"Overwhelmingly affecting" law enforcement. Really? What did they do when people didn't have technology and just whispered their secrets to each other? Did they whine that they couldn't hear the secrets and tried to pass laws that required everyone to shout? We have always had secrets that law enforcement could never figure out and we always will. There have always been unsolved cases, and there always will be. Law enforcement has always whined that it could do more if only they had more power, and they always will.
The site that the viewer is actually visiting should be allowed to nix any ads they don't want to host. Those sites though have to do some actual work for this though, when most just prefer to keep hands off. If web sites stopped allowing abusive ads, irrelevant ads, immense ads, and so forth then the ad companies would notice that there's a market for better ads. If the web sites stopped allowing 25 different javascript layers being passed to their visitors then the advertisement and analystics providers would wise up and stop slowing down people's computers.
What's happening with adblock is that there's a subtle message going to the web sites. But instead of hearing the intended message of "your web site sucks!" what they mistakenly hear is "we're stealing your profits". So they don't get the message and so aren't spending any effort in cleaning up their act.
Going bankrupt would be ok. Do people really like Wired so much that they'd put up with the ads?
Yes, they could regain their reputation with non-abusive ads.
If they don't know what a non-abusive ad looks like, then they deserve to go bankrupt. When they were print media they hired real people to curate the ads that fit with their demographics, seek out advertisers, negotiate rates, etc. Now they probably set up online after following a link that said "Publish your own online magazine, click here to find out how!"
If they can't break even with ethical and respectful advertisements, then they should go bankrupt.
In no case whatsoever should the visitors be made to feel guilty about it or feel compelled to support abusive ads. Wired is NOT a charity, spend that $1/month on something that matters.
Yup, adblock blacklists do not have "wired.com" as one of the sites. However wired.com is really a small business overall, they don't want to hire extra people to do this. So they outsource the work. It's the easiest outsourcing in the world, you just have to hand over the reins to your reputation and then wait for the profits.
So what's really needed is a good player in the third party advertiser world, then reputable sites could outsource to them.
This is sadly one of the drawbacks to adblock. With it on you can't tell the shitty sites from the good ones. And it's too risy to turn it off and have a look without it.
Allow visitors to the site to donate. But, but but, I can hear people cry out... "But I can't do that, there's not enough revenue from donations." Well then, maybe they need to say what "enough" means. I honestly think that those people don't really want to remain as unpaid hobbyists, and that instead they really want to become a professional internet personality so that they can quit their day job. If so, they should be honest about it instead of pretending that they only need enough money to pay for the extra ISP costs. Otherwise, not getting enough donations really means that no one cares about your hobby.
Exactly right, we do not have to go to their sites. Wired can go bankrupt if they want without any of our help.
I use adblock because you are never told up front how much it will cost you to support their ads, they don't tell you how much or your bandwidth they will borrow, they don't tell you if they have malware or not, because all you know is that someone said "here's an interesting link that you should read about this important topic". I never agreed to get their malware. I never agreed that in order to read 20 lines of text that I must also accept 20 megabytes of animated ads or that my fast broadband on my fast computer will take a very long time downloading it and executing the scripts.
I am sure that theoretically there are good players out there. But I HAVE to use adblock for my own safety and to protect my internet service from abuse. I see Wired maybe once or twice a year which is far to little to deal with the hassle of adding to a whitelist, so it's simpler to just stop going there altogether. (I have allowed some sites to serve up ads in the past but Wired doesn't reach that bar for me)
If sites really cared then those sites would serve up their own curated ads rather than relying on sleazy third party advertisers and would not serve up an overwhelming amount of crappy javascript.
Using third party advertisement services is done out of laziness. It used to be that there was significant work spent finding a good advertiser and putting your faith in them. After all if you've got a bad advertiser it makes you look bad too. Even companies that relied on advertising for their living, like radio and television stations, would never accept all comers and instead they were picky; if your market is young adults then you don't want ads about incontinence ads. But today the easy route is taken and you get a third party company that does all the work, they present the ads by injecting them into HTTP and they'll send you whatever cash they deem fit and all you have to do is sit back and not bother with pesky details like whether or not you are alienating your audience.
They could spend their own money sending out ads in the mail, instead of spending my money to deliver them.
