Slashdot Mirror
Who Invests in Spyware Companies?
NW writes "Ben Edelman just published a list of major investors in spyware companies totaling over $139 million in venture capital." Slashdot has not verified Edelman's information, and please note that harassing the receptionist at these places is unlikely to cause any change in their investment policies.
It doesn't really go into who actually advertises on spyware or which networks supply the ads.
Ah well that's not surprising, I was hoping to see some hidden players. A call to these people's secretary definitely wouldn't do any good. It would probably just result in more telemarketing offers.
Does Slashdot ever verify the information it links to? As if we need the disclaimer.
That's just Slashdot's CYA for the implicit suggestion (not to) harass them.
Of course, I'm probably just reading it wrong.
There's a gorilla from Manilla whose a fella that stinks of vanilla and has salmonella.
They talk about going after spammers, but maybe what they need to do is go after these companies that invest in them.
.02
If the spammers didn't have these companies funding them, then I dare say they wouldn't last very long.
just
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy - Benjamin Franklin"
Say what? Like you're going to boycott venture capital firms?
I wish Genstar II would invest in these spyware guys, they seemed to do a fine job of running a company I worked for into the ground. Maybe they could do likewise with the spyware folks.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
michael must be smiling. /. never provides disclaimers. Michael puts on there to implant the thought 'harass.' Kinda like reverse physcology. You are the exact reason that line is in the article.
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
What they have to say:
http://www.weatherbug.com/aws/NotSpyware.html
While WeatherBug is not *technically* spyware, it does serve advertisements. But so do a lot of functional websites. Big deal.
The problem *I* have with WeatherBug is the following:
1) It is set to automatically come up on boot. And when it does so, it serves an advertisement. Any program that pops up an advertisement is INDEED "adware" by any definition of the term.
2) The "Typical" installation adds MySearch Toolbar, which is known to cache search terms. Why exactly do they need to store my Internet searches? Why is this installed by default?
3) A Desktop Icon ad for Netscape. This is pointless and worse, IMHO, than popup ads. I now have to MANUALLY DELETE the advertisement automatically placed on my Desktop
4) Ironically, when you go to "Add/Remove Programs" they beg you to reconsider uninstalling, then beg you to keep it, they'll just remove the fullscreen pop-up on boot. Why they don't offer a choice in the first place is beyond me. This is really just a rehash of point #1.
Maybe those of us technical support geeks that loathe the software wouldn't be so offended by it if it somehow knew we were troubleshooting the owner's PC and didn't want to hear about the latest tsumani threat to the state of Iowa, or potential blizzard in San Diego while we're clearing off all the *real* spyware.
As I know there are WeatherBug employees who are actually paid to refute online comments on forums stating that their product is adware, I openly challenge those employee to please post their definition of "adware" in a reply.
-
Can you give some links to some? I'd love to have a program that offers similar capabilities without the evilness.
Weather Pulse is ad free and free (as in beer). I haven't used it myself though. Here's the info blurb from their website:Weather Pulse is Free for use, if you enjoy the program, just let us know by dropping by our website and using our many services and software. Please feel free to suggest anything you'd like to see in future releases, your suggestions will determine the future upgrades and software development.
Some time ago there was mention on Slashdot about adware/spyware/malware exploiting security holes as a means of installing itself and other software without a users approval or knowledge.
Now that's a pretty hefty claim and while I have little trouble believing it, I'd like to see positive confirmation of that claim. What I mean to say is that perhaps someone out there with the skills could should at least one example by disassembling some of this malware to show us all exactly what exploits are being used, when, where and how. It would be nice to see evidence that cannot be denied or spun away.
I think if it can be shown that they are indeed actively exploiting security holes and are not operating ethically as they all claim to be, then the U.S. Federal Trade Commission might be able to step in and take measures to rectify the situation. I don't think we need more laws even if they would actually serve to benefit the public a little better. I think if we can show they are intruding onto computers without permission, there are already laws against that -- both civil and criminal.
Does it come as a surprise that our business class would be interested in forcing software onto people they "have" to run so that they can collect information and enrich themselves?
Does it come as a surprise that our business class generally believes that a removing consumer choice and privacy are a good thing?
I'm kind of waiting for a significant investigative peice in the media spyware, spam and its relationship with more "traditional" businesses whose only real motivation for staying out of that space is their reputation.
