I used to work at the helpdesk at my school, so I can tell you this would most likely have no effect.
To give a real example from my university: By default, all the network jacks are on, and if you use it and don't pay for the dorm internet connection, it gets cut off after a week. If it is never used, it is left on (this helped reduce the mess of getting everyone set up the first week in the fall).
One day in the middle of the spring semester, we detected port scanning from a student townhouse dorm, coming from an unregistered jack (the townhouse had 4 of them, 2 of which were being paid for). The jack was still on because it was previously unused. Solution? We simply had the NOC kill the jack.
The student had switched the jack his computer was connected to, thinking it would prevent us from tracking him down. He was half right - perhaps we couldn't say which student in the townhouse was doing it. If he had a router behind it, we didn't need to know - the jack was all we cared about.
Lo and behold, within a few minutes one of the students at that room called up to say his network connection had died. It was hilarious... it was practically a confession. Of course he denied it, but refused my offer to come over and check his computer since it was port scanning without his knowledge. We let him off with a warning, and to the best of my knowledge, he didn't do it again.
Darn... I just bought a solar powered watch (Citizen Eco-drive) - which requires a few hours of office level light, several minutes under a bright lamp, or just a few minutes of direct sunlight, to recharge each day.
This article makes me wonder if a substantial amount of the price was because of the power cells (no silver or gold). I'm sure a watch doesn't need the best efficiency (15-20%) of the current pricy solar cells - 10% efficiency would mean my new watch needs about 30 minutes under a lamp rather than 15-20. Big deal. Of if I'm lazy, I'll stand in the sun for 5 minutes instead of 3.:-)
Making solar power affordable, attractive and practical is the first step in converting to environmentally friendly sources of power. Cost effectiveness is a primary obstacle for new technologies, especially for the environmentally friendly. I guess the other would be defeating the entrenched monopolies that currently rely on oil and other natural resources.
I love meeting people who believe in astrology. I met this girl in a bar who was really into this stuff, so I decided to play along (beer goggles). She's going on about how she foresaw this, that and some other thing, or when her best friend was in a car accident she'd had a dream about it the night before, and her psychic told her blah blah blah. I let her talk about it for quite a while.
After all sorts of anecdotal evidence, I played that I was convinced it worked, and said something to the affect of "I think astrology is amazing. For example, I'm outgoing and hard working. My political views are middle of the road. I'm a bit of a planner, but willing to try anything. I enjoy being different but like to fit in too. Sometimes I have a bit of a temper..." and so on. Once I feel I've given an adequate description, I finished with
"And the amazing part is, because astrology works, you're now going to tell me my birthday."
I don't think she ever caught on I was making fun of her...
Re:Spielberg annoys to the end (*spoiler*)
on
Minority Report
·
· Score: 1
The worst is that the PreCrime unit is chasing one of their own, yet they never cut off his security access to the building - even after they catch him!!.
Okay, so maybe the movie is pretty accurate on corporate security...
I wouldn't recommend this movie because the ending (last half hour?) really dragged and dropped the ball. Oh well, at least I didn't waste money on popcorn and soda:-)
Too bad you didn't bother to read the SPEWS site - if you did you would know they don't sensor anything. I quote (emphasis added):
"We do not control the network traffic on anyone else's servers; therefore, we are not the ones rejecting your email, the mailserver you attempted to send email to generated the bounce. We simply provide a public list of ranges of Internet space (IP addresses) which we do not wish to exchange traffic with. Other networks may choose to filter traffic on their systems using our list. SPEWS never touches any email (or other data packets) between your network and someone else's network. Any email bouncing or packet blocking that takes place occurs at the receiving system."
That is like me saying "I don't like to talk to Bill Gates", and someone thinks my opinion on who I like to talk to matters a whole lot, so they decide not to talk to anyone I don't talk to. As a result, they don't talk to Bill Gates either. And how am I liable? Why don't you post your e-mail address with your post and then see how you feel about "censorware" after your mailbox is full of penis enlargement offers.
This book is *terrible* for extreme programming - I don't know why they even put it in the title (um, ok - to sell more books...) It's a good book for the price though - don't just take my word for it:
While it's important to have the proper security checks, this article only focuses on *possibilities* (emphasis added):
"Digital cameras, MP3 players and handheld computers could be the tools that disgruntled UK employees use to sabotage computer systems or steal vital data, warn security experts."
