Because Netflix will still work.. but Airplay wonâ(TM)t. People will blame Apple for that, public pressure will grow for Apple to cave. I just donâ(TM)t think that many people use AirPlay for this to work as well as Netflix wants with Bluetooth speakers, smart TVs, consoles etc in mix.
Netflix is glad to support airplay as long as they know their DRM/licenses will be properly enforced. They donâ(TM)t care about third parties so much as they canâ(TM)t guarantee that third parties will prevent piracy the way they want it done. Thatâ(TM)s a part of what this pissing match is about. That, and money of course.
IANA.. anything relevant here. I work in construction management (many years prior in IT, security, etc, hence me being here), and often at my desk on the jobsite the grinding, hammering, cutting, you name it gives piercing noise that makes it f'ing near impossible to concentrate. So I've been eager to use noise cancelling.. however there are issues.
The obvious one, pointed out, is possible cancellation of noise you really need to hear instead of ignore, like something collapsing, someone calling you, etc. (especially when walking the site instead of at the desk) In a construction environment, it'd be very hard to programmatically distinguish the good loud noise versus bad loud noise- scaffolding may be collapsing, or it may just be a steel worker cutting an extra toe angle off of a joist that was manufactured incorrectly and that falling to floor. It's probably kind of like if an active shooter scenario happened at a gun range- which gun shot is bad? You can perhaps tell by direction sound was aimed in that case, but standard folks listening will mostly just hear shots until they notice something amiss. (I pray I never experience that.) I suspect the best answer in industrial application would be "partial cancellation," a bit more noise let through than Bose currently lets through, kill plainly regular noises like compressors but let irregular noises like crashes or hammering through.
However, my sister is an audiologist and pointed out something else- there really hasn't been a study of noise cancellation in loud environments, and it's benefit to ear health. While the cancellation is creating opposing waves and all, there's no study on the actual sound pressure that gets to the ear drum and possible effects of that, even if it is in an inaudible range. I can say when sitting at my desk and I turn on cancellation with my Bose QC20i's, it does WONDERS for noises like compressors and such- but I can tell there's a pressure in my ear from the cancellation. So there's still a valid health concern to be investigated before they'd be OSHA approved for use- I'd rather not lose my hearing thinking the cancellation was a good noise reducer when it had negligible health effects. As such, right now OSHA doesn't really approve noise cancellation in any construction environment, just standard NRR rated blocking materials.
I actually wonder why it's so hard for any company to say "Here's what we collect, here's why we use it. Here's an option to submit automatically, review before submit, or not send at all. And oh yeah, here's an option to remove data from reports or to decline to ever send a selected field."
I can say this- if a company were transparent and provided a means to verify what they were doing (IE not secretly sending a few extra undocumented pieces), I might be more inclined to send data based on that honesty than I should be. There might still be stuff I take out, but if I know what's being sent instead of just "Hey there's a crapton of data on my line, I've no clue what it is, where it's going, or why!!"
Barely related side note- crap like this actually makes me miss dialup. With broadband, sending these little reports back isn't too noticeable if you're just on a workstation on a dsl line at home, and while you might have firewall or other setup, most folks including IT nerds "set it and forget it.". People really don't tend to care if there's no user experience impact.
Back in Win XP days a friend of mine, who *damn well* shoulda known better, linked a pretty cool Matrix screen saver in group chat about the time the movie was gaining steam in media. Everyone knowing he's competent admin, always does due diligence etc, checks it out. At the time I was at bumfuck Missouri visiting family where dialup was the only option (even until less than 5 years ago.) Well, after installing the screensaver, I noticed that the modem activity indicator was going in the systray for 10-20sec periods. I only had IRC loaded, no web browser, nothing else that would be hitting the network, and knew what to expect traffic wise of standard OS functions. (I HEREBY ACCEPT MY PUNISHMENT OF ETERNAL JUDGEMENT, UNPAID MALWARE REMOVAL, AND FINGERPOINT AND LAUGHING- You guessed it, this screensaver had a new nasty riding its coattails. Yes, I should have checked myself etc etc, trust me I knew instantly my errors, and have used that lesson well in life since. The screensaver actually wasn't sending much data at all, apparently a C&C check that had no new instructions at that time.. but enough data that I noticed- only because of dialup. The group chat of admins did some reverse engineering on it, reported to McAfee and Norton (back when, relatively to today, they didn't suck, and were the big AV players, we hit several minor ones as well)- both companies worked with us, updated defs within 6hr, gave us credit for the find. Seriously though- dialup was the hero here, it would have likely gone undetected for a while if not for seeing small data being forced to take a long time to transmit.
Kinda sucked, because for the time, it really was a dang decent screensaver with 3d effects that by today's standards wouldn't be awesome but not aged/antiquated.
FWIW- I worked with a small business server (I didn't choose the OS, I inherited.) around 2008. It got deactivated due to hardware change (HD failure, we upgraded RAM while at it before reinstalling new drive and restoring backup). SBS wouldn't activate. I called MS per phone number listed clearly on screen, they asked a few basic pieces of info to ascertain the original license and I assume find the reason for decline in their records. I told them the situation and basic, not precise, details of HW changes that occurred, they provided an activation over the code, no purchase necessary. Total time was 10 minutes on phone. They really weren't unreasonable at all about it, pretty solid customer experience with individual on phone not treating me like idiot or pirate or etc. I'm no fan of them, but I do give them props for how smoothly that process went.
If it's substantially the same hardware, even if their system flagged it, they're actually not out to gouge on this side of things. (I make no claims about gouging in any other part of the process here.) If someone were reactivating constantly due to reinstall/hardware/etc, they would have needed to call MS at some point I'm pretty sure, and would have explained what's going on. I'm sure that MS keeps records of that, and looked for such before pursuing in court.
I'm sitting here thinking it wouldn't be hard to wire the clock to stop on whistle. Put a sensor in ball, ref pushes button after he hands ball to inbounding player, it detects acceleration of throw in then starts clock on next (capacitive?) touch. (Ok probably it only transmits acceleration/touch and score table receiver does logic on that). As always human standby, if they hit start after transmitter starts clock or stop after whistle stops ignore it, but if they start/stop when a sensor missed it it accepts the human command and resumes logic. The programming seems easy here, the tech of not imbalancing the ball, durable for impact etc probably not that far off... As a bonus this system might help remove much of human skew on timing, but doesn't help refs slow to whistle etc.
On the surface this isn't news for nerds.. But really with a bit of imagination it could be!
Get a hunting trail camera. Takes pics on an SD card. Not networked, but is designed to be outside and it should get you the information you seek relatively cheaply.
When I purchased my iPhone, I was told there WOULD be an activation process available at the AT&T Stores (after they finished the big first day's rush of business), as well as there apparently is a way to activate by calling a 1-800 number, not from the phone most likely.;) HTH, but I would certainly be asking the rep BEFORE I purchased if I were in your shoes.
Ok, I like his explanation better than mine. And certainly respect it more.;) Thank you sir as always for sticking around and helping us legal novices make heads and tails.
Or perhaps the RIAA media engine wasn't trying to get this published like they do anything remotely looking like a success for them?
(And yes, they do have a media team. It actually may be the most successful part of this operation so far in terms of money earned (via sales from deterred infringers). If one could call any of it a success....)
Interesting.. not that many comments, and three responses saying "I'm a decent sized ISP employee, and while we don't respond, we at least look into each complaint." I can only hope so.
While reading over this article and thinking, I came up with another interesting idea. I have recently registered a domain which I'm sure is ripe for joe jobs. It is basically a private image hosting service. Flickr-esque in nature, but... just for my friends to upload, world to see.
Because of this privilege, and other semi-obvious reasons, I don't want anyone with an account on my domain sending an email with a jpg attachment. Why can't we set up an anti-spam utility which says "ok, the from: address is this domain. This domain uses ____ rules. This email [does|does not] follow the rules" and flag appropriately. If I had an email from my domain with a jpg attachment, it's obviously spam. Other similar rules applied appropriately could help filter spam.
Side note.. in the new discussion system, where is the respond to article button, instead of reply to post??? I gotta be missing something obvious here...
I've always insisted though that the show's not out for accuracy, but 1. Entertainment, and 2. Inspiration. To you or me it's a big whoop. To a 8 to 13 year old, though, it can open their eyes to things, get them inspired in science, and help start the next wave of students down that track. If they happen to get things right, great.
Actually, I'd say sometimes they intentionally leave the door open to crappy results. It's called "revisit show" or "free publicity" when someone makes a big hooplah of proving them wrong on the web. Job security through incompetence (sadly seems common in the science world.)
(OT Side idea... The grass is greener... might be interesting to test to see if there's some weird reflection/refraction properties in the grass or the perspective angle of the grass might cause the light to always come back greener. I know, silly idea, but who knows, maybe they'll try for fun. It takes one, though.. can't even come up with a smart alec way for them to try that. Darn.)
Shame on me for saying without supporting link, but iirc if a person is rendered suddenly unconscious while standing, or is shot dead instantly (etc) they will fall "forward" instead of backwards, though most of the momentum is downward.
But while we're at nitpicking the nitpickers... The purpose of Mythbusters isn't science itself, but to engage people in science. To entertain foremost, but there's a background hope your 8 to 18 year old kid will say "Waittaminute" at something, look at it, and do their own analysis at some level. No I don't mean load the back yard up with bottle rockets and send the beanie baby to the neighbors (IE the raccoon myth) but they actually have lots of things where you can look and say "I think I can make a better device than that" or "But what happens if THIS factor is accounted for?" or or or.... For a kid, that can be a career deciding moment. And at worst, it makes them more aware and willing to research. How many of us haven't seen the death ray links both from the show and hobbyists (linked from/. articles, of course!! Like http://www.solardeathray.com/ ) and said "Hrmmmm...."?? I know I'd like to try building my own (but knowing my glue skills, I'll set me on fire, and the Britney Spears plush will survive. If we ever want ET life to touch down here, I'd best not do that.)
Also, I must agree, 90% of the time the scope of their intentions is misunderstood either through us not looking, or them not presenting. Or both. I'm not praising their science, I'm praising their intentions. And to be honest, I'd be honored to meet EITHER of the hosts, or even "The Build Crew" (KARI!!! but the rest are neat too) and engage in a 5 minute(+) discusion.. I suspect there's lots to these guys we don't get to see on TV.
I think you more elegantly phrased my thought (and managed to avoid the bitter tongue I take to companies in my country.) Thank you. Good to know someone got it.:)
This is of course, the model of the youth hotels in Europe. Pay less for customer labor. Would it be that bad, if it worked that way you propose?
Sadly, for me, in corporate USA, I'd have to pay for the privledge to stock the shelves. Some money hungry people miss the point so much they miss the money.
That show is almost spot on for that sort of topic. Save they don't take the scientific view at it. To boot, they're pretty equal opportunity harassers when it comes to politics. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Green, etc are all targets as far as those two are concerned. And occasionally they're educational too.
If you work for a government agency, educational institution, or a other non-profit, you're lucky to get them to cough up $20 to purchase nics AND hubs/switches, much less anything more advanced. And the way I see it, being willing to spend $100 for security is better than the amount that the people who caused him to ask this question spent.
Seriously, I can understand his statement- you gotta work within what you know you can get, not what you wish you could get.
But for dialup users like me, it kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it?;)
I like most other people don't mind ads that are static text, static images. Even something with a relatively simple blink. It's these 500k animated gifs and 1mb spank the monkey flash ads that kill me. On dialup at home, I *have* to use adblock even on/. due to the fact that I don't want to wait up to 10 minutes just for content to be readable.
I suppose yet another workaround would be to set up an adblock that does the get, but then drops the packets after the first 1k or so. As someone pointed out to that, a javascript could be used to detect the image size and compare to expected, but...
Bah. All of this would be simpler if advertisers would just realize that it's been brought onto themselves. Kind of like spam, this is going to become a game of back and forth, I fear. We've already named the next two iterations of lunacy.;)
Why not pull a tarhole like spam trappers do- My web script PUTs the first content through the first </a> then holds a brief second, a bit of the <some content> but not all.
Then, I go and look at the server logs for the get of the IMG file. If I don't see a fetch from the same IP that is fetching this page, redirect! Many browsers honor the redirects placed in odd places, plus there's good ol' javascript too.
Seems simple to write in english. But I'm not sure how easy that'd be to code. Not too difficult either, I would reckon
I greatly agree with your statement with one nitpick: Broadband's everywhere. Here in podunk Missouri, it's still fairly sparse, and expensive to those who can get it.
That being said, I use dialup at home. And Firefox is under 10 minutes to download. There are website indexes that I swear take longer to load.
That perhaps is its best selling point- painless even under some extreme circumstances.
And throw in adblock, wow things are much better. I almost feel like the web's back to the days of 14.4 when people didn't insist on mucking up their pages with that crap!
Slashdot Mirror
Because Netflix will still work.. but Airplay wonâ(TM)t. People will blame Apple for that, public pressure will grow for Apple to cave. I just donâ(TM)t think that many people use AirPlay for this to work as well as Netflix wants with Bluetooth speakers, smart TVs, consoles etc in mix.
Netflix is glad to support airplay as long as they know their DRM/licenses will be properly enforced. They donâ(TM)t care about third parties so much as they canâ(TM)t guarantee that third parties will prevent piracy the way they want it done. Thatâ(TM)s a part of what this pissing match is about. That, and money of course.
Hot grits.
Had I mod points and the roof wasn't 5, this would be +1. There's some things you don't touch on.. but you really nail an elephant in the room!
IANA.. anything relevant here. I work in construction management (many years prior in IT, security, etc, hence me being here), and often at my desk on the jobsite the grinding, hammering, cutting, you name it gives piercing noise that makes it f'ing near impossible to concentrate. So I've been eager to use noise cancelling.. however there are issues.
The obvious one, pointed out, is possible cancellation of noise you really need to hear instead of ignore, like something collapsing, someone calling you, etc. (especially when walking the site instead of at the desk) In a construction environment, it'd be very hard to programmatically distinguish the good loud noise versus bad loud noise- scaffolding may be collapsing, or it may just be a steel worker cutting an extra toe angle off of a joist that was manufactured incorrectly and that falling to floor. It's probably kind of like if an active shooter scenario happened at a gun range- which gun shot is bad? You can perhaps tell by direction sound was aimed in that case, but standard folks listening will mostly just hear shots until they notice something amiss. (I pray I never experience that.) I suspect the best answer in industrial application would be "partial cancellation," a bit more noise let through than Bose currently lets through, kill plainly regular noises like compressors but let irregular noises like crashes or hammering through.
However, my sister is an audiologist and pointed out something else- there really hasn't been a study of noise cancellation in loud environments, and it's benefit to ear health. While the cancellation is creating opposing waves and all, there's no study on the actual sound pressure that gets to the ear drum and possible effects of that, even if it is in an inaudible range. I can say when sitting at my desk and I turn on cancellation with my Bose QC20i's, it does WONDERS for noises like compressors and such- but I can tell there's a pressure in my ear from the cancellation. So there's still a valid health concern to be investigated before they'd be OSHA approved for use- I'd rather not lose my hearing thinking the cancellation was a good noise reducer when it had negligible health effects. As such, right now OSHA doesn't really approve noise cancellation in any construction environment, just standard NRR rated blocking materials.
I actually wonder why it's so hard for any company to say "Here's what we collect, here's why we use it. Here's an option to submit automatically, review before submit, or not send at all. And oh yeah, here's an option to remove data from reports or to decline to ever send a selected field."
I can say this- if a company were transparent and provided a means to verify what they were doing (IE not secretly sending a few extra undocumented pieces), I might be more inclined to send data based on that honesty than I should be. There might still be stuff I take out, but if I know what's being sent instead of just "Hey there's a crapton of data on my line, I've no clue what it is, where it's going, or why!!"
Barely related side note- crap like this actually makes me miss dialup. With broadband, sending these little reports back isn't too noticeable if you're just on a workstation on a dsl line at home, and while you might have firewall or other setup, most folks including IT nerds "set it and forget it.". People really don't tend to care if there's no user experience impact.
Back in Win XP days a friend of mine, who *damn well* shoulda known better, linked a pretty cool Matrix screen saver in group chat about the time the movie was gaining steam in media. Everyone knowing he's competent admin, always does due diligence etc, checks it out. At the time I was at bumfuck Missouri visiting family where dialup was the only option (even until less than 5 years ago.) Well, after installing the screensaver, I noticed that the modem activity indicator was going in the systray for 10-20sec periods. I only had IRC loaded, no web browser, nothing else that would be hitting the network, and knew what to expect traffic wise of standard OS functions. (I HEREBY ACCEPT MY PUNISHMENT OF ETERNAL JUDGEMENT, UNPAID MALWARE REMOVAL, AND FINGERPOINT AND LAUGHING- You guessed it, this screensaver had a new nasty riding its coattails. Yes, I should have checked myself etc etc, trust me I knew instantly my errors, and have used that lesson well in life since. The screensaver actually wasn't sending much data at all, apparently a C&C check that had no new instructions at that time.. but enough data that I noticed- only because of dialup. The group chat of admins did some reverse engineering on it, reported to McAfee and Norton (back when, relatively to today, they didn't suck, and were the big AV players, we hit several minor ones as well)- both companies worked with us, updated defs within 6hr, gave us credit for the find. Seriously though- dialup was the hero here, it would have likely gone undetected for a while if not for seeing small data being forced to take a long time to transmit.
Kinda sucked, because for the time, it really was a dang decent screensaver with 3d effects that by today's standards wouldn't be awesome but not aged/antiquated.
FWIW- I worked with a small business server (I didn't choose the OS, I inherited.) around 2008. It got deactivated due to hardware change (HD failure, we upgraded RAM while at it before reinstalling new drive and restoring backup). SBS wouldn't activate. I called MS per phone number listed clearly on screen, they asked a few basic pieces of info to ascertain the original license and I assume find the reason for decline in their records. I told them the situation and basic, not precise, details of HW changes that occurred, they provided an activation over the code, no purchase necessary. Total time was 10 minutes on phone. They really weren't unreasonable at all about it, pretty solid customer experience with individual on phone not treating me like idiot or pirate or etc. I'm no fan of them, but I do give them props for how smoothly that process went.
If it's substantially the same hardware, even if their system flagged it, they're actually not out to gouge on this side of things. (I make no claims about gouging in any other part of the process here.) If someone were reactivating constantly due to reinstall/hardware/etc, they would have needed to call MS at some point I'm pretty sure, and would have explained what's going on. I'm sure that MS keeps records of that, and looked for such before pursuing in court.
I'm sitting here thinking it wouldn't be hard to wire the clock to stop on whistle. Put a sensor in ball, ref pushes button after he hands ball to inbounding player, it detects acceleration of throw in then starts clock on next (capacitive?) touch. (Ok probably it only transmits acceleration/touch and score table receiver does logic on that). As always human standby, if they hit start after transmitter starts clock or stop after whistle stops ignore it, but if they start/stop when a sensor missed it it accepts the human command and resumes logic. The programming seems easy here, the tech of not imbalancing the ball, durable for impact etc probably not that far off... As a bonus this system might help remove much of human skew on timing, but doesn't help refs slow to whistle etc.
On the surface this isn't news for nerds.. But really with a bit of imagination it could be!
Get a hunting trail camera. Takes pics on an SD card. Not networked, but is designed to be outside and it should get you the information you seek relatively cheaply.
I think 'timothy' needs to read articles before accepting stories.
You must be new here...
Read the article? You must be new he... awww, I give up.
When I purchased my iPhone, I was told there WOULD be an activation process available at the AT&T Stores (after they finished the big first day's rush of business), as well as there apparently is a way to activate by calling a 1-800 number, not from the phone most likely. ;) HTH, but I would certainly be asking the rep BEFORE I purchased if I were in your shoes.
Ok, I like his explanation better than mine. And certainly respect it more. ;) Thank you sir as always for sticking around and helping us legal novices make heads and tails.
Or perhaps the RIAA media engine wasn't trying to get this published like they do anything remotely looking like a success for them?
(And yes, they do have a media team. It actually may be the most successful part of this operation so far in terms of money earned (via sales from deterred infringers). If one could call any of it a success....)
Interesting.. not that many comments, and three responses saying "I'm a decent sized ISP employee, and while we don't respond, we at least look into each complaint." I can only hope so.
While reading over this article and thinking, I came up with another interesting idea. I have recently registered a domain which I'm sure is ripe for joe jobs. It is basically a private image hosting service. Flickr-esque in nature, but... just for my friends to upload, world to see.
Because of this privilege, and other semi-obvious reasons, I don't want anyone with an account on my domain sending an email with a jpg attachment. Why can't we set up an anti-spam utility which says "ok, the from: address is this domain. This domain uses ____ rules. This email [does|does not] follow the rules" and flag appropriately. If I had an email from my domain with a jpg attachment, it's obviously spam. Other similar rules applied appropriately could help filter spam.
Side note.. in the new discussion system, where is the respond to article button, instead of reply to post??? I gotta be missing something obvious here...
I've always insisted though that the show's not out for accuracy, but 1. Entertainment, and 2. Inspiration. To you or me it's a big whoop. To a 8 to 13 year old, though, it can open their eyes to things, get them inspired in science, and help start the next wave of students down that track. If they happen to get things right, great.
Actually, I'd say sometimes they intentionally leave the door open to crappy results. It's called "revisit show" or "free publicity" when someone makes a big hooplah of proving them wrong on the web. Job security through incompetence (sadly seems common in the science world.)
(OT Side idea... The grass is greener... might be interesting to test to see if there's some weird reflection/refraction properties in the grass or the perspective angle of the grass might cause the light to always come back greener. I know, silly idea, but who knows, maybe they'll try for fun. It takes one, though.. can't even come up with a smart alec way for them to try that. Darn.)
Shame on me for saying without supporting link, but iirc if a person is rendered suddenly unconscious while standing, or is shot dead instantly (etc) they will fall "forward" instead of backwards, though most of the momentum is downward.
But while we're at nitpicking the nitpickers... The purpose of Mythbusters isn't science itself, but to engage people in science. To entertain foremost, but there's a background hope your 8 to 18 year old kid will say "Waittaminute" at something, look at it, and do their own analysis at some level. No I don't mean load the back yard up with bottle rockets and send the beanie baby to the neighbors (IE the raccoon myth) but they actually have lots of things where you can look and say "I think I can make a better device than that" or "But what happens if THIS factor is accounted for?" or or or.... For a kid, that can be a career deciding moment. And at worst, it makes them more aware and willing to research. How many of us haven't seen the death ray links both from the show and hobbyists (linked from /. articles, of course!! Like http://www.solardeathray.com/ ) and said "Hrmmmm...."?? I know I'd like to try building my own (but knowing my glue skills, I'll set me on fire, and the Britney Spears plush will survive. If we ever want ET life to touch down here, I'd best not do that.)
