Pretty much. Nobody is forcing you people to use a Mac. If you don't like Apple products, don't use them. There's no need for OS crusades and spreading FUD.
Actually I find it entertaining about how some of you are so quick to defend it and cry foul.
While I can easily be wrong, doesn't most news places that have a helicopter have TV & radio news? Isn't that what they use the helicopter for? Can't really see any reason why a newspaper company would need a helicopter...
I get so many mod points I don't know what to do with them. I am always logged in and I visit a couple of times a day. I meta-mod when I remember to do so.
I can never remember how to metamod. it's like they buried it's link or something. found it once recently, but can't remember how or where.
What premium content do you have in mind? Do you think that doing even more exhaustive research on a story is going to change any of what I just explained? And what are you going to do when a blogger subscribes to your $5 per week premium content and then blogs about all of it at freetimes.blogspot.com? What then? Copyright lawsuits? Nobody cares. People say "offer premium content" with a wave of their hands. Well, what did you have in mind? I tried to discuss an alternative of this on Slashdot to no avail where basically there would be a pyramid of fractions of ad payments from those subscribed to your site cascading up to the original source.
Well, NYtimes (or another site) could use some web 2.0 tech, that only gives the link of the site (so no one has direct links) then send all the data to you via that. So you get the page, or article, intact, with advertisments on it. Sort of like using a flash player app or something. Then they could have "links" to articles, that will end up being the same sort of deal, will load the page up in like a flash player.
And thats off the top of my head. Given a little motive and time, I'm sure most peeps could come up with a free system that benefits both the publisher and user.
... Internet ads have never done that. Google tried with adsense, but it never really works unless you're a lonely man with a small penis and erectile disfunction.
oh, wait, everyone gets those? and here i thought they were just targeting those ads at me...
Assuming that any hacker is likely to be a marijuana smoker seems a little reaching. As a slashdot story once pointed out that smokers as a group have a lower iq than non smokers, I'd imagine that a large portion of the best hackers would not be smoking marijuana or anything that would poison your lungs and brain with tar.
I'm sorry, but using a slashdot story as proof of something seems a bit odd, considering the quality of stories we get here and the great editors we have.
A big part of the problem is that those jobs are very unappealing. First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants, then they are forced to work in secure facilities that feel like caves or underground bunkers, and on top of that they aren't allowed to discuss what they do in anything but the most general terms. Taking a job doing cyber ops for the government is volunteering to put a giant gap in your resume that you can't discuss.
with the exception of the security clearance, I don't see a problem with the job.
Until two years ago... it didn't happen. It conveniently happened right as I finished my first year of law school. There are now tons and tons of young lawyers with no job prospects and huge amounts of student debt. Fortunately I have a software engineering background to fall back on. Most of my classmates are not so lucky. Sure, a few have landed jobs in big law firms. Some of those people will end up being very successful. Most of the rest of my class... not so much.
sorry if i don't feel bad for your horrible life choice.
It is also a form of DRM. You can't cam a 3D Movie, you can't duplicate a 3D BluRay (yet) so that is why everything is going that direction. 3D Movies are not able to be pirated right now, so they are pushing 3D because it is a new form of DRM hidden under a layer of "entertainment enhancement".
um, you do realise you no NOTHING of what you are talking about?
3D movies can easily be pirated.
3D movies are stored so there's the left eye and right eye pictures on the disc. usually interlaced field sequential is the most common, but some are 2 pics above & below each other, some are side by side.
Now, granted, I haven't found any of the latest 3D movies yet out, but not because they can't be ripped, but because they are hard to find. Most of them are exclusives with bluray players. But seeing as you can rip bluray movies, I don't see why 3D bluray movies would be any different.
I'm not sure I can ever remember a time when I suddenly stopped playing an FPS game because the "3D simulation on a 2D screen" wasn't immersive enough for me - but I can remember stopping many games because they were crap.
