China Bans Ad Blocking (adexchanger.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Two weeks ago, China released its first ever set of digital ad regulations that impacted Chinese market leaders like Baidu and Alibaba. "But hidden among (the new regulations) is language that would seem to all but ban ad blocking," wrote Adblock Plus (ABP) operations manager Ben Williams in a blog post Wednesday. The new regulations prohibit "the use of network access, network devices, applications, and the disruption of normal advertising data, tampering with or blocking others doing advertising business (or) unauthorized loading the ad." There is also a clause included that addresses tech companies that "intercept, filter, cover, fast-forward and [impose] other restrictions" on online ad campaigns. ABP general counsel Kai Recke said in an email to AdExchanger that the Chinese State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) has much more control over the market than its otherwise equal U.S. counterpart, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). "After all it looks like the Chinese government tries to get advertising more under their control and that includes that they want to be the only ones to be allowed to remove or alter ads," said Recke. "Ad-block users are a distinct audience and they require a distinct strategy and ways to engage them," said ABP CEO Till Faida at AdExchanger's Clean Ads I/O earlier this year. "They have different standards they've expressed for accessing them, and advertising has to reflect that."

Comments

I think I speak for all America when I say...

[Nova Express]

...bite me, China!

Re: I think I speak for all America when I say...

[davidwr]

I wouldn't invite them to Hoover me either.

Re:I think I speak for all America when I say...

[saloomy]

Sucks to be Chinese then. I'm sorry they don't even have the freedom to skip through/block ads.

Re:I think I speak for all America when I say...

[StikyPad]

They don't have the "freedom" to use pirated versions of Windows or hack foreign nations either. I'm sure this law will be enforced just as diligently as those.

I'm waiting for

[presidenteloco]

"China accidentally bans the declaration of new laws that have accidentally restrictive clauses."

That's OK

[penguinoid]

I don't use an adblocker, I use a scam/malware remover, bandwidth saver, page quality enhancer, and internet speed enhancer. But by a strange coincidence, it is called AdBlock.

Re:That's OK

[penguinoid]

I'd like to add that while it does sometimes block ads, it only blocks ads that aren't really owned by any legitimate businesses. For example, none of the businesses whose ads get blocked actually take responsibility for their ads should their ad be a scam ("Your computer has a virus, click here for your grandmother to install one for you while you aren't here to warn her its a virus") or directly contain malware with a Flash exploit.

Re:That's OK

[Threni]

Why don't you use ublock origin? It's like the others except leaner and doesn't make you faff around blocking "permitted" ads or whatever they call them.

Re:That's OK

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't use an adblocker, I use a scam/malware remover, bandwidth saver, page quality enhancer, and internet speed enhancer. But by a strange coincidence, it is called AdBlock.

Do you think such an argument (even if it is true) would actually work in China if they tried to enforce this policy against you?

(Then again, would any argument, short of being a relative to somebody with real power, actually work in China if the authorities really wanted to get you?)

Re:That's OK

[Thanshin]

Sorry, the judge doesn't speak English, doesn't care about your version, and won't even see your face before sending you a few years to prison.

Well, I never thought I'd say this, EVER...

[behrooz0az]

I think APK hosts file generator may actually work here.

Re:Well, I never thought I'd say this, EVER...

[amicusNYCL]

APK has nothing to do with it, there are several ways to manage a hosts file without requiring you to use a spammer's software to block ads. A quick search shows a program called HostsMan, for example. There's a small list of hosts managers here (including the one I mentioned, but that list doesn't include the software written by a notorious spammer), and another list here (also with a notable exclusion).

Even if you want a program to help you manage your hosts file, you still don't need to stoop to the level of a spammer, there are spam-free hosts file alternatives also (which should not be a surprise).

Re:Well, I never thought I'd say this, EVER...

[behrooz0az]

Slashdot never ceases to amaze me. I expected my post be either -1, Troll or +5, Funny. not a real answer.
Anyway, tnx. I don't live in china so I would probably never search for these programs.

Re:Well, I never thought I'd say this, EVER...

