Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo Changes User Profiles, To Massive Outrage

Wiseleo writes "Yahoo decided to massively screw up their entire userbase by changing all user profiles to blank. No warning, no automated way to get data back, and other unwanted changes. The blog has such choice quotes as 'We know this has been a rough transition for some of you and, and are committed to helping you use, understand, and (hopefully) enjoy your new profile,' and, 'We also know lots of you worked hard on your old profiles and want your data. If you feel like you're missing data, we've saved a copy of your old profile (and alias) and our Customer Care team can retrieve this information. You won't, however, be able to revert back to your old profile format, but you will be able to get any data that you think is missing. To do this, please go here to contact Customer Care.' There were 850 comments posted, all negative, on the first day. There are hundreds more today. There is even more outrage on the Yahoo Messenger blog."

255 comments

  1. FIRST POST by Mal-2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And nothing of value was lost.

    Seriously, what could be in your profile that you don't know about yourself?

    Mal-2

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    1. Re:FIRST POST by iminplaya · · Score: 1, Troll

      Seriously, what could be in your profile that you don't know about yourself?

      Their sex offender registration?

      --
      What?
    2. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I wasn't even aware that people actually USED their Yahoo profiles.

    3. Re:FIRST POST by AmberBlackCat · · Score: 4, Funny

      A bunch of lies you told about yourself?

    4. Re:FIRST POST by Kagura · · Score: 1

      There were 850 comments posted, all negative, on the first day.

      Wow. I'd hate to be the junior editor assigned to counting up all 850 comments to make sure such a statement could be made.

      I'm just being silly. ;)

    5. Re:FIRST POST by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

      Myself? Oh, you mean my made-up character. let's see. I'm a 15-year-old bi-sexual girl with a 38DD, I remember that, but um, what um, I can't find the picture, and I can't remember what activities I was supposed to be into, other than group orgies... sh***....

      Oh well, guess I'll just create a new one.

    6. Re:FIRST POST by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Wow, a first post worthy of an insightful moderation? I thought I would never see the day.

    7. Re:FIRST POST by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Myself? Oh, you mean my made-up character. let's see. I'm a 15-year-old bi-sexual girl with a 38DD, I remember that, but um, what um, I can't find the picture, and I can't remember what activities I was supposed to be into, other than group orgies... sh***....

      Oh well, guess I'll just create a new one.

      Yes, it's true ... if you always tell the truth you don't have to keep track of all your lies.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    8. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, that's .000017% of yahoo users who are outraged! Yahoo really has screwed itself this time.

    9. Re:FIRST POST by jcgf · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, what if you forget the truth?

    10. Re:FIRST POST by sexconker · · Score: 1

      5 billion yahoo users?
      REALLY?

    11. Re:FIRST POST by Goldberg's+Pants · · Score: 4, Funny

      Clearly someone who has never been married.

      "No, dear, you're wrong. We've had that portable DVD player for ages and you just never noticed. I told you I was buying it. I showed you it when I got it."

      That is an actual conversation I had with my wife recently. Only thing is I WASN'T LYING! I genuinely DID tell her I was buying it, and DID show it to her, AND have used it multiple times in front of her. The other day she finds the box. "Why do we have a portable DVD player box?"

      *facepalm*

    12. Re:FIRST POST by tonywong · · Score: 1

      I read this story right after I finished reading this story from the New York Times

      http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/business/19ping.html

      It's about Yahoo's changing of its home page and doing it gradually and and being very careful of responding to feedback.

    13. Re:FIRST POST by Bozzio · · Score: 0

      Lol,

      Sex Conker!

      --
      I just pooped your party.
    14. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's about 5000 yahoos for every slashdot user. Sounds about right.

    15. Re:FIRST POST by mad+flyer · · Score: 1, Funny

      So my wife have a sister as dumb as herself... good to know... I bet she can't cook either, and the kitchen look like Tchechnya everytime she try to make coffee...?

    16. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's not about not knowing what used to be in your profile, it's about having to rewrite whatever information was in there from scratch. Or requesting the data from Customer Care (also very fun).

      Bottom line is that it's extra work for absolutely no reason.

    17. Re:FIRST POST by OriginalArlen · · Score: 1

      So my wife have a sister as dumb as herself...

      Repent at leisure much, do you?

      You know it's odd, I'm nearly 40; I've spent twenty years feeling steadily more despondent and left out as my contemporaries got married, got a mortgage, started having kids... and now? Heh! ;)

      --

      Everything I needed to know about life, I learnt from Blake's Seven
    18. Re:FIRST POST by Cylix · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm thinking of those tens of millions of profiles that no one has used in seven years.

      They finally cleaned up that mess. Kudos ;)

      --
      "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
    19. Re:FIRST POST by LVSlushdat · · Score: 0

      > I wasn't even aware that people actually USED Yahoo...

      There.. Fixed that for ya...

      --
      THANK YOU, Edward Snowden!! Americans owe you a debt of gratitude (whether they know it or not..)
    20. Re:FIRST POST by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But you will note that they very carefully did not remove the tens of millions of accounts that no one has used in seven years. Wouldn't want the paying customers (that's not you, "user") to guess that their marketing statistics are inflated.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    21. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does anyone know who I am?! Anyone at all?! I can't figure it out!!

    22. Re:FIRST POST by mysidia · · Score: 1

      The few that did now have blank profiles, and they're not going to bother to repopulate them, seeing as Yahoo will probably just wipe them again.

      Clearly retaining user information reliably isn't important to Yahoo.

      f*** yahoo.

    23. Re:FIRST POST by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      Says more about you than your wife. Why marry someone you don't respect?

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    24. Re:FIRST POST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm just being silly. ;)

      Yup, but it's still sad because it's true!

  2. Let's move on now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can we get Facebook and MySpace wiped clean, too?

    1. Re:Let's move on now... by kirbysuperstar · · Score: 0

      Seconded.

    2. Re:Let's move on now... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 3, Informative

      Looks like you'd be playing whack-a-mole: Yahoo's new profile style appears to mimic MySpace and Facebook.

    3. Re:Let's move on now... by NfoCipher · · Score: 5, Funny

      You'd need to nuke it from orbit.. It's the only way to be sure.

      --
      I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.
    4. Re:Let's move on now... by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

      No, you need some loyal, suicidal servants who will have a nuke strapped to their chest. It's the only way to be sure of a direct hit.

      No servants? No problem. Good help is hard to find anyway, just do it yourself.

    5. Re:Let's move on now... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm sure there are a few (ahem!) insurgents that could possibly be convinced to take the job.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    6. Re:Let's move on now... by jenn_13 · · Score: 1

      Thirded.

    7. Re:Let's move on now... by Glyphstream · · Score: 1

      Oh how I wish I could insert a picture of Scruffy the Janitor right about here.

      --
      Sig unrelated.
    8. Re:Let's move on now... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please GOD!

      I would LOVE to see myspace and facebook have a massive hard drive failure. I created an account simply to have an easy link to some family and old friends, have rarely used it, and the last time I did log in, everyone of my 'friends' had spammed my page with stupid apps, so I don't even check the page anymore because I'm tired of stupid graphics and apps and third grade 'see who has a crush on you' BS.

      Can I ask why people feel it necessary to clusterf*ck their site into a 10,000x80,000 resolution so that everyone that comes to the page has to go on a scrolling expedition just to find the content?

      I'm seriously....someone please nuke it. ...what's a yahoo profile? Isn't that a front for child exploitation under the guise of a search engine?

    9. Re:Let's move on now... by DougF · · Score: 1

      Fourthed...fourth'd...fourded....ah hell with it, me too.

      --
      Impetuous! Homeric!
  3. Re:Yahoo still matters? by russlar · · Score: 1

    Dude, it's Saturday.

    --
    Anybody want my mod points?
  4. Five Nines, please, on my free service. by wild_quinine · · Score: 4, Insightful
    With the passage of time, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that these services are, for most users, free services.

    When hotmail was new, before Microsoft owned it, there was genuine discussion over how appropriate it would be to trust a service that you don't pay for.

    Seems like for the last ten years or so, that's not even been on the table. It's just one more service that people expect, and expect to run with utter reliability

    I know these companies make a buck from advertising revenue, or whatever. But YOU don't pay them a penny, unless you want to. Most people don't want to.

    If you're complaining because the least part of a large service that you have been using for free, perhaps since the dawn of the commerical internet, has made an unexpected change... well, really, you need to have a long think about whether or not that makes you an ass.

    Even if it doesn't, relying on a free service to keep ANY of your data probably makes you one.

    1. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Idiomatick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      its about competition. Other free services would never do this. And though we don't pay them, they get money from us. So we can complain. That said. Yahoo please die already, noone has liked you since '96.

    2. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by iminplaya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Even if it doesn't, relying on a free service to keep ANY of your data probably makes you one.

      I wouldn't have any more faith in the paid ones.

      --
      What?
    3. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by William+Ager · · Score: 4, Informative

      While it is true that many users are using the services for free, Yahoo also has a significant number of paying users, if I recall correctly; I see nothing to suggest that these changes didn't affect them as well.

      Unfortunately, many companies with online services that have free and paid versions tend to forget about the paying customers when planning these sorts of things.

    4. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by BrokenHalo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're complaining because the least part of a large service that you have been using for free, perhaps since the dawn of the commerical internet, has made an unexpected change... well, really, you need to have a long think about whether or not that makes you an ass.

      Well said. I have had several discussions with associates and friends who are by now utterly dependent on Facebook. The latter has always bothered me, since (among other reasons) there are so many cases of people getting their fingers burnt through no fault of their own.

      If a service is important to me, I expect to have to maintain it by means of something a bit more binding than a click-through agreement that cedes all control to the administrator.

    5. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by narcberry · · Score: 1

      Yahoo requires users to be successful.
      Users are pissed off.

      ergo Yahoo hurt themselves. Who cares if users have a "right" to be pissed off.

      --
      Modding me -1 troll doesn't make me wrong.
    6. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see why you brush off the ads so quickly. Users use the system in exchange for being exposed to ads, and exposing recipients to ads. If it weren't for those users, Yahoo wouldn't be able to sell ads.

      Even if it doesn't, relying on a free service to keep ANY of your data probably makes you one.

