.

  6. And this helps how? by stubear · · Score: 4, Interesting

    '...then proposes a 'control panel' as a centralized interface to manage all the communications one would make via the computer."'

    What are the options? Drop nuke on spammer's house? Send in the black helicopters? The problem isn't so much on the receiver's end as it on the sender's end. Instead of forcing users to jump through flaming hoop after flaming hoop why don't we develop systems that make it more difficult to send spam in the first place? Jakob Neilsen, of all people, should know better than to suggest such a wasteful UI to solve a much deeper problem with the system itself. If you want total anonymity on the internet than you have to deal with these problems. You can't say only certain peolpe get to be anonymous and the people I don't like can't. You want to be able to spoof headers? Be prepared for spammers to take advantage of this "feature". You want to have the ability to have open relays? Get ready for the flood of spam that will use them.

    1. Re:And this helps how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What are the options?

      Howzabout pulling the plug on the Internet connection while you're not supposed to be on the Internet? No one can get hold of you then.

      But then we can't whinge about how those horrible people won't leave us alone.

    2. Re:And this helps how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      '...then proposes a 'control panel' as a centralized interface to manage all the communications one would make via the computer."'


      It seems he has bought in to the Windowesque delusion that, if we have a user interface, then actual technology just appears in the guts of the system. What a moron.

  7. control panel.. by gl4ss · · Score: 2, Interesting

    like a modern cellular phone? that's where it's heading anyways, an all-around communication device.

    . you know, sms is quite a bit like im(well, ..doh, it is instant messaging) and you can use im services(irc,aim,whatever i guess) from most new phones(i know, the j2me irc sucks, virca that is.. but wirelessirc for series60 is pretty good, most phones also come with email clients as well). already I use more the online services made possible by cheap enough gprs than what I use my phone for actual talking(gprs is ways much cheaper than sms's in most cases and obviously you get the added benefit of contacting all your friends who are online at once when they're on the same channel).

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:control panel.. by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

      oh fuck, i only rtfa after i wrote a comment.

      the guy is making no sense. his control panel is just an app for idiots to filter the mail they subscribed for.. wtf, that's supposed to be new, auto filtering into boxes? geez, somebody drag this guy into 2003 before it's too late!

      that is supposed to be an article!?!?!? it's just a bitching up!

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:control panel.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the guy is making no sense. his control panel is just an app for idiots...

      You mean, the same kind of idiots who are incapable of using a "shift" key for its intended purpose?

  8. Re:Proof Apple is for homosexuals by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    why? will there be glory holes i can stick my big alabama blacksnake into?

    i heard mac fans' specialty was sucking cocks.

    in fact, mac world and san fran were made for each other, just like a cock and the chocolate starfish.

  9. Poll - Who's more annoying: Nielsen or Bowie Poag? by smitty45 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Or...how to categorize anything they say:

    A- Conceited without reason
    B- Self-interested to astronomic proportions
    C- Frustratingly condescending and tunnel-visioned
    D- Doesn't matter, it's all idiocy to me.

    Get your votes in fast.

  10. Re:ranting! by silicongodcom · · Score: 1

    er...

    carlcannabis.blogspot.com/

    and no, it's not mine so mark me for trolling but not for spamming!

  11. Berkeley? by rduke15 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    There are two major products to come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence.

    Berkeley? LSD came out of Basel, Switzerland (that's in Europe), in the forties.

    (Hopefully commenting on a signature will help me burn out some excess karma before year's end.)

    1. Re:Berkeley? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      LSD came out of Basel, Switzerland (that's in Europe), in the forties.

      LSD was invented in Switzerland, and Unix was invented in New Jersey. However, the idiom "Y comes out of X" doesn't mean it was invented there, just that X is a major center of production. E.g.:

      Berkeley was a noted production center of LSD and Unix (technically a Unix-like system, Unix is a trademark of whatever it's a trademark of these days, yaddayaddayadda).

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:Berkeley? by rduke15 · · Score: 1

      OK. If only we knew where it is freshly comming out of now... (not Unix or cars or steers of course)

  12. Re:Protect your children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could have used some more misspellings to make it more obvious, and I'll not be surprised if a few dozen think it's meant in earnest, as the deadpan is delivered rather well. Best of all no goatse links from an AC!

  13. Re:This is totally [OT]... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Babies, before we're done here, y'all are gonna be wearing gold-plated diapers.

  14. Re:Protect your children by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now THAT'S a good troll! Quality work, sir.

  15. Re:This is totally [OT]... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    MORE COWBELL!

    Much like the Oracle of Delphi, you speaketh the trutheth. Indeed, Walken is on teh spoke.

  16. empirical evidence? by m0rphin3 · · Score: 1

    What empirical evidence?
    An article named 'Sleazy Scumbags' and a guidelines paper he wrote himself?

    --
    for great justice
  17. Re:This is totally [OT]... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Babies, before we're done here, y'all are gonna be wearing gold-plated diapers.
    What does that *mean*?!
  18. This Was A Big Problem For Me by gurustu · · Score: 5, Interesting
    So I solved it by setting up two separate computers. One's my "work box" with my editors, shells, DB clients, etc. The other is my "communications box" with my email client, IM client, calendar, IRC clients, etc. Once I turned off all the alarms/alerts on the latter (except for the calendar), and once I made it so that I couldn't see the latter except by switching over to that box, my efficiency (and job satisfaction) skyrocketed.

    Initially, it made me less available and less responsive, and that bothered me. However, my work habits started to change in response to it. Because I now control my exposure to communications, I find that I can flip to the other box, scan for messages, and flip back to my work box without exiting the flow state.

    This has had some other really positive side effects. For example, people are aware that I'm in my office, even if I'm not responding to IM. That means that if something's really important, they'll often just drop by, replacing the thirty back-and-forth email with a simple 5 minute conversation. Sure, I lose my flow state, but high priority problems bubble up to the top of the list and get resolved in the most effective way (ie; face to face) possible.

    1. Re:This Was A Big Problem For Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why would you send 30 emails back and forth when they see you on aim? you must work for a stupid company.

    2. Re:This Was A Big Problem For Me by sapped · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This has had some other really positive side effects. For example, people are aware that I'm in my office, even if I'm not responding to IM. That means that if something's really important, they'll often just drop by, replacing the thirty back-and-forth email with a simple 5 minute conversation.

      This is great if you are in a position to do so. On my last project we had 3 management types who "communicated" with us continuously on such useful topics such as "File time sheets by 4pm". Yeah, like that was worth breaking my concentration! However, I tried to combat this problem first by talking to them about it and then later by simply not logging onto the company IM system anymore when I needed to concentrate. This was rewarded with a public reprimand branding me as combatitive and I was told I had to be logged into the IM and be available to management at all times otherwise they would refuse to sign off on my billing.

      Needless to say the useless twits "managed" themselves and us out of jobs when their constant nitpicking eventually killed the project. 3 years working with a 45+ team in four countries and not a thing to show for it today. Go you wonderful corporate giant!

    3. Re:This Was A Big Problem For Me by Naffer · · Score: 1

      I suffer from the same problems mentioned in the articles. When I'm looking at some really good porn, and someone interupts me with an IM, it takes a good 10 minutes to get back in the "productivity" mood.

      In all seriousness, I've long since turned off the audio alerts that come with AOL intstant messanger and usually stay online with an away message set (something witty of course). When people IM you when your "away" they don't expect an immediate response and it usually lets to delay responding to them untill you actually feel like talking.

    4. Re:This Was A Big Problem For Me by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful
      IM has no place being used in most company environments. It's a fundamentally interruptive medium and makes the cost of interrupting somebody too low for the interrupter. Especially if you are managing a team of thought-workers, like programmers. If you have an important issue to discuss with somebody in the office, pick up your phone, or drop by their cube/office. If it's not important or immediate enough for that, email them and let them respond when they are taking a break. Or if it involves more people, bring it up at a daily or weekly team meeting.


      You are definitely dead-on - it sounds like they did manage themselves and you out of a job. In the future, I'd recommend you see managers who are so short sighted that they want to constantly nag and harrass their employees as a clear indicator of a project/company destined for failure and avoid them at all costs. Instead of getting yourself reprimanded by ignoring explicit instructions, float your resume around and find another job or transfer to a different group if you're in a big enough company. It was obvious to you that the policy was stupid - trust your intuition and find better people to work for.

    5. Re:This Was A Big Problem For Me by C10H14N2 · · Score: 1

      Makes me feel so much better about a project I was on where the manager's idea of version control was a big metal filing rack. We spent 20% of our time printing up reams of useless crap for his "system" when everything was in CVS anyway. He blew through a million bucks and then fired the whole team with nothing but a stack of proofs of concepts for the most obviously feasible technologies to show for it. Amazingly, he still has _his_ job. Personally, I'd prefer being IM'ed to death to the endless hour-long pre-meeting meetings before the actual three hour meetings followed by the hour-long post-meeting meetings. Breaking concentration for email and IMs may kill a few minutes, but being dragged across the building and between floors for pointless managerial stroke-a-thons will kill an entire day. Unfortunately, it won't kill the managers who no doubt are now salivating at the thought of the post-post-meeting meeting wrap up via IM. Ugh.

  19. But what of the quailty of the information? by cluge · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The idea for solving "Information Pollution" is interesting, but what of the quality of the information that is delivered? In this day and age when you can find web sites devoted to "Proof we never made it to the moon" and hard facts are often replaced with "that sounds about right" isn't the real pollution the content we supposedly want - and not the advertisers?

    Find me a system to easily and quickly verify the "facts" with something I can trust.

    AngryPeopleRule

    --
    "Science is about ego as much as it is about discovery and truth " - I said it, so sue me.
    1. Re:But what of the quailty of the information? by cfuse · · Score: 3, Interesting
      The idea for solving "Information Pollution" is interesting, but what of the quality of the information that is delivered? In this day and age when you can find web sites devoted to "Proof we never made it to the moon" and hard facts are often replaced with "that sounds about right" isn't the real pollution the content we supposedly want - and not the advertisers?

      Find me a system to easily and quickly verify the "facts" with something I can trust.

      I find this whole concept fascinating. So much of the information available today is either obviously false, or more interestingly, deliberatly false.

      Still, I guess it's just the new mind control.

      The idea of peer approved/trusted "truth" is fascinating because it's so seductive. Don't think or question, we'll tell you what's the truth.

      I'm not even sure that truth exists.

    2. Re:But what of the quailty of the information? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Truth may not exist, but truths exist.

      Truth is an abstract concept that probably doesn't have a well defined boundary. But I definitely got out of bed this morning. And I have socks on my feet. Etc. (One could quibble about dreams seeming real, but they've never seemed real to me. I just never think to question them until they're over.)

      OTOH, once we get beyond personal experience...if you assert that you got out of bed this morning, I'll probably believe you. But is it Truth? I have no reason to doubt your assertion, and good reason to feel that it's likely even without your assertion of it.

