Slashdot Mirror


5 Years Later, 'Do Not Track' System Ineffective

An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from ComputerWorld: "In 2009, a few Internet privacy advocates developed an idea that was supposed to give people a way to tell websites they don't want to be monitored as they move from website to website. The mechanism, which would eventually be built into all the major browsers, was called Do Not Track. ... But today, DNT hangs by a thread, neutered by a failure among stakeholders to reach agreement. Yes, if you turn it on in your browser, it sends a signal in the form of an HTTP header to Web companies' servers. But it probably won't change what data they collect. That's because most websites either don't honor DNT — it's currently a voluntary system — or they interpret it in different ways. Another problem — perhaps the biggest — is that Web companies, ad agencies and the other stakeholders have never reached agreement on what "do not track" really means."

254 comments

  1. Never would work - You can trust them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You can't trust ad agencies even if it was spelled out in law. There are always parties who just don't care about anything but making money.

    If you want to not be tracked use some anonymizing technologies.

    1. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      There are always parties who just don't care about anything but making money.

      Theyre called "businesses".

    2. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by SternisheFan · · Score: 3, Insightful
      "Please Do Not Track me, thank you."

      "What? You're still tracking me? I asked you nicely, can you not respect my wishes? Alright, it's Adblock all the way for you from now on."

      Thugs will be thugs. Might as well ask your killer not to kill you, or your rapist not to rape you.

    3. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Having gone through this exercise of asking nicely to not be tracked, we are now protected against any accusations of over-reaction on our part when we defend ourselves from tracking by technological and legal means.

    4. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      If you want to not be tracked use some anonymizing technologies.

      The problem with Do Not Track all along is that it has been voluntary. People who don't want to honor it just don't honor it.

      OP's argument that "stakeholders" (a very misleading term here) can't agree on what it means is just plain BS. Everybody knows what it means. They just can't agree on which deliberately distorted interpretation of it best fits their business.

    5. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hence the problem is with capitalism, which needs to be severely curtailed. The free market is more trouble than it's worth. I've lived in both for many years, and I much preferred a heavily-regulated economy. The law needs to be laid out and severely enforced.

    6. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Capitalism sucks, until you look at all of the attempts to replace it.

    7. Re:Never would work - You can trust them by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Quite so.

  2. It never did have a chance... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being "voluntary" doesn't make it work.

    Which is why things that DO work (like the various ad block plugins) are frowned on...

  3. True by bswarm · · Score: 1

    I bought an mp3 on Amazon, went to facebook on the same tab before closing my browser, and found an ad for the same song had slipped through adblocker.

    1. Re:True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have buyed ogg! ogg sounds better!

    2. Re:True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I find the adverts for something I've just bought even more pointless, I'm hardly going to buy it twice !

    3. Re:True by bswarm · · Score: 1

      I prefer flac but Amazon only had mp3. And, It wasn't available anywhere else.

    4. Re: True by rodolfo7087 · · Score: 1

      Yes I too have received ads for things I have just bought, but remember client retention and mitigating buyer's remorse can be as important as new sales.

    5. Re:True by PPH · · Score: 1

      Crack?

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    6. Re:True by Coniptor · · Score: 0

      window.name

      Window Name Eraser for chrome.
      Nothing for Firefox as yet.

    7. Re: True by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just bought a piece of furniture, 2 weeks later i'm getting all these ads for the piece of furniture, I JUST BOUGHT. Makes no sense to me.

  4. It was never going to work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The advertising companies were never going to just sit there and let people casually tell them not to make money. The only way you'll ever have privacy is by taking it, not by trusting someone to give it to you.

  5. You don't say.. by drunkennewfiemidget · · Score: 3, Funny

    Also: water: wet. Sky: blue. Rob Ford: drunk and high.

    More at 11.

  6. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Meatloaf's blog has talked about this extensively and once you have read his contributions theres not really much more to say on the subject. Criticise his music all you like but his contributions to the Linux kernel and online rights education are phenomenal.

  7. Re:Why would anyone want it? by nospam007 · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Cookie tracking means you're getting spammed with ads you DO want, instead of the ads you don't want."

    Don't care. I don't see any ads, 'wanted' or not.

    Adblock+Ghostery+a Refererblocker works for me.

  8. EFF's Privacy Badger by P0ltergeist333 · · Score: 2

    I use a script blocker and am testing out EFF's Privacy Badger: https://www.eff.org/privacybad...

    I feel pretty well about my privacy from private enterprises, and luckily I have nothing to hide from the NSA.

    --
    One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
    1. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by NewWorldDan · · Score: 2

      I use a DNS (hosts file) based ad blocker. Works great. Although I'm less concerned about being tracked than I am about someone using ad networks as a vector for malware.

      I'm not opposed to advertising, but until ad networks can be trusted, I'm going to leave the blocks in place.

    2. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am also trying out the Privacy Badger, and I can report that with use there have been no bad side effects to date.

    3. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      I use a script blocker and am testing out EFF's Privacy Badger: https://www.eff.org/privacybad...

      I feel pretty well about my privacy from private enterprises, and luckily I have nothing to hide from the NSA.

      The problem with not opposing the likes of the NSA while their power is still growing (because, hey... you have nothing to hide) is that in most police states the paranoia of the regime tends to grow over time and so does the set of things that are considered to justify surveillance and eventually... punishment (i.e one morning you wake up and find that the definition of 'things to hide' has changed while you were sleeping and you suddenly have things to hide after all). My grandparents survived the Third Reich. The police surveillance complex was initially justified as begin aimed at communist subversives, then social democrats, the all other political opposition, then the Jews and Catholics and by 1945 people were being dragged into the street and shot in the back of the neck for listing to the BBC or giving a pot of soup to starving Soviet POWs. Whether you are talking about government or corporate surveillance the problem is the same. The longer these tossers allowed to continue to grow their surveillance activities unopposed the harder it becomes to kick their nose out of every single corner of your existence and if you allow them to go unchallenged for too long they'll own your ass.

    4. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by qbast · · Score: 1

      I use a DNS (hosts file) based ad blocker.

      Don't even use these words. They attract crazy posts from insane troll.

    5. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by Coniptor · · Score: 0

      Bad side effects: Forces DNT:1 header regardless of firefox preferences set.
      Examine ip-check.info to know why this would matter.

    6. Re:EFF's Privacy Badger by P0ltergeist333 · · Score: 1

      The problem with not opposing the likes of the NSA while their power is still growing...

      For the record, I never said nor implied that I don't oppose 'the like of the NSA.' Please do not put words in my mouth. To be clear, I mentioned it merely because the steps I take to protect my privacy from the private sector are not sufficient to protect me from Government agencies, based on recent revelations. Swing and a huge miss.

      --
      One of these days I'm going to cut you into little pieces. - PF
  9. I said do not track! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

    Web companies, ad agencies and the other stakeholders have never reached agreement on what "do not track" really means.

    Said one CEO, "I thought it was for the NSA."

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    1. Re:I said do not track! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought it meant that individuals would not track the ad agencies.

  10. I think you have that backwards by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another problem â" perhaps the biggest â" is that Web companies, ad agencies and the other stakeholders have never reached agreement on what "do not track" really means.

    "Do not track" is dead because the meaning is so obvious that they couldn't find a way to gut its meaning while pretending to give it lip service.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:I think you have that backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do the slashdot scores stop at 5? Some comments deserve a 6.

    2. Re: I think you have that backwards by f16c · · Score: 2

      Most of the tools might be yours but the infrastructure was paid for by your customers, not your business. You didn't build that out of your pocket, you built it out of ours. Just like the roads, electric grid and the phone systems. Your customers paid for it. Business may be how some things are built but the capitol never comes from the businesses but from society at large. Quit taking credit for the money if others, asshole. Revisionist Capitalist jackass!

      --
      bob@Osprey:~>
    3. Re: I think you have that backwards by jellomizer · · Score: 0

      However with these business the customer are the people who buy add space from your. The user who uses the tool for free may think they are a customer of your product, but they are just a target audience, in essence just a resource like a piece of equipment.
      The customer wants to track the resource. The equipment is recommended that is isn't tracked. However if you ignore that feature nothing much happens.
      If the people really did care about the do not track option and stopped going to sites that tracked them, then they will have less ad impressions, then slowly they will loose their customers.
      But because this feature is turned on by default in browsers, it means there is no intensive to pay attention to this group. As they really don't care

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:I think you have that backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could always refuse service to customers that requested do not track or offer a paid version - that is what a reasonable person would do.

    5. Re:I think you have that backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like your business plan is untenable.

    6. Re:I think you have that backwards by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is a difference between serving advertisements and tracking the customer.

      You can still show advertisements without employing tactics to track a user's movement across the web to gather demographic information on their viewing habits and interests. Put up a website about computers and solicit advertisements from computer manufacturers (Dell, Apple, etc.) and the like. Monitor your server logs to see which stories are read most and gauge what topics are found most interesting from there. If your website has a social aspect, keep tabs on the discussed issues and if there are particular hot-topics, use that to fine-tune your ad-stream (e.g., don't advertise Microsoft Windows on Slashdot). All this information can be gleaned without following your users to other websites or compiling databases of information about the interests of each particular user.