      There is a big difference between being an ass and being stupid or careless.

    7. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Seems like for the last ten years or so, that's not even been on the table. It's just one more service that people expect, and expect to run with utter reliability

      Since I've had it my gmail has been available whenever and wherever I wanted it. All the time. Everywhere. If it has failed in the last five years, it failed somebody else. AFAIC it's got nine nines of reliability. In the hypothetical future where they let me down maybe I'll consider somebody else for my important stuff. Frankly I'd forgive them for quite a lot today, since every other service has let me down quite a lot in the mean time.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    8. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      Since I've had it my gmail has been available whenever and wherever I wanted it. All the time. Everywhere. If it has failed in the last five years, it failed somebody else.

      That would be me. But it has failed less often than the ancient Linux box serving xemacs.org has failed over the same time period.

      As you point out, gmail has been pretty much available whereever (I've accessed it from all over the world) and whenever I want it. It works for me and with a few tweaks to the system, it would be worth paying for.

    9. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you're complaining because the least part of a large service that you have been using for free, perhaps since the dawn of the commerical internet, has made an unexpected change... well, really, you need to have a long think about whether or not that makes you an ass. Even if it doesn't, relying on a free service to keep ANY of your data probably makes you one.

      I disagree. It doesn't make you an ass, so much as it makes you an idiot.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    10. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yahoo loses money on every customer, but they make up for it in volume!

    11. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      The only reason these "free" services make money on their advertising is because they can claim that they have a large number of users viewing those adds on a regular basis. So, all those people who use Yahoo are paying for it every time they look at one of those adds. That's the business model. Of course, most businesses that don't deal with life-and-death issues are completely free to shoot themselves in the foot and turn their popular services into crap if they want to. On the other hand, it is completely reasonable for those customers using the service to react with outrage, let their anger be known to the company, and, if not responded to, leave the service completely thus depriving Yahoo of the ability to charge a decent sum for their advertising space. To say that it is unreasonable for users to expect high levels of reliability is to not recognize that while these particular customers may not be providing monetary payment, this company is relying on a different style of business model and those customers are the only thing that makes it possible for Yahoo to get any money as they entirely rely on advertisers to get payed.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    12. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by GameMaster · · Score: 1

      Just as a follow-up, I wanted to make the observation that Yahoo is in a position where they have to please two different customers for every dollar of revenue (actually more than two as many customer views are needed for every dollar of ad space sold but the general point is still the same). This puts them in a difficult position, but it is a position they chose to put themselves in.

      Also, I too am not a fan of Yahoo and don't use their service.

      --

      Rules of Conduct:
      #1 - The DM is always right.
      #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
    13. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Hey, can just an FYI, 12,000 people work at yahoo. We like our jobs. Kthxbai

    14. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That said. Yahoo please die already, noone has liked you since '96.

      Whoever Noone is, at least one person likes them.

    15. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by am+2k · · Score: 1

      Actions like this one definitely don't help keeping your jobs, though.

    16. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ...

      Yahoo please die already, noone has liked you since '96.

      People said stuff like that to Apple and Atari as well :)

    17. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, you pay for it with your eyeballs in ad time, and with the privacy that you give up when these companies build profiles on you.

    18. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      I know these companies make a buck from advertising revenue, or whatever. But YOU don't pay them a penny, unless you want to. Most people don't want to.

      If you're complaining because the least part of a large service that you have been using for free, perhaps since the dawn of the commerical internet, has made an unexpected change... well, really, you need to have a long think about whether or not that makes you an ass.

      Small nitpick here: You are paying for ad-sponsored services.

      --

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

    19. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by ChameleonDave · · Score: 1

      An ass = asinine = an idiot = idiotic.

    20. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by YourExperiment · · Score: 3, Funny

      People said stuff like that to Apple and Atari as well :)

      So you're saying Yahoo has a 50% chance to pull through?

    21. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With that philosophy they'd have been better off investing in the First CityWide Change Bank nowadays. :-D

    22. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lycos disables free mail accounts every thirty days or so - I can understand this to a certain extent and it is the price you might end up paying for paying nothing for a service...

    23. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      While that is true and you cant hold them to the same levels as high end commercial, if they want you to use them and rely on them, something like this is unacceptable.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    24. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1

      ...

      Yahoo please die already, noone has liked you since '96.

      People said stuff like that to Apple and Atari as well :)

      I'm still saying it.

      --
      This space available.
    25. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by dbcad7 · · Score: 1

      Hotmail has had very few hiccups.. even with the changeover (I think they had like almost 24 hours of downtime).. On the other hand, an example of changeover gone wrong was Excite where mail was out for like 30 days.

      A user profile snafu like this, is annoying.. but imagine the guy running his eBay business with an excite email address... now you can say shame on him, but Excite did also have a pay email service as well. Although I didn't run a business, I did get caught up in the mess, and really missed my excite email.. which prior to this had been so reliable that it was basically my primary email address. Now the lack of trust is gone, and the majority of contacts have been switched to my ISP email address.. or hotmail.

      That people think that because it's free, then you have no reason to bitch.. obviously never had something like this happen to them.. IMHO, if you can't provide reliable email.. and take the responsibility as serious as if you were providing snail-mail .. then just don't be an email provider.

      --
      waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
    26. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the passage of time, a lot of people seem to have forgotten that these services are, for most users, free services.

      The hell they are!

      Just because you don't pay them cash, doesn't mean you're not paying at all.
      Personal information is not worthless junk. This attitude in the general public is exactly WHY these "free services" are so thriving.

      People provide Yahoo with insight into their entire personal lives, so they are entitled to some proper service.

    27. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by jcrousedotcom · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're exactly right. I often have people ask me why I don't post all of the pics I post to my personal website on myspace or facebook. My short answer is - I *pay* for jcrouse.com, the hosting of my data, etc. and it is [essentially] my little spot on the `net. When I put it on Faceboook, there is an always changing EULA and the fact that I have no control over their servers, their policies, or *anything* that they do with my data. I don't even know if I even 'own' the pictures I post on those websites anymore. Since I make the EULA on what is posted on my website, I have a better feeling I own them.

      This of course is not withstanding the EULA I have with my hosting provider. I know some, like godaddy have some weird things going on, and I am not trying to get into that discussion with this post (I don't use godaddy for that specific reason) - my point is, posting your [presumably] valuable information on something like Yahoo or Facebook could be problematic. You *don't* own the domain, you *don't* pay for the server space. You have no recourse if they delete, modify, censor, or otherwise (in your mind) misuse your data.

      --
      Illiterate? Write for free help!
    28. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      An ass = asinine = an idiot = idiotic.

      Yes, but being an ass implies that one is deliberately acting in an asinine manner (as in, "what an asshole.") On the other hand, being an idiot in this context just means you're too stupid to use a computer.

      Neither are particularly positive attributes however.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    29. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by ChameleonDave · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, but being an ass implies that one is deliberately acting in an asinine manner (as in, "what an asshole.")

      OK, I'll grant you that it's probably thus for Americans (since you've merged "arse" with "ass"), but, for me, a person who is an ass is someone who acts idiotically, as though they had no more brain than an ass (equus asinus, whence both the words "ass" and "asinine"). Someone who deliberately behaves in a stupidly objectionable way is an arsehole, bastard, prick, or any number of other obscenities.

    30. Re:Five Nines, please, on my free service. by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Yes, but being an ass implies that one is deliberately acting in an asinine manner (as in, "what an asshole.")

      OK, I'll grant you that it's probably thus for Americans (since you've merged "arse" with "ass"), but, for me, a person who is an ass is someone who acts idiotically, as though they had no more brain than an ass (equus asinus, whence both the words "ass" and "asinine"). Someone who deliberately behaves in a stupidly objectionable way is an arsehole, bastard, prick, or any number of other obscenities.

      Well, I'll admit that either way it's often very difficult to distinguish the two just by their behavior.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  5. I wonder what people are thinking by HBI · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I mean, doing business with Yahoo has been bad business for years now. And people are surprised that Yahoo just doesn't give a shit? Why would you use their services? They've been customer-unfriendly at least since the dot-com thing went south.

    I was kinda hoping Microsoft would buy them so a few dozen bil of their funds would wink out of existence over a couple years. This Google ad deal is far less satisfying.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  6. Yahoo Screws the pooch. again. by chrispycreeme · · Score: 0, Troll

    I can imagine that there are some people somewhere who give a flying crap about this. I am not one of them. In fact I find it amusing that so many people are upset.

  7. Way to piss your userbase Yahoo by rgo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I know that online profiles are stupid, but why did they do that. They should have implemented a migration process or something like that. Now Yahoo risks losing some of its userbase for some braindead decision (from the users' point of view).

    1. Re:Way to piss your userbase Yahoo by Joe+U · · Score: 1

      I had to do something similar several years ago on, obviously, a much smaller scale.

      Migration costs money, lots of it if you want to do it properly. Our users had a choice, either continue with a backend that didn't work and crashed, lose profiles and settings and have to re-enter them, or burn money migrating what was essentially a few hundred useful profiles.

      Considering that most profiles are just small amounts of user input, we figured that the users could always re-enter it. Yeah, it was a crappy thing to do, but it was the right thing to do. (And I personally spent my own time sending lost poems, URLs and pictures back to users who requested them. I'm not a heartless bastard, that title was reserved for upper management)

    2. Re:Way to piss your userbase Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering that most profiles are just small amounts of user input, we figured that the users could always re-enter it. Yeah, it was a crappy thing to do, but it was the right thing to do. (And I personally spent my own time sending lost poems, URLs and pictures back to users who requested them. I'm not a heartless bastard, that title was reserved for upper management)

      From your explanation, you warned them before the transition, so they can save their information and enter it back.

      Yahoo didn't do this. Sending a notification to the users costs nothing.

  8. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 4, Funny

    Actually, it's sunday.

  9. What I want to know... by Garwulf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can't say I'm happy about this - among other things, I had to reset my profile with absolutely no notice whatsoever, and all of my online friends are going to have to do the same. But, I'm not paying any money for this service - I don't even use the official Yahoo client (I use Trillian instead) - so it is theirs to do, no matter how annoying it is.

