They are doing nothing different from the long, accepted mail order tradition
... exactly, and mail order companies also have been collecting state taxes for years when they have a presence in the state. You'll see that on many mail-order forms, for example "Residents of $STATE please add $N. sales tax."
I think so many people haven't bothered even looking at a mail-order coupon in ages (blame the Innert00bs:^) that they've forgotten this.
You're welcome. However, I think that the REAL story here, and the one everyone is missing, is that in reality, Amazon is just looking for any excuse to dump their affiliates without having to take the bad publicity. After all, unlike back in the '90s, Amazon now has a big enough market presence that they don't need to cough up a commission to an affiliate to get the sales.
In reality the headline should be "Amazon dumps affiliates to lowers costs, increase profitability, state takes blame.", because that's what just happened, and they'll do it at every opportunity while pretending to bemoan the whole thing.
Will Bezos now patent the "invention and method for cutting out affiliates"?
That there shall not be tariffs on commerce between states is a cornerstone of our nation.
Pretty weak cornerstone to base a nation on. Also, the tax is not on interstate commerce - the goods are free to travel through the state without accruing tax liability. It's only when they find their way into the hands of an end user that they are liable to the sales tax, or the equivalent state use tax. If you can show that sales taxes, levied by the state against the local individual, as opposed to being levied by the state against the vendor, are unconstitutional, you'd have a point.
Just as important, it's not interstate commerce when you have a business presence in-state. The affiliates ARE that presence - affiliates are, after all, affiliated with Amazon, that's why they're called affiliates, duh!!! They're paid by Amazon, not some 3rd party. They're no different than having a commission sales rep working the state, because that's what they are, commission sales reps.
Or maybe they can go to the cloud! "Yay, cloud!":-(
The truth: Amazon could figure it out - they just can't be bothered. They WANT to drop their affiliates, since they no longer need them to "get the Amazon name out." If you're an Amazon affiliate, your days are numbered - Amazon just wants to be able to blame someone else when they dump you.
How many of those 25k affiliates "forgot" to include their affiliate income? How many others were so insubstantial that no income tax was owing?
It's the same problem with ebay, and the crack-down is inevitable. Let them compete on an equal footing with the locals, and each will win their fair market share based on price, product, and service.
Instead, local business is indirectly subsidizing Amazon by carrying a disproportionate share of the tax burden.
And maybe the reason that those local stores closed down was from unfair competition - companies like Amazon that didn't have to charge sales taxes. The local store provided local jobs, and paid taxes that supported your schools and your police and your fire protection and your clinics. Amazon doesn't.
Keep in mind that you're still supposed to pay the equivalent "use tax", so any savings were a lot less, unless you're a tax cheat. The vast majority of people, given the opportunity, proved to be tax cheats, which was no surprise.
All California is doing is saying "if you want to compete, compete on an even footing, and don't enable tax cheats." Is it a cash grab? Look around - state governments everywhere need the cash. Which is better - that Amazon be forced to compete fairly, or that you pay for a state bail-out?
Because then they'd have to collect state and muni taxes, and their price advantage would either become much less, or go negative.
"Gee, I can buy it for $50 at the store today, or $50 on Amazon and have it Monday, but I'll get free shipping..." - most people will just buy it locally.
Ok, you've convinced pretty much everyone that you're a total psychotic nutjob with those last two posts.
If you call that "winning", even Charlie Sheen carries it off better than you.
But no, you haven't "exposed" anything, or "won" anything, except the Internet Fool of the Year Prize. We're all still here, there was never any "coordinated attack" against you except in your own paranoid-addled pea of a brain, and everyone is laughing at you, not with you.
We're looking for the stupidest poster on slashdot, and so far APK (the "hosts file guy", Alexander Peter Kowlalski) is it. Nobody else even comes close when it comes to self-immolation.
He must really like the taste of shoe leather and dirty socks, the way he keeps stuffing both his feet into his mouth.
He keeps accusing me of attacking him as an AC, when it's obvious to everyone that, unlike him, I don't hide. His latest post sounds like the "Vietnam strategy" - declare victory and get the f*** out. Of course, being the perennial loser, he'll be back. Sort of like herpes, the "gift that keeps on giving". He just can't help himself.
APK, grow up. If you're now claiming that you're too stupid to even check something yourself, you've just proven that stupid is as stupid does. You make Forrest Gump look like the second coming of Einstein.
