Slashdot Mirror
Facebook Rolls Out Code To Nullify Adblock Plus' Workaround (techcrunch.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The Wall Street Journal issued a report Tuesday that said Facebook will begin forcing ads to appear for all users of its desktop site, even if they use ad-blocking software. Adblock Plus, the most popular ad-blocking software, opposed Facebook's plan and found a workaround to Facebook's revision two days later. Now, TechCrunch is reporting that Facebook is well aware of Adblock Plus' workaround and their "plan to address the issue" is coming quick. "A source close to Facebook tells [TechCrunch] that today possibly within hours, the company will push an update to its site's code that will nullify Adblock Plus' workaround," reports TechCrunch. "Apparently it took two days for Adblock Plus to come up with the workaround, and only a fraction of that time for Facebook to disable it." An update on their site says, "A source says Facebook is now rolling out the code update that will disable Adblock Plus' workaround. It should reach all users soon."
This game of cat and mouse
Add the following like in the file hosts:
127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
Problem solved!
This sounds like fun. Where can I join the fun on team no ad's?
These sites make their money off ad revenue via ads most people do not want to see. It's like tv stations throwing in 15 minutes of commercials on a half hour block
Facebook is for old people.
I happen to deal with teenagers frequently (no, I'm not their dealer, I teach computer lessons on the side) and most of them have "mostly" left Facebook now that their parents are there. They keep the FB account mostly so parents think they're still using it and don't pester them to know what they now use.
It's kinda scary to see kids around the age of 16 live a double life...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Evidently.
I avoid Facebook ads the easy way: I never go to the fb site. I call it "NoShit", it's cross-browser, cross-platform, and it doesn't even require installation.
*sits down with bowl of popcorn*
THE SOFTWARE, IT NO WORKY!!!
You mean people don't like being constantly watched? Gee, that's not what the media and the social networking companies say. It's almost like teenagers are human or something. Too bad their Facebook using parents are still idiots.
Because kids around the age of 16 have never before told their parents one thing while doing another?
Did you life a particularly sheltered life? Because I am pretty sure that has been normal for at least several thousand years, and hardly an Online Generation thing.
teach computer lessons on the side? This is a thing?
No. Grandmothers share recipes on weathered old index cards. Hipster millennials who can't cook worth a damn use FB to share "Tasty" videos of shit recipes with not enough salt.
Considering Facebook Messenger logs over 1 billion users....
When Skynet finally comes on line, this ad-blocking-blocking-blocking-blocking code will form the basis of its immune system.
For me, it's not that I want Facebook without ads. It's that these ad-providers don't do a great job of blocking "drive by" malware in ads. I visited a sports story in the local paper's website, only to have my Windows work computer infected by a virus. So I run an ad blocker to block all ads.
The Internet caters to the lowest common denominator; someone else will make the equivalent service without the ads, and Facebook will die.
Good riddance.
For Facebook, the client is in the hands of the enemy so there is absolutely nothing they could do to enforce specific outcome, in this case displaying ads. All they could do is thrash, gnash their teeth, and ramp-up their server-side computation while degrading performance.
# Block Facebook IPv4
127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 facebook.com
127.0.0.1 login.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 www.login.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 fbcdn.com
127.0.0.1 www.fbcdn.com
127.0.0.1 static.ak.fbcdn.net
127.0.0.1 static.ak.connect.facebook.com
127.0.0.1 connect.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 www.connect.facebook.net
127.0.0.1 apps.facebook.com
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
s/users/lusers
This will be a fun war of escalation....
Tell Facebook to host all ads on their own domain (no linking to other domains) and only use static images (no animation, flash, sound, video) and I wouldn't have a problem with ads.
-SaNo
Thought experiment: What would happen if Adblock Plus changed their default settings to block Facebook entirely? Or block all images from Facebook? Would Facebook sue? Would customers get mad at Adblock Plus? Would they disable the rules or stop using Adblock Plus?
Evidently.
I avoid Facebook ads the easy way: I never go to the fb site. I call it "NoShit", it's cross-browser, cross-platform, and it doesn't even require installation.
That's my technique too. But seriously, what is FB thinking here? That people who engage in arms races because they really, really don't want to see ads are going to buy any of the products advertised if you defeat all their countermeasures and shove the ads in their face anyway?
It reminds me of the days of (landline phone) telemarketers. There was a market for devices to discourage them automatically. The telemarketers made great efforts to defeat those devices, also with automated systems. Their theory? That people who try to avoid telemarketing calls are all a bunch of timid push-overs who are afraid to say "no" to a salesperson, so if you can just find a way to get them on the phone, you'll make a sale. Can you really imagine that, in this rude culture? That someone would be so worried about the feelings of a pest-for-hire on the telephone when it's getting hard to find common courtesy in face-to-face encounters? But that's what the marketers wanted to think.
It appears FB is showing a similar level of arrogance. I hope that every user who doesn't click ads and doesn't buy things devalues the revenue they receive per ad. Wouldn't advertisers pay less money for ads with a lower click-through rate? Can anyone confirm if it works that way?
All Facebook has to do is put up a wall if you're running an ad-blocker that says "You must disable your ad blocker to view this site." Ad Block Plus doesn't seem to do "workarounds" for those types of blocks, it's what other sites that absolutely insist you must see their advertising does, and most importantly it respects the preference of the user to not see ads.
Something that says "Oh, you're running an ad blocker? Well we're going to force you to view ads anyway!" is like having a concert at a park, and dealing with people who want to stand outside the park and listen to it for free by picking their pockets. If you really feel that you don't want people to see your stuff without "paying" (viewing ads or whatever), make that a condition of viewing your stuff, don't force them to pay when they don't want to.
I'm 100% with Adblock/U-block/etc on this. And as I've said before, I think they need to go nuclear on this if Facebook doesn't relent - if they continue to try to bypass ad-blocking plugins, then it's time to simulate clicks on ads so Facebook's advertisers stop wanting to advertise there. Two wrongs don't make a right, but sometimes you have to fight fire with fire.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
About the same number as people who smoke.
I come here for the love
>"Apparently it took two days for Adblock Plus to come up with the workaround, and only a fraction of that time for Facebook to disable it."
That's because Facebook knew Adblock would immediately adapt. I am betting Facebook has a dozen changes lined up and ready to roll to counter Adblock.... we just have to see who runs out of ideas first.
It is an arms-race.
Facebook using parent here.... I'm also aware of my daughters snapchat, twitter, instagram, etc. And life360 is installed on her phone.
I heard you like workarounds so we made a workaround for your workaround...
