Yup. They're called, "people who believe that some sites should be supported by their primary revenue model."
I leave advertisements on when visiting/. Why? They're mostly harmless, and well targeted -- albeit a bit redundant. Someday I might actually see something I'm interested in and make these guys a few bucks.
Seems a fair thing to do in exchange for their services.
I click on links because Google reads my mind...and by mind, I mean mail.
The higher the density of ads on a page, the more likely I am to ignore them all - either electronically or mentally....but when there's tastefully placed ad about something I'm genuinely interested in (see: Google reads my mind), perhaps offering me a discount or a new product from an existing line I'm familiar with, I'll sometimes visit the site.
...unless of course I hate your site. Then I'll visit the advertiser directly from the address bar.:)
Funny how in the beginning years of the internet there WERE no ads. None. Zero.
And yet. It managed to survive and grow.
That worked fine before 30 hours of content were uploaded to YouTube every second of every day. It's a different day. Running any website that isn't for hobbyists can get expensive fast. People are "on the internet" 16 hours a day.
I run a couple of websites that are similar in scope to "the beginning years of the internet." I host sites to direct people to my poker leagues, trade a few recipes, host a few easily hotlinkable pictures, lampoon a few friends, and passively sell some junk. I've got nearly zero ads. [One of my sites has streaming live video sometimes, and by advertising subtly for my video host, I get more bandwidth.] I pay a hundred bucks a year or so to keep my pile of domains registered and pay for some prosumer level hosting.
If my poker league's videos got wildly popular or my recipe site became a smash hit, I'd either have to restrict content, give it up, or find a revenue stream. I ain't made of money.
A check is a piece of paper that contains your routing number and account number.
Nobody actually writes paper checks for anything except paying their FIRST bill with a company -- so that the account number and routing code can be re-used for automatic EFT billing. The occasional grandmother-writing-birthday-check and paying-the-babysitter-check get written, but NOBODY born in the last 40 years uses a checkbook any longer for anything other than the OCCASIONAL weirdo at the grocery store holding up the line.
The only people taking checks on payday are the working poor, who inexplicably take them straight to a check cashing store to turn them into cash. A process I'll never understand.
I'd trust a sufficiently automated system to manage correct mayonnaise handling procedures over a couple of bored teenagers. The machines are much, much, more likely to have washed the pans, kept the mayo at the right temperature, and rotated stock when they were supposed to.
"Keeping up with the times" is important, if you're - for example - administering a hospital, and physician satisfaction (an item that's almost entirely perception) is a major consideration for retaining high-quality staff.
I've worked in healthcare IT pretty much forever, and there's a lot more to appearances than meets the eye.....or I suppose it's exactly what meets they eye:)
First, this particular brand of Satanism is an atheist group, so it's hardly "another religious group."
That said, if it takes two statues in Oklahoma to sheds some light on the hypocrisy, I'll settle for them as the broken eggs necessary to make my omelette.
It's not a terrible idea to codify good behavior. Those of us who don't believe in inherent good and evil -- rather that things are "good" or "evil" based on what happens to us when we do them -- could easily teach ourselves that stealing is good. We'd steal things, and we'd benefit from the theft, and we'd possibly not feel the consequences. Stealing sure seems good when you're young and short-sighted.
It takes some experience to understand that making stealing "evil" (as opposed to it just being evil) is because we can all produce more grain and tend our animals easier if we don't have to sleep with one eye open.
If someone has a point to make, fine, but you're not going to convince the other guy by mocking them.
That's because religious people, by definition, can't apply logic.
I don't know what religion (or lack thereof) you support, but since there's no majority as to the right religion, statistically speaking, you're probably wrong. [Just like everyone else in this thread.]
Those of us who don't believe in Zeus or G-Zeus, we still look at the 10 commandments as a fairly reasonable list of ways to go about your life...
...only we ignore the God parts and temper them with reason.
1-4 get ignored -- straight up invisible unicorn stuff. 5: Respect MaMa and PaPa. -- A fairly good idea. Listen to the our folks, they're probably not as crazy as you think. 6: Don't kill. -- Seems reasonable. I don't want people killing me, so let's all do that. 7: Fidelity. -- Also reasonable. Honor your commitments and contracts. 8: No stealing. -- Reasonable for the same reason as murder. Let's all agree not to do that. 9: Tell the truth. -- Reasonable, and a good idea. White lies at cocktail parties not withstanding. 10. Don't covet. -- At least here it's debatable. The whole world revolves around coveting.
Slashdot Mirror
NOTHING HE EVER DID WAS EVEN A LITTLE BIT IMPRESSIVE.
His social engineering skills were impressive.
Sorry about being on you lawn.
Cooler! 90 Days!
...a punishment largely avoidable by not being a gangbanger.
822. Respect your elders indeed.
I've got the option, and I ignore it. They trust me. I trust them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
Hard to explain it much better than that...
If you're afraid to publicly affirm what you believe, you probably don't deserve your beliefs.
>by Anonymous Coward
I agree.
Science doesn't disprove anything.
Adults who believe in imaginary friends are stupid, or suffering from disease. In either case, they need help.
You may experience violence if you voice your views in some countries.
Like the United States of America, sadly...
Yup. They're called, "people who believe that some sites should be supported by their primary revenue model."
I leave advertisements on when visiting /. Why? They're mostly harmless, and well targeted -- albeit a bit redundant. Someday I might actually see something I'm interested in and make these guys a few bucks.
