Slashdot Mirror


WhenU.com Enjoined From Competing Pop-Ups

Frisky070802 writes "The NY Times reports that a preliminary injunction has been issued against WhenU.com, a company that distributes software that performs certain tasks for users but also intercepts their website visits so that, for instance, a visitor to Expedia would see a pop-up ad for Orbitz. Now if only we could get rid of all the rest of the pop-up ads."

148 comments

  1. Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by the+man+with+the+pla · · Score: 3, Informative

    My favorite pop-up blocker is google's toolbar. ,

    If I'm going to have some stupid something sitting my windows toolbar section, it might as well do some useful stuff--search google, block pop-ups, and give me pagerank.

    I love free software.

    Davak

    --
    The linux hacker
    1. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and give me pagerank

      YOU HaeV ViOLaTE TeH PRIVACIE!!!!!111

    2. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 4, Informative

      My favourite pop-up blocker with Mozilla, with Opera a close second. I'd go with Opera if it weren't for Adblock from Mozdev.org.

      --
      Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
    3. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by geekychic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ironically, enabling the "advanced features" of the Google Toolbar does nearly exactly the same thing as WhenU's software in that it sends the URL of the page you are visiting to Google which returns the page rank and category of that URL.

      Same method, completely different use.

    4. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Lshmael · · Score: 4, Informative

      However, the installation for the Google Toolbar clearly states that this will happen if you enable the advanced features. Secondly, those "advanced features" are optional, and not enabled by default.

      Different method, completely different use.

    5. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Kris_J · · Score: 1

      My favourite is still Proxomitron, even though development ceased a while back.

    6. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Full ACK. I especially like the ability to quickly switch between several proxies which is pretty cool when flaming idiots on patriotic message boards while pretending to be a Frenchman/German/whatever.

    7. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by MyFourthAccount · · Score: 1

      My favorite pop-up blocker is google's toolbar.

      As much as I like Google, their popup blocker does not work terribly well. It will ocasionally let popups through, which really should not happen.

      I always liked Meaya Popup Ad Filter which works a lot better, but I'd have to agree with the Mozilla crowd, why pay for that if you can get it for free?

      Btw. I don't think software has to be free, but $25.- for a popup killer is just too much, like $20.- for a music CD or $200.- for M$ Office is...

    8. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by jefe7777 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know a lot of people are going to mention mozilla. And for good reason. It just works. But I'd like to mention that pop-ups represent a golden opportunity to introduce opensource software to your non-techie friends and family.

      The non-geeks have a difficult time understanding the whole concept. But if you solve a very visible problem for them, like pop-ups, you earn a chance to tell them why mozilla exists. Don't beat them on the head with it (i.e. don't preach), just feed them a little. Next time they have a problem, they'll come back for more.

      So while pop-ups are a curse for your average folk, we geeks can make a little use out of the situation.

      jef

    9. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      If it weren't for the credibility issues of such campaigns, I could see a lot of pop-up ads for Mozilla: "If you were using Mozilla, this window wouldn't be here to annoy you."

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
    10. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Andrea_from_Arg · · Score: 1
      My favorite pop-up blocker is google's toolbar.

      In Windows, if you don't use Firebird, you can use myIE2 (http://www.myie2), which uses the Internet Explorer rendering engine, and adds lots of features (tabs, content filter, mouse gestures, and of course, popups blocking)

      --
      :: Andrea ::
      Anime Wallpapers
    11. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by lonb · · Score: 1
      I am not pro-WhenU, but the implications here are factually wrong. I am familiar with the WhenU story because I consulted for WhenU's sister company (in the same office). WhenU software provides service which many people consider valuable and functional -- it offers competing deals and coupons for the products or services visitors are looking for, as they shop. This is not very different from going to compare prices on mySimon.com or using handhelds that give nearby deals at other stores (something like Handango's Thrifty Shopper).

      In my experience a user does, in fact, need to agree to install the software. My only contention is whether or not most users realize what they're doing. That's a topic for a different debate.

      If it may be said that users are intelligently agreeing to the use of WhenU's software, than there is nothing wrong with the service. In fact it's great for anyone frequently shops online and wants the best deals.

      I'll end by noting that personally, I don't think that (users are intelligently agreeing...) can be said.

      --
      "Ain't I a stinka..." - Bugs
    12. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by slasher999 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm a Mozilla'er as well - Firebird to be precise. I read that XP SP2 Beta review and noticed that IE is getting a popup blocker of it's own when SP2 for XP is released. It's about time.

    13. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      I use galeon and checked "Open Popup Windows in Tabs". Good enough for me.
      I don't miss sites that depend on popups or display useful stuff in them (those are still out there *sigh*) and spotting/closing the ads takes no time - the title bar gives it away.

      There are a few really nice sites where the webmaster makes some extra bucks (or any at all..) through popup ads. I like the fact that I'm still supporting them a bit that way even tho I never see their ads (unless I miss the X on first click...).

      Unforna

    14. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by Feztaa · · Score: 2, Funny

      So while pop-ups are a curse for your average folk, we geeks can make a little use out of the situation.

      "I don't want Mozilla, I want the internet!"

      *sigh*

      I just installed mozilla anyway and made the Internet Explorer and Outlook Express icons launch moz instead.

    15. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by taped2thedesk · · Score: 1
      I agree, I love the Mozilla Firebird pop-up blocker. In my experience, Google didn't manage to block ALL popup ads. Mozilla products block them all.

      It is also easier to allow popups from specific sites in Mozilla. Throw in the Flash Click To View extension and you've eliminated a great deal of the annoying crap that comes along with surfing the web.

    16. Re:Shamless google pop-up blocker plug by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Nothing that has javascript can eliminate popups. You just happen to be ahead of the curve, and advertisers are all using the same method. Once they realize that plenty of people are blocking them, they'll do the same thing the website in my .sig does...

      Only way to get rid of it is to disable javascript all-together, and you can do that with any browser (Internet Explorer, Mozilla, Firebird, Opera, Navigator, etc.)

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  2. When U... by graveyardduckx · · Score: 3, Funny

    When U dot com, U get mozilla and block pop ups.

  3. WhenU wish upon a star... by ObviousGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Star light
    star bright
    first star I see tonight
    I wish I may
    I wish I might
    see all spammers and pop-up software writers be sent directly to jail, do not pass go, do not collect 200 dollars.

    --
    I have been pwned because my /. password was too easy to guess.
  4. That is scheduled for... by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We are scheduled to get rid of pop-up ads right after we deal with SPAM once and for all.

    Don't hold your breath, please.


    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:That is scheduled for... by jmv · · Score: 1

      We are scheduled to get rid of pop-up ads right after we deal with SPAM once and for all.

      Isn't the problem already solved? I'm using Mozilla (galeon actually) and I'm only reminded popups still exist when I have to use a Windows machine that only has IE (not very often). I may have missed something, but it would seem like the SPAM problem is much further from being solved.

    2. Re:That is scheduled for... by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Informative

      Spam is easy. Just use a mail aliasing system that allows you to give a unique address to every form and your real one to none. Then if one alias starts receiving spam, kill it. Only problem is that it doesn't fix an account already infected with spam, you have to change address. Best move I ever made was dumping my Yahoo address and signing up for a Spamgourmet account.

    3. Re:That is scheduled for... by jmv · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So it's not that easy, right? At least not as easy as the one click it takes to get rid of popups. The other non-easy thing is that I still want people to be able to reach me (being the author of a couple OSS packages) and the best way is to leave an address on a web site. So far it's been easier to just use a bayesian filter... hope it'll continue to work (so far, much less than 1% of the spam gets through).