    However, I want to know something. When you look at the profile screen, an important word stands out in one of the corners - "BETA." "Beta" means that the service is still being tested, and isn't ready for full release. So, what I want to know is why the entire user base of Yahoo was put onto a profile system that hasn't moved out of beta testing yet. There is no way that is good practice.

    In all seriousness, this should have been finished and declared done before a change like this was made.

    --
    Robert B. Marks
    Author, Demonsbane in Diablo Archive
    1. Re:What I want to know... by fat+man+with+a+monke · · Score: 1

      So then they'd be releasing a program that hadn't been tested as thoroughly. Beta means you're testing it by using it, whether you like it or not.

    2. Re:What I want to know... by mixmatch · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Yahoo is trying to be more like Google with the Beta thing. Some things have no logical explanation except that they follow an existing trend.

    3. Re:What I want to know... by dricci · · Score: 5, Funny

      Beta isn't a trend, it's a lifestyle!

    4. Re:What I want to know... by Bieeanda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ah, but you see, they've changed the nomenclature on us. 'Beta code' no longer means 'computer code that is mostly usable, but still in testing', but rather means 'beta is code for never saying that you promised usability, uptime, or data retention'.

    5. Re:What I want to know... by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 1

      And all this time I thought Beta meant "Hey look at me, I'm trying to be cool"

    6. Re:What I want to know... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you see, they've changed the nomenclature on us. 'Beta code' no longer means 'computer code that is mostly usable, but still in testing', but rather means 'beta is code for never saying that you promised usability, uptime, or data retention'.

      Yes, and we do have Google to thank for that redefinition.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    7. Re:What I want to know... by Kneo24 · · Score: 1

      What I want to know why this format feels worse? I honestly never tried uploading a picture before, but I'm doing it now. I honestly have no fucking idea what the dimensions should be. I started out with something huge, and it asked me to crop it down (leaving about a third of the width missing if I leave everything height in wise), which is no good. So I went to a smaller dimension, which was about 400x 360, same fucking things. So I tried smaller, 196x172, same thing! It didn't matter what dimension it was, I still had to crop it down and when I tried with the tool they gave, the cropping always ended up the same.

      It might be a beta, but crying out loud, pretend I am average idiot joe user. Tell me specifically what dimensions that you support, how the pictures work.

      Now, I honestly don't care that much. I just wanted to see what all the hub-bub was about. I can see why users are flabbergasted, to say the least. It's a new system, it's confusing, and it wasn't exactly easy to find your own profile from Yahoo's page. This just stinks of failure.

    8. Re:What I want to know... by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Ah, but you see, they've changed the nomenclature on us. 'Beta code' no longer means 'computer code that is mostly usable, but still in testing', but rather means 'beta is code for never saying that you promised usability, uptime, or data retention'.

      To be perfectly frank, the former does imply the latter; so the nomenclature is still valid.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    9. Re:What I want to know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still in Beta? It must be one of those darned Linux distros! Anyone have a download link for this Yahoo?

    10. Re:What I want to know... by pbhj · · Score: 1

      OT: why do you have a monkey next to your name?

  10. Ya who? by symbolset · · Score: 4, Funny

    Are they not dead yet? Next you'll tell me AOL is still around.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
  11. Microsoft Buyout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    They're just practicing for when Microsoft buys them out. Microsoft has a long history of losing user data.

    1. Re:Microsoft Buyout by jamesh · · Score: 1

      While involving Microsoft, my first was a little different... "Microsoft has sabotaged Yahoo to lower their value before buying them out."

  12. The $64K question is: why did they do it? by bigsteve@dstc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Clearly, this is monumentally bad customer relations, and some people are going to say "they did it because they don't care". But there must be some business / technical explanation. Does anyone know what they are trying to achieve by reseting the profiles? Is this a necessary fallout from some change in their profile infrastructure? Or did they just plain screw up?

    1. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In the past, each alias could have its own profile. Now there is only one profile per user, each alias can either refer to it or show a blank page. Every user who has used aliases will do one of two things.
      1) Keep one account with one profile, thus reducing the amount of disk spaced used.
      Or...
      2) Create a new full account for each alias desired, thus artificially boosting Yahoo's user count.

      Either way, it's a win for Yahoo! Assuming the users don't revolt.

    2. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The old rule, never explain as malice that which can be explained by stupidity, doesn't work here. Yahoo really doesn't give a shit about their users. Chat rooms are overrun by bots, rampant cheating on their games sites, etc.

    3. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by raehl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      To obliterate over a decade of cruft accumulation?

      Most Yahoo profiles were created by spammers. I bet a year from now, anything that hasn't been updated gets deleted entirely, freeing up a lot of the username space.

    4. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      If they delete abandoned accounts their supposedly enormous user base will appear to shrink. Bad for business. Deleting profiles does not do that (but it does free up disk space).

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    5. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      But there must be some business / technical explanation.

      Or to cooperate with some law enforcement agency. The old profile system allowed one person to build multiple independent on-line personalities, and there can be no doubt that some persons used this fraudulently to create sock puppets and worse. The new system prevents this: multiple aliases are still supported, but no alias can have an independent profile backing it. All aliases either point back to the original profile, or the pointer is null. This is a good thing for internet security in general. You can still hide your identity, but everyone will know that you might be doing that.

      That this happened suddenly and without warning is consistent with Yahoo being made aware that their old profile system was being used in a specific crime. Not saying that this is so; only that the action fits this kind of scenario.

    6. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by Martin+Blank · · Score: 1

      I'm one of those who had to have multiple profiles, and the reasoning for it is evident when I try to use the new profile system. I'm one of those who got into Yahoo's chat service early, well before there was even an IM client. I was there in the first couple of days, possibly on the very first day, and remembered being logged into the system on occasions when I was the only person in the system (they would list all users online at one point, and as the night went on, the number of users dropped).

      Unfortunately for me, at that time, Yahoo allowed spaces in the names, and I took advantage of this. They stopped allowing this a little while after the IM client came out. Every time they make a major change to their services, they seem to hope that those few of us that still have such a name have stopped using it. (The old profiling system was always a little quirky with my primary account name, so I created a profile with an alias that had the same letters but with a hyphen instead of the space.) Each time, I have to open a support request and wait a week or so while they sort it out. It looks like I have to do it again here.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    7. Re:The $64K question is: why did they do it? by slashtivus · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall Yahoo flushing their user accounts a few years back. My google fu is weak so I'm not finding any links. I believe it was even discussed on Slashdot though.

  13. Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by Tatsh · · Score: 1, Interesting

    and nobody's complaining.

    1. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by mixmatch · · Score: 1

      I personally lost nothing in the change. Maybe that's why.

    2. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by dristoph · · Score: 1

      and frankly, the iGoogle changes are pretty annoying. minor, but annoying. they should really get some caliber designers on it. but, then again, all the data is still there.

    3. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welp, what do you expect? Nobody dares to challenge the great wizard of Google! (If you don't get it, where have you been? Grab a copy of the wizard of oz someone, below the rock dweller.)

    4. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by Tacvek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nobody is complaining? Everybody in the Relevant Google Groups are complaining! http://groups.google.com/group/Google_Web_Search_Help-Personalizing/topics

      Most of the trackbacks for the Google Blog post announcing the change were negative, although Googleblog admins have since removed those trackbacks.

      Most people dislike the wasted space of having the tabs to the left. People Also dislike the removal of the plus feature in rss feed gadgets, since the replacement (the first 20 words or so of the text of each article) is not nearly as nice looking or functional. (This change has since been reverted.) Lastly, many people are upset that gadgets can no longer be collapsed and expanded with just a single click.

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    5. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by thatskinnyguy · · Score: 1

      The side-tabbed browsing of specific modules of iGoogle has actually enhanced my experience with it. The improvements to the Gmail module were long overdue. Am I the only one who thinks the change was a good thing?

      --
      The game.
    6. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by raehl · · Score: 1

      People don't like the wasted space of tabs on the left when the old profiles were designed for 600x800 resolution screens at best?

    7. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know! I hate the new Google, and the fact that there's no opt out is seriously making me doubt my faith in google.

      You'd never get an article about it up on Slashdot though, people are way too fanatic about Google.

      You know what I say? Google CAN do evil, these iGoogle changes ARE evil.

      At least Microsoft still lets you USE their old stuff (Windows XP). The Google changes would be akin to Microsoft automatically upgrading your IE6 to IE7 back when it came out, was immensely buggy, and unliked. Oh, and they won't allow anyone to install IE6 anymore.

      (Pretend that everyone prefered to use IE6 over the competition back then.)

      Honestly, I came to this article looking for an iGoogle comment, because I immediately thought of Google's changes. The difference there is they had no good reason to change it, it worked perfectly.

    8. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes? why the hell would you bother with more than 1 tab. There are plenty of people who don't overload their homepage with tons of features, and only need 1 tab. Yet there's no way for them to hide the tab.

      And the gmail changes were not improvements. When I click on a email, I want to go to my email, not some popup in the middle of my homepage with no other information except the ONE email I clicked the subject of.

      Also, why would I want to keep it there after navigating off the page? When I click HOME, I want to go to my HOMEpage, not an email that I already read.

    9. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      Plenty of people are complaining. Look at the comments left for any og the iGoogle themes (not that it's the theme's fault), or how about the petition in my sig (I didn't start it, but I did sign it).

      Does anybody know of an alternative to iGoogle where I can aggregate GMail, RSS feeds, and preferably a calendar app?

    10. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      The iGoogle GMail changes are totally confusing and buggy. When I checked it yesterday, links (or rather http://.../ lines in an e-amil) in the iGoogle "partial GMail" version weren't linkified while in the full GMail they are. I've no idea what they were shooting for with the new IGoogle GMail - you've now got the embedded version as before, as well as the full GMail itself, but now also this bizarre useless maximized version of the embedded version.

    11. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by SpinyNorman · · Score: 1

      For the time being it seems that it's basically Americans that are hosed - those using google.com.

      If you login to google.co.uk, or google.ie (Ireland) instead (probably many others too), there are still, for the time being, serving up the old interface.

    12. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by HAKdragon · · Score: 1

      For the time being, you can use a non-US google site and it will still use the old layout. I've been using http://www.google.ie/ig?hl=en to get the old version of the page, but who knows it will be until they release the change for everybody.

