During the few times that I ever clicked on a banner ad, just to see what the site was pointing to, I came away feeling that I had wasted my time.
The problem is that sites pointed to by the banner ads are filled with such garbage and useless stuff such as MORE banner ads to click on, "You can't see this until you pay $xx.xx", "Keep clicking until you win a prize!", etc.
What bugs me is that it takes so much WORK just to find out what they're selling. If only they'd just say upfront what they're offering, offer interesting content, etc. Then maybe I'd click on banner ads more often.
Another reason why I avoid banner ads is because they often lead to spam traps and windows that endlessly respawn another window if you try to close them, filled with garish ugly flashing animations, java scripts that are guaranteed to annoy the hell out of you.
Why? Why trap me? After all, I *did* click on your banner ad, didn't I? I might've been interested to see what you were selling, but you've just pissed me off enough that I don't want to see anymore!
It just doesn't make sense to piss off your visitors, then cry, "Wahhh! Banner ads aren't working!" if noone clicks on your ads anymore.
Be nice. Be friendly. Offer interesting and meaningful stuff if someone were to click on your banner ad. More importantly of all, don't piss them off. And for god's sake, don't force people to wait or fart around until they get to the REAL stuff (such as fluffy intro flash animations, etc.)
My attention span is *VERY* short. If I don't find anything meaningful within 10 seconds, I close the window. Design your web site around that. Be creative.
Re:I'm Sure the Chinese Will Love This....
on
Norway Bans Spam
·
· Score: 1
Well...
If I'm being oppressed by my government, and they're committing atrocities in secret, then I'm going to tell people about it, spam law or no spam law.
That's the great thing about humans -- they're flexible. If the phone rings and you pick it up to find that it was someone who dialed a random number, looking for help because he was shot in the guts (let's just pretend he forgot about 911), what would you do? Curse at the "fucking moron" for making an unsolicited phone call, or call 911 on his behalf?
Yes, we do have laws. But they can be bent or exceptions could be made for humanitarian reasons. Otherwise, "self-defense" wouldn't ever apply defense against a murder charge.
I hardly think that a chinese man would hesitate to send spam just because the PRC made anti-spam laws. Speaking out against the PRC is illegal (in China) anyways, so what's one more broken law?
It's commercial spam that we *DO* need protection against, especially since they're working so hard to avoid getting blocked by forging their return addresses, spacing out the subject line to avoid keyword filters, etc.
It's fun spreading conspiracy theories, but do try to keep things in perspective.
Try signing up on AOL. Post your email address on an usenet post somewhere (preferably in one of the pron groups). Or anything that'd expose you to bulk emailers.
Now, when you're getting 400+ spam emails a day (yes, PER DAY), let's see if you're still singing the same tune. You're effectively forced to wade through 400+ emails for that ONE email from your dearest relative.
I don't know about the USA, but up here in Canada, I can actually ask the post office to NOT deliver junk mail to my mailbox. I can't say the same for my ISP (and frankly, I can't seriously expect them to block every single piece of spam without blocking the entire internet).
What's the big deal? The big deal is this: if we don't fight spam, then you're likely to receive unsolicited mail from just about EVERY SINGLE DOTCOM. In that light, even 400 emails seem like just a drop in the ocean....
Yes, go right ahead and waste your time hitting delete 400+ times a day (while being careful not to delete any important mail!) No big deal, right?
You think I exaggerate? Look at Usenet. People have all but given up on it due to spam.
When I signed up for eBay, I selected NO to all the spam. I don't want spam. Period.
Now they're saying that it looks like an error if everything was selected as "no", and therefore they need to put you "in line" with the others.
Now... they've already proven that they've done this once. What about the NEXT time when they "notice" that all your selections are set to NO?
What about the next newbie who signs up for eBay service? Will s/he have to go through the same thing at some point in the future? If s/he does, will everyone else have to go through the same thing AGAIN? Will it become company policy to periodically reset your preferences because they look like an "error"?
If they keep resetting my preferences in order to send me spam, that's unsolicited mail. What's worse, they are SPECIFICALLY opting me back in without my permission. And if they're going to do this periodically, this makes it even worse. Eventually, they're going to catch me while I'm gone on vacation, and I won't be around to reset my preferences before the deadline expired.... HELLO SPAM!
No thanks, I am *NOT* going to put up with that. It looks like that in order to opt-out of eBay spam, I have to completely opt-out of eBay altogether.
I've read your post over and over again. Each time it left me with one impression (and I'm not trying to flame you or anything, this just IS the way your post reads):
Are you saying that Rambust withdrew the complaint because of who they got as the judge?
Are you saying that you'd advise your clients to withdraw their complaints if they got Harris?
And you're saying that this is the right decision on Rambust's part?
Are you not, in fact, encouraging judge-shopping?
I don't think that the question about whether flex-time is good or bad is one that can be answered so easily.
