as a side note, companies that do treat their employee's poorly always end up failing anyway, due to them not being able to keep any decent or well trained staff.
Oh, well that explains why walmart is such a crashing failure.
Interesting factoid here, in Sweden its perfectly legal to make love to animals. Can't be bothered to dig up a link right now, but if you like it wild and hairy, Sweden is the place to go.
Not really a flaw, just a different currency. The indie101 guy is buying time, spent on that website, or a vote, while firefox is selling downloads. If a click results in a download, google should get paid, and not before. Not all transactions are purely financial, but on the internet, they are all measurable, and can thus be translated into financial terms for an affiliate program.
Funny, most of the capitalistic world would disagree with you.
Unless you are qualified to speak for most of the capitalistic world, I'm sad to say you aren't qualified to speak here. And as for major advertisers taking my advice, everyone knows large companies are the first to adopt new things...
...
aren't they?
Heheh, anyway, back to more wobbly rolls of fat.
I can get a prime time commercial during Super Bowl Sunday for the crappiest product in the world if I have the money to buy the advertising space.
Can you do an affiliate program on Superbowl Sunday? No. Should you? If possible, yes. To the extent that SS can be justified, then yes, it is justified. The internet will need more justification however, because it can.
Not one of the major Internet advertisers has shown even the smallest interest in your whole "affiliate programs" stuff.
Research, my son, the foundation of any good argument. Until then you are just making noise out your noise hole. Which, ironically enough, you are.
One small time cell phone _reseller_ is far from being an example of success.
Christ, did you even read the link? They don't even sell phones. Why do I bother. Crawl back into your cave, troll.
I find a certain kind of mindset only resorts to "commie" or "terrorist" when utterly backed against a logical wall. So lets deal with this.
One definition of capitalism is the most efficient allocation of resources to maximise profit potential. Affiliate programs are this. Communism has been bandied about so much I don't even know what the most recent definition is, so lets work with stupidity for a while. Faced with a choice where I can load money onto some media train and pray it returns with paying customers (pets.com), or pay only for those customers I get, which seems the more intelligent?
Affiliate programs were never possible before the advent of the internet, discounting sales reps and referrers, and advertising on the internet is still in its infancy, finding its feet. Now that automated affiliate programs are possible, its the only marketing model that makes sense, and its capitalism in its purest form.
Why should I only be paid to advertise for you based on your skills as a sales person?
If you don't like the ads or think they aren't going to sell, don't put them on your site. No one is twisting your arm making you put adverts on your site, they are simply asking you to justify why they should pay you for advertising. Understand the nature of advertising; its not some magical thing that occurs where anywhere a lot of eyeballs gather, its an expenditure made in order to make more profit. Thats the bottom line, baby, and thats capitalism.:D
Of those 5 advertising spots, I allow you one of them.
Incorrect, nice try, but no cigar. Advertisers have the money and you have to make them happy before they give their money to you, who has none. Its you who has to appease advertisers, and you who has to convince them to put adverts on your site.
Umm, it is not the claim of a company selling advertising space.
It will be soon. Affiliate programs make you justify your advertising claims. If you can't live up to your claims, you shouldn't be offering advertising space. Unless you are trying to defraud advertisers?
If you fail, that doesn't mean that I should fail with you for allowing you to place ads on my site. If you want to advertise, then pay the damn money and take your chances with _YOUR_ product.
Actually, yes it does, and no, I won't. Nor should any sane advertiser. Advertisers have the money and its up to them to decide what to do with it. Maximising their return on investment is just good business sense.
No major advertiser will ever go for your method.
Mediaplazza, the single largest seller of mobile phone content in Europe, a cellphone happy place, is one giant affiliate program. Note cellphones are also a relatively modern industry.
sellers and advertiser having to _both_ succeed or fail.
Makes sense to me. Justify your adspace, show me the sales, and I'll give you a cut. You don't win if your visitors aren't into my product. Next time pick an affiliate program that they will like.
Unworkable since it relies on people making purchases during the same session
that they were referred to the site.
Again I have already answered this one above. I will repeat it for clarity. Please read previous comments before posting redundantly.