      --
      "Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
    13. Re:Google changed iGoogle only a few days ago... by slashtivus · · Score: 1

      That's funny, my iGoogle page changed just over 3 weeks ago. I didn't like it.

  14. Stallman by Moe1975 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't this just the type of thing that Stallman was referring to not long ago? Granted, the particular details of this instance are not THAT alarming (people's profiles) however, it certainly goes to show . . .

    I agreed with him then, and will certainly keep it in mind.

    Moe

    --
    SARAVA!
    1. Re:Stallman by Kethinov · · Score: 1

      Isn't this just the type of thing that Stallman was referring to not long ago? ... it certainly goes to show . . .

      Goes to show what? That using web services is "just as bad as using a proprietary program" as Stallman put it? Did you bother to think through Stallman's position? If he had his way, there'd be no GMail, no Flickr, hell, probably not even any Slashdot. Because you know, Slashdot's a web service. And by having personal information on a Slashdot account, well then you're just "putty in the hands of whoever developed that software."

      Forget web services. Who needs them? "Do your own computing on your own computer with your copy of a freedom-respecting program." Sure, you won't have pesky things like modern, convenient services that the vast majority of the rest of the world seems to think are great, but at least you'll have the "freedom" (one could also say paranoia) to laugh at all those idiots for having the slightest faith and trust that their fellow men and women behind those services aren't working as agents of evil.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    2. Re:Stallman by jamesh · · Score: 1

      People keep saying that about the incoherent ramblings of Nostrodamus too... ;)

    3. Re:Stallman by Moe1975 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Interesting, how the entire concept behind this particular opinion by Stallman has COMPLETELY gone over your head guy. I suspect his other theories and opinions do so as well.

      Here it is, nice and simple: by using someone else's hardware and software to do your computing and store your data, you risk losing access to and control over said hardware and software resources, as well as your data.

      Now, please don't try to make me list all the possible scenarios, or explain it to you any further - I have no patience for it.

      Stallman is absolutely right on this.

      --
      SARAVA!
    4. Re:Stallman by Kethinov · · Score: 2, Insightful

      by using someone else's hardware and software to do your computing and store your data, you risk losing access to and control over said hardware and software resources, as well as your data.

      Then run for the hills! Abandon your Slashdot account immediately because it's an evil web service that you can't control! Go run your own web server for your own IMAP email, or abandon IMAP entirely and use POP! Look, contrary to your condescending attitude, I understand Stallman's argument perfectly. And like plenty of other people, I happen to find Stallman's intentions good, but his conclusions so far from practical that he comes off sounding vaguely kooky.

      The bottom line is it isn't in any web service operator's best interest from a business or a reputation standpoint to suddenly deny their customers access to the service and/or their data. Otherwise you get Slashdot stories like this one. On top of that, there are plenty of folks out there whose data is better in the hands of, say, GMail than their ISP provided POP email account because there are plenty of folks out there who don't know the first thing about keeping regular backups. GMail does this for them.

      I, like most people, just don't buy Stallman's argument. For him to be correct, something apocalyptic would have to happen. And even if being that paranoid was legitimate, Stallman's solution of confining your computing to computers you own is so inconvenient that most people would sooner prefer to just lose some data. Even the folks unable to comprehend regular backups tend to store the really important data in multiple places anyway, such as in the cloud, in a text file somewhere, and on some good old fashioned paper too.

      So while you're sticking your nose in the air waiting for that apocalyptic scenario to happen so you can join Stallman and the < 1% who agree with him in saying "I told you so!" so you can feel smarter than everyone, the rest of the world is going to carry on using web services. Because whatever negligible risks of data loss and even privacy invasion that exist are well worth the convenience.

      --
      You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
  15. What changed? by SL+Baur · · Score: 4, Funny

    I wasn't even aware that people actually USED their Yahoo profiles.

    I just logged in for the first time in a couple of months and did not see much change, other than increased clutter on the screens getting me to yahoo mail.

    What changed? Am I supposed to be outraged too? Inquiring minds want to know!

    1. Re:What changed? by digitalchinky · · Score: 4, Informative

      The only thing that seems to have visibly changed is http://profiles.yahoo.com/ - this died a quiet death years ago anyway, nobody actually used it for anything serious. It was always nothing more than a place to stick a couple of pictures and a few fields for the odd comment or two. http://360.yahoo.com/ is far more popular and provides services akin to actual 'social networking' - it makes for a better 'profile' anyway.

      Either way this new system is a step up from what it used to be, though yes, a tad annoying in the sense that they just blanked everything out, but I probably would have done the same, It was just an incoherent disjointed mess. The user experience was horrid right from the beginning.

    2. Re:What changed? by digitalchinky · · Score: 5, Informative

      Possibly bad form to reply to myself, but meh... I went through the process of restarting one of my ancient profiles just now - I suspect Yahoo have made a few changes since the story hit the tubes. Not everything is blanked out, in fact most details were resurrected just fine. All my pictures and contacts are still there, though I had to go through a couple of simple mouse clicks to make it happen.

      The only people who will be really annoyed by this are those that are bitching about the loss of all their split personalities (aliases) - well not exactly, they can keep the multiple names, just that Yahoo is going to point back to a single profile and link all the aliases to that one profile. This will clean up all the crazies who roll out a new persona with every new boy/girlfriend, bad hair day, full moon, EMO issue, and so on and so forth.

      Probably just a housekeeping strategy internally at yahoo - it'd save them a few bucks on hard drive space at the very least. I guess for anyone who really wants a bunch of different profiles, they can always create another account. They are free after all.

    3. Re:What changed? by slughead · · Score: 4, Funny

      850 angry comments can't be wrong. You are currently feeling rage.

    4. Re:What changed? by Provocateur · · Score: 4, Funny

      all the crazies who roll out a new persona with every new boy/girlfriend,
      check

      bad hair day,
      check

      full moon,
      check

      EMO issue,
      check

      Hey, you guys get your own stalker. I've found mine already.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    5. Re:What changed? by infonography · · Score: 5, Funny

      yeah but it was only three people making those posts.

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    6. Re:What changed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, exactly how are they going to do that? How are they going to know that CootieGirl347 and J_C_Chiller182 are the same person and link the profiles?

    7. Re:What changed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm CootieGirl346, not 347. Please get it right

      --- J_C_Chiller182

    8. Re:What changed? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What changed is that the "old" layout is now gone. It used to be an option, which was great for those of us that preferred the extremely compact look for our main page. Now what used to easily fit on a single screen takes up 3+ screens (stock quotes, weather, fares for example) and the "new" look is more a reminder of the Fisher-Price move with 2K->XP.

      What gets me is since this should all be CSS anyways, why they felt the need to destroy their highly useful compact old layout for the new one. Perhaps it's time to apply GreaseMonkey to my.yahoo.com.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    9. Re:What changed? by goaliemn · · Score: 2, Informative

      Unfortunately, I didn't want a social networking site. I liked yahoo. I used it for specific things, and social networking is not one of them. I didn't join yahoo360 because it didn't include any new "features" that I wanted over classic yahoo. Now, it looks like everything is going to yahoo360..

    10. Re:What changed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the only problem I have with this is exactly why Yawhore did it. Everything was fine. It wasn't causing viruses or any problematic situations like massive server shutdowns that took days to fix. The only thing wrong with Yawhore was the consistent flow of bots into the chats. Sadly, not many people understand the difficulty of having multiple accounts to avoid being compromised by people they don't like. Having to log in and out to avoid pointless arguements about whoever's lover is truly tedious, not to mention people who make joke names such as Michael Jackson or Barney the purple dinosaur to broadcast their hilarious creativity.

      Why didn't they attack the bot problem instead of attacking a problem that didn't even exist? They really made an epic fail this time. It's going to make a lot of people cut their wrists. Lmao.

      Let's see if the teenage suicide rate suddenly jacks up in the next few days. If it does, I blame Yawhore.

  16. What really happened by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Actually this was part of the deal with Google. Google said: "We'll fuck up iGoogle, if you fuck up Yahoo! Profiles. Just wait a few days to make it look like a co-incidence!"

    It's all part of the Zion Catholic 9/11 7/July Conspiracy by the Royal Family to take over the world, in order to secure a monopoly on Cheese production. WaKE UP SHEEPLE!!!111!one

    1. Re:What really happened by infonography · · Score: 1

      I know it's all part of a secret conspiracy by some bastard who's allegedly responsible for it all.

      http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=QACSo5xk3dE

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  17. Losing Friends by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WIth Yahoo in a slow death spiral, I would think they would try to gain customers not lose them.

  18. Why so hard to fix? by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't get it. If they still have the data, why is it so hard for them to write up a script to fix the mistake?

    It shouldn't take one of their programmers more than a few hours to whip up, and would save them all this headache.

    I wonder if there's more behind this "accident" than we're seeing.

    1. Re:Why so hard to fix? by Trails · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It wasn't an accident. From the article, it looks like they fundamentally changed their profile/account structure (note I'm not a yahoo user, this is simply from RTFA).

      It seems to "migrate" existing data to the new structure is not clear-cut and linear. In theory, they could have built some user facing tools to allow the users to choose different data migration paths, although this would invariably involve a ton of additional complexity, which is probably why they opted not to do it.

      I suspect this is being done in advance of some social networking type features they're planning to roll out, and they wanted to get the unpleasantness out of the way so that it didn't mar the release of their shiny new features.

    2. Re:Why so hard to fix? by rumith · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't get it. If they still have the data, why is it so hard for them to write up a script to fix the mistake?

      Because they insist that it wasn't a mistake and, generally, they wanted people's profiles clean. Now if this is true or not remains to be seen: they could be covering up their asses by saying it was intentional, because a company that accidentally kills or blocks your data would receive event less trust than a company that does it intentionally. So practically by this announcement they could be choosing the lesser of the two evils.

    3. Re:Why so hard to fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This sounds like the new profile structure will have some of the features reserved for paying users.

    4. Re:Why so hard to fix? by DougBTX · · Score: 1

      I don't get it. If they still have the data, why is it so hard for them to write up a script to fix the mistake?

