Slashdot Mirror


Startup Webaroo to put the 'Web on a Hard Drive'?

An anonymous reader writes "A new startup called Webaroo is launching Monday with an audacious proposition: You can search the Web without a net connection of any kind. Initial release consists of 'Web packs' on specific topics such as news, city guides or Wikipedia. Later this year they're promising a full-Web version that you can carry on a laptop -- provided you're willing to devote something in the neighborhood of 80 gig."

340 comments

  1. sounds great by sentientbeing · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'm sold. Does anyone have the .torrent for it?

    --

    ------
    beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
    1. Re:sounds great by Red+Alastor · · Score: 5, Funny
      I'm sold. Does anyone have the .torrent for it?
      Me too ! Do you think we can subscribe to a service to get updates when the content change ?
      --
      Slashdot anagrams to "Sad Sloth"
    2. Re:sounds great by cgenman · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't have a lot of hard drive space. It would be really convienient for me if they just put the packs online.

    3. Re:sounds great by sukotto · · Score: 1

      No torrent, but w3schools (sort of) has a tutorial.

      --
      Come play free flash games on Kongregate!
    4. Re:sounds great by not-admin · · Score: 1

      The problem with that is they'd have to make a pack with all the webpacks in it. And so forth.

    5. Re:sounds great by Paraplex · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm sure this is all gonna go well until they upload it to the net, at which point the universe will collapse into spiral of recursion.

    6. Re:sounds great by Young+Master+Ploppy · · Score: 1

      Does anyone have the .torrent for this? Sure - here : http://willowpondlane.com/blackbox/images/download www.gif

      --
      http://instantbadger.blogspot.com
    7. Re:sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like it's a webcrawl of URL's from the old book "The whole internet".

    8. Re:sounds great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      April fools jokes still rolling in... c'mon that was two weeks ago already!

  2. Dotcom v3.0 by Saven+Marek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A new startup called Webaroo is launching Monday with an audacious proposition: You can search the Web without a net connection of any kind.

    If anyone doubted the next dotcom boom is upon us, this should put that doubt to rest.

    1. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by kryten_nl · · Score: 1

      Bursting of this bubble is expected at 2006/04/10 12.00 GMT

      --
      For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
    2. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I was JUST thinking that. This seems like the beginning of a whole slew of semi-ridiculous ideas that get funded because their proponents seem 'ahead of their time'. Did someone at a funding company not think of the following two points:

      1) the web is growing at a phenomenal rate. in a few years, the only thing that you'll be able to fit on even high-density media is very narrow, specific content. is there really such a huge market for that?

      2) wifi is nearly ubiquitous. why pay for a static snapshot of the web that will be obsolete in a few days when you can walk into a starbucks with you laptop and get the fresh stuff almost for free??

      I'm sure the guys who want to put the web on a disk have thought these points through, but me...I just really want to sigh. and buy some short-term stocks.

      --
      An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
    3. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by SirTalon42 · · Score: 1

      "in a few years, the only thing that you'll be able to fit on even high-density media is very narrow, specific content."

      Welcome to 10 years ago.

    4. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by KenDodd · · Score: 1

      Fresh stuff in a Starbucks? Are you kidding me? :)

      --
      Did you know my dad's dog died?
    5. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by caffeinemessiah · · Score: 1

      content, if not coffee.

      --
      An old-timer with old-timey ideas.
    6. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by redalien · · Score: 1

      Web 2.0 - Feeding the bubble.

    7. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

      in a few years, the only thing that you'll be able to fit on even high-density media is very narrow, specific content.

      The thing is that Wikipedia, with all its imperfections and gaps, is still a surprisingly good start.

    8. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Milton+Waddams · · Score: 1

      Wait. There have already been 2 dotcom booms? I know there was one in the mid to late 90s. When was the other one?

      Plus, I hope you're right. I'm starting my graduate IT job in July. I'm gonna start earning loads of money! :)

    9. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Insightful

      wifi is nearly ubiquitous.

      I think you're way off on this one. On the other hand, I have a suitable substitute:

      2. What the hell are they going to do about the copyright issues?

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    10. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Gyga · · Score: 1

      wifi is nearly ubiquitous. why pay for a static snapshot of the web that will be obsolete in a few days when you can walk into a starbucks with you laptop and get the fresh stuff almost for free??

      No it isn't. There are no hotspots in my town (there is one secure hotspot), the nearest is in starbucks 1 hour away.

      --
      I don't preview or spellcheck.
    11. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i predict a major bubble burst in 2009. right when i graduate with my cs degree

    12. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Philocke+Fox · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Robert X. Cringley had an article about this last year. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050210. html

      Basically what he said was that venture capitalists raised a whole bunch of money that they didn't spend during the last boom. This money is raised from investors and is given to the VCs for a limited time. The VCs make money from the management fees they collect for dealing with this money, usually 1 or 2% of the total amount. But, if they don't invest, then the money AND the fees get sent back to the original investors.

      The time limit on investment is usually about 10 years. So if we say that the boom started around '96, then some of these limits have already expired, and the rest of them will expire within the next 4 years.

      Use it or lose it. And the VCs will definitely use it.

    13. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Xeriar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What the hell are they going to do about the copyright issues?

      Quoted for truth. I know I'm not the only one who thought "Hey, this would be cool... but the target websites are going to be pissed about losing their ad revenue."

      For sites like Wikipedia and others whose goal is the distribution of their content, this isn't as much of a big deal (unless, in the case of Wikipedia, they snapshot a vandalized site...), but a lot of content providers won't be happy about getting their ad revenue stolen.

    14. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to mention the copyright issues. I don't think many companies/individuals would want their websites being packaged and sold without their consent.

      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    15. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by flyingsquid · · Score: 3, Funny
      I was JUST thinking that. This seems like the beginning of a whole slew of semi-ridiculous ideas that get funded because their proponents seem 'ahead of their time'

      In related news, NewsCorp bought Myspace.com for 580 million.

    16. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      Doesn't the wifi at Starbucks run somewhere in the range of $6 an hour? That seems hardly free to me.

    17. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Tim+C · · Score: 0

      While I agree with you, if I may play devil's advocate for a moment - while the sites will lose ad revenue, they'll also gain in the form of lower bandwidth bills...

    18. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Mr+Z · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hmm... I'm guessing bandwidth better be cheaper than ads, otherwise they lose money with every page served. So, if the ads bring in more than the bandwidth costs, they still lose money here.

    19. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by corpsiclex · · Score: 1

      Personally, I think it's worth 80gb to have a certain percent of the web's content load instantly (and hopefully check for a new version of the page in the background afterward).

      --

      eBayDig 1s a typo saerch engien
    20. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by Sentry21 · · Score: 1

      2. What the hell are they going to do about the copyright issues?

      I hope they take my content - they're going to archive me a new Mini Cooper!

      I like this idea already.

    21. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the return of the modem.

      I say we mix this with a autonomous wireless network that allows "offline" users to share "packs". I doubt any of this will happen though.

    22. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by ShadowBot · · Score: 1
      At first glance I assumed that what was being offered was a copy of the web on removable media. I personaly think this would be much more useful as there are still many parts of the world where internet access is still extremely expensive and slow, and even out of date copies of things like university research papers, online encyclopdias (yes, yes, wikipedi too), information on engineering processes etc. can still be very useful years after they are published.

      Unfortunately though, thier product will require you to go online and wait while it updates your 'copy-of-the-internet'(tm) so that you browse offline.

      It'll be cheaper (and prolly just as effective) to google the topic you want and add the results page to your favourites with the "Make available offline" option active (in internet explorer) and your link depth set to a high value.

      --
      Quantum Physics a.k.a. sub-molecular statistics
    23. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Your town sucks. I have at least 8 hotspots (3 of which are "open" and unprotected) in my neighborhood alone.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    24. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by The-Bus · · Score: 1

      That's not what's so crazy. What's crazy is that Facebook turned down 750 million dollars and asked for 2 billion. My only hope is that News Corp also buys it, and then pays MySpace in the new News Corp Facebook stock and pays Facebook in the newly issued News Corp MySpace stock.

      --

      Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    25. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      But local coffee shops give it away free. At least MY local coffee shop does.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    26. Re:Dotcom v3.0 by bitfarmer · · Score: 0

      Am I the only one who read that as 'wife is nearly ubiquitous'?

      --
      Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
  3. Sounds like a cache to me by liliafan · · Score: 5, Informative

    After reading the article, it sounds like they are just selling their web cache, nice idea but really unless they are selling really cheap I just can't see it picking up, especially considering the difficulties of getting the data to your drive, I mean an 80G download!

    Additionally what if I decide to follow site links that leave the cache?

    Yeah I can't really see this picking up.

    --
    GeekServ Unix Consulting Services (http://www.geekserv.com)
    1. Re:Sounds like a cache to me by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      I might have considered this before I bought my Treo 650 - now that I can get internet access on my laptop pretty much anywhere I get cell reception, however, there isn't much of a point. It's a nice idea, and I imagine it was pretty tricky to implement - but the internet has simply become too ubiquitous for this to be a viable product.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    2. Re:Sounds like a cache to me by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Well, for an additional fee you'll be able to get a "Webaroo Subscription", which will allow you to connect to the internet and download additional content. I'm sure that this, combined with an optional subscription for real-time content-updates will make this product a smashing success.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    3. Re:Sounds like a cache to me by dogwelder99 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      From TFA...
      The company and service officially emerge from behind their stealth shield tomorrow armed with a flashy bundling agreement from laptop maker Acer.
      Most likely, the reason behind this awesomely silly "feature" is getting people to pay more for laptops with larger hard drives, with marketing promising "search the web without an internet connection!"

      And, of course, selling a subscription service that lets you download updates of your favorite internet content to your laptop... a technology formerly known as, well, "browsing the web". Using slick marketing to sell people stuff they already have, was a huge success for the bottled water industry... can't blame these guys for trying it on the internets.

    4. Re:Sounds like a cache to me by Kennego · · Score: 1

      From the article, Webaroo is a:

      free, ad-supported search service

      So they aren't selling it really cheap, the costs are mitigated by ads. I imagine if they were truly selling it for actual money, no-one would ever buy it. It still makes it a pretty crappy idea with, I'm sure, an even crappier business plan.

    5. Re:Sounds like a cache to me by AcidLacedPenguiN · · Score: 1

      Yes, and now they'll patent it and sue the internet for infringing their patents!!!

      --
      disclaimer: I've been known to store numbers in my ass for which to dig out when quantities are required.
  4. ah yes remember the day by minus_273 · · Score: 5, Funny

    when someone asked if the internet will fit on a floppy?

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:ah yes remember the day by jeroenb · · Score: 3, Funny

      I remember somewhere halfway through the 90s that a co-worker who did research into search technologies got the "idea" to just crawl the web looking for references to stuff you were interested in. It was pretty obvious, but he wanted to back everything up in case he wanted to recrawl it searching for something else.

      One day our internet connection was down and we went up to him asking: "the net connection is down, could we use your internet backup instead?" He was not amused, we were :)

      Come to think of it, I'm not sure what he's up to nowadays...

    2. Re:ah yes remember the day by Surt · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Sadly, I remember the day when it would. Getting too old.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    3. Re:ah yes remember the day by fracex · · Score: 4, Funny

      I remember when I was convinced that the entire interent came on one of those AOL floppies.

      Mind you I think I was 7 years old at the time.

    4. Re:ah yes remember the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think the corrent answer is that it does fit, if you leave out all porn and warez.

      The real question is, who would be interested in it then?

    5. Re:ah yes remember the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, you forgot to leave out /., that must take up more space on teh interweb than pr0n and war3z combined(mispellings, improper grammar, etc. on purpose)(also, fuck the slow down cowboy message, I swear, if /. doesn't fix it and the broken karma system I'm moving to digg, and digg only)

    6. Re:ah yes remember the day by TheCreeep · · Score: 1

      Shut up! I was one of those you insensitive clod!!! Sheesh, I was only 10...

    7. Re:ah yes remember the day by Surt · · Score: 1

      The first poster of content like this is not the redundant one. Check the post numbers and get 'em metamods.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    8. Re:ah yes remember the day by value_added · · Score: 1

      when someone asked if the internet will fit on a floppy?

      Forget the internet. If I win the lottery, I'm planning on buying USENET.

    9. Re:ah yes remember the day by dyefade · · Score: 1

      I remember someone at school copying a link to Internet Explorer to a floppy and believing he had successfully copied the whole internet. Idiot.

    10. Re:ah yes remember the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he now works on the Google cache?

    11. Re:ah yes remember the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how it works if you get the 'no porn' version of Webaroo's software - but where's the fun in that?

  5. Copyright infringment. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How soon till the first lawsuit is filed.

    1. Re:Copyright infringment. by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

      How soon till the first lawsuit is filed.

      US copyright law, 17 USC 512, excuses operators of automated caches that conform to established cache control protocols (meta elements, /robots.txt, etc.) from copyright infringement liability.