But really, since you claim that I ran ad banners on trolltalk.com (not that it would be a big deal if I did, who gives a f***), prove it.
You can't because it never happened. You said I was "greedy", based on your misinterpretation of what someone else (webmistressrachel) wrote, and I have yet to see any convincing argument that people who give away their code under the GPL and host it on a web server paid for entirely out of their own pocket, with nary and ad in sight, are "greedy".
Then again it's what I expect from a Windows fan-boi whose life is spent either spamming discussion boards about his craptastic "hosts file" when everyone else has moved on to better solutions, or stalking people who pointed out your bs.
So again, APK, if you didn't check it out yourself, you're stupider than even I thought possible. In fact, I doubt we'll find a dumber poster on slashdot. Rachel gave you lots of notice that she was trolling you, and even then, you either didn't bother to check, or you did, but assumed that your "hosts file" blocked any ads - because you wanted SO badly to believe that I was a greedy slimeball. A pshrink would say that it's revealing how you project your internal self-image onto others' actions.
So for once in your life get off your big fat ass and do it! You've threatened so many people, and you NEVER follow through, you bloviating gasbag. Discovery against you will be interesting.
BTW - you're the one who wrote that you stopped paying to host your crap because you wanted to spend the $80 on a new graphics card. How is repeating that "libel"?
Just like pointing out that anyone can duplicate your "life's work" with a couple of lines in a shell script under any *nix certainly isn't libel.
And I only yank your chain when your lies come to my attention, which you go out of your way to attract, with your crap-floods after my posts. The only stalker here is you.
You have no professional reputation; you ruined it yourself with your constantly spamming forums for your crappy hosts file "solution" years ago.
If you want to blame someone, look in the mirror - but make it a BIG mirror, you fat loser.
Also, maybe Johnnhy can't code, but you can't read english. The quote from webmistressrachel does not say that I ever ran ads on the site - it says the site itself is an "advertisement" for my giving away GPL'd code that I wrote.
Also, when you write crap like "Why run a website with adbanners if you're not being paid? Why run a CMS Software site at all if you're not making monies on it and at least PR'ing it using adbanners to again, be paid." you smear everyone who has ever donated bandwidth to run a free banner for getfirefox or any other open-source software (yes, I've done that), as well as the hundreds of thousands of devs who also make their code available for free, including many who are paying to host the code themselves, because they believe in giving back and paying it forward.
Again, Johnny can't code, but APK (the "hosts file" guy) can't understand what he reads, which is worse, but at least good for some lulz on a rainy day.
That's just my latest cyber-stalker - APK, the "hosts file guy." Yesterday he was accusing me of being greedy because I run a website where I allow people to download code I wrote that I license under the GPL version 2. He thought his hosts file was "blocking the ads" - there never were any ads, and the moron would have been able to see that if he had been using a more modern ad-blocking technique that allowed for disabling blocking on a per-site basis.
He appears to hate linux, women, and reality (not necessarily in that order).
In terms of whack jobs, I don't think there's anyone sillier than him on slashdot. Any time someone posts against him using their logged-in name, he attacks them. If they do the safe thing, and post as an AC, he thinks it's me and does his usual crap-flood of my posts, demonstration of how stupid he is, and giving me the opportunity to distract him from tracking down and attacking others.
He should do himself (and everyone else) a favor and go hosts file himself. Until then, better he attacks me than someone else who might not know his reputation and actually gives a ****.
At least, that's what they look like of you're following them. You can't say someone's actually "driving" the car if they can't even see over the steering wheel. Just like you can't say they're parking it if their "acoustic sensor system" is the sound the other car makes when they back into it.
They're not really driving - they're playing a game of chance... like their bingo nights, but on public roads.
Oh, I'm so scared of yet another APK anonymous post. Not.
Everyone should post AC when replying to you, because this way you can't stalk them like you do me. Don't like it? Then don't do it yourself, you lying hypocrite.
That's not the definition of libel, ass-wipe. Besides, when I say you're obese, stupid, disturbed and obsessed, and that people should post AC when replying to you because otherwise you'll crap-flood them, the proof is there. It's not libel if it's the truth, fatso.