    4. Re:That is scheduled for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WinXP SP2 will include a popup-blocker for IE6. When 90% of the webbrowsing population suddenly starts blocking popups, advertisers will find ways around this embargo. Mozilla's popup-blocker will cease to be efficient real soon now. Don't get me wrong, I love Mozilla's popup-blocking feature. Just don't think the tranquility will last. The signs are already on the horizon: Many gaming related sites use interstitials, ordinary links to ordinary pages, but not the one you wanted to go to. To get there you have to click a small link on a page full of advertisements. You also may have encountered "shoshkeles", symbols or ad-windows floating over the page by means of DHTML. Sure, turn off Javascript and they're gone, but these sites frequently require Javascript to work at all. Even if they don't, it's not the end of the road for advertisers: Userfriendly uses animated GIFs to cover the content for 30 seconds. If you use another one of Mozilla's anti-annoyance filters and only show the first frame of animated GIFs, you never get to see the content.

    5. Re:That is scheduled for... by ZeLonewolf · · Score: 1
      Try this:
      <script language="JavaScript">
      <!--
      var name = "protected";
      var domain = "psacake.com";
      document.write('<a href=\"mailto:' + name + '@' + domain + '\">');
      document.write(name + '@' + domain + '</a>');
      // -->
      </script>
      --
      "If at first you don't succeed, lower your standards."
    6. Re:That is scheduled for... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haven't seen a pop up in ages.
      Of course, I use Mozilla.

      If you meant getting rid of them entirely, you'd probably have to get rid of IE...

    7. Re:That is scheduled for... by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      That's not nice as it kills some of the biggest advantages of E-Mail: being available at the same address, forever and from everywhere.

      I want to give my (=one) E-Mail address to anyone without having to worry about getting my inbox rammed with spam soon.

      I don't want to make up an alias everytime I give someone my address (or post it somewhere) and I don't want to have to manage all these aliases.

      What if one alias that constantly receives important mail (e.g. mailing list, newsletter, whatever) starts getting spam?
      Kill the alias and re-subscribe to all the mailing lists?

      What if the alias that you gave to your most important customer starts getting spam?
      Kill the alias, kill the customer?

      Multiplying the problem with aliases doesn't solve it..

    8. Re:That is scheduled for... by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1
      Improved version:
      <script language="JavaScript">
      <!--
      var name = "protected";
      var domain = "psacake.com";
      document.write('<a href=\"mailto:' + name + '@' + domain + '\">');
      // -->
      </script>
      <img src="emailaddy.png" alt="e-mail address">
      <script language="JavaScript">
      <!--
      document.write('</a> ');
      // -->
      </script>
      Users without javascript will still be able to see the address (emailaddy.png), just not click it.
    9. Re:That is scheduled for... by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      Kill the alias and re-subscribe to all the mailing lists?
      I'm guessing that since you made that plural you don't fully understand how the aliasing concept works.
      What if the alias that you gave to your most important customer starts getting spam?
      And since you said that, you don't understand how spammers get email addresses -- Hint: it's not by magic.

      Email aliasing works. I'm sure it's harder for a company than an individual, but the "problems" you list aren't problems. The aliases all manage themselves and point to a single mailbox. Using the right system you can still press "reply" and your outgoing mail is re-aliased perfectly. In the whole time I've been using spamgourmet, only one alias has started receiving spam. Better to cut that loose than poison my entire inbox.

  5. Here, there, everywhere! by seanvaandering · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes, the old adage of "click here, end up there" scenario - unfortunately, the only people that will really benefit from all this fighting back and forth are the lawyers. Who really gives a damn about the users anyways?

    1. Re:Here, there, everywhere! by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      "Who really gives a damn about the users anyways?"

      Hey! we at DHS/NSA care about users! We CARE what they read, where they go, what they buy, what they say on their cellphone, what is in their email, how often they download communism in the form of linux, what color their underware is .....

      **Snap!**

      Damn I hate it when that happens......

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
  6. Re:WhenU.com by waaka! · · Score: 2, Informative

    Well, based on reading the article, WhenU.com offers software that helps people fill out address forms and check weather forecast, while providing you with the aforementioned ads from competitors of the website your visiting. (IMO, neither of these example tasks seems like something that would require a separate program to do, let alone one that hijacks your browser with popups.)

  7. This is illegal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If I'm clear about what my software does, and this site was, then I ought to be free to distribute it and block popups or anything else I want. If this behavior is illegal, then popup blocking software ought to be illegal, too.

    1. Re:This is illegal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Couldn't say it any better. Mod parent up.

    2. Re:This is illegal.. by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If I'm clear about what my software does, and this site was, then I ought to be free to distribute it and block popups or anything else I want. If this behavior is illegal, then popup blocking software ought to be illegal, too.
      The difference is that if I install a popup blocker, I expect it to block popup ads. I don't expect it to also "enable [me] to receive valuable software for free by agreeing to see occasional ads."

      If I install KaZaA - God help me if that day ever comes! - I expect it to find me music. I don't expect its bundled programs to also "reach [me] at the exact moment [I] express an interest in [some advertiser's] product."

      Speaking of which, if I go to expedia.com, I'm not expressing an interest in orbitz.com's product! I'm expressing an interest in Expedia.

      I can see both sides of the issue here, and for once it's actually difficult for me to take sides in an issue that involves advertising (usually it's a no-brainer). I still find myself siding against WhenU, though. EULA or no EULA, their practices are sneaky and underhanded. The article claims that between Gator and WhenU, more than 30 million people are infec^Wusing this software. How many of them do you think have any fucking clue it's installed, and of those, how many have the slightest idea how to get rid of it?
      --
      "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
    3. Re:This is illegal.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. People do not realize they are installing this crap. All statements to the contrary by the spyware companies are bullshit.

  8. for the lazy by empee · · Score: 3, Informative

    Company Barred From Use of Some Pop-up Ads
    By BOB TEDESCHI

    Published: January 5, 2004

    JUST when some federal courts seemed unwilling to find fault with a controversial type of pop-up Web advertising, a federal judge in New York has called at least a temporary timeout on one version of the advertisements.

    Late last month the judge, Deborah A. Batts of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, issued a preliminary injunction that bars the advertising software company WhenU.com from displaying pop-ups and other types of online advertisements for VisionDirect.com when visitors go to 1-800 Contacts.com, a competing Web site.

    The decision is the latest twist in a battle between WhenU and more than a dozen companies that object to its advertising techniques. Many more companies are closely watching the fight to determine whether they, too, should sue WhenU and its closest competitor, the Claria Corporation, or simply sign up as advertisers.

    Opponents of WhenU's and Claria's advertising approach compare it to hijacking customers after they have entered a store. The techniques differ from the conventional pop-up advertisements, as when the travel company Orbitz.com pays publishers to have its ads pop up on readers' screens.

    With WhenU's and Claria's services, for example, Orbitz would pay to have its ads pop up with Web surfers visiting the competing site Expedia.com - as in fact happened last week when visitors arrived at Expedia.com.

    In such a case, Orbitz has an opportunity to lure a prospective Expedia customer from Expedia's own site. For this to work, WhenU and Claria must have the Web surfer's complicity. Each company has distributed its software to more than 30 million Internet users. The free software helps users accomplish various tasks online, whether it be filling out address forms or checking weather forecasts.

    In exchange for these free services, users agree to let a piece of software track their activity as they surf the Web. (In some cases, this software is bundled not with software from WhenU or Claria, but with free software from other companies, like the file-sharing service providers Kazaa and BearShare.) It it this tracking software that enables WhenU or Claria to display a competitors' ads when users visit various sites.

    Online companies have fought WhenU and Claria in the courts for the last three years, usually claiming that their pop-up ads violate federal copyright and trademark laws by disrupting the display of the plaintiffs' Web sites and by unjustly using their trademark to sell advertising, among other complaints.

    But WhenU registered several legal victories in the second half of 2003, beginning with a decision in July by a federal district court in Virginia. In that case, the court rejected the argument of U-Haul that WhenU's ads on behalf of its competitors infringed U-Haul's copyrights and trademarks.

    In October, Internet retailers Overstock.com and TigerDirect.com dropped suits against WhenU. In November, Federal District Court Judge Nancy G. Edmunds, in Detroit, denied Wells Fargo's request for a preliminary injunction in its suit against WhenU. Judge Edmunds ruled that Wells Fargo was not likely to prevail on its claims of copyright and trademark infringement.