    2. Re:Copyright infringment. by salesgeek · · Score: 1

      US copyright law, 17 USC 512, excuses operators of automated caches that conform to established cache control protocols (meta elements, /robots.txt, etc.) from copyright infringement liability.

      Webaroo has gone far beyond being a cache, they are aggregating others content into a downloadable product they sell for money. This is no different than Napster 1.0 or a $10 per download warez site - the key difference being this is web content.

      --
      -- $G
    3. Re:Copyright infringment. by neoform · · Score: 1

      good thing american copyright law applies to the internet as a whole huh?

      --
      MABASPLOOM!
    4. Re:Copyright infringment. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fine with that.

      But what's webaroo's web crawler's name? I'll add it in right now.

      And if they distribute content collected before disclosing what their web crawler name is (so people would be *able* to put it into meta or robots.txt files), then they might still be in a legally grey zone. If people aren't yet able to opt-out via such mechanisms, and webaroo slurps up the content anyway, they should at least re-scan the content sources to see if the status has changed since.

    5. Re:Copyright infringment. by netbuzz · · Score: 1

      Webaroo president Brad Husick cited the above post by Tepples when I asked him about the copyright issue this morning. Husick's reply here: http://www.networkworld.com/community/?q=node/5413

    6. Re:Copyright infringment. by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Webaroo and their proposed product do not meet many of the qualifications required to fit under 17 USC 512(b). In particular, the storage of the cache is not "temporary" or "intermediate", since the entire cache is made available wholesale to the end user in permanent form. Webaroo does not qualify as a "service provider" when talking about this cache, because the cache is made available offline.

      And aside from those problems, Webaroo would find itself in hot water if anyone decided to enforce 512(b)(2)(E) against them, since it would be impossible to guarantee that all copies of the cache had been updated.

  6. Is this really the right time? by php_krisp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Is this really the right to to try this? when wi-fi connections are popping up all over the place and the internet's bigger than it ever has been before?

    1. Re:Is this really the right time? by know1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      it would always be the right time, if only for the possibility that the bomb drops and we have to live a mad max style existance scavenging and fighting over laptop batteries and petrol in old stores throughout the land. If that happens, i wanna be able to read uncyclopedia at the end of the day.
      If it didn't happen i would be like the guy who loses his glasses in that old story and can't read even though he has eternity "but there was time now..." or whatever.

    2. Re:Is this really the right time? by IndigoParadox · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've been thinking of snagging the downloadable Wikipedia and using a bot to download some other sites for this very reason!

    3. Re:Is this really the right time? by manboy9 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think it's as good a time as any.

      In the last year alone, I've gone through several situations where I would have loved to have this. On two occasions I had to wait several weeks to get internet access after I moved. Other times, I'm stuck in the middle of nowhere with only a 56K dial-up connection. It works, but it would be really nice to be able to access the information quickly.

      Don't get me wrong, I don't think this technology has any chance of succeeding. First of all, the market for people who move three or four times a year and tend to end up in rural areas is quite small. And secondly, they've got major competition in the Open Source world from wget.

  7. ownership by xzvf · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wouldn't there be an issue here of selling another person's content? While everyone can view the content at will, copying that information to media and then reselling it, or even distributing it for free, would be an issue.

    1. Re:ownership by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Well, that gets back to the whole issue of who, exactly, has jurisdiction of what parts of the Internet, and where, and when, and under what circumstances. And of course, where you choose to sell your "product". Definitely a can of worms. I hope they have a good legal department, because I think they're probably going to need it.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:ownership by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      How is it any different to my ISP charging me to look at other people's content? The only difference is that one is online, the other is off line. Should that really make a difference, I'm sure the lawyers will argue that it does, but in reality there is little.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    3. Re:ownership by ammoQ · · Score: 1

      There is definitely a difference. Technically, they make a copy and the ISP doesn't. You should also consider that owners of websites want to make money with it, by banner advertising etc. Offline, they cannot make money. For that reason, no-one can assume that their approval of that copy since it's obviously against their intentions.

    4. Re:ownership by Monkelectric · · Score: 1

      When you do it -- thats piracy. When a company does it, thats just business.

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    5. Re:ownership by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy. Come up with an exclusion rule for robots.txt that no one is using already. Make it opt-out (not opt-in!!). It worked for the google cache, it will work for this.

  8. why stop there? by cryptoz · · Score: 1

    With hard drive sizes so much larger than they used to be, why limit the space to 80GB? I carry around a 250 with my laptop, and if you plan on having so much data, why not make it even larger?

    Yeah yeah I did not RTFA, so if this is answered in the article, well...Eh.

  9. Copyright? by MustardMan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Considering the fact that companies are suing google for putting the first paragraph of their news tidbits on google news, how long will it be before someone sues webaroo for copyright infringement? Whether the claim is valid or reasonable or not is a moot point - someone is gonna see this as infringement and call out their pack of rabid lawyers.

    1. Re:Copyright? by KenDodd · · Score: 1

      As soon as Webaroo possess a sufficiently strong scent to said pack of rabid lawyers? Startups are largely skin and bones, slender pickings :)

      --
      Did you know my dad's dog died?
    2. Re:Copyright? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Well, since this is a start up they're not going to have very deep pockets, so unless someone is truly disturbed about copyright infringement I doubt you'll see too much legal action right away. No money in it. And I would expect that if anyone did complain Webaroo would immediately remove the offending content from future versions: they'd be fools to do otherwise. However, if (by some amazing happenstance) this becomes popular and profitable, expect multiple packs of hungry, rabid lawyers to move in for the kill. Isn't it amazing how the patent and copyright systems work to advance the useful arts and sciences nowadays?

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think about it, is not there a cache of the sites you visit on your hard drive? So that means that you have illegally copied material.

    4. Re:Copyright? by vidarh · · Score: 1
      Doesn't matter if they remove it. IANAL, but if they put a large number of peoples content (as opposed to small snippets which can be defensible) on a CD and distribute it without verifying either that the copyrightholder has granted a license for it to be used that way, or contacting the copyrightholder to get a license, it is a clear case of copyright infringement and there's no way they'd be able to get a judge to believe it wasn't willful.

      The combination of willful copyright infringement and a profit motive == mandatory fines and a high chance of prison.

      Unless these guys are very careful about not violating anyones copyright it only takes one party in a case like this to care enough, and they're bankrupt. Perhaps they are, but if so, the idea of the "internet on a harddisk" is far away from the reality of it (as if it wasn't anyway)

  10. I won't be doing that one... by joe+155 · · Score: 1

    look at news without a net connection? Either this is going to be just the same as viewing pages offline after you've been on them (perhaps an automated web crawler which grabs pages whilst you have some up time) or you will be viewing very old news... It seems to be the former though, in which case your not really doing it "without a connection"... so why bother? this seems like a waste of space and time (an bandwidth), just look at what you want to when your plugged in rather than constantly getting information you may never need

    --
    *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    1. Re:I won't be doing that one... by Jetekus · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've heard that a technology for seeing news offline already exists. It's very cheap, disposable (so don't worry if you leave it on the train) and can even keep you dry for a short period of time if it starts to rain. What's more - it's made from trees! How clever is that!!!

  11. Airport Example by webmistressrachel · · Score: 1

    The Airport example highlights the major weakness of this software: whait if I want to send and recieve real-time messages and news in that 5 minutes before a flight?

    Has it's uses, though.

    --
    This tagline was transcoded to result in at least one smirk. If you experience failure to smirk, please consult your Gen
    1. Re:Airport Example by caffeination · · Score: 1

      That's not a weakness, it's a characteristic inherent to the fundamental idea. To call it a "major weakness" is akin to scoffing at skateboards for their lack of a motor, or disparaging wallpaper for its poor performance as a security system.

  12. In the world of citi wide wifi & by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    wireless broadband access.. why would I want to download the web on my harddrive, when I will have (if not already) access to it from virtually anywhere ?

    I see potential educational uses, but not wide spread adoption.

  13. April Fools!! by tfriedlich · · Score: 1

    Is it just me, or does seem like a left-over post from last saturday?

    1. Re:April Fools!! by Keweenaw · · Score: 1
      My thoughts exactally. I think someone was a little behind in reading their press releases. The site is still not up for the product. The only information from their front page is:
      Webaroo is a stealth-mode technology startup. We bring a breakthrough capability to your mobile world. The company is backed by world-class venture firms and investors. The company's offices are located in Seattle, WA, Santa Clara, CA, Mumbai, India and New Delhi, India.
      At least they could have had the release of their product on-time for April Fools. Maybe they're suffering the same delays as MS with Vista. lol
    2. Re:April Fools!! by Kman_xth · · Score: 1

      Yes one might assume that, weren't it for the total lack of PONIES!11LOLOLOL!

    3. Re:April Fools!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is it just me, or does seem like a left-over post from last saturday?


      Actually I think it's a partial repost or related to something.. "SQL on Rails" and "import internet.sql" come to mind.
  14. Old news in Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Bah, this is old news. We swedes have been buying "Internet on a cd-rom" from http://home.swipnet.se/snezzer/pi/ for a long time. You can even buy it on VHS for 489:- or DVD with surround sound!

    1. Re:Old news in Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dark Helmet: What the Hell am I looking at?! When does this happen on the internet?!
      Col. Sandurz: Now! You're looking at "now," sir. Everything that happens now is happening "now."
      Dark Helmet: What happened to "then?"
      Col. Sandurz: We passed it.
      Dark Helmet: When?
      Col. Sandurz: Just now. We're at now "now."
      Dark Helmet: Go back to "then."
      Col. Sandurz: When?
      Dark Helmet: Now.
      Col. Sandurz: Now?!
      Dark Helmet: Now!
      Col. Sandurz: I can't.
      Dark Helmet: Why?
      Col. Sandurz: We missed it.
      Dark Helmet: When?
      Col. Sandurz: Just now.
      Dark Helmet: When will "then" be "now?"
      Col. Sandurz: Soon.
      Dark Helmet: How soon?
      Spaceball: Sir!
      Dark Helmet: What?
      Spaceball: We've identified their location.
      Dark Helmet: Where?
      Spaceball: It's the moon of Vega.
      Col. Sandurz: Good work. Set a course and prepare for our arrival.
      Dark Helmet: When?
      Spaceball: Nineteen-hundred hours.
      Col. Sandurz: Buy high noon tomorrow Dvorak will be our prisoner.
      Dark Helmet: Who?!

  15. Weaboo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did somebody say "Weaboo?" Because I... oh, webaroo. Damn, nevermind.

  16. What about important updates? by KenDodd · · Score: 5, Funny

    For example, where do we get the porn diffs?

    --
    Did you know my dad's dog died?
    1. Re:What about important updates? by zanglang · · Score: 1

      diff -cr webaroo_porn_pack_2006_04 webaroo_porn_pack_2006_05 > porn.diff
      cd /home/porn
      patch -p0 porn.diff

  17. Downloading Wikipedia Is Nothing New by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2, Funny

    Been around since the early 90's. Back then it was called "fan fiction."

  18. Sweet!!!11 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    80 gigabytes of Natalie Portman pictures - sweeet!! Where do I sign up..

  19. How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: 3, Insightful

    e.g. searching? Having Wikipedia on your hdd is all well and good, but if you can't easily search it, what's the point?

    --
    The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
    1. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by timeOday · · Score: 1
      So you're saying it's harder to seach content stored on your computer than if it's stored all over the Internet?

      Besides, great thing about Wikipedia is you don't need to search it. You just look up the topic you want, and there's your information, already organized. (And yeah, I know books have been doing just that since the invention of the printing press. But I could never afford a copy of Britannica, could you?)

    2. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia is not a collection of html pages, it's a database with a web interface.
      Grandparent poster posits that without the database software running on your laptop, Wikipedia won't work. At all.

    3. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by ravendug · · Score: 1

      Having Wikipedia on your hdd is already possible: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_do wnload It is also a great way of generating fairly large dictionary files in several different languages: Generating a word list from Wikipedia

    4. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by WStaind · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't need Wikipedia's software running on your computer/laptop. What would be stored in cache would the the HTML generated by Wikipedia's software, similar to how Google cache's websites http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:FL1c-uLSSrwJ:e n.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia+wikipedia&hl=en&gl= us&ct=clnk&cd=2&client=opera/.

    5. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by castoridae · · Score: 1

      Local hard drive search? Spotlight should do the trick for me...

    6. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      without the database software running on your laptop, Wikipedia won't work. At all.

      Not true.

    7. Re:How are they going to handle dynamic things.. by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > Having Wikipedia on your hdd is all well and good, but
      > if you can't easily search it, what's the point?

      Searching is no sweat. Anything on your hard drive is much easier (in terms of computer resources) to search than something online. Certainly, searching a local HD-based copy of Wikipedia should be faster, on any modern computer, with a reasonable search facility (involving an index, I imagine), than waiting for the results to a Wikipedia search query to come back over a dialup connection.