If it has any consequences for your livelyhood, here's a clue - the first thing to do when you're in a hole is to stop digging. Stop trying to pimp your crappy useless hosts file all over the net. Stop trying to claim that Windows is somehow more secure or better performing than the various *nixes out there. Stop telling lies about others who point out what a phoney you are when you threaten to sue, but never do (there's a law against that, btw).
In other words, go hosts file yourself. The world will be a better place for it. Or you could grow up, but we both know that will never happen.
I'm not the least worried. He threatened to sue me, I told him to go ahead, produced the links showing he's always making those threats and never going through with them, big talker, small doer, blah blah blah... end result, he began making all sorts of excuses why "it's not worth it."
Once someone says it's not worth it, they lose the right to sue for that particular event, since you can now use their own words that "it's not worth it" against them, to show that there were, at most, de minimus damages.
It's really pitiful - the first time he tried to get away with the "I'll sue you" threat, he was claiming to have a law firm on retainer "so that it wouldn't cost him more just to sue" (he obviously doesn't know how those arrangements work). At the same time, he was explaining elsewhere that he was no longer going to pay to serve up his "hosts files" and other stuff because he wanted to save the $80 a year to buy a new graphics card instead.
He's a joke with no punch line. A stalker who does so to try to increase his own sense of importance in the world, not realizing that everyone is laughing at him, and the more he tries to lie and bully, the more attention he draws to his eccentric, bizarre, misogynist behavior.
He really has a problem with women proving him wrong. He cannot stand that, and resorts to childish bullying and name-calling, like any other immature pinhead.
In my case, I really, really got his goat, and not just because I encourage others to use the same tactics against him that he uses, and that I exposed his threats as hollow bluffs (see my user profile for why he's obsessed with me personally).
The funny thing is I have never had any paid advertising on any of my sites - the only banners I ever ran were for things like the "get firefox" campaign, just like a lot of us did. We did this because we believe in GPL software and FLOSS principles, and we didn't receive a single penny, nor did we want to. The "warm fuzzies" was good enough.
He would have known this if he had used a modern ad blocker instead of his stupid hosts file. He could have just disabled ad blocking on the site for a minute and seen that he had been totally p0wned by Rachel (all she did was exploit his willingness to lie and believe the worst of anyone when it suits his own warped purposes - and only after saying plenty of times that she was trolling him).
Of course, if I *had* been making money from http://starmedia.trolltalk.com/ (as an example), there's nothing inherently wrong with that. That link is an ongoing example of citizen journalism, and I had to fight with my hosting company to reinstate it on that basis after starmedia's owner complained about my exposing his frauds. Reporters in other media make money off their journalistic endeavors, just as they do on the Internet. I choose not to. Who knows, maybe in some future alternate reality I'll become a rich and famous investigative reporter, (yeah, right:-) but right now, it's about exposing fraud and doing the right thing, not about monetization.
I certainly don't look down on traditional journalists - I'm meeting with one next week to discuss the whole starmedia mess as well as get a preview the stuff I haven't published yet. This is the future of news - cooperative, as well as competitive. It's about negotiating with hosting companies to not shut you down when a scammer complains that you're ruining their "business model," but instead acknowledge that citizen journalism is part of the common good and as such overrides any limitation of the TOS. It's about having other slashdotters ready to mirror your reporting if censorship stays in place. It's about reporting stuff even when it means you open yourself up to lawsuits, because it's the right thing to do.
Plenty of people run ads on their sites to take at least some of the financial bite out of it. I don't. Not because there's anything wrong with it in principle, I just haven't bothered to consider it, in part because of privacy concerns with ad-tracking/user-tracking. Ad servers that track you from site to site are just plain wrong, and I'll never have anything to do with them. The old-fashioned "pay per view with no tracking" I have no similar ethical issues with, but right now, I want to focus on other stuff instead.
APK (Alexander Philip Kowalski) has serious issues, he's been cyberstalking me for some time, and his "reality" needs some serious meds. He should do himself and the world a favor and go HOSTS file himself:-)
I have never libeled you, APK. Everything I have written about him is the truth. I have never, for example, said that you were a monkey-f*cking, goat-dick-sucking serial pedophile. I *have* said that you're an overweight, immature, stupid, paranoid misogynist with delusions of self-importance who is obviously so obsessed with me that you have to stalk me on slashdot and crap-flood whenever some AC posts that you're an ill-informed jerk with the personality of a wet turd.
And those are probably your good points.