[amicusNYCL]

I think the lack of mods indicates that people have grown apathetic to APK. He used to be a serious nuisance, but the lack of his shit posts in threads lately indicates that the site managers (or others who have been contacted and made aware that he is using their names and reputations in his spam) mean that he has probably decided to find something else to do. I'm sure he'll be along eventually to pinch out a post or two, but you'll notice, for example, that instead of the direct links to his programs he's now linking you to search engine results on Bing or whatever, because of the Slashdot filters designed to remove his crap. He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing, but in general I think the 40+ spam posts by him in a single thread are a thing of the past.

Then again, maybe people are just saving their mod points for him. And I have 15 too, too bad I already posted.

Re:Well, I never thought I'd say this, EVER...

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Just for sake of correctness, Javascript hasn't been interpreted for a decade, unless you're using obsolete software. Likewise, arguing about C and assembly when algorithms actually matter is pointless. Plus, it has repeatedly been demonstrated that ring 0 execution of code isn't actually desirable for performance if you want something frequent to run fast - inlining the respective piece of code to avoid syscalls can be more desirable than jumping into kernel mode all the time. See futexes vs. kernel-provided mutexes, for example. Ditto for the recent moves of graphics driver features into userspace. Ditto the non-kernel-related but conceptually similar case of Chrome moving to Blink (removing marhsalling costs for DOM access and integrating it into JS engine optimizations).

All You Need to Know

[brwski]

This tell you all you need to know â" ads are now officially surveillance tools. Why they'd admit such a thing is unclear. Continue to block, block, block away.

Re:All You Need to Know

[golden_hands]

Not necessarily- Perhaps the CCP( Chinese Communist Party) expects to have propaganda ads along with the other commercial ads and they don't want those to be blocked.

The real reason

[Anonymous Coward]

So is this just a tacit admission that AdBlockers are inadvertently screening out some of the government surveillance tools?

Money Talks Again.

[zenlessyank]

He who has the money but isn't getting it at a flow rate that satisfies him, gets to make the rules that ensure that flow rate is satisfactory.

Re:Money Talks Again.

[amicusNYCL]

if ads == money

There's a false equivalence if I've ever seen one. If that's your premise, and your premise is false, then the rest of your post doesn't matter.

Ads are not the same as money. Ads are also malware distribution vectors, privacy invaders, resource hogs, a waste of screen space, etc. Money is none of those things. If ad distributors wanted to actually take responsibility and clean up their industry, fine, we would be having a different conversation. But they have proven for decades that they don't want to do those things, so this is the conversation we're having.

Re:Money Talks Again.

[zenlessyank]

^^^ This. And to add that the internet was designed to be open. I pay for my internet connection. It gives me a rest stop and an on/off ramp. I can put up a sign so you can stop too. I might put up a little museum. I might charge you to get in. I might not. I may sell trinkets in my museum. I may not. You can do the exact same thing. Anyone who tries to stop or mutate that is not an open traveler and is not welcome on the internet. You decided to drive on our highway with an unlicensed piece of shit vehicle that is dangerous. I put up a gate to my on/off ramp to keep you from coming to my museum. Get over it.

Great Firewall

[Architect_sasyr]

So... China bans the Great Firewall?

Re:Great Firewall

[magarity]

Yes indeed, I was just thinking that now some Chinese website needs to have embedded Google Ads.

What about text-only browsers?

[davidwr]

They inherently block ads that contain no text.

Does this mean blind people will be forced to use a regular browser and a screen reader so as not to block the ad from showing up on their computer? That seems inefficient to the point of being stupid.

Re:What about text-only browsers?

[DivineKnight]

In a word, yes.

If the TPP is past, this will come to America

[Nyder]

If the TPP is past, Corporations will be able to sue Governments for getting in the way of their making profit. So you can damn well bet that the advertisement networks will sue to get any type of ad blocking banned. And they will be backed by most other corporations also, so ya, this will be coming to America.

Re:If the TPP is past, this will come to America

[Anonymous Coward]

Good thing the TPP is future, then.

Re:If the TPP is past, this will come to America

[Anonymous Coward]

You underestimate American lawyers' ability to play word games. It's not "ad blocking", it's "untrusted access prevention". It's "unrequested bandwidth waste reduction". It's "filtering of invalid data".

Nobody is going to watch anyones' ads unless they wish to or are too uninformed to use an ad blocker, both of which are the watcher's fault and no one else's.