Likewise, I cannot remember staring at a movie in the cinema or on a TV screen and not feeling immersed enough due to flat screen images - but I can remember walking out of crap movies in cinemas or turning off crap DVDs.
I'm also old enough to remember movies like Jaws 3D which were released *SPECIFICALLY* to showcase 3D but were ultimately crap movies... Avatar was very pretty, I'm pleased I saw it but was ultimately just a series of graphical set pieces strung together by a simple plot.
3D in entertainment is a gimmick & marketing tool, nothing more. It turns everything into eye candy which means your brain spends more time looking at stuff rather than wondering about the quality of the plot and the content - if you look at most stuff that's released as entertainment these days, it's clear to see quality standards have dropped, everything now is about marketing and branding.
And as such, the technology companies are in the pay of the entertainment companies to force 3D on consumers so they can continue to churn out mainstream rubbish remakes.
I don't agree. Stuff made with 3D in mind looks really good. Stuff that was made with 2D in mind then converted to 3D doesn't look as good.
Now, with technology being better, they can shoot a movie with 3D in mind (or make a game with 3D in mind) and have it look great. One problem is, the exclusive 3D movie deals that are happening. You can only get some movies if you buy a certain brand of bluray 3D players. Which sucks, because there isn't a bunch of 3D movies out there to get.
Sure, 3D may not be for everyone, but it's the next step in the evolution.
Get in on it now, get in on it later. Or wait for holograph tech (which i assume is where this is heading) when it comes around...
The dollar figure is BS - its not like he did damage to the hardware, programs, or data. But he did hack the system...and should be punished.
Not for the people who are involved. If your systems get "browsed through" would you not be combing through just to make sure the guy didn't decide to do something malicious instead? Or do you trust the hacker that just cracked your SSH password that all he did was "look around"?
The numerical amount may be high, but that could encompass a lot of costs in having to hire forensic investigators to check out each and every system (since breaking into one can also lead to breaking into others). So you've got the cost of downtime for everyone using the systems (because you want to freeze the system for investigation), the cost of the investigation itself, plus the cost of incidentals (e.g., changing passwords, etc).
No sane admin treats a system that was "just looked over" as untouched - they all treat it as someone intentionally put something on the machine, and until proven otherwise, the machine is untrustworthy.
If your using dumbass passwords like, password, then the problem isn't what the person did, it's you.
I wish the people behind these anti-big-brother movements would stop calling themselves pirates. There are LOTS of good reasons to support file-sharing and a free-as-in-speech Internet, and to oppose abusive government intrusion and the commercialization of the Internet. Those who fight for this cause under the "pirate" banner are not only doing a disservice to their own cause, but to the rest of us who want a free Internet for reasons other than downloading the latest crappy summer blockbuster movie via BitTorrent.
At the very least, the word "pirate" should be avoided because that is the MAFIAA's loaded word of choice for painting file sharers as dangerous criminals. Why let your enemy frame the argument in his own terms? It's akin to the way the neocons in the U.S. frame the war debate as a question of whether or not you support the troops.
While we are on that, hacker needs to go back to the non criminal meaning. Unlimited needs to mean that, unlimited.
people been changing the meaning of words since the beginning of time. Just deal and accept it.
The only question that matters is: do people who play Farmville (etc) have fun doing so?
If so, then it is a perfectly legitimate form of entertainment, and may well be worth the money they spend on it - not any less so than hardcore gamers playing Fallout or HL2. The latter can similarly be simplified to the point of "you shoot things so that you can shoot more things", and from there on to "you push the button so that you can keep pushing the button", but it misses the crucial point - somewhere along that line of simplification, you lose that quantity called "fun".
It's like taking some gourmet dish, decomposing it down to raw protein, fat, carbs and minerals, blending them, and saying that the disgusting result is somehow representative of the original food. It is, in some way, but it's not the way that matters.