      That is what Do Not Track is about. It is an insistence that we, the viewers, don't want to be cataloged, our habits followed across the web and then sold to anyone with a large enough wallet. Many of us /also/ do not like advertising itself, but that is a separate issue (your argument would be more pertinent against ad-blocking). Websites can (and some do) survive well without relying on intrusive data-monitoring of individual users. Unfortunately, the alternative has become both too convenient and too lucrative for some businesses to resist. They have put money over morals again and I have little sympathy for them if ad-blockers and anti-tracking software makes their tactics less profitable.

    7. Re: I think you have that backwards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, are you really this illiterate, or are you typing on your phone?

    8. Re:I think you have that backwards by Kjella · · Score: 1

      With all due respect, the one website you visit doesn't say all that much about who you are. From a statistical and marketing viewpoint I have no problem seeing that knowing you visit websites X and Y or X and not Y, Y or not X is far more valuable than knowing who visits X and Y individually. Targeted advertising works far better than general advertising, to use the car analogy there's no point in showing car ads to the person who's not buying a new car. Timing is everything which is why for example so many stores try to find pregnant women, they have a changing - or soon to be changing - shopping pattern. Any information - no matter how indirect or circumstantial - that you may be in the search of a particular product is better than just spamming it across the news to everybody.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    9. Re:I think you have that backwards by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      I think you are forgetting what happened when advertisments nearly crashed 10 years ago or so. Simple unintrusive adds, just stopped working, people stopped paying attention to them, and with time the internet started falling into 2 categories. Web pages that threw loud, obnoxious advertisements, pop-ups, pop unders. comercials you had to watch before you could click next, etc... and then they started offering paid subscriptions for the pages to let you skip advertisements. Then came targetted advertisments which more or less dug the internet out of that well. Whether longterm that is going to save or kill the internet, who knows, but we do need to come up with the least evil approach, that will keep the webpages we like afloat.

  11. Class action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe they change after a class action lawsuit with 300 million plaintiffs. What's the per-person damage of 5 years of unauthorized tracking? Times 300 million?

  12. "A Contract" by TrollstonButterbeans · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Do not track"?

    Everyone wants everything for free, and so there is advertising.

    The entire idea of "do not track" was ludicrous.

    Everyone wants their free lunches with no strings attached, but there will always be strings.

    --
    Priest: "Universe from nothing, no laws of physics, sped up time"+ huge discrepancies. Creationism? No. Big Bang Theory
    1. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ads are one thing, but tracking and building up a internet profile is another

    2. Re:"A Contract" by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NO. People just don't want the web equivalent of a radio collar attached to them. They do not want to be stalked by creepy advertisers. They can advertise without stalking. Advertising survived and flourished for centuries without stalking.

    3. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My free lunch is paid for with a ludicrously high monthly bill from my ISP.

    4. Re:"A Contract" by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Informative

      People just don't want the web equivalent of a radio collar attached to them. They do not want to be stalked by creepy advertisers.

      And for me, that is one of the main reasons I quite aggressively block as much of this shit as possible.

      Between companies like bright cove, scorecard research, and the literally dozens of tracking companies on the average web page, I have found I simply won't use the web without things like NoScript, and Ghostery, and as many as I can find for the browser I'm using.

      Some web pages literally have 25 (or more in some cases) external entities who want to track what I do .. Facebook, Linked in, Google Analytics, and countless piles of crap.

      I don't give a crap about your revenue model or your social media campaign -- I sure as hell didn't sign up for 50 entities I've never heard of knowing every site I visit.

      Thankfully, there are plenty of really good privacy extensions out there. The more you have, the better. Because it's astounding just how much complete shit is embedded in every page -- which is not only bleeding out your personal information, but using up your bandwidth.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    5. Re:"A Contract" by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      Done it say do not advertise?? In my book spying on consumers that don't want to be spied apon make bad customers. Like me, I've never ever clicked on an AD ever on purpose. I have been tricked into clicking ads guess what? I've never ever bought anything ever. Get it? You can still advertise, you make ads relevant TO THE SITE VISTED or is that too hard? that is IMO

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    6. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some people try to earn a living by providing content, while others get their income elsewhere and can thus provide content for free. Therefore, there exist people who can provide content for free without having any need to steal information from their users and profiting from it.

      I would be perfectly happy with an Internet where only free (as in beer) content was published. Youtube may be handy, but if they shut down their service as a consequence of tracking becoming illegal, I am certain that there would be other video sharing websites that would keep providing content for free.

    7. Re:"A Contract" by 0a100b · · Score: 1

      Exactly, the euphemism "tracking" should be dropped and it should be called by its proper name: stalking.
      I hope, most likely in vain, that cyberstalking laws could (one day) be used against these stalking advertisers.

    8. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fine with advertising, and ad-supported services. I have even (gasp) clicked on adverts that looked interesting on a handful of occasions, and made purchases because of them.

      I don't mind Amazon tracking my purchases through Amazon and suggesting things they think I'd be interested in; in fact it's actually pretty useful.

      Advertising woodworking tools on a site about woodworking is probably a good idea, but trying to profile me across multiple sessions, devices and locations because I once bought a drill bit, so I must be super-interested in buying a drill is both creepy and counter-productive. Nine times out of ten, if I look for something I either find and buy it right then, or fail to find anything that meets the requirements and change the requirements. I've never once thought, whilst browsing around for something unrelated, "hey, look: there's an ad for the thing I didn't buy last week! Now's my chance!".

      To use a print analogy: magazines have had ads in them for years, based on the demographics and interests of their readers. Web tracking is the equivalent of embedding a tiny spy camera in each and every magazine page to track your eyes whilst you read, share that info with every other magazine, and change the ads in your copy to fit the articles you've spend the most time reading.

      As well as being fucking creepy, all the bloat of tracking slows me down (especially on mobile) and opens me to security risks. Throw in obnoxious, distracting ads, and I have no qualms about using adblock, and whitelisting sites that I use frequently and don't have over-the-top ads.

    9. Re:"A Contract" by Technician · · Score: 1

      Do not track does not prohibit advertising. It is privacy for which websites you visit. Advertisers love that info to target ads and talor them to their target demographic. Let's face it, most beginning programmers are not interested in golf clubs. A guy shopping for an RV is a much better target.

      Back on topic, I f I have an online persona that may be a grey area and I don't want a future employer to find out, while using a public hotspot, I could use a PC without a hard drive to boot from a Live CD to do my grey activities and then power down when done. Later in normal browsing that session is not associated with the other persona.

      Example uses could be for protection on a whistle blower case. Your employer would not have a clue unless you provided unique information that only you had access to.

      Logging in at work everything would be normal. Logging in at home only normal activities are in your history with your browser and ISP. A raid etc will come up clean of whistle blower materials.

      There is nothing unique about an Ubuntu installation CD or DVD in your media that can tie you to your contacts with the press about the leaking drums of industrial solvent burried out back.

      There are legit uses for do not track. Leave no fingerprints behind.

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
    10. Re:"A Contract" by Vokkyt · · Score: 2

      If they don't want to offer up the content to those with adblockers or other DNT indicators, then they should just bite the bullet and do so.

      It's not that people want their lunch for free, it's that they were provided a lunch without ever discussing the price and then hit with a price some folk didn't want to pay. It doesn't help that the price can often be a lot more than just the annoyance of an advertisement. Drive-by attacked from ads that don't get vetted are still a common reality -- scam websites are still allowed to wantonly display their advertisement and piggy-back off of the legitimacy of websites. You can say caveat emptor for anyone who may follow the ads, but that's really unacceptable; it's getting the user into really awkward, and in some cases dangerous, places when they probably didn't even care enough to really check the content in the first place.

      The idea that all content is worth the advertisement cost is flawed -- if paywalled content would stop users from visiting, then it's likely that the content wasn't really worth that much to them. Apathy and laziness are the only thing that takes most people to these sites.

    11. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Advertising survived and flourished for centuries without stalking.

      It really didn't. A different form of advertising existed, that wasn't a full industry. Advertising only exists where the people, who are interested in your product, are. Without tracking, 99% of advertisements become financially unviable. In general, there were no advertising firms before mass media.

      Next up, in order to use google, you need to run a more aggressive software suite. Be happy you only have cookies to deal with. How can technologists not see the solutions are going to cause more damage than the status quo? Sad.

    12. Re:"A Contract" by sjames · · Score: 2

      So you're claiming that newspaper ads were a failure from the beginning but for some reason persisted throughout the 19th and 20th centuries? There was no tracking there, the ads in the newspaper had no way to report back where you were or what you bought at all. None. All those billboards lost money? The famous Burmashave signs were a total loss?

      The TV ads failed miserably? The TV has no idea who went to the bathroom and who didn't. If you watched one, it had no idea if you lingered longer over the product next time you went shopping or not.

      Or are you claiming that was all garage operations rather than an industry with big expensive suites on Madison Avenue?

    13. Re:"A Contract" by argStyopa · · Score: 1

      So many, many people simply don't understand TANSTAAFL.

      Seriously - do you think everything is out there on the web solely for your convenience?

      --
      -Styopa
    14. Re:"A Contract" by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      I would not mind advertising if there were responsible advertisers. Instead this is like a war, the ads become bigger and more intrusive. Ads slow down our computers, some carry malware, some use popups, etc. In broadcast television in the US it is somewhat typical to have less than 25% of the time being spent on ads, but on the internet the vast majority of data being transferred may be advertisements! Ie, read a simple 2 line text mail message in a web browser while being shown very large images.

      Turning on adblock can drastically increase your web browsing performance, especially for people with slow internet connections.