      Keeping up-to-date is a bigger problem, but if you don't have convenient access to the net all the time, a six-month-old copy of Wikipedia would be considerably better than no Wikipedia. Similarly, a slightly out of date copy of the CPAN would be considerably better than nothing.

      Some things just won't work, though. Perlmonks would be a good example of a site for which an out-of-date local copy just isn't going to be useful. Slashdot is another example. What would be the point?

      If they're really thinking of this as "the whole web on a disk", they're barking up the wrong tree. Large parts of the web would not be useful to include. However, I'm sure there's 80GB worth of stuff out there that *would* be useful to have. If they're thinking in terms of carefully selecting the stuff that would be really useful to have in a local copy, that might actually prove useful. Potentially.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  20. Screw the web searching business by mtrisk · · Score: 2, Funny

    They should be selling their compression technology!

    --

    Without a proper flamewar, Anonymous was undecided on what shell to run.
    1. Re:Screw the web searching business by uberjoe · · Score: 1

      Easy just add in the 'boobies algorithm.' Saves a ton of space.

      --

      The days of the digital watch are numbered.

  21. Search results?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FTFA:

    Webaroo will also be touting the potential cost savings...

    "Every hotel I go to wants to charge me $10 to $15 a night for Internet. Every airport wants to charge me another $10 to get connected," Husick says. "If I've got five minutes before I have to board my flight, do I want to spend that five minutes connecting or do I want to spend five minutes getting my search answer?"

    I would be more interested in checking email(s) than assimilate search results.

    1. Re:Search results?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might be interested in Google's new "your mail" beta then. Coming soon to a store near you...

  22. AaAAAAaaHH!!!eleventy1 Big brother attacks! by redheaded_stepchild · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This is the single dumbest thing I've seen on Slashdot recently. As someone has already posted, why carry the internet as hard copy when wifi is becoming ubiquitous? In any case, is it just my tin-foil-hat nature that sees this as a great way of hiding/censoring parts of the internet? I mean, if this were to actually take off we'd be trusting a single source of info, with little or no culpability to the public. Granted if this became popular we'd see other sources come in, but....oh to hell with it.
     
    I'm not going to waste any more time on this. It's just an exercise in paranoia. Nothing to see here, move along.

    --
    Don't use the Troll mod just because you disagree with me.
    1. Re:AaAAAAaaHH!!!eleventy1 Big brother attacks! by weg · · Score: 1

      In any case, is it just my tin-foil-hat nature that sees this as a great way of hiding/censoring parts of the internet?

      Not saying Webaroo is a good idea, but censoring can be done by current search engines, too (at least, it's easy to hide content from less ambitious users)
      --
      Georg
  23. Already got it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I'm posting this message from my Webaroo offline internet connection.

  24. 80 gig web? by hlh_nospam · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That would cover about 0.0000000001% of the web, give or take a few dozen orders of magitude.

    1. Re:80 gig web? by AndreiK · · Score: 1

      So that would be between 10^-34 and 10^14 percent?

    2. Re:80 gig web? by anotherone · · Score: 1

      No images and compression on the text would probably change that quite a bit.

      --
      Username taken, please choose another one.
    3. Re:80 gig web? by hlh_nospam · · Score: 1

      Actually between 10^-10 and zero percent. Probably much closer to zero. But nobody really knows just how big the WWW is, or even how fast it's growing. Even the mighty Google doesn't index more than a small percentage.

    4. Re:80 gig web? by hlh_nospam · · Score: 4, Insightful
      No images and compression on the text would probably change that quite a bit.

      Not enough so's you'd notice. What's the difference between one thimbleful of ocean and 100 thimblefuls of ocean? Besides trying to solve the wrong problem to begin with?

    5. Re:80 gig web? by TTK+Ciar · · Score: 1

      It's more like 0.15%, if they use the same compression and content selection criteria as the Internet Archive. If they eschewed with all non-html content (graphics files, pdf's, etc) that would go up quite a bit. If they used better compression (the Archive uses gzip) it would go up some more.

      An average crawl of the public web, minus files which are "too large" (not sure what the threshold is for that), makes about 55TB of gzipped archive. 80GB / 55000GB = 0.0014545, or about 0.15%.

      -- TTK

    6. Re:80 gig web? by TubeSteak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You make a good point, but there are ways to squeeze the size down. They aren't archiving the entire ocean, just the top layer, which is what 99% of people look at anyways.

      Compression, for one. Force people to use some proprietary browser (or a FireFox extension) and compress html files > xx KB so that the browser opens the archives on the fly. Zip up executables, pdf's, word documents, etc etc etc. Webservers & browsers use gzip to save bandwidth, why can't this archive use it to save space?

      Convert bitmaps into jpegs, recompress/resize jpegs greater than xx KB or some arbitrary height x width. (and make people pay more for uncompressed/resized images).

      Write up an automated tool to strip the html of links to ads while deleting the ad images/files too.

      That's just off the top of my head, but if anyone had 40GB of web pages to sift through, I'm sure they can come up with some other intelligent ways to save space.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    7. Re:80 gig web? by Kennego · · Score: 1

      Actually, according to the article, the results come "with all graphics intact." So it'll come with both images and text, but everything better be compressed, or that's just a huge waste of space.

    8. Re:80 gig web? by zanglang · · Score: 1

      3.5 thimbles of salt and a lot of water?

      Actually just talking about the compression, it would make sense. I'd say most html pages have an abundance of duplicate tags (lots of divs, brs for example), similiar text ('email','me','omg','sex'(i'm actually serious about these)) and so on. I'd imagine that's how Google's cache servers handle it as well. *Unless* you put back in the binary data such as jpeg images, then you get that extra 99 thimbles of seawash.

      Interesting thing is whether or not one can come up with a browser to navigate between pages while still in compressed archive...

  25. about 8 days late on this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I doubt the implementation will work properly without CPIP.

  26. It means... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that you will be able to download it from itself once you have it installed on your HD?

  27. Sounds exactly like freenet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  28. Slashdot pack by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

    At least if you have it on your harddrive you don't have to redownload it to get your dupes!

    --
    liqbase :: faster than paper
  29. this is nothing new by santaliqueur · · Score: 1, Funny

    it's just the president nixon stereotype version of the normal web.

    i'm going to surf the webarooooo

    --
    I do not accept czechs.
  30. Not quite useful enough by bender647 · · Score: 1

    When I can get to a PC, I can usually get to the net. Do they offer hardcopies instead?

    1. Re:Not quite useful enough by Al+Dimond · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Bender647 produced from a sack strapped onto his back a large book. "The book of teh intarweb", it read in gold lettering on its black leather binding. "Now, my children," intoned the wise old man, stroking his long grey beard, "I shall read you the story of when I got fsir7 ps0t."

  31. Altogether now: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Massive copyright infringement.
     
    They'll crash and burn.

    1. Re:Altogether now: by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      oh ive got you one better

      WiMax/Clearwire this would be wireless internet @ cable modem speeds i would figure that about the time Vista is a Stable Product (FSSVO Stable) Clearwire will have coverage on the Verizon/SprintPCS scale and have cute little adapters that you can use for a Laptop.

      Anybody for a Webaroo sandwich??

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  32. All of the Web on a laptop? by omeg · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The Internet Archive Wayback Machine contains approximately 1 petabyte of data and is currently growing at a rate of 20 terabytes per month. This eclipses the amount of text contained in the world's largest libraries, including the Library of Congress. If you tried to place the entire contents of the archive onto floppy disks (we don't recommend this!) and laid them end to end, it would stretch from New York, past Los Angeles, and halfway to Hawaii."

    Internet Archive Frequently Asked Questions

    1. Re:All of the Web on a laptop? by Shinaku · · Score: 1

      and, of course, one of the floppies will corrupt leaving you with the rest being useless.

      --
      -- :>
    2. Re:All of the Web on a laptop? by MikeXpop · · Score: 1

      Is archive.org trying to suggest "If you put the entire archive on floppy drives, and layed them out one by one, starting from New York and heading due West, how far would it reach?" is a frequently asked question?

      --
      Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
  33. Google Local by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    How big is Google's index of the Web, complete with URLs of results? I could search that, only a day out of date, without a Net connection, if it fit on a HD. Maybe using Usenet to distribute it...

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Google Local by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Google's indexes probably run to many terabytes. Google indexes roughly a billion pages. If each page has a thousand words, and each word can be reduced to a single 32-bit number in the index, that comes to 4 terabytes. And it's probably much, much higher than that; this is a back-of-the-envelope calculation.

      Especially since there's considerable redundancy; they can't search all that data that quickly without throwing multiple computers at it. Even if you could have a local Google copy, it would run very slowly.

      To run the calculation another way: when Google Desktop indexes your hard drive, it takes up around 10% of that drive. The web contains many petabytes, and even though much of that is pictures, there are still petabytes of text to index.

      In fact, it's Google's ability to store and quickly access all that information that's more interesting than the Pagerank algorithm (for which there are other, equally good candidates). Google's ability to manage all that data is the real reason Google is able to say to the world, "Come, everybody gets free 2 gigabyte accounts! We've got more disks than you can shake a stick at!" And why they can store satellite photos to cover the globe and serve them up, and store vast quantities of free video, etc. And make caches of all of those web pages (at least the text part).

  34. Not just access by David+Hume · · Score: 2, Interesting
    FTFA:
    Which isn't to say that ever more ubiquitous 'Net connections won't pose a challenge to the Webaroo business model.

    "Long-term their opportunity may have more to do with [search] performance" than the offline capability itself, Enderle says.

    Husick tells me that performance benefit was reinforced for the company by a rousing reception their service received from Japanese mobile operators who he says were salivating over Webaroo as a means to siphon search traffic away from their increasingly crowded wireless broadband networks.

    Webaroo will also be touting the potential cost savings and convenience of its service.

    "Every hotel I go to wants to charge me $10 to $15 a night for Internet. Every airport wants to charge me another $10 to get connected," Husick says. "If I've got five minutes before I have to board my flight, do I want to spend that five minutes connecting or do I want to spend five minutes getting my search answer?"
    I still think this is a business scheme destined to fail. It may be a business plan that is designed to survive only long enough to cash out.
     
    I've got news for Husick. I'm a lawyer who have sets of Statutes, Court Rules and Local Rules behind his desk. I still look them up online to make sure I have the most recent version. I can't afford not to.
     
    Search performance? Rarely, if ever a problem.
     
    Siphon traffic away from "increasingly crowded broadband networks?" They make money from that traffic. They can't, if necessary, charge per data download? Tier the service by download bandwidth? Charge more? Build a better network?
     
    The first cell phone or wireless device that expects me pre-download some portion of the net, that portion being determined by somebody else, is the first one I can cross off my list.
     
    Save $5 or %10 at the airport by not connecting? What if I want to send or receive e-mail? Get the latest news, business or stock information? I'm AT AN AIRPORT, which implies I have some money, and in his context that I'm on business. I'm going to foregoe a net connection for $5 or $10? If my employer is that tight, I'm looking for another job anyway -- one that doesn't use Webaroos' services.

    This reminds me of software solutions to cramped hard drive spaces awhile back. On the fly file compression and expansion when data size was outstriping hard drive size for a short period of time. (Remember the file corruption.) Even though there was a market for those products, barely, everyone and his brother knew that market was going to go away Real Soon Now.
    1. Re:Not just access by birge · · Score: 1

      Like most lawyers I know, you seem to miss the possibility for more than one option to exist in the world. (That's why you guys make such great politicians.) But the world of engineering is about increasing the number of possibilities, quite unlike the zero sum game from which most lawyers skim off the top. It's quite reasonable to suppose that there are times when having a laptop that has both wireless connectivity AND a static snapshot of the more useful parts of the net would be fantastic. For example, maybe in the airport you connect and grab e-mail but once you get on the airplane it would still be nice to have last weeks snapshot of the internet available to you while on the flight. There will always be times when the internet is unavailable, either through technical problems or the realities of your location. Having another, albeit lesser, option is always nice and these guys are trying to provide that.

    2. Re:Not just access by David+Hume · · Score: 0, Troll
      There will always be times when the internet is unavailable, either through technical problems or the realities of your location. Having another, albeit lesser, option is always nice and these guys are trying to provide that.
      Then Mr. Superior Engineer, you buy the stock. Or better yet, invest some start-up money because this is such a briliant business idea.
       
      Or better yet, please take a job there.
    3. Re:Not just access by birge · · Score: 1
      Hey, maybe it will fail. But I'll take a million failed startup companies over one more law firm. I'm not being superior, but simply negative about the effect of lawyers on society. I wouldn't put engineers on a pedestal above garbage men. We're all helping. Hell, the world would be a miserable, dry place if everybody were engineers. But the world would stop functioning if we were all lawyers, the majority of whom are parasitic wastes of space taking advantage of a corrupt system of their own design. (I'm simply talking in terms of society here. As individuals they run the gamut, of course, like everybody else, though you do have to raise an eyebrow at people who decide to devote their professional lives to cutting up the pie--while taking a third for themselves--instead of making it bigger.)