      OK. On to web pages. Web pages are an assertion by someone unknown that something is true. Usually several somethings. We choose whether or not to believe them. What we need to do is learn to accept that they aren't that much more believeable than the speaker on a soapbox in the park. You need to decide whether or not you accept the page, you don't just presume that it's accurate just because someone asserts it. Do you believe that "You need to buy a new Chevorlet today!"? I may have just seen an ad asserting that. But I don't place a high credence on ads.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  20. Stop stealing from adequacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  21. Information Pollen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At first I read "Information Pollution" as "Information Pollen" as seen in the Warren Ellis series Transmetropolitan.

    Either way, it's nasty stuff.

  22. Some thoughts... by DeepDarkSky · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. Do you ever use your email like an instant messenger? Meaning, do you and another person sit there writing messages to each other in almost real-time? You sit there pathetically pressing refresh or check email, waiting for the next reply? I have.

    2. A control panel for monitoring information flow is not a bad idea - just that it needs to be implemented to cover everything and be easy to use. You should be able to easily define rules (like spam rules) that says what to do with the messages if they meet certain criteria.
    Of course, it defeats the purpose of IM - after all, if you don't want to be available, or just don't want to be interrupted, just turn the thing off!

    3. I think that instead of finding a technical solution (yet another program that will cure all, bring world peace, and improve worker productivity - remember that's what they said about email? Instead of all of these, just sit down and take some time and figure out the best routine for yourself. Everybody has different work habits, and a control panel, no matter how flexible, is not going to accommodate everyone's requirements. If you don't want to be interrupted, then just turn those notifications off, change your IM status to "away" or "do not interrupt"

    4. Some workers don't "want" to be productive. They want to be interrupted.

    1. Re:Some thoughts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another point is that different types of communication play different roles. While it's true that an IM interruption can cause a 15 minute loss of concentration, it can also mean that I solve a problem in a few minutes rather than an endless string of back and forth emails. In my workplace, a NOC, we communicate in several different ways.

      1.) Email for anything that doesn't require much discussion.
      2.) IRC for public realtime information sharing.
      3.) IM for quick discussion or exchange of output of commands.
      4.) The phone for things that require discussion.
      5.) Video conferencing for meetings when face to face isn't possible.

      It isn't perfect, but most people use the most appropriate form of communication most of the time. IM could be a problem if it were abused, but otherwise it's nice.

      My 2 cents.

    2. Re:Some thoughts... by DonGar · · Score: 2, Interesting
      1. Do you ever use your email like an instant messenger? Meaning, do you and another person sit there writing messages to each other in almost real-time? You sit there pathetically pressing refresh or check email, waiting for the next reply? I have.

      Yes, but not normally when instant messaging is available. I the long ago, bad old days (before ICQ existed) I was emailing back and forth with a friend that had moved to Boston university. He never replied to a message I was expecting, and SIX MONTHs later it just showed up.

      It had hung in one of the several email relays between us and just stayed there until the server was next rebooted. When he stopped emailing, I was vaguly pissed that he didn't send a quick 'gotta go' or some such. 6 months later I talked to him, and found that he'd felt the same way.

      --
      plus-good, double-plus-good
  23. Blah by rhetoric · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Nielsen is respectable not only because of the clarity of his arguments but because he also cites empirical evidence, rather than just complaining.

    But he is just complaining!

    From the article: "It is naive to believe that IM is the answer to the information overload that's ailing e-mail. Continue current trends a few years and most people will get so much IM that they will have to tune it out to get any work done."

    This is the problem he's trying to address it would seem, and his solution is a nice pretty control panel that does everything for him. Now this is obviously a problem, as many many other people have pointed out, but what is Nielsen doing about it? Whining that someone else should write a program apparently. If he believes this control panel is the end-all-be-all solution he should write it and try to sell it, but I'm not buying it. Until some public key standard ala PGP is made idiot proof and seamless enough for the average suburban housewife to use, consumers and big media will keep complaining, imho.

    --

    "where words meet intent, lies rhetoric's lament"
  24. pollution by ghettoreb · · Score: 0
    we all know the ways of dealing with polution.

    The idea is, when Marginal Cost to an individual of sending out spam is lower than the Marginal Cost to Society, then free market will not lead to socially optimal outcome. The use of spam filters does nothing to stop the problem, instead it helps society deal with the burdens of pollution. It's like suggesting that we all wear dust masks is the way to address air pollution

    The only efficient way of dealing with the problem is to raise the marginal cost of spam. This could be accomplished with a tax on emails, albeit that would require the government to perfectly estimate the disparity in the marginal costs as well as adjust the tax amount as that disparity changes (because as the amount of spam decreases, the marginal cost of spam to society will decrease, so the tax should start out high and be lowered)

    More creative and efficient solutions should probably be used instead. Spam only becomes spam when it's used for false advertising. Improving the network protocols to make it impossible to fake headers is probably the most efficient way of curing 90% of spam, as that would make parties liable to FCC, FDA regulations. To cure the rest (which would be similar to "Girls Gone Wild" ads on comedy central--perfectly legal, but a nuisance) would be harder and require more creative methods or more gov't regulation (which is inherently inefficient)

    PS. Needless to say, the method suggested before -- forcing the sender to wait before sending an email -- isn't efficient as in how it imposes inflexible costs. Adjusting these costs will be difficult, and hence efficiency will be lost.

  25. The WinXP personal firewall stops them for me by Cryofan · · Score: 0, Redundant

    As soon as I take it down, back they come.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  26. Self Control by xanthan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This may be hard for some to fathom, but try this: turn it off. No really. I mean it. When I need to work, I minimize email, go "invisible" on IM, and let voicemail pick up the phone. My cell phone has caller ID so I can ID my wife and know to pick up the phone.

    All of these technologies have a way of being turned off and queueing messages for you. Use it. When you're ready for a break or it's just that time again, process them in bulk and get them over with. When I was programming, I only processed email 2-3 times a day (morning, right before lunch, and towards the end of the day) and this worked very well. Having a gig in marketing land has changed my job requirements where I'm actually judged by how often I interact with the sales team and customers so I check mail more often -- but, when I need to get a document written up or read and comment on something else, I minimize it all and focus.

    One last note about IM -- have strict rules about IM. I don't socialize over IM when I'm working. I tell friends that are on my buddy lists to not expect a response during typical working hours if they just want to chat. I won't respond. If you want to send a social comment, send it via email to my personal mailbox and I'll get to it when I've got time to socialize.

    1. Re:Self Control by sapped · · Score: 1

      All of these technologies have a way of being turned off and queueing messages for you. Use it.

      At my last contact, management forced us to keep IM on all the time so that they could blurb us during the day with useless trivia. No amount of telling them they were killing our productivity made any difference.

      In the end we were proved correct when the whole project folded.

      In those kinds of situations you are unfortunately hosed as management would insist that the proposed control panel would not allow them to be put "on hold" or filter their messages out. Sadly, it's exactly their drivel and droning that I want removed from my desktop.

      The rest of the people on the team have enough respect for each others time not to intrude unless it is really required, and if they overstep the mark you can usually have a quiet chat with them and it doesn't happen again.

    2. Re:Self Control by rodentia · · Score: 1

      Ya. I'm to the point I simply don't run IM, no matter how much they beg. There is no value in the chat interface. I'm in enough contact. Remember that no one's time is remotely as important as they would like you to believe it is.

      That lumpy black thing on your desk is called a phone. Internal communications are free and internally routed. Cool.

      --
      illegitimii non ingravare
    3. Re:Self Control by rsadelle · · Score: 1

      Here's what I don't get about this and similar comments about personal IM discussions at work: Why the hell don't you have one screen name for work, to be used at work and known only to business colleagues, and one for personal matters, to be used at home and known only to friends and family? You clearly have such a system for e-mail, so why not extend the same boundaries to IM?

  27. No interruptions by tedric · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think he makes a good point with the statement that a one minute interruption can cost 10 to 15 minutes of productivity. Maybe productivity is the wrong word here because it translates so easily into money these days. Concentration would be much better. I for myself need a room that can be locked, a telephone line that can be unplugged and a quiet and relaxed atmosphere to concentrate on the work I want to do or that I have to do.

    Unfortunatly this seems to be impossible in "modern" offices, there's lots of noise (IM and E-Mail is "noise", too!), everybody thinks he just can walk in after knocking at the door without waiting for a "come in" and the phone rings permanently.

    It's great that you can reach and can be reached at any time at any place today. But it would be even greater if you could not be reached some time and others would respect that. Everybody who tried to have a phone line "just for emergencies" knows how people abuse it over time...

    1. Re:No interruptions by iSwitched · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First off, don't get me wrong, I actually agree with everything you've said, I would love to have this level of concentration available to me daily -- others have posted this sentiment, but every time I read it I find myself thinking, what would the average PHB think, and it goes something like this:

      Question:
      Financial implications aside, what is the difference between a tech guy in my office who I can only communicate with peridodically, usually via email, and rarely ever see; And some coder working for an Indian mega-consultancy in a cube in Bangalore.

      Answer:
      Not a damn thing...

      Companies are groups of people working together for a common purpose, hell its why they're called a 'company'. For better or worse, they have eveolved into very social entities, with all the benefits and problems that entails.

      One clear advantage the average local geek has over his outsourced counterpart is that he can be reachable, responsive, even friendly. I've played that card extensively over the last couple years, sure I get interrupted alot, but I've never been outsourced.

      Just food for thought, not meant as a flame.

      --
      "That naive cube! How long must I suffer this!" --Sheldon J. Plankton
  28. Hypocrite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    He goes on about information polution and spam, and yet polutes his own mailing list with adverts - try couting the number of lines of actual content and then the number of lines about the conferences:
    Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox for December 8 is now online at:
    http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20031208.html

    Summary:
    Transactional email can be a website's customer service ambassador,
    but messages must first survive a ruthless selection process in the
    user's in-box. Differentiating your message from spam is thus the first
    duty of email design.

    ------------

    Usability Week 2004 conference

    > USA: Orlando, San Francisco
    > Europe: London, Copenhagen
    > Australia: Melbourne

    > 3-day Intensive Camp: Usability in Practice
    > Web Usability 2004: brand-new research
    > 6 specialized 1-day tutorials, including intranets and newsletters

    More info and full program:
    http://www.nngroup.com/events

    For the British event, we are trying something new: a residential event at
    a nice training center west of London. There is an Underground station
    nearby, but it's best to stay on-site to get the full immersive
    experience: all usability, all the time. The venue is 6 miles from the
    cottage where Milton completed "Paradise Lost" - not sure whether that's
    symbolic for current websites and intranets.
  29. IM? Why? by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 3, Insightful
    say that they now prefer instant messaging (IM) over e-mail as their medium of choice for computer-mediated communication

    Good grief, why? IM seems to me to combine the worst features of the telephone and e-mail. I've never understood its allure. E-mail is quite fast enough for non-interactive communication, and if you want interactive communication pick up the phone (or better yet get off your ass and walk over to me, if we're in the sam building, I hate intra-office telephoning) and we can be much more interactive when we don't have to type at each other. And many people have e-mail through work, but not IM accounts. (Sadly, spammers are not amoung them, as IM spam is apparently becoming common.) Plus, the IM space is fragmented.

