I don't know if I've ever seen anyone so desperate for site traffic. Give up this pathetic reverse psychology guerilla advertising campaign, and buy a slot on adfu.
You're not fooling anyone.
Re:Oh, this is gonna be unpopular.
on
Win an AIBO
·
· Score: 1
It isn't an ad, it isn't pro-spam, it's AIBO news.
You must be joking. If they were giving away a computer with Linux pre-installed, would that be Linux news? If they were giving away money, would that be US Mint news? If they were giving away a tree, would that be environmental news?
And to all you ppl worried about evil evil nasty spam, even if they are lying, it's about time you wake up and notice it's 1999 and spam exists.
What, pray tell, is your point? Yes SPAM exists. We still hate it. We still try to avoid putting our e-mail addresses in places that are likely to get it SPAMMED.
If you don't mind SPAM, why exactly do you spam-proof your e-mail address as it appears on/.?
As a fellow AOLer in an identical situation, I feel for you...
However, your original post didn't speak very highly of your technical expertise.
If you want to view the source of any webpage, all you have to do is right-click on the webpage and then click on view source which will be a choice in the resulting list
Sure, that'll give you the HTML, but not the perl script that generated it.
If that still does not suit your fancy, you can log on anonymously to http://www.slashdot.org with your favorite ftp tool.
Wrong again. First of all, you don't FTP to an http:// URL, that's what ftp:// is for. Secondly, www.slashdot.org isn't running an FTP server, though you could telnet to port 80 of any of slashdot's IPs and GET / if you really felt like it...
It doesn't improve your image to insult people and then not know what you're talking about:)
Rob has recently turned off karma scores on personal pages
He did?
User Info for Signal 11 (7608) http://www.malign.net signal11@mediaone.net?Subject=Slashdot Karma 279 (mostly the sum of moderation done to users comments)
Karma whore or not, 279 is pretty damn impressive:)
How often do things like this happen? How many companies do we threaten to boycott for bullying the little guy? Can we even keep track of them all? Of course not.
But we have the power of computers and databases on our side. Why not organize a list of online corporations we have gripes with, and interface it with client-side software that will warn us when we attempt to visit "sanctioned" sites?
ALERT: Amazon.com is currently filing a lawsuit against Barnes and Noble for violating their patented concept of "one click shopping." Though they do have a legal patent on the technology, this is an obvious non-innovation, and this patent and lawsuit is considered by many to be abusive and frivolous. Visit http://link.to.the/news/story.html for more information. Do you wish to proceed?
We can't personally keep tabs on every corporate bully, but to organize and be a veritable force for companies to be wary of, perhaps we can convince them our voices really do matter.
One might worry such organization would be forced to make overly subjective decisions, and eventually become political, but the choice would always be left to the user. The software and database would prodive the information (hopefully a link to a [mostly] impartial news story), and the user would choose, based on the information provided, whether to personally avoid the site or not. Personally, I imagine many would opt to support these boycotts.
Every dollar the monstrous corporations have came from someone's pocket.
I shouldn't complain because it probably couldn't be any better, but moderation often sucks on/. People who don't know what they're talking about get moderated up all the time, and good stuff gets forgotten because it's not catchy enough.
People need to stop using moderation to take out their sexual frustrations.
I worked for a while on a web-based application, where we used ASP/IIS with MSSQL server on the backend. We would have loved to migrate to Apache/PHP, but the size of the existing codebase would have made a port too costly. I've heard of a number of other people in this same situation.
The ASP->PHP port would be much easier if PHP supported the ASP object model. This would allow for dumb parser/translators to be written (like asp2php) that could work nearly flawlessly, because arbitrary translations don't have to be hardcoded in. For example, instead of hunting down how to do a redirect in PHP (ie. writing the header manually: this took me a good 15 minutes to figure out), I can just type response.redirect().
If mindshare is what this project's after, I can't think of a better way than to get a horde of gracious ASP/IIS converts. The stability and performance boosts alone should be enough to convince all but the most devout Microsoft fanatics.
The problem I see with the idea of making money off support of a product is this: The more stable and easy-to-use your product is, the less money you make! This is an ironic situation, whereby overwhelming success in the ease-of-use department could almost be your undoing.