Your obsessive crap-floods are why I advise others to post AC when replying to you - it makes you go nuts (which is a bonus), but the real reason is preventing you from stalking them the way you do me, since I don't post as an AC, and am easy to follow.
Those of us who have followed your personal obsession with me for some time know the real reason you're so obsessed with me, and it has nothing to do with your stupid hosts file. And we're laughing at you, because you can't come out in the open and admit the real reason, because you haven't got the guts. Think of it - of the almost 600 people who have friended me on slashdot (and the thousands more who just happen to take a peek once in a while because I'm sometimes interesting, sometimes funny), I think about half of them know the real reason, and we're all laughing at you.
BTW, are you a monkey-f*cking, goat-dick-sucking serial pedophile? Just asking, because that's got to be at least as likely as my being "greedy" because I run some sites that don't take any paid advertising whatsoever, and promote giving away GPL code (including my own), expose fraud such as I'm doing at http://starmedia.trolltalk.com/ and ran a few banner ads years ago on one of them (not trolltalk.com) telling people to OMG HOW EVIL OF ME get firefox because your beloved IE sucked.
Poor APK. Do yourself and the world a favor: Go HOSTS FILE yourself. And lose some weight.
Slashdot Mirror
So all those "Not sold in stores - 97 cent shipping to home" products on walmart's site are just an optical illusion? Wow ...
I think so many people haven't bothered even looking at a mail-order coupon in ages (blame the Innert00bs :^) that they've forgotten this.
In reality the headline should be "Amazon dumps affiliates to lowers costs, increase profitability, state takes blame.", because that's what just happened, and they'll do it at every opportunity while pretending to bemoan the whole thing.
Will Bezos now patent the "invention and method for cutting out affiliates"?
Pretty weak cornerstone to base a nation on. Also, the tax is not on interstate commerce - the goods are free to travel through the state without accruing tax liability. It's only when they find their way into the hands of an end user that they are liable to the sales tax, or the equivalent state use tax. If you can show that sales taxes, levied by the state against the local individual, as opposed to being levied by the state against the vendor, are unconstitutional, you'd have a point.
Just as important, it's not interstate commerce when you have a business presence in-state. The affiliates ARE that presence - affiliates are, after all, affiliated with Amazon, that's why they're called affiliates, duh!!! They're paid by Amazon, not some 3rd party. They're no different than having a commission sales rep working the state, because that's what they are, commission sales reps.
Maybe Amazon should resort to their "Mechanical Turk". It would be a better use than the 40% of all Mechanical Turk jobs that are devoted to spamming.
Or maybe they can go to the cloud! "Yay, cloud!" :-(
The truth: Amazon could figure it out - they just can't be bothered. They WANT to drop their affiliates, since they no longer need them to "get the Amazon name out." If you're an Amazon affiliate, your days are numbered - Amazon just wants to be able to blame someone else when they dump you.
It's the same problem with ebay, and the crack-down is inevitable. Let them compete on an equal footing with the locals, and each will win their fair market share based on price, product, and service.
Instead, local business is indirectly subsidizing Amazon by carrying a disproportionate share of the tax burden.
Keep in mind that you're still supposed to pay the equivalent "use tax", so any savings were a lot less, unless you're a tax cheat. The vast majority of people, given the opportunity, proved to be tax cheats, which was no surprise.
All California is doing is saying "if you want to compete, compete on an even footing, and don't enable tax cheats." Is it a cash grab? Look around - state governments everywhere need the cash. Which is better - that Amazon be forced to compete fairly, or that you pay for a state bail-out?
"Gee, I can buy it for $50 at the store today, or $50 on Amazon and have it Monday, but I'll get free shipping ..." - most people will just buy it locally.
Now please extend this to the other 49 states.
No, a real real real geek would have sent it tied to the leg of the headless chicken that was running around after they bit its head off.
Silly goose, learn to read (and to format your posts properly). I never said I ever had any banners on trolltalk.com.
None of the code I've GPL'd is a derived work, moron.
That's not fuel - that's reaction mass. You use fuel (or an external energy source, such as solar) to heat it up.
Ok, you've convinced pretty much everyone that you're a total psychotic nutjob with those last two posts.
If you call that "winning", even Charlie Sheen carries it off better than you.