    So, can anyone convince me that I should sign up for an IM account?

    --
    Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
    You cannot wash away blood with blood
    1. Re:IM? Why? by vadim_t · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Chat, what else. Like IRC, only in most cases between just 2 people.

      It's pretty convenient too. Email is not suited to some purposes. Like say, you want to help somebody troubleshoot something. Email is very inconvenient for this. Sure you can mail lots of messages, but those things go slowly. IM is fast, and convenient because you could simply paste URLs, error messages, etc, instead of going through the whole process of opening a new email window, selecting who to send it to...

      In the office IM is nice because it doesn't interrupt. You can also easily set away/busy status to let people know that they should try later. A phone pretty much requires you to pick it up. Going somewhere requires getting up, which is again invonvenient if you need to talk about something related to something you have near you.

    2. Re:IM? Why? by howlatthemoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't think IM is for everyone or every situation.

      It works for me at my location. I am one of a dozen consultants stationed throughout my institution. With IM, I can find out who is available (sort of a virtual in/out board and get quick answers to questions. If it clear another medium is better (phone or e-mail) we switch. I can usually get "have you seen this problem" question with a URL answer in less than a minute. I have found for our group, that phone calls almost always lead to other things work related and personal stuff since it is sometimes as much as a week between times when we see each other.

      Also, I am part of an organization that over-estimates the value of meetings and IM has been a great way for me to keep my productivity up while in meetings that I have no reason to attend, but can not refuse. Since I take notes on my laptop, so it rarely noticed.

      Last for me, it is a fantastic resource when we are in meetings with vendors (In part, I deal with large products and it is not uncommon to have 10 of our people and almost as many vendor reps in the room). It is possible to work collectively to keep on top of what the vendor is saying and figure out what questions need to be asked.

      There are times I turn off everything, but with IM, I can put up a sign saying, "In, but only contact if urgent." This way I know if there is something I need to get to right away. The phone and voicemail don't do that.

      For my friends in cubes, IM is less distracting for their co-workers than phone or cube chats. So for short questions, even IMing a cube or two away can be better for productivity.

      Like I said, it works for me, YMMV

    3. Re:IM? Why? by agent+dero · · Score: 1

      I use IM to have real-time conversations with my friends from my year in germany, ever seen internation calling rates? Yes e-mail works, but IM is more like a conversation.

      I also use iChat AV to talk to some of my friends who live in other states, yes, that's an IM account, being able to telephone.

      Or what about when I need help online? I talk to several of my computer-geek friends at once to try to find a solution, cheap and easy communication.

      Just because you have Instant Messanger or something similar doesn't mean you need to waste your time chatting life away.

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
  30. Use magical filters! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    Don't like the email you get? Use Bayesian filters!

    Want to only read the articles that interest you? Use Bayesian filters!

    Yes, use Magic Beans, er, Bayesian filters and everything will be wonderful! We don't understand what they are or how they work, but by god, we'll recommend them for any kind of content filtering! Don't like TV? Use Bayesian filters!

    This brought to you by the Bayesian filter marketing board -- you wouldn't have seen this if you used Bayesian filters.

    1. Re:Use magical filters! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where can i get these filters?

    2. Re:Use magical filters! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Use magical filters! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeez thats a good anti spam logo

  31. Fuck them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Adequacy.org can lick the sweat off my balls.

    1. Re:Fuck them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Only with the help of a Scanning Electron Microscope.

  32. neilson is lame by Down8 · · Score: 0

    Have you seen the man's website? He's not respectable. If you write a book that tells ppl about shitty UI, then your website should not be shitty. It's as simple as that. There's no excuse. Zero, none, nada.

    I boycott anything having to with Neilson, or the attention whore, Gibson (grc).

    -bZj

    --
    .sig
    1. Re:neilson is lame by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His website may not be "pretty" but it is in fact very easy to use. That's his thing. He's not a graphic artist.

  33. You want Information Pollution? by Darth23 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just take a look at your tv screen.

    Those annoying network logos that sit on the tv screen constantly, except during commercials are the worst form of info pollution.

    Do the nets really think that we won't know what channel we're watching if we don't see a constant reminder of it?

    I suppose they see it as 'branding', increasing their profile in the Consumer's psyche, but it's really overkill.

    It's one reason I got rid of cable tv last year and rarely watch broadcast tv.

    I wouldn't be surprised if they decide to start putting studio logos on DVD's as well.

    --

    -------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.

    1. Re:You want Information Pollution? by Schmucky+The+Cat · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I often have no idea what channel I am watching. Tivo grabs all sorts of shows and I never know or care when it was or what channel it was on.

      Even in cases where I know what channel I expect a show to be on I can be surprised. My daughter likes Blue's Clues from Nickelodeon. Sometimes it shows a syndication on CBS Kids.

      Of course, this doesn't excuse those damnable logos, or worse, when they strip something across the bottom 1/4 of the screen about upcoming shows. Even PBS does it, the bastards.

    2. Re:You want Information Pollution? by tomstdenis · · Score: 1

      You know what's scarier is I can remember a time when branding was "new" and the real channels didn't do it...

      And I'm only 21!!!

      [Well, heck I remember quality shows like SquareOne, Mathnet, ewok adventures, etc...]

      I think it all this "polution" is just people not appreciating the laws of diminishing returns. TBS for example, runs ads every 81 seconds, puts animations all over the bottom.... and right now I'm watching the discovery channel.

      CNN promotes their "we're right because when we covered it first [and then 80000 times afterwards] we got most of the details right!" I still watch local news anyways.

      For that matter, anyone remember when CNN didn't have a marquee at the bottom?

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
  34. Your polluting yourself with information by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I don't get this. People bring much of this interruptedness upon themselves. Ya know what, when I don't want to get cell phone calls, I turn off my cell phone or just turn off the ringer and don't answer it. I will check my messages when I feel like it and get back to somebody when I get a chance. Email, polluted as it is by spam, is by design a non-interruptive form of communication. Sure, I'm as addicted as the next guy - but if I have work to do or I'm focused on something intently, I'll go 3, 4 hours without checking my email.


    IM is no different. It's just that IM is by design an interruptive form of communication. This just makes it all the more important that you don't leave it on all day long like many people do. If you leave your IM client on and complain that people keep interrupting you, I have no sympathy. There are some companies these days that seem to think using IM for work is a good idea. If somebody in the office wants to get in touch with you, they should walk over to your cube, or call you on your office phone. If it's not important enough for that, then an email is a better idea.


    Check your email once every few hours, no more. If you must more often, for work, at least try to reeducate people - don't reply to emails immediately, train them to use more direct forms of communication when they need an immediate reply. Only turn on your IM client in the evenings when you don't expect to do productive work, and are just surfing the web. Learn to turn off your cell phone, and make sure the people you work with understand the rules for contacting you outside of work hours - leave a message, you'll get back to them. Be in control of your life and your time, you don't need some magic technotool, just a little self-restraint and discipline.

    1. Re:Your polluting yourself with information by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1

      Ooops, that should be "you're" not "your" (I know I'll get grammar-nazied on that one)- duh. That's what I get for hitting submit without previewing.

    2. Re:Your polluting yourself with information by jtregear · · Score: 1

      Your advice seems to be contradictory to me. On the one hand, you make the suggestion to turn on IM only in the evenings. On the other, you suggest that users reeducate other users to use more direct forms of communication other than email when they need an immediate reply. Isn't IM exactly that? That is, isn't IM itself one of the more direct forms of communication that you advocate?

      I assume you are suggesting that people in need of immediate reply come by personally in order to get that assistance, since you also either turn off your phone or its ringer thereby turning phone communications into an asynch messaging system and not a usable channel for real time communications.

      Leaving aside the problem of people who cannot physically come by to see you and just dealing with those who can, I would prefer that they IM me rather than stop by. I can often deal with an IM session briefly and efficiently if I need to get back to something I am working on. I can't seem to get somebody out of my office once they've stopped by for at least fifteen minutes. There is just so much ritualistic overhead in meeting face to face I think.

      I do think that people need to be educated about the uses and abuses of new real time communications like IM, but the education they need to receive is to treat them exactly as they would an in-person interruption or a telephone call. Those courtesies have been resolved in those two latter instances, people are already aware of abusing those channels. I think over time the same courtesies will be applied voluntarily by most users of IM as they gain more experience with it both as interrupter and interuptee.

    3. Re:Your polluting yourself with information by Fnkmaster · · Score: 1
      I don't really think this is contradictory. When I'm not at my desk working, and it's not in normal business hours, you don't have a right to reach me. If you happen to be able to reach me on my cell phone, great, but don't get angry if you have to leave a voicemail and I call you back later.


      Coming by in person is more of an investment in time, and picking up the phone and calling somebody is as well. Generally, I've found that people make this investment in time when the need is there, and know not to abuse it. Furthermore, if you are busy/on the phone/whatever you are "unavailable" for in person discussion too. There are always times when you are going to be unavailable, that's just something other people have to learn to deal with, and again, it sets up the importance threshold - if it's really critical, they can wait 5 minutes to talk to you, otherwise, they can fire you an email saying they need to talk when you have a chance.


      I think IM is too distracting - people know not to call you at work unless it's important, but people never seem to have the same kind of compunction about IMing people at work. Just my observations. I guess we could just try to "educate" everybody that IM should not be abused, but that's just not the way people seem to naturally use the medium. I don't see any obvious benefit to using it in the workplace, and while I wouldn't object to others using it, I'm almost certain I'd find that they were mostly using it to chat with friends and not to get actual work done.

    4. Re:Your polluting yourself with information by jtregear · · Score: 1

      I am not suggesting that IM is for everyone, personal preference for how best to handle interruptions is important. I am suggesting that in the spectrum of systems to handle immediate communication needs that IM is a useful system. Ideally, I would do as you and others here have suggested: essentially turn off all real-time systems and respond later, but unfortunately in my current position (almost anybody's position other than the CEO) there are people who have the absolute right organizationally to interrupt me as they see fit. To me, IM is a useful alternative system in between email and dropping by or calling to handle those interruptions. As others in this thread have pointed out you have to learn how to manage it with the presence and state tools that most IM systems provide. The most useful being the "interrupt me only if it is urgent" state.

      Also, I don't think that most enterprise IM systems are dominated by users who are chatting with their friends. While this might be true of the public systems, especially for "at home" uses, enterprise systems tend not to be used this way. Probably the fact that most enterprise systems archive sessions reduces personal uses significantly.