      Looks like they forgot how many features their old system had before it was re-built from scratch. For example, they used to support multiple aliases, so that you could have multiple names under one account (a personal alias, one for work, one where you're a 16 year old girl) but the new system only has one profile page per account, not one per alias, so it is impossible for them to merge all the data from the old accounts into the new ones, because it won't fit. So instead they "deleted" it. Oops.

    5. Re:Why so hard to fix? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get it. If they still have the data, why is it so hard for them to write up a script to fix the mistake?

      The old way allowed each account to have several different identities, but each one had a full profile. You could use it to have one for friends and one that just had your first name and age for public use (e.g. with a Yahoo Group mailing list).

      Now, it looks like you get one account profile (thus one age, location etc) and can add aliases that may or may not point to it.

      So they're removing duplication of data fields for each user. But if someone used differing profiles,e.g. ages or genders, then there's no automatic 'fix'.

      It does make it simpler to set up. If you want to use fake details, they now say just set up another account.

      My ISP uses Yahoo to provide its email service, and I get premium features like AddressGuard (unique mail aliases for tracking spam sources) so do use it to an extent, but I'm happy to see my profiles gone, I never made them visible.

  19. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Seriously, couldn't this space on /. be taken up by something that matters on the intarweb?

    According to Alexa, Yahoo! is the most popular site on the internet. I'd say that that's more than enough to make a website matter, personally.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
  20. Its free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love people that bitch and moan about a free service making changes. Don't like it? Take your zero dollars and go somewhere else.

  21. I know why by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There used to be clever hacks in the old Yahoo Profiles to modify your profile to do things like play MIDI files and change the background and run Javascripts via a series of exploits in the way the Yahoo data forms worked.

    Yahoo wants to get rid of the exploits by wiping clean every profile after it fixes the exploits. Some of the exploits stole passwords and other data and some even installed malware.

    I don't mind having a blank profile, I am not really notable anyway. I am a pirate ninja and just love to blend into the background so nobody can notice me as I turn invisible. :)

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:I know why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not that difficult to come up with a filter or to otherwise just escape out the code to begin with.

      Blanking the profile is hardly the only way to deal with this.

  22. How to run an internet business. by hack++slash · · Score: 2, Insightful

    10 PERSON has good idea and sets up internet COMPANY
    20 PEOPLE eventually flock to COMPANY and use their services
    30 TIME passes
    40 COMPANY bosses get itchy and need to scratch, read: they feel they need to be 'innovative' and/or they feel they aren't making enough money
    50 CHANGES happen to site which affects users ability to conduct their business (buying/selling/communicating etc.)
    60 PEOPLE are fucked off with CHANGES and complain bitterly
    70 COMPANY ignores PEOPLE
    80 GOTO 30

    --
    To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
  23. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ah! So that's why they did it... to drum up extra traffic from everybody fixing they're profiles (or just making a stink about them getting f'ed up, traffics traffic)

  24. Some time ago... by symbolset · · Score: 1

    Some friends and I were discussing general utility questions and the issue of what we'd be willing to pay for Google (the search engine) and Gmail (the email service) if we had to.

    The consensus opinion was $50/year for search, $20/year for email. Take that for what you will: it's a water cooler discussion.

    For Yahoo mail and search, MSN anything, or ownership of all of AOL free and clear, $0. Give or take a nickel.

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Some time ago... by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      The consensus opinion was $50/year for search, $20/year for email. Take that for what you will: it's a water cooler discussion.

      Interesting. Take advertising and wikipedia out of the search results and US$50 would pay for itself in a day, at work.

    2. Re:Some time ago... by symbolset · · Score: 1

      Take advertising and wikipedia out of the search results and US$50 would pay for itself in a day, at work.

      As much as I hate to say this since I hate advertising ... the ads on Google when I'm looking for a product to buy are almost always relevant. I almost always Google an IT product before I buy it, and I almost always buy a product from the vendor Google sends me to (or Newegg!).

      As for wikipedia, find it a reliable source but take all sources of information with a grain of salt. Sometimes I even salt the soup so as I like it.

      I always Google potential hires. I hope my boss doesn't, because this post will shortly be somewhere in the Googleplex. ;-)

      Anyway, the tyranny of Google is that they are relentlessly focused on delivering my heart's desire, wherever it's located on the Internet. I would be seriously twisted to oppose that.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    3. Re:Some time ago... by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      As much as I hate to say this since I hate advertising ... the ads on Google when I'm looking for a product to buy are almost always relevant.

      I am not involved in purchasing decisions at work, so those results are irrelevant.

      I will grant you that when I first started out in gmail my first email conversation had to do with finding preinstalled Linux notebook computers and the Google targeted ads were a spectacular success.

      I always Google potential hires. I hope my boss doesn't, because this post will shortly be somewhere in the Googleplex. ;-)

      Yeah, so do I. I'll weigh samples of self-written code higher, but a search often reveals a flaky potential employee.

      That just makes a case for people starting out to get involved in Open Source as soon as they can. In my current job, my name had dozens of hits on the _internal_ intranet search engine due to my contributions to various emacs related things. That kind of stuff can only help.

    4. Re:Some time ago... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Some friends and I were discussing general utility questions and the issue of what we'd be willing to pay for Google (the search engine) and Gmail (the email service) if we had to.

      The consensus opinion was $50/year for search, $20/year for email. Take that for what you will: it's a water cooler discussion.

      I have a similar feeling. I'd be willing to go higher, though, considering how useful Google Docs has become. I'd happily pay something like $50 a year for exactly the service I have now (including ads) with GMail just for the guarantee that if they had to shut down, they'd bank the money to keep things operational so I'd get like a month's notice to transition. Going dark is fine. Going dark suddenly, that's what scares me.

      --

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

    5. Re:Some time ago... by mysidia · · Score: 1

      As I see it. Either don't use your real name in online postings or on online sites, so searching is not fruitful.

      Or use it everywhere such that if someone googles for your name, there will be several million irrelevent hits.

    6. Re:Some time ago... by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

      As I see it. Either don't use your real name in online postings or on online sites, so searching is not fruitful.

      It's not that simple. I would recommend using your real name on everything technical and an alias on everything political and/or social.

      Slashdot is in the grey area in between and I decided to go with real name. When I feel like trolling, I can always click the "Post Anonymously" box.

      Or use it everywhere such that if someone googles for your name, there will be several million irrelevent hits.

      Quoted for truth.

  25. taste of cloud computing by SideshowBob · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And this is a perfect example of why I will NEVER use 'cloud computing'. My data on my hardware that I have complete control of, thank you.

    1. Re:taste of cloud computing by jamesh · · Score: 1

      Your data should be safer on a properly maintained cloud than it is on your own hardware. I think in this case though, while Yahoo did get income from people using it, the people who's data they were storing would not have any recourse should their data get lost. I haven't read the EULA, but I think it's safe to say that it has something in it along the lines of "If we screw up and lose all your data you can assured that the sympathy you receive from us will be of the highest quality".

      On the other hand, a cloud operator would be taking your money directly and would have a certain SLA to meet.

      That being said, if a cloud did ever fail in Yahoo-like spectacular fashion, I'm sure that the senior staff would have an infallible backup plan, presumably along the lines of a tunnel direct to a country offering safe harbour.

    2. Re:taste of cloud computing by xtronics · · Score: 1

      Cloud computing is just a recycled bad idea. When the mainframe went down - all work stoped - things got better with PCs. If a local machine goes down, just that work stops. If you want to risk your competition mining your contacts, use cloud computing. If you think the *.doc file lock-in has cost you - just wait for cloud computing. If you want someone else to determine which version of software you will run, use cloud computing.

      M$ thinks it is their future (now that they are losing the desktop) - lots of easy marks will use the cloud.

    3. Re:taste of cloud computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your data should be safer on a properly maintained cloud than it is on your own hardware.

      Yeah, safer in someone else's hands.

      I truly hope you are using "properly maintained" to mean:

      • available to me any time I want it
      • never goes offline
      • is backed up frequently
      • is never accessible to the host without authorization
      • is never altered by the host without authorization
      • is never accessible to other users without authorization
      • will be permanently deleted if and when I request it
      • will not be sold for ??? PROFIT!
    4. Re:taste of cloud computing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My data on my hardware that I have complete control of, thank you.

      cough cough DRM cough

    5. Re:taste of cloud computing by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > Cloud computing is just a recycled bad idea.

      Could computing could be a good idea. Maybe someday we will actually have it. It won't be called that, though, because the markedroids have appropriated the term as a euphemism for timesharing.

      With real "cloud computing", if it ever comes, you will send your job into the cloud and not care if it goes to Google, Sun, or Cloud Nine.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    6. Re:taste of cloud computing by swimmar132 · · Score: 1

      And that would consume too much time and requires too much technical knowledge for the majority of people.

      Good for you though!

    7. Re:taste of cloud computing by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that any business interested in providing for-pay cloud computing services (you know, the only ones where you should expect any guarantee of data integrity) would handle a situation like this *far* better than Yahoo seems to have.

  26. Sadly, Not Surprising by wdr1 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I worked at Yahoo for five years. I have no idea who's left (most folks I knew have also since left), but this is a clear sign of losing focus on the user. First there was the draconian booting of everyone off the old version of My Yahoo! & now this.

    Why do people get to make decisions like this & keep their jobs?

    --
    SlashSig Karma: Excellent (mostly affected by moderatio
    1. Re:Sadly, Not Surprising by linzeal · · Score: 1

      This is the problem with all top-down management styles, they eventually get forced into deciding about things they have never had any interaction with, no knowledge of or an even more dangerous mixture of both. My favorite is my friend's boss who spent 20 years teaching mechanical engineering and became a middle manager for a drafting project in a large un-named company. Last time I got off the phone with him he told me his boss had decided that all employees should be able to do accurate drafts of the parts they are designing on paper with t-rule, protractor and compass when 90% of them have never done any drafting outside of a CAD program and that is what he was looking for in new hires instead of knowing all the dozens of "doo-dads" in CAD programs. A simple vote would of allowed them to get rid of this clown and elect a manager that actually represents them. Where are the tech worker unions, btw?

  27. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was Caturday.

  28. Yahoo's still around? by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Someone tell them they should schedule something like this every few months to let us know they still exist.