This is old news in the affiliate marketing world. This fact is taken into account with longer term cookies or other methods of accredation, such as visitor registration, which extend beyond the first visit.
Most affiliate programs offer credits beyond the first visit, some extending to five weeks beyond.
What if I use a different computer to make the purchase (think people
who use public terminals at libraries)?
If you are entering your credit card details in a public library computer, you have bigger problems than trying to escape the relentless jaws of the marketing machine. In any case, most of the people making a purchase will do so from the machine that they normally browse on. And there are methods that can be used to track people even if they use different machines.
How exactly am I to know that you are getting 10 extra sales per week from the ads on my site?
Most affiliate programs have an internal control panel where an advertiser can see clicks from their site and purchases that can be tracked back to their site. Can that be set up to cheat affiliates? Of course. Which is why you sign an affiliate contract, which is a legally binding document. If you feel you have been cheated, you can report the affiliate site to law enforcement, the IRS, or whoever you want. But its not in the affiliate's best interest to cheat its marketers, ever.
Remind me again how that is worse than Google's pay per click?
For example, if I put an ad on tv, I PAY FOR THE AD UP FRONT.
Now who's got the flawed advertising model? You pay and take a gamble; with affiliates, you don't pay until you get paid. Which model is better? Also its a mistake to compare the internet with non-interactive models like TV and the newspapers. Think of it more as a sales rep, who gets paid on commission.
why should I have to also lose money?
Its not costing you anything. Even the image for the advert isn't eating into your bandwidth because its sourced from the affiliate server. If you look at the the affiliate site, think it has a good chance of selling, and want a percentage of the sale (a percentage mark you) then you go ahead and apply to be an affiliate.
If you become the affiliate for a two bit website hosted on geocities, thats your choice. Its about time advertisers took some responsibility for their claims. Thats why affiliate programs shine.
I have to disagree based on the fact that very few internet purchases are made on the first visit
This is old news in the affiliate marketing world. This fact is taken into account with longer term cookies or other methods of accredation, such as visitor registration, which extend beyond the first visit. Most affiliate programs offer credits beyond the first visit, some extending to five weeks beyond.
Various studies have various estimates, but one of the more recent ones claimed a visitor will come to a site up to 9 times before making a purchase. Affiliate programs have been taking this into account for a long time.
These are the answer, I think. Its only an area we have been getting into lately, but its showing a great deal of promise. How it works is like this; you get people to put adverts up on their site, someone clicks on the advert, browses your site, then make a purchase. Not until a purchase is made do advertisers get paid. There is no chance for fraud, unless its someone using stolen credit cards, and then there are defences, chargebacks, and well established legal routes that can be taken. Besides, all online purchasing suffers this risk.
Some people use the argument that affiliate programs lead to a lot of spam, but thats easily knocked on the head; affiliate programs can simply set it so that only traffic from a certain domain gets accredited. And besides, how is it easier to spam with affiliates than it is with pay per click? At least there is some value to affiliate programs, to all concerned.
The future of advertising on the web is accredited purchasing; pay per click is verifiably doomed, even if in this case the lawsuit is relatively spurious.
Not to mention a huge increase in the efficiency of any machine with moving parts (including guns), frictionless spacecraft re-entry, submarines that can go as fast as their engines can push them, and here's an interesting one, would that even cause a wake?
Taking it further into the realms of wild specuation, since frictionless substances reduce the effects of whatever is moving relative to its surroundings, would this make it possible to push faster than light speeds? Also if we assume gravity as a type of friction, if we could apply the same notion to create anti-gravity devices or at least zero to 9 million in 2 seconds kind of pickup?
Ah yeah didn't mean to go mad there, and if I was going to analyse the effectiveness of the method from the standpoint of recruiters, I'm actually surprised they didn't do it sooner, so on that level I agree with you. However its a mistake to treat these issues in a vacuum. Sometimes its hard to see the wood for the trees, so on those odd occasions when you get the chance to see the big picture, you should take it, not meaning you personally, but in a broader sense.
Good response, very good. Intelligent, well thought, out, clear. Very indicative of a mind honed by years of keen debate and original thought. You have convinced me.