      There is another article (A Closer Look at Our Common Wisdom) in the same issue of Queue that Nielsen's article appeared in about usage of enterprise IM at AT&T labs. They captured around 300,000 IM messages, which represented around 21,000 conversations and analyzed those conversations. Only 13% included any personal topics at all and over 62% focused entirely on work related matters. I think that would be similar to the results you would get analyzing in person work-time conversations.

      The payoff as far as I am concerned of IM for these uses is contained in another of their findings: that IM conversations are generally quick averaging 4.5 minutes. To me, that is fairly efficient compared to the "commute" and "ritual" overhead of an in-person conversation. Also, in 85% of the conversations, at least one user multitasked. I tend to do that too and that's something I find I cannot due in an in-person conversation. It's just too rude.

      So in the case of interruptions that I can't avoid (i.e. people who have the right to interrupt me or who really do need to talk to me now), I have found that IM is an efficient way to get through them as quickly as possible. To me, it's also way better than the phenonmenon that someone else here described: people who use email like an instant messenger. We have one high level director here who does this and expects everyone within her organization to respond to emails immediately. Email was never meant to be that kind of system and that really does create a worst case system. I know middle level managers who spend their entire day in front of open email clients constantly clicking the refresh button. If she was using an IM system at least those managers would have some tools like presence and notification to handle those urgencies better.

    5. Re:Your polluting yourself with information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many companies like ours run completly on IM, I have been with the company im with for 6 months now, and I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times my phone has rung. Phones are noisy and disruptive, and cant maintain long running conversations without it being the single point of focus. I can hold half a dozen IM conversations at the same time, whilst I can hold only one phone conversation, I can xfer URL's and relevant files whilst discussing a subject. I can ignore an IM ping for 5 mins without it pissing my colleages off. If the otherend goes out for lunch,no problem, we just pick up when they get back. IM has the data richness of email, with the immeadiatcy of phone, with built in call screening.

  35. mod up! by Down8 · · Score: 1

    This is actually a funny, and insightful comment.

    -bZj

    --
    .sig
  36. Information pollution by Merik · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A better definition from Nielson:
    "Excessive word count and worthless details are making it harder for people to extract useful information. The more you say, the more people tune out your message."

    --

    --

    What is the sound of this sentence?

    1. Re:Information pollution by x3ro · · Score: 1

      So the ideal piece of information according to dear Jakob is the soundbite?

      I could do with less soundbites and more indepth info ... 'word count' is quantitive, not qualitative ... typically reductionist. The man is a Philistine.

      --
      [ UNSIGNED NOT NULL ]
    2. Re:Information pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ooooo, shiney.

    3. Re:Information pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or in the sprit of it: "Pithy = Good!"

    4. Re:Information pollution by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      'word count' is quantitive, not qualitative

      I expect that's why he wrote 'word count and worthless detail'. Because word count is quantatitive, but worthless detail is qualitative, and the evaluation of how information is best presented would surely combine both aspects?

      I could do with less soundbites and more indepth info

      And yet you chose to make your argument in a three line post? I wonder why?

      ... typically reductionist. The man is a Philistine.

      At least his argument isn't full of logical holes, ad hominems and doesn't rely on selective use of the data to try and make his case.

      That's *my* idea of a philistine...

    5. Re:Information pollution by kaschei · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the people that networks are paid to sell commercials to are assumed to be Philistines by marketing forces... and they are, largely, correct.
      If you think of advertising as a means of spreading information (which at its heart it is) you'll see how much more effective it is to say "Buy my product" five times with some glamour about the payment plan than to make an ad that details exactly what's good about what you're selling. The most glaring instance is in pharmaceutical ads, they just show a happy couple who were presumably in some sort of crisis but are now saved thanks to "the purple pill." So in short, what YOU'D like, while it may be what's best on the whole, is not what's best for the bottom line.

      --
      I should not talk so much about myself if there were anybody else whom I knew as well. -Henry David Thoreau
    6. Re:Information pollution by x3ro · · Score: 1

      Yes, true, but the bottom line is not really interesting unless you're a shareholder in one of those companies. As a viewer, I don't see a difference between crap media that makes money and crap media that doesn't; it just sucks. Except that I will have to put up with the crap that makes money for longer, since it will be more successful; so really it's worse :)

      And also, aren't they two very different kinds of Philistine really? Nielson thinks anything apart from information in its barest form is a waste of 'screen real estate'. Look at his website. It's so bare and ugly that I stand to stay on the page long enough to read any of it. The marketing Philistines are a different animal; they don't care about information in the slightest. The only thing that matters to them in the money.

      --
      [ UNSIGNED NOT NULL ]
    7. Re:Information pollution by x3ro · · Score: 1

      the evaluation of how information is best presented would surely combine both aspects?

      Surely. But I'm basing my opinion on the painful experience of reading a huge quantity of material by Nielson. I don't think he is capable of making value judgements. In fact I would probably agree with those words from someone else -- as you say, ad hominem. I just hate his guts.

      And yet you chose to make your argument in a three line post? I wonder why?

      A forum is like a conversation. I don't expect websites to be presented in the same way. Nor do I think Jakob Nielson's critiques are directed at forum content.

      At least his argument isn't full of logical holes, ad hominems and doesn't rely on selective use of the data to try and make his case.

      If I wanted to put together an argument, I would do so. What exactly do you think my argument is here -- what 'data' is question? I wasn't intending to analyse or deconstruct. I am just casually slagging off someone I find irritating. He really is an annoying little piece of crap -- is this not obvious? If you like I can put together an anti-Nielsen counter-argument for you -- but that'll have to wait till after work :)

      --
      [ UNSIGNED NOT NULL ]
  37. Sounds like a newbie without a clue by Baloo+Ursidae · · Score: 1
    The Web is a junkyard.

    To which he is contributing to the problem he's bitching about with this.

    Do you want to keep track of your eBay auctions? Instead of five e-mails per auction, all scattered throughout your inbox, you would have a single flag in the control panel. Discussion groups? The control panel would show when hot topics of interest to you are being discussed and would call attention to discussions with contributions by writers you particularly respect.

    It's almost 2004, and this guy still doesn't know about Procmail and what a kill file is?

    E-mail? Restricted to truly personal communication. Newsletters, intranet status reports, and other nonletter communications would be summarized and available for perusal on request.

    Isn't that why Procmail and SpamAssassin exist?

    IM would have a small role, but your personal agent would be very strict at screening incoming requests.

    Unless you're a complete moron completely lacking self-control, odds are you set yourself do-not-disturb when you're managing a lot of state.

    --
    Help us build a better map!
    1. Re:Sounds like a newbie without a clue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Here it is, almost 2004 and some people do not know how to close tags. ;-)

    2. Re:Sounds like a newbie without a clue by dipipanone · · Score: 1

      Or use the preview button...

      Incidentally, wtf is this business about having to wait twenty seconds after hitting reply before you can post? That's another contributor to information overload. This post would have been just five words long, but now I've had to increase it to 52 to get past the barrier.

  38. IP by ninkendo84 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Isn't Internet Protocol and Intellectual Property enough for these two letters? Let's all choose a different buzzword. kthxbai

    --

    $ make love
    make: don't know how to make love. Stop
  39. Opportunity Knocking by Quirk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It reads like a golden opportunity for entreprenurial programmers.

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
    1. Re:Opportunity Knocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is ther anythang more pathetic than a drunk 'n stoned Karma Whore

    2. Re:Opportunity Knocking by michaelhood · · Score: 0

      As an entreprenurial programmer, enlighten me/us on what you think the opportunity is. :)

    3. Re:Opportunity Knocking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      an anonymous troll?

  40. TMDA Challenge/Response by Aliencow · · Score: 1, Informative

    I've recently setup TMDA (www.tmda.net) to filter my inbox and it's awesome... People who confirm their email addresses get whitelisted, it generates emails for websites (ie: gepeto-keyword-9391319@aliencow.com) that I'll need to communicate with for a few days (confirmation emails etc..).. Ok getting the confirmation prompt the first time you email me might be annoying..but if everyone had this it'd be annoying but much less than spam.

    1. Re:TMDA Challenge/Response by Alan+Cox · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Its a pain in the arse - you cause everyone else more pollution for your own ends. Fortunately like a lot of people I now have TMDA confirmations in the "absolutely 100% spam, dispose of now" category

    2. Re:TMDA Challenge/Response by Aliencow · · Score: 0

      Well if you can't be bothered to reply to the first email you send me, maybe what you were going to send me was worthless anyways.

      But in any case I blacklist arrogant Kernel geeks like you and Linus anyways, so you wouldn't even get my "pollution" !

    3. Re:TMDA Challenge/Response by zBoD · · Score: 1

      If you're too lazy to reply to a single email, you don't deserve to be in my whitelist.

      BoD

      --
      BoD
  41. Information Pollution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was bound to happen sooner or later. We never thought about how much information is actually out there on the net and how it would eventually reach us, but here we are.

    What's the next overloaded trend? Computerized bionic overclocking?

  42. Mental Environmentalism by Merik · · Score: 4, Informative

    Our inbox mirrors our daily life.(even the penis enlarger ads[enzyte]).
    3000 commercial messages a day are rammed into the average persons head wether they like it or not.
    Adbusters argues that our mental environment is becoming polluted. "information pollution" has been a focus of their "mental environmentalism" since '89.

    --

    --

    What is the sound of this sentence?

    1. Re:Mental Environmentalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe I'm missing something. Adbusters' stated goal is to fight pollution of our mental environment. So how are they doing this? By, well, polluting our mental environment. From the site:

      "To this end, Adbusters Media Foundation publishes Adbusters magazine, operates this website and offers its creative services through PowerShift, our advocacy advertising agency."

  43. Like chickens complaining about their own shit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How come nobody listens?

    Don't post your fucking numbers and addresses!
    If you HAVE to post them, DON'T use your regular
    account. Set up a spam account and only check
    it when you HAVE to.

    Instant messaging? Unless you are FORCED to use
    it by your company.... UNINSTALL the fucking thing.
    Yes, you CAN work on the internet and not have
    to use that shit.

    Junk faxes? ROTFL! What is this? the 70's??

    No I didn't read 'Yet Another Stupid Spam article'

    You want to cut bandwidth??
    Design email services that only send a 20Kb 'bounce'
    message instead of your entire message.

    Dumbasses will always use stupid programs that
    don't send attachments correctly. Retarded
    that there are servers that will send BACK
    a 700Mb e-mail that bounced due to lack of address
    or say a mailcap LOL. Fucking Retarded, folks.

    Don't believe me? Send an e-mail with WildMetalCountryInstaller.exe attachement to crappppolkjsdfkj23423wes@aol.com
    They'll bounce the WHOLE FILE BACK. Dumb eh?

    That reminds me, No.. I still don't get spam
    e-mail on the accounts that I don't want it.

  44. Information? Data! by vinlud · · Score: 1

    Information you don't want to know is not information, but data!