    The judge said that WhenU did not use Wells Fargo's trademark, per se, in its advertising, since the pop-ups themselves did not display those trademarks. No trial date has yet been set for the case.

    Judge Batts, in New York, made a different judgment in issuing her preliminary injunction against WhenU. She noted that WhenU places the 1-800 Contacts.com Web address in an internal database that is used to trigger the display of competitors' ads. That, she wrote, violates the Lanham Act's trademark protections, because WhenU has used the trademark of 1-800 Contacts in a way that is likely to cause consumer confusion. Specifically, Judge Batts wrote, consumers could be confused about the connection between

    1. Re:for the lazy by waaka! · · Score: 1

      The article was actually submitted with a partner=GOOGLE parameter in the link, so all of that NY Times registration junk wouldn't have come up, anyway.

    2. Re:for the lazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope the NTY gets on slashdot's assen about that.

      Maybe it would finally prompt them to contact the NYT about a partnership. Using Google's isn't a good idea.

    3. Re:for the lazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assen?! What the fuck is wrong with you? I suppose you think "virii" and "boxen" are words also?

    4. Re:for the lazy by jrutley · · Score: 1

      "The free software helps users accomplish various tasks online, whether it be filling out address forms or checking weather forecasts." So what's the most tactful way to tell the NYTimes to clarify their usage of "free" software?

  9. No problem by noselasd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For the unfortunate friends and family that run Windows, I always install adaware and do a scan of their computer every once in a while.
    http://www.lavasoftusa.com/
    It seems to take care of the adware kazaa installs, and most others.
    Reccomended for every windows user, should be "mandatory" like antivirus software.

    1. Re:No problem by seanvaandering · · Score: 5, Informative

      Then you are gonna love once XP SP2 is finally released, working helpdesk for an ISP myself, I receive call upon call of people whos computers either

      1. Run slow (its your connection!!!)
      2. Boot slow (damn [ISP] software!)
      3. GP error (Must be [ISP]'s fault - I didn't install anything!)

      etc etc...

      Simply disabling the "Enable Third-Party Browser extensions (requires restart)" option 'sometimes' fixes the issue, but being the root of all evil is the browser and the spyware embedded in the registry, most fixes are temporary until you get to the FORMAT C: prompt once again.

      However I do hear yor pain, and FINALLY a firewall enabled by default in SP2 (XP's firewall is disabled by default), popup blockers in IE, and warnings when a program is attempting to install itself into your browser is one hell of a great start on improving the state of the nation. I am personally looking forward to supporting the original issues that I was paid to support - namely the CONNECTION.

      With all those, all you need is a decent Anti-Virus software and a little luser education and they are set.

      Rant is over. Move along.. nothing left to see here...

    2. Re:No problem by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      Just to note, Spybot Search and Destroy is also needed.

      Each miss a little and find stuff the other misses. I regularly run both, even using non-ms browsers/mail clients there is a good deal of crap isntalled, each finding a good dael of ad-ware or tracking devices.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    3. Re:No problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I agree, I tell my friends that are still using Windows to use AdAware, and also SpyBot-Search & Destroy, as SS&D tends to find stuff that even AdAware, as fine an app as it is, misses. I still run 98SE on one partition for games, and I use both (AdAware and SS&D) to keep the nasties down to a tolerable level, and I still find the occasional 'bot and such, even though I only visit the occasional game-site for updates, patches, etc. using 98SE, as I do any serious surfing from one of my linux distros on the same machine. Otherwise, I leave my firewall in 98SE set to "block all".

  10. Controversial statement of the hour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Funny how all through the article not one mention is made of the weaknesses of having IE and Windows (which is the only setup the whenu.com client affects) as a monoculture. I can't count the number of times people on my ISPs board have claimed the ISP must be doing something wrong cos going to one site brings up another, or cos going to one site brings up ads for another.

    Weak software brings about this crap. Start at the base.

    1. Re:Controversial statement of the hour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't the base be Javascript which explicitly allows for pop-ups?

      Pop-up blocking is a specific workaround to a design issue. By not performing pop up functionality, you could say that Mozilla was deliberately introducing bugs in the default setting.

    2. Re:Controversial statement of the hour by fishbowl · · Score: 1

      My big annoyance is the disabling of the right mouse button, which is my back button on IE. I'm not here to steal your stupid pictures, and that trick doesn't work anyway.

      The other thing I really hate is when you have to click a popup. You can't open-in-new-window, or you just get an error page with a javascript popup statement in the url field. Highly annoying.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    3. Re:Controversial statement of the hour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how all through the article not one mention is made of the weaknesses of having IE and Windows (which is the only setup the whenu.com client affects) as a monoculture.

      The problem is not IE and windows as a monoculture, the problem is IE and windows.

      The crappy software, with poor design choices, is the cause of the problem.

      Software has bugs, but it is the poor design choices of MS that makes its bugs so serious. Many other programs/operating systems are designed to run with the minimum user rights possible. So when an exploit based on a bug is reported, the damage is minimized.

  11. Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by core+plexus · · Score: 2, Informative
    "Now if only we could get rid of all the rest of the pop-up ads."

    I use Mozilla, and haven't seen a pop-up in a very long time. In fact, I haven't seen any Flash (which I hate) either.

    -cp-

    Alaska Bugs Sweat Gold Nuggets

    1. Re:Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the flash isnt' really Mozilla so much as it's just "I haven't installed Flash." I *have* seen Flash, and I alternate between Opera and Mozilla.

    2. Re:Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      If you need help installing Flash, check the FAQ.

    3. Re:Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by axxackall · · Score: 1
      If you need help installing Flash, check the FAQ.

      Not much of help for users of most of Linux hardware platforms. The only Linux arch where flash works (somehow) is x86.

      --

      Less is more !
    4. Re:Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by VJTod · · Score: 1

      I use IE and haven't seen pop-ups in a very long time. My work keeps me on the internet almost constantly.

      I think it's more that many home users install crap (whenu.com software, toolbars, search helpers, malware crap).

      I use SpyBot S&D to scan for malware and the like. Usually I find mostly tracking cookies on my computers, but I find loads of crappy malware on my families' computers.

      Pron dialers will not give you free pron.

    5. Re:Get Rid Of Pop-Up Ads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While IE may have it's flaws, it's not the demon most Mozilla-ites and Opera fans want it to be.

      Besides, there are many free IE based browsers that have flash/ad/image blocking, multi-tabbed window browsing etc... My preference is Avant which does the job very nicely.

  12. It just reminds me how low the internet has gotten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The internet seems to become more worthless every day, as more and more of it is hijacked by spammers and other commercialization.

    How can we take it back? If we can't, how can we replace it with something more resistant to these electronic malignancies?

    I want instant communication with friends and colleagues all over the planet, but I don't want UCE. I want instant access to the world's knowledge on all topics, from crucial news to movie trivia, but I want it without viruses, interstitial ads, popups, spyware, and all that other crap.

    By using Linux with some other specialized software, I have erected a defensive perimeter around my internet existence, so the tidal wave of garbage largely passes me by. But the walls need maintenance, and there always seems to be some new leak that needs plugging.

    It's regrettable that we need to take such drastic measures, but what really worries me is that the need is increasing with time. Can you imagine the situation where 99% of your email is spam? Is there an alternative to giving up email entirely at that point?

  13. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    How about having nothing extra in your toolbar and just use Mozilla instead? :) http://mozilla.org/

  14. While I personally wouldn't install such software by ghettoboy22 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I doubt WhenU held a gun to people's head forcing them to install the WhenU client.

    All kidding aside though and to be serious, what right does a court have to block how software the user installed interacts with said user? If the court rules against WhenU in this case, what stops a multitude of lawsuits from being filed because Company X doesn't like how Company Y's software interacts on Average Joe's home computer? I swear, the US is getting WAAY too litigation happy, especially on such tech issues.