I'm baffled at the support of advertisers on slashdot. Too many people here making their living delivering ads?
Do people still remember when the richest companies in the world made their money by making and selling things? Actual sweat invested, a product that when finished you could point at and be proud of. Advertising back then was a side line, part of a necessary thing to sell your product but never the main attraction. Today the richest companies are essentially advertisement delivery vehicles. Somewhere something went terribly wrong.
People want electric cars in order to conserve energy, not for themselves but for the environment. So having a very inefficient charger defeats that purpose.
Utilities have lots of people doing PR to deflect negative publicity (*). And the general public will not pay attention to stuff like this anyway. They will sue until the former employee has nothing except a few followers sending consolation tweets.
(*) except for PG&E which seems to have the most incompetent PR ever. Their method of dealing with angry customers is to make them angry at something else (like asking to reduce the very light fine they were given for accidentally killing their customers)
In California, they complain that the vote was rigged and that illegal immigrants were bused in to the polls, then demand a recount over and over until they're hauled away by the people in the white jackets. A lot of politicians never learned how to lose gracefully while in little league.
DOJ: Explain again why you lobbed a nuclear weapon at your chief competitor's headquarters? Corporation: It was a business decision necessary to appease the stock holders. DOJ: Well, I guess that's ok, but we'll still have to fine you $1000 for for disrupting traffic. Corporation: Fair enough.
Train him in everything I do... I'd ask what the budget it for training, how many years of graduate school to pay for, give him a list of subjects to learn, then wait for the person to get caught up. If one is in a position where a trained animal can do it then it's important to make sure you're an indispensible trained animal. Otherwise you'll be treated like a trained animal. Obtain incriminating evidence on the CEO and store it in escrow, shmooze with the COB, don't write down the passwords, and keep the resume updated just in case.
Slashdot Mirror
"Overwhelmingly affecting" law enforcement. Really? What did they do when people didn't have technology and just whispered their secrets to each other? Did they whine that they couldn't hear the secrets and tried to pass laws that required everyone to shout? We have always had secrets that law enforcement could never figure out and we always will. There have always been unsolved cases, and there always will be. Law enforcement has always whined that it could do more if only they had more power, and they always will.
The site that the viewer is actually visiting should be allowed to nix any ads they don't want to host. Those sites though have to do some actual work for this though, when most just prefer to keep hands off. If web sites stopped allowing abusive ads, irrelevant ads, immense ads, and so forth then the ad companies would notice that there's a market for better ads. If the web sites stopped allowing 25 different javascript layers being passed to their visitors then the advertisement and analystics providers would wise up and stop slowing down people's computers.
What's happening with adblock is that there's a subtle message going to the web sites. But instead of hearing the intended message of "your web site sucks!" what they mistakenly hear is "we're stealing your profits". So they don't get the message and so aren't spending any effort in cleaning up their act.
Going bankrupt would be ok. Do people really like Wired so much that they'd put up with the ads?
Yes, they could regain their reputation with non-abusive ads.
If they don't know what a non-abusive ad looks like, then they deserve to go bankrupt. When they were print media they hired real people to curate the ads that fit with their demographics, seek out advertisers, negotiate rates, etc. Now they probably set up online after following a link that said "Publish your own online magazine, click here to find out how!"
If they can't break even with ethical and respectful advertisements, then they should go bankrupt.
In no case whatsoever should the visitors be made to feel guilty about it or feel compelled to support abusive ads. Wired is NOT a charity, spend that $1/month on something that matters.
Yup, adblock blacklists do not have "wired.com" as one of the sites. However wired.com is really a small business overall, they don't want to hire extra people to do this. So they outsource the work. It's the easiest outsourcing in the world, you just have to hand over the reins to your reputation and then wait for the profits.
So what's really needed is a good player in the third party advertiser world, then reputable sites could outsource to them.
This is sadly one of the drawbacks to adblock. With it on you can't tell the shitty sites from the good ones. And it's too risy to turn it off and have a look without it.
A lot of web sites are justifiably scared about this approach because they'll find out that they really don't have any faithful visitors.
Allow visitors to the site to donate.
