A large number of those users are using the free trial periods, or are existing users getting free service (AOL offers that if you try to cancel - it's actually possible to get AOL for free indefinitely).
Your objection is pretty silly - if they want you to print it, they're certainly not going to open up a dialog box and specifically click the "Don't let recipient print this email" checkbox...
ask the operator why the 'strating price' cannot be reached.
Sorry to reply twice, but the way you get the starting price is to click the "Recommended systems" link instead of the "Customize it" button. That'll bring you to this $656 system ($150 rebate).
When this article was posted, the URL execcareer.com listed in the article redirected users to http://execcareer.0catch.com/ - now, it goes to http://membres.lycos.fr/execcareer/.
Thus, the submitter appears to have gotten kicked off his old host for spamming - a slight problem with his contention that he's being persecuted for exposing bad business practices.
Not only that, but the $150 statistic was from launch date.
Hardware prices have dropped spectacularly since then - I'd be surprised if they're still losing money on the Xbox. (plus it also gets cheaper the more you make of them)
Xbox initially sold at a loss - they're probably breaking even now. The more you make, the cheaper they get (plus, the same components are cheaper than they were a year ago).
This site has been banned for SPAM violations. We apologize for the idiot webmaster who could not control him/her self.
Perhaps there are other reasons your site keeps getting taken down?
On the chance that you're not a spammer and that's just their standard removal notice, I'd recommend contacting your potential hosters before signing up and inform them of the situation. They'll be much more willing to stand by you if they know what's going on in advance.
I'm sure lots of companies hire ex-NSA engineers. Perhaps they hired him because he is a competent engineer? I hope you realise that this point makes you sound like someone with a paranoia disorder of some sort.
Should have also mentioned the fact that Google likely provides intranet search capablity for many US Govt. agencies, some of which would require someone with a security clearance to work on the systems.
For some reason, though, all of NameBase's deep pages -- its pages with specific names and citations -- have a low Google page rank, which causes them to show up low in the search results. Search for "Donald Rumsfeld" in Google and in the first five pages you get a lot of.mil and.gov sites, some news stories, and some activist sites. Namebase's entry on Rumsfeld doesn't come up. (It is in Google's database, but to find it somebody would have to first wade through hundreds of results.)
Brandt sees this as Google's major flaw. "I'm not saying there aren't some sites that are more important that others, but in Google the sites that do well are the spammy sites, sites which have Google psyched out, and a lot of big sites, corporate headquarters' sites -- they show up before sites that criticize those companies."
In other words, Brandt recognizes that there has to be some order to Google's results, and that some sites might deserve to come up before others. He just disagrees with the way Google does it. In Brandt's ideal world, if you searched for "United Airlines," you would see untied.com -- a site critical of United -- before you see United's page. And if you searched for Rumsfeld, you'd see NameBase's dossier on him before the Defense Department's site on the "The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld."
My God! Heaven forbid Google list relevant search results before the others! Frankly, if I type in "United" I don't want anti-United sites - I'd have typed something like "United sucks" for that.
People like this guy really abuse freedom of speech.:-/
The whole thing depends on the power of the default.
So, you advocate removal of the default? If they don't have IE, how the hell are they going to download Mozilla?
There is little incentive to really develop these applications due to lack of potential return on investment.
Hence the obviouslack of good alternative browsers.
The bundled stuff presents a nice target for those who would write viruses and such.
No, user idiocy presents a nice target for those who would write viruses and such. Most infections are due to people double clicking on.exe attachments - that's not going to be fixed anytime soon.
Uninstall KaZaA from the computers, then block kazaa.com (and the other major filesharing program sites). That'll stop the vast majority of users from reinstalling it.
Slashdot Mirror
The article seems to be taking quite a number of shots at Opera. I wonder if this has anything to do with Opera's hissy fit over Safari?
A large number of those users are using the free trial periods, or are existing users getting free service (AOL offers that if you try to cancel - it's actually possible to get AOL for free indefinitely).
Your objection is pretty silly - if they want you to print it, they're certainly not going to open up a dialog box and specifically click the "Don't let recipient print this email" checkbox...
They say they allowed people who have Steve as their middle name if those people used their middle name instead of their first name in everyday life.
ask the operator why the 'strating price' cannot be reached.
Sorry to reply twice, but the way you get the starting price is to click the "Recommended systems" link instead of the "Customize it" button. That'll bring you to this $656 system ($150 rebate).
$749. It's actually NOT cheaper
Please explain how a $749 Dell laptop is "NOT cheaper" than a $799 Lindows laptop?
Not to mention that the Dell laptop will be more powerful, has a $200 OS included, AND you get phenomenal tech support.
When the ISP puts up a "this stupid webmaster was removed for SPAM" notice on the page, it's a rather logical conclusion.