      I am also being served ads in services that I pay for! My commercial ISP redirects my web mail to yahoo, which comes with ads. Plus yahoo shows the message saying "we no longer honor Do Not Track", and they've recently managed to throw in one line advertising text messages anyway. This is ridiculous for a service that I am paying money for.

      Adblock is a survival mechanism, it is the users versus the bad guys. It's sad that there may be a couple of honest advertisers hidden in the masses of the bad guys, but adblock+noscript is the only safe and usable way to be on the internet.

    15. Re:"A Contract" by praxis · · Score: 2

      "Do not track"?

      Everyone wants everything for free, and so there is advertising.

      The entire idea of "do not track" was ludicrous.

      Everyone wants their free lunches with no strings attached, but there will always be strings.

      No, not everyone. I would love to pay for a service that's worth the cost rather than use a heavily-tracking service. That's why I chose a private RSS aggregator which charges $20 a year rather than Feedly.

      I'll vote with my wallet and give money to companies that have a product worth buying. I will not buy in to a business model that's revolting to me. Don't fucking tell me I want my shit for free. Man up and sell it to me.

    16. Re:"A Contract" by hawk · · Score: 1

      >Ads slow down our computers,

      I suppose it's nearly 20 years ago now . . .

      On a 486, which was still respectable though not top of the line at the tie, I had two full pages open (large monitor for the time), and both hit ad-heavy pages.

      It brought the machine to its knees.

      I installed junkbuster.

      To this day, I don't block ads. But I'm downright aggressive with anything that blinks (or moves, or scrolls, or . . .), including "content"

      hawk

    17. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't mind the banner ad next to what I am looking at. If they stopped there I wouldn't bother with ad blockers. What I DO mind is the annoying scripted pop up ads that COVER what I am trying to look at, and force me to click something to be able to do what I am trying to do. Or the ads that follow you and stay on the side of the web page no matter where you scroll. Annoying! The ads that get in my way deserve to be blocked, period. Also, it is none of anyone's business what my buying/behavioral patterns are. So I don't want to be tracked. I don't pay attention to ads anyway. If I feel I need something, then I go find exactly what I need, and the ads I see rarely play a part in that. If an ad has nothing to do with what I am currently focused on doing, then it is just background noise, at least until it gets in my face and forces me to respond to it, and my response is usually getting pissed off.

    18. Re:"A Contract" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone wants their free lunches with no strings attached, but there will always be strings.

      Yes, we want new strings. We are quite literally sick from the propaganda and psycological manipulation that has infected our media. We look forward to a day when advertising funded becomes an unsustainable business model and the media taken over by people with more imagination.

  13. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Imagix · · Score: 1

    Cookie tracking means you're getting spammed with ads you DO want, instead of the ads you don't want.

    If only they weren't lying. I don't want _any_ of the ads.

  14. Re:Why would anyone want it? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Right now, most geeks think of advertising as bad things, because they hate the ads served to them as geeks are a horrible audience demographic. They don't know, that in the real world, people actually WANT advertising. That's why people buy things like newspapers and magazines, BECAUSE of the ads.

    No -- that's certainly not why people buy newspapers, except for those people who just want the coupon section (which is generally segregated from the rest of the paper). Who the heck buys a newspaper just for the ads?

    As for magazines, there are some which clearly seem to be able the ads -- particularly style magazines and such. Mostly it's something to allow people to drool over clothes and other luxury fashion items they can't afford (or could barely afford). But yeah -- SOME magazines seem to be bought for the ads.

    Many others, however, like ones focused on news or politics or science or literature or whatever, are definitely not about the ads. At best, they're a minor annoyance that readers put up with -- very few people buy a copy of Scientific American or The New Yorker for the ads. In some cases, like trade magazines or foodie magazines, the ads can be targeted better, so I can see how some people want that.

    In any case, the point is that "in the real world" people do NOT want advertising incessantly. How many people prefer to watch TV with advertisements thrown in (other than as a break to go to the bathroom or get a sandwich)? If everybody did, there would be little reason for technology that allows you to record and fast forward through the commercials.

    People are often happy to receive ads on their terms and when they want to receive them. They know what they're getting if they buy a newspaper for the coupon section or if they buy a magazine 90% full of photos of expensive designer clothing ads.

    But "real everyday people" are just as annoyed by pop-up ads or random ad interjections getting in their way of accomplishing tasks as anyone else is. And, let's face it, that's what MOST of the advertising on the web is. If I want to buy something on the web, I go to a freakin' merchant site and browse for things. It's not like I have to go out and buy a magazine to show me ads for designer clothes, when I can just go to the websites of the companies that sell this stuff and see the stuff directly!

    In sum -- yeah, sometimes people buy things that have ads when they want to see ads. But on the internet, people often just want to get tasks done too -- whether it's sending email via webmail or interacting on Facebook or whatever. I have NEVER EVER in my life heard a person say, "Gee -- I really love how Facebook keeps adding more ads to my newsfeed" or "I really wish that my webmail would have more pop-ups to get in my way when I'm trying to read a message."

  15. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I have a link to his blog, please?

  16. Ha HA! by pooh666 · · Score: 1

    HaHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA In Europe, even if there is some degree of lipservice going on, there is some real teeth in a LAW. DNT was a joke from the start with nothing to back it up.

  17. Did anyone really expect anything else? by GlennC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I certainly didn't figure this to work at all. I'm actually surprised that the "Do Not Call" list works as well as it does.

    As for me, ABP, NoScript, BetterPrivacy and Ghostery seem to do the job well enough

    --
    Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
    1. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by Zocalo · · Score: 1

      Another of those things where you need to be proactive take responsibility for your own safety on-line. The marketing companies have done nothing to help combat malicious advertisements and will quite happily farm as much information as they can whether people want them to or not, so fsck 'em. ABP, NoScript et. all, combined with hosting my own DNS zone for the domains of the larger ad/tracking firms and mapping all their hosts to 127.0.0.1 have ensured I haven't seen a single third party ad, malicious or otherwise, in years and I'm going to do whatever I have to do in order to keep it that way.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
    2. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Swap Ghostery for Disconnect. The dev behind Ghostery sells metrics data to advertisers which helps them target their advertising. http://www.businessinsider.com/evidon-sells-ghostery-data-to-advertisers-2013-6

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Do Not Call" is enforced by law, you can sue for violations. You can't sue over violations of "Do Not Track" and so it is useless.

      --
      Not a sentence!
    4. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Maybe you missed the part that this is an opt-in thing?

    5. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by x_t0ken_407 · · Score: 1

      Good call, I plan on testing out Disconnect later on tonight.

    6. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      For about a year after Do Not Call the number of calls drastically declined. Then they started back up. Right now it's basically easier for me to NEVER answer the phone than to try to report every caller. Especially ridiculous right now with the primary elections coming up (none of these campaigns will ever honor Do Not Call because they don't consider themselves to be telemarketers).

      So the solution of refusing to use the phone (it's for dial-out only) could be applied to the internet if it gets bad enough. Maybe someone has a great web site but that's irrelevant if people refuse to visit that web site because of the ads. Sorry about not getting revenue anymore, but I grew up on the internet when it was about sharing information and trying to make money with it was considered boorish behavior.

    7. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From the article you linked:

      ...selling them data collected from the 8 million Ghostery users who have enabled the tool's data sharing feature.

      Apparently the people who haven't enabled the Ghostrank 'feature' are still in the safe.

    8. Re:Did anyone really expect anything else? by Xolvix · · Score: 2

      Why the shit would anyone deliberate enable a data-sharing function in an extension specifically about enabling personal privacy? Unless there was an assumption that the data was only going to be used for the benefit of improving the extension and not to sell to advertisers (naive as that assumption may have been).

  18. Re:Why would anyone want it? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

    I gave up on ghostery. they're not bad guys (they cannot be trusted).

    use 'disconnect' instead.

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  19. DoNoEvil Bit by Arancaytar · · Score: 1

    Isn't this like that April Fools RFC?

    1. Re:DoNoEvil Bit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is also the Do Not Fraud header, DNF: 1

  20. Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Cookie tracking means you're getting spammed with ads you DO want, instead of the ads you don't want.

    Do-not-track only means you're going to end up with ads you hate. It's not a "do-not-advertise". It's not going to stop ads at all.

    Right now, most geeks think of advertising as bad things, because they hate the ads served to them as geeks are a horrible audience demographic. They don't know, that in the real world, people actually WANT advertising. That's why people buy things like newspapers and magazines, BECAUSE of the ads.

    Besides, it's the website that decides how they want to treat their audience, not the viewer. The only thing the viewer can/should do is to not visit the website in the first place if they feel their usage rights are violated, and right now, no one is going to miss losing an audience demographic of geeks.

    Completely disagree, there's a huge difference in what people are willing to --tolerate-- and what people do not want. The article is about these ads collecting data on you, and because of ignorance/arrogance no ones knows the extent of what they are collecting. Your notion of advertising is delusional, when it comes to a brick and mortar stores, yes people have interest in it, but the ads don't track your every move, you read them, throw them away.

    It's the types of abuse collecting data can provide, pretty much a physiological, detailed profile of a person. And that isn't from logging in, creating an account then filling out all the attributes with your real life information on social sites, websites, credit/bank cards ect.. What they are doing really is no better then the NSA. And their proving to be another corporate industry that owns politicians, this should have been dealt with by them, and yet all we hear is about the NSA, but nothing about the companies who are doing the same and not being halted/punished for it.