    Now while I can certainly understand the affected companies concerns (I work for one of the plaintifs), I simply think the courts have no moral right, let alone legal grounds, to step into this sort of situation.

    To say it plainly, if it's MY computer, I'll install what I choose, and if I'm not happy, I know exactly where the uninstall is located. I think the consumer should be able to decide for themselves what software to install and how it interacts with the rest of my system - I don't need mommy & daddy to decide for me......

    Argh... I could go on for a while here.......

  15. Too dirty even for Microsoft by Mostly+a+lurker · · Score: 1
    Thank goodness for at least one sensible court decision in this area.

    One indication of the impropriety of WhenU's actions is that even Microsoft does not do it. IE does, by default, collect a lot of marketing related material. For instance, anytime Microsoft can claim a search was needed (as when a url is typed in the address bar) it sends the data home. But they do stop short of actually modifying valid links to send users somewhere else.

    1. Re:Too dirty even for Microsoft by jigyasubalak · · Score: 0, Troll

      Son, you underestimate the lows that Microsoft can stoop to. Nothing is too low for them.
      Just don't give them ideas.

      --
      The best planning can be done after the project completes.
  16. Enjoined? by -tji · · Score: 4, Funny

    According to Webster, "Enjoined" is how you say forbidden / prohibited when you want to sound like a lawyer.

    1. Re:Enjoined? by transient · · Score: 1

      My boss has a JD and told me a funny story from law school. The reason lawyers use all that ridiculous language in contracts is that there's all sorts of case law for incomprehensible contracts -- because they're incomprehensible. The ones that are written in plain language are never disputed because they're easy to understand, so there's no case law on them. Most lawyers would rather use language that has been disputed before so that they'll have precedent to back them up.

      --

      irb(main):001:0>
  17. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by MisterFancypants · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How about having nothing extra in your toolbar and just use Mozilla instead?

    You can hide the Google toolbar so it doesn't take up any real estate. And if it is resource (memory, CPU) usage you're worried about, well XUL and other bits of Netscape add a lot more resource usage than the Google toolbar does to IE.

    Note: I have nothing against Mozilla, it is a fine browser, but the 'nothng extra' statement regarding the google toolbar was kind of silly.

  18. Pop Ups? by LamerX · · Score: 2, Funny

    What exactly are these pop up things you are talking about? I have never seen a pop up before! Would someone please explain what a pop up is please? And what is this Internet Explorer program? Do people really use this program? I'm totally amazed! I'll have to try it out to see exactly what these "pop up" things are...

    1. Re:Pop Ups? by Sensitive+Claude · · Score: 1

      And what is this Internet Explorer program?

      Internet Explorer uses patented Virus Transfer Protocol technology.
      It makes it so easy to install viruses on your PC that the user doesn't have to make any effort at all.
      Just think of all the pop-ups and viruses you are missing because you are using an inferior browser.
      That's internet content that is basically being censored. I mean if software cannot repeatedly change your homepage to goatse then what has happened to freedom of speech?

      And won't somebody think of the pop-up software writers?
      Just because they create one of the most annoying things in the entire internet doesn't mean we should be insensitive to them.

      --
      Promote Sensitivity on Slashdot, make me your friend.
    2. Re:Pop Ups? by evilviper · · Score: 1

      Click-on my sig and you'll get more pop-ups that you can stomache.

      Not safe for work/home/humans.

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  19. It seems to me by grawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems to me that this is more a victory for the pop-up companies. After all, if this company manages to make it less profitable for companies to USE popup ads, then eventually there will be fewer of them. I mean, it's generally pretty sleezy tactics, but that seems to be the general trend in advertising these days anyway.

    I'm just glad safari and mozilla block popups for me...

  20. We can. by Murmer · · Score: 4, Informative
    As of my starting to type this, there are six comments on this page. By the time I'm finished, there will probably be sixty all saying the same, obvious thing: if you want to stop seeing popups, get Firebird.

    Use Mozilla. Tell your friends.

    --
    Mike Hoye
    1. Re:We can. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you want to play Hexic, you can't unless you use IE.

    2. Re:We can. by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty happy with Opera also. I have had better succes in cross-platform usage, though others have had a different experience there.

      I use Opera as my main browser, Mozilla if it fails, and finally MSIE if both do. My personal experience has been that Opera,Mozilla (or firebird), and MSIE have about the same amount of problem webpages, just different ones. Opera's and Mozilla's have about equivalent crap-blockers (pop-up and other types of stuff). Feature set is about the same, one wins in a few departments, the other in a few different ones. I like Opera's interface better and use thier "wins" more than mozilla's so I use it mainly, others may vary.

      MSIE sucks monkey balls in general though. I have converted all my relatives away from it and all have been *very* happy I have.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    3. Re:We can. by evilviper · · Score: 1
      : if you want to stop seeing popups, get Firebird.

      I'm afraid not... Javascript is evil, and Firebird only works right now because Advertisers are lazy, and all do things the same way. Popups and other annoyances cannot possibly be eliminated until you've completely disabled javascript.

      Go ahead, using Firebird, click the link in my .sig.

      Of course, that link is most certainly not safe for work, home, anywhere else.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  21. Re:While I personally wouldn't install such softwa by fishbowl · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "I doubt WhenU held a gun to people's head forcing them to install the WhenU client."

    No, but I have suspected them of using an IE exploit to install their client without the user's knowledge or consent. I can't prove it, of course, and I'd imagine it would be a big stink if it were true (e.g., felony computer crime for each violation, one would think.)

    They don't literally force anyone to install their software, but they certainly do it clandestinely and without a clear affirmative decision made by the user. It doesn't fall in the same category as literally holding a gun to the user's head, but that doesn't make it ok.

    "To say it plainly, if it's MY computer, I'll install what I choose, and if I'm not happy, I know exactly where the uninstall is located."

    This kind of spyware sneaks in. And without a certain amount of knowledge, such as knowing the registry inside and out, they are very hard to remove. I don't need help with this stuff either, but I know a thing or two about computers. That does not diminish my concern for a victim who cannot say that.

    So instead of holding a gun to your head and making you talk, they sneak into your apartment while you're at work and bug the place. Does that make you feel better?

    --
    -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
  22. it's NOT your PC anymore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    thats is the hole..sorry whole problem. In the hands of Claria(who make the disgusting GAIN), WhenU.com and may others, your PC STOPS being YOUR PC and becomes THEIR PC. Many (l)users have NO idea of all the scumwares installed on their PCs. I certanly didn't about 2 days ago when i d/led, installed both Ad-Aware and SpyBot then I ran them. and I thought I DID get rid of GAIN looong ago, but NOPE, I WAS wrong!
    Today a new practice has been taking hold.
    This practice is called drive-by-software installation. It is largly accomplished in 3 ways:
    Java,
    JavaSCript
    ActiveX controls
    Again, unsuspecting (l)users have NO diea what they are getting into by using Internet Exploder
    with Security Settings on low.
    A (l)user doesn't have to even DO anything today to get a scumware instaleld on their PC, all they need to do is visit a web site.
    For more info, read cexx.org and http://www.searchlores.org/scumware.htm.
    (the searcholres article is mine, BTW and I am adding a lot more to it.)

    1. Re:it's NOT your PC anymore by shadowcabbit · · Score: 1

      A (l)user doesn't have to even DO anything today to get a scumware instaleld on their PC, all they need to do is visit a web site.

      Thanks to the magic of Windows XP, they don't even have to visit a web site. There are exploits that can install crapware without ever opening a browser; the computer just needs to be on an unfirewalled broadband connection. Yay for remote access, boo for not bothering to protect it in any way.

      --
      "Why Subscribe?" Good question...
  23. Popup ads are a tax by Kedder · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Popup ads, as I understand them, are a tax for not knowing how to disable them. If you don't want to learn - you look at ads. If you don't want to look at ads - you learn how to disable them.