I generally don't feed the trolls, but I'll make an exception in your case. While I brush the flies away from your slow moving mind, I'll repeat myself, using the smallest words I can so there is no chance you will pick them up wrong.
a) For thinking people dont get punished in other countries for crimes committed against foreign citizens.
Whoever said they didn't get punished? The perception (that is the picture they see in their minds) they have is that they are reasonably well insulated (that is like a warm coat in the winter) from legal retaliation (when the other village idiot steals your pot, you steal his). In many cases, they are in fact correct, especially in places like India and south east asia, with some exceptions.
For thinking its the fault of Party B that contracts were drawn up where Party A is outsourcing work to Party B, while at the same time not drawing up provisions to penalize Party B if shit happens.
Tell it to the judge, mush. I just repeat what I heard, from the horses mouth. Whether the Indian contractors were just pulling it out of their ass or not is another story, but if you can come up with a link to disprove what I'm saying, be my guest. Meantime keep your random lip flappings to yourself, eh?
You are nothing but clueless to imagine that Fortune 100 firms would risk everything they stand for and all the goodwill they have made, to outsource work to a nation who "can walk out of a contract at will" with out penalty.
Nothing but clueless to think a large firm will not see an opportunity like 2 buck an hour highly skilled labour and take its chances regardless? Yes, I must have missed the classes in corporate opportunism. Oh no wait, that was you.
You talk like a 13 yr old.
This from the clown that starts off his ill-informed rant with personal abuse. I like it.
A strong military is a key factor in influence and power.
Ah yes, which explains why the EU is so helpless and weak in international affairs. Heheh. What you are actually saying is that a strong military is the key to keeping control of nations your rightfully should have no control over.
You are talking about justification of war. Please stay on topic.
One step at a time here soldier, marketing firm gets recruits, leads to a larger army, leads to... thats right! War! Which brings us right back to the justification for the marketing firm, which in fact is the very same as the justification for war. Or lack thereof. If you do not possess the ability to see your arguments through to their logical conclusions, I suggest you stay out of arguments.
Your next point, well, if you don't like the freedoms here, you are welcome to relocate. Should you already be relocated, please stay there.
Yikes, and leave the country to people like GW and his version of "freedom" to molest to his heart's content? Let me ask you, what would you do in my position?
Finally, my statement about learning in english refers to certain wars involving Japanese, German and Russian language speaking people.
Yeah, strangely ironic that you picked the English as a good example of freedom. Then again that seems to be the trend throughout your arguments.
Oh how I wish I had the luxury of being near sighted.
Well thank god for you! I say it again, thank god we have people like you, who see so clearly that the rest of us needn't even bother thinking. With far sighted individuals such as yourself leading the way, America will be uber alles until the sun burns out. Or, to put it another way, learn from history, marine. I draw the attention of the audience at this time to the sad and sorry cases of Rome, Greece, Persia, and just about every other empire whose glories armies once bestrode the land.
But hey man, here's the reality, you want to let the military fall apart NOW?
Why not? What do you have to lose? Who would be insane enough to invade America? The glassy knolls of Nagasaki and Hiroshima should be warning enough. And if you think the army prevents terrorists, well all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't stop Timothy McVeigh, savvy?
I'm having a little trouble tracking down exactly the point of your rambling dissertation, so I'll just pull a few of the most objectionable points out at random...
We are a nation founded on revolution and war. Our power in the world was won through superior military force. We are currently having difficulty in maintaining that force.
Okay, I want you to think long and hard about that statement. Your nation is founded on revolution and war, against the tyranny of a militarily superior or at least equally powerful enemy. And now you find your position is reversed, you don't have the right to use the founding struggle to justify your acting like the original agressors.
And correct me if I'm wrong here, but I thought the American strength was the American dream, which always had to do with freedom to be whoever you like, opportunity found nowhere else? You seem to painting the strength of America to be mere transient force of arms...
Our modern society is productive because of our ability to exploit knowledge opportunities. Now that it's being done for the defense of the country, people want to complain.
Don't confuse the defence of the country with the invasion and domination of more or less defenceless third world states. It might upset people and cause them to do things to bring the reality of the matter to the attention of the American public, like flying planes into buildings for example.