  21. What does the header say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Please, I am but a lamb. Don't eat me, wolves."?

  22. Just like Do Not Call... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    In principle it's supposed to stop telemarketers from bugging you. But in reality you still get calls because companies that you are currently doing business with are allowed to solicit you. Companies lobbied Congress for a loophole and got it.

    As long as Do Not Track is voluntary it will be ineffective.

  23. Do not need it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Firefox, NoScript, AdBlock Plus. And cookies are totally disabled, except for those 3-4 websites I have to login to. And when I also want to hide my IP, Tor is out there. I don't even remember what an "ad" or a "pop-up" are. Advertisers cannot track anything about me, they'd better track their few neurons instead.

    If all users did the same, the internet as we know it would go bankrupt. And it would get back to its free and community-driven nature that used to have until the early '90s.

  24. No shit Sherlock by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    Send a hot woman to walk naked in front of a frat house holding up a "do not take pics" sign and see if that works. Same idea.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  25. Re:Why would anyone want it? by CheshireDragon · · Score: 1

    That's why people buy things like newspapers and magazines, BECAUSE of the ads.

    That's like saying I buy Playboy for the articles. I NEVER bought magazines/newspapers for the ads; I bought them for the content.

    --
    "That's right...I said it."
  26. Advertiser NEVER itnended to honor a DNT by aepervius · · Score: 2

    Honoring a DNT would mean a high risk that sooner or later the majority of the page served would ask to not track. And that would have meant to return to the old day of "dumb" TV like advertising where they do only lknow statistically who is watching the ad, but not idnvidually. This would mean billions of $ of market evaporating.

    From the get go advertised never intended to honor DNT, they simply slowed down any discussion and finally simply pulled excuse out of thin air to not honor it.

    And the result is : thanks ghostery, noflash, adblock, and referer check.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  27. Force them: Use the DoNotTrackMe add-on by Burz · · Score: 1

    Happily, the author is not connected to the ad industry: https://abine.com/donottrackme...

  28. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I buy Playboy just for the ads.

    Of course, it's only to drool over the luxury centerfolds that I couldn't possibly afford.

  29. Re:Why would anyone want it? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

    Ive come to the conclusion that using ANYTHING in conjunction with adblock is a bad idea-- they seem to overlap and cause conflicts, and adblock already attempts to do the stuff that Ghostery / disconnect / etc do.

  30. Re:Why would anyone want it? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2

    They don't know, that in the real world, people actually WANT advertising. That's why people buy things like newspapers and magazines, BECAUSE of the ads.

    Wrong.

    In the days before the World Wide Web existed I bought Computer Shopper magazine for the ads (the whole magazine was 95% ads). But that's the rare exception. People DO NOT want ads and they especially do not want the annoying, obnoxious ads that have become so prevalent.

  31. Double-speak by David_W · · Score: 1

    The timing of this amuses me, given what I recently saw on Yahoo. They've updated their privacy policy to say they ignore DNT. But since marketing types have to spin everything, they bill it as:

    "Web browser Do Not Track settings are no longer enabled on Yahoo. Users receive a personalized experience by default."

    Thank you Yahoo for caring about my experience! :P

  32. Blast from the past by mrvan · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your post advocates a

    (X) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

    approach to fighting tracking. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    ( ) Trackers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
    ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
    ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop trackers for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    ( ) Users of email will not put up with it
    ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    (X) Requires too much cooperation from trackers
    ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    ( ) Trackeres don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    (X) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
    (X) Asshats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
    ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
    ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
    ( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
    ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
    (X) Extreme profitability of tracking
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with trackers
    (X) Dishonesty on the part of trackers themselves
    ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
    ( ) Outlook

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (X) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
    been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    ( ) Sending email should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
    (X) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (X) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
    house down!

  33. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There have been plenty of malware issues traced through compromised ad servers. Until the ad guys can get their stuff secure, any competant IT person will treat those sites as potentially dangerous. At best, they invade privacy. At worst, they can compromise an entire enterprise.

  34. Thanks Apache by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Thanks Apache for being pretentious assholes and hard coding your web-server to ignore the do not track flag when sent by I.E.

  35. Re:Why would anyone want it? by KiloByte · · Score: 3, Informative

    Use RequestPolicy. It makes both AdBlock and Ghostery obsolete -- by referencing 3rd party servers on an opt-in rather than opt-out basis. It might be a bit tedious to use the first time you visit a new website, but almost always it's obvious what needs to be unblocked.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  36. Re:Why would anyone want it? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who the heck buys a newspaper just for the ads?

    You must be a youngun'. Back in the pre-web days there were magazines that were pretty much 100% ads. "Computer Shopper" was one. "Nuts & Volts" was 90% ads. The best part of PC Magazine was the page of tombstone ads at the very back of the magazine, often for some weird product from a garage start-up. I have bought many, many newspapers/magazines "just for the ads".

  37. Mozilla killed it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They made it useless when they turned DNT on by default in Firefox.

    It was designed as an opt-out, any respectable company would follow that selection with the expectation that FTC would enforce it.
    Some paranoia evangelist working for Mozilla in the W3C workgroup sabotaged it because he feels that all tracking should be forbidden.
    Now we don't have any solution anymore, even for willing companies that listen to their clients.

  38. I asked Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

    1. Re:I asked Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just so you know, one thing you can tell is that you don't understand how to scale horizontally (stalking individuals who criticize you or your software on an ad hoc basis), and you don't have a sense of proportion. Given that, no-one sane should ever let you near anything related to their security or privacy.

    2. Re:I asked Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      APK understood how to floor AdBlock's Wladimir Palant perfectly http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  39. I asked Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  40. I asked Wladir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  41. I told you so by kbg · · Score: 1

    I told you so 5 years ago, but of course no one listened to me.

    1. Re:I told you so by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Sorry, I had you on adblock.

  42. The author of the above software is not stable. by mmell · · Score: 2, Informative
    The author of the above mentioned software has been banned from multiple public participation websites due to intentional abuses of those forums. His repeated, vociferous cyberstalking of anybody who is in any way critical of his software's value is (to me) an indication of his mental instability; using software written by an individual who cannot be counted upon to behave in a socially acceptable manner is begging disaster.

    Too bad - this is precisely this kind of situation where hostfiles can represent a good technical measure to counteract tracking behavior. It's a shame that this particular piece of software is authored by an unreliable individual. While hostfiles are a valid and effective technical countermeasure to website tracking, the author of this particular hostfile manager has often and repeatedly displayed his instability in multiple online forums. Simply google on Alexander Peter Kowalski. I believe any intelligent research will convince users that permitting software written by APK to run in kernelspace is dangerous at best. The software may or may not be just fine, but the software's author has already demonstrated that he cannot be trusted to make rational, acceptable decisions.

    Fortunately, the cyberstalking behavior APK has repeatedly demonstrated is almost certainly a compulsive, involuntary behavior on his part. I have no doubt that soon he will demonstrate fully the exact instability I have pointed out here. C'mon, Allie - post a bunch of links to your past posts, or call me "bigmouth" again. I'd say pick the most bellicose and insulting of your past posts; but nearly all of your cyberstalking is consistently offensive and insulting, indicative of a juvenile intellect. Instead of contstantly reposting the same insults and invective, give us something new to gauge your mental state from.

    ...msm

  43. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Plus, the usual trend is to get ads that are actually stale. For example, my father bought a snowblower for the winter and still sees ads for them. Yesterday, it got up to 90 degrees where he is, so I don't think he'll be getting another. But the point remains; most targeted ads are actually reactionary ads and, by their very nature, are not relevant to my current needs.

  44. Why listen to browser providers by aggles · · Score: 1

    DNT was dead the moment a vendor, and not the user, made the decision to set the flag on by default. Why should any content provider respect the wishes of a browser company, with regards to tracking?

    1. Re:Why listen to browser providers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > Why should any content provider respect the wishes of a browser company, with regards to tracking?

      Because DNT is opt-in and making a product choice has almost always been considered opt-in (they ensure it with an accepted EULA).

  45. Smart enough to shut AdBlock's author up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You too, mmell ("Run, Forrest - RUN!!!") -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    * FIRST, you erroneously described my app as a DNS replacement? WRONG - It works WITH DNS, overcoming its redirect security flaws if anything!

    ** SECOND, you called my app a malware, & then "suddenly Satan TURNED TO CHRIST", & you recanted it (because you were butthurt & ANGRY I got the best of you, with facts, as always with ANY 'naysayer' detractor OR libeler... easily!)

    APK

    P.S.=> HOWEVER - This was the most REPREHENSIBLE THING you did, saying I "like little boys" etc. (& YOU CALL ME unstable mentally? Please... lol!) -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ... apk

    1. Re:Smart enough to shut AdBlock's author up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're one of the more well-known /. loonies APK. Congrats?

  46. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Noah+Haders · · Score: 0

    Do-not-track only means you're going to end up with ads you hate. It's not a "do-not-advertise". It's not going to stop ads at all.

    are you a google shill? because you're doing a great job attempting to spin their bs lies.

    DO NOT TRACK means exactly what it says. don't track my movements, don't put me in a huge database, don't intrude on my life and spy on my behavior. It should be the functional equivalent of surfing in "incognito" mode.

    goog tried to subvert this into "do not serve targeted ads" which basically means they'll still track you.

    I'm glad you worked really well from the political propaganda playbook that redefined words to mean the opposite. You're the most recent in a proud line from Stalin to Pailn.