"The innocent-looking devices could also be used to smuggle out confidential or sensitive information."
"One way that unhappy employees might try to damage computer systems is by smuggling in programs on devices such as digital cameras, handheld computers and MP3 players. "
"Mr Longhurst said because digital cameras, MP3 players and handheld computers swapped information with a PC they could be used for nefarious purposes. "
"Disgruntled employees could easily load hacking software on to the memory card for their digital camera at home, transfer the software on to a PC at work and let it run loose, said Mr Longhurst."
Yes, we should all be concerned and watchful for both internal and external security issues. Yes, trusted employees have the potential to cause more damage because they have better access to information and first hand knowledge of the systems, security and policies. But listing a whole bunch of "could's" and "might's" is as insightful as saying:
"employees could use their Bic pen to damage Post-it notes you have for sale by writing 'buy me:-p' on each sheet."
The article clearly ignores that *most* security problems are from the outside. When will companies realize there is a simple solution: keep your employees happy; keep happy employees.
"There seems to have been a slight problem with the database. Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser. An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, who you can also contact if the problem persists. We apologise [sic] for any inconvenience."
I kept hitting refresh, but I think it only made the problem worse... when the problem concontinued, I also started e-mailing them each time;-)
I feel so helpful, now let's see if this karma thing really works!
What about doubleclick? Their servers link to anything and everything that nobody finds interesting!
I think it's a great concept that will make lesser known content accessible to the average user. Instead of spending almost all their online time on a few huge sites (AOL, MSN, CNN, and a few other media giants), we can jump to a page with the same topic but no advertising budget. But how do you rank and order the list of members? Traditional text search? Even if a community has only a few hundred members, few users will go to page five in the list to find a site. Admittedly, it's only a matter of time before you can pay to be listed at the top of the community membership, instead of a random listing.
And like all good ideas, this system wouldn't be free of abusers. People could always spam their page with links to major sites using single pixel clear gifs, thus making their page a part of any community I wanted. So it becomes a process of "give me sites with links like this page, but not links like the following black hole listed pages." Useful for filtering content (for good or bad reasons).
China isn't stupid. The government uses the military to keep information censored and the people powerless. Yes, in the US the media and the government does manipulate information, but we have access to other sources that are not manipulated in the same way.
I do agree you must be 13 since you don't know a thing about Tiananmen Sq. Unless you think their current persecution of the Falun Gong is a sign that the government is "relaxing a bit and opening up?"
Or is it "what is best for their economy?" Take a look at Hong Kong. It scares China because it had much more freedom and both the people and the economy prospered. Everyone wants to move there from Mainland China, so the government put restrictions on who can live there and have removed the popular vote from the upper parliament and replaced it with wealthy members of the Communist party.
And of course China's long history and defiance in the face of institutionalized and continuing human rights abuses must be what you chalk up as "the people suffer a bit." But I guess you agree that when "the people develop their own businesses on the net and their own culture" they will for give the government for burying their newly born child alive and sterilizing the woman.
You need a backhoe to shovel all that sh*t and you and everyone else knows it.
bah... that was worth the rant. I have enough karma that I can call you on your distortion of the truth without fearing for a precious few points. Isn't that what karma is really about?
That's like saying "people still use AOL? why?" Because they don't know better. Think about it - paid placement works because the "average" user doesn't realize it is an ad. These sites aren't targeting the tech-savvy user. We - research something before we buy it. - don't trust the media or corporations - circument ads, tracking technologies, etc. - look for the best price once we identify what we are buying
And most importantly, for every 10 of us, there are 2 million new internet users who - click on the first link they see - believe what the ads have to say - want to buy from a company name they have heard of (like "AOL" or "MSN") - think "special offers" are really special (because their mommy said so).
A master was explaining the nature of Tao of to one of his novices, "The Tao is embodied in all software -- regardless of how insignificant," said the master.
"Is the Tao in a hand-held calculator?'' asked the novice.
"It is," came the reply.
"Is the Tao in OpenGL 2.0?" continued the novice.
"It will be in OpenGL 2.0," said the master.
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"
The master coughed and shifted his position slightly. "The lesson is over for today," he said.
the argument is you don't have to opt-in for snail-mail spam, so why should you put restrictions on internet companies beyond the regulations on brick and mortor companies? Don't get me wrong - I think they should all be opt-in. But regulating e-mail beyond what snail-mail is regulated isn't fair.