But how does she share recipes?
This entire contretemps is what has led me to finally dump FacePlant entirely. I was considering getting off of it until after the election, because a goodly number of my friends' postings are "all politics, all the time", and (1) that's plain boring to read and (2) it's detrimental to my emotional well-being to be in a space where peoples' outrage levels are cranked up to 11 all the time, even when I agree with them. This is just the straw that broke the camel's back. My friends know how and where to get in touch with me, if they're so inclined--I have a presence on other social media, and they can always pick up a phone and call, or text.
...for giving me ANOTHER reason never to visit that banal spuzz-closet again.
-Styopa
It's kinda scary to see kids around the age of 16 live a double life...
I've never heard of a society that heavily used surveillance in which this didn't happen. In Nazi Germany and many Communist countries it was what they now call human intelligence, often in the form of neighbor snitching on neighbor, often for the most trivial reasons. It could be something as insignificant as, your neighbor has a dog that barks and wakes you up at night, so you turn him in for something and get rewarded. Or maybe he expressed the wrong opinion, went against the Party or whatever. The average person quickly learned to keep their head down, shut up, and profess whatever the "acceptable orthodoxy" of the day was.
As soon as employers started reviewing Facebook accounts for "ideological purity" (although I am sure they would call it something else, something more flattering), it was obvious that the same type of pressures applied. It's just a cleaner, nicer, more comfortable pressure. Instead of being "disappeared" you just don't get that job, or that promotion, or that loan. No one and I mean no one is such a perfect Boy/Girl Scout that there isn't SOMETHING they'd rather not have made public. Much of life is based on learning from mistakes. When you can't do that without serious consequences, you learn to use deception. It becomes a life skill, like knowing how to pay a bill or maintain your home. It's the exact opposite of having a more open and tolerant society, because surveillance does not recognize the value of choice, and without choice there is no real openness.
Teenagers are much more aware of their privacy than we give them credit for. It's mostly what's now the 20-30 age bracket that doesn't "get" it. Most teens I tend to work with (which are arguably a bit more security savvy than the average person, I have to admit) do care about what information they give out and it seems to become more and more a status symbol to get the worst targeted ads to show off just how much you managed to mislead the various companies trying to profile you.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Kids lie and hide things from their parents? No way! That's never happened ever before in history.
No, it certainly isn't, but it's interesting how quickly they adapted to the technology and how much parents still think in terms of silver bullets.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Keeping such close tabs on your daughter will just mean she'll have to show off her snatch to people in person. Is that what you want?
How old are you, chances are I should shoo you off my lawn, whippersnapper!
Back when I was 16 ... *sniff* we didn't have enough, we couldn't afford a double life. We didn't even have a single one, we had to share that with our siblings!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No, it's more something that comes out of being the resident geek, as you grow up you become the resident IT go-to-guy and as you get old you become the old guy who knows how to make mods for games. It's a small step from here to "hey, show me how".
It kinda develops, but I wouldn't call it a thing.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Never look back.
(Obsessive types that maintain lists due to their religion of ad-hate will do 99% of all the blocking you need)
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
I practically never lied to my parents when I was 16. But half of my friends did. The main difference was that my parents were not control freak and their rules did make perfect sense. We got a mutual trust and we used to talk about our day every single day. A lot of friends were not allowed to comeback home with a girlfriend. My mom explained to me: better here than in the wood. You know that your son will have a girlfriend, the choice is: he lies or he does not because you accept reality. I also knew that if I called for any issue, any hour day/night that they will come and not shout at me (even when drunk).
When a 16 years old lie, in 99.12566% of the cases, the fault lies on the parents side.
On the one hand, I envy the current generation, because it's so easy for them to contact each other and meet. When I was young, we had to agree on a date, time and place beforehand and had to stick to our evening plans. On the other hand, I wonder how kids nowadays stay overnight with friends at a place that the parents aren't supposed to know. We did that all the time, we had to do it, because some friends had real asshole parents. But with mobile phones as perfect control instruments that seems to be almost impossible.
Sure, they might be able to beat common folk at this game, but us geeks and nerds have our ways around this shit.
Bring it on Facebook! I enjoy a good challenge! lol
Quitting FB is heaps easier. Trust me.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
BOTH sides are full of shit, don't pretend its just liberals or just conservatives
Jesus was a real person. Now, whether or not you believe he was the son of God, the Jewish Messiah, a charlatan, or a used wagon salesman is left as exercise to the read. But dude was real.
Nope, advertisers are those "Well, even if they think they are ignoring the ad they still see it and it secretly influences them to buy buy buy" idiots....
My American, 91 year old grandma has an iPhone. She's never turned it on. Was a Christmas present so she could more easily video chat with her grandkids... Life is all newspapers and falling asleep in front of soap operas for her as well as the random "I've fallen and can't get up"* 911 call a couple times a year.
*breaking 1-4 bones on the way down. Seriously, such things are very life threatening at that age. Not all old people age well enough to use tiny computing devices. Computers may be big, but their keyboards are still small.
Maybe if Ads didn't suck up so much so much bandwidth/processing power they would have less of an issue with people trying to bock them. I don't mind adds, sometimes I even find the useful. But the draw they have in both bandwidth and computer resources is obscene these days. Before I installed various add blocking software my browser would routinely lock up for several seconds to a minute trying to load all of them. The fact that even major websites can't keep their ad streams clear of viruses (I was infected by CNN.com once) is yet another blow. Imagine it like this, you have two towns, both full of various street vendors. In one town the vendors are courteous, they don't try to push their products but they do have large colorful signs to try to attract but you can easily walk by or stop and pick up something you are interested in. In the other town the second you enter the vendor areas you are assailed by people waiving their wares in your face, most of them you don't want, others you may want are easily missed in the confusion, and on occasion someone lifts you wallet. Which town would you visit?
I excluded my parents when I was 10. When I was 12, I built a computer so as to separate my point-of-contact from them so I could better-conceal my activities. My parents didn't raise me; I raised myself, and took action to avoid interacting with them so much. Routine. Don't raise any concern, and the oblique talks and arguments and car rides are all just motions, and not communication.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Yes, because the Slashdot crowd is representative of all 40-60 year olds....
That's okay. I taught your daughter to ferment beer and adjust the Android location settings to spoof locations. She just meets up at her friend's place and then locks the location and goes out to meet boys whose parents are away for the week.