Well, you're being given freedom, and it's going to require some computers and research to get it done.
If by freedom you mean being listed in a database by a government with dubious interest in the well being of the citizenry that voted them into power, well then you're positively drowning in freedom. Well done.
No one forces the hand of the individual to sign the paper.
Yet.
Learned in English? Thank a soldier.
English soldiers. Remember them? The original oppressors?
I mean come on, surely you can do better than "take ya medicine or ya legs'll fall off"?
You're saying "they think they can get away with it that's why they do it".
Correct! First thing you have got right so far...
I'm saying their motives probably include wanting to increase their quality of living.
If you can find another reason to indulge in profit-based criminal activities or indeed activities of any sort, please, do tell.
It has ZERO todo [sic] with where they live or what laws govern their nation.
Oh, dear, and you were doing so well! If we were discussing street crime, yes, I would agree; bank robberies, I'm right there with you. In this case however, the fact is they feel that the layers of distance and different legal structures insulate them from serious consequences, especially given the affected entities are not citizens of their own country. To an extent, they are even justified in their beliefs.
Several of my friends work in shops which have outsourced large amounts of work to India and China. Among some of the things they have been told is that Indians can walk out of a contract with a western company any time they want, with no repercussions. Do you think that could happen in the west?
What exactly does that have to do with the comment? I never said it wasn't, it was your sloppy reading skills and lightning fast (whoops) response that put words in my mouth. Seriously, since you're such a big fan of google, do yourself a favour and make
ad hominen
your word for the day, mmkay?
Oh, really, well next time try actually reading it, like a good man. Yes India has a criminal code for such infringements, but the point being that the people working in callcentres over there feel that since no Indian citizen is being harmed, they won't be prosecuted. Knee-jerk reaction much?
Nah, it mostly happens in places like India and China, since the grunts on the ground feel far enough removed from potential backlash that they can sneer and act with impunity.
Over in the first world, we know exactly what response our employers will have to such fraud and corruption, and it involves fines and imprisonment.
Its just a question of accountability, actual and perceived.
Affiliate programs need a unique way to identify web browsers and visitors to the site over a period of sometimes weeks. Yes, its easy for someone to click on an advert and then be tracked from their point of entry, but when thye leave and come back a few times over the coming weeks before actually spending money, the original affiliate doesn't get credited with the sale unless the visitor can be somehow linked to them over time. This means cookies. If you remove the ability to credit affiliates with a sale a month after the initial visit, affiliate programs will dry up.
And affiliate programs are probably the only way it makes sense to advertise on the web, as they are accountable, no one makes money until a purchase is made... pay per click is too easily abused, and bald banners hurt sites more often than they help.
And before anyone starts shouting "skr3w teh advertis3rzz teh inatrweb iz fr33!!1", I suggest you people try moving out of your mothers' basements and earning a living for yourselves for a change. It costs money to do just about everything, and that money very often comes from advertisers. If you feel like knocking your favourite site off the web, don't click the adverts.
It is now primarily only within Ireland and N. Ireland that bombings still occur
Actually only in Northern Ireland, the south was never a target of bombing attacks. Wonderful how much peace you can have when you don't go around invading people, really.
No, its not that simple. Lets say I have a small business, I sell garden tools, lawnmowers,etc, in a certain region. And yet I do a search on google for garden tools + region, I am nowhere to be found. What do I do? I optimise the hell out of my site, caking it with region name + garden tools information, and I set up a links exchange program, getting in links left right and centre from related sites. This is SEO, and it will only affect people that enter a search for "garden" "tools" "my region". In other words, those that actually want to find my site.
Theres a distinction between SEO and spamming; if I was to optimise for a garden tools site and set up a poker site there, that would be spamming.
Sweden is the place where there was
forced sterilisation until quite recently? Oh yes, I can see how an ID card might be useful there. I bet it made the eugenics program run like clockwork.
Slashdot Mirror
as a side note, companies that do treat their employee's poorly always end up failing anyway, due to them not being able to keep any decent or well trained staff.
Oh, well that explains why walmart is such a crashing failure.