So why don't we make snail-mail spam opt-in? Because the whole USPS is dependent on it. Something like half of all snail-mail is commercial advertising. If we didn't allow these mailings, the USPS would tank and no one would be able to send snail-mail. While the same isn't true about e-mail (yet?) - once we regulate one but not the other, the companies have the valid argument of unfair treatment. What we really need, as consumers, is to publicize which companies are fighting these "opt-in" laws... that's some good-ol-fashion bad-pr for them:-)
I'm all for opt-in as much as the next person. But with 2 millions new internet users every month, we aren't the target audience of opt-in or opt-out. And since tech-savvy users know how to alter their e-mail address and switch between temporary free accounts without too much disruption, the opt-in vs. opt-out argument really becomes a fight over new (and often ignorant) internet users.
I have a friend who works in ad sales for a major.com (think: primary internet portal). They have a specific ad package that targets only newbies - ads that appear the first time the visitor has the cookie set. Apparently these users click on ads like crazy. They haven't learned yet. And with all the new internet users every day, there will always be a bevey of people that want to opt-in not knowing the difference.
And when does opt-in really make a difference? How many e-mails for you have to receive with the subject "re: your e-mail about HOW TO MAKE $$$$$$ FROM HOME IN YOUR SPARE TIME" from unreadjunk@hotmail.com (yes, that is my real address, and no, you can't send me e-mail there unless you are on my address list) before you realize no one cares about in vs out... you get spam anyway.
E-mail advertising use to be the next best thing. Heck, they even had studies saying we wanted this crap. These days, nobody does. Now they have studies saying we don't mind - make that want, even - SMS spam. When will they learn? When the newbies to the internet stop clicking on them. When the newbies stop buying from them. When the AOL users of the world learn better. But as long as those users are out there, they keep what is left of the internet free for the rest of us. I have a proxy that filters ads. I get 3 spams a month. And I don't pay a cent for a single site I visit. But the newbies do - with their clicks and their time.
Rev. Lovejoy: Well, it appears science has faulted once again in the face of overwhelming religious evidence
Lisa: Bu...
Moe: Go home science girl!
Lisa: I am home!
Moe: Good, stay there
In other news...
In a trailer park on the shores of the Mississippi, a local man has claimed to have invented a perpetual motion human.
To prove his claim, he hooked a car battery up his wife/cousin for 10 minutes while she held a 100 watt light bulb in each hand. After removing the car battery, she proceeded to twitch for more than 37 hours.
Aleady companies are clammoring for the device, known as the "shockway," claiming it will revolutionize the world. "We could have our employees work 24 hours a day," said one business owner. "This could be the most important invention to come out of Mississippi since... since... paternity tests"
SONY never went after MOD chip makers because there was no legal precendent. With the DMCA and the broad enforcement and wide interpretation of it's laws, SONY probably feels - make that probably does - have a clear victory in this case. But this is just another case of a major corporation essentially sueing the people by going after a few companies. Armed with the DMCA and the legal standard that legitimate use doesn't matter, large, entrenched companies can continue to use the DMCA to prevent other, legitimate, businesses from eating their market share.
Not that it really matters - people will always make these mod chips and sell them, or instructions to make them, on the internet. Heck, even X-Box hacking is gaining steam against M$'s weak protections. The problem is companies want to control more than just their product - they want to control if you can buy it, use it, how you use it and for how long. Yeah, right - I'm going to sit back and pay money so some other company can control a small part of my life.
If we've learned nothing from history, you only own what you can control, and you can't control people or technology... for long.
Despite my best efforts to throw them all away, AOL keeps trying to grow my collection with their latest offerings...
It's like those blasted music clubs - spend nothing now, but if you sign up you'll pay through the nose later. No matter what, their gonna keep sending you cd's until you wish you'd made a better choice!
Slashdot Mirror
I used to work at the helpdesk at my school, so I can tell you this would most likely have no effect.
To give a real example from my university: By default, all the network jacks are on, and if you use it and don't pay for the dorm internet connection, it gets cut off after a week. If it is never used, it is left on (this helped reduce the mess of getting everyone set up the first week in the fall).
One day in the middle of the spring semester, we detected port scanning from a student townhouse dorm, coming from an unregistered jack (the townhouse had 4 of them, 2 of which were being paid for). The jack was still on because it was previously unused. Solution? We simply had the NOC kill the jack.