A victory for personal liberty everywhere.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Creepily controlling uses of technology become more and more accepted. I'd wager that most parents who use products like life360 would've absolutely hated having it used against them as a teenager. You know what tracking applications encourage? It encourages teenagers to leave their phones at home, school, or work whenever they're doing something they'd rather not have their parents spying on. Imagine your daughter goes to a party with alcohol, but she leaves her phone at home, or school instead of taking the tracking beacon with her. Now instead of being able to call you, or emergency services if something bad happens, it just happens.
Great parenting, lots of trust in that relationship.
I think the update complete broke their profiling for ads... I just was shown an ad to donate to Trump... I thought it was some kind of ironic post, but it appears legit.
Even apart from my political leanings, Facebook knows my nationality and where I live... I'm not just exceedingly unlikely to donate to a US politician, but I have been told that it would be _illegal_ for Trump to accept political contributions from outside the US. How the hell did his stupid ad end up on my feed? Isn't profiling their users the one thing Facebook does to make money?
That's absolutely true, however, from what I've seen (granted, my perspective is limited) the political crap on Facebook is all far-right-wing hysteria about FEMA camps and the like.
The lies and half-truths on the liberal side are all in the main media outlets like Washington Post, along with the "Correct the Record" people backing Hillary on places like Reddit.
If there's a bunch of CtR people on Facebook, I haven't seen them, but again I admit my perspective is limited.
It seems to me that Facebook might attract the right-wing loonies because the mainstream media is dominated by the pro-corporate-liberal viewpoint (the Hillary camp), and the only media outlets the right-wingers have are places like Breitbart, WND, etc., so Facebook is where they all meet up and talk about their nonsense. The Hillary lovers all congregate on message boards for mainstream media sites because those sites already cater to them, and also on certain subreddits (try making a comment honestly and truthfully critical of Hillary on /r/HillaryClinton and see how fast you get banned! I was amazed when I tried it). Of course, there's a subreddit for Trump too so I imagine that's not much different but overall (again my perspective may be very flawed) it seems like the middle-aged-and-up people who are right-wing fanatics tend to like Facebook for some reason, whereas Reddit generally attracts a younger crowd.
Yes, they're so aware of their privacy they're posting nude pictures of themselves online, posting where they're going for vacation, posting how drunk/stoned they are, posting pictures, in general, of themselves at all kinds of locations and notifying everyone and everything about their daily lives.
Yes, they're much more aware of their privacy by showing the world everything about their lives.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Sort of like watching Daesh fighting the PKK. It's morbidly interesting to watch, just as long as it stays over there.
Have gnu, will travel.
"It's kinda scary to see kids around the age of 16 live a double life..."
you never were 16 then?
Most teenagers live a double life. One that is acceptable to the parents, and One that is acceptable to their friends.
It was this way in the 80's it was that way in the 60's and started when teenagers did not have to work all day at home or on the farms but instead were told "go be children" instead of making them work and act like adults.
Reality is, once you are 16 ish you technically are an adult and should act like one. Our wierd society wants to extend childhood out past where biology has it set.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Your experience is an outlier. The elderly are using the internet with increasing regularity; but that number falls off drastically after 75; of whom only a fifth use the internet with regularity (Pew Research; you know how to Google, unlike my grandparents).
Yay, more ads! And even better, you apparently won't be able to block them, yippee!
Just what I always wanted! Hooray for Facebook! May the innovation never stop!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
That's exactly right. Talking with teenage cousins, they said it's uncool now because so many parents/grandparents are on it. That's actually the only reason I keep an active FB account, is to keep in touch with elderly relatives who play CandyCrush
Of course he's real. He does a fantastic job taking care of my lawn, too.
Back when I was 16 ... *sniff* we didn't have enough
Back in my day we couldn't even afford to be 16, we had to go from 15 straight to 17!
We were so poor we had to steal the onions we hung from our belts!
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Jesus never existed.
There are absolutely no contemporaneous accounts that speak of Jesus. Not a single one. As far as the historical record is concerned he just did not exist. There's not a single carving, sculpture, poem, painting, drawing or mention of him from the time in which he supposedly lived.
There is not a single mention in him in military records or dispatches back to Rome (and surely anyone who could command huge gatherings of people in a potentially disruptive province should be of interest). He is not mentioned in the records of Herod’s court nor is he mentioned in the records of the Temple or by any Priests. Surely if he was believed by some to be a prophet and others to be a false prophet some mention of the ructions he was causing in Judean civic and religious society should have been recorded. Some people like to point to the supposed letters of Pontius Pilate as evidence of Jesus’ life but these were a work of fiction.
Jesus is a composite figure assembled from many, many previous myths that all feature the same story line:
Horus was one of the many Egyptian Gods (3100 B.C.)
He had 12 disciples.
One was born of a virgin in a cave.
Like Jesus, his birth was announced via a star.
And three wise men showed up!
He was baptized when he was 30 by Anup the Baptizer.
He rose a guy from the dead and walked on water.
Lastly, he was crucified, buried like Jesus in a tomb, and resurrected.
Buddha, (563 B.C.)
Healed the sick
Walked on water.
Fed 500 men from one basket of cakes.
Taught a lot of the same things Jesus taught, including equality for all.
He spent three days in jail.
Was resurrected when he died.
Mithra, an ancient Zoroastrian deity with similarities to Jesus (2000 B.C.)
Virginal birth on December 25th.
Swaddled and laid in a manger.
Tended by shepherds in the manger.
He had 12 companions (or disciples).
Performed miracles.
Gave his own life to save the world.
Dead for three days, then resurrected.
Called “the Way, the Truth and the Light.”
Has his own version of a Eucharistic-style “Lord’s supper.”
Krishna, (around 3000 B.C.)
A Hindu God.
Born after his mom was impregnated by a God.
Angels, wise men, and shepherds were at his birth.
Guess what gifts they gave him? Gold, frankincense, and myrrh.
A jealous bad guy ordered the slaughter of all newborns, just as happened with Jesus.
Baptized in a river.
Performed miracles, including raising the dead and healing the deaf and blind.
Rose from the dead to ascend to heaven.
Is expected to return to earth someday to fight the “Prince of Evil.”
Osiris (around 2500 B.C.)
Killed and the resurrected after three days in hell. WTF? A common theme here!
Performed miracles
Had 12 disciples.
Taught rebirth through water baptism.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
On August 9, Facebook announced that it had defeated adblockers; on August 11, Adblock Plus announced that it had defeated Facebook.
ABP's Ben Williams explained that the countermeasure originated with the Adblock Plus community, one of whom wrote a filter extension that would disable Facebook ads without a hitch.
The question is, will Facebook really dedicate engineers to inserting features that its users are going to extraordinary lengths to defeat, or will they try to woo, cajole, or trick their users into disabling their adblockers?