Interesting factoid here, in Sweden its perfectly legal to make love to animals. Can't be bothered to dig up a link right now, but if you like it wild and hairy, Sweden is the place to go.
Not really a flaw, just a different currency. The indie101 guy is buying time, spent on that website, or a vote, while firefox is selling downloads. If a click results in a download, google should get paid, and not before. Not all transactions are purely financial, but on the internet, they are all measurable, and can thus be translated into financial terms for an affiliate program.
Funny, most of the capitalistic world would disagree with you.
...
Unless you are qualified to speak for most of the capitalistic world, I'm sad to say you aren't qualified to speak here. And as for major advertisers taking my advice, everyone knows large companies are the first to adopt new things...
aren't they?
Heheh, anyway, back to more wobbly rolls of fat.
I can get a prime time commercial during Super Bowl Sunday for the crappiest product in the world if I have the money to buy the advertising space.
Can you do an affiliate program on Superbowl Sunday? No. Should you? If possible, yes. To the extent that SS can be justified, then yes, it is justified. The internet will need more justification however, because it can.
Not one of the major Internet advertisers has shown even the smallest interest in your whole "affiliate programs" stuff.
Research, my son, the foundation of any good argument. Until then you are just making noise out your noise hole. Which, ironically enough, you are.
One small time cell phone _reseller_ is far from being an example of success.
Christ, did you even read the link? They don't even sell phones. Why do I bother. Crawl back into your cave, troll.
Wow.
:D
I find a certain kind of mindset only resorts to "commie" or "terrorist" when utterly backed against a logical wall. So lets deal with this.
One definition of capitalism is the most efficient allocation of resources to maximise profit potential. Affiliate programs are this. Communism has been bandied about so much I don't even know what the most recent definition is, so lets work with stupidity for a while. Faced with a choice where I can load money onto some media train and pray it returns with paying customers (pets.com), or pay only for those customers I get, which seems the more intelligent?
Affiliate programs were never possible before the advent of the internet, discounting sales reps and referrers, and advertising on the internet is still in its infancy, finding its feet. Now that automated affiliate programs are possible, its the only marketing model that makes sense, and its capitalism in its purest form.
Why should I only be paid to advertise for you based on your skills as a sales person?
If you don't like the ads or think they aren't going to sell, don't put them on your site. No one is twisting your arm making you put adverts on your site, they are simply asking you to justify why they should pay you for advertising. Understand the nature of advertising; its not some magical thing that occurs where anywhere a lot of eyeballs gather, its an expenditure made in order to make more profit. Thats the bottom line, baby, and thats capitalism.
Of those 5 advertising spots, I allow you one of them.
Incorrect, nice try, but no cigar. Advertisers have the money and you have to make them happy before they give their money to you, who has none. Its you who has to appease advertisers, and you who has to convince them to put adverts on your site.
Umm, it is not the claim of a company selling advertising space.
It will be soon. Affiliate programs make you justify your advertising claims. If you can't live up to your claims, you shouldn't be offering advertising space. Unless you are trying to defraud advertisers?
If you fail, that doesn't mean that I should fail with you for allowing you to place ads on my site. If you want to advertise, then pay the damn money and take your chances with _YOUR_ product.
Actually, yes it does, and no, I won't. Nor should any sane advertiser. Advertisers have the money and its up to them to decide what to do with it. Maximising their return on investment is just good business sense.
No major advertiser will ever go for your method.
Mediaplazza, the single largest seller of mobile phone content in Europe, a cellphone happy place, is one giant affiliate program. Note cellphones are also a relatively modern industry.
sellers and advertiser having to _both_ succeed or fail.
Makes sense to me. Justify your adspace, show me the sales, and I'll give you a cut. You don't win if your visitors aren't into my product. Next time pick an affiliate program that they will like.
Unworkable since it relies on people making purchases during the same session that they were referred to the site.
Again I have already answered this one above. I will repeat it for clarity. Please read previous comments before posting redundantly.
This is old news in the affiliate marketing world. This fact is taken into account with longer term cookies or other methods of accredation, such as visitor registration, which extend beyond the first visit.