  29. The conspiracy theorist in me says.... by Rod+Beauvex · · Score: 1

    That a first world government, like the US or England, wanted yet more information on people to collect, and they wanted Yahoo to help. Yahoo caves, wipes everyone's profiles clean, so when they get rewritten, that data goes straight to the secret databases.

    1. Re:The conspiracy theorist in me says.... by FooGoo · · Score: 1

      Thats the best conspiracy theory you could come up with? Come on....impress me.

      --
      People who bite the hand that feeds them usually lick the boot that kicks them
  30. Re:Yahoo still matters? by digitalchinky · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yahoo is popular yes, but profiles.yahoo.com, not so much.

  31. You can still get to your old profile by TwinkieStix · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I believe that everything is still there at the old address right? http://edit.yahoo.com/config/eval_profile Or, am I missing something?

    1. Re:You can still get to your old profile by SirDaShadow · · Score: 1

      When you use yahoo chat, it still pulls the old profile information when you hover the mouse on the nicknames...where can you access this "hidden" information, I don't know...anyone?

  32. 59: OUT 966, 0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    or was that 59: POKE 966, 0?

    I better go call the professor, the symptoms are appearing again even after the deep C therapy.

  33. fighting spam, perhaps? by bmecoli · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Suppose you have a PC that's infested with all sorts of malware. Your first instinct is to just format and reinstall, right?

    ok, with that in mind, who's to say that the staff at yahoo saw the thousands (millions?) of spam profiles with links to porn/malware sites and decided "you know what, fuck it, we can just start with a clean slate. The users who aren't bots can always get their data back anyway."

    You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, you know?

    1. Re:fighting spam, perhaps? by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      Suppose you have a PC that's infested with all sorts of malware. Your first instinct is to just format and reinstall, right?

      ok, with that in mind, who's to say that the staff at yahoo saw the thousands (millions?) of spam profiles with links to porn/malware sites and decided "you know what, fuck it, we can just start with a clean slate. The users who aren't bots can always get their data back anyway."

      You have to break a few eggs to make an omelette, you know?

      In my opinion, you're not wrong, but you're missing an important detail. It happened suddenly. I mean, is there a reason that they couldn't have made it clear like a week in advance that they were doing it? It'd still be obnoxious, but skimming the thread so far, I think the big issue here is distrust over blackouts.

      --

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

  34. Wouldn't the invisibility work only if... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    only if you had direct access to their visual receptors integrated physically onto the host in their preservation cell? What version are you in? I'm in 1.4, trying to remove some of these patches installed ever since I was tricked into receiving the food.

    What if your fade actually didn't work post >2.1, and answer me this: what firmware allowed the symbiotic pirate to ninja couplink?
    Some people try to store their encryption keys in MIDI, and use an old version of Netscape or Mosaic to redirect it to their MIDI synthesizer to authenticate event sequences remotely.

    I have more ideas, but I don't want to share them here while everyone is watching. A decentralized profile database preserved peer-to-peer caching torrent would replace MYSPACE, YAHOO, FACEBOOK, web applications, journal/Blogging email, nntp, filesharing, and all userID disputes by timestamp all in one super tunnel of simulated authentic traffic to conceal the carrier.

    1. Re:Wouldn't the invisibility work only if... by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      If you can figure out my email, it is orion_blastar at the company mentioned in this article. (Yahoo.com) and we can discuss this further.

      Asida Kim taught me a lot about Ninjitsu, Piracy is actually a form of Christianity as the skull and crossbones used to appear at the bottom of a crucifix to symbolize Jesus' power over death but got removed once Pirates started to use it. Ninjitsu is like Christianity as well, it has a golden rule of doing unto others as you would have them do unto you or as they do unto you do unto them back.

      My mind picks up hidden messages. It also uses psionics to cloud the minds of others near me so that they ignore me and it is like I am invisible. Some mistake that for a mental illness but it is really psionic powers. I can do remote viewing as well. These things were created by God, as he interfaces to my brain and makes changes. I acted a certain way on the Internet according to God's will, but that is over now. I have new missions and Operation Blastar moves into a new phase.

      Many are unaware that the universe is just God's computer, he has many of them. The other Gods and Goddesses work for the main God to spread diversity as diversity is good for learning and discovering new things. The Devil works in quality control as do many other so called "evil" Gods and Goddesses. Pain and suffering are just data, a way of learning things. Many Saints suffered but the greatest sinners are sociopaths that do not suffer or feel pain and thus do not learn.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    2. Re:Wouldn't the invisibility work only if... by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah the Buddha works for God as well, he doesn't suffer because he became one with the universe, which is like entering Heaven where pain and suffering no longer exist and such people serve God and the Universe. That is the goal for Buddhists and it is the way to the truth.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  35. Poor Customer Care by residieu · · Score: 1

    I really wouldn't want to be on the "Customer Care" team, dealing with all the pissed off people that will be asking for their data.

  36. Yahoo Help On-Line Is Useless. by sciop101 · · Score: 1
    After two troubleshooting suggestions, Yahoo Help On-Line tells customers to call an 877 number.

    If the customer does not call, Yahoo Help ends the On-Line session.

    --
    The only thing new in this world is the history that you don't know.[Harry Truman]
  37. Re:Yahoo still matters? by xstonedogx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah. When I drop my daughter off for school at 8:00 am local time, I always say "good afternoon" to the other parents. The idiots think I'm crazy.

  38. Re:Yahoo still matters? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Welcome to the exciting world of time zones, many people still think it's saturday, these are of course american idiots who wouldn't know what a GMT was if you told them and can't read a 24 hour clock to save their lives. It's not their fault that the US doesn't uses a single international standard, their country is screwed up.

    Look, dude ... you're posting in a public forum on an American web site, and all you're doing is reaffirming all the bad impressions we have about people from other countries. Don't you understand that it goes both ways? People go on and on and on about "Ugly Americans" and how uncouth and uncivilized we are, and then go and make crass comments that, really, just go to show unpleasant they are. You're a classic example of that behavior. Absolutely classic. I have news for you: every society on Earth is screwed up on more ways than one. That, my impolite friend, is human nature. If what you're really saying is that, despite our imperfections, we managed to achieve a degree of cultural influence, economic and military success that your nation never even dreamed of ... well, that's just sour grapes on your part. Grow up.

    Stupid git.

    --
    The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  39. Re:Yahoo still matters? by TheABomb · · Score: 3, Informative

    But that's only among the subset of browsers with their toolbar installed. If we look at Netcraft's take on the subject, Google is 14 of the top 16 Most-Visited, (Yahoo! #23) Hitwise also counts Google the best. Among my friends, nobody under thirty still uses Yahoo! except those who're still clinging to their fifteen year-old mail accounts, which again, Google does better.

    --
    MSIE: The world's most standards-complaint web browser.
  40. The important thing to remember about this is... by everynerd · · Score: 1

    ... it's not actually important.

  41. Damn those Yahoo!s by SL+Baur · · Score: 1

    850 angry comments can't be wrong. You are currently feeling rage.

    Whew! Thanks for clearing that up.

    Now let me find something I can smash into tiny pieces ...

  42. Re:Yahoo still matters? by enrgeeman · · Score: 1

    everyday is caturday.

    --
    sent from my slashdot browser.
  43. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, dude ... you're posting in a public forum on an American web site, and all you're doing is reaffirming all the bad impressions we have about people from other countries. Don't you understand that it goes both ways? People go on and on and on about "Ugly Americans" and how uncouth and uncivilized we are, and then go and make crass comments that, really, just go to show unpleasant they are. You're a classic example of that behavior. Absolutely classic. I have news for you: every society on Earth is screwed up on more ways than one. That, my impolite friend, is human nature. If what you're really saying is that, despite our imperfections, we managed to achieve a degree of cultural influence, economic and military success that your nation never even dreamed of ... well, that's just sour grapes on your part. Grow up. Stupid git.

    Well, you didn't hÃve to reply, and you cÃuld've used other arguments. You see: I'm not impressed. I know of at least two other countries that once in time were way more succesful than the US of A nowadays. History goes back more than 23 years, you know. Grow up, no need to call names. And yes, all nations are screwed, one way or another. But the US of A are not the rampant success you may want us to believe.

  44. No big surprise.. by glitch23 · · Score: 1

    since Yahoo already disables searching for other members using their search function at members.yahoo.com. They make you subscribe to Yahoo Personals if you really want to find someone (whether for a relationship or not). Their search function was hit and miss over the last few years and now I think it is off for good. They also have been raising their Yahoo Personals membership fees over the last year. Big surprise there.

    --
    this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
  45. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Joren · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Welcome to the exciting world of time zones, many people still think it's saturday, these are of course american idiots who wouldn't know what a GMT was if you told them and can't read a 24 hour clock to save their lives. It's not their fault that the US doesn't uses a single international standard, their country is screwed up.

    I'm not aware of any country that requires its citizens to refer to Greenwich when stating what day it is, regardless of their own time zone. I kind of thought not having to do that was one of the good points of time zones, e.g. so that people in Japan wouldn't have to change their dates at 9 AM every morning. What time zone are you? Do you always check GMT before posting on Internet forums?

    --
    -- Joren
  46. Re:Yahoo still matters? by nesstopher · · Score: 1, Troll

    "we managed to achieve a degree of cultural influence, economic and military success that your nation never even dreamed of" we dreamed it and did it a long time ago. and 'military success"? where you getting that bro? Vietnam? Iraq? gobshite. greetings from Scotland

  47. Not quite. by raehl · · Score: 1

    'Beta' now means "it's cool because it's new." It's 0-day for the masses.

  48. They do allow some migration. by raehl · · Score: 1

    I just redid my profile, and it did automatically fill my interests field for the new profile with my interests from my old profile.

    I didn't really have much else there. Photos had already been moved elsewhere.

  49. So... by Mystic+Pixel · · Score: 1

    Yahoo? Wasn't that some page at Stanford? (Disclaimer: I'm 24; I remember loading the original URL on a 2400bps modem; and yes, it was the hot thing back in the day.) Yes, it's outrageous for them to do this with no real warning or 'gradual transfer' to the new format (and especially for them to not carry over the old data into the new format -- really? are you kidding me?) but I'm more intrigued by the backlash; in a social circle of my contemporaries, I can't think of anyone who is seriously concerned with Yahoo.