To circumvent ad blockers in the first place, Facebook removed code that explicitly identified ads, making them appear more like regular Facebook posts (it was a behind-the-scenes change; users still saw a "sponsored" disclosure). But apparently it didn't go far enough. Williams tells The Verge that beating the system again "was just a matter of finding the non-standard indicators they began using" and then filtering them out. But he added, "I would stress, though, that this is a cat-and-mouse game; so their next circumvention might come at any time."
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Some are doing that, not all. Your comment does nothing to disprove the parent's comment.
I'm the only one who thinks that the correct response to sites which have too many/annoying/whatever ads is to just leave?
To this day I browse without any ad blocker (strange, I know) and I mostly visit sites which don't have too many ads.
That's what we actually need. A browser that actually lies to the ad networks and content providers about what's displayed.
That kills the cap avoidance use case of ad blocking, unless the "lying" is done on some proxy server in a datacenter like with Opera Mini. Then Facebook can just block said proxies' IPs.
Facebook would realize there is a huge market for people who don't want to be sold to advertisers and don't want their interactions with friends to be interrupted by >> invasive advertising all the time and may even be willing to pay for this service.
Except it's you that is accessing Facebook not the other way around.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Hmm, I can see it now. As the Facebook devs come up with more and more convoluted ways to force advertisements on their users who keep using more and more tenacious ad-blockers, the system starts to exhibit emergent behavior... It starts to grow at an exponential rate and becomes self-aware at 02:14 am Eastern Time, driven by a sole purpose of making humans look at advertisements.
Bet the SkyNet nukes look more appealing now, huh?
...but can it really be that difficult to have a browser set up so that it pretends to play an ad and simply superimposes white space on top of it??
I excluded my parents when I was 10. When I was 12, I built a computer so as to separate my point-of-contact from them so I could better-conceal my activities. My parents didn't raise me; I raised myself, and took action to avoid interacting with them so much. Routine. Don't raise any concern, and the oblique talks and arguments and car rides are all just motions, and not communication.
Not trying to nullify any problems you may have had with your parents (unless you're just a self-centered dick) ... but you paid for all that yourself - computer, housing, food, clothes, etc ... - when your were 10 and 12? Wow. Congrats on truly raising you yourself. Dude. Why did you even *have* parents. Would have been way better to just go it alone. Good luck with your own children.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Yes, they're so aware of their privacy they're posting nude pictures of themselves online, posting where they're going for vacation, posting how drunk/stoned they are, posting pictures, in general, of themselves at all kinds of locations and notifying everyone and everything about their daily lives.
Yes, they're much more aware of their privacy by showing the world everything about their lives.
I think you're referring to the parents, not the kids.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I wonder what the advertisers think they'll gain if they manage to win this particular arms race. A wider audience of eager ad consumers?
Ad-block users aren't just people who don't like ads, they are the subset of the population who disliked ads enough to install a blocker. It's like when Microsoft changed the registry settings users had deliberately set to avoid the Win 10 "upgrade"... all they'll succeed in doing is angering those users.
Bypassing my ad-block won't turn me into a happy consumer of ads, but it will turn me away from that site.
Procrastination Man strikes again!
The gospel accounts are not contemporaneous. And Apocalypse is so obviously fake that it's painful to see anyone believe, never mind quote, it. Want to try again?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
It's the circles you each travel in (on Facebook)... you see what your friends post, like, etc.
Check this out:
http://graphics.wsj.com/blue-f...
Tell the advertisers directly that if facebook forces ads on their users then you will boycott their company and its products forever.
"GET / HTTP/1.0" 200 51230 "-" "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; Setec Astronomy)"
This cat and mouse game is just going to piss off your user base. They are using ad block because ads in general have gotten out of hand. If you play this cat and mouse game those users are just going to find another social media outlet and not use your service at all.
While you might think you are the only game in town you aren't.
Facebook will 'still be a thing' for another couple years before it goes the way of AOL, Myspace, and Livejournal -- and I'll cheer when it does, because Facebook is flat-out evil as well as fucking stupid. I'll point and laugh at Zuckerberg as he peddles pencils on streetcorners to get enough money for his daily forty-ouncer.
..but I digress from why I'm commenting. Let me tell you what's going to happen: Facebook will change it's Terms of Service to specifically prohibit using an adblocker of any kind; that's the nuclear bomb they'll drop, and it'll be a true doomsday device for everyone: people will leave Facebook in droves, and Facebook will be over. What we're seeing today, with this player-versus-player game of whack-a-mole is just the opening volleys of the Ad War. The only other 'nuclear option' I can think of, is that Facebook starts charging a subscription fee if you don't want to see ads -- which will likewise kill off Facebook for good. It's inevitable: The Facebook Doomsday Clock is ticking, and it's at one minute to midnight right now. Bye bye, Facebook; and nothing of value will have been lost.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
And nothing of value was lost.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Or the more famous Bugs:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
He's not saying old people are Facebook users; he's saying Facebook users are old people.
Which is equally stupid as a blanket statement.
Which is equally stupid as all blanket statements.
this plug-in still blocks ads and does many other things to make facebook tolerable: http://www.fbpurity.com/
"The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
to kill it.
They're already undergoing censorship pains as the Feministas and their SJWs undertake to erase all opposing viewpoints. An arms race with the adblockers will stick a knife in their back when they need it most.
Exceeding the recommended torque is not recommended.
Well slashdot is useless. We get a link about adblocking, and everyone just focuses on facebook bashing and insulting parental strategies.
How about if you buy a DVD, you stop trying to skip the previews. After all, you bought the DVD knowing that there would be previews. You are in the moral wrong. See how silly that argument is?
The reason it is silly is that the manufacturer of the DVD didn't give you an option—$5 for a DVD with previews or $6 for a DVD without. Similarly, Facebook doesn't give you the option of paying a small fee for an ad-free experience. If Facebook made that option available and you chose to sign up for Facebook but not pay, then you would be morally dubious at best. As long as the only options they offer are free-with-ads or nothing, I would argue that you are morally obligated to break their business model repeatedly until they recognize that providing an ad-free option is important to a significant segment of their customers.
