Slashdot Mirror
Calling Video Professor a Scam
palmerj3 writes in to give some wider attention to a piece on Techcrunch today in which Michael Arrington reacts to Video Professor's desperate attempts to shut him up after he called Video Professor a scam in a piece syndicated by the Washington Post. As described by Arrington, the ways the company's site operates (differently depending on where a visitor comes from) are strongly reminiscent of the practices a Senate committee recently condemned. (Here is a detailed example of another, similar scam, from a not-naive victim. Video Professor's tactics sound even more deceptive.) Video Professor seems to react with belligerence, not to mention legal threats, towards any hint of criticism. Please share any direct experiences you have with this outfit.
if you ask me, a tacky name like "video professor" is more than enough evidence of a scam.
weinersmith
Seriously, I know I could just google it but damnit slashdot, this sounds like a typical example of an editor knowing about a subject that a submission happens to be about yet most likely the average slashdot users doesn't have a clue as to what/who the fuck "Video professor" is.
/Mikael
Greylisting is to SMTP as NAT is to IPv4
Is that gaming market is doing a great job of trying to implode on itself. Seriously, if the way it works is the games that participate in offerbot scams are the successful ones... Well then I don't see it having a long term future. After all, there are TONS of PC games that are not that way, be they web based Flash games or retail games or whatever. There are more games than you can play in a lifetime out there that aren't like this. If this is what the gaming scene on Facebook is, my guess is that it'll implode and disappear in a couple years.
2 words - Grow Op?
They gave me my money back AND let me keep the course. That really surprised me.
Given their high profile, displaying a desire to avoid criminal prosecution really shouldn't come as a surprise.
512 MB RAM, 20 GB disk, 200 GB transfer, five datacenters. $19.95/month.
It is bigoted to point out that someone believes in imaginary creatures?
Would it be bigoted if I claimed people who believed in unicorns were foolish?
Since when does anyone have the right not to be offended?
"even Atheists". How very nice of you. This is a tech site. We make fun of "lo(o)sers" who use Windows. To call a minor dig at a religion a violation of civil rights is perhaps over reacting. Religion should not be given a free pass just because it is religion. If you truly believe that christianity makes more sense than the badly written summary then I am deeply sorry.
A belief in fairy tales does not constitute a protected class. An African-American never chose to have black skin nor can they change that condition. A Christian can apply a modicum of critical thinking to remedy their condition.
In any other discussion, a willful disregard for scientific evidence will be appropriately mocked here on Slashdot. So why should believing that the earth is 6000 years old be any different? And why should believing anything from a book compiled for a purpose ~1700 years ago be any more reasonable that believing the myths of other primitive societies?
I've got nothing against people that believe there is a higher power, but you won't find a lot of Christians that believe just that without believing in all the provably false claims in the Bible. And even then, no one would give a rats ass about that belief too if Christians didn't have a nasty habit of trying to use those spurious beliefs to shape public policy and the annoying habit of trying to spread their critical thinking deficiency virus. I can't speak for the rest of the people who make clear their disdain for Christians, but for my part, they need only stop those two habits for me to stop caring about them entirely. They can go off into their own little corner and enjoy their wacky cult. But as long as people preach their bizarre beliefs and use them to justify insane public policy, it's the duty of every rational person to denounce them.
Because you make much MUCH more money that way, at least until some A.G. shuts you down. Even if they were legit at some point (I don't remember), they are currently riding that edge between scummy and illegal. The money convinced someone it was worth it. It usually does.
Comment forecast: Bits of genius surrounded by a sea of mediocrity.
uh, parent is unintentionally NOT OFFTOPIC this time
It's a TERRIBLE fucking scam.
It does detail in explicit detail everything they're doing. You have unlimited time to review the conditions. So scam? No not really. Deceptive marketing? Absolutely.
"Deals" like these have been the status quo for decades. Should they be illegal? Yes, but given current contract law, try and figure out a way to band them, win a nobel prize.
Consumers who ignore the find print deserve what they get, and get what they deserve.
I don't want to vote for an idiot. (Note personal opinion.. some people don't think of her as an idiot, I chalk that up to the fact that they are probably idiots themselves)
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
Because such "learn at home" videos are in fact very difficult to make: they have no feedback with the student, they're easily at far too sophisticated or far too untrained an audience, and because "teaching Photoshop" reequires a great deal of hands-on experience to learn how the workflow really works, and to recover from errors or inappropriate shortcuts. It's far easier to make a very lame and poorly produced document that does not actually teach, but relies on fraud to make its profit.