    Yes I'm an SE :)

    --
    Repeat after me: We are all individuals
  45. Duh!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "Empirical" as in "Emperor" as in autocratic. What are you some kind of skeptic that doesn't believe everything can be broken down into a specious sound bite? I'd thought we'd eliminated your kind from the galaxy.

  46. Buzz-phrases by GuyMannDude · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases, appearing in various media ...

    Hmmm. Funny thing is that I've always considered those buzz-phrases that are so often bandied about by 'various media' as Information Pollution in their own right. The by-products of processing good information down into a more-assimilabable (but less rich) format for consumption by the masses.

    GMD

    1. Re:Buzz-phrases by NTmatter · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Serial Experiments Lain had a much more appropriate term for the pollution (dilution?) of information with [insert ad here] useless blather to amuse the minds of the masses: "Infornography"

      A summary of the episode named after it can be found here.

  47. I honestly don't know... by Qbertino · · Score: 1

    ...what this Jacob Nielsen hype is all about. Seriously.
    I've tried to figure, I've scimmed one of his books and some of his ideas are way into bullshitting territory while others arent't complete bogus. But to constantly parade this person as the incarnation of the web design god appears just silly to me.
    It even emphasises what I am inclined to think: That this guy is nothing but an excuse for wannabees to go and make believe they know what webdesign is all about and that's mostly what makes up his 'fame'.

    --
    We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
    1. Re:I honestly don't know... by randyest · · Score: 1

      Thanks for asking! Please take the following corrections as constructive criticism from a U.S. English viewpoint: "skimmed" not "scimmed", "emphasizes" not "emphasises" (though Brits prefer the 's', I believe), "aren't completely bogus" not "arent't complete bogus", "I am inclined to think that this guy" not "I am inclined to think: That this guy"

      BTW, I only provided these corrections because you requested them. IMHO, your English is good and understandable. I'm just trying to help :)

      --
      everything in moderation
    2. Re:I honestly don't know... by realdddave · · Score: 1

      The problem isn't Jacob Nielsen, but the false image everyone has created. He isn't trying to say he's a 'web design god'. Web design is a large field that encompasses art, business, technology, psychology, and more - he's just focusing on tying these things together.

      Nielsen's focus is usability, and little else; he's using knowledge of the psychology of users to help shape the site's layout (art) with the intent of improving business and taking advantage of technology. Basically, he's trying to tell people how they might be able to improve sales from their web sites.

      The problem is that lots of people think he's trying to 'cramp the style' of artists by stating lots of standard practices and rules that restrict what site designers should do. A better relationship would be to look at web pages as food you'd find at a grocery store. Nielsen's advice then would be things like "putting a strobe light on a box of cereal would attract customers, but it could also cause major backlash due to epileptic seizures." That doesn't stop anyone from putting a stobe light on the box of cereal (their managers might decide to take Nielsen's recommendation as law, but that can hardly be blamed on him). He's just pointing out possibly unforseen economic impacts of product design.

      Admittedly I'm not completely up-to-date on his Alertbox articles. As I see it, he might eventually start running thin on new major ideas or suggestions, as he seems to be outpacing the widespread adoption of new web-surfing technologies. However, he has come up with tons of suggestions that are worth considering, especially if you're trying to improve sales from your web site. He's definitely the most public figure in web usability (he wrote the book on it, even :) ). But please, don't listen to people who attack him for being something he's not actually trying to be.

    3. Re:I honestly don't know... by Qbertino · · Score: 1

      BTW, I only provided these corrections because you requested them. IMHO, your English is good and understandable. I'm just trying to help :)

      Hey, that's nice.
      Well, thank you then!

      --
      We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
  48. Quality vs Quantity by B5_geek · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I think our biggest problem isn't the amount of SP*M (hehe it is a 4 letter word you know) we get, or the unrelenting advertising that we get bombarded with. I think 90% of our discontent arises from not being able to weed out the content that we do want.

    I would give my left kidney if I could do a google search for an item and exclude all places that try to sell me the widget.

    Google search: widget -sale

    then I would gladly wade through the 5,000 sites that had INFORMATION on the widget.

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
  49. **Yawn** by dasunt · · Score: 1

    Good tools help you deal with information, bad tools don't. Your email system should be able to classify email - throwing probable spam in one folder, dividing mailing lists into their own folders, server alerts into another folder, etc. If the email is important enough, it should have the ability to flag you in some manner.

    Your IM software should be able to stay quiet in the background unless you want to be interrupted. Again, like your mail handling system, it should be able to classify messages according to sender.

    I don't want some unified console with limited abilities that force me to use $APP_XYZ. Give me something like the docks in several unix window managers, where I can select from a variety of apps for the purpose and pick and choose what I want.

    Sure, I might need to learn a little scripting or configuration syntax, but if I'm going to be using my computer alot, I'd rather take a day now then waste a week a year.

    Just my $.02

  50. Old Problems, New World by Thenomain · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "Information Polution" isn't a new thing, we're just mainstreaming an old problem. I certainly don't want to put up with billboards, telemarketers, sidewalk evangelists or any of the advertising that comes up in my mailbox every day. I'm sure people used to complain at length about the illegitimacy of newspapers or magazines. (Okay, so they still do.)

    Nowadays we don't have just a few dozen channels for information at any given time, but literally thousands, possibly more, arranged and biased exactly the way you want it. If Mr. Nielson can't handle the two he's most concerned about -- and he's more concerned about workflow than personal use -- there are existing options. Email not fast enough? Pick up the phone. IM causing worker inattention? Block it.

    Small "Internet Control Panels" exist, in limited-information capacities. I have no idea how many "e-bay tracker" applications there are out there, but my guess of "a lot" would probably be an understatement. And the message-filtering abilities of many modern e-mail clients means you could easily sort everything into the locale you want. (I'm not talking spam-filtering, but scripts to filter mail from a general pool into folders.)

    E-mail is hardly dead, or sick, or dying. It's abused, and like many things that are abused people will either abandon it or find a way to change it into usefulness. Both are proper social reactions. People use and adapt to the most useful channels of communication.

    Mr. Nielson appears to be so far behind the issue that he probably thinks he's ahead.

    --
    This now concludes our broadcast day.
  51. Important Reminder: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jakob Neilson is a talentless self important blow hard. All his opinions should be read in that context.

  52. Knock? Door? by webwench_72 · · Score: 1

    What is this 'knock' of which you speak? I haven't had an office with a door since I entered the IT industry in 1996. We live in cubes nowadays, most of us, which means we are interrupted not only by our own cube-lurkers and phone calls, but the cube conversations and phone calls of those ten or fifteen cubes that are within earshot, and don't even get me started on IM, and people who configure their email clients to alert them when they receive new email, in both their work and personal email accounts. Between that, a few useless staff meetings a day, a social visit here and there, tracking one's time to the hour, and your own telephone, it's a miracle anything ever gets done in Corporate America. I almost have to go home to get any work done these days.

    --

  53. The only IP is from jacob by jaltoids · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Can we just ban this man from ever getting posted on slashdot again? This has to be the most convoluted piece of drivile that I have seen linked from the front page of slashdot in a long time, it is so bad that I don't even know where to start to attack it.
    • Email is not IM
    • We can all ignore the phone, how is IM any different
    • If closing a door can benift programmer productivity (as suggested in the article) then turning off IM and email can do the same
    • If user cant filter mail/block unwanted IM's how is another interface (as he suggests) going to be of benift, we need to fix the UI issues in those applications

    Look I get as much junk IM and email as any one else, but i filter and block religiously, it is the only way I can stay productive. When I really need to get things done I'm not afraid to turn those items off.

    The best little gem from the article --
    Our culture is hurting from information pollution everywhere we turn. The Internet is the most severely afflicted ecosystem, with countless content-free Web pages overflowing with either low-value stream-of-consciousness postings or bland "corporatese." The physical world is not much better. In the United States, for example, you can't buy a lawn mower without a label saying that you're not supposed to mow your feet. Most instruction manuals are littered with "important" warnings that caution against obvious stupidities, burying actual dangers amid a mass of irrelevancy.


    This whole article shines as an example of that "irrelevancy"...

    Just remember if jacob had his way we would all still be using blue links!!!
  54. Just on a note. by Buzz_Litebeer · · Score: 1

    I have found myself on the wrong end of information pollution as described in this article, I went out of my way to do exactly what this fella describes.

    My desktop has no icons, My start bar has 4 icons based on priority and then by catagory (1 icon is for freq used programs the others for 3 main catagories of programs) I keep my start menu in pretty good shape, and I use a program called samurize to keep all my data summerized and unobtrusively check e-mail and tell me when my box has mail.

    yes it helps, my time on the computer is greatly optimized, but the best solution is probably the easiest... simply stop signing up for things, and checking so much.

    I used to check 10-12 pages per day, now i read pages that summarize news from many other sources based on my interests. I dont put my e-mail in places im likely to get spam from, and i sign up for services using a "spam" e-mail, which i do not give to my friends. It allows me to read the subjects, see who they are from, and dump the rest.

    The best medicine in this case is limit the flow of information that you receive, instead of trying to smart prioritize it on your end.

    Buzz OUT

    --
    If you don't vote, you don't matter, so don't waste your time telling me your opinion
  55. Jakob Nielson and Macromedia by fiftyLou · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Isn't Jakob Nielson mixed up with Macromedia?
    What he's describing sounds a lot like their vision for Central

    Coincidence?

    1. Re:Jakob Nielson and Macromedia by fiftyLou · · Score: 1


      Bad link, sorry - I've been drinking. Make that Central

  56. What is interesting? by Smallphish · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The obnoxious part of this idea, to me, is that it seems to ignore the problem of creating a program, or control panel, that would be able to determine what is of interest to a particular person at a particular time and what is not. This problem is unlikely to be be solved by smart filters and summarizing programs anytime soon, because what is interesting to a person is very much dependent on that person's state of mind at the moment. What may be interesting and diverting news while you're sipping your morning coffee would be an annoying distraction when you are on a conference call, or trying to work out a difficult problem. Unless we had software that could model a particular person, as a whole and taking into account all inputs _and_ their mental state at the time of those inputs, such "personal agents" could be worse problems than the ones they would solve, removing perhaps critical information while letting extraneous irritating information through. It seems to me that this would be a nontrivial problem to solve, and the idea that it would be solved for something as seemingly trivial as information overload, when there are much easier non-technical ways to overcome that burden, (e.g. turn off your IM when you're busy, etc.) is a case of sloppy thinking, in my opinion.

  57. Communication Pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases, appearing in various media to describe unwanted phone calls, faxes, emails, etc.

    That's not "information pollution," at best that's "communication pollution".

    "Information pollution" is a glut of information, so much so that it is difficult to locate, understand, and/or disseminate information that is correct and relevant.

    An example of information pollution is an Ask Slashdot requesting comparisons of the Linux and *BSD VM subsystems answered by three calmly worded, widely informed, well paced posts being drowned by five hundred wrong-headed OS proselytization posts. I cruse at no lower than +4.