  47. That's SIX advertising posts on this page alone. by mmell · · Score: 1
    APK obviously feels that spamposting (like cyberstalking) is an acceptable behavior.

    (cue the ad hominem attacks by A/C a.k.a. APK)

  48. Right on time! by mmell · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And almost exactly as predicted.

    1. Re:Right on time! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  49. It is just a matter of incentives. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Sane) people do what they have incentives to do. Advertisers have a huge financial incentive to track, with no incentive to stop.

    If yahoo announced today "nevermind, we are going to seriously honor the "do not track" flag and force our partners to do the same" would end-users abandon gmail and flock back to yahoo? Of course not. Such a noble effort will not be rewarded at all, and it would drive partners away from Yahoo. They really have no choice but to track.

    Give them a real incentive, and they will fall in line. Until then, any expectation of politeness is pure folly.
     

  50. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Besides, it's the website that decides how they want to treat their audience, not the viewer. The only thing the viewer can/should do is to not visit the website in the first place if they feel their usage rights are violated, and right now, no one is going to miss losing an audience demographic of geeks.

    No. Just, no.

    Go back to class and learn how HTTP works. The user (and his "agent", the designated software making requests on his behalf) are fully in control of the experience. The website presents content on an open interface, and the user, via his agent, requests it as he sees fit. If he requests the text of the page, but not the images, that's his prerogative, not the site owner's. If he requests only certain images, follows only certain links, and doesn't do certain DOM manipulations via scripting, that also is the viewer's prerogative. The site owner has fuck-all to say about it.

    That's why site owners cannot win against AdBlock. HTTP was built for exactly the situation that AdBlock enforces. It's just that most site owners got used to lazy, unconfigurable user agents that didn't do what their users actually wanted. Now that some users are daring to go against that "standard", site owners are showing their true colors by becoming a bunch of whiny asshats.

    This has nothing to do with geeks, either. AdBlock is becoming my go-to tool for people that complain their "internet is slow". And once they get a glimpse of the web without ads, it's game over. Nobody wants advertising. People tolerate advertising as long as what they get in return is worth putting up with some no-skill ass-clown shouting about the product he's been hired to shill for. But advertising companies long ago stepped across that line. I have no moral qualms about wiping out advertising completely. I'm willing to do it and put up with whatever consequences there are. Advertisers are wise to not push me or those that think similarly.

  51. Posting ac now mmell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Speak for yourself http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    APK

    P.S.=> You've got SERIOUS ISSUES man... apk

    1. Re:Posting ac now mmell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an external, and mildly bemused, observer to this whole thing (and having endured /. trolls for a long time now), I'm fairly certain that I can say that you, APK, are the one with "serious issues".

      Not the least of which is your inability to understand proper capitalization and use of markup for emphasis.

      There's also that silly post-script that you tag on to the end of every message, as if you were using ink on paper to compose your messages rather than a text editor. It's not the 19th century anymore. Hell, it's not even the 20th century anymore. We're over a decade into the 21st century. Post-scripts to messages should be long since dead. If you have multiple topics to discuss, a simple paragraph break will suffice. Otherwise, it just makes you come off as a sad-sack with a serious problem with l'esprit de l'escalier. That's almost more embarrassing than blue-balls. Almost.

      Hopefully you'll understand why people don't take you seriously. But I doubt it. By the way, I use AdBlock (with the "acceptable ads" checkbox unchecked), Ghostery (with no GhostRank, and with all of everything blocked), NoScript, RequestPolicy, NoRedirect, and FlashBlock. I also know how to edit my hosts file for those particularly egregious offenders that somehow defeat all of these easily updated and configured browser plug-ins. So far, I have... a few entries. All of which for temporary sites that I've built and don't have DNS entries for. So, really, none for blocking. But it's there if I need it! (As long as I don't update to Windows 8... but... eww!)

    2. Re:Posting ac now mmell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mmell you came in here stalking and libeling apk http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and apparently, that's no first from you (out of geek angst when apk showed us all how utterly stupid you are in computing technicals and you libeled him further stating he's a pedophile, so we know who's posting that falsehood about apk, and libeling him calling his wares virus etc) http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... so posting by anoncoward posts now doesn't fool anyone but yourself, nutcase.

    3. Re: Posting ac now mmell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "so we know who's posting that falsehood about apk, and libeling him calling his wares virus etc) http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... so posting by anoncoward posts now doesn't fool anyone but yourself, nutcase."

      ----

      The irony is killing me lol

      Seriously though, get some sleep, relax, try meditation - whatever you need to do; none of it matters in the end but I sincerely hope you can find some respite, perspective & peace

    4. Re: Posting ac now mmell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this would be the appropriate reply http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  52. Libel != acceptable behavior mmell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You repeatedly libeled apk since he showed you know squat in computing http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  53. Ghostery = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  54. Re:You're more than welcome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about you learn to fucking READ, Alexander? He didn't say hosts files didn't work, he said you were an insane troll, which you've shown to be true all by yourself when anyone criticizes you. And you're hypocritical as hell - you've been spamming the shit out of the comments to this article with links to your site, and why? Because you're trying to sell your own little rinky-dink little hosts file manager that any programmer with any DNS experience could have written.

    Fuck you, you spamming piece of shit.

  55. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

    1. Re:I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hostsfiles cant do regex, lol.

      But hey listen, Im totally gonna trust a random hosts file from some dude on the internet.

  56. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AdBlock Plus, Ghostery, NoScript, RequestPolicy, FlashBlock and NoRedirect all play nicely together for me.

    RequestPolicy is a bit over-the-top in how often it causes pages to break and requires permission to allow stuff, but honestly, it's somewhat eye-opening. There's so much crap leaking through on some sites that it's often simpler to just go elsewhere. They may not think they care about a "leech" that won't view their ads, but I'm also someone who will never direct a non-AdBlock user to their site. I will never even know their site exists. And if someone asks me what I about that site, I'll go there, watch it break into a million miserable pieces, and tell that person to avoid it.

    NoRedirect is one that defeats the "our site only works with adblock disabled and javascript fully allowed from all of our affiliate sites, so we're going to redirect you away from this page that you wanted to see to preach at you about stuff you're not going to change anyway" that some sites do after detecting your blocking plugins. TigerDirect is rather forceful about this until you block their bullshit redirect. When I saw that, I figured it was a canary and more sites would follow later. So now I have a plug-in to prevent sites from reacting adversely to my other plug-ins.

    I place the blame for any incompatibilities on the sites pulling stupid tricks to piss off their potential customers. They're poisoning their own well, and I feel no sympathy for them.

  57. AdBlock & Ghostery = Infeiror + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  58. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  59. RequestPolicy = Inferior to hosts (see "A") by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  60. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  61. AdBlock & Ghostery = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  62. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  63. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    Or, you could just use Lynx.

    Or you could just stop using the web.

    Or you could disable all images and javascript.

    Pretty much anything is less work and less annoying than having to screw with all the times those tools screw up and you have to fix or whitelist a website. Just look at all the mental energy in this comment thread wasted trying to put together 5, 6, or 7 tools in the right combination like alchemists.

    Or, you could just not give a damn so long as it's not flashing or covering the content, and avoid sites that do, because you don't feel like running 10 more unnecessary browser hacks/addons/extensions forever slowing down page loads rather than shrugging your shoulders and never giving it a second thought.

    Or yeah, keep fighting the good fight, and Free Tibet... everyone needs a cause, I suppose. ;)

    --
    I8-D
  64. Exactly as predicted. by mmell · · Score: 1

    It would seem I've profiled you very accurately. It's not voluntary for you, is it? It's some kind of compulsion you can't stop. Too bad.

    1. Re:Exactly as predicted. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're stalking him and libeling him too? Come on http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... and it's no big stretch of the imagination stating you're the one minus modding his posts also. You'll run out of those. He won't run out of being able to repost (apk ac's the only one I know that can do it too).

  65. AdBlock & Ghostery = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  66. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  67. You'll LOVE this then... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  68. It was not ineffective at all! by Nicopa · · Score: 1

    It helped divert attention to privacy issues to a dead end for 5 years!

  69. He said hosts are a shitty solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From what I read hosts do a lot more than Almost All Ads Blocked by far. So much for hosts being shitty. He ran from answering those questions for obvious reasons (adblock = a shitty solution vs. hosts).

  70. Did anyone ever really think this would work? by sootman · · Score: 2

    It's as dumb of an idea as thinking a "do not mug me" shirt would be worthwhile in a high-crime area, and (by measure) it's probably less effective than a rock that keeps tigers away.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
    1. Re:Did anyone ever really think this would work? by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 2

      I disagree. While its effectiveness at stopping tracking was never much at doubt, it very much brought out into the open how sleazy the advertising companies are. Ad companies for years paid lip-service about how they, of course, understood people's concerns but -because of how extensive their networks were - there unfortunately was no easy way to address these issues without actually tracking the users. Remember how you could go to doubleclick.net and have them set a special cookie that said "don't track me? Does anyone believed that actually worked (I have a bridge to sell you)?

      Then comes along DoNotTrack, a little beacon that any user could set that immediately indicated their desire not to have their web-history and demographics compiled into some vast database, and exactly the solution to the above problem. And what happens?

      The advertising companies ignore it. They out-and-out say they will not honor the users' request and will continue to stalk our activities across the web.