Such behavior is very common: do not rely on something sounding "perfictly viable" to assure that it has, in fact, any useful quality.
In any other discussion, a willful disregard for scientific evidence will be appropriately mocked here on Slashdot. So why should believing that the earth is 6000 years old be any different?
Thats a nice straw man you have there, did you make it yourself? I was under the impression that "age of the earth" had a NUMBER of different positions among christians, and that "young earth" was only one of them. But if it makes it easy for you to ridicule christians, by all means continue; it really helps your case to accuse others of being irrational in the same breath you commit logical fallacies.
And why should believing anything from a book compiled for a purpose ~1700 years ago be any more reasonable that believing the myths of other primitive societies?
And why should we believe modern neuroscience, i mean others have been wrong in that realm before right? So clearly their being wrong invalidates anything modern neuroscience can say.... Is that how your argument goes?
but you won't find a lot of Christians that believe just that without believing in all the provably false claims in the Bible
Ive heard that so many times, and yet the best ive seen pulled out is some claptrap about pi being 3, or willful ignorance about what metaphorical language is. (And these are the same people who will have no issue understanding "he was so hungry he could eat a cow", who then turn around and find that in the Bible, and remark on how stupid its writers must be for thinking one person could eat that much meat!)
Maybe im just a jerk but i find it really amusing when people launch into irrational attacks on others, all the while claiming that its their target that is irrational. I know its probably just as foolish for me to engage in this kind of discussion on the internet, but really I expected better from slashdot since fallacies are commonly ridiculed here.
This should be fairly easy to figure down... Are they Google-able? They have a company?
The NDA part shouldn't be bothersome... it's par for the course; I make vendors sign 'em for certain server infrastructure additions or analysis (cf. anything that may possibly handle trade secrets, etc - even Microsoft signs one before doing their true-up audits). Besides, no NDA can prevent you from reporting illegal activity, so don't sweat it.
Otherwise, just get everything in writing (and notarized!) before agreeing to it, and make sure you get at least some of the payment up-front, at certain project milestones, etc. If it still makes you nervous, spend some cash on a lawyer to eyeball the whole thing before signing it.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
And you are a fucking moron...the Civil Rights act protects your from being discriminated against in finding shelter, a job, etc. It does NOT protect you or your religious beliefs from criticism by others. THAT right is protected in the US Constitution, under the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the "Free Speech" clause.
The UN's declaration of rights includes the rights of Free Speech and belief....this means you should be able to believe whatever you want without fear of oppression by your government, and I have the right to mock you for your beliefs...again without fear of oppression by my government.
You sound like the typical "poor Christians getting oppressed" whiner when the truth is you can't stand the idea that others also get to express their beliefs and opinions which include disdain for your beliefs. Go whine to the ACLJ and see how successful you are in a law suit. I'll talk to the ACLU to assist in defending my 1st Amendment rights against your claims.
I've got nothing against people that believe there is a higher power, but you won't find a lot of Christians that believe just that without believing in all the provably false claims in the Bible?
More than half of all Christians are part of the Roman Catholic Church, which does not believe in creationism or any of the other 'provably false claims' you refer to. Books such as Genesis are seen as largely symbolic, and in my experience when the RCC does attempt to influence public policy, they do so using secular arguments, even if their motivation for doing so is founded in religious beliefs (e.g. the abortion controversy).
Disclaimer: I am a member of the RCC
Most human behaviour can be explained in terms of identity.
I am one of those "olds" you speak of, and I seem to be able to spot these things a mile away. But then the older I get the more cynical I get. And if I want to learn about xyz, I go to the Borders web site and see what the local store has on xyz, or I just buy the Xyz Bible from Amazon. If I want a quick video on something, I go to YouTube. You really have to go out of your way to get scammed by these characters; though, obviously, they are still unethical. I suspect the dupes involved are the same folks who put money in the collection box every week to get "saved." As old PT used to say, there's a sucker born every minute.
Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
Already answered the words of Jesus have done a lot to fight bigotry, and Jesus works through his followers to educate people.
Not every Christian is going to be a Fundamentalist Christian you know.
Some Civil Rights Activists are Christians, and thus Jesus works through them.
Barrack Obama is a Christian and is trying to reform civil rights and fight bigotry as Jesus did.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.