    1. Re:Communication Pollution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I cruse at no lower than +4.

      And place yourself at the mercy of the morons who happened to get mod points that day.

  58. Mr Nielsen... by hysterion · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your article about unwanted X is unwanted.

    Spam filtering, popup killing, troll killfiling, instant message yanking...

    we are overloaded by information about information overload.

    Please go away.

    Thank you.

    1. Re:Mr Nielsen... by columbus · · Score: 1
      we are overloaded by information about information overload.

      You have him in a bit of a logical bind there. Any discussion of information overload will be to some degree self-refferential.
      The instruction 'less is more' does itself add a little bit more.
      The proverb 'silence is golden' does itself break the silence.
      Total silence will not solve the problem. Spam will not vanish if we simply stop talking about spam.

      --
      friends don't let friends teleport drunk
  59. Re:Poll - Who's more annoying: Nielsen or Bowie Po by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    In fairness to Bowie, I'm using one of his desktop tiles right now.

    More practical value than I ever got out of Nielsen.

  60. And I didn't even mention by webwench_72 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And I didn't even mention the worst new irritant: the accumulated ringings of everyone's personal cellphones, all of which are set up to ring with the most annoying and lengthy ringtone possible, at the highest possible volume.

    --

    1. Re:And I didn't even mention by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "And I didn't even mention the worst new irritant: the accumulated ringings of everyone's personal cellphones, all of which are set up to ring with the most annoying and lengthy ringtone possible, at the highest possible volume. "

      I've found a good way to deal with this problem. I approach the person and say "Could you pleases turn down your ringer?" For some reason, it took a month for somebody to do that at my office.

      Be careful, though. I found out that turning off an investor's cell phone is a nono, even if he does set it somewhere and let it constantly ring as though the caller has NFI what voicemail is.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:And I didn't even mention by autechre · · Score: 1

      Try the combination of one person listening to the "local" ClearChannel country station (a match made in hell if ever there was one) and having The Star Spangled Banner as his (loud) ring tone.

      My roommate gets nigh-hysterical at hearing a phone ring when he's concentrating on something computer-related. Personally, if I'm really focused, I don't even hear people when they're talking directly to me. Some part of my brain registers speech, but that's it. But I'm usually not so intense, and the rest of the time those background noises get seriously annoying. Whoever decided that AIM should have sounds on by default for every single message transaction should be slowly roasted alive.

      --
      WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
  61. The problem with Nielsen... by DynamiteNeon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is that he thinks there's some magical universal solution that will work for every person. It's not true.

    I remember reading Clay Shirky's open letter to him and they were debating the same sort of thing over web standards compliance. Clay Shirky was taking the position that diversity and experimentation in user interface design ultimately creates a better system. I tend to agree with that.

    Anyway, back to the topic. While I agree IM is not the best solution to everything, it works for me quite well.

    I work from home as a programming consultant. I work with a few other people, and IM is the most common way we communicate. It's faster than email and telephone in general when you have quick questions, and is convenient when you have longer conversations throughout the day and want to leave the information up on the desktop.

    Sure it's not perfect. One of it's best (and worst) features is the the ability to know when someone is online. It's annoying when you're trying to eat dinner and someone from work sees that you were just online. Yes, you can ignore it, but it can still be annoying if you don't manage it properly. It just requires a bit of discipline.

    As for IM spam, if you just have your settings so that you only receive messages from people on your contact list, you should generally be fine. It doesn't disable the requests for people to add you to the list, so if anybody really wants to talk to you, they can still reach you.

    Email is still more convenient when you're sending things back and forth that you want to save for a long time. IM doesn't do that well (yet.).

    I think what's really needed is a way to store and search all the different forms of information you get from day to day in email and IM and strip out the fluff. I have tons of emails in my mailbox that I may just keep around for one or two lines in them, but would be nice if there was a simple way to delete all the stuff I don't need and keep the info I do.

  62. Junk in search results? Where? by hkmwbz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What exactly did you search for?

    A search for teens using Google didn't show any adult sites on the first four pages at least. I just had a quick look, and on page four I didn't bother going any further.

    And the other comments about ring tones. What are you people searching for? I don't seem to have these problems at all.

    Enlighten me.

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
    1. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok, then try "asian teens"

    2. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by robogun · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Google did a good job of cleaning up THAT pollution as described here. A month ago many common pop culture searches would have turned up nothing but auto-generated commercial pages, all alike.

      For example, searching on Paris Hilton after her little slip-up returned hundreds upon hundreds of affiliates all spamming the same site which, in the end, did not actually have the infamous video. Today, there are much fewer such links.

      Similarly, searching on an obscure actor would return hundreds of sites all wanting to sell you posters, DVDs and videos of the movie they had their bit parts in, but little actual information.

      That is a good example of information pollution, a term I heard first from Earthlink.

      It is the result of affiliation, combined with legions of small-time marketers who all think their affiliate page should be number one in a category. Using the services of firms like Web Position Gold, many succeeded, pushing relevant results off the first ten pages.

      Also, Amazon and Ebay have seized most of the keywords, which Google is slowly forcing off onto the paid listings.

      I had actually quit Google and went over to MSN, as it had received much less attention by the page spammers and was able to return much more relevant results. But I prefer to browse using an early version of Netscape and for some reason doesn't load MSN well at all.

      Google looks a lot cleaner, but spammers still seem to be trying their tricks. For instance, Google cleaned up that meta-refresh fault which would index the text full of keywords and ship you off to the spammed site once you went for it.

      But spammers have come back with a javascript substitute that does the same thing.

    3. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the first page is 100% adult related if you search for asian teens! W00T for asian girls, anyway. The main reason they're so popular is that they look really young.

    4. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Sapphon · · Score: 1
      Blockquoth the poster..

      searching on Paris Hilton after her little slip-up returned hundreds upon hundreds of affiliates all spamming the same site which, in the end, did not actually have the infamous video

      Speaking from experience, are you?
      --
      Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
    5. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Out of idle curiosity, which early version of Netscape? My *preferred* browser is NS3.04, js and images off. :)

      One recent scam I found Google prey to, I discovered when I did a search for a printer model that I own (was looking for toner carts). One text string that came back was from my own site, and it used MY domain name -- but in the page displayed, my domain as displayed was LINKED to a linkfarm where ALL the links were built that way. Needless to say, I complained to Google about this, hopefully with enough info that they could figure out how to put a halt to this -- well, what amounts to a hijacking. At the very least, a polluted result!

      (Linkjacking just doesn't sound right. :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    6. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > For example, searching on Paris Hilton after her little slip-up returned hundreds upon hundreds of affiliates all spamming the same site which, in the end, did not actually have the infamous video. Today, there are much fewer such links.

      And while we're at it, how the hell is any poor bastard trying to rent a room at a Hilton-operated hotel in capital of France ever going to find out whether such a hotel exists or not. (Then again, who cares? :)

    7. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by robogun · · Score: 1

      I use 3.04 non-gold with java and js turned off, images on. It worked pretty well until last year... now a lot of sites seem to be IE-only. Even some Ebay sellers (who you would think want everyone possible to be able to see their ad) make that mistake.

      When forced off Netscape, I use IE 6 with Popup Cop ( a shareware prog) blocking all the webcrap. IE really sucks though -- why oh why does it keep so much default cache (2 gig on my machine). If you run IE, try PurgeIE (another shareware prog) after emptying temporary internet files to see how many files it loses track of. Speaking of IE shareware, why is IE free but to safely run it you need $100 of shareware. And when it loads up, you cannot save pictures as anything but untitled bitmaps. The only thing it does better is save login credentials (and even that is not so smart, considering how easy it is to pull out those masked passwords out of IE - NEVER save Paypal and banking passwords in IE).

      Netscape seems to run just fine with 15mb cache and is immune to flash, java tricks and lame DHTML bullshit.

      I empathize with your hijack experience. I have to regularly patrol google for webmasters who use *my* names on their previously-mentioned keyword page / meta-refresh trick. Apparently they find out the top web searches, then create and upload keyword pages containing those terms, which try to redirect you to their lame site. Usually one email is enough to make him knock it off (if he is even still there), but sooner or later another pops up.

      Something makes me think they are buying from some spammer selling $59 "businesses" who tells them this is the way to make quick money. When they actually try it, they get their asses handed to them by the trademark owners.

    8. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      I also prefer 3.04 non-gold over the Gold edition, mainly for the context menu ordering. Netscape is THE app that weaned me off WFWG, because it addicted me to Right-click. :) It still works fine for everyday use on 90-95% of the sites I need to see. I don't load images partly because in the 14.4k era it was too slow, and even when I had 56k (26.4k now, having moved to a bad phone area) I found I *prefer* images off, because it was less junk in my face and in most cases, actually made it *easier* to navigate (well, for one who thinks all links appear first in the status bar :) I also use it for email -- it's pretty braindead, but also immune to every sort of nasty but morons who left-click on attachments. :)

      When I'm forced into another browser, my choices in descending order are:

      Netscape 4.0x, when I've got it handy, with js on, images off. (Never got around to installing it on this machine, which wasn't originally my internet box.)

      Mozilla 0.99 (buildID 2002041803), with js, images, and flash -- I really don't like Moz because it emulates *not* NS, but *IE's* mode of operation, and its renderer is so freakin' SLOW... but at least it lets me kill popups, and view most IE-only sites. This version annoys me the least.

      Moz 1.5 (with all the bells and whistles), which I like even less because it's screwed up wrt functionality on the local disk, but it can handle some bad js that crashes 0.99.

      IE 5.00.2314.1003 (images and js on, ActiveX disabled) -- an internal M$ build from the Win2K team, much better-behaved than its kin, including even the next major builds (25nn and 29nn, I think); this one doesn't seem to interfere with the desktop so much. Have never seen it do anything "bad", and it's not crash-prone, nor does it cause general resource leaks (a serious problem with IE5.5). Mainly used to test my own web pages, since for what I do, it covers all the later NS and Moz views in one swell foop. I only let it use about 10mb of cache space, and manually kill that off whenever the urge strikes.

      NS4.50 or 4.7x, depending on what's available, with bells and whistles. Somewhat crashy, hence at the bottom of the list.

      I also keep NS2.02, Mosaic 0.99, and some DOS web browsers in the stable. On those rare occasions when I fire up the Mandrake box, I use Konquerer, because it's quite similar to NS3.04!! (Well, closer to NS2.02, but they're much alike.)

      Sorry you've had to play whack-a-mole with keywords -- that sounds pretty damned tedious. I think there must be some bot that does nothing but troll for keywords, since I've seen some that defy all logic, apparently used for no purpose but to snag every search engine that passes by. Google has done us all a good service by making those folks' lives harder. :)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    9. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by robogun · · Score: 1

      I have 3.04 installed on several computers, but I fear it is slowly getting obsoleted.
      I actually used the mail feature in Netscape 3.04 until I recently switched servers. For some reason nothing I do will make the new POP server accept the mail password if it sent from Netscape. If it comes from Outbreak Express or my spam filter program it takes it just fine. Weird. Similarly, I used to use the news feature but it doesn't do Yenc which seems to be the method of encoding binaries currently in style.