  50. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Toonol · · Score: 1

    I'll stick up for Yahoo's mail accounts. I have mail accounts on Yahoo and Gmail, and I think Yahoo's is just as good. Granted, they were forced into improving because of gmail, but improve they did.

    Nearly everything else yahoo has is pretty worthless, though. Last I checked, although you can customize your yahoo page, you can't remove the F***ING HOROSCOPE! That actively pisses me off every time I set eyes on the page.

  51. That's what you get.... by bruce_the_loon · · Score: 4, Funny

    for insisting on 38DD blondes. There is a fixed brain to boob ratio and it can't be violated.

    --
    Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
    1. Re:That's what you get.... by Mistshadow2k4 · · Score: 4, Funny

      There is a fixed brain to boob ratio and it can't be violated.

      BULLSHIT. What an outrightedly sexist and utterly wrong thing to say. I dare you to even attempt to prove it. Simply put, I know you can't, no more than I can prove that men with large penises all have IQs less than a hundred.

      --
      I dream of a better world... one in which chickens can cross roads without their motives being questioned.
    2. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmm, no spelling mistakes, no misuse of apostrophes ... I assume your IQ is above 100. ;)

    3. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to convince us you have big boobs, a picture would be more effective.

    4. Re:That's what you get.... by Scott+Carnahan · · Score: 0, Troll

      Would you find this joke equally funny if you switched to an anatomical reference about black people? How about Jewish or Chinese? You're doing real harm by broadcasting this objectifying sort of humor in public.

      --
      "Your notation sucks!" -- Serge Lang (1927-2005)
    5. Re:That's what you get.... by Venerable+Vegetable · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The day that we can joke about black, Jewish or Chinese people as light hearted as we do about blondes will be a great day. Doing harm by making a blonde joke? Yeah right.

    6. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. Some of us are mature enough to separate humor from reality.

    7. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Interesting"?!

      Mod parent "Gigantic lack of humor"!

    8. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jus bekas I hav big dik dont meen I am low IQ

    9. Re:That's what you get.... by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      > BULLSHIT. What an outrightedly sexist and utterly wrong thing to say. I dare you to even
      > attempt to prove it.

      He can't, because he's wrong.

      It's an inverse relationship.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    10. Re:That's what you get.... by ozphx · · Score: 1

      Thats what you get for insisting on 38DD blondes. There is a fixed brain to boob ratio and it can't be violated.

      Would you find this joke equally funny if you switched to an anatomical reference about black people? How about Jewish or Chinese? You're doing real harm by broadcasting this objectifying sort of humor in public.

      This is what you get for insisting on a joke involving 38 inch black people. Theres a fixed cock to your anus ratio and it can't be violated.

      Fortunately you are such a lame politically correct trolling faghat that your distended asshole could easily accomodate the aforementioned giant member.

      --
      3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
    11. Re:That's what you get.... by Scott+Carnahan · · Score: 0

      The day that we can joke about black, Jewish or Chinese people as light hearted as we do about blondes will be a great day. Doing harm by making a blonde joke? Yeah right.

      It will be a greater day when our society no longer singles out groups like the above for prejudice and ostracism. You'll be free to make your jokes then, but you might find that they've lost some of their vaunted edginess. German and Irish immigrant jokes were popular in the early 20th century (look for old joke books in the library), but do you still hear lots of them now? Probably not, and this is mostly because the populations in question are by and large no longer oppressed. Sexism is still strong today, and jokes about "fixed brain to boob ratio" just add to the stream of negative body image messages that surrounds us.

      --
      "Your notation sucks!" -- Serge Lang (1927-2005)
    12. Re:That's what you get.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is a fixed brain to boob ratio and it can't be violated.

      BULLSHIT. What an outrightedly sexist and utterly wrong thing to say. I dare you to even attempt to prove it. Simply put, I know you can't, no more than I can prove that men with large penises all have IQs less than a hundred.

      Actually we do, but everyone else is either too busy being jealous or too busy salivating about our junk to notice our lack of "intelligence".

      Women (amend that- good looking women) who also have large breasts tend to get what they want in life with little or no effort. This absence of application of skill or ability results in atrophy, which is easily mistaken for stupidity.

      Or to put it in simpler terms for you, a person's IQ is a measure of how well they learn not how much they know. So it is entirely reasonable to see large numbers of hot women with big tits and empty heads, who are quite capable of learning quickly. Thus, dumb with a high IQ.

  52. Stallman is always right by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    It often takes time for it to become clear just how right Stallman is but so far he always is. Why do you think his detractors focus on Herd and the GNU/Linux naming? Because they can't argue with his theories.

    First sign someone is right, his enemies attack him on non-issues.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

    1. Re:Stallman is always right by Alomex · · Score: 1

      I call BS. His detractors number in the hundreds of thousands who make a living in the proprietary software industry. In fact the only success one can find for RMS-like philosophies is Linux and the reason why it succeeded is because it shedded most of the "free software" ideas of RMS.

      First sign someone is right, his enemies attack him on non-issues.

      The whole GNU/Linux naming debate is not a non-issue. Is a Bush-style attempt to rewrite history in a way that is more kind to the failure of his arguments. He might as well hang a banner saying Mission Accomplished at the FSF headquarters. Are you so naive that you can't see that?

  53. Tough by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Anybody who uses Yahoo deserves what they get.

    The first time I installed SBC DSL, I allowed the stupid Yahoo software on my machine, which at the time was running Windows 98. It crashed the entire OS, and I had to restore my Registry to get it back.

    Fuck Yahoo and anyone stupid enough to use them. That applies to AOL and AOL users, and MSN and MSN users, too.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    1. Re:Tough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Including your sig, you sound very angry. Can you please show us on the doll where the bad man touched you ?

  54. I have a kinetic electricity gun, & launch veh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now where is that Raymond Rife sticker and Scotty's ashes that would properly christen the holy cause!

  55. Reminds me of Ebay login. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next thing you know, they'll delay the TCP/IP link to 10 seconds on first login whenever no matter how fast we clicked past their spam screen, oh wait...

  56. Re:Yahoo still matters? by SnowZero · · Score: 5, Funny

    Last I checked, although you can customize your yahoo page, you can't remove the F***ING HOROSCOPE! That actively pisses me off every time I set eyes on the page.

    You're just saying that because you are an Aquarius -- so eccentric and passionately unwilling to fit in with everyone else.

  57. I get what you are saying.. by TiggertheMad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... but the biting irony of posting this on Slashdot as anything but an AC is just too delicious.

    I mean, how much different is a /. profile from a yahoo profile, really?

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
    1. Re:I get what you are saying.. by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Funny

      Apparently the Yahoo profile is terribly, terribly important.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  58. Can we get BT to drop Yahoo with this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anything to keep setting up a British Telecom home modem from installing 100 Meg of Yahoo crap all over your system, when all you need is web access to the BT hub, would help a lot. My god, it's bloatware and crapware. I don't *WANT* Yahoo based internet pool and poker just to run my DSL modem.

  59. Not the worst thing they did. Check Flickr now. by CdBee · · Score: 1

    have a look at Flickr. They've completely f*cked it up and removed loads of useful features

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
  60. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yahoo can't be the 1st!
    Never used it since 98'
    Sum up all local versions of google (.uk .fr .it .lv etc), and see who is is the first now.

  61. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

    A water-bearer, eh? Woould say he feels pissed off, or pissoed on?

  62. Lame duck act plays well to Google by Pearmiester · · Score: 1

    /. recently reported Google had voiced interest in Yahoo. Between MS and Google's take over bids, it would make sense for Yahoo to intentionally piss off their clients in preparation for the new version. their ad clients would like to see a nice shift.

  63. Re:The idiot in you says.... by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Because any goverment gives a shit about yahoo user profiles or could not simple collect the info the old database.

    You are one of the reasons conspiracy theories are ALWAYS seen as the brain farts of the moronic.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

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

  64. Ask for your money back by 1s44c · · Score: 1

    Why not check what the SLA says you are entitled to, which will be what you paid, i.e. nothing.

    You get what you pay for or what you build yourself.

  65. Some geek... by XB-70 · · Score: 1

    ...just got fed up with the terrible spelling.

    --
    *** Don't be dull.***
  66. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All that work, and there is STILL no way to turn back on your Y!IM web presence... in fact, there's no way to turn it OFF anymore either.

  67. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Translation:

    Yahoo is absolute shit because I don't use it, and I'm clearly the most important person in the universe. Everyone else is a worthless fucking peon not fit to lick my boots.

    You're welcome.

  68. Re:Yahoo still matters? by joss · · Score: 1

    > all the bad impressions we have about people from other countries

    Yeah, people from other countries suck. I'm not so keen on people from other states either. Or towns come to think of it, and those people on the east side of town are pretty sucky too come to think of it. I'm not really that keen on the next street over, its a bit scuzzy, neighbours suck... actually, people other than me are basically suspect. So, when I see a dumb comment like yours, it just reaffirms my conviction that people who aren't me are flawed. You really ought to watch that.

    --
    http://rareformnewmedia.com/
  69. New slogan: WWRFD? by revxul · · Score: 1

    Outrage? Really? sarcasm{Oh dear god no, they lost their age, gender and three "cool links".}

    Really now, come on. Seriously.

    Where's Red Foreman when you need him?

    --
    Truth, Just Us, And Hatred For All Mankind!
  70. Obviously by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

    They want a piece of facebook's action. I just went through the reset up (yes, yes, I use Yahoo, shut up) and looking at the layout and how it's set up it's a yahoo version of facebook.

    And to quote a movie: 'This is not a good sign. No, no, no, no, no.'

    By the way, if anyone can tell me the name of that movie I've been looking for it for ages. It's a comedy involving rafting that is late 70s, early 80s.

    --
    I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    1. Re:Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the way, if anyone can tell me the name of that movie I've been looking for it for ages. It's a comedy involving rafting that is late 70s, early 80s.

      Is it Up the Creek (1984)?

    2. Re:Obviously by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      No mod points today, but I think you are right on the money.

      The thrust of this change seems to be to take away people's ability to have as many profiles as they like, one associated with each alias.