The student had switched the jack his computer was connected to, thinking it would prevent us from tracking him down. He was half right - perhaps we couldn't say which student in the townhouse was doing it. If he had a router behind it, we didn't need to know - the jack was all we cared about.
Lo and behold, within a few minutes one of the students at that room called up to say his network connection had died. It was hilarious... it was practically a confession. Of course he denied it, but refused my offer to come over and check his computer since it was port scanning without his knowledge. We let him off with a warning, and to the best of my knowledge, he didn't do it again.
Darn... I just bought a solar powered watch (Citizen Eco-drive) - which requires a few hours of office level light, several minutes under a bright lamp, or just a few minutes of direct sunlight, to recharge each day.
:-)
This article makes me wonder if a substantial amount of the price was because of the power cells (no silver or gold). I'm sure a watch doesn't need the best efficiency (15-20%) of the current pricy solar cells - 10% efficiency would mean my new watch needs about 30 minutes under a lamp rather than 15-20. Big deal. Of if I'm lazy, I'll stand in the sun for 5 minutes instead of 3.
Making solar power affordable, attractive and practical is the first step in converting to environmentally friendly sources of power. Cost effectiveness is a primary obstacle for new technologies, especially for the environmentally friendly. I guess the other would be defeating the entrenched monopolies that currently rely on oil and other natural resources.
Here's to a cleaner planet!
Cheers,
RC
for nerds. Or for stuff that matters.
Why would you ask such a question here?
- A recent convert to a belief; a proselyte.
- A beginner or novice: a neophyte at politics.
- Roman Catholic Church. A newly ordained priest.
So... some apple users are new to sharing kiddie pr0n, not mp3s!A novice of a religious order or congregation.
I love meeting people who believe in astrology. I met this girl in a bar who was really into this stuff, so I decided to play along (beer goggles). She's going on about how she foresaw this, that and some other thing, or when her best friend was in a car accident she'd had a dream about it the night before, and her psychic told her blah blah blah. I let her talk about it for quite a while.
After all sorts of anecdotal evidence, I played that I was convinced it worked, and said something to the affect of "I think astrology is amazing. For example, I'm outgoing and hard working. My political views are middle of the road. I'm a bit of a planner, but willing to try anything. I enjoy being different but like to fit in too. Sometimes I have a bit of a temper..." and so on. Once I feel I've given an adequate description, I finished with
"And the amazing part is, because astrology works, you're now going to tell me my birthday."
I don't think she ever caught on I was making fun of her...
can we say irony?
The worst is that the PreCrime unit is chasing one of their own, yet they never cut off his security access to the building - even after they catch him!!.
:-)
Okay, so maybe the movie is pretty accurate on corporate security...
I wouldn't recommend this movie because the ending (last half hour?) really dragged and dropped the ball. Oh well, at least I didn't waste money on popcorn and soda
Screw precedent - after spews.org is /.ed all the SPAM will get through anyway!! He just has to keep SPEWS in the news that matters for nerds...
(or have Katz review the site) shudder
Too bad you didn't bother to read the SPEWS site - if you did you would know they don't sensor anything. I quote (emphasis added):
"We do not control the network traffic on anyone else's servers; therefore, we are not the ones rejecting your email, the mailserver you attempted to send email to generated the bounce. We simply provide a public list of ranges of Internet space (IP addresses) which we do not wish to exchange traffic with. Other networks may choose to filter traffic on their systems using our list. SPEWS never touches any email (or other data packets) between your network and someone else's network. Any email bouncing or packet blocking that takes place occurs at the receiving system."
That is like me saying "I don't like to talk to Bill Gates", and someone thinks my opinion on who I like to talk to matters a whole lot, so they decide not to talk to anyone I don't talk to. As a result, they don't talk to Bill Gates either. And how am I liable? Why don't you post your e-mail address with your post and then see how you feel about "censorware" after your mailbox is full of penis enlargement offers.
This book is *terrible* for extreme programming - I don't know why they even put it in the title (um, ok - to sell more books...) It's a good book for the price though - don't just take my word for it:
amazon reviews
- "Digital cameras, MP3 players and handheld computers could be the tools that disgruntled UK employees use to sabotage computer systems or steal vital data, warn security experts."
- "The innocent-looking devices could also be used to smuggle out confidential or sensitive information."