      DoNotTrack might not have worked as designed, but it's a Snowden-like revelation on the true attitudes and operations of advertising companies. Yes, before DoNotTrack we all suspected this sort of behavior, but thanks to this little bit of software, now we know. No amount of marketing-speak can cover up that - despite any assurances of good and honorable intentions - they had a chance to stop stalking a user's habits and outright refused to do so.

  71. AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  72. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  73. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/Meatloaf

  74. Adblock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = Inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  75. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  76. Obviously you like doing things inefficiently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " I use AdBlock (with the "acceptable ads" checkbox unchecked), Ghostery (with no GhostRank, and with all of everything blocked), NoScript, RequestPolicy, NoRedirect, and FlashBlock'; - by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 22, 2014 @01:02PM (#47067791)

    READ THIS -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth... (where AdBlock's PROVEN HUGELY INEFFICIENT in RAM + CPU usage - 5++gb & 100% CPU inefficient operations...!)

    and then, this -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... (Where I made "the great Wladimir Palant" (not, lol, look @ the mess his almost all ads blocked makes) "Run, Forrest: RUN!!! from facts he couldn't overcome... )

    APK

    P.S.=> Hosts files do FAR MORE for added;

    SPEED
    SECURITY
    RELIABILITY
    ANONYMITY

    Than ANY SINGLE BROWSER ADDON THERE IS, with less messagepassing, CPU, & RAM resource usage overheads, from a FAR FASTER LEVEL OF OPERATION (ring 0/kernelmode vs. slower ring 3/usermode LAYERING ON MORE MOVING PARTS COMPLEXITY & ROOM FOR BREAKDOWN ontop of ring 3/usermode browsers)... apk

  77. AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  78. I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  79. Due to messagepassing, RAM, & CPU overuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I asked AdBlock's Wladimir Palant a question by email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" do these things (he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"?

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  80. Re:Why listen to data-gatherers ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    DNT was dead the moment a vendor, and not the user, made the decision to set the flag on by default

    That line does not even make sense. How does a user set that flag "by default" ?

    DNT was dead to the user when companies demanded, and got the right to ignore it.

    Everything after it was just circus, beating a dead horse while telling everyone that the slapping sound was the indication many people where working hard on it.

    And pardon me, but believing DNT could work would be as stupid as leaving your wallet in a public place with a note attached to it "please do not take, im retrieving it shortly" and than being surprised when, when you come back, its gone.

    No, the only way to be sure that noone would take that wallet would be to make sure you are always in control of it, and not depend upon the honesty of your fellow man. And what-do-you-know, that is called "common sense".

    Not so for DNT. You just send trackable data to everyone, and than trust them not to do what brings them the most profit. Does that sound like "common sense" to you ? It surely doesn't to me ...

  81. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are you a google shill? because you're doing a great job attempting to spin their bs lies.

    Actually, he's right.

    Although having that data will enable them to send you personalized advertisements, when they do not have such data they will just send you generic ones.

    DO NOT TRACK means exactly what it says

    For you maybe, but not for the DNT the article is about. All it currently has been watered-down to is a "pretty please" request to not being tracked, which the other party has the right to to fully ignore.

    You're either trolling or one of the most uninformed persons (by choice?) here.

  82. Re:AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by amaurea · · Score: 1

    AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default)

    AbBlock Plus sold out, not AdBlock. Several things call themselves "AdBlock", but as far as I know none of them have sold out. The AdBlock Plus sellout resulted in a fork called AdBlock Edge, which is equivalent to AdBlock Plus, but without the "acceptable" ads "feature".

  83. DUH! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It didin't take a brain surgeon to realize that the information would be abused. You just end up on some other lists. I didin't use it, and I recommended to everybody that they don't use or trust it either. Now we see the results.

  84. Re:AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does it matter? AdBlock's author ran scared from apk http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  85. I've solved the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here is the UNIVERSAL definition for "DNT" otherwise known as DO NOT TRACK.

    Don't create cookies at all, use another method for the current session to remain active, destroy when the session completes - store absolutely NOTHING with regards to the user's session.

    If the user initiates a transaction with your website, for say a purchase, retain only the ip address and any information the user provides for the transaction itself.
    Discard / destroy all other information, it cannot be kept for any reason other than the current transaction, and it must be marked as "non-harvestable" - ie, it cannot used for any reason other than consumer safety or court-order, all other uses current and future, known and unknown, are strictly prohibited.

    Companies caught violating this will have all of their assets seized, shredded and destroyed. All executives, board members of said company or corporation will have all of their assets seized, liquidated and distributed evenly among the customers that were violated.

    This will be a ZERO tolerance policy - there is NO wiggle room, there are NO loopholes, any attempts to violate the letter or spirit of this definition constitutes an aggravated and intentional violation of the policy and full penalties will apply immediately.

    1. Re:I've solved the problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only we could achieve this...

  86. *** Could be grounds for a new service *** by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What are the thoughts on creating a service, like a proxy, that strips out all of the ads, beacons, cookies, and delivers the clean Internet we all pay for? I would be interested in maybe looking into this, if not just for myself, others. I already see no ads, no web beacons, no tracking based on clever little things I do to get around all that. It's a bit cumbersome, but it all works. Testing my setup reveals someone who is not what is shown, nor even on the same continent. No issues with Javscript, etc. I already pay to use the Internet, I will not pay with my privacy. My ISP doesn't even see where I go. As it should be. I think this setup offered as a service would do OK.

  87. Why do you refer to yourself in the third person? by mmell · · Score: 1

    Do you suffer from deep-seated identity issues as well as mania?

  88. Re:I asked Wladir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here he goes again. Notorious spyware author and internet kook flinging dirt. Hosts File is spyware - it's been confirmed over and over again. Not just spyware either, but badly written, horribly slow spyware. I cannot make the claim that it is APK's mental health that drove him to produce the spyware, but it's certainly true that it his condition that leads him to interact with others in the way he does.

    I would advise seeking help from a mental health professional

  89. Re: AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stop talking about yourself in the f.cking 3rd person!

  90. Re:AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    Why would anyone want to use a system that you promote? It could be the best in the world but with you as a spokesman it becomes badly tainted.

  91. Re:I asked Wladir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here he goes again telling the truth: You all judge http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  92. Re:AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone that read this would http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  93. Re: AdBlock/Ghostery/RequestPolicy = inferior by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you hearing voices again? This will cure you http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  94. Re:Why do you refer to yourself in the third perso by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you hearing things again? This will cure you http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  95. You're still A/C. Still APK far as I can tell. by mmell · · Score: 1

    You want to be treated like a peer? Use a registered login like one. Otherwise you can remain a second-class netizen.

  96. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Tom · · Score: 2

    Cookie tracking means you're getting spammed with ads you DO want, instead of the ads you don't want.

    Tell me which ads I do want, I dare you.

    It's not difficult. Hint: One word.

    Yes, that's right. That word is "none".
    If I want something, I know how to search. If I'm looking for inspiration, I know how to search. I watch movie trailers for fun, for example, and then write down which movies I like. There is exactly zero need to shove a trailer down my throat, and more likely than not if you try to, I'll not watch the movie because I don't like your attitude.

    Here's how to get customers like me: Put your advertisement budget into making your product better.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  97. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Tom · · Score: 1

    They don't know, that in the real world, people actually WANT advertising.

    [citation required]

    No, wait, I'll up the ante: Challenge: Find me someone who WANTS pop-up ads. I mean as a victim, not as someone selling them for a living. I'm quite sure that a gay jewish nazi is easier to find.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  98. Re:That's SIX advertising posts on this page alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's not selling anything. It's free. Can't be advertising then. Sounds better than anything else too.

  99. Re:You're still A/C. Still APK far as I can tell. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would he lower himself to be your peer http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... all he has to do is this (what you never will be able to on your best day) http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  100. Seek professional help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seek the help you so desperately need. This is no laughing matter, despite the guffaws you raise at /. and elsewhere

    1. Re:Seek professional help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Appears Wladimir Palant of AdBlock needs professional help vs apk http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

  101. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Right now, most geeks think of advertising as bad things, because they hate the ads served to them as geeks are a horrible audience demographic. They don't know, that in the real world, people actually WANT advertising. That's why people buy things like newspapers and magazines, BECAUSE of the ads.

    No -- that's certainly not why people buy newspapers, except for those people who just want the coupon section (which is generally segregated from the rest of the paper). Who the heck buys a newspaper just for the ads?

    In the last decade the only reason I've bought a newspaper was for the classified adds which contain offers of employment and rental listings.

  102. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too many ads, not ads themselves. Everything we buy has a corporate logo displayed, television is mostly unwatchable, the commercials scream loudly (I thought that was supposed to be fixed, it ain't), bald faced product placement, ads popping up all over the screen during the shows themselves. Radio is the same.

    Corporate sponsorship is everywhere. Bill boards line the roads, and every now and then on a nice sunny day the sky above my house is littered with a bi-plane dragging a Geico banner across the sky with a stupid looking lizard head smiling down.

    If I go to hobby website and there's a static ad for something related to that hobby, know what that is? Targeted marketing.

    But I block most ads because they're screaming flash based blinking auto playing garbage, with mostly misleading verbiage, and often lead to something filled with internet cootie bugs.

    All advertising is ugly.

  103. "he"? by mmell · · Score: 1
    Interesting. What does any of this have to do with the discussion here, Mister Alexander Peter Kowalski? Or are you just that ashamed of your identity? Perhaps you just don't want to reveal the identities of your sock puppet accounts?