      What I think is happening here is that I think they are realizing that Facebook is quickly gaining value over them in the eyes of investors because Facebook does everything it can to force you to use your real identity. When you see an identity on Facebook it has pretty good currency - very likely that's a real person and it's their one and only real identity on Facebook. On Yahoo, it's very unlikely because they make it so cheap and easy to behave pseudonomously - either by creating multiple Yahoo accounts or by using multiple aliases within a single Yahoo account. In short, the value of a Yahoo identity is low and the value of a Facebook identity is high.

      It seems to me they are trying here to start clawing back some of that freedom they have given their users, and become more Facebook like (ie. evil). This then increases their value in the social networking space and gives them more ability to compete with Facebook.

  71. didn't affect sports by olivebridge · · Score: 1

    fantasy sports profiles were unaffected.

  72. Out Dated by Yeorwned · · Score: 0

    How far are you out of touch that you still use Yahoo for personal data anyway? People still really use Hotmail and Yahoo?

    1. Re:Out Dated by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      hotmail is fine. Been using it since 97 and don't plan on changing.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  73. You're the product, not the customer by John+Hasler · · Score: 2, Insightful

    > its about competition. Other free services would never do this. And though we don't pay
    > them, they get money from us.

    If you don't pay them they don't get money from you. They may get money from people you buy stuff from, but that money stops being yours when you spend it. Try to understand that to these advertising agencies you are the product, not the customer. Nothing wrong with that as long as you remember that the services they give you are just promotional gimmicks. They have no obligation, legal or ethical, to deliver anything at all to you.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:You're the product, not the customer by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I didn't say they had an Obligation. Just they should listen to their product lest we sell ourselves through another company.

  74. It's still a mess by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1
    Yahoo has been dropping the ball all morning. I'm constantly having to resend stuff or reload the page.

    Grrrrr.

    rs

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  75. Re: modifiable Search! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I already force Wikipedia to be in the search when that venerable project is what I actually want.

    I try a few anti-ad search techniques, but they don't really work all that well.

  76. Re:Yahoo still matters? by lostguru · · Score: 0

    Funny I didn't realize California was another country. Why didn't anybody tell me we had succeeded.

    --
    Jayne: "These are stone killers, little man. They ain't cuddly like me."
    98% of America's teens drink alcohol, smok
  77. Re: Monkey! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something to do with ThinkGeek.

  78. Not All Info Lost by MaverickMila · · Score: 1

    I logged into Yahoo for the first time in like a century to see what all the hoopla was about, and went through the new profile generation process. When it prompted me for "Name", "Display Name", "Interests" and "Anything Else," the default text in those textboxes was the information that I had had in those fields on my old profile. So I'm not sure what exactly you'd need to contact customer support for....

  79. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Gothic_Walrus · · Score: 1

    Good point; I'd forgotten that Alexa requires the toolbar installation.

    That said; Yahoo! still gets a pretty significant amount of traffic according to the sites you listed. It may not be popular with the younger set of internet users (the only thing I use Yahoo! for now is for old and disposable e-mail addresses, and their fantasy sports leagues), but just remember how long AOL has stuck around thanks to its base of older users who don't know or don't care about alternatives.

    --
    Goo goo g'joob.
  80. RIP:FIRST POST by OldHawk777 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Thank god Chauncey is dead ... walking on water must forever remain a secret.

    If Chauncey was on yahoo, then PuppetPOTUS Bush's overlords would have forced yahoo to report Chauncey's secret as a potential weapon of global terrorist. Then the Overlords of Subversion would have used Chauncey's secret to rule the world.

    Remember "Pinky and the Brain"... well Pinky is nothing like PPOTUS Bush, but "The Brain" looks like a close blood relative of DickUS Chaney and CrawlUpUS Rove.

    Anyway, I always wanted to meet a/o "Just Watch" Chauncey, but today I am relieved that Chauncey cannot be exploited for megalomaniacal gains over US "The People".

    --
    Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
  81. And this io the eve of AT&T switching.... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    its users to a yahoo home page....

    hmmmm....

  82. Yahoo are incompetent by Peaker · · Score: 1

    They've been incompetent for many years now.

    Their email service was sub-par. They waited until Google innovated an AJAX interface (and then some) to try to innovate on their own, and they failed to create an interface that is as good.

    They shut down their Yahoo Photos service, requiring users to move around their photos (or by default, lose them all).

    Yahoo sucks.

    1. Re:Yahoo are incompetent by zuperduperman · · Score: 1

      They're certainly not incompetent. They run several of the top 10 sites on the internet, and they do it very successfully.

      In case you didn't know, they've had an ajax mail interface that is by some measures better than gmail for year's. It may amaze you, but the reason they have not moved people to it is because *most of them are perfectly happy and don't want to*. I had exactly this conversation with my wife a month or two ago where I pointed out how painful and inconvenient the old UI was and pointed to my account and showed how I can drag and drop emails around etc. She just looked at me blankly and said "I like my email the way it is".

      In fact I find it ironic that you are criticizing them for not forcing their users to use the new mail interface (which they don't want) in support of an article that is all about them forcing users to adapt to a different change the users don't want.

  83. Not just that. by antdude · · Score: 1

    I noticed my privacy settings were changed. Did anyone notice that? I had to reset those up too. Ugh!

    --
    Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  84. Ha-ha! by ReedYoung · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's one thing to be user-friendly, but Yahoo's content always suggested to me a culture that was more about looking good than being good. Obviously, their target is the mainstream computer user, but my impression is that beyond that, their tone is almost anti-tech, definitely anti-nerd. Don't ask me to cite examples, I won't bother. As I said, this is "my impression," and it's a general one. I'd guess that in their hiring decisions, they consider "fitting into the company culture" far too much, and qualifications far too little to be a place I'd like to work, so I haven't applied. Google asks the right questions of applicants: numbers of patents, entrepreneurial successes, programming awards won. So, I'm not at all surprised to see this happen to Yahoo!

    --
    "I can't imagine how things could get any worse!" (some guy) "That could just be failure of imaginatioÂn on your p
  85. Some of us didn't have a choice by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 1

    When SBC/ATT went to SBC/Yahoo or ATT/Yahoo

    OK, yeah, maybe we did of RoadRunner.

    But the point is that not all Yahoo! users are using the free service.

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
  86. Re:Yahoo still matters? by ozphx · · Score: 0, Troll

    "...we managed to achieve a degree of cultural influence, economic and military success that your nation never even dreamed of..."

    A Brief History of America:

    After the British created America and set it well on the way to success as another wonderful new colony, America decided to kick off its own unique approach to world politics - as she proceeded to declare war on herself.

    After the skillful British had gone home for a tea break, the Americans declared victory. The British had a good chortle over this, but decided to be gentlemen and go along with it. The perpetually fat and lazy Americans were then forced to enslave a whole bunch of Negroes and Chinese in order to get shit done.

    They also came up with the only literary achievement in America's history, the "Constitution", which is widely regarded as one of the greatest practical jokes of all time, and completely indecipherable, as it is still ignored and debated until this day.

    This "Constitution" was then amended several times to support typical American habits, such as carrying guns around all the damn time, talking far too much and too loudly, and having the right to not incriminate yourself when you stupidly talk about your own criminal behaviour.

    Towards the end of World War 2 when the British were well on the way to victory, America finally got off her collective fat arse and joined in at the last moment. This left them convinced that this victory was due to their own fighting skill, and slightly pissed off about missing a good opportunity to shoot people at the start of the war. This led to hilarity as the violent and overconfident Americans started, and then promptly lost, wars all over the world.

    America's crass and violent influence on world affairs will always be remembered by historians with a sense of humour. We can only hope that the current economic fail they are experiencing will allow them to pick a target for their next failed military campaign.

    --
    3laws: No freebies, no backsies, GTFO.
  87. Re:Yahoo still matters? by seandiggity · · Score: 1

    Nearly everything else yahoo has is pretty worthless, though. Last I checked, although you can customize your yahoo page, you can't remove the F***ING HOROSCOPE! That actively pisses me off every time I set eyes on the page.

    Similar, but less annoying, problem with Myspace. I've sent them multiple complaints to no avail. Still can't find a way to hide the zodiac sign in the profile with CSS, without also hiding other stuff in the profile.

    --
    Geeks like to think that they can ignore politics, you can leave politics alone, but politics won't leave you alone.-rms
  88. Oblig. Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly changed to blank. I fear something terrible has happened. "

  89. stocks... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    This must have hurt their stocks pretty bad!

  90. Re:Yahoo still matters? by Anonym1ty · · Score: 1

    It's amazing how French you sound, despite the pro-British rantings.

  91. Cool! An Anne Hathaway/Sarah Palin love scene! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Programmer 1: Our new format is incompatible with the old format.

    Programmer 2: Can we convert them?

    Programmer 1: Not easily. Let's just force everybody to re-do their profiles. This new format is very neat, after all, and warms my heart as a programmer. What's the worst that can happen? A few million people get mad at my employer? Bah! That's nothing when weighed against the satisfaction of introducing a neat program that warms my programmer heart.

    And sadly that's exactly the way it is at many places. Most programmers are clueless about making user interfaces intuitive (much less testing same, witness the famous Bill Gates letter about MS's tortuous online store ordering system) to say nothing about making sure their "neat new thing" handles upgrades flawlessly.

    Is it really that hard to look at it from the user's point? What would you, as a customer, expect? You'd expect to log in to see some new features, but all your data is still there.

    Oh, by the way. For millions of users, it's worth it for the company to have a few extra programmers integrate all the old crap and the new crap so it can all work at the same time. Just a small loss in stock price for this fiasco would justify dozens of programmers.

    The real problem: poor planning on the part of management for letting the developers dictate the path. Somewhere, somebody above the buffoon programmer who said "well, wipe it all then" was a manager who should have thought, "Well, that'll piss off our customers." But didn't.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  92. Yahell strikes again by ikeman32 · · Score: 1

    I never used my profile for anything so I didn't care whta they did to it until I tried to change my alternate email. When I click on update email I go directly to the update profile click save and try again it deja'vu all over again. They didn't just screw it up the FUBAR'd it.

    F'ing morons they could fubar a wet dream. Every try and submit a URL to them? Holy convoluted beaurocracy Batman! It's like trying to pull hen's teeth to submit a URL. About the only thing that works even half way decent is the web based email, now if only I could get the bloody site to stop crashing my browseer on my Debian system.