    Popups facilitate freedom of choice:)

    I don't remember when I saw popup ads last time...

  24. I'm not a Lawyer but I playone on /. by frode · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "[The Judge] noted that WhenU places the 1-800 Contacts.com Web address in an internal database that is used to trigger the display of competitors' ads. That, she wrote, violates the Lanham Act's trademark protections, because WhenU has used the trademark of 1-800 Contacts in a way that is likely to cause consumer confusion."
    ____

    Since it is an internal database which is entirely
    transparent to the end user I doubt this ruling will stand at trial.

    Also I'm sure in the 8 billion page Eula the End-user agreed to when they installed what ever free software this pop-up program resides in that they (end users)are aware that they can be re-directed to another site depending on their activitites. If not I'm sure a new Eula is being written right now.

    As a side note using a combination of Mozilla and Adaware I haven't had a pop-up in months.

    --
    I have no .Sig
  25. Ethics, Not Privacy, Is the Issue Here by osewa77 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Quote from the WhenU.com site:
    WhenU enables consumers to receive valuable software for free by agreeing to see occasional ads instead of paying a fee


    The injunction against the company only prevents them from using a particular pop-up ad that is triggered when a user visits the webste of one of their customers. So I think the main issue is it ethical to draw people away from your competitor by taking advantage of the fact that you have some software installed which "knows" when you visit your competitors' site?
    1. Re:Ethics, Not Privacy, Is the Issue Here by eples · · Score: 1

      Huh? Of course it's ethical, you can put a Burger King billboard up right next to a McDonalds restaurant.

      The issue is that 1-800 Contacts wants the practice stopped (who can blame them), and that they actually have the phrase "1-800-Contacts" trademarked.

      --
      I'm a 2000 man.
    2. Re:Ethics, Not Privacy, Is the Issue Here by Just+Jim · · Score: 1

      "Huh? Of course it's ethical, you can put a Burger King billboard up right next to a McDonalds restaurant."

      How about inside the restaurant, without the owner's agreement?

    3. Re:Ethics, Not Privacy, Is the Issue Here by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      If I signed up with Ford to tell me when there was a problem with Chevys (such as a safety recall) when I was looking at the models, then I would have asked for it. I don't see how this is any different. If the software produces bad results, I can remove it.

      If you want to make something illegal, make it software which is deliberately difficult to remove.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  26. Another good tool destroyed... by tcdk · · Score: 4, Funny

    One of the things that annoy me the most about pop-up ads, is that they have destroyed an otherwise fine tool. I'll a couple of home-pages and sometimes it would be really nice to be able to do a pop-up. Like for telling people that, if they have to keep on getting the news letter they will have to blah blah, blah... or warning them that there's only two days left if they want to join the competition.

    But people are so negative about pop-ups that if they aren't using a blocker (I'm using Firebird), they certainly aren't reading what's in the pop-up before they close it.

    Yes, most pop-op blockers have a white-list function, but most users are totally clueless on how to use it and will not white list anything. Even if you give them a clue, they will revert to cluelessness in a few minutes. I'm not just guessing here. I installed Mozilla on every workstation here (15 WS's), changed the default browser to mozilla and demoed it, include the white-list function (our intranet uses pop-ups). So they all had the intranet white-listed "out of the box" and they all know that if there's a small blue question mark is means that there's a pop-up that they might be missing. How often do you think that they come to the me, complaining about home pages that doesn't work "in that stupid mozilla browser..." ?

    The only solution that I can see is a global/central white list function. If it was possible to register my site as a "good practice pop-up site" at the various pop-up blocker suppliers, that would could us the pop-up back as a useful tool.

    I imagine the rules for getting on the white list should be something like this:

    1. Only display a pop-up once to each visitor. Use a cookie or something to make sure that you don't do it again.
    2. No ads in the pop-up. The pop-up must be related to the site visited.
    3. Make it clear if clicking a link will result in a pop-up (we need a common icon/symbol for this).
    4. For the extra strict: Only pop-up to registered users who have signed up for the pop-ups. Like phpBB2's "news personal mail" pop-up box.

    I'm unsure if it could be automated, either by analyzing the site with a robot, or through analyzing the manual white-listing done by the users of your blocker software. Otherwise it would have to be a manual process... (which means that it probably would become a paid for extra service).

    --
    TC - My Photos..
    1. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by Kris_J · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There's no such thing as a positive pop-up. They're only annoying, no matter if they contain ads or a message telling you that your password failed. Put the damn message in the body of the web page.

    2. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by pe1chl · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Give an advertiser a useful tool, and he will abuse it until nobody wants the tool anymore!
      Apparently advertisers never consider this effect, they make the same mistake over and over again.

      - They changed television from an information/entertainment medium with the occasional advertisement into a continuous show of advertisements with the occasional show element inbetween. Result: people buy VCRs and TIVO, to skip the ads.

      - when they discovered the banner ad they did not stay with displaying a logo and static advertisement text, no it all had to be animated and blinking. Result: people install banner blockers

      - then they discover the pop-up, and abuse it to such a level that some sites cause an endless loop of popups and the amount of popups is annoying in generel. Result: people demand popup blockers.

      When will they learn to be moderate? Probably never.

    3. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by Frisky070802 · · Score: 1
      There's no such thing as a positive pop-up.

      I disagree with you completely!

      As the parent post noted, there are reasons, other than ads, for which popups are useful. My own reason for not completely disabling popups is:

      1. My company has some internal sites that work by popping up new windows.
      2. I like to respond to CNN polls :)

      The first reason is something they maybe could have worked around, per your comment. But in responding to a poll on a page, I'd much rather have a dismissable popup show me results (as on CNN.com) than move to a new page where I now have to move back to get where I was (money.cnn.com). And if the submit is a button, not a link, I can't shift-click to open elsewhere.

      So, I have to configure the browser to allow some sites and not others. Sadly, to allow polls to popup, I have to allow all the crap ads they send as well, so I should probably just bail, or wait until I figure out (if it's even doable) how to allow the one but not the other. I'm using firebird, if anyone wants to offer suggestions :)

      --
      Mencken had it right. So glad that's old news.
    4. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by DreamerFi · · Score: 1

      The only solution that I can see is a global/central white list function. If it was possible to register my site as a "good practice pop-up site" at the various pop-up blocker suppliers, that would could us the pop-up back as a useful tool.

      Which would work fine until the second the company running the registry realize they can make money by selling entries in the white list.

      Cynical? Maybe, but remember it's advertising we're talking about

      -John

    5. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by Idarubicin · · Score: 1
      I'm unsure if it could be automated, either by analyzing the site with a robot, or through analyzing the manual white-listing done by the users of your blocker software. Otherwise it would have to be a manual process...

      Or you could switch to Opera. The Quick Preferences menu (F12) offers four settings with regard to popups:

      Accept pop-up windows

      Refuse pop-up windows

      Open pop-up windows in background

      Open requested pop-up windows only

      The 'open requested pop-up windows only' setting will open only one pop-up at a time--not a nested series of them--and then only in response to an actual click. So clicking on the 'Change Password' link on your corporate intranet will open the popup that you're looking for, but the advertising popups are eliminated.

      It may be necessary to tweak your web site implementation, however. The user does still have to do something to indicated that they want to receive a popup, but it's not very painful. Just a thought...

      --
      ~Idarubicin
    6. Re:Another good tool destroyed... by Kris_J · · Score: 1
      As the parent post noted, there are reasons, other than ads, for which popups are useful
      No, there aren't. There are some non-ad uses of pop-ups in the wild, but they are unnecessary and can easily be worked into the main page body or a frame.
  27. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I use Google all the time anyway. Being able to just enter a search query into the toolbar instead of having to surf to "www.google.com" every time more than makes up for the few pixels the Google toobar uses. I've got a 1280x1024 resulution too, so it really doesn't take up that much space.

  28. Misinformation by xintegerx · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1) WhenU does not install because a user asked it to. It is spyware.