For someone who's supposed to be answering phones (ie: secretaries, PR people, etc), flex-time is bad. They MUST be around to answer the phone when it rings. Or meet clients when they come in. Etc. It's not like it requires brainpower to pick up a phone, anyway.
For other jobs that don't require as much personal interaction such as programming, engineering, art, etc., then flex-time is good. When you're working creatively, managers CANNOT order you to be creative on demand. Writer's (or coder's) block simply cannot be overcome on demand. Unfortunately, not all managers understand this, and this can lead to ill-will within the work environment. With flex-time, this could be avoided.
I'm a programmer, and what I do takes *concentration*. If I'm in a noisy environment, then that disrupts my concentration, and my productivity goes downhill. If I can work after hours when there aren't so many people around, then I can actually be more productive.
I read in a paper that on average, it takes about 15 minutes for a programmer to sit down and get into "the zone" where code is flowing from his/her fingers. If s/he is interrupted by anything (a coworker asking a question, loud talking, etc.), s/he breaks out of "the zone", and must spend another 15 minutes to get back into "the zone". I don't know if this applies to everyone, but it seems fitting most of the time.
I'm allowed to set my own schedule (within reason -- must work at least 8 hrs a day), then I can avoid the "noisy" times, and aim for the "quiet" times. Mornings and late afternoons are the worst, so I don't even bother to try to work during those times. If I'm forced to work regardless... well... you're just going to end up with a lot of crappy and sloppy code from me.
Getting back to my original point -- yes, flex-time is a good thing... only for those who actually really needs it. Managers, secretaries, marketing people, etc. don't. Designers (of whatever type) do. Run your business accordingly.
(slightly off-topic)
And for god's sake, SCHEDULE your meetings well ahead of time. Flex-time or not, I can be there for a scheduled meeting. If you or your managers run the business on sudden meetings, then it's time to look long and hard at how the business's run.
Yet, he's the one who's fighting the MPAA.
He's the one who's fighting DMCA.
He's the one racking up massive legal bills defending your basic rights.
What are *YOU* doing about the DMCA?
I was watching a show on the Discovery channel a couple of weeks ago. They were doing a special on the moons of Jupiter, and they mentioned that sometime in the year 2002 (2003?), they will be launching a probe that will attempt to land on Europa, and release a heating vent of sorts that will melt through the ice to the water below, and (hopefully) see what's under all that ice. Has anyone else seen this show? Any more information on this?
Slashdot Mirror
During the few times that I ever clicked on a banner ad, just to see what the site was pointing to, I came away feeling that I had wasted my time.
The problem is that sites pointed to by the banner ads are filled with such garbage and useless stuff such as MORE banner ads to click on, "You can't see this until you pay $xx.xx", "Keep clicking until you win a prize!", etc.
What bugs me is that it takes so much WORK just to find out what they're selling. If only they'd just say upfront what they're offering, offer interesting content, etc. Then maybe I'd click on banner ads more often.
Another reason why I avoid banner ads is because they often lead to spam traps and windows that endlessly respawn another window if you try to close them, filled with garish ugly flashing animations, java scripts that are guaranteed to annoy the hell out of you.
Why? Why trap me? After all, I *did* click on your banner ad, didn't I? I might've been interested to see what you were selling, but you've just pissed me off enough that I don't want to see anymore!
It just doesn't make sense to piss off your visitors, then cry, "Wahhh! Banner ads aren't working!" if noone clicks on your ads anymore.
Be nice. Be friendly. Offer interesting and meaningful stuff if someone were to click on your banner ad. More importantly of all, don't piss them off. And for god's sake, don't force people to wait or fart around until they get to the REAL stuff (such as fluffy intro flash animations, etc.)
My attention span is *VERY* short. If I don't find anything meaningful within 10 seconds, I close the window. Design your web site around that. Be creative.
Well...
If I'm being oppressed by my government, and they're committing atrocities in secret, then I'm going to tell people about it, spam law or no spam law.
That's the great thing about humans -- they're flexible. If the phone rings and you pick it up to find that it was someone who dialed a random number, looking for help because he was shot in the guts (let's just pretend he forgot about 911), what would you do? Curse at the "fucking moron" for making an unsolicited phone call, or call 911 on his behalf?
Yes, we do have laws. But they can be bent or exceptions could be made for humanitarian reasons. Otherwise, "self-defense" wouldn't ever apply defense against a murder charge.
I hardly think that a chinese man would hesitate to send spam just because the PRC made anti-spam laws. Speaking out against the PRC is illegal (in China) anyways, so what's one more broken law?
It's commercial spam that we *DO* need protection against, especially since they're working so hard to avoid getting blocked by forging their return addresses, spacing out the subject line to avoid keyword filters, etc.
It's fun spreading conspiracy theories, but do try to keep things in perspective.
You underestimate the power of spam.