Most affiliate programs offer credits beyond the first visit, some extending to five weeks beyond.
What if I use a different computer to make the purchase (think people who use public terminals at libraries)?
If you are entering your credit card details in a public library computer, you have bigger problems than trying to escape the relentless jaws of the marketing machine. In any case, most of the people making a purchase will do so from the machine that they normally browse on. And there are methods that can be used to track people even if they use different machines.
And it beats the hell out of pay per click.
How exactly am I to know that you are getting 10 extra sales per week from the ads on my site?
Most affiliate programs have an internal control panel where an advertiser can see clicks from their site and purchases that can be tracked back to their site. Can that be set up to cheat affiliates? Of course. Which is why you sign an affiliate contract, which is a legally binding document. If you feel you have been cheated, you can report the affiliate site to law enforcement, the IRS, or whoever you want. But its not in the affiliate's best interest to cheat its marketers, ever.
Remind me again how that is worse than Google's pay per click?
For example, if I put an ad on tv, I PAY FOR THE AD UP FRONT.
Now who's got the flawed advertising model? You pay and take a gamble; with affiliates, you don't pay until you get paid. Which model is better? Also its a mistake to compare the internet with non-interactive models like TV and the newspapers. Think of it more as a sales rep, who gets paid on commission.
why should I have to also lose money?
Its not costing you anything. Even the image for the advert isn't eating into your bandwidth because its sourced from the affiliate server. If you look at the the affiliate site, think it has a good chance of selling, and want a percentage of the sale (a percentage mark you) then you go ahead and apply to be an affiliate.
If you become the affiliate for a two bit website hosted on geocities, thats your choice. Its about time advertisers took some responsibility for their claims. Thats why affiliate programs shine.
I have to disagree based on the fact that very few internet purchases are made on the first visit
This is old news in the affiliate marketing world. This fact is taken into account with longer term cookies or other methods of accredation, such as visitor registration, which extend beyond the first visit. Most affiliate programs offer credits beyond the first visit, some extending to five weeks beyond.
Various studies have various estimates, but one of the more recent ones claimed a visitor will come to a site up to 9 times before making a purchase. Affiliate programs have been taking this into account for a long time.
These are the answer, I think. Its only an area we have been getting into lately, but its showing a great deal of promise. How it works is like this; you get people to put adverts up on their site, someone clicks on the advert, browses your site, then make a purchase. Not until a purchase is made do advertisers get paid. There is no chance for fraud, unless its someone using stolen credit cards, and then there are defences, chargebacks, and well established legal routes that can be taken. Besides, all online purchasing suffers this risk.
Some people use the argument that affiliate programs lead to a lot of spam, but thats easily knocked on the head; affiliate programs can simply set it so that only traffic from a certain domain gets accredited. And besides, how is it easier to spam with affiliates than it is with pay per click? At least there is some value to affiliate programs, to all concerned.
The future of advertising on the web is accredited purchasing; pay per click is verifiably doomed, even if in this case the lawsuit is relatively spurious.
Some more interesting Swedish facts, bestiality is not in fact illegal there, and is actually on the rise...
rofl
Not to mention a huge increase in the efficiency of any machine with moving parts (including guns), frictionless spacecraft re-entry, submarines that can go as fast as their engines can push them, and here's an interesting one, would that even cause a wake?
Taking it further into the realms of wild specuation, since frictionless substances reduce the effects of whatever is moving relative to its surroundings, would this make it possible to push faster than light speeds? Also if we assume gravity as a type of friction, if we could apply the same notion to create anti-gravity devices or at least zero to 9 million in 2 seconds kind of pickup?
Ah yeah didn't mean to go mad there, and if I was going to analyse the effectiveness of the method from the standpoint of recruiters, I'm actually surprised they didn't do it sooner, so on that level I agree with you. However its a mistake to treat these issues in a vacuum. Sometimes its hard to see the wood for the trees, so on those odd occasions when you get the chance to see the big picture, you should take it, not meaning you personally, but in a broader sense.
Good response, very good. Intelligent, well thought, out, clear. Very indicative of a mind honed by years of keen debate and original thought. You have convinced me.