"I hear it's really easy to use. Do I even NEED support?"
I think you've completely missed the point of this test.
The only question that even remotely links to your criticism is the last question (number 11), and the question prompts you only to devise a way to best solve your inherent problem with the power of the internet. I can see absolutely no way you could interpret this to be an attack on people who use technology.
The point of the test is that the internet, as it grows in scope, will envelop more and more of our lives. How will this change things? How can we preserve neccesary elements of accountability, authenticity, and decency while not sacrificing freedom? That is the point, and you've completely missed it.
a programmer at 3, he already had 11 years experience
Am I justified in being skeptical of a 3 year old "programmer", or am I just jealous that I didn't do anything remotely resembling programming until I was 9?
I suppose Mozart wrote his first concerto at about the same age though...
This hinges on getting pppd to grab onto an aready started connection, and that AOL's pp prtocol isn't weird.
I'm afraid that the ppp protocol would have to be altered somehow to support all of AOL's addons like IM's, keywords, all the AOL only stuff. Interesting idea though.
The way AOL interfaces with winsock is the AOL Adaptor it installs. You would have to find a way to get this working first, then run the AOL client.
Could this be accomplished by adding code to WINE to intercept these API calls? And if that worked, could a virtual networking adapter be written, similar to the vmnet* adaptors from VMWARE?
I've had the same problem of Windows-only, proprietary internet clients with AOL (I'd switch but my parents pay the bill). My aspirations of completely abandoning Windows are impaired by there not being an AOL client for Linux.
Wine runs the AOL software just fine for the most part, but as far as I know there's no way to interface the kernel's networking code with AOL's PPP connection (ie. I want to be connected to AOL through WINE and be able to use all the command line net utilities.
I don't know enough about the internals of WINE to discover whether this is feasable. Does anyone know how hard this would be to implement, or how you'd even do it?
To me, this means the maximum distance between any two sites is 19 clicks. Sort of the way that people claim that only six degrees separate us from any other person in the world. This would be an impressive display of the "web" aspect of the world wide web.
But this isn't the claim at all. If you read the article, it says that
there's an average of 19 clicks separating random Internet sites.
I'm 17 years old. Almost everything I know about computers has come from a combination of books and the WWW in the past five years or so. If at any time my parents decided they didn't trust me, and could only allow me to see a tiny fraction of the web, I would probably be your average computer luzer today.
I've spent countless hours on the web when my parents are gone. Does that mean it's my babysitter?
>And if Microsoft isn't smart enough to do that, >someone in the open-source community (a group >very good at reverse-engineering) will be -- at >which point Microsoft will get to use the >results. So AOL loses either way.
Wait a second... the open source community codes a client that gets around AOL's blocks, releases it under the GPL, which Microsoft uses to derive its own client?
I can see it now! You're presented with the EULA during the install which reads:
Microsoft Instant Messenger 1.0
PREAMBLE The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users.
OK, Kiddies, you want to make the RIAA look stupid, convince people that SDMI isn't worth the trouble, thwart the record industry's monopoly on music, and guarentee MP3 a long, successful life?
Recognize efforts like these, and pay a measely buck for guarenteed, easy, and fast access to songs you like that puts money in the artist's pocket too.
The irony in this, of course, is that if people wouldn't voluntarily pay for the things the government spends money on, then those things aren't the will of the people anyway. The argument that "we need taxes to make us pay what we want to pay for" is self-defeating.
So much for democracy.
Though I do agree with the second point, that people would rip off artists if not for copyright law...
Slashdot Mirror
The group's Web site made available information, such as eToys' IP address
What sickos. Who knows what these loonies will do next.
I like ice cream because it is sweet, it is sweet because it has sugar, sugar is sustainence, and sustainence keeps me alive
:)
Beta-carotene is sustenance too, but a good portion of the population finds broccoli and asparagus repulsive.
I would also challenge you to trace back the arts to sustenence. Telling a story about increasing sex appeal isn't going to do the job, either
I don't know if I've ever seen anyone so desperate for site traffic. Give up this pathetic reverse psychology guerilla advertising campaign, and buy a slot on adfu.