    I don't use such - and I don't bother moderating A/C comments because I see them all at -1. I don't post A/C because I'm not ashamed of who I am.

    While it's true I've made mistakes in the past, I (unlike you) own up to them. I also don't try to hide as an A/C.

    Poor child. Were you abandoned by one or both of your parents, or did you just never feel that you'd lived up to their expectations?

    1. Re:"he"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  104. Andrew, Andrew, Andrew. by mmell · · Score: 1

    Do you really think that anybody here believes what you say? I notice that nobody but you is defending your posts. Do you believe posting A/C actually hides or confuses anything?

  105. P5P Specification by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obligatory: http://pastebin.com/ijjRKvUB

  106. DNT find out what it means to me by epine · · Score: 1

    We shouldn't lose sight of the small victory here. Regardless of how it's handled, it's important that the end user can go on record as having requested more a tiny millibob of actual respect.

    We also need a companion flags: YESISETITMYSELF and IFYOUBLOWMEOFFYOUREANASSHOLE.

  107. Re:That's SIX advertising posts on this page alone by LookIntoTheFuture · · Score: 1

    "If you continue to post this comment, all moderations done to this discussion will be undone! Are you sure you want to post?"

    Yes. Modding your posts down isn't going to help. As others have already suggested, get help. Take your meds. Dive down a flight of stairs. Whatever it takes for you to stop ruining everyone's time.

    --
    Brave Sir Robin ran away. ("No!") Bravely ran away away. ("I didn't!")
  108. Re:AdBlock & Ghostery = Inferior + 'Souled-Out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tried it. Title of song says it all dedication to your work vs. trolsl http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... it works.

  109. the zipper and the bee by epine · · Score: 1

    Ruminant self-castigation concerning my previous post.

    Fingers and foghorn were clearly operating at different stages of rubbing the sand out of their eyes. Waking up is hard to do. Harrumph. Nothing burnishes one's wit like mucking up one's determiners twice in two sentences.

    I blame it all on eliding the apostrophe from the all-caps. That small joke went against the soul of my being. It was like The Scream welling up inside me.

    It just struck me that we should change the name of the apostrophe as used in contractions to "the zipper mark". Do up your zippers boys and girls. First lesson on the first day of middle school every year through grade seven, eight, nine, and ten.

    Then this brief public service announcement concludes with the disclaimer that surfaces sometimes deceive: the zipper mark and the dangling participle have nothing in common, but if you'd like a good example of the DP to think about until we get there, consider this:

    Flitting gaily from flower to flower, the football player watched the bee.

  110. We can all turn off all cookies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And just live with what we get or dont get it is really fine with me. I dont need anyone for anything really.

  111. Re:Why would anyone want it? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

    Who the heck buys a newspaper just for the ads?

    You must be a youngun'. Back in the pre-web days there were magazines that were pretty much 100% ads.

    Seriously?!? This gets modded "insightful" when you just regurgitated what I said in my post?!

    Let me refresh your memory, since you obviously have trouble with reading comprehension. Here's what I said:

    As for magazines, there are some which clearly seem to be able [sic, "about"] the ads -- particularly style magazines and such. Mostly it's something to allow people to drool over clothes and other luxury fashion items they can't afford (or could barely afford). But yeah -- SOME magazines seem to be bought for the ads. [snip] In some cases, like trade magazines or foodie magazines, the ads can be targeted better, so I can see how some people want that.

    I'm not a "youngun'." I remember these things well, and they still exist in various areas, as I point out (though the ones that have survived seem more targeted to "style" conscious groups these days and such).

    I have bought many, many newspapers/magazines "just for the ads".

    No -- you just said you bought many MAGAZINES for the ads. You said this after quoting the sentence where I asked who buys a NEWSPAPER for the ads. I realize the boundary between these concepts is not exact, but I'd say the percentage of people who buy NEWSpapers for ads is much smaller than the number of people who buy MAGAZINES for ads...

    And I explicitly said that in my previous post.

    Before going around insulting people, please take a minimum amount of time to read what they've actually said. If you can't be bothered, don't insult people -- you can still state your opinion, but arguing that an OP is ignorant of something when it was explicitly addressed in the post is just nonsense.

  112. Re:Why would anyone want it? by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

    I know I shouldn't feed the trolls, but I've feeling frisky...

    No -- that's certainly not why people buy newspapers, except for those people who just want the coupon section (which is generally segregated from the rest of the paper). Who the heck buys a newspaper just for the ads?

    People buy the sunday paper because of the ads. The big coupon supplement is the whole reason to buy it.

    Wow, is there an echo in this room?

    Not just some, MOST magazines that have a growth business model exist because people buy them for the ads.

    I acknowledged about five different types of magazines that people buy for ads.

    But here's the difference between magazines and most web advertising: when I buy a magazine for the ads, I'm buying a magazine for the ads. I know what I'm getting, and I'm making a conscious decision to have contact with something that will give me a lot of ads.

    There's nothing wrong with that. I made the choice to buy the magazine.

    On the internet, things are different. Ads come flying at you, popping up at you, etc., regardless of whether you're at some sort of consumer site where you might want ads, or whether you're actually trying to get something else done.

    I acknowledge that I'm not like most people in what I do online, but even all the "non-geeks" and "non-nerds" out there periodically are trying to get some other task done on the internet, like writing or reading a message, or learning about something, or reading news. Say you wanted to write an old-fashioned letter. Would you seriously buy a pack of paper that would shove things in your face as you were trying to write? Or would you buy a set of encyclopedias that required you to click three times to get rid of images that popped up before you could read the next paragraph?

    I know what your response is: "But the internet is free! You would pay for those things." Yeah, well -- people are willing to TOLERATE inconveniences for free things. It doesn't mean they want them disrupting whatever else they are trying to do. If you want to buy the newspaper for the coupons or the classified section, sure -- lots of people do that. But if you actually want to read the news, the advertisements get in the way... and lots of people actually want to do that SOMETIMES too, but they tolerate the ads interspersed with the news. And apparently they're willing to tolerate all sorts of crap popping up at them when they're trying to do other things online, as long as they get stuff "free."

    You're not in the target market for the ads you see, then.

    I wasn't talking about myself. I was talking in the sentence you quoted about other people. I've heard many, many, many people -- "non-geeks" -- complain about excessive ads online. I have NEVER heard anyone say they want more -- certainly not on random sites they are visiting and trying to get some other important task done.

    You really should study how people in the real world respond to advertising... they fucking love it. A fashion shopper goes apeshit when they see their favorite Miu Miu shoes go on sale at Net-a-porter. They get so excited that they email their friends about telling them to buy it.

    Yep -- which is the reason fashion magazines exist, which I explicitly mentioned. Great. We agree.

    It is only the narcissist libertarian geek that tries to avoid ads. "I'm so important, look at me, I hate advertising because i am more important than advertisers. I am so important that I don't want ads on the website I don't pay to visit! Look at me! WEEE!"

    I'd HAPPILY pay for websites without ads, if they delivered quality content. I already do so in some cases. Why does this make me narcissistic? Because I want to pay for quality content rather than have idiotic nonsense shouting at me that I don't want to see? That's "narcissi

  113. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 1

    But, you got to select the ads you wanted to see, and paid for the printing.

    I buy something online, and I get adverts for the exact same thing. Just bought a computer, now I get computer ads in my mailbox. Bought a car, now I get "now's the time to buy a car" adverts. Sure customer loyalty is big, and even a .01% chance of selling another car is worth the spend. But you're just pissing me off.

    Worse, I click on something, decide I don't want it at all, and I get ads for the same or similar things. That's valuable space being wasted on something I not just am not interested in.

    Your point works in a perfect world, where we can give feedback on which ads we want to see, in your case by paying for it. And where advertisers consider what we truly are interested in, and won't promote something unrelated just because it has a larger payment per click.

    There is a very, very small part of the business that will truly work this way, until everyone realizes that we have to work together. Don't annoy me, show me what I want, hide what I don't want. And don't be intrusive.

    Don't sell to facets I haven't revealed - such as identifying when I'm pregnant or gay. How do you know what's safe to sell me? You're going to have to be really good at figuring out what to detect, and what to ignore.

    Otherwise, you're going to creep out the next generation of lawmakers.

  114. Tor - do it right from the beginning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    https://www.torproject.org/

    and you're just another exit node up one day and down the next.

    track me, bitch.

  115. Re:mmell's LIBEL 'classics' by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

    APK, you're insane. Your crazy incoherent ramblings and random use of bold and capital letters are not helping your cause.

    You sound like a cross between the Unabomber and a 9/11 Truther. Even if your software does what it claims to do, I would not trust it, simply on the basis of how you conduct yourself in discussions online.

    --
    Eat the rich.
  116. Right - hosts are EASIER to manage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple textfile format of IPAddressIspace)hostname vs. regular expressions complexity, and hosts certainly do a BETTER JOB of resource usage than AdBlock https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

    * I've LITERALLY taught a nigh-compiuter illiterate pal of mine how they work - even HE says they're easy (GED highschool education level on his end)...

    Also - My program gets its hosts file data from 12 reputable & reliable sources in the security community online (e.g. -> MVPS or MalwareBytes' HpHosts for example).