Sigh... serves me right for feeding the trolls...
I generally don't feed the trolls, but I'll make an exception in your case. While I brush the flies away from your slow moving mind, I'll repeat myself, using the smallest words I can so there is no chance you will pick them up wrong.
a) For thinking people dont get punished in other countries for crimes committed against foreign citizens.
Whoever said they didn't get punished? The perception (that is the picture they see in their minds) they have is that they are reasonably well insulated (that is like a warm coat in the winter) from legal retaliation (when the other village idiot steals your pot, you steal his). In many cases, they are in fact correct, especially in places like India and south east asia, with some exceptions.
For thinking its the fault of Party B that contracts were drawn up where Party A is outsourcing work to Party B, while at the same time not drawing up provisions to penalize Party B if shit happens.
Tell it to the judge, mush. I just repeat what I heard, from the horses mouth. Whether the Indian contractors were just pulling it out of their ass or not is another story, but if you can come up with a link to disprove what I'm saying, be my guest. Meantime keep your random lip flappings to yourself, eh?
You are nothing but clueless to imagine that Fortune 100 firms would risk everything they stand for and all the goodwill they have made, to outsource work to a nation who "can walk out of a contract at will" with out penalty.
Nothing but clueless to think a large firm will not see an opportunity like 2 buck an hour highly skilled labour and take its chances regardless? Yes, I must have missed the classes in corporate opportunism. Oh no wait, that was you.
You talk like a 13 yr old.
This from the clown that starts off his ill-informed rant with personal abuse. I like it.
A strong military is a key factor in influence and power.
Ah yes, which explains why the EU is so helpless and weak in international affairs. Heheh. What you are actually saying is that a strong military is the key to keeping control of nations your rightfully should have no control over.
You are talking about justification of war. Please stay on topic.
One step at a time here soldier, marketing firm gets recruits, leads to a larger army, leads to... thats right! War! Which brings us right back to the justification for the marketing firm, which in fact is the very same as the justification for war. Or lack thereof. If you do not possess the ability to see your arguments through to their logical conclusions, I suggest you stay out of arguments.
Your next point, well, if you don't like the freedoms here, you are welcome to relocate. Should you already be relocated, please stay there.
Yikes, and leave the country to people like GW and his version of "freedom" to molest to his heart's content? Let me ask you, what would you do in my position?
Finally, my statement about learning in english refers to certain wars involving Japanese, German and Russian language speaking people.
Yeah, strangely ironic that you picked the English as a good example of freedom. Then again that seems to be the trend throughout your arguments.
Oh how I wish I had the luxury of being near sighted.
Well thank god for you! I say it again, thank god we have people like you, who see so clearly that the rest of us needn't even bother thinking. With far sighted individuals such as yourself leading the way, America will be uber alles until the sun burns out. Or, to put it another way, learn from history, marine. I draw the attention of the audience at this time to the sad and sorry cases of Rome, Greece, Persia, and just about every other empire whose glories armies once bestrode the land.
But hey man, here's the reality, you want to let the military fall apart NOW?
Why not? What do you have to lose? Who would be insane enough to invade America? The glassy knolls of Nagasaki and Hiroshima should be warning enough. And if you think the army prevents terrorists, well all the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't stop Timothy McVeigh, savvy?
I'm having a little trouble tracking down exactly the point of your rambling dissertation, so I'll just pull a few of the most objectionable points out at random...
We are a nation founded on revolution and war. Our power in the world was won through superior military force. We are currently having difficulty in maintaining that force.
Okay, I want you to think long and hard about that statement. Your nation is founded on revolution and war, against the tyranny of a militarily superior or at least equally powerful enemy. And now you find your position is reversed, you don't have the right to use the founding struggle to justify your acting like the original agressors.
And correct me if I'm wrong here, but I thought the American strength was the American dream, which always had to do with freedom to be whoever you like, opportunity found nowhere else? You seem to painting the strength of America to be mere transient force of arms...
Our modern society is productive because of our ability to exploit knowledge opportunities. Now that it's being done for the defense of the country, people want to complain.
