Gee, you slid from "buying" to "searching". Two very different situations.
It is pragmatic only for the advertiser and retailer to have ads touting the competition appear, when someone is already looking at a particular title. If you can't come up with an example, on your own, where this conduct would be considered shifty, if not reprehensible (even if it is common practice and oh-so-slick) then your unneeded defense of the behemoths is going to take the luster off your "objective" stance pretty durn quick.
I think people can read a website and judge the impartiality of the news on their own.
Would that it were true. Most people here on/. can, but it takes time and effort to be discerning. Attempts to provide "solutions" to this could easily be worse than the initial "problem", though. It would be nice, at least, if websites saddled with ads they'd rather not run would place that key sentence you quoted, from the Legal Notices, in (a) much more conspicious place(s).
Preying on the ignorance of people buying books about alternative solutions... Now there's a company to admire, huh?
It would be decent if you had the ability to prevent ads that were misleading (or worse) from appearing. (That sounds like a big, involved project, though, for huge web retailers.) While/.'ers are not as likely to be thrown by them, it's disappointing how much subconscious pull a banner ad can have for most surfers, if only from the context and timing of its appearance.
I would hope websites have more (full ?!) choice in what they block or accept.
(Never had to deal with supporting banner ads, myself, so set me straight if I'm being naive again. T'x.)
Alright! Your current good intentions will have to be reassuring enough, then... until you do come across an extra twenty grand. Good thing neither of us is that wealthy, today.
A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device....as opposed, I said stupidly, to an unlimited resource computing device...
Filed: July 12, 2002
Other References: Applications Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998. Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
(hmmmmmm)
Later in the patent:...based on the length of time an application button is pressed...
... the theater is on the side of the polite, firm patron, if it's any quality at all.
You must not live where I do. The "theater" (which often is represented by a 21-year-old manager) - any theater, here, which comes to mind right now - is not on the "side" of any patrons. They want sheep who pay up and do not disturb the staff any more than is necessary.
If you know of a chain of "quality" theaters, please advise. In real life - here, at least - the closest thing to "quality" establishments I know of are my living room, and my friends', where we don't charge each other US$9.25 just to get in the door.
A reasonable expectation of respect must be nice, for those of you well over 6' tall.
B-but your post wasn't at all amusing... it was just completely offtopic. ("Uuhhh, speaking of asteroids - I just picked up this great collection of old Atari games on sale at the store...")
I did appreciate "pupulation", though, and wish I had mod points today 'cause that's got potential for being a nifty and useful word.
It's easy to complain about a subjective loss of privacy. It's more difficult to appreciate how information swapping accelerates economic activity. Like many other aspects of modern society, benefits are dispersed, amounting to a penny saved here or a dollar discounted there. But those sums add up quickly.
There's almost the tone, here, that privacy and info-swapping are at odds with each other. What a shame.
You make art a team sport by having people do it together and fail publicly at it. "You have to honor failure," Nelson explains, "because failure is just the negative space around success."
It's certainly open to debate whether market research is as SACROSANCT or RELIABLE or OBJECTIVE as some might believe.
Regardless of whether big media influences people's tastes or follows them, it's hard to agree that airing the same overplayed dreck as usual would naturally lead to "pissing off" the "masses" (of which you and I are members, BTW).
Losing customers... are we really that soft? Perhaps they think so, but I have to agree with another poster - the respect would have been shown by not "proactively" protecting all the "masses" from the prospect of feeling an emotion. And what may have been "respectful" in the NYC area doesn't justify sanitizing the playlist in Butte or Honolulu.
Agreed - fleeing AT&T after many years (when my "calling plan" ended and my bill jumped 3x in a month) I went with T-Mobile last year. They were the only ones OK with a one-year commitment.
The free little Sony Ericsson phone does pretty well everywhere I've been - other western states, Florida, southern half of Cali - except within about 8 miles of downtown Sacramento. About half the dialing attempts never connect here. But I think it's improving - and they did install a tower or two out in the direction of Jackson, hooray. I've wondered if maybe it's the sucky phone I got for free. Here's proof, once again, that you get what you pay for ( = free camera phone), but I'm finally getting to a point where I can actually recommend T-Mobile. YMMV.
* (contingent on the negotiated definition of "not", "over", "until", "lady" and "sings". The most likely interpretation of "bastards" is left as an exercise for the reader.)
Slashdot Mirror
Gee, you slid from "buying" to "searching". Two very different situations.
It is pragmatic only for the advertiser and retailer to have ads touting the competition appear, when someone is already looking at a particular title. If you can't come up with an example, on your own, where this conduct would be considered shifty, if not reprehensible (even if it is common practice and oh-so-slick) then your unneeded defense of the behemoths is going to take the luster off your "objective" stance pretty durn quick.
<grrr>
I think people can read a website and judge the impartiality of the news on their own.
/. can, but it takes time and effort to be discerning.
Would that it were true. Most people here on
Attempts to provide "solutions" to this could easily be worse than the initial "problem", though.
It would be nice, at least, if websites saddled with ads they'd rather not run would place that key sentence you quoted, from the Legal Notices, in (a) much more conspicious place(s).
<grrr>
(heh)
(Hey, this is fun, we could play this analogy out all day)
<grrr>
Preying on the ignorance of people buying books about alternative solutions...
