"You're not very observant are you? Look at the real world. Why would anyone buy a CD when they can get it for free on blah blah blah. People STILL buy music in a day and age where music can be got for free. It's reality. It will still be reality."
"It's not the consumers fault that they jumped on the bandwagon after someone else did. It's call competition. Sometimes other people get to ideas before you do."
Wait a minute, I thought you just said that people are still buying music? Now you're telling me that people flocked to Napster, instead of buying TMBG's music? Competition my ass.
"What a flaming crock of horse shit. You basically deny the existence of companies like RedHat that sell free software! That's right, they sell software that is given away for free everywhere else. The difference is, when you buy it, you get trimmings like actual CD's, manuals, and so forth. This model is very simple, works, seems pretty damn honest, and makes money. It could be very easily applied to the music industry."
Why in the hell do people always bring up software in the music debate? Anyway...the music industry already offers trimmings along with their CDs. Obviously, you get the liner notes, so you can figure out what the lyrics are. Also, a lot of CDs also include extras on the CD, like interviews, music videos, Internet links, and even games. It's a nice treat for those who buy the CD. But, as you pointed out above, consumers "jumped on the bandwagon" and headed to Napster.
Now that's a flaming crock of horse shit.
"Ugh, we need less of corporate bottom feeders like you."
The Internet's primary use is not for distributing pirated music or child porn. While I'm sure we'd all have a verbal battle over what the Internet's primary purpose is (communicate?), it's certainly not for distrubution of pirated music or child porn.
OTOH, programs KaZaA, Morpheus, Audiogalaxy, etc. are being used primarily for distributing pirated music. Look at the offerings of those services on any given day. How many MP3s of Britney Spears and Metallica are out there, compared to MP3s of that little garage band down the street? Yes, some people are using these services to distribute their own music, but compared to the offerings of commercial artists, these indie artists are far and few between.
I'm no fan of the RIAA, but your rationale doesn't work. The fact of the matter is that these file-sharing services are primarily being used for illegal purposes. It makes the program wrong, not the methodology behind it.
What's so "outstanding" about Salon.com? They're just another liberal dot-com magazine wannabe. Sure, they have David Horowitz writing now, but that only came recently. Before that, it was just your average left-wing piece of toilet paper.
Don't fool yourself. Liberal journalism like what you find on Salon.com is a dime a dozen. But you obviously sound like a Salon.com cheerleader, so go ahead and spend your money. When they go under, I hope you aren't expecting a refund.
"I paid for the privledge to be there, but that doesn't mean they should be able to force me to do things their way."
I don't know about you, but last I checked, using a computer during a class wasn't a constitutional right. You may have paid for the privelidge to go to college, but that's all you paid for. You didn't earn the "right" to set your own rules in the classroom when you sent in your tuition payment.
Don't start with the libertarian-esque whining when the professor tells you to stop checking your mail during class. If you don't like how the professor does things, drop the class. It's not like anybody's forcing you to show up.
"If you'd rather be surfing the web or writing email during class, why should it matter to the professors as long as you aren't disrupting their class?"
If you feel that web surfing during class is sooo important, then why not skip class and stay in your dorm? That's why universities stick those little Ethernet jacks in dorm rooms. The rest of the class probably doesn't care to hear the keyboard clacking or the various annoying sounds of AIM (some idiots at my school still don't know how to turn off the speakers on the machines!).
Some people actually show up to class to learn something. If you have no interest in learning, please don't show up and bother everyone else who's there to learn.
What censorship? I don't see any censorship here. Before any of you go into a "FREE SPEACH!!!" mode, read the article...
"The software doesn't censor which sites a student can visit on the Internet. Instead, a professor can choose whether classes have access to the entire Internet or just the school's internal network."
I know this may sound like a foreign concept to some...but you're in class to learn. Wanna use the Internet? Do it in your dorm, and save the rest of the class from your incessant keyboard clacking.
Who here hasn't had to deal with those annoyingly gigantic Flash ads at Salon or CNET? Anyone been lucky enough to avoid those X10 ads (especially those who substituted 3000 for 30 in the remove URL:))? If you said no to the above, you're lucky.