    10. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Reziac · · Score: 1
      One nice thing about 3.04 is that it will tolerate being merely dumped onto a system, and doesn't require a proper installing. I've been migrating the same copy that way for years.

      If an NNTP server fails to actively *request* the password in the prescribed fashion, Netscape will report a failed login due to "bad password". The Wildcat 5.x NNTP server has that bug, so it doesn't work with NS3.x. I suppose it's possible that your ISP's new POP server is either misconfigured or has a similar bug. Anyway, it's worth asking 'em to check it, assuming they give a flip.

      I still sometimes use NS3 for news -- the way around the evil yEnc problem, or multipart files in general, is to select all the body parts, then "save as" to a file on disk, at which point NS will proceed to download them all to a single file. Then use UUDeview to decode it. UUDeview is smart enough to deal with headers and multiple files, and now knows about yEnc. Also, if UUDeview says the file is bad, it is definitely bad, no matter what else may claim to have successfully decoded it.

      I use NewsXpress for most news now (very text and keyboard friendly, and far less annoying than Agent, which I loathe), but NX never heard of yEnc. So I use a variant of the above method: archive all desired posts to a folder, then use UUDeview to decode them all (or selected files) at once, yEnc or not.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    11. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by robogun · · Score: 1

      Yenc is a joke. It, and years ago, Base-64 were merely attempts by Usenet users to lose AOLers (me-too'ers) and more recently Outlook users by obsoleting their client software.

      Of course, eventually their software gets updated and they come back. In the meantime Usenet is filled with their complaints and the attendant responses from the Usenet intelligentia, who daily demonstrate their superiority by instructing them to "Get a Real Newsreader (tm)."

      They won't, and after their software updates things will quiet down. But in two or three years another new eocoding scheme will take off like wildfire. Not because it is better, or more efficient. But because it will allow the longtime Usenet users to temporarily lose the AOLers and Outlook users again.

      I remember the anti Base64 arguments back when that came out and they were exactly the same as the anti-Yenc complaints currently being heard on Usenet.

      Just to stay on topic, this counts as Internet Pollution (R) because many posters try to make everybody happy by reposting the same files in Base64, thus more than doubling the bandwidth in some binary newsgroups.

      Thanks for the tip on the NNTP servers. I'll check it out.

    12. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by evil+ai · · Score: 1
      Similarly, searching on an obscure actor would return hundreds of sites all wanting to sell you posters, DVDs and videos of the movie they had their bit parts in, but little actual information. That is a good example of information pollution, a term I heard first from Earthlink
      Is that really Information Pollution or a case of our search tools not scaling well to the volume of information? I think it's just a matter of coming up with better tools to filter and find information. The semantic web is a promising move in that direction. But with no clear way to implement it, it's going to be a long wait...

      I'm not familiar with search engine technologies at all, but it looks like the technology is not keeping up with or adapting fast enough to the rate that new information is being put on the net.

    13. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Actually, Base64 was annoying BBS folk long before Usenet was popular. Most QWK readers didn't handle it (of those few that handled attachments at all) and most BBS software mangled multipart Base64 attachments anyway, even if they handled the older UUEncodes properly. EQCity BBS's Real Sysop (I'm tne co-sysop-at-large -- yes, we still have a dialup BBS!) wrote a little utility that fixes the problem for Wildcat 4.x QWK packets.

      While most people just use whatever is popular and don't realise how it shuts out less-endowed folk, there are indeed some who glory in their exclusionism. (Linuxdom is loaded with 'em, as anyone reading /. soon learns.) "Get a REAL whatever" has been the battle cry of exclusionists since time immemorial, with scant regard for whether that's practical or even desirable. Which often enough, it's not:

      At least UUEncode and Base64 didn't mangle data, you have to convert binaries to some form of text for NNTP no matter what, and these formats at least preserved data integrity. But with yEnc, Jeremy is right, the percentage of corrupt yEnc posts is vastly higher, resulting in both [ObTopic] information and bandwidth pollution even for folk equipped to gracefully handle the nasty stuff. yEnc post corruption is chronic enough that unless the end result is a textfile (such as an ebook) where data integrity doesn't matter so much, I no longer bother downloading yEnc files at all. (Earthlink has really good completeness and retention, and I rarely to never see mangled base64 posts. So it's not my NNTP server at fault!)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    14. Re:Junk in search results? Where? by KrispyKringle · · Score: 1
      I use exclusively Linux on my desktop and have no issues with IE-only sites. Except for a very select few, most sites render fine in Firebird, Mozilla, or Konqueror. I know offhand of one that only seems to work in Opera, and maybe two more that render fine but without certain features they have on IE, like dropdown menues. Maybe I don't know what I'm missing, but everything seems to be fine.

      Perhaps the issue is not that they are designed to work only in IE, but that they are using web standards that were developed since your browser was made (i.e.XHTML 1.0, CSS 1.0, etc). These standards do, in fact, change, and believe it or not, are actually often improvements.

      But I guess insisting on a no longer supported browser because it is somehow indefinably better ammounts to Ludditism now, eh? (No, I'm not trying to be an ass, but I can just as easily set my browser to be ``immune to flash, java tricks, and lame DHTML.'')

  63. Talking about information pollution... by hkmwbz · · Score: 1
    It is kind of interesting that you should be posting a comment for this story, and at the same time you advertise a completely unrelated web site outside your sig! This means that you insert it into every comment.

    I am not attacking you here, I am simply making an observation, and I am wondering if this isn't the kind of thing which contributes to "pollution". Your site could have been left in the sig, because then I wouldn't have to view it if I didn't want to.

    Why the site ad outside the sig?

    --
    Clever signature text goes here.
  64. useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where did this nielsen guy come from ???
    he's utterly useless.

  65. Information pollution may be a new buzzphrase by wiresquire · · Score: 2, Informative

    but is not exactly a new conycept. It's been around in the knowledge management world for many years.Eg, here's a link that mentions it from 1998, but I'm sure that there were a number of research papers that refer to this from earlier.

    --

    So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?

  66. Nobody uses invisible mode? by Oriumpor · · Score: 1

    ICQ and AIM the top two messagers both allow you to appear offline, and still be able to initiate messages. I have used this functionality for many years during work hours, or while I don't want to be bugged by a quick "UH-OH" or Aim chime and a 5-10 minute conversation.

    1. Re:Nobody uses invisible mode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to seem like a n00b, but how do you do that for AIM?

    2. Re:Nobody uses invisible mode? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about this: ICQ allows you to only allow IMs of people on your contact list.

      So all you have to do is limit your list to nothing but the people you actually would get important messages from (and then tell those family members and co-workers that IM is like the phone -- only to be used when its something worth talking about).

      Never strive for a technological solution when a human one presents itself. (People listen when you yell at them).

    3. Re:Nobody uses invisible mode? by anubi · · Score: 1
      I don't know just what to think of all of today's personal interruption devices.

      I thought the telephone was bad enough. Fine if your business was in marketing and it was your business to be available... but if you are in production, you are supposed to be in the lab building something, not yapping on the phone. If its that friggen important, it should be the person who engaged you to do something, and it would be in his best interest if he were to come to you personally to discuss it, not have you spending valuable time servicing phone interrupts.

      Its gotten much worse lately. The phone. The fax. The mail. The email. Now cellphones. And IM. Geez, when does anybody ever do anything? We seem to be a network of routers. Somehow we find jobs where we get paid to delegate someone else to actually do anything - but who's doing anything these days? Is it offshore so you can hire people to actually do something?

      Another thing that pisses me off about all this new technology is the social aspects of it... you are opening yourself up to all sorts of casual contact, and each contact eats up so much time to service. If you are not easy to contact, people leave you alone. Once someone has made contact with you, now the onus is on you to respond or they get their feelings hurt... and everybody who has taken the trouble to contact you expects a timely response. Ok, so I get a cellphone... suddenly all my family and friends want to know it. They call when I am in the middle of something. But I gotta remember my manners, make nice, and go on and on and on about the lost cat or whatever. When I am supposed to be designing something for a client.

      The more things I have that can interrupt me, the less stuff I can do. By even having the stuff, I am forced to get people's feelings hurt, because once they have used it to snag me, they feel that they should be given priority time. We have placed technology at a special place in our life. Its like when we personally visit someone else, and the phone rings, it gets priority. The technology gets to do the dirty work of butting in and forcing an interrupt to shut it up.

      That little priority trick ( aka "dialing for attention" ) was shown to me when I went to register for college. There was a long line in front of the desk. I didn't know if it was the right line or not. Confused, I asked another student. He didn't know either but gave me an extremely valuable piece of advice... that is to walk up to the front of the line, see if there's a phone on the desk, get the number, then call it and ask my question. Presto - instant front-of-the-line by using the phone! Walking up to someone and banging a bell until I got attention would socially be considered extremely rude, but doing the same thing using technology is quite acceptable.

      This technology comes at a price. The price of being interruptible. If people know you have a personal interrupt mechanism available which others can access but not them, now you have hurt their feelings. You give them access and thats just that much less time you have to get your own stuff done.

      I was at Burger King the other day, and kinda felt sad for one guy that came in with his laptop and wireless phone, trying to make the most of his lunch "hour". Here he was, trying to type up email responses on one subject, yet his cellphone would ring every time he closed it.. and it didn't sound like very productive calls to me. They sounded like he was rescheduling yesterday's work over and over again instead of doing it. I wonder if he enjoyed his burger, or had to toss down a bottle of antacid to get his body to accept food during such a barrage of interrupts.

      The way this technology has mushroomed, I find it amazing anyone can actually do anything.

      --
      "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]

  67. Secretary by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 1

    I don't have a gatekeeper- because I don't have that kind of 'gate'. No IM here. I won't deal with it, and in fact I have my phone ringer off as well.
    What I do find is that I need help keeping track of the information I do want. I once wrote a program named 'Staccato' to do that: it ran on boot and reminded me what was up that day.
    I went to OSX and was in the puzzling situation of trying to dig through loads of information to find the same thing, as freeware, but in the end I did something totally different but better with two free programs one of which is a front end on a really fundamental UNIX tool.
    I ran system console on my desktop (MkConsole) and stuck my reminders into cron as >& /dev/console so they were added to the list of messages.
    So now, I may not have a secretary, but something starts gently reminding me every hour past midnight, "...did you do some writing on my novel yet?" knowing that I write late and have been known to forget. And my weekly events and appointments are in there as well. The computer is not acting to block information coming in. The computer is allowing me to NOT HAVE that information in my head in the first place, and feeding me it only when I want it. Otherwise I'd have to keep it all 'live' in order to know what was relevant that day and what was not.
    It's not always about writing the bot to decide for you who you don't want to hear from. Sometimes it's the bot that acts as a clever alarm clock. I could also see using a heinous shell script to do something like *crunchcrunchcrunch* "Um, it looks like you haven't touched this project in three months. Do you still want to finish it? Your busiest project was X..."