Malware creators everywhere rejoice

[The MAZZTer]

We may very well see an uptick in legitimate site's ads used to deliver malware because of this.

Re:Malware creators everywhere rejoice

[ThatAblaze]

Especially the government sponsored malware.

If they go too far

[istartedi]

If the Chinese go too far, people will sour on the whole idea of business. There will be a backlash. They'll have a communist revolution on their hands. Of course I've been making this joke for a while now...20 years seems about right. The insanity just keeps rolling along... like a tank.

Ad BLOCKING?

[ememisya]

What about ad corrupting? A plugin in every navigation software which randomly clicks ads? I'd say stop it by reducing the value of the data you are being forced to see. I suppose putting a sticker on the monitor where ads are is also an option.

That's Insane!

[BrendaEM]

Why would a communist country ban a program defeats a device of capitalism?

In Communist China...

[sonamchauhan]

...Ads block you!

"Take that, you capitalist running-dogs!"

Probably not

[jandersen]

... prohibit "the use of network access, network devices, applications, and the disruption of normal advertising data, tampering with or blocking others doing advertising business (or) unauthorized loading the ad."

I have read through this string of words several times and still find it hard to read that interpretation into it. The way I read it, it says that it is illegal to hinder your competitors' online advertising in any way - and even I, who fundamentally dislike adverts in any form, find it hard to see that as anything but quite reasonable. Banning users from using adblockers etc would be absurd - like demanding that people must stop to look at advertising posters or have to watch tv adverts. Another thing I notice is that this comes from a website with the address http://adexchanger.com/ - I couldn't be bothered to go and read it, but the name suggests they are in the advertising business - wouldn't a ban on adblockers be a wet dream of theirs?

Re:Probably not

[Cederic]

Plus of course it doesn't prevent you from just not attempting to access the server hosting the ad content in the first place.

Which is what good ad blockers actually do.

I think the issue is not ABP / uBlock

[GuB-42]

Our usual ad blockers are probably not what is targeted by this law. And if they are, it is easy to work around it by shipping the software (which is basically a browser-based firewall) and the lists separately. uBlock especially doesn't even market itself as an ad-blocker.

What is more problematic is when the end user is not in control of the list. For example, some ISPs offer (or offered) an ad-blocking option. This is totally against net neutrality, I don't want my ISP to decide what is good for me or not (kinda ironic in china but still...). Even worse are those that hijack ads and replace them with their own. There is a difference between choosing not to look at billboards and tearing or covering them off.

Well, this is what I think of. The translation in TFS are so poor that it isn't clear at all what the law is all about.

Great job! Karl would be proud.

[sabbede]

You're doing great China! Keeping the spirit of Communism alive, and honoring the memory of Marx and Mao in the best way possible - making sure nobody interferes with advertising!

Unenforcable anyway.

[djnforce9]

I doubt they are going to check every computer for Adblock. Either banning ad blocking was an unintended side effect of overly broad language or the brains behind this legislation is clueless about technology.

Re: IF kernelmode doesn't matter for speed

[behrooz0az]

Kernel mode is only worth if it there are loads of data or the data is already there like multiple frames each consisting of millions of pixels, also graphics output/input buffers, DMA. that kind of stuff are all already there.
linux libc is in usermode and it processes dns resolution.I don't know about windows.
We're not talking about performance here. just functionality which I think is fairly good for the matter at hand.

Re:When a pitiful blowhard like you

[amicusNYCL]

I'll just quote myself.

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

Thanks for proving me right.

Re:Don't impersonate me, ok?

[amicusNYCL]

which he RAN from

I like how you link to a post from Feb. 25th in a thread that includes posts by me up to Mar. 8th (the last word, even). That's a seriously slow run I've got there, isn't it?

Re:Hostsman's inferior in 3 ways

[amicusNYCL]

It has a major benefit though: it's not developed by a known spammer/troll.

Re:Graphics only? WRONG... apk

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Well well well, what do you know...they did it to avoid kernel space-user space transitions, since those are expensive. And guess what, what happens when a packet comes from the outside to a computer? Right, an interrupt happens and the computer starts processing it in kernel mode! So it makes sense to have the relevant facilities in kernel space, assuming that they aren't buggy (that would be really bad for security). But the exact same logic justifies putting address translation for user mode applications in user space - because keeping a facility in the same place where it's being used leaves in on the other side of the wall in this case! Computer systems 101.