But no, you haven't "exposed" anything, or "won" anything, except the Internet Fool of the Year Prize. We're all still here, there was never any "coordinated attack" against you except in your own paranoid-addled pea of a brain, and everyone is laughing at you, not with you.
We're looking for the stupidest poster on slashdot, and so far APK (the "hosts file guy", Alexander Peter Kowlalski) is it. Nobody else even comes close when it comes to self-immolation.
He must really like the taste of shoe leather and dirty socks, the way he keeps stuffing both his feet into his mouth.
He keeps accusing me of attacking him as an AC, when it's obvious to everyone that, unlike him, I don't hide. His latest post sounds like the "Vietnam strategy" - declare victory and get the f*** out. Of course, being the perennial loser, he'll be back. Sort of like herpes, the "gift that keeps on giving". He just can't help himself.
But really, since you claim that I ran ad banners on trolltalk.com (not that it would be a big deal if I did, who gives a f***), prove it.
You can't because it never happened. You said I was "greedy", based on your misinterpretation of what someone else (webmistressrachel) wrote, and I have yet to see any convincing argument that people who give away their code under the GPL and host it on a web server paid for entirely out of their own pocket, with nary and ad in sight, are "greedy".
Then again it's what I expect from a Windows fan-boi whose life is spent either spamming discussion boards about his craptastic "hosts file" when everyone else has moved on to better solutions, or stalking people who pointed out your bs.
So again, APK, if you didn't check it out yourself, you're stupider than even I thought possible. In fact, I doubt we'll find a dumber poster on slashdot. Rachel gave you lots of notice that she was trolling you, and even then, you either didn't bother to check, or you did, but assumed that your "hosts file" blocked any ads - because you wanted SO badly to believe that I was a greedy slimeball. A pshrink would say that it's revealing how you project your internal self-image onto others' actions.
BTW - you're the one who wrote that you stopped paying to host your crap because you wanted to spend the $80 on a new graphics card. How is repeating that "libel"?
Just like pointing out that anyone can duplicate your "life's work" with a couple of lines in a shell script under any *nix certainly isn't libel.
And I only yank your chain when your lies come to my attention, which you go out of your way to attract, with your crap-floods after my posts. The only stalker here is you.
If you want to blame someone, look in the mirror - but make it a BIG mirror, you fat loser.
Also, maybe Johnnhy can't code, but you can't read english. The quote from webmistressrachel does not say that I ever ran ads on the site - it says the site itself is an "advertisement" for my giving away GPL'd code that I wrote.
Also, when you write crap like "Why run a website with adbanners if you're not being paid? Why run a CMS Software site at all if you're not making monies on it and at least PR'ing it using adbanners to again, be paid." you smear everyone who has ever donated bandwidth to run a free banner for getfirefox or any other open-source software (yes, I've done that), as well as the hundreds of thousands of devs who also make their code available for free, including many who are paying to host the code themselves, because they believe in giving back and paying it forward.
Again, Johnny can't code, but APK (the "hosts file" guy) can't understand what he reads, which is worse, but at least good for some lulz on a rainy day.
Jackass!
That's just my latest cyber-stalker - APK, the "hosts file guy." Yesterday he was accusing me of being greedy because I run a website where I allow people to download code I wrote that I license under the GPL version 2. He thought his hosts file was "blocking the ads" - there never were any ads, and the moron would have been able to see that if he had been using a more modern ad-blocking technique that allowed for disabling blocking on a per-site basis.
He appears to hate linux, women, and reality (not necessarily in that order).
In terms of whack jobs, I don't think there's anyone sillier than him on slashdot. Any time someone posts against him using their logged-in name, he attacks them. If they do the safe thing, and post as an AC, he thinks it's me and does his usual crap-flood of my posts, demonstration of how stupid he is, and giving me the opportunity to distract him from tracking down and attacking others.
He should do himself (and everyone else) a favor and go hosts file himself. Until then, better he attacks me than someone else who might not know his reputation and actually gives a ****.
They're not really driving - they're playing a game of chance ... like their bingo nights, but on public roads.
Oh, I'm so scared of yet another APK anonymous post. Not.
Everyone should post AC when replying to you, because this way you can't stalk them like you do me. Don't like it? Then don't do it yourself, you lying hypocrite.
I'm not the least worried. He threatened to sue me, I told him to go ahead, produced the links showing he's always making those threats and never going through with them, big talker, small doer, blah blah blah ... end result, he began making all sorts of excuses why "it's not worth it."