- "One way that unhappy employees might try to damage computer systems is by smuggling in programs on devices such as digital cameras, handheld computers and MP3 players. "
- "Mr Longhurst said because digital cameras, MP3 players and handheld computers swapped information with a PC they could be used for nefarious purposes. "
- "Disgruntled employees could easily load hacking software on to the memory card for their digital camera at home, transfer the software on to a PC at work and let it run loose, said Mr Longhurst."
Yes, we should all be concerned and watchful for both internal and external security issues. Yes, trusted employees have the potential to cause more damage because they have better access to information and first hand knowledge of the systems, security and policies. But listing a whole bunch of "could's" and "might's" is as insightful as saying:- "employees could use their Bic pen to damage Post-it notes you have for sale by writing 'buy me
:-p' on each sheet."
The article clearly ignores that *most* security problems are from the outside. When will companies realize there is a simple solution: keep your employees happy; keep happy employees."There seems to have been a slight problem with the database. Please try again by pressing the refresh button in your browser.
;-)
An E-Mail has been dispatched to our Technical Staff, who you can also contact if the problem persists.
We apologise [sic] for any inconvenience."
I kept hitting refresh, but I think it only made the problem worse... when the problem concontinued, I also started e-mailing them each time
I feel so helpful, now let's see if this karma thing really works!
That still doesn't beat sexual positions.
"Hey, would you try DoggyStyle? I can't get in.
Northeasterners are the most confused, Midwesterners the most computer-confident.
;-)
Couldn't this be a sign that midwesterners are just overconfident?
Since when does confidence translate to computer ability? I bet plenty of AOL users can't name features of their computer other than AOL and Word.
What about doubleclick? Their servers link to anything and everything that nobody finds interesting!
I think it's a great concept that will make lesser known content accessible to the average user. Instead of spending almost all their online time on a few huge sites (AOL, MSN, CNN, and a few other media giants), we can jump to a page with the same topic but no advertising budget. But how do you rank and order the list of members? Traditional text search? Even if a community has only a few hundred members, few users will go to page five in the list to find a site. Admittedly, it's only a matter of time before you can pay to be listed at the top of the community membership, instead of a random listing.
And like all good ideas, this system wouldn't be free of abusers. People could always spam their page with links to major sites using single pixel clear gifs, thus making their page a part of any community I wanted. So it becomes a process of "give me sites with links like this page, but not links like the following black hole listed pages." Useful for filtering content (for good or bad reasons).
China isn't stupid. The government uses the military to keep information censored and the people powerless. Yes, in the US the media and the government does manipulate information, but we have access to other sources that are not manipulated in the same way.
I do agree you must be 13 since you don't know a thing about Tiananmen Sq. Unless you think their current persecution of the Falun Gong is a sign that the government is "relaxing a bit and opening up?"
Or is it "what is best for their economy?" Take a look at Hong Kong. It scares China because it had much more freedom and both the people and the economy prospered. Everyone wants to move there from Mainland China, so the government put restrictions on who can live there and have removed the popular vote from the upper parliament and replaced it with wealthy members of the Communist party.
And of course China's long history and defiance in the face of institutionalized and continuing human rights abuses must be what you chalk up as "the people suffer a bit." But I guess you agree that when "the people develop their own businesses on the net and their own culture" they will for give the government for burying their newly born child alive and sterilizing the woman.
You need a backhoe to shovel all that sh*t and you and everyone else knows it.
bah... that was worth the rant. I have enough karma that I can call you on your distortion of the truth without fearing for a precious few points. Isn't that what karma is really about?
That's like saying "people still use AOL? why?" Because they don't know better. Think about it - paid placement works because the "average" user doesn't realize it is an ad. These sites aren't targeting the tech-savvy user. We
- research something before we buy it.
- don't trust the media or corporations
- circument ads, tracking technologies, etc.
- look for the best price once we identify what we are buying
And most importantly, for every 10 of us, there are 2 million new internet users who
- click on the first link they see
- believe what the ads have to say
- want to buy from a company name they have heard of (like "AOL" or "MSN")
- think "special offers" are really special (because their mommy said so).
A master was explaining the nature of Tao of to one of his novices, "The Tao is embodied in all software -- regardless of how insignificant," said the master.
"Is the Tao in a hand-held calculator?'' asked the novice.
"It is," came the reply.
"Is the Tao in OpenGL 2.0?" continued the novice.
"It will be in OpenGL 2.0," said the master.