As far as the IAB's assertion that "bigger is better," they're wrong. Sure, because of their persistent pop-up ads, people associate X10 with digital cameras. But they're also associating X10 with assholes, annoying assholes at that. People like the IAB seem to forget that there are actually some people who are annoyed by garish Internet ads. Damn, whodve thunk it?
Banner ads used to be the Next Big Thing(tm) a few years ago, and now they've gone by the wayside. Why? Because people merely pushed them into the background, or they filtered the things out. Now we have pop-ups and annoying Flash ads. While they're not as "quiet" as a banner ad, most filtering software can summarily take care of them. In a few years, will these ads still be the Next Big Thing(tm), or will they go the way of the banner ad?
"When I go anywhere I make sure to have fully researched (usually w/the Internet, sometimes w/maps) where I am going and what's going on."
So you research where you're going. Who gives a flying fuck? Just because you did research doesn't mean you know where everything is. I see people who have their planned travel maps from AAA who still get themselves lost, and have to ask for directions. At least most people are kind enough to not have the "holier than thou" attitude you have, and help those people.
The very concept of peer-to-peer has been around since the early days (very early days) of the Internet. ARPANET was originally intended to be decentralized, in case of Global Thermonuclear Warfare (sorry, just finished watching a DVD of War Games:)), so that if one node died, the others would still be around.
"P2P" (God I hate that stupid buzzword) is just a commercially friendly term to describe something that's already been around for 30 years. I fail to see the revolution here.
...and tradition businesses are trying to crush it... It's as simple as that.
With the obvious exceptions of the RIAA and the MPAA, what businesses are trying to destroy the peer-to-peer concept? Hell, not many businesses are even getting into the concept. Why? Because, thanks in part to Napster, businesses don't see a lot of worth in the concept, unless they want to trade MP3s (or porn or movies). Granted, Napster is moving along to a subscription-based service, but there's still no guarantees that, in the end, it'll be successful. Maybe if someone develops a peer-to-peer service (yes, I'm aware of Freenet) that isn't being utilized by people trading Metallica MP3s, Jenna Jameson pictures, and Quicktime files of Gladiator, then maybe one of the big players will jump in.
As I see it, "P2P" (Did I mention that I fucking hate that buzzword?) is just a fad. The concept already exists people, just ask the people who worked on the ARPANET. Giving the concept a hip new acronym and a few evangelizers doesn't make it any bigger of a revolution than it already is.
What good is this Hellmouth series on Slashdot doing anyway? This would have a far better impact if it was actually published (yes, I know, some people raised a stink about their comments being used), but this is just standard preaching to the choir.
You've had your fifteen minues of fame Jon. I don't doubt that your initial work regarding this subject was good, but now it's getting old. Your constant rants on "Geek Profiling" (TM) are making you just as bad as the school officials and other such people you write about. Not all geeks (I prefer the term "nerd" myself:)) are depressed, trenchcoat wearing misanthropes. Quit trying to assume that they are, because you'll end up doing more bad than good ("Hey, Jon Katz says Billy is a depressed geek! Let's put him away!").
Just drop it and find some new cause to trumpet, mmmkay?
--
You're the dumbfuck here
on
"Traffic"
·
· Score: 2
"In fact, because your wits are more about you when you are sober, the sentence should be greater when you are NOT intoxicated and have committed a crime."
So, by your logic, drunk drivers who cause fatal accidents should be slapped on the wrist, since they didn't know what they were doing. Tell me Mr. Dumbfuck, what's your rationale for that argument? Anyone who puts others at risk due to their own indulgence in alcohol or drugs deserves to be put away.
"Public safety is NOT a right."
True, but that doesn't give you the green light to put someone else's life at risk. People do die, but if you cause someone to die, you'll definitely be paying for it, no matter what fucked up bullshit rhetoric you try to offer.
As far as I'm concerned, you can put whatever you want into your system. Do it in the privacy of your own home.