/.'ers are not as likely to be thrown by them, it's disappointing how much subconscious pull a banner ad can have for most surfers, if only from the context and timing of its appearance.
Now there's a company to admire, huh?
It would be decent if you had the ability to prevent ads that were misleading (or worse) from appearing. (That sounds like a big, involved project, though, for huge web retailers.) While
I would hope websites have more (full ?!) choice in what they block or accept.
(Never had to deal with supporting banner ads, myself, so set me straight if I'm being naive again. T'x.)
<grrr>
Alright! Your current good intentions will have to be reassuring enough, then... until you do come across an extra twenty grand.
Good thing neither of us is that wealthy, today.
<grrr>
Well, I can ridiculously overanalyze that joke in _twelve_ statements.
(Uh, I just don't feel like doing it right now.)
<grrr>
Selfish - or, maybe, it's satire.
<grrr>
Sure, the work environment is nicer
Whatever place this is that you're talking about, with the nicer work environment - are they hiring?
<grrr>
Yup, you're only talking about it - so far.
What's the precursor to evil behavior?
(cp. "If all the other spammers jump off a bridge, are you going to want to do it too?")
<grrr>
A method and system are provided for extending the functionality of application buttons on a limited resource computing device. ...as opposed, I said stupidly, to an unlimited resource computing device...
...based on the length of time an application button is pressed...
.?
Filed: July 12, 2002
Other References:
Applications Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
Handbook for the Palm III.TM. Organizer, 3Com Corporation, 1998.
(hmmmmmm)
Later in the patent:
So - this doesn't really apply to mice . .
<grrr>
Bill Gates and I agree
{ shiver }
<grrr>
Thank you.
It's not illegal here, either.
What a huge difference "... at least here, where I live" would have made.
It's clearly prohibited
Clearly?
Where?
How many people reasonably take the camcorder for purely personal viewing with no intent to distribute the copy?
Rhetorical. Irrelevant.
And yet the OP is modded "Insightful".
You must not live where I do. The "theater" (which often is represented by a 21-year-old manager) - any theater, here, which comes to mind right now - is not on the "side" of any patrons. They want sheep who pay up and do not disturb the staff any more than is necessary.
If you know of a chain of "quality" theaters, please advise. In real life - here, at least - the closest thing to "quality" establishments I know of are my living room, and my friends', where we don't charge each other US$9.25 just to get in the door.
A reasonable expectation of respect must be nice, for those of you well over 6' tall.
<grrr>
In hindsight, 9999999 would've been a much better choice...
<grrr>
I find this funny.
B-but your post wasn't at all amusing... it was just completely offtopic.
("Uuhhh, speaking of asteroids - I just picked up this great collection of old Atari games on sale at the store...")
I did appreciate "pupulation", though, and wish I had mod points today 'cause that's got potential for being a nifty and useful word.
<grrr>
Alright! Thanks - I was sitting in a meeting today, trying to remember the heart of this quote.
Spiffericity.
<grrr>
It's easy to complain about a subjective loss of privacy. It's more difficult to appreciate how information swapping accelerates economic activity. Like many other aspects of modern society, benefits are dispersed, amounting to a penny saved here or a dollar discounted there. But those sums add up quickly.
There's almost the tone, here, that privacy and info-swapping are at odds with each other. What a shame.
<grrr>
You make art a team sport by having people do it together and fail publicly at it. "You have to honor failure," Nelson explains, "because failure is just the negative space around success."
That is one shrewd, long-term thinker.
<grrr>
Cease and desist with that humming. Right now.
<grrr>
Keep watching.
History is cyclical.
<grrr>
It's certainly open to debate whether market research is as SACROSANCT or RELIABLE or OBJECTIVE as some might believe.
.02
Regardless of whether big media influences people's tastes or follows them, it's hard to agree that airing the same overplayed dreck as usual would naturally lead to "pissing off" the "masses" (of which you and I are members, BTW).
Losing customers... are we really that soft? Perhaps they think so, but I have to agree with another poster - the respect would have been shown by not "proactively" protecting all the "masses" from the prospect of feeling an emotion. And what may have been "respectful" in the NYC area doesn't justify sanitizing the playlist in Butte or Honolulu.
my
<grrr>
Agreed - fleeing AT&T after many years (when my "calling plan" ended and my bill jumped 3x in a month) I went with T-Mobile last year. They were the only ones OK with a one-year commitment.
The free little Sony Ericsson phone does pretty well everywhere I've been - other western states, Florida, southern half of Cali - except within about 8 miles of downtown Sacramento. About half the dialing attempts never connect here. But I think it's improving - and they did install a tower or two out in the direction of Jackson, hooray. I've wondered if maybe it's the sucky phone I got for free. Here's proof, once again, that you get what you pay for ( = free camera phone), but I'm finally getting to a point where I can actually recommend T-Mobile. YMMV.
<grrr>
Great reply. Thank you.
<grrr>
* (contingent on the negotiated definition of "not", "over", "until", "lady" and "sings". The most likely interpretation of "bastards" is left as an exercise for the reader.)
<grrr>
- What do they deliver the tenth time?
- I had no idea the entire Web was being delivered to me when I use M$IE. Whoa. All these humungous temp files suddenly make more sense.
- Good thing they don't make parachutes.
((rimshot))
<grrr>