Try signing up on AOL. Post your email address on an usenet post somewhere (preferably in one of the pron groups). Or anything that'd expose you to bulk emailers.
Now, when you're getting 400+ spam emails a day (yes, PER DAY), let's see if you're still singing the same tune. You're effectively forced to wade through 400+ emails for that ONE email from your dearest relative.
I don't know about the USA, but up here in Canada, I can actually ask the post office to NOT deliver junk mail to my mailbox. I can't say the same for my ISP (and frankly, I can't seriously expect them to block every single piece of spam without blocking the entire internet).
What's the big deal? The big deal is this: if we don't fight spam, then you're likely to receive unsolicited mail from just about EVERY SINGLE DOTCOM. In that light, even 400 emails seem like just a drop in the ocean....
Yes, go right ahead and waste your time hitting delete 400+ times a day (while being careful not to delete any important mail!) No big deal, right?
You think I exaggerate? Look at Usenet. People have all but given up on it due to spam.
Yes, let's look at the big picture, why don't we?
When I signed up for eBay, I selected NO to all the spam. I don't want spam. Period.
Now they're saying that it looks like an error if everything was selected as "no", and therefore they need to put you "in line" with the others.
Now... they've already proven that they've done this once. What about the NEXT time when they "notice" that all your selections are set to NO?
What about the next newbie who signs up for eBay service? Will s/he have to go through the same thing at some point in the future? If s/he does, will everyone else have to go through the same thing AGAIN? Will it become company policy to periodically reset your preferences because they look like an "error"?
If they keep resetting my preferences in order to send me spam, that's unsolicited mail. What's worse, they are SPECIFICALLY opting me back in without my permission. And if they're going to do this periodically, this makes it even worse. Eventually, they're going to catch me while I'm gone on vacation, and I won't be around to reset my preferences before the deadline expired.... HELLO SPAM!
No thanks, I am *NOT* going to put up with that. It looks like that in order to opt-out of eBay spam, I have to completely opt-out of eBay altogether.
I've read your post over and over again. Each time it left me with one impression (and I'm not trying to flame you or anything, this just IS the way your post reads): Are you saying that Rambust withdrew the complaint because of who they got as the judge? Are you saying that you'd advise your clients to withdraw their complaints if they got Harris? And you're saying that this is the right decision on Rambust's part? Are you not, in fact, encouraging judge-shopping?
I don't think that the question about whether flex-time is good or bad is one that can be answered so easily.
For someone who's supposed to be answering phones (ie: secretaries, PR people, etc), flex-time is bad. They MUST be around to answer the phone when it rings. Or meet clients when they come in. Etc. It's not like it requires brainpower to pick up a phone, anyway.
For other jobs that don't require as much personal interaction such as programming, engineering, art, etc., then flex-time is good. When you're working creatively, managers CANNOT order you to be creative on demand. Writer's (or coder's) block simply cannot be overcome on demand. Unfortunately, not all managers understand this, and this can lead to ill-will within the work environment. With flex-time, this could be avoided.
I'm a programmer, and what I do takes *concentration*. If I'm in a noisy environment, then that disrupts my concentration, and my productivity goes downhill. If I can work after hours when there aren't so many people around, then I can actually be more productive.
I read in a paper that on average, it takes about 15 minutes for a programmer to sit down and get into "the zone" where code is flowing from his/her fingers. If s/he is interrupted by anything (a coworker asking a question, loud talking, etc.), s/he breaks out of "the zone", and must spend another 15 minutes to get back into "the zone". I don't know if this applies to everyone, but it seems fitting most of the time.
I'm allowed to set my own schedule (within reason -- must work at least 8 hrs a day), then I can avoid the "noisy" times, and aim for the "quiet" times. Mornings and late afternoons are the worst, so I don't even bother to try to work during those times. If I'm forced to work regardless... well... you're just going to end up with a lot of crappy and sloppy code from me.
Getting back to my original point -- yes, flex-time is a good thing... only for those who actually really needs it. Managers, secretaries, marketing people, etc. don't. Designers (of whatever type) do. Run your business accordingly.
(slightly off-topic)
And for god's sake, SCHEDULE your meetings well ahead of time. Flex-time or not, I can be there for a scheduled meeting. If you or your managers run the business on sudden meetings, then it's time to look long and hard at how the business's run.
Yet, he's the one who's fighting the MPAA. He's the one who's fighting DMCA. He's the one racking up massive legal bills defending your basic rights. What are *YOU* doing about the DMCA?
I was watching a show on the Discovery channel a couple of weeks ago. They were doing a special on the moons of Jupiter, and they mentioned that sometime in the year 2002 (2003?), they will be launching a probe that will attempt to land on Europa, and release a heating vent of sorts that will melt through the ice to the water below, and (hopefully) see what's under all that ice. Has anyone else seen this show? Any more information on this?