  68. google search features by mxnmatch · · Score: 1

    Just use "-" to remove results you don't want. So, if "teen" returns too many results that involve sex, just do "teen -sex" and no pages with the word sex will be returned.

    1. Re:google search features by rifter · · Score: 1

      Just use "-" to remove results you don't want. So, if "teen" returns too many results that involve sex, just do "teen -sex" and no pages with the word sex will be returned.

      And what if you are writing about teen sex but not about 18 year old porno actors? ahhh yes I guess you are screwed then.

    2. Re:google search features by ahknight · · Score: 1

      teen sex -"porno actors"

      Gray matter is not just a blog software...

    3. Re:google search features by rifter · · Score: 1

      teen sex -"porno actors"

      Gray matter is not just a blog software...

      Whatever. I suppose that when you write academic papers on teen sex it is about "hot lesbians" and XXX blowjobs. Just a few of the many uninformative sites that that search brings up.

  69. Hah by buddha42 · · Score: 1

    ""Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases, appearing in various media to describe unwanted phone calls, faxes, emails, etc. Jakob Nielsen,...

    Did anyone else mistake the "." at the end of "etc" for another comma and still think the sentance made perfect sense?

  70. #4 hits the nail on the head. by Trejkaz · · Score: 1

    I get almost zero "unwanted instant messaging interruptions" because almost every interruption I get is wanted.

    --
    Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
  71. Re: Zero porn content by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 2, Funny
    Zero porn content in a random search for teens.
    And where do you go to get 100% porn content in a random search for teens?
    I need to do "research" for a "company", too.
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  72. Sysline is the answer by gvc · · Score: 1
    I use an ancient BSD program called sysline for monitoring my email. When email arrives, I see the sender's name, the subject, and as much of the text as fits in a one-line window. And if I choose not to read the mail a single asterisk appears at the right side of the window until I do.

    I am able to triage incoming mail in approximately 2 seconds. If the message is short like "call home" or "meeting in 5 minutes" I can absorb it without opening my mail client. If it is longer I can almost always determine whether or not it would be useful for me to interrupt what I'm doing to read it.

    This interface is in direct contrast to an alert box that demands your intervention in order to make it go away, or to a single flag that tells you nothing about the content of the message.

    This interface gives me the same immediacy as an instant message or a telephone call, but is far less intrusive. I can easily handly a couple of hundred emails a day, but that meay phone or IMs would drive me nuts.

    I'm not sure why this program has fallen into disuse, replace by inferior user interfaces.

  73. Google's next challenge? by thellamaman · · Score: 1

    Google has it covered, easily. You just need to learn how to exclude pages. Try:

    java "cell phones" -"ring tones"

    1. Re:Google's next challenge? by Dick+Faze · · Score: 1

      Too bad this doesn't work reliably anymore. Try: lalane -"juicer" -"juice" -"juicing" for a page full of links about buying a juice machine.

  74. Less than it appears at first glance... by Cody+Hatch · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...but still interesting.

    If (and this is a really big if) it was well done, I might be interested in a program that sat between me and usenet, irc, IM, email (and whatever other mediums comes along), and filtered out the worst, brought the urgent stuff to my attention, and just stored the rest.

    My initial negative reaction to his article was because for the technically savvy user, email (his major focus) is (or can be) like he wants. A bit of fiddling with procmail, install a bayesian filter, a bit of training, and email isn't really a problem.

    That still leaves two fairly important problems which do need adressing - perhaps even by his "control panel". First, the tools need to get easier for the non-tech-savvy to use (although that's a much lesser problem than it was, given the integration of bayesian filtering in current versions of Mozilla). Second, the tools need to be expanded and integrated. My usenet client supports filtering using a static ruleset - but in its own "special" format. My email client uses bayesian filtering - but my IM client doesn't do any at all!

    What would be nice is a single place where you write rules and/or feed stuff into bayesian filters for ALL your incoming communications. That'd be the tech-savvy version of Nielsen's "control panel", should be useful, and might not even be that hard to implement.

    For a start, how hard would it be to write an IM to email gateway? That is, an IM client that accepts incoming IM messages, converts them into emails and feeds them into your MDA (procmail, say) where you could run it through whatever filters you wanted? Google turns up this project, but it looks to be nothing more than a rough outline of an initial design doc so far.

    Still, if you took the concept and extended it, your MDA and MUA would become your CDA (communications delivery agent) and CUA (communications user agent) - methods for filtering, managing, and displaying all sorts of communications, not just email. If filters can keep pace with the spam, then that should solve the problen...

  75. reduce, reuse,... by name773 · · Score: 0

    recycle!!!

  76. The New Pollution by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    She's got cigarette on each arm
    She's got the lilly-white cavity crazes
    She's go a carborator tied to the moon
    Pink eyes looking to the food of the ages

    She's alone in the new pollution
    She's alone in the new pollution

    she's got a hand on a wheel of pain
    She can talk to the mangling strangers
    She can sleep in a fiery bog
    Throwing troubles to the dying embers

    She's alone in the new pollution
    She's alone in the new pollution

    She's alone in the new pollution
    She's alone in the new pollution

    She's got a paradise caoflauge
    Like a whip-crack sending me shivers
    She's a boat through a strip-mine ocean
    Riding low on the drunken rivers

    She's alone in the new pollution
    She's alone in the new pollution

    "The New Pollution" - Beck

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  77. Cluttered desktop - task-oriented dashboard by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How about this GNOME project that relates all your messaging (and other) info into a consolidated dashboard? A better metaphor than a desktop, especially for mobile devices like "phones".

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  78. Technological solutions for social problems don't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    work.

    "Information Pollution"=new name for an old concept.

    Next.

  79. Programming by Tim+Ward · · Score: 1

    When I was programming, I only processed email 2-3 times a day (morning, right before lunch, and towards the end of the day) and this worked very well.

    Don't work too well if some of the email comes from the change control system and says, in effect, "drop what you're doing and fix this bug now because there are five people waiting for it".

  80. Has anyone ever noticed.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That people like Jakob Nielsen are the main sources of the pollution they are compaining about?

  81. Ohmygod! You modded down Alan Cox! by StupidKatz · · Score: 1

    ... you bastard!

    Seriously, grandparent, set yourself up your own mail server (assuming you can't mooch root/whatever access off someone else you know that runs theirs) and set up a new email alias, which then points right back to your system account, for every single instance that requires the divulgence of such an address. Customize it in respect to the requesting site: 'brian.slashdot.org@youkickedmydog.org', for example.
    This is only slightly defeated by the need to maintain a highly visible address, such as one posted on some whacky Linux web site somewhere, and yet aliases can still be used to that end, although not as effectively.

    That said, I have had three out of approximately two hundred aliases posted on web sites for the past four years, and the site that delivers the highest volume of spam to my inbox is someonelikesyou.com, due to ONE of my "friends" plunking my actual address into their maw some time ago, which amounts to, at most thus far, one spam a week.

    Other occasional sources are the now defunct digitalmandate mailing list ("Support the US Beef Export Ban!!!@!"), and a bi-monthly blurb from some moron that includes webmaster@/abuse@/postmaster@ in their lists. All but the RFC required/recommended addresses have their own alias, dropped at any time I wish. Also, I then have a very good idea of whom sold me out.

    1. Re:Ohmygod! You modded down Alan Cox! by Aliencow · · Score: 0

      I do have my own mail server. I just figure if people can't press reply and send a reply the first time they email me, what they were gonna send me wasn't worth reading anyways.

    2. Re:Ohmygod! You modded down Alan Cox! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just metamoderated him down. :) It'll be some time till he can moderate again.

  82. Pollution by ProfKyne · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's 6:18 in the morning so I'm a little groggy, but I honestly thought the headline read

    "Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases, appearing in various media to describe unwanted phone calls, faxes, emails, Jakob Nielsen, etc.

    Also, this guy has a another funny point about Jakob Nielsen's press photos.

    --
    "First you gotta do the truffle shuffle."
  83. Buzzwords! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "Information Pollution" is one of the newer buzz-phrases
    Shouldn't that be iPollution?
  84. Ringing cells ? Switch 'em off !!! by GreenEggsAndHam · · Score: 1

    Simple as that. The owners simply switches the phone back on when they're back. They never ask who switched the phone off : they've been 0wn3d. Yourself, you've avoided getting wound up over the whole thing.

    Now if we could do something against hysterical laughing ....

  85. information "literacy" needed by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Some people are "voer wired", that is hooked to cellphones, beepers, internet, IM all the time. You dont need all that. You learn to choose what is important and what to discard.

  86. beware of relatives with laptops by peter303 · · Score: 1

    I noticed a new form of information pollution this xmas. Several of my relatives were toting around laptops on which they had loaded thousands of digital slides and hours of digital videos of there summer vacations, pet antics, and other thrilling subjects. I realize the ubergeeks have had this capability for some years, but now it has perculated to the unwashed masses.

  87. IM Spam by Darren+Hiebert · · Score: 1

    Has anyone else been getting unsolicited IM messages on YIM! from automated bots using randomized screennames? Once a week, or so, I will get an IM containing only a smiley from an obviously randomized screenname. Sending any reply gets a one-time automated response directing you to some porn website.

  88. Re:Poll - Who's more annoying: Nielsen or Bowie Po by rifter · · Score: 1

    A- Conceited without reason
    B- Self-interested to astronomic proportions
    C- Frustratingly condescending and tunnel-visioned
    D- Doesn't matter, it's all idiocy to me.

    E - Cowboyneal
    F - ????
    G - Profit!

    I am going with E personally, though I am starting to lean towards F.

  89. How about... by sean.peters · · Score: 1

    ... those a$$holes who, in the depths of the cubicle farm, make all of their phone calls on the &^%$ SPEAKERPHONE - so we're all treated to both ends of the conversation... at max volume, of course, because it's hard to hear and be heard over the speaker!

    Sean

  90. The cure for that by webwench_72 · · Score: 1
    The cure for that is to go over and slam the offender's door closed, loudly. Usually this can be done incognito.

    In a cubicle farm, thrown paperwads have their uses. I recommend this only in less-formal IT environments.

    --

  91. I can't even find ringtones by joee · · Score: 2, Funny
    Yeah, that is becoming a real problem, any search for anything that is remotely connected to mobile/cell phones returns the dreaded "FREE RING TONES".

    Ironically, I've actually been trying to find a ringtone to give a friend as a Christmas gift. But information pollution (read: search engine spam) has made it impossible for me to find a decent version of the tune or clear instructions on how to install it on her phone. I'm even willing to pay!

  92. Use the Slashdot method. by Rob9000 · · Score: 1

    Slashdot does a great job of filtering, by using humans as moderators. I'd like to see a moderated search engine.