Once someone says it's not worth it, they lose the right to sue for that particular event, since you can now use their own words that "it's not worth it" against them, to show that there were, at most, de minimus damages.
It's really pitiful - the first time he tried to get away with the "I'll sue you" threat, he was claiming to have a law firm on retainer "so that it wouldn't cost him more just to sue" (he obviously doesn't know how those arrangements work). At the same time, he was explaining elsewhere that he was no longer going to pay to serve up his "hosts files" and other stuff because he wanted to save the $80 a year to buy a new graphics card instead.
He's a joke with no punch line. A stalker who does so to try to increase his own sense of importance in the world, not realizing that everyone is laughing at him, and the more he tries to lie and bully, the more attention he draws to his eccentric, bizarre, misogynist behavior.
He really has a problem with women proving him wrong. He cannot stand that, and resorts to childish bullying and name-calling, like any other immature pinhead.
In my case, I really, really got his goat, and not just because I encourage others to use the same tactics against him that he uses, and that I exposed his threats as hollow bluffs (see my user profile for why he's obsessed with me personally).
He would have known this if he had used a modern ad blocker instead of his stupid hosts file. He could have just disabled ad blocking on the site for a minute and seen that he had been totally p0wned by Rachel (all she did was exploit his willingness to lie and believe the worst of anyone when it suits his own warped purposes - and only after saying plenty of times that she was trolling him).
Of course, if I *had* been making money from http://starmedia.trolltalk.com/ (as an example), there's nothing inherently wrong with that. That link is an ongoing example of citizen journalism, and I had to fight with my hosting company to reinstate it on that basis after starmedia's owner complained about my exposing his frauds. Reporters in other media make money off their journalistic endeavors, just as they do on the Internet. I choose not to. Who knows, maybe in some future alternate reality I'll become a rich and famous investigative reporter, (yeah, right :-) but right now, it's about exposing fraud and doing the right thing, not about monetization.
I certainly don't look down on traditional journalists - I'm meeting with one next week to discuss the whole starmedia mess as well as get a preview the stuff I haven't published yet. This is the future of news - cooperative, as well as competitive. It's about negotiating with hosting companies to not shut you down when a scammer complains that you're ruining their "business model," but instead acknowledge that citizen journalism is part of the common good and as such overrides any limitation of the TOS. It's about having other slashdotters ready to mirror your reporting if censorship stays in place. It's about reporting stuff even when it means you open yourself up to lawsuits, because it's the right thing to do.
Plenty of people run ads on their sites to take at least some of the financial bite out of it. I don't. Not because there's anything wrong with it in principle, I just haven't bothered to consider it, in part because of privacy concerns with ad-tracking/user-tracking. Ad servers that track you from site to site are just plain wrong, and I'll never have anything to do with them. The old-fashioned "pay per view with no tracking" I have no similar ethical issues with, but right now, I want to focus on other stuff instead.
APK (Alexander Philip Kowalski) has serious issues, he's been cyberstalking me for some time, and his "reality" needs some serious meds. He should do himself and the world a favor and go HOSTS file himself :-)
And those are probably your good points.
Your obsessive crap-floods are why I advise others to post AC when replying to you - it makes you go nuts (which is a bonus), but the real reason is preventing you from stalking them the way you do me, since I don't post as an AC, and am easy to follow.
Those of us who have followed your personal obsession with me for some time know the real reason you're so obsessed with me, and it has nothing to do with your stupid hosts file. And we're laughing at you, because you can't come out in the open and admit the real reason, because you haven't got the guts. Think of it - of the almost 600 people who have friended me on slashdot (and the thousands more who just happen to take a peek once in a while because I'm sometimes interesting, sometimes funny), I think about half of them know the real reason, and we're all laughing at you.
BTW, are you a monkey-f*cking, goat-dick-sucking serial pedophile? Just asking, because that's got to be at least as likely as my being "greedy" because I run some sites that don't take any paid advertising whatsoever, and promote giving away GPL code (including my own), expose fraud such as I'm doing at http://starmedia.trolltalk.com/ and ran a few banner ads years ago on one of them (not trolltalk.com) telling people to OMG HOW EVIL OF ME get firefox because your beloved IE sucked.
Poor APK. Do yourself and the world a favor: Go HOSTS FILE yourself. And lose some weight.