Well, the other day, I was playing Pokemon Rumble on my Wii (hacked of course) and i'm trying to collect all these pokemon, and you have a single, 1 button attack. Really not much point in the game, other then hitting a button to do attacks. Not even sure why I'm playing it, over and over, trying to get the last pokemon from an area i'm in.
While I am not OCD, i think some of these games can bring the OCD out in some players.
"[HTC Incredible] By using a death grip of both hands covering the phone we saw the results go from -57 to -64 dBm"
"[Droid X] can be difficult[...] We used two hands on this larger phone."
"[BlackBerry Bold] was a little more resistant [...] hold of it with two hands, we saw the signal strength go from -80 to -87 dBm."
Yeah, cause covering the entire phone with two hands is a perfectly normal way that people would ever use the phone. I bet if I shoved a smart phone up my a**, it would lose a lot of signal too...
Can you set it to take a picture while it's there?
While I'm not defending the guy (he's a loser), his listed "crimes" were no big deal. He didn't have a history of physical or sexual violence. It was some theft & some bad checks.
Not a big deal, all in all.
Of course, that is what he's been caught for, and now, he has sexual assault on a minor & probably rape, so he's graduated to the big time dickwad.
Then you should immediately report to the nearest psychology lab and make a living being examined for this highly unusual trait.
Advertisement today contains more science than Spirit and Opportunity. It practically is a science of its own - the science of manipulating masses, often unconsciously, and especially in such a way that they are either unaware of it or in complete denial.
Ockhams Razor says you are not immune, you are in denial.
So, people that are blind & deaf are just in denial about being not immune to ads?
Or is it your in denial about your view point being correct?
The complete opposite influence they want me to have maybe?
I guarantee that you have not been able to ignore advertising or cause it to have the opposite influence. You're fooling yourself.
What kind of computer do you use? What kind of portable media player? I guarantee that you chose them because of advertising. You know which components to buy when you build a computer because of advertising. You know which cereal to buy because of advertising.
Even if you buy the cheap store-brand of corn flakes, it's because the store-brand is piggy-backing off the effect that Kellogs' advertising had on you or you wouldn't even know to buy corn flakes.
I bet you know the names of Apple's laptop computers. I bet you know the names of the individual programs in Adobe's Creative Suite. I bet you can tell me the names of car models made by the biggest car companies. All because of advertising.
There's a long game in advertising too. Even if you aren't directly influenced to run out and buy a product, you learn the names, you learn the qualities that made one brand better than another. Eventually you will make a decision, and though you think you're making the decision based only upon your own independent thinking, the marketing plays a bigger role than you think.
What sort of sheep are you?
I built my own computer. Not buying parts that were advertised, I bought parts that I did research into on what was best. I didn't pick up some cheap video card because it was on sale, I went with the best performer (at it's time).
I bought an ipod. 120gb. Why ipod? Because I'm an apple fanboy? Nope, not at all. I bought an ipod because there was few choices of >100 gb mp3 players. The ipod did what I wanted to, in a nice clean UI. I don't use itunes, I use winamp. All in all, i'm very happy with the ipod, just don't care how it stores music on it. (i sort of prefer the directory/sub method.
As for ceral, I buy what I like. ya, usually it's on sale, but I only find that out when i actually go to the store. I don't eat alot of breakfast, so I don't really buy ceral much. But as for food, I tend to buy whats cheap in the store, within stuff I like.
I know it's hard to believe, but it stand to reason that there are people who are not affected by advertising. They probably don't care about having to "fit in" with society, or keeping up with the jones. Or maybe they are just oblivous to stuff like that.
Just seems to me, those of you that are jumping on peeps saying advertising doesn't affect them, are jealous because they are sheep when it comes to advertising.
One thing I've learned in this life is closed minds make the impossible.
What if I am NOT influenced by adverts, do not click them and avoid the products mentioned within them?
You are influenced by adverts whether you know it or not. Now, your conscious influence may be stronger than the unconscious; I am fairly adept at detecting the manipulation attempted by advertisement, and it makes me angry. But that doesn't make you immune to the techniques used. It only means that they must be employed more subtly to work on you.