    APK

    P.S.=> That's just pure fact... apk

  117. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

  118. mmell's LIBEL 'classics' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You spoke of how I conduct myself? Heh - I use facts that you dorks can't overcome, & your results? See above - reduced to LIBELING me like worms you all are (and you KNOW it, worm)... apk

  119. mmell LIBEL 'classics' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

    1. Re:mmell LIBEL 'classics' by mmell · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if you're into the "big lie", or if you're just so emotionally stunted that this is the only form of gratification left to you. Probably the latter - you don't strike me as intelligent enough to pull off the big lie.

  120. mmell LIBEL 'classics' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

  121. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

  122. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

  123. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even a geek, you're a writer wannabe)... apk

  124. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  125. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  126. mmell LIBEL classics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS etc. too? Please -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  127. Re:That's SIX advertising posts on this page alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  128. Quit projecting mmell, you're busted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  129. mmell that's you "ac supporting yourself" again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  130. mmell busted ac post "supporting himself" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  131. mmell = busted (ac post supporting himself) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  132. mmell you're busted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  133. Hello mmell sockpuppet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  134. mmell busted ac post "supporting himself" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who were you replying to here mmell calling them ac http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ? YOURSELF you dimwitted idiot. You are busted trying to "support yourself" by ac posts. You truly ARE a "registered 'luser'"

  135. AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  136. AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  137. AdBlock = Inferior + 'Souled-Out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit:

    http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    (Details of hosts' benefits enumerated in link)

    Summary:

    ---

    A. ) Hosts do more than AdBlock ("souled-out" 2 Google/Crippled by default) + Ghostery (Advertiser owned) - "Fox guards henhouse", or Request Policy -> http://yro.slashdot.org/commen...

    B. ) Hosts add reliability vs. downed or redirected DNS + secure vs. known malicious domains too -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme... w/ less added "moving parts" complexity + room 4 breakdown,

    C. ) Hosts files yield more speed (blocks ads & hardcodes fav sites - faster than remote DNS), security (vs. malicious domains serving mal-content + block spam/phish & trackers), reliability (vs. downed or Kaminsky redirect vulnerable DNS, 99% = unpatched vs. it & worst @ ISP level + weak vs FastFlux + DynDNS botnets), & anonymity (vs. dns request logs + DNSBL's).

    ---

    Hosts do more w/ less (1 file) @ a faster level (ring 0) vs redundant browser addons (slowing up slower ring 3 browsers) via filtering 4 the IP stack (coded in C, loads w/ OS, & 1st net resolver queried w\ 45++ yrs.of optimization).

    * Addons are more complex + slowup browsers & in message passing (use a few concurrently - you'll see)

    ** Addons slowdown SLOWER usermode browsers layering on MORE - bloating memory consumption too + hugely excessive CPU usage (4++gb extra in FireFox https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...)

    SO - Instead, I work w/ what you have in kernelmode, via hosts (A tightly integrated PART of the IP stack itself)

    APK

    P.S.=> "The premise is, quite simple: Take something designed by nature & reprogram it to make it work FOR the body, rather than against it..." - Dr. Alice Krippen "I AM LEGEND"

    ...apk

  138. I asked Wladir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  139. I asked Wladir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  140. mmell = busted ac post supporting himself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  141. mmell = busted ac post "supporting himself" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  142. mmell = busted ac post "supporting himself" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  143. Nobody believes you mmell: Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ROTFLMAO mmell caught trying to ac post "support himself" http://slashdot.org/comments.p... You're a fool that projected his own modus operandi doing it no less.

  144. LOL, you're so busted & full of shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who were you replying to here mmell calling them ac http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ? YOURSELF you dimwitted idiot. You are busted trying to "support yourself" by ac posts. You truly ARE a "registered 'luser'"

  145. mmell = busted in a BIG lie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who were you replying to here mmell calling them ac http://slashdot.org/comments.p... ? YOURSELF you dimwitted idiot. You are busted trying to "support yourself" by ac posts.

    You truly ARE a "registered 'luser'"

  146. I asked Wladimir Palant of AdBlock a question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By email if "Almost All Ads Blocked" does these things (after he emailed 1st stating "hosts are a shitty solution"):

    ---

    1.) Block malware/malscripted sites (not just adbanners with bad code)
    2.) Block out Known sites-servers/hosts-domains that are known to serve up malware (especially "fastflux" types, the predominant design that uses host-domain names vs. IP addresses (far easier to 'kill' in the latter is why)).
    3.) Block Bogus DNS servers malware makers use (via fastflux + rogue DNS servers).
    4.) Block Botnet C&C servers.
    5.) Block known PHISHERS.
    6.) Block TRACKERS.
    7.) Block SPAMMERS.
    8.) Get you back speed/bandwidth you paid for by blocking adbanners + hardcoding your favorite sites (faster than remote DNS server resolution).
    9.) Add reliability (vs. downed or misdirect/poisoned DNS servers - since most are NOT patched vs. the Kaminsky flaw).
    10.) Add "anonymity" (to an extent, vs. DNS request logs).
    11.) The ability to bypass DNSBL's (DNS block lists you may not agree with).
    12.) Truly UNIVERSAL PROTECTION (since any OS, even on smartphones, usually has a BSD derived IP stack & hosts 99.999% of the time).
    13.) Faster & MORE EFFICIENT operation vs. browser plugins https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...
    14.) Custom hosts files work on ANY & ALL webbound apps (browser plugins do not).
    15.) Custom hosts files offer a better, faster, more efficient way, & safer way to surf the web & are COMPLETELY controlled by the end-user of them WITHOUT having to know regexp.

    ---

    * Can you tell me WHY he refuses to reply?

    (He knows that if he admits hosts are more versatile, superior, & efficient than AdBlock - he's done: ClarityRay's going to assure that anyhow)

    APK

    P.S.=> Palant also said "You're ignoring facts"? Please - His reasoning's flawed!

    AdBlock or any browser addon doesn't do a FRACTION of what hosts can in added speed, security, reliability, or anonymity vs. APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ 32/64-bit -> http://start64.com/index.php?o... )!

    ... apk

  147. Re:Why would anyone want it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, I am a geek, and I don't mind the banner ad next to what I am looking at. If they stopped there I wouldn't bother with ad blockers. What I DO mind is the annoying scripted pop up ads that COVER what I am trying to look at, and force me to click something to be able to do what I am trying to do. Or the ads that follow you and stay on the side of the web page no matter where you scroll. Annoying! The ads that get in my way deserve to be blocked, period. Also, it is none of anyone's business what my buying/behavioral patterns are. So I don't want to be tracked. I don't pay attention to ads anyway. If I feel I need something, then I go find exactly what I need, and the ads I see rarely play a part in that. If an ad has nothing to do with what I am currently focused on doing, then it is just background noise, at least until it gets in my face and forces me to respond to it, and my response is usually getting pissed off.

  148. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  149. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  150. mmell" How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  151. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  152. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  153. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  154. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  155. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  156. Re:That's SIX advertising posts on this page alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Adblock/RequestPolicy/Ghostery can & not APK? Fuck off ya shill for inferior tools vs. hosts.

  157. You're MORE than welcome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To validly technically disprove 17 points on hosts adding security, speed, reliability, & anonymity for end-users of them online enumerated here http://start64.com/index.php?o...

    *:)

    (Good Luck - you'll NEED it: More like a miracle, since those points are completely valid & SOLID AS A ROCK!)

    Hell - I KNOW YOU CAN'T DO IT !

    Why?

    Your bogus downmod of the 1st time I posted this earlier http://yro.slashdot.org/commen... is how (guilt by evasion of a FAIR CHALLENGE put to you & downmodding to attempt to effetely + vainly "hide it" (along with YOU RUNNING, Forrest...)

    APK

    P.S.=> "Onwards & UPWARDS..."

    ... apk

  158. mmell: How'd "eating your words" taste? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Saying I use hosts to evade police while I surf little boy porn http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (1 of 2)

    Libeling me saying my WARE IS A VIRUS http://slashdot.org/comments.p... (2 of 2)

    THEN RECANTING THAT LIBEL HERE - "EATING YOUR WORDS" http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

    ?

    ERRONEOUSLY saying I was creating a DNS replacment (which it's not, it shores up DNS redirect security issues & resolves FASTER locally in RAM vs. remote lookups) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comme...

    Saying VI can do all my APK Hosts File Engine can do (not) & running -> http://slashdot.org/comments.p... when VI can't?

    * Please... lol!

    APK

    P.S.=> You have SERIOUS issues - get over your ''geek angst" already (you're not even much of a 'geek' based on your technical screwups above)... apk

  159. Re:mmell's LIBEL 'classics' by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 1

    P.S.=> You spoke of how I conduct myself? Heh - I use facts that you dorks can't overcome, & your results? See above - reduced to LIBELING me like worms you all are (and you KNOW it, worm)... apk

    I think this pretty much speaks for itself.

    Weird and inconsistent use of punctuation (comma followed by ampersand, really?), excessive use of ellipsis, random ALL-CAPS and bold text, defending arguments with spurious insults, obsessively cataloguing perceived slights and list of enemies, and so on and so forth.

    These are all hallmarks of a crazed conspiracy theorist or a person with severe mental instability, or both, which is often the case.

    I don't know how you got the idea that I'm a mmell sock puppet. Look at our user IDs, my account is significnatly older than mmell's. Besides that, I don't care much for his aggressive tone, but at least he manages to communicate in writing without coming off as a rambling paranoid delusional conspiracy nut case.

    Seek help. You seem to desperately need it. Seek help now.

    --
    Eat the rich.