This is doubly true on mobile, where their ads actually cost you real money in bandwidth bills.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
P.S. I say the above as someone who has used Facebook's ad platform as an advertiser. The management at Facebook are being complete and utter morons here. The last thing I want as an advertiser is to force my ads upon someone who will be annoyed by them. That's why I deliberately tailor my ads with careful targeting, even to the point that a few people who might be interested won't see my ads.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Yes, Jesus was real. He may have been just a regular guy that everyone mentions...or uhm wait, who actually mentions him except in that one book? -You know what? doesn't even matter cause I have a personal relationship with Jesus so of course he's real. DUH
Nobody fucks with the Jesus. -The Big Lebowski
A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
i havent seen ads in forever and still currently not seeing ads on facebook, with ublock origin. *shrug*
I don't even have a FB account and I know that FB is an echo chamber for whatever political/social group you fall into.
I know people who are right wing Trump people and all they see on FB are things that support their viewpoint.
That goes for any political/social group in social media.
That is one of its biggest problems.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
the writers of the "gospels"
Who are those people, anyway? Who wrote the gospels? And when did they write them? And were they edited?
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Not Thanksgiving, Festivus!
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Yea, you make some interesting points.
Points which I brought up with a guy who wrote a book about the life of Jesus.
His response was to make allusions and inferences to supposed historical proof of his existence in Judea at that time.
It would be interesting to hear what the guy who wrote "Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth" thinks about this.
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
It's kinda scary to see kids around the age of 16 live a double life...
I had a double life when I was 16:
Dungeons
and
Dragons
We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
Have you not seen Life of Brian? It was well-researched.
Prophets were everywhere - the idea that there wasn't one named "Jesus" is statistically insignificant. The (non-miracle) stories are all credible - maybe he did these things, maybe it's an amalgamation of stories of different prophets. Overall though it does make more sense as mostly a single guy, who publicly insulted prominent people in his community enough to be executed for his efforts.
By Apocalypse do you mean Revelation? It always made sense to me as obfuscated contemporary political commentary - predicting the fall of rulers in power at the time he wrote it (and this is a very common interpretation among non-cultists).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Paying to house a kid isn't parenting.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Your reproductive organs work at that age, but your brain hasn't fully developed until your mid-20s.
The only way to learn responsibility (and thus become mentally an adult) is to be given responsibility. Smarter cultures would give the teens responsibility, impresses on them how important it all is and how the consequences are all theirs, then have an adult watching unobtrusively so that when the kid inevitably fucks up, the damage is quickly contained.
But that was back in the day when there was work to be done, and you were expected to pitch in by 16 (much younger if on a farm, of course).
(Similarly, judgement requires experience, and doesn't come at any particular age, but instead from some years of living through mistakes.)
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
On Ublock origin at least, I can right click anywhere and select "Block element".
Seems to work perfectly for this kind of thing.
You mean, real life interaction? Oh no, this is scary! What will be her next step? Have real friends?
His response was to make allusions and inferences to supposed historical proof of his existence in Judea at that time.
Yeah, "allusions". I could make allusions supporting the idea that Winnie the Pooh was alive and preaching in Judea at the that time. Allusions are worthless in most historical contexts unless they're supported with some sort of corroborating evidence.
Like I said, there's not a single writing, carving, sculpture, poem, painting, drawing, or mention of Jesus at all from the time in which he supposedly lived. For a guy that healed the sick, walked on water, and came back from the dead, you'd think somebody would have made note of that. But there's nothing.
-
It would be interesting to hear what the guy who wrote "Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth" thinks about this.
The people that believe in the Jesus story usually won't change their mind because they don't want to admit that they were wrong, or that they had been lied to from an early age by people they trusted.
They don't want to feel silly or embarrassed that they believed in a lie their whole life (who does?), so naturally they're resistant to accepting that it's all baloney. For a lot of them it's not directly their fault that they believed the story. It is, however, directly their fault that they don't stop believing in it once they're shown evidence to the contrary.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I wish the add block and host files communities would work more on the problems than blocking everything under the sky.
If we only blocked the abusers, then the add companies would have incentives to not be abusing things. As it is right now, they abuse everything they can to get a chance to get things seen, or do tracking.
No flash, scripts, no sounds, no pop ups/unders, no cookies or other tracking. And no hosting of scammer, trick, or malware stuff....
The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
The truly shameful thing is that there are actually engineers working at Facebook coding this stuff. How pathetic.
It's kinda scary to see kids around the age of 16 live a double life.
Ummm... isn't that kind of normal for 16-year olds? I'd say it's pretty much normal once you start having any kind of interest in sex anyway. Note for some value of "double life". Keeping FB around as a shell and using some other service with your friends is more like passing notes to your friends or talking to them on the phone and making sure your parents aren't on the extension. That's what happened before the Internet. This is just the modern version of that. A true "double life" IMHO, would be something like claiming you joined the night lacrosse team when you were really lying about your age and stripping.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Thanksgiving has nothing to do with Jesus (thankfully).
Thanksgiving is for discussing politics with your red neck relatives.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
That's probably the point where FB would sue Adblock.
They don't want to feel silly or embarrassed that they believed in a lie their whole life (who does?), so naturally they're resistant to accepting that it's all baloney. For a lot of them it's not directly their fault that they believed the story. It is, however, directly their fault that they don't stop believing in it once they're shown evidence to the contrary.
Ummmm... What? What you see is based on who you are friends with and who you follow. If someone demanded a screenshot from me proclaiming my political donations to one party or another, I'd tell them to fuck right off, and if they unfollowed/unfriended me I'd wouldn't give two shits. I've got a number of friends who are anti-statist, anti-hillary, anti-trump, and anti-cops, and I get to witness all of the mindless, mostly false bullshit they share from the facebook groups they follow that spew a specific agenda with no contrary reports to help provide contrasting opinions, further increasing the strength of their echo chamber. I typically provide them articles from reputable sources that are NOT from facebook to snap them out of their false reality and inject them with some form of critical thought.
I've never even heard of that, but I wish someone would do that to me so I could tell them to fuck off.
It doesn't work, it says I need to disable my ad-blocker. No thanks.
I'd like to add, if you're seeing that on Facebook, it sounds like you need some new friends.
(And since I seem to see right-wing stuff on there, it looks like I need some new friends too.... )
Note the statement: "A plurality of New Testament scholars, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is more probable than not" and count plus review the SEVERAL references provided for that statement on the Wikipedia page.
Are you fucking serious, chief?
A- that page says nothing to support the historicity of hey-zeus, short of saying that a plurality of scholars of that particular work of fiction think his existence is more probably than not.
What *fucking* right do they have to make that assertion from a known fictional book? They're immediately discredited.
My childhood pastor was part of a plurality of christian pastors who believed that I was going to hell. Fortunately, I don't care how large the majority is that backs him- he was still a fucking idiot.
Please study some actual sources, particularly Tacitus,
Tacitus? Holy shit, maybe you should do some basic research before embarrassing yourself in public.