      Anyway, don't be so sore. You should just take the inevitable vituperation towards your profession as a small price to pay for leaching off productive society. And if you're one of a few good lawyers who we actually need, then get mad not at me but at your fellow attorneys for giving the profession such a well deserved notoriety.

    4. Re:Not just access by geminidomino · · Score: 1

      Wow... I'll get downmodded for this but I just have to say it.

      Well said.

  35. hmm... by atarione · · Score: 1

    yeah... I don't know, usually when i'm travelling and i'm trying to get online i'm trying to connect to my VPN, or check my email...etc..not trying to look up what the capital of Georga is?.. plus how many people have a spare 80GB's on their laptop?????? (NOT ME)

    plus i don't know where they are staying but the hotels we use have free HS Internet in the rooms?

    --
    actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
    1. Re:hmm... by s-orbital · · Score: 1

      That's easy, it's Tbilisi

      --
      Patent: from Latin patere, to be open
  36. Hm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Only if one of the webpacks is porn. Or better yet, if several are porn, cross referenced by type and participants.

    Though, my vaguely disturbing ramblings do raise an interesting point, maybe - what's their stance on the indecent materials that make up a good deal of teh webernet? When they say the "whole internet," do they MEAN goatse too?

    1. Re:Hm.. by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think goatse would be under "hole internet".

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:Hm.. by edbulldog · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only way one can store the "whole internet" in a 80GB drive is to drop off the pr0n. I mean... besides the pr0n, everything else should fit in a 80GB drive, right?

    3. Re:Hm.. by Walruzoar · · Score: 1

      Never mind download the internet, I want to print it out! High speed printer for hire, anyone?

      --
      Take off every 'Sig'!! You know what you doing. http://www.donline.co.uk/
    4. Re:Hm.. by Mordaximus · · Score: 1

      There is probably 80GB worth of PDFs alone out there. How about music in all formats? Game demoes? Linux Distributions? (Non-Pr0n) video? Flash? Photos? Just duplicates of tacky animated gifs would take up quite a bit of space.

    5. Re:Hm.. by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you trying to be funny? 80 GB of PDF's out there? Buddy, there are departments of companies, not the whole company, that have more than 80 GB of PDFs available to the public on servers.... (sometimes limited public, i.e. customers, for owners manulas, docs etc....)

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    6. Re:Hm.. by fshalor · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking this would be like "google caches" of the top ten-25 fisrt hit pages or something.

      --
      -=fshalor ::this post not spellchecked. move along::
    7. Re:Hm.. by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 1

      I just read my post that you replied to and realized that I sounded like an asshat. Apologies...

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
  37. Surfing is only part of the web... by hlh_nospam · · Score: 0, Redundant
    FTFA: There's a fine line between crazy and audacious -- we'll know soon enough which side Webaroo falls on.

    I can already tell you which side of the line it falls on. In addition to 80g being a thimbleful of ocean, websurfing is not my main use of the internet. How, for instance, are they going to support reading blogs, or even /.? My main use of the internet is to send and receive mail. Followed by participating in several blogs and fora (like /.). My home page is Google/ig, set up to monitor several RSS feeds, email, and news. This idea is so bad it isn't even wrong. It's pathetic.

    1. Re:Surfing is only part of the web... by caffeination · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So your personal computing habits are the yardstick by which all IT products are to be measured?

      When your argument is based exclusively on your opinions and personal experience, global absolutes like "this idea is bad" come off as arrogance. Phrases like "this is useless to me" are more accurate.

    2. Re:Surfing is only part of the web... by hlh_nospam · · Score: 1
      I'd be willing to bet real money that these turkeys will either radically change their approach, or be out of business in 6 months. Maybe I'm not a representative user of the 'Net, but I don't know of ANYBODY who would consider a one-way surfing experience to be an adequate substitute for the real internet. The real internet is a two-way medium. You want one-way? Watch a DVD movie on your laptop during the time you are separated from the 'Net. Generally, I prefer to read a book or listen to classical music, so maybe I am in a tiny minority.

      But to me, without two-way content, the internet is utterly effing useless.

  38. Pr0n? by Dante+Shamest · · Score: 4, Funny

    Would the downloadable content include porn?

    Er, I'm asking this in order to, er, protect my girlfriend's sensibilities. Can't have her unwittingly downloading such naughty stuff you know. =)

    1. Re:Pr0n? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, admit it, you have no girlfriend, unless by girlfriend you mean pr0n.... so you dont want your pr0n, downloading pr0n... what?

    2. Re:Pr0n? by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      if(posts_to_slashdot && has_girlfriend)
        if(girlfriend.has_sensibilities)
          chance_of_lying = VERY_HIGH;
        else
          chance of lying = HIGH;

      --
      Long live the Speaker Bracelet
      Rolo D. Monkey
    3. Re:Pr0n? by Terrasque · · Score: 1

      order to, er, protect my girlfriend's sensibilities. Can't have her unwittingly downloading such naughty stuff you know.

      Just download with your left hand, then.

      --
      It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
    4. Re:Pr0n? by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 1

      Damn, I forgot the underscores, it should be chance_of_lying = HIGH;. Sorry about that, and if you are about to tell me that I forgot the brackets, I would suggest you hesitate.

      --
      Long live the Speaker Bracelet
      Rolo D. Monkey
    5. Re:Pr0n? by grimJester · · Score: 1

      Do you really think someone would try to compile it?

    6. Re:Pr0n? by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 1

      No, but some AC felt compelled to point out my mistake.

      --
      Long live the Speaker Bracelet
      Rolo D. Monkey
    7. Re:Pr0n? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one believes you. If you can't change the subject, then shut up.

      (mods, check his post history)

  39. what about copyright issues by josepha48 · · Score: 1

    I see issues of copyright coming up. Just linking to sites these days can get people into trouble, what will be the repercussions of essentially taking all this data and stuffing it on someones hard drive.

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!
    Does slashdot hate my posts?

  40. Early copy already leaked... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Download.

    On a more serious note, in a few years, won't there be wireless internet in the vast majority of places that you would be doing work? Why not work on getting internet everywhere, rather than a dumbed-down crippled version that uses up a big chunk of hard drive space? It seems like the opposite direction of where things are going. With the number of emerging internet based services that used to be only on the desktop (ie. office applications, image management, etc.) it seems like everything is moving to be -online-, not the other way around.

  41. Oh my! by Wellington+Grey · · Score: 1

    Oh my! The endless copyright battles that will ensue!

    -Grey

  42. Damn! Honey, by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    I missed that eBay auction deadline again! I'd better start using FedEx for the new versions.

  43. obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well I, for one, welcome our new "wget" overlords.

  44. Inspiration by billysk8r · · Score: 0

    Webaroo's creator commented that his inspiration to create the service came from beholding the immense power of SQL on Rails

  45. Oh my good god (plus bonus Dr Who joke)... by tyroneking · · Score: 2, Funny

    From the website "Webaroo is a stealth-mode technology startup" which obviously means something very clever ... personally I use WinHTTrack on a small number of sites, now if someone offered pre-downloaded WinHTTrack sites ...maybe to order ...
    Anyway, more importantly - Dr Who is due back on UK TV soon I think (slightly disappointing end to last series - shame to to see Chris E leave) so here's a joke that Webaroo might like to to 'cache' ... "What do Daleks have for a snack? ...
    Dalek bread..." geddit? (thanks to a kids radio show for that one).

    1. Re:Oh my good god (plus bonus Dr Who joke)... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It probably means that the VCs should not be concerned about the lack of a marketing budget -- they are doing "stelath marketing" by not telling anyone, and look, now they got on slashdot. It must be working. And the VC money is going directly to hacking together a cool new technology. They must have either exceptionally stupid or astoundingly clever funding sources.

  46. Wow! I'd be MORE impressed if they.... by i_want_you_to_throw_ · · Score: 1

    could give me Duke Nukem Forever or the next Amiga OS release.

  47. It'll never work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    80 gigs is not nearly enough space for all the porn. Which is what most people search for anyway. 'Web on a hard drive' indeed!

  48. Can't wait... by coastin · · Score: 1

    for the leather bound book inscribed by cyber-monks, with hand illustrated, gold leafed side-bars.

    --
    I lost my sig...
  49. Transoceanic flights? by tepples · · Score: 1

    now that I can get internet access on my laptop pretty much anywhere I get cell reception, however, there isn't much of a point.

    So what should the transatlantic and transpacific frequent fliers use? Wi-Fi and cellphones don't work on an airplane.

    1. Re:Transoceanic flights? by Theatetus · · Score: 2, Insightful
      So what should the transatlantic and transpacific frequent fliers use?

      wget (while they're waiting in the airport).

      --
      All's true that is mistrusted
    2. Re:Transoceanic flights? by mallardtheduck · · Score: 1

      I expect it won't be long until planes have internal wifi on a satellite link.

    3. Re:Transoceanic flights? by e4g4 · · Score: 1

      Last time I was on a transatlantic flight, I flew coach. I didn't even have enough elbow room to use a laptop :-p But yeah, that is a viable market for this product, unfortunately, I give it a year before planes have affordable internet access. I guess the point of my comment is that the internet is only going to get more ubiquitous, and this product is a little too late, and doesn't have much sustainability.

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    4. Re:Transoceanic flights? by timmyf2371 · · Score: 3, Informative
      I always fly Lufthansa whenever travelling trans-atlantic, providing you're willing to pay the WiFi premium, you get WiFi internet access for the duration of the flight.

      For shorter flights within the UK and Europe, it's safe to say I can cope without internet access for two hours.

      --

      Backup not found: (A)bort (R)etry (P)anic
    5. Re:Transoceanic flights? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Transoceanic flights? by Fear+the+Clam · · Score: 1

      Those "comfy web, wireless web" Lufthansa subway ads always make me thing that guy's just rubbed one out and now he's gonna take a little snooze.

      Personally, I'd rather read Usenet offline while flying coach on the cheapest provider and have a couple hundred bucks in my pocket.

    7. Re:Transoceanic flights? by KanSer · · Score: 1

      You stole the words from my mouth Re: Lufthansa.

      I was going to say, "Fly on a decent carrier!" No shit you don't get wifi on southwest flights, jesus.

      --
      • MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward Wednesday April 20, @4:20
    8. Re:Transoceanic flights? by Hamdog · · Score: 1

      Lufthansa has it. It's $29.95 per flight.

    9. Re:Transoceanic flights? by fbjon · · Score: 1
      So what should the transatlantic and transpacific frequent fliers use? Wi-Fi and cellphones don't work on an airplane.
      A good book.
      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
  50. html has never cared where data comes from by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 2, Informative

    This actually isn't by any means a new idea.

    If you've ever written or read html, you know that html doesn't care if links start file:// or if they start html://. HTML has always been quite neutral on whether it was linking to a local file system or getting something over the internet. Of course, most people don't use html extensively for local content. So in theory, this isn't a new idea at all.

    In practice, I don't see a lot of points for it. I can imagine that some people might want a map of a new city, with clickable pictures and informations about various services there. Most features of a city map are going to stay the same for at least six months, so this is the type of thing that could be done staticly. But even with this, internet access is so widespread, that it seems like a solution for a minor problem. Also, if you want a handy city guide, it would make more sense to me to write it from scratch rather than use a cludge of cached web pages.

    --
    Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
    1. Re:html has never cared where data comes from by bcat24 · · Score: 1

      I guess you've never read HTML. :) There is no html:// URI scheme. You're thinking of http:///

    2. Re:html has never cared where data comes from by Glowing+Fish · · Score: 1

      ::: bonks head on monitor :::

      sorry...I guess I should remember to not post on slashdot until AFTER my morning caffeine

      --
      Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
  51. Cache exemption by tepples · · Score: 4, Informative

    Technically, they make a copy and the ISP doesn't.

    Isn't the ephemeral copy in the RAM of a router still a copy? And don't operators of automated caches have a fairly broad exemption under United States copyright law, 17 USC 512(b)?

    1. Re:Cache exemption by ammoQ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It doesn't seem likely to me that those Webaroo guys will be able to fullfill the conditions of (2), especially (C) and (E). The cache exemption is obviously targeted towards _online_ caches. This makes sense, IMO.

  52. There's nothing new here by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1

    It's an offline, indexed database; interesting but hardly newsworthy. So unless they've broken the Shannon limit there's nothing more here than IPO fodder.

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
  53. Slashdot hell by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    Imagine a version of Slashdot that you can refresh all day long, but no new articles appear.
    You can post comments, but they never show up.

    This service is a potential disaster that can drive millions of geeks on the edge of desperation or worse.
    Think of the geeks, people...

  54. WAMP by tepples · · Score: 1

    Grandparent poster posits that without the database software running on your laptop, Wikipedia won't work.