Re: IF kernelmode doesn't matter for speed

[K. S. Kyosuke]

They're usermode again

Your honour, I rest my case.

Re:Blowhard bullshitter, lol... apk

[amicusNYCL]

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

Over, and over, and over again. Go ahead, post again and prove me right yet again. Maybe you should link to a past argument we had as "evidence", even though it only shows me making fun of you. That should help your case.

Re:AmicusNYCL you wish you were me... apk

[amicusNYCL]

How about me?

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

Seriously APK, just keep on fucking that chicken, man. All I do is say that you keep claiming victory in a game that you're the only one playing, and you respond by barfing out a bunch of your "achievements", as if anyone gives a flying fuck about what you're doing. In other words, you do exactly what I said you were going to do.

Here, let me try to illustrate. Recently I spent a few weeks traveling around Brazil, and I got engaged to my girlfriend. Do you fucking care about any of that? No? Then why do you assume that anyone gives a shit about you?

Here, let me drop this here again, so that again you can respond like an idiot and prove my point again. Maybe we can make it 4 times in one thread APK, what do you think?

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

OK, little Pavlov, it's your turn. Speak, boy!

I'm about to marry my girlfriend and you think I would rather be an old unloved has-been with the emotional maturity of a 12 year old. You're a funny guy, APK. As much as I've always wanted to be a hated spammer like yourself slowly wasting away, I think I'm fine just being me.

Re:Knew it, I was right... apk

[amicusNYCL]

The 1 program I put out here is more than you can show

Keep proving my point, buddy. You are the only one playing this game. Just because I choose to not show you anything I've done, and thereby reveal who I am, does not mean I have nothing to show for my work. Again, keep proving me right. Keep playing that 1-player game and shouting "victory!" Maybe one day someone will believe that you've won something.

You're sitting there playing a game of checkers, except you're moving the pieces for both sides, and halfway through the game you take a shit on the board, flip it over, and yell "victory!", and run around celebrating and talking about how great of a checkers player you are to anyone who will listen (which is only you, because no one else is even in the room). And you do it over, and over, and over, almost like it's the only way you know how to act. That sums up your history of Slashdot posts.

Re:You came here talking shit about me

[amicusNYCL]

APK, how many times are you going to keep trying to prove me right? You've already done it buddy, take a rest. Take a little break. You've proven me right, what, four times in this thread alone? Five? How many more times are you going to prove me right?

Well, shit, might as well make it one more time, right? So, go ahead, respond to this post by saying how your work is so much more impressive than mine, even though you know fuck-all about my work, and make sure to add something about the fact that I want to remain anonymous on this site. Also, please list the same so-called "accomplishments" that you always list. I'd like one more victory before this thread ends, so please, just humor me.

Now, King Me, you fucking shitheel.

Re:You came here talking shit about me

[amicusNYCL]

Haha, right on schedule, again I appreciate you continuing to prove me right.

As for me "talking shit" about you, in the first 2 posts in this thread I called you a spammer (which is a demonstrably true fact, not a statement of opinion), and then I predicted exactly what you were going to do over, and over, and over again. That's not talking shit, that's telling it exactly like it is. I give you a rope, and you hang yourself with it. So that's my "shit talking", a couple statements of fact, which were quickly followed by you doing exactly what I said you were going to do.

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

I realize that your limited and stunted emotional development also makes it very difficult for you to come up with any new arguments, but every single one of your posts in this thread does nothing except prove my prediction correct. It's time to quit while you're behind, save up your wits for the next ad blocking story on Slashdot and maybe spend the time to come up with a new argument. When your entire argument is you repeating the exact same crap 6 times in one thread, each time proving me right, then it becomes too easy to predict and you really need to re-evaluate your so-called accomplishments.

I'll now leave to allow you to get back to sucking my balls. Thank you.

Re:You prove you're a do-nothing "ne'er-do-well"

[amicusNYCL]

Wait, what's that sound? Is it the sound of the exact same BS being trotted out for a seventh time in a row? APK, the only sound I want to hear from you is soft slurping as you gently caress my balls.