--
Bill O'Reilly's take on things
on
"Traffic"
·
· Score: 3
"So what if Cmdr. Taco made a mistake (I'm not just kissing ass here)"
So what if the mistake could have been avoided if one freaking link was clicked on? It would be one thing if this was an elaborate hoax, but all the submitter did was link to a Linux Today which isn't related to the issue at hand. And it was sent to the front page.
"Newspapers make errors all the time and retract/correct."
You're correct. They also verify their sources. Tell me, how many times has USA Today or the Washington Post had hoax stories on their front page? I'm not saying that Rob has to play detective, but what's so hard about clicking on one link to check the story?
And don't hand me the argument that Slashdot is "Rob's baby." It stopped being "Rob's baby" when it joined the ranks of VA Linux and the OSDN.
This mistake could have been easily avoided. But if Rob is so haggled that he can't even click on a link to verify something, then maybe he should rethink his priorities...
"I drive a '94 Ford Aspire, which is #8 of the 'Worst cars to be in during an accident'. I think it got there because of the ridiculous number of SUVs on the road with their higher bumpers."
Gee, maybe its' ranking is because the Aspire is a sardine can on wheels? Any car as small as that will be reduced to scrap metal in an accident, regardless of what hits it (SUV, pickup truck, mid-size family car, hazmat, etc).
Here's my opinion for you...get something that isn't mistaken for Ringling Bros. property.
And for the record, no, I don't own a SUV, I own a VW Jetta. Neener.
"it is a shame you do not want to do anything about the problem you so skillfully pointed out."
Yes, it's a shame that not everybody is a programmer. I'm not a programmer, does that mean I can't voice my opinion on Freenet? Everyone has money (to varying amounts) they can donate to charity, but not everybody knows enough C or Java or perl to contribute to an OSS project.
Call me crazy, but Ian Clarke's statement smacks of elitism.
"Worthless ACs and trolls? What kind of fucking megalomaniac are you? Christ... There's just as much tripe at 1 as there is at 0, I assure you. ACs usually have just as many intelligent comments that don't get moderated up, perhaps even more than the logged in accounts, actually."
Ha. I doubt it. Sadly, in any given story, the ACs with something meaningful to say are outnumbered by the ACs whose comments deal with Natalie Portman, grits, first posts, and goatse.cx links. Intelligent comments my ass.
Hell, there aren't even anymore FUNNY trolls either. Sad.
"However, assholes like you, who always cruise at +1, Oldest First,"
Newest first:)
"are usually the moderators, so the ACs can't get heard, and thus can't get moderated up."
If the ACs say anything insightful, I'll be glad to donate a mod point to them. Otherwise, I pass them over.
Lighten the fuck up dipshit. It's people like you who take Slashdot WAY too seriously. There is life beyond Slashdot you know. Why don't you just join Signal 11 and crew and jump over to Kuro5hin (it's too bad that such a good site is becoming more and more of a Disgruntled Slashdot User Club)?
"The idea[l] solution would be to remove AC posting unless you've logged in, so that any abuses of AC posting can be dealt with."
I have a better solution: adjust your threshold. I keep mine at +1 (as mentioned in the sig)...no worrying about worthless ACs or trolls, because they're at 0 or lower.
If AC posting gets banned, then the trolls will probably resort to registering new accounts (read: automatic posting at +1), which means that their voice will get a little bit louder. A +1 threshold won't work then.
Just ignore them. Set your threshold at +1 and let them run around in the land of negative karma.
OK kids, let's review the latest strategies from the advertisers...
Pop-up ads
Maybe these advertisers should take a lesson from Geocities: pop-up ads don't work. Nobody likes to go to a page, only to have a window with some flashing ad banner pop up. My reaction: close them and move on. Nowadays, I have Ad Filter (DISCLAIMER: Windows only) on my machine, which keeps the ads away from me.
Still, history has proven one thing: pop-ups simply don't work.
Interstitials and the such
Unless you're rich / at work or school / lucky, chances are, you're still stuck on a 56 K modem like the rest of us. Who wants to wait for some gigantic 2 MB Javascript ad to load, especially when you're putting along on a modem? It doesn't matter if it "quietly" loads in the background or not, it still sucks up the same amount of bandwidth. Not everybody has a cable modem or higher in their homes.