Hmm, what if adblock, well, blocks them? How do they influence us then?
Why can't we do this in a logical organized manner.
1. The government builds out infrastructure 2. The telecoms lease infrastructure 3. Individuals buy service from the telecoms at a regulated rate 4. The regulated rate has enough buffer to subsidize service to those under the poverty line 5. The lease rate has enough buffer to pay for the original build out, maintenance, plus further innovation 6. Innovation money is funneled back into colleges for research into next gen technologies
The build out could be done with contractors through the telecoms, or contracted on a state by state basis giving states control of where and when to build but the federal government own the spec of how to build out so that it remains consistent and interoperable from a interstate trade perspective (i.e. some broadband may be shared over boarders like in the case of St. Louis). The telecoms still get to profit from the infrastructure albeit at a reduced profit due to regulation and people below poverty get the opportunity to take part via subsidy, library, schools, etc.,. You could even due partial regulation where it's regulated up until some minimum standard and anything over that is considered "gold plan" allowing the telecoms to charge higher rates for higher usage.
How about this. broadband, tv, phone, electricity, water is all taken care of by the government. no private companies trying to make a profit from them. It's part of our rights as american citizens.
Yes, we would still have to pay for them, as taxes, or whatever. But no middle man trying to profit off people.
Of course, the biggest problems are corporations. We have to limit their power first.
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much. Nobody is forcing you people to use a Mac. If you don't like Apple products, don't use them. There's no need for OS crusades and spreading FUD.
Actually I find it entertaining about how some of you are so quick to defend it and cry foul.
While I can easily be wrong, doesn't most news places that have a helicopter have TV & radio news? Isn't that what they use the helicopter for? Can't really see any reason why a newspaper company would need a helicopter...
I get so many mod points I don't know what to do with them. I am always logged in and I visit a couple of times a day. I meta-mod when I remember to do so.
I can never remember how to metamod. it's like they buried it's link or something. found it once recently, but can't remember how or where.
What premium content do you have in mind? Do you think that doing even more exhaustive research on a story is going to change any of what I just explained? And what are you going to do when a blogger subscribes to your $5 per week premium content and then blogs about all of it at freetimes.blogspot.com? What then? Copyright lawsuits? Nobody cares. People say "offer premium content" with a wave of their hands. Well, what did you have in mind? I tried to discuss an alternative of this on Slashdot to no avail where basically there would be a pyramid of fractions of ad payments from those subscribed to your site cascading up to the original source.
Well, NYtimes (or another site) could use some web 2.0 tech, that only gives the link of the site (so no one has direct links) then send all the data to you via that. So you get the page, or article, intact, with advertisments on it. Sort of like using a flash player app or something. Then they could have "links" to articles, that will end up being the same sort of deal, will load the page up in like a flash player.
And thats off the top of my head. Given a little motive and time, I'm sure most peeps could come up with a free system that benefits both the publisher and user.
...
Internet ads have never done that. Google tried with adsense, but it never really works unless you're a lonely man with a small penis and erectile disfunction.
oh, wait, everyone gets those? and here i thought they were just targeting those ads at me...
That's why I said Seinfeld. He's made a career of saying things that aren't funny and still making people laugh. It's all in the delivery.
He doesn't make me laugh. Actually, he makes me sad.
Nothing against jewish people, just really sick of jewish comedians.
You (as in, jewish comedians) aren't funny. You keep rehashing the same self (race) bashing jokes since you discovered you could make money at it.
Seriously, stop now.
I found Jesus. He was at the bus stop.
You can usually find a couple Jesus's looking for work by the home depot.
Assuming that any hacker is likely to be a marijuana smoker seems a little reaching. As a slashdot story once pointed out that smokers as a group have a lower iq than non smokers, I'd imagine that a large portion of the best hackers would not be smoking marijuana or anything that would poison your lungs and brain with tar.