    2) slightly off topic, but their popups and spyware sends are not blocked by the google toolbar. I saw a computer that had google toolbar, with 8 popups blocked (yuppie!) but outside popups were not. The owner had like software popups outside of IE popping up every 10 seconds so much he installed googles toolbar just because of that. Imagine how much business google gets because of the spyware business, as googletoolbar is the most well known popup blocker (even if it doesn't remove those popups the user came to get removed) ?

  29. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by FyRE666 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Well Firebird is the one for me. Absolutely fantastic browser - looks great, fast, no popups, can use Mozilla's plugins. It's made converts of lots of my friends and colleagues too! Also use Thunderbird for mail now, and it rocks!

  30. Removal/Annoyances... by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 1

    WhenU has been a big pain. I've seen it on tons of machines, and I've even documented cases of it crashing a few XP machines. Not destroying - just crashing, but it's still as annoying as hell to get rid of it.

    On a side note, this is why we have Spywareinfo.com's forums... and the neighborhood geek next door, payable in Doritos and new components.

    One last thing: I've found that Ad-Aware doesn't quite do as good a job removing this as Spybot S&D does. I use both and complement them with HijackThis and CWShredder to round it out.

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
    1. Re:Removal/Annoyances... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spywareinfo.com has the finest collection of links, recommended utilities, and online support of ANY free (spy/ad/crap-ware removal) cleanup site. If Norton was as well supported by their PAID staff as the volunteers at SWI do for half a dozen different programs, we might actually have some decent internet security.

  31. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  32. What about CoolWebSearch? by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 4, Interesting

    WhenU pales in comparison to CoolWebSearch. If yo udon't know what that is, it's a Trojan that drops files on your computer that change your IE settings, slow down/crash IE/your system, and can download and execute arbitrary unsigned code, and one version (CWS.ehhtp) tracks everything you do on the Web that begins with WWW, as it changes the prefix "WWW" to "http://ehttp.cc/?". Over 23 variants of it have been documented in _five months_.

    WhenU is at least installed through legal means. CWS installs through holes in the MS Java Machine.

    If the courts wish to create injunctions against spyware/adware, why don't they just go against these first?

    (For more information on CWS, if you're interested, check out Merijn's section on it. His CWShredder tool is quite nice.)

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
  33. IE feature request. by netsharc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here's an idea, most of these tools do their job by attaching themselves to the IE process, something IE allows. Microsoft should make it blatantly obvious which programs have attached itself to IE, and make them easily removable.

    Heh, but who is Microsoft to listen to a slashdotter. However, it's probably possible to make an extension that does the above, just like the extension that stops the "%01" URL-hiding bug.

    AFAIK, IE just looks in a registry key to see which CLSIDs of programs want to attach to it, and then load these programs when an IE instance is running.

    --
    What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
  34. Why do companies get away with writing viruses? by Sensitive+Claude · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In contract law there are certain things that you cannot sign away. For instance, you cannot sell yourself into slavery.

    It is controversial whether EULAs even constitute a legal contract.

    Why should companies get away writing software that if a script kiddy did he would be put in prison, or at least get a criminal trial?

    Once software starts hijacking your computer then it is entering the realm of viruses. Among other things this definition should include being unable to uninstall the software without re-installing windows. Another is repeatedly resetting your password to goatse or other pr0n sites.

    --
    Promote Sensitivity on Slashdot, make me your friend.
  35. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by axxackall · · Score: 1
    Just for a case if you don't know - Firebird is a Mozilla Browser.

    So, no wonder it can use Mozilla plugins :)

    --

    Less is more !
  36. spyware != free by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

    >I love free software.

    If you're using pagerank then the googlebar is spyware. If you consider your private browsing habits to have worth then it is no longer free, but subsidized by the data you generate as a web user.

    On the bright side, you can download a version of the toolbar without pagerank and no tracking will be done. That's the version I install on people's computers. You're either for or against spyware in my book, there really is no middle-ground. I'm afraid the old truism is true, and as gator et al has shown us - give them an inch and they'll take a mile.

    1. Re:spyware != free by taped2thedesk · · Score: 1
      I strongly disagree - I don't think Google's toolbar is spyware. Wikipedia defines spyware as "software that aids in gathering information about a person or organization without their knowledge." The term spyware is obviously derived from 'spy', which generally indicates some type of undercover, covert, or deceptive act.

      Even though many pieces of spyware 'inform' you of their presence though obscure EULAs or deceptive tricks, I still consider this without their knowledge.

      While I haven't downloaded the toolbar in a few months and this may have changed, Google forces you to choose between enabling and disabling the advanced features, and provides more than enough information about the privacy implications of either choice. This is from the FAQ:

      "Some features available on the Google Toolbar can enhance your search and browsing experience, but may require that we have some understanding of the web pages that you are viewing. For example, by knowing which web page you are viewing, the PageRank feature of Google Toolbar can show you Google's ranking of that web page. Google can also use this information about the pages you have viewed to improve functionality or quality, or add new features.

      We believe these features will greatly enhance your browsing experience. We understand, however, you may not agree that the benefits provided by these features outweigh the information we must collect. For this reason, we provide you the opportunity to disable these features on the Privacy Information page (accessed by selecting "Privacy Information..." in the Toolbar's "Google" menu). With the advanced features disabled, no information about the page you are viewing will be sent to Google unless you explicitly request more information about that page (such as with the "Cached Snapshot", "Backward Links" or "Similar Pages" features).

      This information was presented to me upon installation each time I installed the toolbar in the past. The installation also makes the user choose whether they want to enable advanced features, and again brings the privacy implications to the attention of the user.

      To summarize:

      • Google makes no attempt to trick the user into installing the toolbar
      • They are upfront about what information they collect and how to disable it
      • Unlike gator-tied products, they don't force you to send them data to use their product. You can still use the toolbar (minus pagerank) without sending browsing information to them.
      • They provide an e-mail address so that users can ask questions about privacy issues

      Considering the total lack of 'spying', I'm not sure how you see this as spyware.

  37. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Use keyword-bookmarks or Mozilla's URL-bar search feature.

    Make a bookmark for "http://www.google.com/search?q=%s&btnG=Google+Sea rch" (without the Slashdot generated space and the quotes)
    Assign a keyword (g, for example)
    Whenever you want to google: "keyword what you're looking for" (g paris hilton)

    Or just type what you're looking for, press cursor-up, press enter (if you're using Mozilla, have this feature enabled and chosen your favorite search engine in the preferences).

  38. Guilt trip.. by graveyardduckx · · Score: 2, Funny

    When trying to raise money to help pay for my site, I tried using pop-up ads... but quickly realized that I felt less guilty from purse-snatching from little old ladies.

  39. I use opera by romit_icarus · · Score: 2, Informative

    since opera has a block pop-up facility

  40. There still are popups ? by Eivind · · Score: 0, Redundant
    Seriously. Anyone who is annoyed at popups has had the choise of installing a decent web-browser and be done with it for ages. Firebird doesn't show any pop-ups. All that happens is that a discreete icon shows up in the statusbar. If you really like, you can click on this icon and say "allow popups from this host". Personally, I take the icon as meaning roughly "consumer-hostile site, consider taking your bussiness elsewhere."

    So, to a person with a decent browser (a browser that forces you to deal with popups when you don't wish to do is not "decent".) all popups do is act as a warning-sign for sleazy bussinesses. Unless you want to, you never even see them.

    1. Re:There still are popups ? by pe1chl · · Score: 1

      >All that happens is that a discreete icon shows up in the statusbar. If you really like, you can click on this icon and say "allow popups from this host".

      It is a start, but I think it s*cks that you cannot simply view the popup by clicking on that icon, but have to add the site to a whitelist and then do a reload, hoping that the same popup will appear. They should fix that.

    2. Re:There still are popups ? by Eivind · · Score: 1
      True. You're rigth. The feature is very very good, but not perfect.