Conclusions
Why do advertisers think that big-ass Javascript ads are the way to go? Sure, we all grew up with ads on TV and the radio, but until around 1994 - 1995, the Internet was still commercial free. Not all of us grew up on a banner-filled Internet...and some of us who did grow up in one still don't like it.
Re:Rich? Give me a friggin break
on
Hacking The City
·
· Score: 2
"Simple, I *HATE* rich people, can't stand'em. Always throwing their money away into useless prusuits. Sheesh, if I had that kind of money, I'd go out and earn five or so Ph.D's, just for The Sake of Learning."
Gee...you wouldn't like me then:)
So you hate rich people. Yeah, people like me are worrying sick over what some bum like you thinks. So I'm rich. Big deal. I don't give a flying fuck what you think. I worked hard to get to where I am today, and I'm going to enjoy the fruits of my labor as I see fit.
But I digress. I can't speak for the people out there who throw their moeny away into worthless ventures. I'd find better things to do with my money myself...but if they want to burn their money, let em. They earned it, they can spend it however they want. Some people may see your five doctorates as a waste of money too.
Here's my suggestion to you: quit yer bitching. You can bitch all you want about the rich people, but that isn't going to do you any good. I suggest you get off your ass and make something of yourself. Your fevered pursuit of education is a fine start, and I hope you go somewhere with it.
"I'm sad to see that, as usual, the control freaks of the world are eager to lynch anyone who makes 'unauthorized use' of a computer."
In this case, it wasn't just "unathorized use." The chat room was inside a classified network. Even though the CIA admitted that nothing was compromised, in due time, it may have been. Having a publicly-accessible chat room on a network just like the CIA's is an invitation to jump into the network, and that's a big security no-no.
Slashdot Mirror
"You're not very observant are you? Look at the real world. Why would anyone buy a CD when they can get it for free on blah blah blah. People STILL buy music in a day and age where music can be got for free. It's reality. It will still be reality."
"It's not the consumers fault that they jumped on the bandwagon after someone else did. It's call competition. Sometimes other people get to ideas before you do."
Wait a minute, I thought you just said that people are still buying music? Now you're telling me that people flocked to Napster, instead of buying TMBG's music? Competition my ass.
"What a flaming crock of horse shit. You basically deny the existence of companies like RedHat that sell free software! That's right, they sell software that is given away for free everywhere else. The difference is, when you buy it, you get trimmings like actual CD's, manuals, and so forth. This model is very simple, works, seems pretty damn honest, and makes money. It could be very easily applied to the music industry."
Why in the hell do people always bring up software in the music debate? Anyway...the music industry already offers trimmings along with their CDs. Obviously, you get the liner notes, so you can figure out what the lyrics are. Also, a lot of CDs also include extras on the CD, like interviews, music videos, Internet links, and even games. It's a nice treat for those who buy the CD. But, as you pointed out above, consumers "jumped on the bandwagon" and headed to Napster.
Now that's a flaming crock of horse shit.
"Ugh, we need less of corporate bottom feeders like you."
And we need less freeloaders like you.
Here's the difference:
The Internet's primary use is not for distributing pirated music or child porn. While I'm sure we'd all have a verbal battle over what the Internet's primary purpose is (communicate?), it's certainly not for distrubution of pirated music or child porn.
OTOH, programs KaZaA, Morpheus, Audiogalaxy, etc. are being used primarily for distributing pirated music. Look at the offerings of those services on any given day. How many MP3s of Britney Spears and Metallica are out there, compared to MP3s of that little garage band down the street? Yes, some people are using these services to distribute their own music, but compared to the offerings of commercial artists, these indie artists are far and few between.
I'm no fan of the RIAA, but your rationale doesn't work. The fact of the matter is that these file-sharing services are primarily being used for illegal purposes. It makes the program wrong, not the methodology behind it.
What's so "outstanding" about Salon.com? They're just another liberal dot-com magazine wannabe. Sure, they have David Horowitz writing now, but that only came recently. Before that, it was just your average left-wing piece of toilet paper.