I'm sorry, but using a slashdot story as proof of something seems a bit odd, considering the quality of stories we get here and the great editors we have.
A big part of the problem is that those jobs are very unappealing. First the applicants have to get a security clearance, which weeds out all non-citizens and a good deal of other applicants, then they are forced to work in secure facilities that feel like caves or underground bunkers, and on top of that they aren't allowed to discuss what they do in anything but the most general terms. Taking a job doing cyber ops for the government is volunteering to put a giant gap in your resume that you can't discuss.
with the exception of the security clearance, I don't see a problem with the job.
Until two years ago... it didn't happen. It conveniently happened right as I finished my first year of law school. There are now tons and tons of young lawyers with no job prospects and huge amounts of student debt. Fortunately I have a software engineering background to fall back on. Most of my classmates are not so lucky. Sure, a few have landed jobs in big law firms. Some of those people will end up being very successful. Most of the rest of my class... not so much.
sorry if i don't feel bad for your horrible life choice.
It is also a form of DRM. You can't cam a 3D Movie, you can't duplicate a 3D BluRay (yet) so that is why everything is going that direction. 3D Movies are not able to be pirated right now, so they are pushing 3D because it is a new form of DRM hidden under a layer of "entertainment enhancement".
um, you do realise you no NOTHING of what you are talking about?
3D movies can easily be pirated.
3D movies are stored so there's the left eye and right eye pictures on the disc. usually interlaced field sequential is the most common, but some are 2 pics above & below each other, some are side by side.
Now, granted, I haven't found any of the latest 3D movies yet out, but not because they can't be ripped, but because they are hard to find. Most of them are exclusives with bluray players. But seeing as you can rip bluray movies, I don't see why 3D bluray movies would be any different.
I'm not sure I can ever remember a time when I suddenly stopped playing an FPS game because the "3D simulation on a 2D screen" wasn't immersive enough for me - but I can remember stopping many games because they were crap.
Likewise, I cannot remember staring at a movie in the cinema or on a TV screen and not feeling immersed enough due to flat screen images - but I can remember walking out of crap movies in cinemas or turning off crap DVDs.
I'm also old enough to remember movies like Jaws 3D which were released *SPECIFICALLY* to showcase 3D but were ultimately crap movies... Avatar was very pretty, I'm pleased I saw it but was ultimately just a series of graphical set pieces strung together by a simple plot.
3D in entertainment is a gimmick & marketing tool, nothing more. It turns everything into eye candy which means your brain spends more time looking at stuff rather than wondering about the quality of the plot and the content - if you look at most stuff that's released as entertainment these days, it's clear to see quality standards have dropped, everything now is about marketing and branding.
And as such, the technology companies are in the pay of the entertainment companies to force 3D on consumers so they can continue to churn out mainstream rubbish remakes.
I don't agree. Stuff made with 3D in mind looks really good. Stuff that was made with 2D in mind then converted to 3D doesn't look as good.
Now, with technology being better, they can shoot a movie with 3D in mind (or make a game with 3D in mind) and have it look great. One problem is, the exclusive 3D movie deals that are happening. You can only get some movies if you buy a certain brand of bluray 3D players. Which sucks, because there isn't a bunch of 3D movies out there to get.
Sure, 3D may not be for everyone, but it's the next step in the evolution.
Get in on it now, get in on it later. Or wait for holograph tech (which i assume is where this is heading) when it comes around...
Not for the people who are involved. If your systems get "browsed through" would you not be combing through just to make sure the guy didn't decide to do something malicious instead? Or do you trust the hacker that just cracked your SSH password that all he did was "look around"?
The numerical amount may be high, but that could encompass a lot of costs in having to hire forensic investigators to check out each and every system (since breaking into one can also lead to breaking into others). So you've got the cost of downtime for everyone using the systems (because you want to freeze the system for investigation), the cost of the investigation itself, plus the cost of incidentals (e.g., changing passwords, etc).