      However, the context of this story was to avoid annoying comercial popups. And for that, it works fine.

  41. Whom to root for?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hate Gator (now "Claria") and what they do, and I would love to see them crushed in a gigantic, heaping, HUGE steaming pile of litigation.

    But the plaintiffs are using the same types of arguments (violating our copyright) that the broadcast industry uses against Tivo, et. al. when suing them for facilitating user control over advertisements. Some innovation occurs that threatens their business model, so they sue to stop it (or eventually pursue legislation)! I hate that, too!!

    As in the case of Tivo, isn't this an issue of free speech or the rights of individual consumers to control what they are exposed to? Can't I voluntarily (RTFA) install software that delivers ads to my desktop based on what sites I visit? (It could be a service to me by informing me of alternatives before I decide what to purchase.) Or can't I voluntarily install software to block ads from being delivered to my desktop? Or can't I install a device on my TV that prevents ads from being delivered to my face?

    Now, you can say that this company uses deceptive practices because most users don't, in fact, voluntarily install their software. But that is a separate complaint (class action lawsuit, anyone?) and how I feel about that is different from how I feel about this supposed copyright infringement case.

  42. Blocking pop-ups not coming from a website by lintux · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem with this kind of popups is that they're not opened by a little JavaScript in the HTML source, but by a tiny program running in the background. AFAIK, that is.

    So I'd think the popup blocking in WinXPSP2 (for example) will not be able to block this kind of popups. And well, if it will work, the dorks at Gator can just alter the program so that some weird window opens up with a HTML component in it, instead of a real browser window.

    So yeah, this kind of software might just keep the popups alive... What can one do against this?

    1. Re:Blocking pop-ups not coming from a website by pe1chl · · Score: 1

      For one, make sure that the user-id that you use to do daily work on your computer is not allowed to install software. Only the administrative user can do that, and you switch to that user when you have bought a shiny new CD, not when some sleezy popup appears.

  43. 99% of email is spam? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a matter of fact, I CAN imagine a situation where 99% of my email is spam. Actually, it's more like 99.9% of my email which is spam. If you ignore the large portion that's not even addressed to me, only 99.5% of my email is spam, though. In terms of numbers, in the past 3 weeks I have received 25 emails work keeping (about 1 per day), while receiving 5000 spams, and another 20,000 not even adressed to me!

  44. Mozilla Firebird by jlar · · Score: 1

    I recently changed browser from Mozilla to Mozilla Firebird mainly for one reason. In Mozilla Firebird you can download (one click) an extension that blocks flash animations. If you then click on the flash animation it will play. That is one great feature for a user who is tired of flash adds.

    1. Re:Mozilla Firebird by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Adblock (http://adblock.mozdev.org/installation.html) for Mozilla suite blocks them too, requires more than 1 click to install so the Firebird way seems better that way.

      Another extension for the suite is Multizilla (http://multizilla.mozdev.org) which has a preliminary block assistant too. It allows you to select if you want to block or open the popup in new tab or window.

      Panu

  45. Not good enough. by twitter · · Score: 1
    Use Mozilla. Tell your friends.

    That's not a bad start, but it's better to liberate them completely. Most people won't really know the difference between windoze and a KDE desktop, but the Windoze desktop is less robust. Most people only care about email and web browsing. Any modern Linux distribution will give them that much better than Windoze does and last longer. Windows 2000 pro does not even come with a spell checker, how lame is that? Mozilla can provide a good browser and mail client on Win32, but it can't cover up all of the problems and sooner or later those problems will result in a dead pooter. Before it gets there, ActiveX and Windoze messaging will be hijacked to stream all sorts of nasty pop-ups. The worst break comes from installing Windoze Media player from Microsoft's download site. It eats all media files, comes with a EULA that makes any system behave like XP Home, forgets old codecs like Microsoft's own AVI that most digital cameras use for movies, then streams all sorts of crap at you, constantly. It's something the average porn site would be embarrased to do to a user. A free computer, on the other hand, is much harder to break.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  46. Re:While I personally wouldn't install such softwa by AchmedHabib · · Score: 1

    If your "security" level in IE are too low it could be installed by itself from an ad, like GAIN.

  47. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    The &btnG=Google+Search is not necessary.

    http://www.google.com/search?q=%s will do.

  48. ob plug by Tom · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Now if only we could get rid of all the rest of the pop-up ads.

    It's called Mozilla.

    Haven't seen a popup in ages.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  49. Re:It just reminds me how low the internet has got by Salsaman · · Score: 1
    Can you imagine the situation where 99% of your email is spam?

    I don't need to imagine. On one of my email accounts, 99% of the messages *are* spam. Fortunately Mozilla's Bayesian filter means I only get to see the 5% or so that slip through.
    So there is your alternative.

  50. Re:And the webmasters say... by Chatmag · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Excerpt from our Policy regarding Pop Up ads.

    Chatmag.com DOES NOT USE POP UP ADS!

    If a user of Chatmag is viewing a pop up ad, it IS NOT being served by Chatmag.com but by one of several third party advertising servers. These third party advertising servers place a program on a users system, and then while browsing, serve ads from their servers.

    If you have installed a file sharing program or "wallet", from such companies as: Gator, (Note: Gator has changed their name to Claria) Kazaa, WhenU, BearShare, or AudioGalaxy, you may have downloaded an ad server as part of their software. These programs are authorized by you, when you read the agreement before you installed their software (you did read it, didn't you?). We realize most people do not read their agreement, and inadvertently download ad server software, which is now happily serving you pop up advertisements when you visit a Chatmag.com page.

    We strongly advise getting and running Ad Aware, and dump all ad servers, unless you like pop up advertisements, and other web sites losing revenue by these programs.

    Please note that Chatmag.com loses revenue by the use of any third party ad serving software, and we highly resent others being paid for our hard work and dedication to provide only relevant advertising, or none at all, depending upon the specific topic page.

    --
    Pete Carr Owner Chatmag.com
  51. Mod Parent Up by PAjamian · · Score: 1

    If I had mod points I'd mod that insightful.

    --
    Windows is a bonfire, Linux is the sun. Linux only looks smaller if you lack perspective.
  52. Pop-ips? by haggar · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Honestly, I don't understand how can even a marginally technically knowledgeable person still worry about pop-ups. Just use Firebird, and forget about pop-ups, as I did. As far as I'm concertned, pop-ups are a battle I feel I as a computer user, have now won.

    Next up: spam. Score: losing.

    --
    Sigged!
  53. With a little foresight, wouldn't have started by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If the browser developers had simply added one more selection to the popup window that says you don't have flash installed, do you want to download/install now, yes/no, I doubt flash would have spread like the virus that it is.

    Simply adding a third selection to the menu "Do you want to download/install..." that says, "No, and DON'T ASK AGAIN", then allowing for a subsequent "ask again" in the options dialogue, would have gone a long way in stopping this virus.

  54. Soon peoples will be killed by surfing the net by Cyborg00_ · · Score: 1

    As a computer technician, I get alot of peoples everyday bringing in computers that "runs very slowly, is it a virus ?". In 99% of the cases, spyware are the problems. So far my personal record is seeing a computer with over 700 detected spywares (by Spybot). It was a p4 2.6, but it felt like a p2 266. I usually end up giving an explanation of what is a spyware and a small tutorial on how to use spybot. Right now, with all the worms/spyware/spam, peoples are having a hard time just browsing the web, and reading email, wich are the 2 main reasons why they own acomputer. IMO things will only get worst. I'M sure we'll soon see spywares that are designed to grab all personnal info, wich takeover windows totally so u can't uninstall them (by example that takes out the windows icons everywhere and replace them with ads, or that automatically deleted antivirus and antispyware software). I let u guess the next logical step...

  55. Re:Shamless boat anchor plug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Just for a case if you don't know - Firebird is a Mozilla Browser.