Don't fool yourself. Liberal journalism like what you find on Salon.com is a dime a dozen. But you obviously sound like a Salon.com cheerleader, so go ahead and spend your money. When they go under, I hope you aren't expecting a refund.
</flame>
"I paid for the privledge to be there, but that doesn't mean they should be able to force me to do things their way."
I don't know about you, but last I checked, using a computer during a class wasn't a constitutional right. You may have paid for the privelidge to go to college, but that's all you paid for. You didn't earn the "right" to set your own rules in the classroom when you sent in your tuition payment.
Don't start with the libertarian-esque whining when the professor tells you to stop checking your mail during class. If you don't like how the professor does things, drop the class. It's not like anybody's forcing you to show up.
"If you'd rather be surfing the web or writing email during class, why should it matter to the professors as long as you aren't disrupting their class?"
If you feel that web surfing during class is sooo important, then why not skip class and stay in your dorm? That's why universities stick those little Ethernet jacks in dorm rooms. The rest of the class probably doesn't care to hear the keyboard clacking or the various annoying sounds of AIM (some idiots at my school still don't know how to turn off the speakers on the machines!).
Some people actually show up to class to learn something. If you have no interest in learning, please don't show up and bother everyone else who's there to learn.
What censorship? I don't see any censorship here. Before any of you go into a "FREE SPEACH!!!" mode, read the article...
"The software doesn't censor which sites a student can visit on the Internet. Instead, a professor can choose whether classes have access to the entire Internet or just the school's internal network."
I know this may sound like a foreign concept to some...but you're in class to learn. Wanna use the Internet? Do it in your dorm, and save the rest of the class from your incessant keyboard clacking.
This should give you some background info on Fischer and his "eccentricities."
Who here hasn't had to deal with those annoyingly gigantic Flash ads at Salon or CNET? Anyone been lucky enough to avoid those X10 ads (especially those who substituted 3000 for 30 in the remove URL :))? If you said no to the above, you're lucky.
As far as the IAB's assertion that "bigger is better," they're wrong. Sure, because of their persistent pop-up ads, people associate X10 with digital cameras. But they're also associating X10 with assholes, annoying assholes at that. People like the IAB seem to forget that there are actually some people who are annoyed by garish Internet ads. Damn, whodve thunk it?
Banner ads used to be the Next Big Thing(tm) a few years ago, and now they've gone by the wayside. Why? Because people merely pushed them into the background, or they filtered the things out. Now we have pop-ups and annoying Flash ads. While they're not as "quiet" as a banner ad, most filtering software can summarily take care of them. In a few years, will these ads still be the Next Big Thing(tm), or will they go the way of the banner ad?
--
"When I go anywhere I make sure to have fully researched (usually w/the Internet, sometimes w/maps) where I am going and what's going on."
So you research where you're going. Who gives a flying fuck? Just because you did research doesn't mean you know where everything is. I see people who have their planned travel maps from AAA who still get themselves lost, and have to ask for directions. At least most people are kind enough to not have the "holier than thou" attitude you have, and help those people.
--
P2P is a revolution in the making...
:)), so that if one node died, the others would still be around.
...and tradition businesses are trying to crush it... It's as simple as that.
The very concept of peer-to-peer has been around since the early days (very early days) of the Internet. ARPANET was originally intended to be decentralized, in case of Global Thermonuclear Warfare (sorry, just finished watching a DVD of War Games
"P2P" (God I hate that stupid buzzword) is just a commercially friendly term to describe something that's already been around for 30 years. I fail to see the revolution here.
With the obvious exceptions of the RIAA and the MPAA, what businesses are trying to destroy the peer-to-peer concept? Hell, not many businesses are even getting into the concept. Why? Because, thanks in part to Napster, businesses don't see a lot of worth in the concept, unless they want to trade MP3s (or porn or movies). Granted, Napster is moving along to a subscription-based service, but there's still no guarantees that, in the end, it'll be successful. Maybe if someone develops a peer-to-peer service (yes, I'm aware of Freenet) that isn't being utilized by people trading Metallica MP3s, Jenna Jameson pictures, and Quicktime files of Gladiator, then maybe one of the big players will jump in.