Seems a fair thing to do in exchange for their services.
I click on links because Google reads my mind...and by mind, I mean mail.
The higher the density of ads on a page, the more likely I am to ignore them all - either electronically or mentally. ...but when there's tastefully placed ad about something I'm genuinely interested in (see: Google reads my mind), perhaps offering me a discount or a new product from an existing line I'm familiar with, I'll sometimes visit the site.
Funny how in the beginning years of the internet there WERE no ads. None. Zero.
And yet. It managed to survive and grow.
That worked fine before 30 hours of content were uploaded to YouTube every second of every day. It's a different day. Running any website that isn't for hobbyists can get expensive fast. People are "on the internet" 16 hours a day.
I run a couple of websites that are similar in scope to "the beginning years of the internet." I host sites to direct people to my poker leagues, trade a few recipes, host a few easily hotlinkable pictures, lampoon a few friends, and passively sell some junk. I've got nearly zero ads. [One of my sites has streaming live video sometimes, and by advertising subtly for my video host, I get more bandwidth.] I pay a hundred bucks a year or so to keep my pile of domains registered and pay for some prosumer level hosting.
If my poker league's videos got wildly popular or my recipe site became a smash hit, I'd either have to restrict content, give it up, or find a revenue stream. I ain't made of money.
Also, my apologies for standing on your lawn.
A check is a piece of paper that contains your routing number and account number.
Nobody actually writes paper checks for anything except paying their FIRST bill with a company -- so that the account number and routing code can be re-used for automatic EFT billing. The occasional grandmother-writing-birthday-check and paying-the-babysitter-check get written, but NOBODY born in the last 40 years uses a checkbook any longer for anything other than the OCCASIONAL weirdo at the grocery store holding up the line.
The only people taking checks on payday are the working poor, who inexplicably take them straight to a check cashing store to turn them into cash. A process I'll never understand.
I'd trust a sufficiently automated system to manage correct mayonnaise handling procedures over a couple of bored teenagers. The machines are much, much, more likely to have washed the pans, kept the mayo at the right temperature, and rotated stock when they were supposed to.
"Keeping up with the times" is important, if you're - for example - administering a hospital, and physician satisfaction (an item that's almost entirely perception) is a major consideration for retaining high-quality staff.
I've worked in healthcare IT pretty much forever, and there's a lot more to appearances than meets the eye... ..or I suppose it's exactly what meets they eye :)
Bigger is better.
It's clearly five better.
...it's an entire page of reading before the word "Windows" appears.
Good job not starting this with a short requirements list.
First, this particular brand of Satanism is an atheist group, so it's hardly "another religious group."
That said, if it takes two statues in Oklahoma to sheds some light on the hypocrisy, I'll settle for them as the broken eggs necessary to make my omelette.
Yeah, great, Everything I really Needed to Know, I Learned in Kindergarten.
http://www.amazon.com/Really-Need-Know-Learned-Kindergarten/dp/034546639X
It's not a terrible idea to codify good behavior. Those of us who don't believe in inherent good and evil -- rather that things are "good" or "evil" based on what happens to us when we do them -- could easily teach ourselves that stealing is good. We'd steal things, and we'd benefit from the theft, and we'd possibly not feel the consequences. Stealing sure seems good when you're young and short-sighted.
It takes some experience to understand that making stealing "evil" (as opposed to it just being evil) is because we can all produce more grain and tend our animals easier if we don't have to sleep with one eye open.
We're entitled to a little happiness every now and again.
The Satanists are right, and we're enjoying the fundies squirm.
Me too!
[Sent from AOL.]
If someone has a point to make, fine, but you're not going to convince the other guy by mocking them.
That's because religious people, by definition, can't apply logic.
I don't know what religion (or lack thereof) you support, but since there's no majority as to the right religion, statistically speaking, you're probably wrong. [Just like everyone else in this thread.]
Five Monkeys and a Ladder.
God doesn't mind if the neighbor kid comes over and turns on your television for you, just so long as you don't do it yourself.
Theist logic!
Those of us who don't believe in Zeus or G-Zeus, we still look at the 10 commandments as a fairly reasonable list of ways to go about your life...
1-4 get ignored -- straight up invisible unicorn stuff.
5: Respect MaMa and PaPa. -- A fairly good idea. Listen to the our folks, they're probably not as crazy as you think.
6: Don't kill. -- Seems reasonable. I don't want people killing me, so let's all do that.
7: Fidelity. -- Also reasonable. Honor your commitments and contracts.
8: No stealing. -- Reasonable for the same reason as murder. Let's all agree not to do that.
9: Tell the truth. -- Reasonable, and a good idea. White lies at cocktail parties not withstanding.
10. Don't covet. -- At least here it's debatable. The whole world revolves around coveting.
I've always found COBOL quite readable. Math, especially, always looked clean.
SUBTRACT 10 FROM WS-A GIVING WS-B
DIVIDE WS-A INTO WS-B GIVING WS-C REMAINEDER WS-D
And I think this stolen example of conditional code is also pretty clear to read...
IF WS-AMT IS NUMERIC
ADD WS-AMT TO WS-BANLANCE
ELSE
MOVE ZEROS TO WS-AMT
PERFORM ERROR-PARA.
END-IF.
[COBOL is incompatible with the lameness filter...]