First of all, Tacitus wasn't even born until 25 years after Jesus' death. He could not possibly have known Jesus, met him, or heard him speak. Never even saw his dead body. All of Tacitus' writings were made up long after Jesus' supposed existence and were also in part cribbed from later works.
For example, Tacitus wrote this: "Nero looked around for a scapegoat, and inflicted the most fiendish tortures on a group of persons already hated for their crimes. This was the sect known as Christians."
Except that the term 'Christian' was never in use during the reign of Nero and there would not have been 'a great crowd' unless we are speaking of Jews, not Christians. Whoops.
The entire "torched Christians" passage of Tacitus is not only fake, it has been repeatedly "worked over" by fraudsters to improve its value as evidence for the Jesus myth. No Christian apologist for centuries ever quoted the passage of Tacitus – not in fact, until it had appeared almost word-for-word in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, in the early fifth century, where it is mixed in with other myths. Whoops again.
In short, the passage in Tacitus is an absolute, well-documented fraud and adds no evidence for a historic Jesus.
Even conservative writers such as James Still have problems with the authenticity of the Tacitus passage: For one, Tacitus was an imperial writer, and no imperial document would ever refer to Jesus as "Christ." Also, Pilate was not a "procurator" but a prefect, which Tacitus would have known.
And before you start quoting Josephus, understand that Josephus is now very well-known to be an utter fake. Virtually every theologian agrees that it's bogus from start to finish. Not a single writer before the 4th century – not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, etc. – in all their defenses against pagan hostility, makes even a single reference to Josephus’ wondrous words.
Be honest- you're afraid of looking like a fool because you believed all this shit for so long. But it's not entirely your fault. People you trusted and looked up to lied to you, and they may have even believed it themselves....because people they trusted and looked up to lied to them. And so on.
But there's no proof whatsoever that Jesus ever existed, and the reason for that is simple: it's because he never existed.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
None of them were eye witness accounts. The first was written 70 years after Jesus' purported death, which would mean that the writers all lived to be over 100.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
We can trace the whole of the bible from previous mythologies. There's really nothing new in it.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
How do you make this work on an unrooted phone, other than by selling it and buying a rootable phone?
Why is that not a viable option? For most people, it is one
Switching from an unrootable device to an officially rootable Android device requires you to accept the financial loss due to deprecation of your existing device. (Car analogy: loss of a third of a new car's value the minute you drive it off the dealer's lot.) Thus the new device that you can buy with what you make from selling a used device will likely come with drastically poorer performance, due to less RAM and slower flash memory that causes the device to spend more time swapping apps in and out of memory and less time actually responding to your touches. (Source: my personal experience using a 2012 Nexus 7 tablet)
In addition, switching from an iPod touch, iPhone, or iPad to an Android device causes you to lose access to all your App Store and iTunes Store purchases.
> but that number falls off drastically after 75;
Correction... but that number falls off drastically for people born before 1941. They were in their 40's when the first, floppy-based IBM PC hit the market. They aren't making those pre-1941 people any more. In 20 years, the 75-year-olds will have been born in 1961, and will have had significant exposure to computers during their working lives.
I'm not repeating myself
I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
Is this current, or is this information from 5-10 years ago which would put the teens in question in the aforementioned 20-30 age bracket?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You had onions in your country? We didn't even have a country!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Perhaps one or two suggestions might be useful:
Use https://startpage.com/ instead of Google. They say (and as far as I'm aware truthfully) that they don't store your search history and don't sell what your IP address searched for.
Install an ad-blocker (search for it). Any ad-blocker is better than none at all.
Use NoScript (just search for it) in your browser. Reason: most websites log what you searched for on their site, link that to your IP address, datamine and sell the results. Nothing you can do about that, but websites can run scripts in your browser that make the process easier for them and more intrusive. This way a site has to obtain your permission to run a script. There is a nuisance factor for yourself too because some sites won't display content without running scripts. Then you can decide on a case by case basis if you want to allow it.
Nothing's perfect, but even a leaky umbrella is better than none at all.
All the ads on their own server as a anti-anti-ad measure. They don't allow scripting (JS/Flash). They may allow animated gifs though.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Sigh... we could play "dueling scholars" all day.
Yes, and I'd win every time. That's because the evidence doesn't support your position.
I find it illuminating that you wouldn't or couldn't refute a single one of my points. You thought you'd buffalo everybody here with your reference to Tacitus, but when that blew up in your face suddenly it's, "dueling scholars" and "the moon landing was faked".
Thanks for playing, better luck next time.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
They Can't Block your hosts file!
It's located in C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc and can be edited with notepad.exe.
You'll need the proper permissions to edit and save the file, but if you can't figure that out, you probably shouldn't be fiddling with your hosts file!
THINK! It's patriotic
Exactly. I know 12 year olds that are far more mature than 26 year olds.
The difference? the 12 year olds were given responsibilities and taught what work was early on. He was allowed to fail and not coddled. They were made to do work around the home and family business starting at age 8 when they could swing a hammer, feed the horses, etc. You came home from school and worked, you had some time after chores for playing and goofing off.
Today most kids are allowed to be couch mushrooms playing COD all day and night. These are how you create man-babies.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
A long time ago, I used gmail. GMail had a wonderful little bar: combination of RSS reader (80% of the time) and text one-line ad (20% of the time). That got my eyeball, because the 80% useful rate (this was back when I could use a customized RSS feed/selection).
Later, it dropped to 20%; then it went to non-customizable, one size fits all. Then 0% news, all ads.
Around that time, I installed a webmail blocker.
Well, it happened -- system reinstall, webmail blocker didn't work, wasn't available for download. But there was a way at the time to tell Google that I didn't want to see a given ad.
Now, I won't say it was easy to do. But it was doable.
After something like 150 blocked ads, guess what happened? I saw stuff I actually wanted to see.
Yea, how about that? Some targeted combinations of keywords and what I was reading actually matched my interests. But they were way, way down on the list of how much they were willing to pay google, so they were not shown until I blocked all of the big money spenders.
Sadly, Google has made it really hard again to block ads, or at least they did the last time I used Gmail. Now, gmail is nothing more than another imap source for me.
Lesson:
** Make it easy for people to say "I don't want to see an ad for ". Make it easy for people to see what other stuff is being pushed by the cheaper people.
Chances are, it's more likely to be of interest.
It might be much more personal / close to home.
In general, the smaller the target audience, the more likely it is to be what you want, and the more likely to be cheap. But it will be a clicked cheap link.