Don't confuse the defence of the country with the invasion and domination of more or less defenceless third world states. It might upset people and cause them to do things to bring the reality of the matter to the attention of the American public, like flying planes into buildings for example.
Well, you're being given freedom, and it's going to require some computers and research to get it done.
If by freedom you mean being listed in a database by a government with dubious interest in the well being of the citizenry that voted them into power, well then you're positively drowning in freedom. Well done.
No one forces the hand of the individual to sign the paper.
Yet.
Learned in English? Thank a soldier.
English soldiers. Remember them? The original oppressors?
I mean come on, surely you can do better than "take ya medicine or ya legs'll fall off"?
You're saying "they think they can get away with it that's why they do it".
Correct! First thing you have got right so far...
I'm saying their motives probably include wanting to increase their quality of living.
If you can find another reason to indulge in profit-based criminal activities or indeed activities of any sort, please, do tell.
It has ZERO todo [sic] with where they live or what laws govern their nation.
Oh, dear, and you were doing so well! If we were discussing street crime, yes, I would agree; bank robberies, I'm right there with you. In this case however, the fact is they feel that the layers of distance and different legal structures insulate them from serious consequences, especially given the affected entities are not citizens of their own country. To an extent, they are even justified in their beliefs.
Several of my friends work in shops which have outsourced large amounts of work to India and China. Among some of the things they have been told is that Indians can walk out of a contract with a western company any time they want, with no repercussions. Do you think that could happen in the west?
What exactly does that have to do with the comment? I never said it wasn't, it was your sloppy reading skills and lightning fast (whoops) response that put words in my mouth. Seriously, since you're such a big fan of google, do yourself a favour and make ad hominen your word for the day, mmkay?
That's the dumbest thing I've ever read.
Oh, really, well next time try actually reading it, like a good man. Yes India has a criminal code for such infringements, but the point being that the people working in callcentres over there feel that since no Indian citizen is being harmed, they won't be prosecuted. Knee-jerk reaction much?
Nah, it mostly happens in places like India and China, since the grunts on the ground feel far enough removed from potential backlash that they can sneer and act with impunity.
Over in the first world, we know exactly what response our employers will have to such fraud and corruption, and it involves fines and imprisonment.
Its just a question of accountability, actual and perceived.
Affiliate programs need a unique way to identify web browsers and visitors to the site over a period of sometimes weeks. Yes, its easy for someone to click on an advert and then be tracked from their point of entry, but when thye leave and come back a few times over the coming weeks before actually spending money, the original affiliate doesn't get credited with the sale unless the visitor can be somehow linked to them over time. This means cookies. If you remove the ability to credit affiliates with a sale a month after the initial visit, affiliate programs will dry up.
And affiliate programs are probably the only way it makes sense to advertise on the web, as they are accountable, no one makes money until a purchase is made... pay per click is too easily abused, and bald banners hurt sites more often than they help.
And before anyone starts shouting "skr3w teh advertis3rzz teh inatrweb iz fr33!!1", I suggest you people try moving out of your mothers' basements and earning a living for yourselves for a change. It costs money to do just about everything, and that money very often comes from advertisers. If you feel like knocking your favourite site off the web, don't click the adverts.
It is now primarily only within Ireland and N. Ireland that bombings still occur
Actually only in Northern Ireland, the south was never a target of bombing attacks. Wonderful how much peace you can have when you don't go around invading people, really.
No, its not that simple. Lets say I have a small business, I sell garden tools, lawnmowers,etc, in a certain region. And yet I do a search on google for garden tools + region, I am nowhere to be found. What do I do? I optimise the hell out of my site, caking it with region name + garden tools information, and I set up a links exchange program, getting in links left right and centre from related sites. This is SEO, and it will only affect people that enter a search for "garden" "tools" "my region". In other words, those that actually want to find my site.
Theres a distinction between SEO and spamming; if I was to optimise for a garden tools site and set up a poker site there, that would be spamming.
Sweden is the place where there was forced sterilisation until quite recently? Oh yes, I can see how an ID card might be useful there. I bet it made the eugenics program run like clockwork.
Twit.
There are a lot of good uses for near-unbreakable ID.
There are a lot of good uses for dog collars too...