No sane admin treats a system that was "just looked over" as untouched - they all treat it as someone intentionally put something on the machine, and until proven otherwise, the machine is untrustworthy.
If your using dumbass passwords like, password, then the problem isn't what the person did, it's you.
Wow, you have written probably the best defense of this yet.
Being socially deficient doesn't make you incapable of determining right and wrong,
...that's reserved for lawyers and elected politicians.
Which Obama just washed his hands of?
I wish the people behind these anti-big-brother movements would stop calling themselves pirates. There are LOTS of good reasons to support file-sharing and a free-as-in-speech Internet, and to oppose abusive government intrusion and the commercialization of the Internet. Those who fight for this cause under the "pirate" banner are not only doing a disservice to their own cause, but to the rest of us who want a free Internet for reasons other than downloading the latest crappy summer blockbuster movie via BitTorrent.
At the very least, the word "pirate" should be avoided because that is the MAFIAA's loaded word of choice for painting file sharers as dangerous criminals. Why let your enemy frame the argument in his own terms? It's akin to the way the neocons in the U.S. frame the war debate as a question of whether or not you support the troops.
While we are on that, hacker needs to go back to the non criminal meaning.
Unlimited needs to mean that, unlimited.
people been changing the meaning of words since the beginning of time. Just deal and accept it.
The only question that matters is: do people who play Farmville (etc) have fun doing so?
If so, then it is a perfectly legitimate form of entertainment, and may well be worth the money they spend on it - not any less so than hardcore gamers playing Fallout or HL2. The latter can similarly be simplified to the point of "you shoot things so that you can shoot more things", and from there on to "you push the button so that you can keep pushing the button", but it misses the crucial point - somewhere along that line of simplification, you lose that quantity called "fun".
It's like taking some gourmet dish, decomposing it down to raw protein, fat, carbs and minerals, blending them, and saying that the disgusting result is somehow representative of the original food. It is, in some way, but it's not the way that matters.
Well, the other day, I was playing Pokemon Rumble on my Wii (hacked of course) and i'm trying to collect all these pokemon, and you have a single, 1 button attack. Really not much point in the game, other then hitting a button to do attacks. Not even sure why I'm playing it, over and over, trying to get the last pokemon from an area i'm in.
While I am not OCD, i think some of these games can bring the OCD out in some players.
Even better: Posting comments going for a "Funny" mod which doesn't mean anything for your Karma... but doing it anyway. ;)
You do realize that some of us don't give a fuck about our karma?
"[HTC Incredible] By using a death grip of both hands covering the phone we saw the results go from -57 to -64 dBm"
"[Droid X] can be difficult[...] We used two hands on this larger phone."
"[BlackBerry Bold] was a little more resistant [...] hold of it with two hands, we saw the signal strength go from -80 to -87 dBm."
Yeah, cause covering the entire phone with two hands is a perfectly normal way that people would ever use the phone. I bet if I shoved a smart phone up my a**, it would lose a lot of signal too...
Can you set it to take a picture while it's there?
Nice article.
Of course, seeing as most defends want to have their cases thrown out, it's not really news.
"Cesmat, who has a sizable criminal history,"
The girl's mother is an idiot.
While I'm not defending the guy (he's a loser), his listed "crimes" were no big deal. He didn't have a history of physical or sexual violence. It was some theft & some bad checks.
Not a big deal, all in all.
Of course, that is what he's been caught for, and now, he has sexual assault on a minor & probably rape, so he's graduated to the big time dickwad.
What if I am NOT influenced by adverts,
Then you should immediately report to the nearest psychology lab and make a living being examined for this highly unusual trait.
Advertisement today contains more science than Spirit and Opportunity. It practically is a science of its own - the science of manipulating masses, often unconsciously, and especially in such a way that they are either unaware of it or in complete denial.
Ockhams Razor says you are not immune, you are in denial.