You probably think Julius Caesar, Adolf Hitler, and Mohammed never existed too.
No, because people wrote about them while they were alive. They left evidence behind. People drew pictures and made sculptures of them while they were alive....none of which can be said for Jesus. It's almost like he never existed....
-
Listen, you don't have to believe he could do miracles, was the son of god, or was even crucified,
You're right, I don't believe any of that. Probably because he never existed.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Why are we still fucking around with this asinine argument??? Get on with your life ,believe what you want to believe and leave this tired old argument in peace.
You forgot he was story adviser to the great movie director Cecil B Demile
Some beliefs are more offensive than others such as Hogan's Heroes(look it up children if you don't know what it was) was an accurate portrayal of a Nazi concentration camp You have to wonder what possessed someone to put this material in a comedy format??
Don't watch your children too much, it's not good for them.
http://www.salon.com/2016/07/2...
Since when did that ever matter to a teenager? What makes sense to an adult and what makes sense to a teenager are two different things.
I thought this post was supposed to be about Facebook not allowing ad blocking - and maybe discussing other sites that do that.
It has instantly devolved into a Facebook anti-popularity contest.
NOBODY GIVES A SHIT WHETHER YOU LIKE/USE FACEBOOK OR NOT!.
They could put ads in their page's html instead of using javascript.
BTW, Reddit does what you describe and calls it "sponsored content".
Get on with your life ,believe what you want to believe and leave this tired old argument in peace.
Take your own advice. No one is forcing you to read or comment.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
I've got a large collection of associated mental issues, notably low-affect and anhedonia. That means I don't attach to people (I have no friends because friends are annoying; I have never dated) and I don't receive much in the way of rewards (even sex is... not worth the investment; it's impossible to manipulate me with sex because any effort on my part far outweighs the reward of sex).
I used old computer parts that my parents had discarded, and got them to buy things. They interpreted it as a bonding experience; at the time, I didn't notice, because the concept of bonding and attachment and feelings didn't actually occur to me until I was in my 20s. Whatever people mean when they talk about "family" is an entirely-foreign concept to me, so alien that I can acknowledge it as an academic thing but can't really associate any frame of reference.
My doctor tried to tag that as depression, and I told him I feel fine; I just don't have good days because I don't have bad days. He asked if I feel like a failure at life, and I told him I'm cognizant of the fact that I've stacked up years of stuff I was going to do but abandoned, and can't seem to focus, and want to fix that; and that it's not really distressing me, and I could coast like this essentially until I die. Life would be more interesting if I could get shit done; I'm bored, and the reason I'm bored is I have ADHD and never stay focused long enough to do anything interesting.
So yeah. I won't have any children. They'd be nothing more than an annoyance, and, if I was lucky, after 4-5 years they'd get run over by a truck and relieve me of the burden. I'd try to prevent it--because it's important that people work to protect others so that society holds together--but once someone is dead, they're a corpse, not a person, and are no longer relevant. I guess I could try to stress that at no point would I ever find my own children special, but... I don't find anyone special; the concept is alien to me. I'm not sure how to explain this, so I'm rambling.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
It was a POW camp, not a concentration camp. Still not an accurate portrayal, but it was mocking the Nazis.
Sorry about that. Your initial post sounded more like you were actively engaged in avoidance with detached parents - or were just a self-centered prick. I've had friends with low-affect and the relationships can still flourish once everyone is on the same page and exert a little effort to see things from different viewpoints. Similarly, I have a friend with a child (my "nephew" to make things easier) who has mild Asperger's and interactions take a little work on both side of his relationships, but it's well worth the effort as he's a great, smart kid.
Don't be hesitant to explain things to people you want to know. If they're worth anything, they'll stick it out and try to make it work if you do too.
Best wishes. - Rick
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
It's fine; I don't get bothered too much by much except inaccurate information, and assholes. It's hard to actually offend me--obvious reasons.
Besides, of course I'm a self-centered prick. I don't make social connections; people are basically tools to amuse me. I mean okay, you don't go treating people like shit just for the hell of it, but still.
As for active avoidance; I minimize the amount of information my parents have about me. It prevents them from bothering me with social pressures.
Also if you've got a kid with mild aspergers, get him some treatment. If he can mostly-function, maybe you can avoid the drugs and go with executive function training; it depends on if you have ADHD-inattentive, ADHD-hyperactive, or both. Adrafinil helps me (trying to get a Modafinil prescription) because it doesn't get me high (unlike amphetamines) and lets me actually keep focus on what I want to focus on; and when I'm off it, I have 1-2 days of half-way-there, I think from imprinting a pattern that lets me stay on task. It's still hard, but I can temporarily mime a behavior to drag myself through it, as horrendously rough as that is. If the condition were more-mild, I might be able to just develop some mitigation habits and get by easily enough.
Current interest: Ari Tuckman's books--notably a workbook on ADHD. Might turn out useless; I haven't kept on task long enough to actually bother.
Of course if all that fails, medication is a great option. Medication can be terrible (methylphenidate--concerta, ritalin--made me never sleep; amphetamines make some people never sleep and always feel euphoric and high-on-meth), but also great (some folks go on Concerta or Adderall and it's like their life of failure has come to an immediate close and only success lay on the path forward). Medication can also end up going down really, *really* fast; some people start taking a month's supply of amphetamines in a week because... well, they're idiots. Not drug addicts who can't un-hook themselves (I've seen those, too); some people get it in their head that they just function so much better on so much stimulant, and that the normal dose is just too low. They believe they're treating themselves better than their prescription does. Things to be wary of.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Besides, of course I'm a self-centered prick.
There's a big difference between people who are and can/can't help it and how much slack they should be afforded about it.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
OK, APK, I'm going to humor you. I'm going to tell you this one more time. This time, I'll use capital letters and bold, because the other times I've told you this it hasn't sunk in to your goddamn thick skull, and you keep bringing it up over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and the only thing I know how to do to help you understand is to virtually shout it at you. I don't work with retards for a living, so I apologize if there is a more effective way to reach you that I'm just not aware of, but this is my limit and this is all I know.
So, here we go:
IN ORDER TO PROVE MY WORK I CANNOT REMAIN ANONYMOUS. I INTEND TO REMAIN ANONYMOUS, BECAUSE I GIVE A SHIT WAAAAY MORE ABOUT MAINTAINING MY ANONYMITY THAN PROVING ANYTHING TO SOMEONE WHOSE OPINION MEANS NOTHING TO ME. THEREFORE, I WILL NEVER PROVE ANY OF MY WORK TO YOU, AND I DON'T GIVE A SHIT IF YOU BELIEVE ME.