I am reading the content - the content of what remains on the old host, which says he's a spammer.
He says he got kicked off for being a consumer advocate, but we have no way to truly verify that, so I'll trust his old ISP as much as I trust him.
When this article was posted, the URL execcareer.com listed in the article redirected users to http://execcareer.0catch.com/ - now, it goes to http://membres.lycos.fr/execcareer/.
Thus, the submitter appears to have gotten kicked off his old host for spamming - a slight problem with his contention that he's being persecuted for exposing bad business practices.
Now do you get it?
please invest in something resembling a clue
:-p
Or just some Microsoft stock...
Not only that, but the $150 statistic was from launch date.
Hardware prices have dropped spectacularly since then - I'd be surprised if they're still losing money on the Xbox. (plus it also gets cheaper the more you make of them)
Didn't know about the attach rate - nifty.
Xbox initially sold at a loss - they're probably breaking even now. The more you make, the cheaper they get (plus, the same components are cheaper than they were a year ago).
if win2k=nt5, then windows server 2003 = 5.1
Actually, XP Professional is NT Server 5.1.
Part of that could be the increase in popularity and name recognition that would be happening when MS buys a formerly independent site.
1.3b is the first version to have it - phenomenal! :-)
I'd imagine HavenCo's rates are a smidge too high for this guy's small site...
It used to go to http://execcareer.0catch.com/ - apparently he's picked up new hosting space again.
Sorry to reply to my own comment, but I forgot to say something.
:-)
Find some other sites that have similar content (and appear to be surviving legal threats) and ask/find out their ISP. Easy, eh?
p.s. popup warning for IE users on the link in the article...
SPAM Violation!
This site has been banned for SPAM violations. We apologize for the idiot webmaster who could not control him/her self.
Perhaps there are other reasons your site keeps getting taken down?
On the chance that you're not a spammer and that's just their standard removal notice, I'd recommend contacting your potential hosters before signing up and inform them of the situation. They'll be much more willing to stand by you if they know what's going on in advance.
I'm sure lots of companies hire ex-NSA engineers. Perhaps they hired him because he is a competent engineer? I hope you realise that this point makes you sound like someone with a paranoia disorder of some sort.
Should have also mentioned the fact that Google likely provides intranet search capablity for many US Govt. agencies, some of which would require someone with a security clearance to work on the systems.
From the Salon article...
.mil and .gov sites, some news stories, and some activist sites. Namebase's entry on Rumsfeld doesn't come up. (It is in Google's database, but to find it somebody would have to first wade through hundreds of results.)
:-/
For some reason, though, all of NameBase's deep pages -- its pages with specific names and citations -- have a low Google page rank, which causes them to show up low in the search results. Search for "Donald Rumsfeld" in Google and in the first five pages you get a lot of
Brandt sees this as Google's major flaw. "I'm not saying there aren't some sites that are more important that others, but in Google the sites that do well are the spammy sites, sites which have Google psyched out, and a lot of big sites, corporate headquarters' sites -- they show up before sites that criticize those companies."
In other words, Brandt recognizes that there has to be some order to Google's results, and that some sites might deserve to come up before others. He just disagrees with the way Google does it. In Brandt's ideal world, if you searched for "United Airlines," you would see untied.com -- a site critical of United -- before you see United's page. And if you searched for Rumsfeld, you'd see NameBase's dossier on him before the Defense Department's site on the "The Honorable Donald Rumsfeld."
My God! Heaven forbid Google list relevant search results before the others! Frankly, if I type in "United" I don't want anti-United sites - I'd have typed something like "United sucks" for that.
People like this guy really abuse freedom of speech.
You could choose to buy the Microsoft Plus media and productivity pack, or not.
.exe attachments - that's not going to be fixed anytime soon.
You already can.
The whole thing depends on the power of the default.
So, you advocate removal of the default? If they don't have IE, how the hell are they going to download Mozilla?
There is little incentive to really develop these applications due to lack of potential return on investment.
Hence the obvious lack of good alternative browsers.
The bundled stuff presents a nice target for those who would write viruses and such.
No, user idiocy presents a nice target for those who would write viruses and such. Most infections are due to people double clicking on
Can't imagine that this functionality is standards compliant... naughty Opera! ;-)
Wow, everyone's ignoring the simplest solution...
Uninstall KaZaA from the computers, then block kazaa.com (and the other major filesharing program sites). That'll stop the vast majority of users from reinstalling it.
Hell, how'd this article get posted? Does the mention of "DMCA" and "spam" in the same article get it automatically accepted?
Sheesh...
Voltage doesn't matter, it's amperage that'll kill you... there's upwards of 10,000 volts in static electricity.
Same reason a 50,000 volt taser won't kill you, but a 110 volt outlet can.