As I see it, "P2P" (Did I mention that I fucking hate that buzzword?) is just a fad. The concept already exists people, just ask the people who worked on the ARPANET. Giving the concept a hip new acronym and a few evangelizers doesn't make it any bigger of a revolution than it already is.
--
What good is this Hellmouth series on Slashdot doing anyway? This would have a far better impact if it was actually published (yes, I know, some people raised a stink about their comments being used), but this is just standard preaching to the choir.
:)) are depressed, trenchcoat wearing misanthropes. Quit trying to assume that they are, because you'll end up doing more bad than good ("Hey, Jon Katz says Billy is a depressed geek! Let's put him away!").
You've had your fifteen minues of fame Jon. I don't doubt that your initial work regarding this subject was good, but now it's getting old. Your constant rants on "Geek Profiling" (TM) are making you just as bad as the school officials and other such people you write about. Not all geeks (I prefer the term "nerd" myself
Just drop it and find some new cause to trumpet, mmmkay?
--
"In fact, because your wits are more about you when you are sober, the sentence should be greater when you are NOT intoxicated and have committed a crime."
So, by your logic, drunk drivers who cause fatal accidents should be slapped on the wrist, since they didn't know what they were doing. Tell me Mr. Dumbfuck, what's your rationale for that argument? Anyone who puts others at risk due to their own indulgence in alcohol or drugs deserves to be put away.
"Public safety is NOT a right."
True, but that doesn't give you the green light to put someone else's life at risk. People do die, but if you cause someone to die, you'll definitely be paying for it, no matter what fucked up bullshit rhetoric you try to offer.
As far as I'm concerned, you can put whatever you want into your system. Do it in the privacy of your own home.
--
For any of you who watch the O'Reilly Factor on Fox News, Bill O'Reilly had an interesting take on the War on Drugs on his show last week.
Certainly interesting and somewhat inflammatory. Gotta say I agree with it though.
--
"So what if Cmdr. Taco made a mistake (I'm not just kissing ass here)"
So what if the mistake could have been avoided if one freaking link was clicked on? It would be one thing if this was an elaborate hoax, but all the submitter did was link to a Linux Today which isn't related to the issue at hand. And it was sent to the front page.
"Newspapers make errors all the time and retract/correct."
You're correct. They also verify their sources. Tell me, how many times has USA Today or the Washington Post had hoax stories on their front page? I'm not saying that Rob has to play detective, but what's so hard about clicking on one link to check the story?
And don't hand me the argument that Slashdot is "Rob's baby." It stopped being "Rob's baby" when it joined the ranks of VA Linux and the OSDN.
This mistake could have been easily avoided. But if Rob is so haggled that he can't even click on a link to verify something, then maybe he should rethink his priorities...
--
"I drive a '94 Ford Aspire, which is #8 of the 'Worst cars to be in during an accident'. I think it got there because of the ridiculous number of SUVs on the road with their higher bumpers."
Gee, maybe its' ranking is because the Aspire is a sardine can on wheels? Any car as small as that will be reduced to scrap metal in an accident, regardless of what hits it (SUV, pickup truck, mid-size family car, hazmat, etc).
Here's my opinion for you...get something that isn't mistaken for Ringling Bros. property.
And for the record, no, I don't own a SUV, I own a VW Jetta. Neener.
--
Yeah, and it's also Ric Flair's entrance music :)
Your point?
--
"it is a shame you do not want to do anything about the problem you so skillfully pointed out."
Yes, it's a shame that not everybody is a programmer. I'm not a programmer, does that mean I can't voice my opinion on Freenet? Everyone has money (to varying amounts) they can donate to charity, but not everybody knows enough C or Java or perl to contribute to an OSS project.
Call me crazy, but Ian Clarke's statement smacks of elitism.
--
I mean, if NORAD is tracking the big guy, you know he exists!
:)
Besides, it's not like the government to waste tax dollars you know *knocks on wood*
--
"Worthless ACs and trolls? What kind of fucking megalomaniac are you? Christ... There's just as much tripe at 1 as there is at 0, I assure you. ACs usually have just as many intelligent comments that don't get moderated up, perhaps even more than the logged in accounts, actually."