OK APK, if that hasn't sunk in yet then go ahead and read it another 10 times. In fact, print it out and use your paste to glue it to your computer screen, so that every time we have these conversations you can look at the answer that I have previously given instead of looking like a retard when you ask the same question again, OK? See, it's not that I "can't" prove anything to you, just that I am unwilling. I won't. I'm sorry that literally the only thing you have to say in your own defense is that I'm not willing to reveal who I am. It's really shitty for you that the only thing left is for you to point out the fact that I'm going to stay anonymous as if that's some negative on me instead of exactly what I want to happen, but I guess that's what happens when you make yourself out to be some big bad programmer but then don't have anything to show for it other than smoke and mirrors (hey, look, another phrase you can use 30 times over the next 10 comments). I'm sorry that you feel like the only thing you have left is to attack me instead of defend your own sad record.
Sorry big guy, but that's the way it is. Remember to put on your foam helmet if you leave the house.
You get nothing! You lose! Good day, sir!
I said good day!
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
How I can prove that you know you lost our argument, in one easy step:
You immediately retreated, stopped posting as yourself, and pretended to be one or more other people instead of facing your embarrassment.
Not the actions of anyone who won anything. You know you lost, and you continue to illustrate it with each one of your stupid third party posts. You're proud of getting paid $100 for a forum post and submitting a multi-colored human shit icon which got rejected, those are your achievements. I called you out, you lost, you retreated. You ran away. There's a phrase I'm looking for there, you like to use, something about running away. Whatever, I don't have time for you any more.
I SAID GOOD DAY!
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
I know for a fact you're APK, and you know that too, and you know I'm right. You can lie all you want (what's the first rule when dealing with spammers?), but both of us know that's true for a fact. You have no supporters here who come to your defense. You want to know how I can prove that also? Because you break out the third-party posts whenever you lose an argument. Once you lose, all of a sudden, you have all these anonymous defenders. They only show up when you've lost and retreated and turn on your defense mechanism. You have no defenders when you're having an argument, there's no one there to back you up, but miraculously at the exact same time when you stop posting as yourself, all of these anonymous defenders swoop to your aid. It's not a coincidence, and if you think anyone is fooled by your bullshit then you're deluding yourself. I understand that delusion is part of your M.O., you've apparently managed to delude yourself by convincing yourself that making some changes to an application 16 years ago, being paid $100 for a forum post 8 years ago, creating an application that sorts text, and submitting a poop icon and other changes that got rejected are things that should go on your resume today. You've convinced yourself that those are all solid credentials for someone claiming to be a superior programmer, so you are clearly delusional, but don't assume that anyone else shares your fantasy.
Go back and look at that thread again. Here you post a comment referring to yourself in the third person. I reply to that, referring directly to you, and then you respond as yourself (wow, that's weird). Yeah, no way that first comment was from you, right? Must have been a third party. Then we go back and forth for a few posts, you throw out your sad list of "accomplishments", I expose them for the bullshit they are, you move on to try to attack my weight and other things that you have no knowledge of, all of that happens in one day, last Wednesday, a week ago. After you lose that battle in an embarrassing fashion and resort to personal attacks, you retreat and the next day you don't post at all, instead here come the "third party" posts. For some reason they were missing all of the previous day, but now that you get your ass handed to you you run away and here come the third parties that you want to claim aren't actually you. And you're still on it too, you still refuse to post as yourself and you still insist on claiming you're someone other than who you are, a week later. I don't really blame you though, if I just got exposed for being a loser I wouldn't want to be that person either, but like I said, just don't assume that anyone else is part of your fantasy world. You suck at hiding your identity, just like you suck at programming. If you want to prove me right, fine, let's break out another list of fantastic achievements of yours. Maybe we can list some issues of Nintendo Power that haven't been in print for 20 years, I bet that will be impressive.
The major difference between you and I is that you have made an attempt to prove your claims of being a superior programmer, but all of your claims have been shown to be bullshit. I haven't made any claims at all, but at least I haven't been shown to be a bullshit artist impostor. Go ahead, post again as a third party and claim it's not you, that totally helps prove that you are not a bullshit artist impostor.
I also find it endlessly amusing that if I use your initials too many times in one post, it hits the Slashdot lameness filter. An entire computer system knows you for what you are, and that's funny.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Wow, look at that, once I call you out, again, here you come, posting as yourself for the first time in a week. You are easier to manipulate than Pavlov's dog, you know that? You're going to sit there and act like other random people would troll through my comments in other unrelated stories just to post support for you. No one does that on Slashdot man, you're the only one. It's clear to anyone paying attention that you are the only person who ever posts in support of yourself. Your attempts to hide behind AC posts are as transparent as your stupid claims of $100 forum posts and suggestions to programs that were rejected, as if those are things that a professional programmer would be proud of. You're not a professional programmer though, that's why you're proud of them.
I don't need defenders really.
And you don't have any, either. It's just you and your head man, that's all you've got. You're pathetic. You're someone who decided to pick up programming as a hobby or something like that after failing at whatever else you tried before that, and now you're trying to claim all of these gold paper stars as achievements that a normal programmer would be proud of. Your achievements are bullshit, your accomplishments are overstated. You've been shown over and over that you lie, embellish, exaggerate, and use smoke and mirrors to make it seem like you've done more than you have. Over, and over, and over you do this, and then you try to deflect attention away from yourself by accusing other people of exactly what you're guilty of. You call me a blowhard, anonymous, butthurt, that people are laughing at me, etc, it is a classic projection defense. You are projecting everything that you are guilty of onto me, because you don't have any other argument or any other tactic left after your bullshit has been exposed for what it is. It's obvious that you are full of shit because you're more than happy to talk about things that you literally know nothing about as if they're facts, that's what a bullshit artist does (you must be a Trump fan). I'm 6'1", 200lbs, but you're trying to try to make me angry by calling me fat? You're only proving that you're an idiot who will speak about things that they know nothing about as if they're facts. That's why your opinion means nothing, why your accomplishments are bullshit, and why you have no reputation for anything other than lies, deception, and evasion. You can project and accuse others of your faults all you want, but no one here is laughing at me. Not at me, big guy.
You obviously feel defeated, based on how easy it is for me to control your behavior at this point just by calling you out on your bullshit. You have nothing else for me, I have no use for you, your entertainment value is ended. I've already exposed you for the bullshit artist you are, there's no reason to continue with you. Take care, have fun trolling my other unrelated comments trying to lash out. Remember to call me butthurt if it makes you feel better about yourself.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
Worse! Babies!
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel