An original Idea for the scavenger hunt that doesnt weakly attempt to show how witty, creative, pretentious and just plain lame we actually are. The Judges must look like the morons they are. [242 points]
The linux/freenetworks movement isn't about spending dot-com cash in flashy Bay Area venues
You ever been to interop or comdex or other large scale conference in vegas?
seriously, you're delusional if you think there is no money wasting going on there. Do you have any idea what the conference booths cost that many companies use at large vegas conferences? MILLIONS. yes Millions.
they point about the wireless I was making was that they need to do it in a real, dense city environ - re-read my comment.
the price was just an aside. I could give a shit about the geek factor of CSI - I want to see products and services that work. Thats why I am a GEEK - because I like to think about getting shit to work!
But it even goes beyond that. There are many people that are looking at wireless services from both directions; Carrier traditional telco model, and Free community network (cheapnet as it were) model.
The problem is that nobody is looking to compbine the two. Each has its share of problems;
Carrier telco model is a rape the consumer fuck privacy - make a killing and make no attempt to actually *do something good* and begin to turn the telco model around to actually benefit the consumer.
Telco's traditionally screw over the consumer. Take a look at the Cell industsry. People who work in the cell market will want you to believe that its hard to survive and all these "features and services" cost a ton to offer. They also want the feds to beleive tha they ned federal subsudies and assistance (both financial and legislative) in order to continue to offer competitive products and services. The reality is that these people are making money hand over fist. Have you noticed how many Cingular Wireless brick and mortar stores their are? TONS. that rent, and building cost is not cheap. You are paying to much for what SHOULD be free - communication.
The Community wireless problem is differnt end of the spectrum - but still an issue..
in the community wireless version we run into problems - like I am sure you are aware, wher you have to have a responisble user base. the access to the network is free (cheap - youre not looking to grow it to a profitable business, or grow it to a nation or statewide carrier class service) - so really lets just call it a non-profit business org.
in these networks you hit constraints - specifically budget. Your network capacity and service offerings are limited by the willingess of its member to contribute self, time and money. and the energy that they put into the system to build it out and support it goes only as far as their enthusiasm.
That is all fine - but what is really needed is a little more commercially minded community network.
We definitely need to keep the telcos out of this space.
One of the things that just utterly amazes me about the wireless space - is how little vision and real understanding of the impact real ubiquitous wireless services will have on the way we compute (i dont want to say live or anything too grandiose here) - but it really is astonishing that its getting such reserved attention.
Wireless service will be the way you compute. period.
When I say *you* I mean an individuals typical interface into the world of devices around him will be over a wireless medium for a greater percentage of activities. obviously backbone services will still be hauled of lines of extremely high speed optical or otherwise. The datacenter will still be the wired nexus of big fucking boxes... but the users interface will be primarily wireless.
You may still carry high speed DSL service to home - or run a gig to the desktop for a workstation at work - but in the city, campus and home there will be the increasing use of wireless.
well where the heck is all this wireless bandwidth going to come from?
well, there are several players that are looking to own this space. but they are going after the space from a carriers perspective. The wireless packets dont stay wireless for long - generally (in a non mesh) they are only wireless for the first hop. otherwise its all traditional network equip that backhauls the stream.
So we get companies like intel, ibm and at&t funding startups like Cometa Networks. Cometa wants to be the "carriers carrier" of wireless services. meaning that the community wireless service at your local starbucks gets its bandwidth from cometa - and *more importantly* gets its physical back hauling from AT&T... This is bad.
Very bad.
The reason is that when you have a backend carrier - forget the fence that is cometa - cornering the market on the physical uplink, what happens to the cost of wireles
but considering that its about free networks and such - why vegas. I mean I just got back from interop and the whole conference thing is vegas is nothing about FREE. in fact nothing about vegas has any remote association with free.
I would prefer that a conference like this happen in SF or some such more technically dense place - maybe moscone....
I would love to go - but cant afford the price of now astronomical vegas plane fair (200 bux from bay area) and all associated costs.
The other thing about vegas is that its a city designed on a wide scale - with monolithic structures generally spaced very far apart.
Pick a more verticle venue - like SF (no bias here;) and then provide a free wireless network for several city blocks. Build it similar to the interop demo network that vendors threw together - and let people see how products are going to work in a dense city with lots of signal obstructions...
I mean I am really into wireless but I swear - the people involved at the core of the movement have zero vision.
Let get someone whos really wanting to promote wireless and get out there and build something real-world. not just some lame ass wireless PDA support in a conference center.
Re:Make sure to use broken drive...
on
Floppy the Robot
·
· Score: 1
uh, so one day you could turn it into a battlebot of course. Damn fine engineering if you ask me!
Seemingly witty reply you make here - however Why dont you look at my other postings where I specifically delineate the differences between ads on a TV and ads off a computer connected to the internet.
Embedded ads that have been designed into the stream such as commercials are different than intrusive popups.
look at my comparison of TV commercials to Pop-ups.
There is a major difference. Slahsdot isnt forcing any of its advertising on you - its intergrated into the viewing channel... which is more similar to a TV comercial - which we have all learned to accept from youth.
There is no interruptive nature of the current ad model on Slashdot.
"What is the benefit to me if the ads are blocked automatically by the ISP rather than automatically by my computer?"
Well obviously there is a rather technically savvy contingent amongst the Slashdot crowd, however as you state - and the apt-get post below does, you are not thinking full circle.
Think about when we take the service out further from the machines that you have more-or-less root on.
The idea being that you *shouldnt* have to stop all this shit at your PC. You should be able to, in good faith, trust a service provider to provide you with a service - while keeping its clients best interest at heart.
Now - the normal cynic will say that "No company has any interest other than the bottom line - and could give a shit about fucking their customers" which is EXACTLY the reason for starting a company like this.
I want to start a network that will be ad free completely.
Think wireless - and what do you envision the future to be like? well, if you've been watching any futuristic sci-fi movies the marketeers are salivating over being able to force ads directly into your head - and hit you from every angle. They want to make every action that you do be metered and channeled between advertising. Fuck that, why not have a network that requires no extra effort from the perspective of the user to have a fully useful and productive and quiet experience.
Would you rather pay X for an ad riddled crap-net or a little bit more - hopefully no more than 25-30% (or ideally less, if possible) for a quiet trusted computing channel.
"They were "invited" to be there by the people providing the content you're after. And your "my machine and bandwidth" argument is rather weak; you can't micromanage the content a website provides. "Oh, I went to your website, but I wasn't expecting it to be 5 pages worth of text...I was expecting it to be only 2! You're abusing my machine resources and bandwidth!"
I totally disagree with this.
INVITED? by the people providing the content? that is wrong. Think about that - so your saying that if I were to call a company on my cell phone, like SBC to discuss my bill - or ask about getting a new phone line installed in my house - that they could "invite" other companies to join in on a conference call to try to sell me other services? unrelated or not - AND making it so that I could not hang up on the phone call?
Thats the worst thing I have ever heard in such a discussion as this. No, it has nothing to do with the original page invites an ad to hijiack my connection for mind-share as they like to term it. The point is that INTRUSIVE marketing tactics are just plain wrong.
How about going to a restaurant and being forced to try other foods that the restaurant has made partnerships with.
I jsut in absolutely no way can agree in any sense with the above argument you have made.
as for the second point, yes - there is no other option for DSL at my house. I have gone through 3 other DSL providers that later went out of business, then had pacbell which then was bought by SBC.
There is no cable - so I am the subject of a metro area monopoly. I use my DSL a great deal, I dont have (paid for) TV (obviously I watch the ocasional DVD) so I spend my "couch time" at the machine, working, playing games or getting my info fix. I am really sensitive to the hijacking of my attention.
Actually - if you compare popups and various ad forms online to that of TV comercials - and you spend as much time in front of machines as I do - then you will see how big the difference actually is.
Most consider TV ads a rather harmless annoyance that nothing can be done about. Also TV ads are really a passive form of ad delivery. Meaning that they are just a part of the overall stream that is a TV channel.
Now online - the difference is much larger in that the amount of attention you are spending through the interface of a computer is orders of magnitude higher than that of a TV. Also - the content delivery method is an interactive pull in a heterogeneous presentation format. This means that any and all breaks in stream of information have a much more disruptive effect on the subject (you in this case). So in the case of popups - its not just a comercial insertion into an otherwise continuous stream of content, is an entirely new stream, delivered in the most attention disrupting and grabbing way possible. In addition it, typically, requires physical interaction (in the form of closing) from the subject.
So - the casual thinker will associate popups with the more traditional and passive TV commercial with regards to its actual effect on ones attention. But when you really compare the two you see that they are two totally separate and non-equal methods of delivering ads. One is harmless, yet annoying - but for the most part can be ignored all together as it is a fully integrated into the stream of content coming across your TV screen - which requires no interaction (unless, obviously you want to change the stream (channel) completely)... the other is a push based interruption into an activity in which you are actually participating - which then requires attention and action to eliminate.
Now - after that long winded comparison - do you still think that popups which you claim are understandable and acceptable "invitations" by the original content host, to be a weak argument as to the resources which I claim are so valuable.
Bandwidth in this argument obviously means much more than jsut the data connection to the internet.
I certainly do not expect any or all content on the web to be free. As i am fully aware of the cost of operating a resource to provide to others - what I am saying is that my machine and bandwidth are not resources that I am supplying to marketers for ads and popups.
Its one thing to place a webserver and content on the web for people to see - and to seek and come to on a voluntary basis. Its another thing entirely to push your content to them and force them to see it - and to consume their resources (bandwidth and cpu) in order to force your content to them. Its also another level of that to do so in a manner that cannot be turned off.
Dont confuse a person/company providing content on the web - and having content forced down your pipe.
Take this example:
I pay SBC for $65 / month for DSL. I have a Yahoo mail account. SBC and Yahoo offer incentives for DSL users to sign up for DSL cobranded by them in a cheaper package. I have had my Yahoo account for almost 8 years now, and I have had DSL for 4. The SBC/Yahoo "partnership" now checks to see if I am logging into Yahoo from an SBC DSL provisioned IP - then redirects me to a full page ad before I have access to my yahoo account. Esentially hijacking my connection in order to FORCE me to watch or interact (close) an ad. I did not sign up for the Yahoo/SBC cobranded DSL - I certainly did not receive the incentive of a discount on the cost of DSL, yet - I am still subjected to push marketing - and both companies claim "too bad"
This is the type of ad force feeding that i think should be illegal or at least provide compensatory incentives for people. at a very *minimum* it should provide an OPT OUT. which currently it does not.
so, like I said - the content on the internet should not be free, but if you are going to force content on me - you damn well better make sure I want it, am compensated for it, and have a way to avoid it. permanently. period.
If I agree to get your crap push mind-waste, by EULA or otherwise fine, but if I do not then I should be free to enjoy a happy, ad free online experience.
Because pop-ups will not go away. What he is claiming is that he invented and patented the pop-up, now that many people use it he wants to get paid. But the likelihood that he will get paid is yet to be seen - the likelihood that the pop-ups will go away very very doubtful.
However, more telling about where blame for frustrations will lie - is in the quote regarding the popups with sound that you cannot turn off. This is VERY upsetting.
I OWN MY COMPUTER - its fully 100% a resource of MINE and nobody else. I also PAY for my internet access, by the month.
If he wants to force feed me ads - then he better damn well PAY me. And protect himself while walking around in public.
Seriously - this is a major concern of mine and I am sure, many others.
Advertising is getting totally out of hand and something needs to be done. I can understand certain forms of advertising, like on free TV stations - where I am getting the service (TV for free) and in return I am agreeing to being subjected to ads.
However in any service where I actually pay for it - I should be asked, paid or otherwise consulted before being subjected to advertising.
In fact I am in the process of starting an ISP where advertising of ANY kind is absolutely forbidden and technically (as much as possible) prevented. No details on how I am doing this, sorry... but one thing is that for a nominally higher rate you can have an ISP that will not tolerate any sort of advertising to its clients.
Advertising is polluting the world we live in and even our minds with unproductive thoughts - and actually detracts from our quality of life. I hope to change this.
On a related note - would you sign up on this ISP?
I cannot agree more. I played UO from beta through for almost 2 years.
At the time my good friend ran Intels game lab - so we had access to a full T1 just for gaming (this was in late '96 and through '97) - which was unheard of for gaming at that time. We had a lab of 20+ machines all with 21 inch monitors. and 2 UO accounts each...
We used to have a whole row of machines open to our world there - and we played CONSTANTLY. It was the best game I have ever played. period.
The fun only lasted so long of course - as they patched and ruined what was a gameworld where the fittest survived. Where the Great Lords and Dread Lords battled it out and the best, most cunning and wittiest player won.
We used to play and battle the 2 of us against 20 others, and we would win. We had GMs that used to follow us around just to see how we played - to ensure that we werent cheating because we were so good. They would watch our battles and see how we were able to fight against that many people - then ask us questions about our strategy.
Man that was a fun time... I still think back at many of the battles we had.
DreadLord Phlux DreadLord Mym DreadLord Draygor
Hellfire Guild
FUN FUN FUN.
I really wish that they would do something with as much freedom as that game had in the first year and a half - and I hope that they can make a game that solely relies on the thinking of the player. For there is no better opponent in a computer game than an actual human on the other end.
Theif made me jump out of my chair and beak my desk when i found the dead guards and they were screeching "JOIN USSSSS... JOIN USSSSSSS" into my heaphones at 3 in the morning.
I had to stop playing for about 2 weeks while i got my reality bearings back.
Hitman 1 had some really strange effects by immersing me into the mindset of an assasin.
well its about damn time. How do you think i am supposed to shoot a torpedo down that 1 meter square hole without an acurate 3d model of the Deathstar's ventillation systems!!?
Slashdot Mirror
But there's a hacker under my bed! I'm scared!
I dont know about you - but the first thing i am going to do in the iLoo is pey all over the keyboard and mouse!
er scratch that - Im just not going to enter the iLoo at all.
HAHAHAHA
Man - this was good.
"...to keep track of our itemss."
Your itemss? Your Preciousss Itemssss?
Well then how come all of them had the only non nasa astronaughts on them ever.
:P
I smell The Man...
Ya they shoulda asked for a piece of Challenger. I mean c'mon - every body in rural texas had a piece of Columbia dropped in their back yards.
How come all the shuttles that explode start in 'C'?
An original Idea for the scavenger hunt that doesnt weakly attempt to show how witty, creative, pretentious and just plain lame we actually are. The Judges must look like the morons they are. [242 points]
The linux/freenetworks movement isn't about spending dot-com cash in flashy Bay Area venues
You ever been to interop or comdex or other large scale conference in vegas?
seriously, you're delusional if you think there is no money wasting going on there. Do you have any idea what the conference booths cost that many companies use at large vegas conferences? MILLIONS. yes Millions.
they point about the wireless I was making was that they need to do it in a real, dense city environ - re-read my comment.
the price was just an aside. I could give a shit about the geek factor of CSI - I want to see products and services that work. Thats why I am a GEEK - because I like to think about getting shit to work!
Exactly - (see my other post in thread)
But it even goes beyond that. There are many people that are looking at wireless services from both directions; Carrier traditional telco model, and Free community network (cheapnet as it were) model.
The problem is that nobody is looking to compbine the two. Each has its share of problems;
Carrier telco model is a rape the consumer fuck privacy - make a killing and make no attempt to actually *do something good* and begin to turn the telco model around to actually benefit the consumer.
Telco's traditionally screw over the consumer. Take a look at the Cell industsry. People who work in the cell market will want you to believe that its hard to survive and all these "features and services" cost a ton to offer. They also want the feds to beleive tha they ned federal subsudies and assistance (both financial and legislative) in order to continue to offer competitive products and services. The reality is that these people are making money hand over fist. Have you noticed how many Cingular Wireless brick and mortar stores their are? TONS. that rent, and building cost is not cheap. You are paying to much for what SHOULD be free - communication.
The Community wireless problem is differnt end of the spectrum - but still an issue..
in the community wireless version we run into problems - like I am sure you are aware, wher you have to have a responisble user base. the access to the network is free (cheap - youre not looking to grow it to a profitable business, or grow it to a nation or statewide carrier class service) - so really lets just call it a non-profit business org.
in these networks you hit constraints - specifically budget. Your network capacity and service offerings are limited by the willingess of its member to contribute self, time and money. and the energy that they put into the system to build it out and support it goes only as far as their enthusiasm.
That is all fine - but what is really needed is a little more commercially minded community network.
We definitely need to keep the telcos out of this space.
One of the things that just utterly amazes me about the wireless space - is how little vision and real understanding of the impact real ubiquitous wireless services will have on the way we compute (i dont want to say live or anything too grandiose here) - but it really is astonishing that its getting such reserved attention.
Wireless service will be the way you compute. period.
When I say *you* I mean an individuals typical interface into the world of devices around him will be over a wireless medium for a greater percentage of activities. obviously backbone services will still be hauled of lines of extremely high speed optical or otherwise. The datacenter will still be the wired nexus of big fucking boxes... but the users interface will be primarily wireless.
You may still carry high speed DSL service to home - or run a gig to the desktop for a workstation at work - but in the city, campus and home there will be the increasing use of wireless.
well where the heck is all this wireless bandwidth going to come from?
well, there are several players that are looking to own this space. but they are going after the space from a carriers perspective. The wireless packets dont stay wireless for long - generally (in a non mesh) they are only wireless for the first hop. otherwise its all traditional network equip that backhauls the stream.
So we get companies like intel, ibm and at&t funding startups like Cometa Networks. Cometa wants to be the "carriers carrier" of wireless services. meaning that the community wireless service at your local starbucks gets its bandwidth from cometa - and *more importantly* gets its physical back hauling from AT&T... This is bad.
Very bad.
The reason is that when you have a backend carrier - forget the fence that is cometa - cornering the market on the physical uplink, what happens to the cost of wireles
Well thats nice and all...
;) and then provide a free wireless network for several city blocks. Build it similar to the interop demo network that vendors threw together - and let people see how products are going to work in a dense city with lots of signal obstructions...
but considering that its about free networks and such - why vegas. I mean I just got back from interop and the whole conference thing is vegas is nothing about FREE. in fact nothing about vegas has any remote association with free.
I would prefer that a conference like this happen in SF or some such more technically dense place - maybe moscone....
I would love to go - but cant afford the price of now astronomical vegas plane fair (200 bux from bay area) and all associated costs.
The other thing about vegas is that its a city designed on a wide scale - with monolithic structures generally spaced very far apart.
Pick a more verticle venue - like SF (no bias here
I mean I am really into wireless but I swear - the people involved at the core of the movement have zero vision.
Let get someone whos really wanting to promote wireless and get out there and build something real-world. not just some lame ass wireless PDA support in a conference center.
uh, so one day you could turn it into a battlebot of course. Damn fine engineering if you ask me!
dont you mean "Old Floppy Hat" or "Floppy Old Hat" ?
18. Gator.com
Gator free eWallet download fills in online forms.
www.gator.com
Thanks!
Seemingly witty reply you make here - however Why dont you look at my other postings where I specifically delineate the differences between ads on a TV and ads off a computer connected to the internet.
Embedded ads that have been designed into the stream such as commercials are different than intrusive popups.
look at my comparison of TV commercials to Pop-ups.
There is a major difference. Slahsdot isnt forcing any of its advertising on you - its intergrated into the viewing channel... which is more similar to a TV comercial - which we have all learned to accept from youth.
There is no interruptive nature of the current ad model on Slashdot.
"What is the benefit to me if the ads are blocked automatically by the ISP rather than automatically by my computer?"
Well obviously there is a rather technically savvy contingent amongst the Slashdot crowd, however as you state - and the apt-get post below does, you are not thinking full circle.
Think about when we take the service out further from the machines that you have more-or-less root on.
The idea being that you *shouldnt* have to stop all this shit at your PC. You should be able to, in good faith, trust a service provider to provide you with a service - while keeping its clients best interest at heart.
Now - the normal cynic will say that "No company has any interest other than the bottom line - and could give a shit about fucking their customers" which is EXACTLY the reason for starting a company like this.
I want to start a network that will be ad free completely.
Think wireless - and what do you envision the future to be like? well, if you've been watching any futuristic sci-fi movies the marketeers are salivating over being able to force ads directly into your head - and hit you from every angle. They want to make every action that you do be metered and channeled between advertising. Fuck that, why not have a network that requires no extra effort from the perspective of the user to have a fully useful and productive and quiet experience.
Would you rather pay X for an ad riddled crap-net or a little bit more - hopefully no more than 25-30% (or ideally less, if possible) for a quiet trusted computing channel.
"They were "invited" to be there by the people providing the content you're after. And your "my machine and bandwidth" argument is rather weak; you can't micromanage the content a website provides. "Oh, I went to your website, but I wasn't expecting it to be 5 pages worth of text...I was expecting it to be only 2! You're abusing my machine resources and bandwidth!"
I totally disagree with this.
INVITED? by the people providing the content? that is wrong. Think about that - so your saying that if I were to call a company on my cell phone, like SBC to discuss my bill - or ask about getting a new phone line installed in my house - that they could "invite" other companies to join in on a conference call to try to sell me other services? unrelated or not - AND making it so that I could not hang up on the phone call?
Thats the worst thing I have ever heard in such a discussion as this. No, it has nothing to do with the original page invites an ad to hijiack my connection for mind-share as they like to term it. The point is that INTRUSIVE marketing tactics are just plain wrong.
How about going to a restaurant and being forced to try other foods that the restaurant has made partnerships with.
I jsut in absolutely no way can agree in any sense with the above argument you have made.
as for the second point, yes - there is no other option for DSL at my house. I have gone through 3 other DSL providers that later went out of business, then had pacbell which then was bought by SBC.
There is no cable - so I am the subject of a metro area monopoly. I use my DSL a great deal, I dont have (paid for) TV (obviously I watch the ocasional DVD) so I spend my "couch time" at the machine, working, playing games or getting my info fix. I am really sensitive to the hijacking of my attention.
Actually - if you compare popups and various ad forms online to that of TV comercials - and you spend as much time in front of machines as I do - then you will see how big the difference actually is.
Most consider TV ads a rather harmless annoyance that nothing can be done about. Also TV ads are really a passive form of ad delivery. Meaning that they are just a part of the overall stream that is a TV channel.
Now online - the difference is much larger in that the amount of attention you are spending through the interface of a computer is orders of magnitude higher than that of a TV. Also - the content delivery method is an interactive pull in a heterogeneous presentation format. This means that any and all breaks in stream of information have a much more disruptive effect on the subject (you in this case). So in the case of popups - its not just a comercial insertion into an otherwise continuous stream of content, is an entirely new stream, delivered in the most attention disrupting and grabbing way possible. In addition it, typically, requires physical interaction (in the form of closing) from the subject.
So - the casual thinker will associate popups with the more traditional and passive TV commercial with regards to its actual effect on ones attention. But when you really compare the two you see that they are two totally separate and non-equal methods of delivering ads. One is harmless, yet annoying - but for the most part can be ignored all together as it is a fully integrated into the stream of content coming across your TV screen - which requires no interaction (unless, obviously you want to change the stream (channel) completely)... the other is a push based interruption into an activity in which you are actually participating - which then requires attention and action to eliminate.
Now - after that long winded comparison - do you still think that popups which you claim are understandable and acceptable "invitations" by the original content host, to be a weak argument as to the resources which I claim are so valuable.
Bandwidth in this argument obviously means much more than jsut the data connection to the internet.
I am not saying that at all.
I certainly do not expect any or all content on the web to be free. As i am fully aware of the cost of operating a resource to provide to others - what I am saying is that my machine and bandwidth are not resources that I am supplying to marketers for ads and popups.
Its one thing to place a webserver and content on the web for people to see - and to seek and come to on a voluntary basis. Its another thing entirely to push your content to them and force them to see it - and to consume their resources (bandwidth and cpu) in order to force your content to them. Its also another level of that to do so in a manner that cannot be turned off.
Dont confuse a person/company providing content on the web - and having content forced down your pipe.
Take this example:
I pay SBC for $65 / month for DSL. I have a Yahoo mail account. SBC and Yahoo offer incentives for DSL users to sign up for DSL cobranded by them in a cheaper package. I have had my Yahoo account for almost 8 years now, and I have had DSL for 4. The SBC/Yahoo "partnership" now checks to see if I am logging into Yahoo from an SBC DSL provisioned IP - then redirects me to a full page ad before I have access to my yahoo account. Esentially hijacking my connection in order to FORCE me to watch or interact (close) an ad. I did not sign up for the Yahoo/SBC cobranded DSL - I certainly did not receive the incentive of a discount on the cost of DSL, yet - I am still subjected to push marketing - and both companies claim "too bad"
This is the type of ad force feeding that i think should be illegal or at least provide compensatory incentives for people. at a very *minimum* it should provide an OPT OUT. which currently it does not.
so, like I said - the content on the internet should not be free, but if you are going to force content on me - you damn well better make sure I want it, am compensated for it, and have a way to avoid it. permanently. period.
If I agree to get your crap push mind-waste, by EULA or otherwise fine, but if I do not then I should be free to enjoy a happy, ad free online experience.
But if everybody gets a piece of the action, it develops into Open Sores....
Well its about time the Computer revolution was brought to the homeless. They have been left out of the tech market vision for far too long!!!
Because pop-ups will not go away. What he is claiming is that he invented and patented the pop-up, now that many people use it he wants to get paid. But the likelihood that he will get paid is yet to be seen - the likelihood that the pop-ups will go away very very doubtful.
However, more telling about where blame for frustrations will lie - is in the quote regarding the popups with sound that you cannot turn off. This is VERY upsetting.
I OWN MY COMPUTER - its fully 100% a resource of MINE and nobody else. I also PAY for my internet access, by the month.
If he wants to force feed me ads - then he better damn well PAY me. And protect himself while walking around in public.
Seriously - this is a major concern of mine and I am sure, many others.
Advertising is getting totally out of hand and something needs to be done. I can understand certain forms of advertising, like on free TV stations - where I am getting the service (TV for free) and in return I am agreeing to being subjected to ads.
However in any service where I actually pay for it - I should be asked, paid or otherwise consulted before being subjected to advertising.
In fact I am in the process of starting an ISP where advertising of ANY kind is absolutely forbidden and technically (as much as possible) prevented. No details on how I am doing this, sorry... but one thing is that for a nominally higher rate you can have an ISP that will not tolerate any sort of advertising to its clients.
Advertising is polluting the world we live in and even our minds with unproductive thoughts - and actually detracts from our quality of life. I hope to change this.
On a related note - would you sign up on this ISP?
I cannot agree more. I played UO from beta through for almost 2 years.
At the time my good friend ran Intels game lab - so we had access to a full T1 just for gaming (this was in late '96 and through '97) - which was unheard of for gaming at that time. We had a lab of 20+ machines all with 21 inch monitors. and 2 UO accounts each...
We used to have a whole row of machines open to our world there - and we played CONSTANTLY. It was the best game I have ever played. period.
The fun only lasted so long of course - as they patched and ruined what was a gameworld where the fittest survived. Where the Great Lords and Dread Lords battled it out and the best, most cunning and wittiest player won.
We used to play and battle the 2 of us against 20 others, and we would win. We had GMs that used to follow us around just to see how we played - to ensure that we werent cheating because we were so good. They would watch our battles and see how we were able to fight against that many people - then ask us questions about our strategy.
Man that was a fun time... I still think back at many of the battles we had.
DreadLord Phlux
DreadLord Mym
DreadLord Draygor
Hellfire Guild
FUN FUN FUN.
I really wish that they would do something with as much freedom as that game had in the first year and a half - and I hope that they can make a game that solely relies on the thinking of the player. For there is no better opponent in a computer game than an actual human on the other end.
Theif made me jump out of my chair and beak my desk when i found the dead guards and they were screeching "JOIN USSSSS... JOIN USSSSSSS" into my heaphones at 3 in the morning.
I had to stop playing for about 2 weeks while i got my reality bearings back.
Hitman 1 had some really strange effects by immersing me into the mindset of an assasin.
well its about damn time. How do you think i am supposed to shoot a torpedo down that 1 meter square hole without an acurate 3d model of the Deathstar's ventillation systems!!?