But, but but, I can hear people cry out... "But I can't do that, there's not enough revenue from donations." Well then, maybe they need to say what "enough" means. I honestly think that those people don't really want to remain as unpaid hobbyists, and that instead they really want to become a professional internet personality so that they can quit their day job. If so, they should be honest about it instead of pretending that they only need enough money to pay for the extra ISP costs. Otherwise, not getting enough donations really means that no one cares about your hobby.
It's sad that people get hurt, but please won't you think of the profits?
Exactly right, we do not have to go to their sites. Wired can go bankrupt if they want without any of our help.
I use adblock because you are never told up front how much it will cost you to support their ads, they don't tell you how much or your bandwidth they will borrow, they don't tell you if they have malware or not, because all you know is that someone said "here's an interesting link that you should read about this important topic". I never agreed to get their malware. I never agreed that in order to read 20 lines of text that I must also accept 20 megabytes of animated ads or that my fast broadband on my fast computer will take a very long time downloading it and executing the scripts.
I am sure that theoretically there are good players out there. But I HAVE to use adblock for my own safety and to protect my internet service from abuse. I see Wired maybe once or twice a year which is far to little to deal with the hassle of adding to a whitelist, so it's simpler to just stop going there altogether. (I have allowed some sites to serve up ads in the past but Wired doesn't reach that bar for me)
If sites really cared then those sites would serve up their own curated ads rather than relying on sleazy third party advertisers and would not serve up an overwhelming amount of crappy javascript.
They're scared. If people keep using adblock then they'll have to stop blogging and get a real job instead.
Using third party advertisement services is done out of laziness. It used to be that there was significant work spent finding a good advertiser and putting your faith in them. After all if you've got a bad advertiser it makes you look bad too. Even companies that relied on advertising for their living, like radio and television stations, would never accept all comers and instead they were picky; if your market is young adults then you don't want ads about incontinence ads. But today the easy route is taken and you get a third party company that does all the work, they present the ads by injecting them into HTTP and they'll send you whatever cash they deem fit and all you have to do is sit back and not bother with pesky details like whether or not you are alienating your audience.
They could spend their own money sending out ads in the mail, instead of spending my money to deliver them.
I'm baffled at the support of advertisers on slashdot. Too many people here making their living delivering ads?
Do people still remember when the richest companies in the world made their money by making and selling things? Actual sweat invested, a product that when finished you could point at and be proud of. Advertising back then was a side line, part of a necessary thing to sell your product but never the main attraction. Today the richest companies are essentially advertisement delivery vehicles. Somewhere something went terribly wrong.
You only have one?
People want electric cars in order to conserve energy, not for themselves but for the environment. So having a very inefficient charger defeats that purpose.
True, but if you're getting the shaft on the way out do you really want to work the people that did that again?
Utilities have lots of people doing PR to deflect negative publicity (*). And the general public will not pay attention to stuff like this anyway. They will sue until the former employee has nothing except a few followers sending consolation tweets.
(*) except for PG&E which seems to have the most incompetent PR ever. Their method of dealing with angry customers is to make them angry at something else (like asking to reduce the very light fine they were given for accidentally killing their customers)
Sue you into nothingness. Always blow the whistle anonymously if you don't want to be a martyr.
In California, they complain that the vote was rigged and that illegal immigrants were bused in to the polls, then demand a recount over and over until they're hauled away by the people in the white jackets. A lot of politicians never learned how to lose gracefully while in little league.
The two week notice is not strictly necessary.
DOJ: Explain again why you lobbed a nuclear weapon at your chief competitor's headquarters?
Corporation: It was a business decision necessary to appease the stock holders.
DOJ: Well, I guess that's ok, but we'll still have to fine you $1000 for for disrupting traffic.
Corporation: Fair enough.
Train him in everything I do... I'd ask what the budget it for training, how many years of graduate school to pay for, give him a list of subjects to learn, then wait for the person to get caught up. If one is in a position where a trained animal can do it then it's important to make sure you're an indispensible trained animal. Otherwise you'll be treated like a trained animal. Obtain incriminating evidence on the CEO and store it in escrow, shmooze with the COB, don't write down the passwords, and keep the resume updated just in case.
It bounced off of Trump's hair.
Decades, what was I thinking. I hate mondays.
I've played a lot of video games over the centuries. I don't ever recall any idealized versions of men or women.
Yes, I do play a lot. You have some counter examples, no one every said it was 100% one way.