    How hard is it to set up a local WAMP (Windows-hosted Apache, MySQL, and PHP) server in a slick installer?

    1. Re:WAMP by The+Lerneaen+Hydra · · Score: 0

      Probably not very difficult, but getting it to configure itself automatically and emulate way that wikipedia (or any other site) works is no easy task.

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

      http://www.apachefriends.org/en/index.html - XAMPP, full Apache/MySQL/FileZilla/PHP/PHPMyAdmin/etc. package in a single installer, I tossed the PERL addon in and that's my windows development server.

  55. Is this even legal? by sunwolf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    How are they to justify selling other peoples' websites? What about the sites' lost ad revenues?

    1. Re:Is this even legal? by tepples · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How are they to justify selling other peoples' websites?

      In much the same way that ISPs justify selling access to other people's web sites.

  56. 2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bye bye web 2.0

  57. Impossible by crvtec · · Score: 1

    That's impossible! I have nowhere near all the pr0n on the interweb and I've used way more than 80GB.

  58. Information Filtering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terrific, we'll have web packs that omit relevant information just the way the media suddenly and completely omitted any mention of Howard Dean as a candidate about halfway through the last election. That kind of obvious collusion won't be necessary now, we'll just be able to read fair and balanced news about one candidate.

    All the news that's fit for you to read, Citizen!

  59. Could just work... by ELProphet · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But not in the way they think. TFA mentions two points, but doesn't explore them in depth. The first is their algorithms they use; let's face it, Google is starting to fall to the SEOs. If they have a new algorithm that was able to actually follow your web browsing all the way, they'd be able to provide much better results. Google claims to do this, but they can't follow you more than your first link. Second, they seem to pick up that most people find their entire information on the second or think link they visit.

    Combine these together, and the program could offer you 80 gigs of data to just sit on your computer and be sifted through at yuor leisure. It would be able to follow you through, and find exactly how you get through your data. When it needs to, it can spider into areas that it might think you'd want to go (Been looking at a lok of Wikipedia? Next time you connect, it goes an picks up some wikibooks).

    The best part, is that all the "Big Brother" information is being stored on YOUR computer, not their servers. You want that info, Bush? You'll have to supoena every user.

    If they tergeted this more towards a desktop-search type thing with better search algos than Google, this could just work.

  60. Finally! by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    Now I can say that I've finished downloading all the intrawebs!

  61. a nice service is possible. by twitter · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The wayback machine's terrabytes of data is what this really takes. Keeping it up to date is another story.

    Archives are good and this can be a useful service. Providing 80 select gigs on a hard drive to libraries and schools is a useful until US networks get where they should be. Their software can keep those 80 GB up to snuff at night. When you leave the cache, you ... gasp ... get the new content. In the mean time, things are much faster when it matters. Mirrored content will always be a good idea. Look at the debian distribution system, for example.

    Good luck to the people at Webaroo. So long as they don't apply for stupid patents that give them an exclusive franchise to distribution systems, they are AOK.

    The road warrior thing will flop, though. People are going to stay where there's a network or pay the $10. It's the one piece of live information that requires the hook up. The speed of the rest is gravy for those people.

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

    1. Re:a nice service is possible. by anti-trojan · · Score: 1

      Wayback machine stores numerous versions of the same page, but still...

    2. Re: a nice service is possible. by gidds · · Score: 1
      The road warrior thing will flop, though. People are going to stay where there's a network or pay the $10.

      I dunno about that. For example, I have a snapshot of Wikipedia on my PDA. (TomeRaider version; under 1GB.) Of course, it doesn't have all the advantages of a live Wiki: no recent updates, current events, or editability. But it's still a great information resource, and it's really handy when I'm sitting on trains (which I do for a few hours each day) or in a car, round at my parents', or anywhere else away from the net. (And even if I'm at my computer, it can still be quicker to find an article there than online!)

      Yes, it's second-best; but even that's still pretty useful, and I've learnt an awful lot browsing it. I expect that a judicious selection of web sites could provide the same sort of benefit.

      --

      Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.

  62. PAR files by tepples · · Score: 1

    and, of course, one of the floppies will corrupt leaving you with the rest being useless.

    How long have PAR files been around?

    1. Re:PAR files by weierstrass · · Score: 1

      welcome to missing the joke.

      w/o idiots like you, the internet would fit on a floppy

      --
      my password really is 'stinkypants'
  63. Just to clear it up... by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    .. not that it isn't obvious but, the whole reason this service is about to happen, and the only reason we're reading about it on Slashdot is the wow factor of saying "get the internet on your disk".

    Should have they said it like "buy our temp files" it's suddenly a lot less interesting.

    You can't split the internet in topics and sell it. Noone browses while restraining himself to one topic. When looking up information or researching a topic, we jump from a site to site totally unrelated to any specific subcategory of pages.

    As for caching specific sites for offline viewing, well that's something IE, a free product, had for ages.

  64. Gibson? by Finni · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised no one has mentioned the word 'aleph' yet.

  65. I won't "move along" by Josh+teh+Jenius · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You raise excellent points which warrant discussion.

    As many have said, the "point" of the Interent (as I see it) is LIVE contact with (just about) everything.

    As many of us understand, 99% of traditional media is owned by the major corps like Disney, Viacom, News Corp, etc. If this is conspiracy theory, then Jon Stewart is a tinfoil hat nut because this is all spelled out in the Daily Show's "America: the book."

    Like many of you, I was attracted to the Interent because I assumed it escaped this sort of control paradaigm. I figured, heck, who would even *try* to control this much info?

    These days, when I browse the top sites on Alexa for example, I see the same sort of "media mafia" tactic has overrun the web in 2006.

    So what? IMO: we are all wrong. My extreme views are just as stupid as yours, however, as my grand-pappy used to say: "somewhere in the middle lies the truth". I feel that the "wackos" on all sides are CRITICAL, and that this "societal average" is the closest we will ever come to "truth". I find anything which threatens this function of the Internet as detrememntal to me, my country, and my fellow man.

    Someone around here has a great sig (sorry, but I am terrible with names), something like: "the problem with wikipedia is that it only works in practice, in theory, it can't possibly work." To whomever shared this with me: right on. This is exactly how I felt about the Internet circa 1996, and the reason I am so hurt to se where it is 10 years later.

    --
    Math is math. Regular expression is regular expression. The tools are there. The future is now.
  66. Rails? by ecloud · · Score: 1

    Lemme guess, they're going to do that with SQL on Rails. (If you didn't see the screencast, that's part of their April 1 demo - they did a SQL query on "the internet", and claimed to have downloaded the whole internet into tables beforehand.)

  67. A better idea by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    And to make some sense out of this... they plan to split the internet in sections and preserve all graphics, bells and whistles, melodies and scripts.

    Wouldn't it be a lot better if they would strip the HTML, graphics and leave plain unformatted text with hyperlinks, the words being compressed using a shared dictionary of the words in all pages?

    You could fit a lot more information in a lot less space that way, also eliminating most of the useless noise such as having a pretty shadow on that rounded panel.

    1. Re:A better idea by !equal · · Score: 1
      Wouldn't it be a lot better if they would strip the HTML, graphics and leave plain unformatted text with hyperlinks, the words being compressed using a shared dictionary of the words in all pages?

      That is a great way to fit every blog on the planet on an 80 gig drive and have 79.9 more gigs to spare for other sites.

  68. Re:What's their useragent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Posting as AC because of terrible karma and don't want to waste posts: DOn't click the link, YAGL(Yet Another Goatse Link). Wow, I just invented a slashcrynom, I'm so happy.(BTW, I hate the /. karma systen)

  69. Two words: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Copyright infringement.

    It's one thing to copy material in order to A) cache it on a squid server to serve it faster, B) cache it in a search engine so that people can find it, or C) copy it into your web browser cache to view it locally. It's a rather different thing to statically bundle the content up as a downloadable package and SELL it as the product of another business. I predict lawsuits. Lots of lawsuits.

    Still, as long as they respect robots.txt (as Google does), I suppose it might be okay.

    Then there's the problem that I can't see many people using such a product, and the expectation that as wireless spreads further, this product is solving a dwindling problem.

  70. Webaroo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is this just marketdroidal Hype, or does it more than this? http://www.gedanken.demon.co.uk/wwwoffle/

    1. Re:Webaroo by weg · · Score: 1

      wwwoffle is just caching stuff that you've at least visited once (so you still pay for the download once). Webaroo would provide some preselected/preloaded stuff. Combined with a cheap on-demand internet connection (i.e., with a rigorous download limit) this might even make sense, if cost for storage (including the effort of installing it) plus the cost for webaroo doesn't exceed the cost of a broadband connection... an 80 GB Harddisk costs around 50 bucks. Your initial search would of course be restricted to the data webaroo provides, I think that's the deal breaker.

      --
      Georg
  71. Re: in other news... by Josh+teh+Jenius · · Score: 1

    In other news, AOL, LLC announced plans to launch their own revamped "super search" engine, with data stored entirely on piles of those "FREE AOL" floppies.

    --
    Math is math. Regular expression is regular expression. The tools are there. The future is now.
  72. Stop joking about Internets on a floppy by Frozen+Void · · Score: 1

    This is very good solution for specific sites. For example a month ago i used a crawler to copy a net library to a folder in my hardrive.
    Now when i like to read something,i just click on Index.htm and it loads in my browser.

    And you don't need to update books.
    Such thing a copy of wikipedia is valuable still,without any updates.
    If slashdot released a torrent of all archives,i'll download it too,just for entertainment.I got a new 250Gb drive

    1. Re:Stop joking about Internets on a floppy by bblboy54 · · Score: 1

      If slashdot released a torrent of all archives,i'll download it too,just for entertainment.I got a new 250Gb drive

      All that wasted space! The whole internet only needs 80GB so you should only need a CD for all of slashdot.

  73. The Net on a disk is not a net by gihan_ripper · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if this is doable and legal, it runs entirely counter to the spirit of the Internet. The Internet on a hard disk is no longer a network, it becomes a passive entity with no possibility of interaction.

    At the moment, we are seeing a return to the interactive origins of the Internet, prime examples being blogging, Wikipedia, and even Slashdot! If this projects takes off it will be harmful to interaction and will turn the Net into a glorified television.

    However, I find it unlikely that Webaroo will gain currency, precisely because we have become dependent on an interactive and living Internet. When I use the Net, I want to be able to read and respond to my emails, to check my bank balance, shop online, and read the latest news. Why on earth would I want to have a static Internet on my laptop?

    --
    Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    1. Re:The Net on a disk is not a net by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "However, I find it unlikely that Webaroo will gain currency, precisely because we have become dependent on an interactive and living Internet. When I use the Net, I want to be able to read and respond to my emails, to check my bank balance, shop online, and read the latest news. Why on earth would I want to have a static Internet on my laptop?"

      I can't believe somebody on Slashdot is actually asking "Why would I want a vast amount like Wikipedia on my laptop? My laptop right now has a bunch of music and dvd rips on it. The idea is that if I take my laptop somewhere, I have plenty of entertainment avialable on it. I *know* I'm not the only one who does this. If, for a reasonable price, I could buy a snapshot of the net, I could build onto that little library. I often end up in places where getting on the net isn't so practical. Right this second, Wikipedia, IMDB, and Snopes have a LOT of things I haven't read yet. Okay, it wouldn't be up to date, who cares? I can get the up to date stuff when I return. BFD.

      Will this project work? Eh, I dunno. I could see them pricing it too high or making it too difficult to reasonably acquire. Sure, that'd kill it. But because the internet is a living breathing organism that needs regular water and sunlight? Give me a break! There's more to the internet than just news.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:The Net on a disk is not a net by fishizzle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Navigate to the page that interests you to have available offline, select "Favorites" -> "Add to Favorites..." -> Check "Make Available Offline" -> Click the "Customize..." button -> Choose how many pages deep you want to download.

      That's for IE, but I'm sure most competing browsers have the ability.

    3. Re:The Net on a disk is not a net by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Navigate to the page that interests you to have available offline, select "Favorites" -> "Add to Favorites..." -> Check "Make Available Offline" -> Click the "Customize..." button -> Choose how many pages deep you want to download."

      a. There's a limit of 3 pages deep.
      b. That only works if you actually go to those pages. If you're offline and it strikes you to look for something else... oops.
      c. You'll spend a hell of a lot of time trying to make this into a useful library.

      Instead of arguing, try using your imagination a little bit. It's just a little too easy to rationalize why something won't work.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  74. Reminds me of a boss I once had... by ruiner13 · · Score: 1
    A boss I once had while working on a NSF grant funded project a handfull of years ago held a meeting his first week on the job. This is his actual quote: "I'm not very good at searching the internet, can one of you put it on a CD for me?" Followed by everyone else in the meeting promptly walking out of the room shaking our heads.