You're not fooling anyone.
It isn't an ad, it isn't pro-spam, it's AIBO news.
/.?
You must be joking. If they were giving away a computer with Linux pre-installed, would that be Linux news? If they were giving away money, would that be US Mint news? If they were giving away a tree, would that be environmental news?
And to all you ppl worried about evil evil nasty spam, even if they are lying, it's about time you wake up and notice it's 1999 and spam exists.
What, pray tell, is your point? Yes SPAM exists. We still hate it. We still try to avoid putting our e-mail addresses in places that are likely to get it SPAMMED.
If you don't mind SPAM, why exactly do you spam-proof your e-mail address as it appears on
...and THIS gets marked as flamebait?? Is this some moderator's idea of a twisted joke?
As a fellow AOLer in an identical situation, I feel for you...
:)
However, your original post didn't speak very highly of your technical expertise.
If you want to view the source of any webpage, all you have to do is right-click on the webpage and then click on view source which will be a choice in the resulting list
Sure, that'll give you the HTML, but not the perl script that generated it.
If that still does not suit your fancy, you can log on anonymously to http://www.slashdot.org with your favorite ftp tool.
Wrong again. First of all, you don't FTP to an http:// URL, that's what ftp:// is for. Secondly, www.slashdot.org isn't running an FTP server, though you could telnet to port 80 of any of slashdot's IPs and GET / if you really felt like it...
It doesn't improve your image to insult people and then not know what you're talking about
Rob has recently turned off karma scores on personal pages
:)
He did?
User Info for Signal 11 (7608)
http://www.malign.net
signal11@mediaone.net?Subject=Slashdot
Karma 279 (mostly the sum of moderation done to users comments)
Karma whore or not, 279 is pretty damn impressive
The question begs asking though: if they didn't want the perception of being VMWare wannabes, why make the name of their project imply that they are?
How often do things like this happen? How many companies do we threaten to boycott for bullying the little guy? Can we even keep track of them all? Of course not.
But we have the power of computers and databases on our side. Why not organize a list of online corporations we have gripes with, and interface it with client-side software that will warn us when we attempt to visit "sanctioned" sites?
ALERT: Amazon.com is currently filing a lawsuit against Barnes and Noble for violating their patented concept of "one click shopping." Though they do have a legal patent on the technology, this is an obvious non-innovation, and this patent and lawsuit is considered by many to be abusive and frivolous. Visit http://link.to.the/news/story.html for more information. Do you wish to proceed?
We can't personally keep tabs on every corporate bully, but to organize and be a veritable force for companies to be wary of, perhaps we can convince them our voices really do matter.
One might worry such organization would be forced to make overly subjective decisions, and eventually become political, but the choice would always be left to the user. The software and database would prodive the information (hopefully a link to a [mostly] impartial news story), and the user would choose, based on the information provided, whether to personally avoid the site or not. Personally, I imagine many would opt to support these boycotts.
Every dollar the monstrous corporations have came from someone's pocket.
I hear you, man.
/. People who don't know what they're talking about get moderated up all the time, and good stuff gets forgotten because it's not catchy enough.
I shouldn't complain because it probably couldn't be any better, but moderation often sucks on
People need to stop using moderation to take out their sexual frustrations.
I worked for a while on a web-based application, where we used ASP/IIS with MSSQL server on the backend. We would have loved to migrate to Apache/PHP, but the size of the existing codebase would have made a port too costly. I've heard of a number of other people in this same situation.
The ASP->PHP port would be much easier if PHP supported the ASP object model. This would allow for dumb parser/translators to be written (like asp2php) that could work nearly flawlessly, because arbitrary translations don't have to be hardcoded in. For example, instead of hunting down how to do a redirect in PHP (ie. writing the header manually: this took me a good 15 minutes to figure out), I can just type response.redirect().
If mindshare is what this project's after, I can't think of a better way than to get a horde of gracious ASP/IIS converts. The stability and performance boosts alone should be enough to convince all but the most devout Microsoft fanatics.