    You're forgetting that not everyone has a quad-opteron or a coffee break to wait for Mozilla to start up and react to input (or wants to spare a single bit of ram for pre-loading it, even with ram to spare). If Firebird was Mozilla, Firebird would be in the same situation. It isn't.

    Mozilla is like an early 80's Cadillac, after GM dropped the big 8 cylinder engines in favor of 6 cylinder engines, but kept the 4000+ lbs of weight, or a 79-81 Trans Am dropping the 400/403 in favor of a 301 non-turbo, and sticking close to 4000+ lbs. Or a Corvette going from less than 10 lbs per horsepower to over 16-18 lbs per horswpower in the late 70's/early 80's...or...

    To simplify, Mozilla (even though I use it from time to time) is a boat anchor. For the Titanic.

    I tried Firebird a bit a while ago, and will try it again in the future. In the meantime, I'm perfectly happy with Konqueror. And I never see popups either. And for the rare instances where I use windows, I much prefer the boat anchor over the windows alternative.
  56. I love popup ads! The more the better! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love popup ads. The more the better as far as I'm concerned. Why? Because I use Opera with the "open requested pop-up windows only" setting when I surf the Net. So the more popups the better, because popups are ads that I can easily defeat.
    If you got rid of all popup ads today, there would soon be even worse ads to replace them, and it would take a little while for anti-ad software to catch up.
    Popup ads work perfectly IMO because advertisers like them and millions of people see them, but they don't bother me or anyone else savvy enough to use blocking software to defeat them. So let's call for more, not less popup ads! ;)

  57. IE is to get a pop-up blocker in XP SP 2 by bns_robson · · Score: 2, Informative

    arstechnica report that XP service pack 2 adds a pop-up blocker to IE

    1. Re:IE is to get a pop-up blocker in XP SP 2 by Snowdog668 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I was just talking about this yesterday with my counterpart in another office. He told me that now that IE is going to block pop-ups that I should come back to the fold (I'm the only Mozilla user in the I.S. group). Nope, IE still doesn't have a "block images from this server" option to kill banner ads. About all I use IE for at work is for pages that don't work well with Mozilla, which includes our corporate intranet site, damn Frontpage. :) I don't use it home at all. What can I say, I was using Netscape long before I tried IE and have never seen a reason to switch.

      --
      I wouldn't say I'm a bad gambler but the last time I went to Vegas I even lost a buck on the soda machine.
  58. Just use Mozilla by n-baxley · · Score: 1

    Honestly, since Mozilla added pop-up blocker, I haven't noticed them at all. I really don't see pop-ups as a problem anymore, because I simply don't see them anymore. Just upgrade to Moziall and be done with it.

  59. Apple's Safari Browser = no pop up ads ever by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Geez, I use Apple's Safari Browser and with it's anti-popup features I *never* see any popup ads.

  60. I second that... by buford_tannen · · Score: 1

    Mozilla really makes browsing without popups and dealing with spam emails a piece of cake.

    Anyone who is still using IE deserves what they get!

    I am the most zealously zealous zealot.

    --
    Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
  61. Re:WhenU.com by halowolf · · Score: 1
    I hardly want to jump on a bandwagon here, but I actually forget that popup ads exist by using Mozilla and configuring it to block unrequested popups.

    I cannot actually recall the last time that I saw popup ads, and that I am thankfull for.

  62. Re:It just reminds me how low the internet has got by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

    Says you.

    The internet gets more and more VALUABLE to me everyday, as the amount of news, information, opinion, and opportunity keeps growing incrementally. Yes, some of that growth is commercial activity, and some of THAT is undesirable crap, but I wouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

  63. Re:While I personally wouldn't install such softwa by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

    I doubt WhenU held a gun to people's head forcing them to install the WhenU client.

    When I was using IE with the default security settings, I found WHenU had "magically" installed itself on my PC without even prompting me. More than once.

    To say it plainly, if it's MY computer, I'll install what I choose, and if I'm not happy, I know exactly where the uninstall is located.

    To respond just as plainly, WhenU doesn't give a crap what you want. If they have an opportunity to get their software onto your system, they'll take advantage of it. Their uninstall doesn't even work -- I had to use Spybot to clean my system afterward.

    Now that I'm running Firebird and have whenu.com nullrouted in my Hosts file, life is much better.

  64. Re:It just reminds me how low the internet has got by rtconner · · Score: 2, Interesting

    yeah i pretty much have given up email. i dont email friends/family anymore, i just call them using my trusty cell phone and free long distance. the only reason i have an email account is to sign up for stuff on the internet. and i do have three accounts for that, only one do i use after i verify that the company i gave my email too isnt spamming me. other than that i stay away from email. althoguh i do use IM a lot.

    --
    023AD01("Child", "Evil");
  65. Re:While I personally wouldn't install such softwa by rtconner · · Score: 1

    well ok. say you are 15 year old sally using the family compy. you go to some site cuz a friend emailed you a link. then you get there and some grey pop up come up from internet explorer that say something you don't know what it says and just click ok to get rid of it. then you continue surfing.

    well what sally didnt realize she was clicking was a prompt from IE. the prompt was asking he if she tusted the website and would allow it to install something onto her computer. unknowingly she clicked yes. it installed, got into her registry, got into her system and now this program runs freely on her computer. the program pop-up ads, changes website urls, and pretty much earns money for the company that owns it. annoying yes, but did sally actually give permission to the company to install it? i highly doubt it. she just clicked stuff, thats all.

    --
    023AD01("Child", "Evil");
  66. Re:Shamless Mozilla plug by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I had to stop using Firebird because it had problems loading pages all the way, mostly pages with dynamic content. It happened most here on /. but happened on other sites as well. I'm back to IE with MyIE2 (I have also used Avant Browser and Crazy Browser in the past, this one has more plugins) and now I just get Slashdot's copious 500 errors :)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  67. Your comment reminds me of how great it is by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The internet seems to become more useful every day, as more and more commercial interests make their wares available to me, provide me with web interfaces to common tasks like checking balances and reporting problems (even SBC has email trouble reporting now.)

    How can we take it back? WTF are you talking about, it's ours already. We vote with our dollars. People obviously want to be spammed, because they're buying things from spammers. Remember, the majority rules.

    I want instant communications with friends and colleagues all over the planet, and I have it. I have several instant messengers including a WASTE network. Sure, all the IMs show me ads. I consider that fair payment for using their services. It's not like they're popups.

    By using Linux without any specialized software, and keeping the XP machines in the house up to date, I have prevent myself from being backdoored. I occasionally run updates on my Linux system so I don't get rooted there, either. And the walls never seem to need any maintenance as long as I keep up to date. Then again, I use NAT, I drop source routed frames, and I don't have any software bound to my insecure/WAN interface except for that which needs to be there; Anything which I can't bind to specific addresses has been walled. (I used to block by default but this has been easier.)

    I don't see how these are drastic measures at all. You wouldn't have a door without a lock, and you shouldn't have a network without a firewall.

    BTW I get a shitload of spam. Mozilla Thunderbird is good enough to roundfile it for me. If I get to the point where 99% of it is spam, I guess I'll have to use spamassassin or something. More than 50% of my snailmail is spam, and that's much worse than email spam, because every time it gets recycled (most of it is newsprint by volume) it takes its tool on the environment. Even trees grown for paper deplete the soil, and the process of making them into paper is fairly dirty.

    I got into internet use in 1990 or so, which by no means makes me an old man around these parts, but I do remember what it was like to just not get spam. But I also remember what it was like to try to find anything on the internet at the time. You basically didn't, unless it was well known. You found most things by following links from server to server which we all thought was pretty neat. Now look at things.

    There are some technical issues related to internet use. It should be technically more difficult to spam people. We will eventually achieve some sort of consensus and make it more difficult through technical means. Right now, just concentrate on your filtering. It will get better. If you want to make it get better faster, attach yourself to a project to accomplish these goals, or start one of your own, and produce something.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  68. block pop-ups by ihop-3 · · Score: 1

    Try Pop-up Defender http://www.synergeticsoft.com