Get a new argument. Haha, sorry, I know you can't. I just like to dream.

He'll still post some spam and claim victory in a game where he's the only one playing

review

[CarmellaVict]

Forward Head Posture Fix Review: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Are you looking for an overview of Mike Westerdal and Rick Kasel Forward Head Posture Fix ? You are in the right place! Do you know, low energy, shortness of breath, inebriation, and neck and back pain are just some of the problems you may suffer from? But why? How a perfectly healthy, athletic person who eating well and trains still suffer? Allow me to explain ⦠Over 90% of US population has been suffering from forward head posture or texting neck. This is a problem that no one is tackling, that doctors are not able to diagnose and that creates just as many health risks as obesity ⦠and youâ(TM)re likely to suffer from it, too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... It affects almost everyone, regardless of your age and fitness level. This is a problem that originates in only one area of your body but affects the overall health, including your mental and your physical condition. Forward head posture fixes it the simplest program you can use to immediately improve your position for greater strength, better health and energy ⦠in less than 15 minutes a day. If you want to stand up, look slimmer, improve your breathing and sleep while to get rid of text messages the neck, you must apply for this Forward Head Posture Fix program. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Few Info About Forward Head Posture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Your neck is designed to remain upright, keeping your weight in the skull ideal line from the top of head right down through your body to your feet. As you look at yourself in the mirror from the side, your ear, shoulder and your hips should be all in a straight line down to the floor. If it is unaligned and your ear t is in front of your shoulders itâ(TM)s a sure sign of the position of the head forward. You see, the average head weighs 10-12 pounds. When your head fits perfectly on your neck and shoulders, the body naturally adjusts to hold this weight. But if your head is constantly pulling forward, pulling the weight of your head on the neck and puts pressure on the spine. When your head is pulled forward the additional pressure on the neck, shoulders and back rises sharply causing serious tissue damage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... In fact, every inch of your head is pushed forward from its natural position adds an additional 10 pounds of stress on the neck, shoulders, back and spine. Thatâ(TM)s why you may have developed that ugly hump below the neck; to combat stress keeping your head up, the bodyâ(TM)s reaction has been to increase bone mass and adipose tissue in order to compensate and protect the spine from the C7 vertebrae. Forward head postures not just leave you looking uncomfortable ⦠No matter how hard you train or how well you eat, if you do not start fixing your head posture right now, it might not be possible to reverse the damage has already been done https://www.youtube.com/watch?... My Recommendation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... I am sure you will see results within a few days, I am happy to make this daring promise that if you are not satisfied for any reason, he insist on giving you a full, hassle-free, no-questions-asked refund -asked refund. Instead, from the first time you watch a video walkthrough with Rick, you know exactly why this program has been so popular, you will be almost immediate use. In just 15 minutes a day, you will find the program very easy to incorporate into your daily routine and within a week you will notice the little aches and pains in your shoulders, back and neck disappeared.

Re:Funny I blew your ass clean away here, lol

[amicusNYCL]

Yeah, wow, you really showed me, APK. You're truly a mental heavyweight of debate and argument, what with your endless repeating of the same tired bullshit. I didn't learn that tactic, that must only be taught in the master classes.

I dusted you

Pointing out that an application uses SQLite and only has a 32-bit version is "dusted". Learn something new every day I guess.

You're still a spamming troll though, that much isn't going to change. And anyone else is still flat-out stupid for running any executable delivered by a spammer. We all know what the first rule is when dealing with spammers, don't we?

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to go nurse all of these just awful wounds that you've inflicted on me. I just can't tell you how much I'm suffering over here.

Re:You OMIT another feature hostsman lacks

[amicusNYCL]

Wow, stop dusting me please! I just almost got all of the dust off me, and look at this, you just toss all of this more on!

Listen, I'm not going to do a feature-by-feature comparison of other programs compared to yours. There are several reasons for that. The primary one is that I have never and will never use your software, so I don't know or care what features it has.

The entire point of bringing up other programs is to show that using software written by a spammer is not a requirement if you want something to manage your hosts file. And that is a statement of fact. Is it feature-for-feature equivalent? Of course not, why write the exact same piece of software? But you don't need to download and run a spammer's software if you want to manage your hosts file. That's my point, argue about your own features or accomplishments all you want, it doesn't change my point.