"And is the Tao in the DOS for a personal computer?"
The master coughed and shifted his position slightly. "The lesson is over for today," he said.
the argument is you don't have to opt-in for snail-mail spam, so why should you put restrictions on internet companies beyond the regulations on brick and mortor companies? Don't get me wrong - I think they should all be opt-in. But regulating e-mail beyond what snail-mail is regulated isn't fair.
:-)
So why don't we make snail-mail spam opt-in? Because the whole USPS is dependent on it. Something like half of all snail-mail is commercial advertising. If we didn't allow these mailings, the USPS would tank and no one would be able to send snail-mail. While the same isn't true about e-mail (yet?) - once we regulate one but not the other, the companies have the valid argument of unfair treatment. What we really need, as consumers, is to publicize which companies are fighting these "opt-in" laws... that's some good-ol-fashion bad-pr for them
okay, this isn't a troll -
.com (think: primary internet portal). They have a specific ad package that targets only newbies - ads that appear the first time the visitor has the cookie set. Apparently these users click on ads like crazy. They haven't learned yet. And with all the new internet users every day, there will always be a bevey of people that want to opt-in not knowing the difference.
I'm all for opt-in as much as the next person. But with 2 millions new internet users every month, we aren't the target audience of opt-in or opt-out. And since tech-savvy users know how to alter their e-mail address and switch between temporary free accounts without too much disruption, the opt-in vs. opt-out argument really becomes a fight over new (and often ignorant) internet users.
I have a friend who works in ad sales for a major
And when does opt-in really make a difference? How many e-mails for you have to receive with the subject "re: your e-mail about HOW TO MAKE $$$$$$ FROM HOME IN YOUR SPARE TIME" from unreadjunk@hotmail.com (yes, that is my real address, and no, you can't send me e-mail there unless you are on my address list) before you realize no one cares about in vs out... you get spam anyway.
E-mail advertising use to be the next best thing. Heck, they even had studies saying we wanted this crap. These days, nobody does. Now they have studies saying we don't mind - make that want, even - SMS spam. When will they learn? When the newbies to the internet stop clicking on them. When the newbies stop buying from them. When the AOL users of the world learn better. But as long as those users are out there, they keep what is left of the internet free for the rest of us. I have a proxy that filters ads. I get 3 spams a month. And I don't pay a cent for a single site I visit. But the newbies do - with their clicks and their time.
Rev. Lovejoy: Well, it appears science has faulted once again in the face of overwhelming religious evidence
Lisa: Bu...
Moe: Go home science girl!
Lisa: I am home!
Moe: Good, stay there
In other news...
In a trailer park on the shores of the Mississippi, a local man has claimed to have invented a perpetual motion human.
To prove his claim, he hooked a car battery up his wife/cousin for 10 minutes while she held a 100 watt light bulb in each hand. After removing the car battery, she proceeded to twitch for more than 37 hours.
Aleady companies are clammoring for the device, known as the "shockway," claiming it will revolutionize the world. "We could have our employees work 24 hours a day," said one business owner. "This could be the most important invention to come out of Mississippi since... since... paternity tests"
SONY never went after MOD chip makers because there was no legal precendent. With the DMCA and the broad enforcement and wide interpretation of it's laws, SONY probably feels - make that probably does - have a clear victory in this case. But this is just another case of a major corporation essentially sueing the people by going after a few companies. Armed with the DMCA and the legal standard that legitimate use doesn't matter, large, entrenched companies can continue to use the DMCA to prevent other, legitimate, businesses from eating their market share.
Not that it really matters - people will always make these mod chips and sell them, or instructions to make them, on the internet. Heck, even X-Box hacking is gaining steam against M$'s weak protections. The problem is companies want to control more than just their product - they want to control if you can buy it, use it, how you use it and for how long. Yeah, right - I'm going to sit back and pay money so some other company can control a small part of my life.
If we've learned nothing from history, you only own what you can control, and you can't control people or technology... for long.
Despite my best efforts to throw them all away, AOL keeps trying to grow my collection with their latest offerings...
It's like those blasted music clubs - spend nothing now, but if you sign up you'll pay through the nose later. No matter what, their gonna keep sending you cd's until you wish you'd made a better choice!
and how about
"Finally, they are plug-in, browser and platform agnostic and require no action from the users in order to be viewed. "
but they use SWF...
I think that qualifies as out-right lying - but isn't that what advertising is all about?