Also, I must agree, 90% of the time the scope of their intentions is misunderstood either through us not looking, or them not presenting. Or both. I'm not praising their science, I'm praising their intentions. And to be honest, I'd be honored to meet EITHER of the hosts, or even "The Build Crew" (KARI!!! but the rest are neat too) and engage in a 5 minute(+) discusion.. I suspect there's lots to these guys we don't get to see on TV.
I think you more elegantly phrased my thought (and managed to avoid the bitter tongue I take to companies in my country.) Thank you. Good to know someone got it. :)
This is of course, the model of the youth hotels in Europe. Pay less for customer labor. Would it be that bad, if it worked that way you propose?
Sadly, for me, in corporate USA, I'd have to pay for the privledge to stock the shelves. Some money hungry people miss the point so much they miss the money.
*sigh*
I know they had a "limited supply" for the release.
I can't help but sit back and think maybe supplies were limited because this was the "public beta"... Save Google fans, we all know what "Beta" means.
(Note, this doesn't justify MS not calling this a beta if my suspicions/musings are true.)
Watch Penn & Teller's Bullsh*t!
That show is almost spot on for that sort of topic. Save they don't take the scientific view at it. To boot, they're pretty equal opportunity harassers when it comes to politics. Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Green, etc are all targets as far as those two are concerned. And occasionally they're educational too.
If you work for a government agency, educational institution, or a other non-profit, you're lucky to get them to cough up $20 to purchase nics AND hubs/switches, much less anything more advanced. And the way I see it, being willing to spend $100 for security is better than the amount that the people who caused him to ask this question spent.
Seriously, I can understand his statement- you gotta work within what you know you can get, not what you wish you could get.
But for dialup users like me, it kind of defeats the purpose doesn't it? ;)
/. due to the fact that I don't want to wait up to 10 minutes just for content to be readable.
;)
I like most other people don't mind ads that are static text, static images. Even something with a relatively simple blink. It's these 500k animated gifs and 1mb spank the monkey flash ads that kill me. On dialup at home, I *have* to use adblock even on
I suppose yet another workaround would be to set up an adblock that does the get, but then drops the packets after the first 1k or so. As someone pointed out to that, a javascript could be used to detect the image size and compare to expected, but...
Bah. All of this would be simpler if advertisers would just realize that it's been brought onto themselves. Kind of like spam, this is going to become a game of back and forth, I fear. We've already named the next two iterations of lunacy.
I thought about this one, and it wouldn't be too hard I don't think. Many browsers fetch elements as the html comes in. So let's take a sample page:
<body>
<a href><img alt="annoying ad"></a>
<some content>
<a href><img alt="annoying ad"></a>
<final content>
</body>
Why not pull a tarhole like spam trappers do- My web script PUTs the first content through the first </a> then holds a brief second, a bit of the <some content> but not all.
Then, I go and look at the server logs for the get of the IMG file. If I don't see a fetch from the same IP that is fetching this page, redirect! Many browsers honor the redirects placed in odd places, plus there's good ol' javascript too.
Seems simple to write in english. But I'm not sure how easy that'd be to code. Not too difficult either, I would reckon
I greatly agree with your statement with one nitpick: Broadband's everywhere. Here in podunk Missouri, it's still fairly sparse, and expensive to those who can get it.
That being said, I use dialup at home. And Firefox is under 10 minutes to download. There are website indexes that I swear take longer to load.
That perhaps is its best selling point- painless even under some extreme circumstances.
And throw in adblock, wow things are much better. I almost feel like the web's back to the days of 14.4 when people didn't insist on mucking up their pages with that crap!