The problem I see with the idea of making money off support of a product is this: The more stable and easy-to-use your product is, the less money you make! This is an ironic situation, whereby overwhelming success in the ease-of-use department could almost be your undoing.
"I hear it's really easy to use. Do I even NEED support?"
1. complain that you're going to get moderated down
But I'll probably get moderated down for saying that.
I think you've completely missed the point of this test.
The only question that even remotely links to your criticism is the last question (number 11), and the question prompts you only to devise a way to best solve your inherent problem with the power of the internet. I can see absolutely no way you could interpret this to be an attack on people who use technology.
The point of the test is that the internet, as it grows in scope, will envelop more and more of our lives. How will this change things? How can we preserve neccesary elements of accountability, authenticity, and decency while not sacrificing freedom? That is the point, and you've completely missed it.
a programmer at 3, he already had 11 years experience
Am I justified in being skeptical of a 3 year old "programmer", or am I just jealous that I didn't do anything remotely resembling programming until I was 9?
I suppose Mozart wrote his first concerto at about the same age though...
Indeed, another source said, this issue might never evince itself in Macs, since the OS doesn't manipulate data rapidly enough to cause the problem
Finally an advantage to the MacOS's sluggishness!
This hinges on getting pppd to grab onto an aready started connection, and that AOL's pp prtocol isn't weird.
:-)
I'm afraid that the ppp protocol would have to be altered somehow to support all of AOL's addons like IM's, keywords, all the AOL only stuff. Interesting idea though.
What's the second idea?
The way AOL interfaces with winsock is the AOL Adaptor it installs. You would have to find a way to get this working first, then run the AOL client.
Could this be accomplished by adding code to WINE to intercept these API calls? And if that worked, could a virtual networking adapter be written, similar to the vmnet* adaptors from VMWARE?
I've had the same problem of Windows-only, proprietary internet clients with AOL (I'd switch but my parents pay the bill). My aspirations of completely abandoning Windows are impaired by there not being an AOL client for Linux.
Wine runs the AOL software just fine for the most part, but as far as I know there's no way to interface the kernel's networking code with AOL's PPP connection (ie. I want to be connected to AOL through WINE and be able to use all the command line net utilities.
I don't know enough about the internals of WINE to discover whether this is feasable. Does anyone know how hard this would be to implement, or how you'd even do it?
Microsoft has already discovered a solution that will make those silly text configuration files completely unneccesary:
Let's give it up for the Registry!
At first I was amazed at the claim that
the web is only 19 clicks wide.
To me, this means the maximum distance between any two sites is 19 clicks. Sort of the way that people claim that only six degrees separate us from any other person in the world. This would be an impressive display of the "web" aspect of the world wide web.
But this isn't the claim at all. If you read the article, it says that
there's an average of 19 clicks separating random Internet sites.
Different story altogether.
I'm 17 years old. Almost everything I know about computers has come from a combination of books and the WWW in the past five years or so. If at any time my parents decided they didn't trust me, and could only allow me to see a tiny fraction of the web, I would probably be your average computer luzer today.
I've spent countless hours on the web when my parents are gone. Does that mean it's my babysitter?
>And if Microsoft isn't smart enough to do that,
>someone in the open-source community (a group
>very good at reverse-engineering) will be -- at
>which point Microsoft will get to use the
>results. So AOL loses either way.
Wait a second... the open source community codes a client that gets around AOL's blocks, releases it under the GPL, which Microsoft uses to derive its own client?
I can see it now! You're presented with the EULA during the install which reads:
Microsoft Instant Messenger 1.0
PREAMBLE
The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users.
...
Do you agree?
OK, Kiddies, you want to make the RIAA look stupid, convince people that SDMI isn't worth the trouble, thwart the record industry's monopoly on music, and guarentee MP3 a long, successful life?
Recognize efforts like these, and pay a measely buck for guarenteed, easy, and fast access to songs you like that puts money in the artist's pocket too.
The irony in this, of course, is that if people wouldn't voluntarily pay for the things the government spends money on, then those things aren't the will of the people anyway. The argument that "we need taxes to make us pay what we want to pay for" is self-defeating.
So much for democracy.
Though I do agree with the second point, that people would rip off artists if not for copyright law...