    This project was a highschool biology series of CD-ROMs, which used html/javascript on a CD (worked in all browsers, all platforms). It was a great project, except that moron gave away "samples" to so many schools the market dried up, as well as feature creep which prevented him from ever declaring the CDs gold. I suspect this project is led by this moron (or a cloned similar PHB model), and will never come to fruition.

    Moral of the story is, don't let a project director hire one of his "soccer buddies" to lead a project just because his friend is unemployed. We all became that way (except for the stupid PHB who still works for the university but hasn't had a raise in 5 years... it is nearly impossible to be fired from a public university).

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

  75. Did somebody say webaroo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  76. A thought occurs by mattpointblank · · Score: 1

    Um.. doesn't this miss the whole point of the internet? We use things like online news (as opposed to physical media) because they're live and up-to-the-minute in ways that recorded/printed media cannot be. Surely by making static copies of it (and doesn't this violate some kind of Intellectual Property - those dreaded words - laws?!) and then removing them from their interactive state, they're just making the digital equivalent of yesterday's paper? Bad move guys.

  77. uhhhh....? by ninji · · Score: 1

    The entire web searchable on 80GB of HD space....

    Does it come with weekly downloadable updates to deal with sites, pages, text, owners, administrators ,sites purposes, changing?

    And what insane alien compression technology are they using? I wasnt part of the whole roswell thing, so I don't know about them, but I know there isnt much around today that can fit that much info on 80GB... The entire Web? Even if just the info that google lists to people about sites, in just 80GB? Thats ridiculious....

    Or maybe I just don't understand how little space it takes up...
    All the text google shows me for one entry is, on aerage 250-500 bytes.

    Every 2-4 results is 1 KB, when i type in plastic, I get 288,000,000 results.
    144,000,000KB->144,000MB, 144GB, Or if every entry was only 250 bytes It would then Just be under their 80GB, and thats just sites containing plastic..
    Now I do a search for sites without plastic. 18,490,000,000 results.

    That implies, google, in total has entries for around 18,778,000,000 sites.
    The information on each site would have to be 4.5 Bytes, to fit on 80GB of space. Thats not even enough for the URL.

    Now, im sure they have special compression methods, like of course compression, and replacing commonalities like http://www./ with 2-3 sequential uncommon ascii chars that can be converetd when displayed... But using any trick in the book, The entire web on 80gb? Even the descriptions and URLs of sites?

    They would make more with this magically compression techonlogy they must plan to use to do it....

    Not to mention, everyday hundreds of thousands of new sites come into exsistance, and old sites go out of exsistance, domains get taken over, companies do, webpage content changes drastically including what a search lists relating to the page.

    With all of the above, They are going to have an impossible time to even provide search listings. And theres mention of actually being able to access the sites? 80GB? Accurate?

    Obviously a company founded and funded by people with minor awareness of the web and surrounding technologies, trying to catch onto another non exsistant bubble, and of course the people they are paying to develop that might actually know the situation arn't going to ruin their job position by telling them it won't work.

    I feel bad for being so cynical, I mean, maybe they Do have a method for providing people constant updates to ensure accurace (even though they wont need the internet????), and they have a way to make Several TB(and if whole sites too, PB) worth of data fit on 80GB... But in my opinion, this isn't even a pipe dream....

  78. ah yes remember ZeroSync? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like a job for ZeroSync who seem to have disappeared. Perhaps their algorithms worked just a little too well and they compressed themselves into zerospace.

    File under fractal recession.

  79. Earth: Mostly Harmless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who says that this is a new idea? ;)

  80. Keeping up to date by Cutterex · · Score: 1

    Maybe their plan on keeping the service up to date is to add an RSS feed for http://./

  81. will they have a web enabled version? by rmallico · · Score: 1

    you know, so you can search your 'web' over the web... jeez...

    --
    sig goes here!
  82. Or you could just... by buckyboy314 · · Score: 1, Funny

    grab the cache and run.

  83. skewed world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what?! that's an entirely different world view from here.

    we have so many hotspots that it's not uncommon to accidentally use someone elses home wifi

    and there are five starbucks within 5 miles of here -- and I'm only a few hundred yards from the West Coast, so that limits the available locations ;) unless they start with some sort of floating starbucks barges or something...hmm...

    what about Peet's Coffee shops? got any of those?

    1. Re:skewed world by onebecoming · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Five? You must live in the sticks. 162 Starbucks within five miles of me right now, according to the store locator... not that there aren't other places I'd rather be.

    2. Re:skewed world by MrAnnoyanceToYou · · Score: 1

      Only 52 in Portland, but that's just the Starbucks branded ones. I know they own at least one of the other chains in town.

  84. feh by andreyw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Frankly, I could see a market for this *maybe* 10-12 years ago. It just doesn't make any sense now. The internet is not solely about static content. Also, the thimble of data provided in each pack will be underwhelming and perpetually out of date.

    I mean, if I know I won't be online for a week, what stops me from just CURLing or WGETing whatever I plan on reading for the next couple of weeks? And that goes only for static content like books and articles. Everything else is cannot be simply cached.

    1. Re:feh by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 1

      Frankly, I could see a market for this *maybe* 10-12 years ago.

      I worked on a project just like this in 1996 for Philips Magnavox. Their CD-i players had a lousy 14k4 (if not worse) and they wanted me to index a shitload of "static" content, such as images, to be distributed as browser cache, with monthly CD updates. Might even have worked if CD-i itself wasn't a doomed platform.

  85. You are lying - Re:Pr0n? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's quite obvious. Nobody in the Slashdot crowd have a girlfriend!

  86. Fundamental Flaw by Jcalaiaro · · Score: 1

    There is a certain fundamental flaw with this proposal. I'm not exactly sold on the idea that there was a clear and vivid understanding of this proposal by those who backed it. Here are my reasons. They have a product, and a product isn't really anything if they don't have a viable consumer base. Which begs the question, just who are we selling our products to? In short, I put forth the idea that there really is no consumer base. Those who would need ubiquitous access to the internet and its infinite resources would more or less need access to things that are only current, or some form of information database, thereby rendering this product as effective as an encyclopedia. So thank you, but I'll keep my Britannica volumes anyday over a homebrew assembledge of information. This might also be perceived as a viable alternative to a monthly subscription to some form of internet access but when one really sits down to think about this, the product in this specific instance becomes obselete in a matter of seconds because of the delivery of new content. We are not far from an age that has a computer with internet access in every household. The notion to sell a static copy of the past is one that will interest at a rate proportional to the installations of new computers with internet access. The bottom line is this, the proposal simply does not make sense for the reason that there is no palpable customer base for this product.

  87. What's in a name by Dorceon · · Score: 1

    You can tell a company how later a company joined the dot-com revolution by how bad a name it had to take to find one whose domain wasn't registered. Examples include Webaroo and letsbuyit.com

    --
    What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
    1. Re:What's in a name by Dorceon · · Score: 1

      Change the first 7 words to "You can tell how late". I didn't ^H enough when I changed how I wanted to phrase that.

      --
      What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
  88. Sounds like an index to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The talk about reducing some terabytes down to a few gigabytes seems to indicate that they would only put the search index on the harddrive alongside a suitable search engine. That would enable you to search a snapshot of the whole net, you would get links out of it, but you couldn't follow the links without a net connection.

    This is certainly possible and might even work well. If it's of any use is another question, as you still need a net connection to actually retrieve you now know to be out there.

  89. Can anybody say.. by Davey+McDave · · Score: 0

    "phantom"?

    Heh heh.

    --
    I've got the spirit, lose the feeling.
  90. I've got this already by mag46 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Just drag the little blue "e" on your desktop to a floppy drive. Then you have the Internet wherever you go, and it only takes a few K!

  91. Alexa / Internet / Archive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Alexa pulls down 1TB (after compression) of data from the web a day, and that's information they've chosen to pull: i.e., stuff that isn't link farms. The metadata they collect is about 10% of the size of each page. Every two months they donate these 100TB crawls to the Archive. With that in mind, we should all have the good laugh that someone is paying good money to bring us.

  92. Oh well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems like the day has come where /. sells link placement.

    At least Fark has the dignity to place a notice next to these kinds of things.

  93. And yesterday I installed broadband... by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1

    why did I bother?

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  94. Can be useful ... by kbahey · · Score: 1

    Look at it from an alternate perspecitive ...

    For most of North America, where high speed is fairly common and unmetered, this is not a good idea.

    For some other parts of the world, the internet is only available in dialup, and is metered. Spending hours surfing can be very cost prohibitive.

    So, if large parts of the net is available offline, I can see a market for those geographical areas, provided the cost is not prohibitive ...

  95. L.A. I guess? by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

    I'm getting only 37 from 75209 (Dallas)

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:L.A. I guess? by onebecoming · · Score: 1

      L.A. is worse than the sticks: it's car country. :-)

      No, I live in New York, which I'll admit has problems of its own... like having 162 Starbucks in five miles.

    2. Re:L.A. I guess? by include($dysmas) · · Score: 1

      lol, 167 within 5 miles of covent garden (london) ... who would have thought it would be more than NY eh?

  96. They sell access by tepples · · Score: 1

    Webaroo has gone far beyond being a cache, they are aggregating others content into a downloadable product they sell for money.

    What is the line between a cache and aggregation? And how is your ISP not "aggregating others content into a downloadable product they sell for money"?

    1. Re:They sell access by salesgeek · · Score: 1

      What is the line between a cache and aggregation? And how is your ISP not "aggregating others content into a downloadable product they sell for money"?

      On the surface you seem to be right. In reality, though, Webaroo has created a mechanism of making copies without permission, collecting fees and in the process denying many webmasters ad revenues, accurate traffic logs, etc (slashdot is one such example of a site that would have ad revenue issues with Webaroo). ISPs on the other hand have infrastructure that websites use to deliver content to users. There is actually a trade going on between ISP and websites - ISPs supply the infrastructure, websites supply the content - and the two together have great value to shared customers.

      --
      -- $G
  97. A different dot.bomb? by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 1
    There has been a large rise in start ups with hyped ideas (well at least if /. is your regular newsfeed) that starts to look a bit like another dot.bomb.

    Dot bombs are not about technically feasible ideas. They are not even about technology. They are all about putting together something that will appeal to venture capitalists. What really drove dot.bomb was that the VCs got into a feeding frenzy and all rational business plan/idea vetting went out of the window. For that to happen again means that a whole lot of people that got badly burnt, or that know someone that got badly burnt, must forget their bad experiences and get stupid and greedy again.

    The last dot.bomb had a fundamentally solid foundation: widescale adoption of internet. It was all the frilly bits that really were overhyped and caused the bomb. In the new wave, we seem to be seeing all the frilly bits and no solid core. Unless there's a solid core I expect the wave will implode long before things can get to the feeding frenzy stage.

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  98. Price competition by tepples · · Score: 1

    I always fly Lufthansa whenever travelling trans-atlantic, providing you're willing to pay the WiFi premium, you get WiFi internet access for the duration of the flight.

    How many dollars, euros, etc. is this Wi-Fi premium? If Webaroo can undercut the Wi-Fi premium and the prerequisite business class premium, then it has a market.

    1. Re:Price competition by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      assuming they actually have a workable product which i very much doubt

      the beauty of the web is a huge ammount of interlinked content including the experiances of others who actually attempt similar things to you.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    2. Re:Price competition by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall paying on the order of $30-40 for WiFi on a flight from Frankfurt back to Dallas, but I could be misremembering. I do remember thinking it was pretty reasonable for WiFi access at 30,000ft. Except around Greenland, the link was good for most of the flight and not too laggy.

      In my case, I spent half my time chatting w/ folks over IM clients and catching up on email, Slashdot and Fark, though. I doubt Webaroo could fill in for those.

      --Joe
    3. Re:Price competition by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1

      US$26.95 for the duration of the flight, however long it is, or between $10-$17 for 1-3 hours. I'd happily pay that, considering it's only a bit more than a good book from an airport bookstore.

    4. Re:Price competition by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      I'd do it only if it's possible to play Quake.

    5. Re:Price competition by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      I tried out "Boeing Connexion" which was I think US$10 for 1 hour. Extravagant by land-based standards, but I was actually able to chat with a customer and help them out with a problem, not to mention check and send emails. Besides the sheer coolness factor of browsing the net from a plane :)

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    6. Re:Price competition by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Aha, that was the name. I was thinking that was the name, but it seemed too similar to the name of the bar at the Steigenberger Hotel in Frankfurt, named "Con.nex.ion." Given how little sleep I got going from that bar, to my room, to the plane, I figured my memory was playing tricks on me. I guess it wasn't. :-)

      Anyway, looking over on Boeing's website, it appears it was slightly cheaper than I was remembering. (I was thinking the cost was in euros, not dollars.) From the site:

      $26.95 for entire flight, including connecting flights within 24 hours of signing in.*

      Compare that to the $30+ my employer paid per night for my land-based WiFi while I was in Germany, that was quite cheap. Here in the states, it's more like $10-$12 per night, but again, that's on the ground, not at 30,000 ft.