I dissagree. The problem isn't that there is a breakdown between propery and responsibility. The responsibility is held by those with power, not neccisarly property. I think you know that, so this is more of a clarification than a correction. The problem is that we haven't doen a good job holding those in power( ceo's exectuives board members) responsible. Worse things can happen to them than getting fired, but it doesn't happen often enough. Enron is one of the few cases where the execs are being punished for their wrong doing. Obviously, in that case you shouldn't punish the stockholders who were the real victums.
Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
not only is it hard as hell to uninstall, when you go through the process it says first:
"Stop! Do you really want to uninstall Weatherbug? It could save your life!"
and then:
"Click here to stop recieving LIFE SAVING hazardous weather alerts!"
any program that tries to scare people (probably older computer users, ie: grandparents) into keeping it, is malware in my book
May you be touched by His Noodly Appendage. RAmen.
I use Weather Corner Alert on my home PC. I would recommend it.
Nortel is a Canadian company, where people actually learn from mistakes, especially those that threaten the sustainability of the whole community. In the US, the threshold for "necessary" in "pierc[ing] the corporate veil" is usually defined as "scapegoat", or "fall guy", after vast legal wrangling and expense. Corporations are very useful organizing principles for cooperation to create wealth and accomplish complex, long-range tasks. The limited accountability that is their veil is too thick, covers too much, and ultimately costs everyone too much in limited accountability (which fosters bad decisions). But, if Nortel, Enron, Worldcom (the list goes on...) aren't enough to challenge basic corporate dynamics, they're obviously here to stay, until they destroy the system and we have to start over - perhaps with clamshells.
--
make install -not war
Same bit. I wouldn't be suprized to find some of these VC's are not just VC's, but sepecifically search out people to put up these little shops. That way, they are protected, as merely being someone who loaned the person money. Get most of the profits, with few of the liabilities.
It would be beautiful to change that - to increase their liability. Like I already said in this post, its like going into a gun store and asking to borrow a gun so you can rob a bank, and promising most of the profits in return. The gun store, if they agreed to that, most certainly should be held liable.
I'm sorry, but if a company out-sources their advertising to someone who uses Spyware, I still won't buy their products.
It's up the company to ensure that their advertising partners are behaving responsibly, no one else!
-
not only is it hard as hell to uninstall, when you go through the process it says first:
I had forgotten about those, they really ticked me off as well. That just adds even more proof that they're not legit. Hell, I've uninstalled spyware and malware that behaved better, at least they didn't claim I was risking my life removing them."Stop! Do you really want to uninstall Weatherbug? It could save your life!" and then:
"Click here to stop recieving LIFE SAVING hazardous weather alerts!"
any program that tries to scare people (probably older computer users, ie: grandparents) into keeping it, is malware in my book
So the detailed analysis is that weatherbug starts at boot (well, duh, how useful would a program to tell you about weather alerts be if you had to remember to start it each time you logged in?), optionally installs itself in IE, and supports itself with ads and that makes it spyware? (I'm choosing to ignore the 'spybot says it's spyware so it must be' argument-from-authority at the end.)
Yahoo Messenger does all of those things. Why isn't it spyware?
please note that harassing the receptionist at these places is unlikely to cause any change in their investment policies
Of course it's pointless to be rude or demand that she personally withdraw company's investments. But you can certainly politely explain that you are a victim of their client's illegal activities and ask to contact one of the partners who has influence in decision making.
You will not get through, but the company's management will eventually know that people keep calling and complaining about Claria. The last thing an investment company wants is a client entangled in a class action lawsuit or government investigation.
Then again, you might be surprised. Michael Moore convinced Kmart to stop selling bullets just by talking to them - granted he brought columbine victims along. Maybe some companies don't wish to invest in scum and will turn away once the reality is fully explained to them.
Adware (like weatherbug) has just as much reason as spy/malware to install itself never to be uninstalled. This is an important point that isn't being made enough, which is that adware is damn near as bad as spyware. The distinction lets weatherbug off the hook by claiming, probably correctly, that they aren't spyware.
I think we need a new term to describe software - of any ilk - that refuses to uninstall, or reinstalls itself, or penetrates so much of your OS that you can't uninstall it. I nominate either "cancerware" or "kudzuware" (after that lovely plant that now covers most of the US South, and is impossible to eradicate).
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
As a veteran of 4 Hurricanes in five weeks last summer, I can declare that when the weather gets to "life threatening" levels, your computer stopped working long before that point.
Laws are for people with no friends.