So, people that are blind & deaf are just in denial about being not immune to ads?
Or is it your in denial about your view point being correct?
I guarantee that you have not been able to ignore advertising or cause it to have the opposite influence. You're fooling yourself.
What kind of computer do you use? What kind of portable media player? I guarantee that you chose them because of advertising. You know which components to buy when you build a computer because of advertising. You know which cereal to buy because of advertising.
Even if you buy the cheap store-brand of corn flakes, it's because the store-brand is piggy-backing off the effect that Kellogs' advertising had on you or you wouldn't even know to buy corn flakes.
I bet you know the names of Apple's laptop computers. I bet you know the names of the individual programs in Adobe's Creative Suite. I bet you can tell me the names of car models made by the biggest car companies. All because of advertising.
There's a long game in advertising too. Even if you aren't directly influenced to run out and buy a product, you learn the names, you learn the qualities that made one brand better than another. Eventually you will make a decision, and though you think you're making the decision based only upon your own independent thinking, the marketing plays a bigger role than you think.
What sort of sheep are you?
I built my own computer. Not buying parts that were advertised, I bought parts that I did research into on what was best. I didn't pick up some cheap video card because it was on sale, I went with the best performer (at it's time).
I bought an ipod. 120gb. Why ipod? Because I'm an apple fanboy? Nope, not at all. I bought an ipod because there was few choices of >100 gb mp3 players. The ipod did what I wanted to, in a nice clean UI. I don't use itunes, I use winamp. All in all, i'm very happy with the ipod, just don't care how it stores music on it. (i sort of prefer the directory/sub method.
As for ceral, I buy what I like. ya, usually it's on sale, but I only find that out when i actually go to the store. I don't eat alot of breakfast, so I don't really buy ceral much. But as for food, I tend to buy whats cheap in the store, within stuff I like.
I know it's hard to believe, but it stand to reason that there are people who are not affected by advertising. They probably don't care about having to "fit in" with society, or keeping up with the jones. Or maybe they are just oblivous to stuff like that.
Just seems to me, those of you that are jumping on peeps saying advertising doesn't affect them, are jealous because they are sheep when it comes to advertising.
One thing I've learned in this life is closed minds make the impossible.
What if I am NOT influenced by adverts, do not click them and avoid the products mentioned within them?
You are influenced by adverts whether you know it or not. Now, your conscious influence may be stronger than the unconscious; I am fairly adept at detecting the manipulation attempted by advertisement, and it makes me angry. But that doesn't make you immune to the techniques used. It only means that they must be employed more subtly to work on you.
Hmm, what if adblock, well, blocks them? How do they influence us then?
Why can't we do this in a logical organized manner.
1. The government builds out infrastructure
2. The telecoms lease infrastructure
3. Individuals buy service from the telecoms at a regulated rate
4. The regulated rate has enough buffer to subsidize service to those under the poverty line
5. The lease rate has enough buffer to pay for the original build out, maintenance, plus further innovation
6. Innovation money is funneled back into colleges for research into next gen technologies
The build out could be done with contractors through the telecoms, or contracted on a state by state basis giving states control of where and when to build but the federal government own the spec of how to build out so that it remains consistent and interoperable from a interstate trade perspective (i.e. some broadband may be shared over boarders like in the case of St. Louis). The telecoms still get to profit from the infrastructure albeit at a reduced profit due to regulation and people below poverty get the opportunity to take part via subsidy, library, schools, etc.,. You could even due partial regulation where it's regulated up until some minimum standard and anything over that is considered "gold plan" allowing the telecoms to charge higher rates for higher usage.
How about this. broadband, tv, phone, electricity, water is all taken care of by the government. no private companies trying to make a profit from them. It's part of our rights as american citizens.
Yes, we would still have to pay for them, as taxes, or whatever. But no middle man trying to profit off people.
Of course, the biggest problems are corporations. We have to limit their power first.