      --Joe
  99. Hate to Parade on y'all's rain, but... by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1
    Without suggesting that these guys got it right, this concept could be done somewhat-well. Would need to be fairly "intelligent". e.g.
    -prolly have to find vast tracts of non-copyrighted stuff, or
    -bulk license a lot of stuff
    -need to configure/personalize your content as part of the setup, AND
    -def. have to start sniffing and analyzing what the user gravitates toward, and grab another few megabytes of that sort of stuff whenever the machine gets back near a link.

    If it's just 80 gigs of hard-coded "most popular pages on the net", it's going to tank.

    --
    My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    1. Re:Hate to Parade on y'all's rain, but... by gerardrj · · Score: 1

      EVERYTHING is copyrighted in the United States.
      If you scribble something on a napkin in a restaurant, the scribble is immediately copyrighted.

      --
      Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
    2. Re:Hate to Parade on y'all's rain, but... by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but not every napkin scribble is going to ensure legal reprocussions if copied, copyrighted or not. Porn (et al), on the other hand, you can bet will have that legal issue. Also, you have to register the copyright to really be able to do much in the legal realm. Not too many people put a (C) on their napkins "just in case" and while it is still technically copyrighted, you won't have much of a case.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    3. Re:Hate to Parade on y'all's rain, but... by ArtStone · · Score: 1

      Time for an ASCAP/BMI/**AA equivalent to collect royalties and grant blanket copyright protection for the entire web - to protect the authors from exploitation of their original works, of course.

      What hath g0d wrought?

      --
      Final 2006 "Proof of Global Warming" US Hurricane Count -> 0
    4. Re:Hate to Parade on y'all's rain, but... by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

      True, but there's also quite a bit of CC-licensed or GDL stuff. Not yet huge tracts of web, but I don't think it'll be long...

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
  100. Mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    In much the same way that ISPs justify selling access to other people's web sites.

    Invalid comparison. Internet access, like electricity or water, is a utility. Providers put a large amount of resources in developing their infrastructure, and need a way to recoup those costs. Basic economics.

    The development of the Internet would've been set back a couple decades if ISPs weren't allowed to charge for their services.

    1. Re:Mod parent down by tepples · · Score: 1

      Internet access, like electricity or water, is a utility.

      So how is Webaroo's product not a form of (indirect) Internet access?

    2. Re:Mod parent down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about web statistics? Sure the company's ad is being relayed to the viewers, but they have no way of tracking the hits. They know how many copies of the "web" were distributed, but not how many people actually saw their content.

  101. Right... by ZSpade · · Score: 1

    And I'm about to put an Elephant on a toddler's Tricycle!

    --
    Go ahead and call me unreliable; reliable is just a synonym for predictable.
  102. I thought of a better way by einhverfr · · Score: 1

    Why not have a web spider working in the background, copying files from the browser's web cache, following links on these documents, etc? This way one is likely to have a great deal of information available for searches, and it would be an automatic cache built by the user, not distributed from a vendor.

    --

    LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
  103. Wikipedia by jacoplane · · Score: 1

    Well, Wikipedia is licensed under the GFDL so there has never been any problem downloading the database for it. There are even many different versions for mobile platforms and XP (including search functionality). And the ipod of course.

  104. Offline WoW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG! My dream is finally come true! I can finally play WoW all by myself and all the world bosses will be miiine!!

  105. interesting by freegis · · Score: 1

    The interesting part of the story is that they claimed their algorithms could extract relevant contents (web pages) from Web. Without much thinking, I suspect that if it is true,and that if their algorithms are that inteligent to parse through the complex web contents. If they really can do that, they'll be able to do things much more exciting than what they are doing right now. Most likely what they are doing is it graps the first 20 or so hit pages from search results for a collection of selected keywords. If this is true, I won't put my money to such a startup --- there are not much creativities here.

  106. Malware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    MMmm.. Now I can get viruses WITHOUT being connected to the internet.

  107. Internet compressed to one-liner by sco08y · · Score: 1

    when someone asked if the internet will fit on a floppy?

    Hell, I compressed it down to an sh one-liner:

    yes 'Blah blah blah.'

  108. Copyright infringement by ThinkingInBinary · · Score: 1

    How do you spell "copyright infringement"? Isn't this like taking a shelf full of books and making copies of them to save people the "trouble" (read: expense or ad impressions) of getting them themselves? I know this may have a good purpose, like providing web information to the developing world, but they've gotta see the copyright issues.

  109. 80GB Huh by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    80GB, huh. What's that? Two, dual-layer BluRay discs. Might make a great case for the next DVD technology.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  110. Re:Moderators are closet Republicans by PastAustin · · Score: 0

    Yeah. That 80's President sucked.


    It's a good thing you didn't complain about George W. Bush, Jr. I can't even imagine the levels of terrible you would need to go into to describe him!

    --
    Firefox 2.0 - Spell Rightly.
  111. Funnycode, ha-ha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please, if you _must_ write funnycode, write _solid_ funnycode.

    1. Re:Funnycode, ha-ha by RoloDMonkey · · Score: 1

      I wrote:

      if(posts_to_slashdot && has_girlfriend)
        if(girlfriend.has_sensibilities)
          chance_of_lying = VERY_HIGH;
        else
          chance of lying = HIGH;

      He wrote:

      Please, if you _must_ write funnycode, write _solid_ funnycode.

      My reply:

      if(posts_anonymously && criticizes_funnycode)
        chance_of_girlfriend = NONEXISTANT;

      --
      Long live the Speaker Bracelet
      Rolo D. Monkey
    2. Re:Funnycode, ha-ha by conJunk · · Score: 1

      forgot the bit above: if (posts_to_slashdot) #define has_girlfriend = 0;

  112. Damn you! by chill · · Score: 1

    Las time I passed thru customs in London, they asked about the laptop and "do I have the Internet on there". I told him "no" but now, thanks to these dweebs, I'll have to say "Yes, I have the Internet on my laptop."

    Bastards.

      -Charles

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  113. wget? by sentientbrendan · · Score: 1

    I can see the value in this, especially if you need to look something up while on the road, but...

    You could do this by yourself *better*. You don't need a million sites that you would never visit. It would be better to write some frontend to wget that caches all top 10 sites that result from a series of google searches. If you parallelize that you couldn't get it done in reasonable time, for free, and use less HD space.

    This kind of reminds me of when people used to sell encyclopedias on CD rom (with lots of nifty low res videos of the moon landing), but then suddenly the internet became better than any encyclopedia.

    The one thing this company does that is cool is that it *reminds me* to make a local cache of wikipedia.

  114. Girlfriend? by psiph · · Score: 1

    i don't think so

  115. Reminds me of a Penny Arcade comic by shashi · · Score: 1

    For some reason when I heard about this all I could think of was the inevitable product to follow... the Web hard copy!

  116. Internet Hash Project by Repton · · Score: 1

    If you've got the whole internet on your laptop, make sure you also get the current hash, to ensure your download didn't corrupt anything..

    --
    Repton.
    They say that only an experienced wizard can do the tengu shuffle.
  117. not all content is legal in all countries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would they have a version for every content restriction?
    after all one could unwittingly download something they ever intended to get.

  118. What about email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There's one thing that was not brought up: When I use the internet it's not only to download things and view pages, but it's also to communicate. Imagine you read something on /. and want to post a comment! Or you want to send an email to someone. Having the entire internet on your hardrive won't help with this... So yep, unless modifying the version you have on your hardrive magically updates the "real" internet, I don't see the point of this. Might as well just get an encyclopedia!

  119. Reminds me of . . . by JazzLad · · Score: 0

    . . . AvantGo

    http://www.avantgo.com/frontdoor/index.html

    I've been able to carry cached web on my palm for /years/ . . .

    Nothing to see here, move along.

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  120. Lawyered Up by OverflowingBitBucket · · Score: 1

    I had a passing idea to do something like this a bit back, but didn't do anything with it, because I really couldn't see it working.

    If they're going ahead with plans to cache certain web content, they had better be lawyered up. Yasee, if you start selling packs of content created by other people for profit, without their permission, those people are going to be mighty pissed when they find out. Sure, this duplication happens every single day through web caches. The difference, though, is that the presence of such caches is well established, and you can always set up your content to not use them (to a a degree). I'm not sure how they plan to get around the whole mass-copyright-infringement angle.

    Anyway, I really hope they've thought this thing through...

  121. 80gb? YEAH RIGHT. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The University of Iowa is currently doing a similiar project: apache, a snapshot of wikipedia, and firefox on a 500gb hard drive. These hard drives are then shipped to Africa.

    The 500gb hard drive was the best they could do - wikipedia (including all the media) is over 500gb.

  122. The whole webpacks thing.. by joshetc · · Score: 0

    Seems a little nuts. I'm sure there will be issues as stated with copyright violations + sites complaining about lost ad revenue. I'd imagine some sort of commercial "bot" software would be fair better..

    Add a couple websites you like to a list and tell the program to cache it. Yes yes, I realize most browsers can do this for you.. only manually I guess. It'd be nice to run my list every time I'll be away from an internet connection though to keep up with minor things. (

  123. Now I see.... by bblboy54 · · Score: 1

    *THIS* is why Google created "Google Desktop"

  124. Uhm... by Cinquero · · Score: 1

    What about copyright???

  125. Re:Are you stupid? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do movie pirates justify selling pirate copies of other peoples movies? In much the same way that movie theaters justify showing other peoples movies.

    No. Not really. Your analogy is silly.

    When ISPs sell access the content makers get paid for their content via ad revenue, sales, subscriptions etc. When these people sell web content on a hard disk the creators of that content get nothing. This is clearly a case of the worst kind of copyright infingement. Not only are they making unauthorized copies they are also selling those copies for a profit.

  126. Lawsuit Magnet by Infonaut · · Score: 1

    but a lot of content providers won't be happy about getting their ad revenue stolen.

    Absolutely. I know I'd be pissed. This is not like an ISP caching content so it can be delivered more rapidly. This sounds more akin to basically scraping the Web and putting it in your own product and calling it your own.

    Purely from a copyright issue, discarding ad revenue, I'm sure there are plenty of companies and individuals that would have a problem with this. If Webaroo even gets past the "burning through capital like it's 1998" phase, I would be surprised as hell if they didn't get sued for what amounts to publishing without permission.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  127. e-mail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One of the biggest problems I see is that people clearly won't be able to check their e-mail.

    The internet is such a powerful tool partly because of the semi-real-time updates.

    Besides reference, what sites do you visit that don't require actually being online? Taking a snapshot of your e-mail, a news site, or a humor site isn't terribly helpful.

  128. Re:Democrats hate moderates thats why we Vote GOP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YHBT YHL HAND

  129. hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how the /. Effect will Affect webaroo-based systems.

  130. how much of this.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...is slashdot? What is the size of all the articles, replies, journal entries and assorted foo-fa-ra that makes up slashdot?

  131. Already Invented, like so 90's by bcnstony · · Score: 1

    I have already founded a company that does just this, and using clever malware have installed it on all Linux machines. If you'd like to test it, open a terminal and type

    wget -m google.com/search?q=cache

  132. Sounds like AvantGo! by Intestineman · · Score: 1

    I used AvantGo on my old Kyocera phone years ago and it worked fine. I subscribed to several "channels" which could be news, entertainment etc. Whenever I sync'd with my PC it would update the channels. (I could also sync remotely using wireless if I had to but is not really the recommended way of using it.) The great thing is I could be somewhere and instantly browse content. I think Webaroo wants to extend this to a larger scale.

  133. Seems like this idea is going to be pointless by BlahMatt · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't it be better to devote more resources to a global wireless network. While there are security flaws in both, it seems to me that have WAP's virually everywhere seems a hell of a lot easier than keeping up with the growth and changes of the internet.

    --
    To understand recursion, one must first understand recursion...
  134. Already been done - Internet on a USB drive by PassMark · · Score: 1
    This is old news & has already been done.

    See,
    http://www.wrensoft.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=871

    "Through a new technique known as Compression by Recursive Annulus Primes, huge volumes of data from the web can now be compressed into tiny index files. Using this revolutionary technology it will now be possible, for the first time, to carry around your own personal copy of the internet on a device such as high capacity USB thumb drive."

    1. Re:Already been done - Internet on a USB drive by bnoblet · · Score: 1

      Err take a look at the date of that post!

  135. Why another product like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget about the mobile platform and lets talk about the laptop/desktop version of the product:: 1. I already have google desktop search installed- the only diff between this and google desktop is push vs pull approach. Using this tool, I am able to pull the site info and store it in my hard drive. Whats the value add by Webaroo? What if Google also gives me a feature in desktop search product, to pull any site to the local drive? And that wil simply wipe away all that Webaroo has done? 2. Wi-Fi: You dont need Webaroo product if you have a WiFi access. 3. Static data: This product would have made sense 10 years back, but now? Who cares about static data? I dont need it anyways. I am not sure of how much of business model validation that has been done for the product. What do you guys think? Am I missing something?