P.S.=> I don't spam

Yes, APK, you DO spam. You have a fantastic 20 or so year history of online posts where you are spamming. Are you spamming right here, right now? That doesn't matter, you're still a spammer. You still spam, whether you are doing it right now or not. You have spent considerable time earning the right to be called a spammer. Remember all of those Slashdot threads where you would post 40 ads in the same thread? Someone would down-mod one piece of spam, and you come along and post another, and then rejoice about how you're "defeating" the moderation system in order to get your spam seen. Remember that? That's called being a spammer, APK. It doesn't matter that the thread was about ad blocking, if you go in and post 40 ads then you are spamming. People who spam are called spammers. You are a spammer. Slashdot has actually written a series of filters specifically to stop your spam. I'm sure you're going to claim victory and gloat about trying to defeat those also, which is exactly how a spammer would react. It doesn't matter if you are doing it right this second or not, you're a spammer.

I'm sure you've heard the joke. It applies to you. You might not be spamming right now, but you ARE a spammer.

A backpacker is traveling through Ireland when it starts to rain. He decides to wait out the storm in a nearby pub. The only other person at the bar is an older man staring at his drink. After a few moments of silence the man turns to the backpacker and says in a thick Irish accent:
"You see this bar? I built this bar with my own bare hands. I cut down every tree and made the lumber myself. I toiled away through the wind and cold, but do they call me McGreggor the bar builder? No."
He continued "Do you see that stone wall out there? I built that wall with my own bare hands. I found every stone and placed them just right through the rain and the mud, but do they call me McGreggor the wall builder? No."
"Do ya see that pier out there on the lake? I built that pier with my own bare hands, driving each piling deep into ground so that it would last a lifetime. Do they call me McGreggor the pier builder? No."
"But ya fuck one goat.."

You trying to argue that you're not a spammer is like trying to argue that you're not a child molester because you only did it those 4 times! I'm not molesting a child right now, so I'm not a child molester! That's your logic.

Re:I'm on topic w/ my solution that works

[amicusNYCL]

You're off topic

No I'm not, I responded to a suggestion that someone should use your program with a series of alternatives. Then I predicted that you were going to show up and start trolling. Then you showed up and started trolling. And here we are.

You know all about trolling. Maybe you should go troll the other comments I'm posting and then talk about how you're on topic, not a troll, and not a spammer. Because when you're jacking off some 4 year old kid while yelling that you're not a child molester it totally makes sense.

Wait, what's that? You're claiming victory again? In a game that only you're playing? What are we up to now, have you proven me right 12 times in one thread? I've lost count.

Let's make it one more time, APK. Keep digging that hole, you're not done yet.

Re:Your solution's like you - INFERIOR vs. me

[amicusNYCL]

Jesus, APK. Some things never change. Like your arguments. Next I'm sure you're going to claim that you don't post as people other than yourself, let's go back to that old classic.

This is going nowhere. Like your life. Take care.

Re:No, you said I had no other arguments

[amicusNYCL]

You came in here talking shit about me & my program, so I CRUSHED YOU ON THAT MUCH + the fact YOU CANNOT SHOW YOU'VE DONE BETTER YOURSELF for giving users more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity online (but I can & have using what they already NATIVELY have that does more for less)... apk

In other words, the same tired argument you always try to trot out. Face it man, you're a spammer and if people don't want to use your software then they have alternatives. It's really that simple. No one deserves to be hounded and trolled by you for not wanting to use software that they see advertised in spam. And I didn't talk shit about your program, or you for that matter, I only pointed out that you were a spammer and that people don't need to use software published by spammers. Those are factual statements, not shit talking. I've already covered all of this, you keep going in circles, I have no desire to continue repeating myself. I'm sure you'll just continue to troll my other comments and continue to declare victory in your 1-player game (again, specifically and exactly what I predicted), but I have no desire to continue a discussion that only goes in circles.

Re:My 2 arguments shut you up fast

[amicusNYCL]

Congratulations man, it's not even possible to carry on this stupid thread in Slashdot because of the filters they have to stop you.

Here you go, like I said there, I'm done with this idiotic thread.