:)
Ha. I doubt it. Sadly, in any given story, the ACs with something meaningful to say are outnumbered by the ACs whose comments deal with Natalie Portman, grits, first posts, and goatse.cx links. Intelligent comments my ass.
Hell, there aren't even anymore FUNNY trolls either. Sad.
"However, assholes like you, who always cruise at +1, Oldest First,"
Newest first
"are usually the moderators, so the ACs can't get heard, and thus can't get moderated up."
If the ACs say anything insightful, I'll be glad to donate a mod point to them. Otherwise, I pass them over.
Lighten the fuck up dipshit. It's people like you who take Slashdot WAY too seriously. There is life beyond Slashdot you know. Why don't you just join Signal 11 and crew and jump over to Kuro5hin (it's too bad that such a good site is becoming more and more of a Disgruntled Slashdot User Club)?
--
"I wonder how much Slashdot.org would pay me to name my kid 'Slashdot.'"
:)
I'd rather name mine CowboyNeal or Hemos...if the price is right...
--
"The idea[l] solution would be to remove AC posting unless you've logged in, so that any abuses of AC posting can be dealt with."
I have a better solution: adjust your threshold. I keep mine at +1 (as mentioned in the sig)...no worrying about worthless ACs or trolls, because they're at 0 or lower.
If AC posting gets banned, then the trolls will probably resort to registering new accounts (read: automatic posting at +1), which means that their voice will get a little bit louder. A +1 threshold won't work then.
Just ignore them. Set your threshold at +1 and let them run around in the land of negative karma.
--
OK kids, let's review the latest strategies from the advertisers...
Pop-up ads
Maybe these advertisers should take a lesson from Geocities: pop-up ads don't work. Nobody likes to go to a page, only to have a window with some flashing ad banner pop up. My reaction: close them and move on. Nowadays, I have Ad Filter (DISCLAIMER: Windows only) on my machine, which keeps the ads away from me.
Still, history has proven one thing: pop-ups simply don't work.
Interstitials and the such
Unless you're rich / at work or school / lucky, chances are, you're still stuck on a 56 K modem like the rest of us. Who wants to wait for some gigantic 2 MB Javascript ad to load, especially when you're putting along on a modem? It doesn't matter if it "quietly" loads in the background or not, it still sucks up the same amount of bandwidth. Not everybody has a cable modem or higher in their homes.
Conclusions
Why do advertisers think that big-ass Javascript ads are the way to go? Sure, we all grew up with ads on TV and the radio, but until around 1994 - 1995, the Internet was still commercial free. Not all of us grew up on a banner-filled Internet...and some of us who did grow up in one still don't like it.
PS: The channel link works. Neener.
--
...right here.
--
"Simple, I *HATE* rich people, can't stand'em. Always throwing their money away into useless prusuits. Sheesh, if I had that kind of money, I'd go out and earn five or so Ph.D's, just for The Sake of Learning."
:)
Gee...you wouldn't like me then
So you hate rich people. Yeah, people like me are worrying sick over what some bum like you thinks. So I'm rich. Big deal. I don't give a flying fuck what you think. I worked hard to get to where I am today, and I'm going to enjoy the fruits of my labor as I see fit.
But I digress. I can't speak for the people out there who throw their moeny away into worthless ventures. I'd find better things to do with my money myself...but if they want to burn their money, let em. They earned it, they can spend it however they want. Some people may see your five doctorates as a waste of money too.
Here's my suggestion to you: quit yer bitching. You can bitch all you want about the rich people, but that isn't going to do you any good. I suggest you get off your ass and make something of yourself. Your fevered pursuit of education is a fine start, and I hope you go somewhere with it.
--
"I'm sad to see that, as usual, the control freaks of the world are eager to lynch anyone who makes 'unauthorized use' of a computer."
In this case, it wasn't just "unathorized use." The chat room was inside a classified network. Even though the CIA admitted that nothing was compromised, in due time, it may have been. Having a publicly-accessible chat room on a network just like the CIA's is an invitation to jump into the network, and that's a big security no-no.
Read the article next time. HTH HAND
--