    1. Re:Why another product like this? by PaulDLondon · · Score: 1

      You're right on the mark and not missing anything. It seems so lame. My sister in San Francisco said they are installing free wifi for the whole city. Just a matter of time before that's the norm. Even if it isn't the norm everywhere there are other products that do this and there have been for years. It's a joke that they say this will change the way we use the web. How many times have we heard that BS?

  136. Charlotte's Web? by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    When they get this thing under their control, maybe they can rename the company...

    But, the rest of us who don't buy into it or who buy back out... well, we'll be the CharleTONS!

    (ba-dum(b)oom!!!)

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  137. Whts their USP? by aish2kar · · Score: 1

    I already have google desktop search installed- the only diff between Webaroo and google desktop is push vs pull approach. Using this tool, I am able to pull the site info and store it in my hard drive. Whats the value add by Webaroo? What if Google also gives me a feature in desktop search product, to pull any site to the local drive? And that wil simply wipe away all that Webaroo has done? >>>Wi-Fi: You dont need Webaroo product if you have a WiFi access. >> Static data: This product would have made sense 10 years back, but now? Who cares about static data? I dont need it anyways. I am not sure of how much of business model validation that has been done for the product. What do you others think?

  138. Download it here! by mwvdlee · · Score: 1
    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  139. Copyrights anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one don't like my website to be copied and sold for profit without permission, and I do believe I own the copyrights to it.

    1. Re:Copyrights anyone? by adzoox · · Score: 1

      I'm with you here ... i don't mind people copying words and ideas and posting on their websites (mentioning me as a source and without my permission) ... but I do mind people selling my ideas ... not that I would even make it into 'an internet essentials collection'.

      --
      Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
  140. On the other hand... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They might be successful: if they served useful, general-purpose contents that could not easily lost their usefulness because they got out of date (encyclopedias, dictionaries, maps, classical literature, newspaper archives, yearbooks, Bible, etc.), or in places with (very (rare|expensive)|no) Internet connections (I think inclusions of such packs in Nicholas Negroponte's $100 server might be a good idea).

  141. eGranary - nonprofit, educational, offlineweb by anaradad · · Score: 1

    The eGranary Digital Library provides millions of digital educational resources to institutions lacking adequate Internet access. Through a process of garnering permissions, copying Web sites, and delivering them to intranet Web servers INSIDE our partner institutions in developing countries, we deliver millions of multimedia documents that can be instantly accessed by patrons over their local area networks at no cost.

    http://www.widernet.org/digitallibrary/

  142. On a floppy.. by Spleen · · Score: 1

    About 10 years ago, our campus had all diskless workstations. We offered boot floppies to our students in the dorms so they could access the network. Several times a week we would have students bringing down a floppy disk and say "Can you put the internet on this disk for me?"

  143. Not just a cache, the return of "pull" technology by managerialslime · · Score: 1
    The most elegant "web" app I have ever used had nothing to do with browsers. It was a self-contained PC application that downloaded information based on configuration menus.

    With all of the data downloaded in background and a beautiful front-end, response time from screen-to-screen was sub-second and the web has been catching up ever since.

    The product was called PointCast.com and it was an advertising-based medium at the very start of the dot-com boom. It also had the most beautiful stock portfolio display of any product I have used prior or since. (Don't bother with the current owner of the PointCast web site. It looks like some other completely unrelated web product startup took the name.)

    PointCast tanked when companies started finally funding high-speed internet connections and investors lost their faith. After all, they reasoned, the web would become so fast that caching became completely old school.

    Even, so, assume that you have a developed a personal page of favorite news, search, and research links. It doesn't have to be pretty, just personally relevant. (Mine is at http://www.roomberg.com/EveryDayPages.htm.) Now assume your PC goes out to the web in background when the PC is otherwise not being used and caches zillions of pages you have linked to. For 90% of the news and blogs you then need, wait time falls to zero. Only when you click a level too deep would you finally need to return to the world wide-but-slow web. Of course Akami (or somebody) might have to develop rules about how many levels deep such a program searched or the the web might actually finally be crushed when everyone's PC tries to repetitively "spider" their favorite site. You might set your PC to fetch PoinCast updates every morning, every hour, ever fifteen minutes, or for that matter, every minute.

    OMG! PointCast is back.

    --
    Live Long and Prosper - Thanks Leonard. You are missed.
  144. New? that's not new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this is old tech. Companies such as webwacker, onfolio, enlighter... have been doing this for years... Why are you all thinking this is new?

    1. Re:New? that's not new... by PaulDLondon · · Score: 1

      I agree. This seems like old technology and certainly not unique.

  145. A Server Farm by trifakir · · Score: 1

    From the article:
    Webaroo does it, he says, through "a server farm that is of Web scale" and a set of proprietary search algorithms that whittle the million gigabytes down to more manageable chunks...
    I hope this thing doesn't start to update itself recur[I hope this thing doesn't start to update itself recur[I hope this thing doesn't start to update itself recur[I hope this thing doesn't start to update itself recur[I hope this thing doesn't start to update itself recur...]...]...]...]...]...

  146. So who will be held responsible... by kalirion · · Score: 1

    when the FBI confiscates your computer and finds some "objectionable material" in the net backup?

  147. Can't you just... by oahazmatt · · Score: 1

    Can't you just set your cache folder reeeaaaaallly big and get the same effect?

    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
  148. This sounds great! by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

    This sounds great! Hang on a minute, let me blog about it and I'll send you the CD!

  149. Dilbert by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

    There was a Dilbert strip where the PHB asked him to download the internet, and print off a couple hard copies. Who would have guessed he was so visionary?

    --
    Stop! Dremel time!
  150. Re:Democrats hate moderates thats why we Vote GOP by Da_Weasel · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Hahah...responding to an automatically generated compliant-letter shows just how blindly you follow Bush. Heil Bush!!

    Did you not see the link to the site that generates these right above them? Did you see the comment jokingly suggest using Bush's name to make one? No of course not, you didn't even read the thread before jumping on the oppotunity to spew anti Democratic Party garbage.

    The truth is all parties and politicians suck. They are the blood sucking leeches on societies wallet. We don't need politicians in office we need citizens. It's time to think outside of the party system. It has been failing us for years and is just getting worse. For the last 20 years our government has been locked up by these two childish parties. And instead of putting our foot down and saying "Enough is enough, get to fucking work already!" We stand around and get caught up in the game they feed us. We let them walk all over us. It's time for change! It's time to get rid of this electoral voting system that ignores a large percentage of the voters views and reinstate the popular vote so our voices can be heard again. This county will continue to deteriorate until we are once again a country for the people, by the people. Give us our country back or we will take it back!

    (ahhh...that felt good!)

    --
    If you must!
  151. Lots of problems by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    The simplest has already been mentioned. Copyright. I can't imagine any site supported by ad revenues being happy at having their site copied and served by someone else. Especially if they use their own ads. Just look at the complaints google gets for its caching and indexing.

    But even worse is how the hell am I going to get even semi uptodate news? The service don't know what I am going to want to read so I have to download ALL the news before I go offline ONLY to then have only old news on my system.

    Sure there are times when I wish I could visit a site without a net connection. Most notably a help site that tells me how to get my connection back.

    But for the rest? You would be lugging around a shitload of data in the hope that one day you need to search something while offline and then hope that it is in the cache AND that it is still relevant.

    It reminds me off those old programs we in europe had in the days of modems. Since we had to pay per minute connected it often made sense to download all your favorite pages as fast as possible and then read them offline. I for instance had it setup to get the various webcomics and such in one go so I only paid for a few minutes what would have cost me at least half an hour online.

    I can still see the same for modern times. When you arrive at an hotspot your computer quickly downloads the pages you regurarly visit and gets the data so you can read them later when you might have left the hotspot.

    But downloading ALL the web? No, to much data that to be transferred that you will never use anyway.

    I can see how they arrived at the idea but I think that they should have stopped before they arrived at the point they decided to cache the web. Develop a program that can easily download the pages you are very likely to want to read when the laptop happens to be connected for off line reading and leave it at that.

    Then again, that might not get you VC money.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  152. The Scene by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

    A bunch of twenty-somethings in a coffee-house, with laptops.

    "Wait.. Wait.. I have an idea!"

    "I got to google this.."

    "no connection no net on-line news access -political -blog -news"

    "It IS a new idea!" Ok, we collect news on-line for people who are not going to be connected"

    "Yeah! We can even to some kind of delayed feedback thing too."

    "But if there's no internet, there may be no power. Hey, how about a hardcopy option?"

    At the checkout: "Um.. it's called a "newspaper", and there's one right here.". "Oh, but this is with COMPUTERS, so we will get a bite of VC!".

    Ratboy

    --
    Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
  153. How will courts tell sneakernet from online? by tepples · · Score: 1

    In particular, the storage of the cache is not "temporary" or "intermediate", since the entire cache is made available wholesale to the end user in permanent form.

    If the cache is implemented as a web proxy, then it could be encrypted with each URL as the key, preventing people from just browsing through the cache.

    Webaroo does not qualify as a "service provider" when talking about this cache, because the cache is made available offline.

    Mailing hard drives, tapes, Blu-ray discs, or other removable media is just a high-latency, high-packet-size data link, with routing handled by a parcel courier. Define "offline" in such a way as to exclude sneakernet.

    1. Re:How will courts tell sneakernet from online? by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Mailing hard drives, tapes, Blu-ray discs, or other removable media is just a high-latency, high-packet-size data link, with routing handled by a parcel courier. Define "offline" in such a way as to exclude sneakernet.

      The common usage of "online" doesn't include sneakernet - it's already been defined that way by society. A reasonable person familiar with the Internet knows the difference between online and offline, and knows that a copy on a CD or whatever isn't online, and that's the way the court will look at it.

      Besides, the post office has been around for hundreds of years, while the word "online", which is specifically used in the statute, has only been around for just over 50 years. Whatever screwy explanation you might come up with to hammer a round peg into a square hole won't fly in court.

  154. Webroo by PaulDLondon · · Score: 1

    I downloaded it today. It seems pretty useless. Tons of dead links, bad formatting and no live data. Makes zero sense to me.

  155. Wikipedia on your palm by xanderwilson · · Score: 1

    I carry a year-old download of Wikipedia on my Palm via TomeRaider, fits on a 1Gig SD card. Very convenient and searchable. For me this was more cost-efficient than to pay for a monthly palm-internet connection, but 80G is a very small percentage of the web no matter what the cost, and the main thing I would like "permanent" access to the internet for would be communication (email, etc).

    Alex.

  156. blu ray application by mindserfer · · Score: 1


      Sounds like a good application for a blu-ray disk.

  157. Pointy-haired boss factor by mentatultima · · Score: 1
    Is the company trying to make an actual product or just tying to get a good stock price for an IPO so that the original investors make there money.

    The unfortunate part is that the company might make sales due to the dilbert pointy-haired boss factor. The boss reads about the internet on a disk and immediately wants it, regardless of common sense.

  158. Lollerskates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GG Brad Husick, considering that the flaws in his argument have already been split wide open by several people.

  159. Re:What's their useragent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rather late, as it took them ten days to reply to my email, but Webaroo's Removals page is here:

    http://www.webaroo.com/rooRemovals.html

    Since Webaroo obviously doesn't mind copyright theft (as that's what they're doing with our data, unless we find out about it and take action to stop them), here's the full specifics for removal:

    -----
    Removing the whole site:

    If you want to remove your entire site from Webaroo, you can do so by specifying it in Robots.txt file. We support the Robots exclusion specification.
    To exclude your entire site:

    Add the following text to your Robots.txt file:
    User-Agent: WebarooBot
    Disallow: /
    Removing a part of the site:

    To exclude a specific directory (for example, subdir), add the following text to your Robots.txt file:
    User-Agent: WebarooBot
    Disallow: /subdir

    Our bot will first obey the first record of User-agent starting with "WebarooBot". If no such entry exists, it will obey the first record of User- agent starting with "*".
    Removing a specific page:

    To remove a page from all search engines, insert the following meta-tag in the section of your page:

    To remove your page from Webaroo only, use the following meta-tag:

    Removing successive pages using HTML meta tags:

    Yes, if you want certain pages of your site not to be indexed, please use the following tag in the head of the html:

    If you want us to index the page but not the outlinks from the page, use the following:

    Removing a page urgently:

    Remember, the above changes to robots.txt and html meta-tags will take time to be reflected in Webaroo. They will take effect during the next Webaroo crawl.

    If you believe your request is urgent and cannot wait until the next time Webaroo crawls your site, please send us an email request with web page and Web Pack details for urgent removal at noarchive@webaroo.com. Before processing their request, webmasters would be requested to insert the "noarchive" meta-tag into the page's HTML code.
    -----