Microsoft Research Paper Considers Serving Web-ads From Localhost
An anonymous reader writes: A paper from Microsoft researchers (PDF) posits the possibility of 'pushing' web ads to a user's own computer and serving them into pre-arranged containers on web pages, with the EFF or ACLU serving as privacy mediators between the user and the advertisers who want to engage them. However the framework — dubbed 'Privad' — would need to get installed on the user's system by the same familiar means which the likes of Superfish use. The report admits that Privad would probably need to be disseminated "through adware-style software bundling, shopping discounts, toolbars or other incentives."
Localhost is my home. You DO NOT touch my home.
No. No. No. No. No. Definitely No. Nope. Don't Even. No. Lets not, and say we did.
In the event of nope, just no. Absolutely not. So, as you can see, NO.
Sincerely,
No@nope.com
This idea will be received with open arms, here on /., I'm sure.
I'm somewhat worried (absolutely petrified, I should say) about the effort spent on advertisements. I guess considering human nature it is a necessary evil, but still...
Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
We'll see how long it takes us before we remove/block this "feature"
Wow. Thanks /.'s Timothy for your editing work.
After all the years we're used to your frequent grammar issues.
But incorrect markup with raw URLs like that, that's an impressive low.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
More like, "From the Microsoft Marketing Department." Unless I'm missing something, this is just bundling "safe" adware as part of Windows. Hmm, maybe Ubuntu will have new life breathed into it.
Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
Privy(outhouse) + ad (derived from)
love is just extroverted narcissism
The GOATSE is coming from INSIDE YOUR HOUSE!!
{#`%${%&`+'${`%&NO CARRIER
There's the evil empire I grew up with! I was wondering where they'd gotten off to.
It's the competition.
.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
I come here for the love
Why are we discussing this paper from 2009 (http://conferences.sigcomm.org/hotnets/2009/program.html) as if it is new?
Class action.
I hope it's in the billions.
Why? The only ones who ever see the awards are the defense attorneys.
Placing the ads on our machines directly is a bullshit move. How about we protect our fucking privacy by not having this shit on our machines in the first place.
I agree! Here's how to start.
Ads stuffed into my machine, but also prevetted by the ACLU and EFF? How high do you think we are?
Not only do you want to suck up my bandwidth, you want to suck up my drive space. And only those ads deemed 'acceptable'?
Didn't we go through that whole push thing about 1998 or so. Hell, you even got free dialup if you accepted their pushed ads. Of course, it rendered the machine unusable, because it was trying to keep up with the ads stream...
Oh man, APK's head is going to asplode!
Why? Don't you miss those screens full off highly functional toolbars? With 4K+ resolution monitors, we should be able to pack a few hundred more in IE (or whatever it's called today).
Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
I have been wanting to see Apple or Microsoft or Netflix embrace torrent like local servers. But not for ads. For movies. Just push out all the movies to people's computers at night. Then let itunes or whoever form the torrent networks to deliver movies to paying customers. As long as I get a discount (since it's my bandwidth and electricity) why not? I'd like it as thumb in the nose of comcast and anyone else throttling the net.
I'm not talking about illegal file sharing, I'm talking about just having content served right within Comcasts own network so there's no peering issues.
Yes I appreciate how long comcast would let that go on. Just a fantasy.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Why Mint in particular, compared to the other distros?
Quite frankly, I wanted to deflect the drubbing I would get if I just linked to Apple's site; and so, since I hear a lot of people on Slashdot speak highly of Mint, especially for users that are coming to Linux for the first time, I figured it would be a kind of "neutral" distro to pick.
But, since Linux fanbois can't seem to pick which of the 100+ distros they want to get behind (one of the biggest reasons why Linux on the Desktop is a complete non-starter, IMHO), I guess I would have to point to someplace like here, instead.
So, to me, your question simply registers in my brain as "No good deed goes unpunished".
A good advertisement is one served to the correct audience. For example, if you are a single man, an ad for feminine hygiene products is unlikely to be good. Therefore some measure of targeting is required.
Because you're not using adblock.
Class action.
I hope it's in the billions.
Why? The only ones who ever see the awards are the defense attorneys.
So what? The societal point of a class action suit is to punish the offenders. Are you going to take a day off work to file a small claims suit for $1.23 when you are overcharged on your phone bill? Will you even bother to spend an hour on hold, or change providers if there is a BS $0.95 "surcharge" added to you bill? I know I won't. I won't use the coupons I get sent either when they lose the suit. At least the lawyers get cash - that what discourage corporate behavior from being even MORE egregious.
You mean like with the Tobacco Company Settlements, where not only did the Defendants get exactly NOTHING, but then THEY ended up paying the Fines in the form of cigarette prices that more than DOUBLED, coincidentally RIGHT after those Settlements were agreed-upon.
I don't even smoke cigarettes; but I thought that was one of the most blatant "transfers of burden" that I have ever seen; the Tobacco Industry didn't suffer a DIME, directly. The ONLY ones who suffered were the poor victims that the Tobacco Companies Addicted in the first place!
So now, tell me how Class Actions teach Corporations a lesson?
Won't work for me! I redirect localhost to 127.0.0.1!
BTW...why are we discussing a paper from 2009? Is this really news?