GP is right, you will have to take it. Bringing up arms won't work. You need to energize the public to the level that they are willing to vote (a very difficult task) and get in office. Hold your revolution there. If enough people against this kind of BS get in office we can make a change. No other way will actually work. -nB
If they make less than 2.4 mil a day from EU countries then the logical choice would be to withdraw your products from legal sale there. We all know that M$ products would still be used (buy from non-member country and ship/smuggle in), just M$ would have legal deniability. -nB
" As long as they stick to Jpegs and PNGs, I'm not complaining. But as soon as they allow animated GIFs, I'm blocking them."
and dropping them from my site. I use google ads to offset some of my hosting costs (pays for about 1/2 year of hosting. If they do anything animated I'm not using them as an advertiser, and I'm blocking thier ads. -nB
While sad he was beaten, it must have been $diety's will no? . . . On a related note, remind me that I should never move to Kansas. Even if there are other reasons to consider doing so. -nB
Since the whole web construct is artifical in nature, I suppose that you could use that argument. My reasoning is that our interaction with the web is its natural state, our changes to our interaction is changing that nature, thus changing our browser behaivour to not download ads is a selection for ad free or reduced annoyance ads. This selects for sites that carry ads which are not overly imposing, thus those sites will prosper while sites that rely on annoying ads will flounder. This is the same premis of natural selection (competition for a limited resource, the better prepared site/creature gets it). -nB
Yes, they monitor the site monthly and spider it. I think they are basically waiting for me to exceed my legally protected rights and then pounce. I will give them no such satisfaction. -nB
It is unnerving when you get one of those letters. here's mine: http://farmersreallysucks.com/cgi-bin/QAD_CMS.pl?p age=E1_First_Takedown.html Anyway, my first reaction was "Oh Shit, Oh Shit, Oh Shit" then I took some time and realised that they were using baseless assertions, thus I got a little pissed. Finally I spent the next week looking up laws in US Title 15 and writing my rebuttal (the red text). -nB
So long as you understand that most judges are elected officals, and as such are eligable for a recall. Start a petition to put a recall on the next election if the oversight board won't do anything about it. -nB
My only concern is the thought that everyone will be web mail. I highly doubt that IT depts will want to put their internal systems and users on web mail (not that I think it is bad, just that it "aint gonna happen"). The key to linux at home is linux on corp desktops, and the key to that is a _fully_ compatible office suite, admin panel and all. -nB
I used to do that, but I realized that there are two paths:
1) Adblock everything -> Content providers make no money -> content goes away or
costs money
2) Adblock selectively -> Content providers make more money from "nice ads" ->
content providers replace "bad ads" with profitable ads -> content stays free
with a cleaner and less annoying ad format.
Both paths are basically an example of natural selection at work. The
first selects for extinction, the second for evolution.
-nB
you can config Adblock to either download and hide or not download. I choose the latter specifically because if a page is poorly designed (waiting on an external ad server to load before loading page content) you will still have to wait for the page to load. Besides hopefully the web master will compare page hits to ad impressions and notice the blinky ads have less impressions than the nice ads. Maybe (hopefully?) they'll get a hint. -nB
All I know is that there are enough ads already. Thank $diety for adblock. If it hinders page loading and is a remote ad server: adblock If it blinks: adblock If it blinks with high eye bleeding contrast: adblock and an oath to kill the designer in the afterlife If it moves more than a simple rolling static images at a "nice" pace: adblock If it's text only, not clashing contrast with the article, or otherwise noticable but unobtrusive: no problem.
If ad spending is increasing that is a GoodThing, because presumably it implies more free content. I just hope that ads evolve into the less painful types. -nB
"You know, it's very easy to slam someone for not being able to pay their bills. But why don't you take a look at the credit industry sometime before sticking up for them. A lot of them are bloodsucking motherfuckers that pray on people."
I worked in the car business about 8 years ago. I worked for the "nice guy" dealership (Saturn). We got way more people with bad credit in proportion to good credit than dealerships with similarly priced new cars because of the "No Hassle, No Haggle" policy they were pushing so hard at the time. There was this one gal who managed to have two BKs in the last 7 years, here credit was crap Fair Issacs in the mid 500's. She had about half a new cars cash to put down with the desire to finance the other half. I all but pleaded with here to not buy a new car, but rather to pay cash for a used car (I even convinced the sales manager to give a $1K break on the price, but I'd lose all commission on the sale). That way she'd be free and clear. The car was only three years old (lease turn in) was decent on the miles and clean. She insisted on the new car and was actually financed (which to tell the truth surprised me). Later that day I found out what she ended up signing for with the finance guys: 22% over 72 months!. Twenty-two fsking percent!!! over a six fsking year term!! I quit the following day, just couldn't do it anymore after that.
So, to respond to the quote above, yes the industry is blood sucking. . . But, at least in the case above, what do you expect them to do? Personally I would not have financed her, but they are in it to make money for their shareholders. -nB
point of interest on the BK laws: If you're actually poor (family income below the poverty line) the rules didn't change. They only changed for the folks that make enough that getting into financial trouble should have been avoidable. -nB
"When people start telling you a P2 is too slow, and you need a special distribution, it's a sign that they're running bloatware."
Especially since I still have a 286 running on my network. Granted it's running DOS, but it is still running. (entropy catcher ala hotbits). Also, to whomever said 8 gig limit, how's a 32 meg limit for you huh O_O (per partition, 540 meg max drive == 17 partitions . . . yech.) -nB
True enough about the BSA. We have automated software audits that run as system, thus as a user (even with admin rights as us devs have) you can not bypass or cancel the audit. If the audit sees software not in it's list of approved software (known freeware &&|| OSS, Site Licensed software, or software the system knows you should have), you are asked to confirm you have a licence. Perodically a LivePerson (TM) checkes that you did not lie, if you did you get your pee-pee whacked (officially, and perminant record). Do it too many times and you will be fired. The rule even extends to shareware. You can't use it if you've passed your free trial (those with unlimeted use, but reduced functinality are fine). All that I agree with, it's a legal issue.
As to Linux, my company does not mind if you install a second HDD and run linux (unless you violate security policy). They assume if you are smart enough to get Linux running on the network to the point of logging in and connecting to the servers, you are smart enough to adhere to the common sense security policy we have. You do, however, loose IT support if you install Linux on the same drive as the IT build of Windows. As it is I've had issues with some security patches killing CygWin, and I was on my own for that as well. -nB
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have kids do you.
GP is right, you will have to take it. Bringing up arms won't work. You need to energize the public to the level that they are willing to vote (a very difficult task) and get in office. Hold your revolution there. If enough people against this kind of BS get in office we can make a change. No other way will actually work.
-nB
If they make less than 2.4 mil a day from EU countries then the logical choice would be to withdraw your products from legal sale there. We all know that M$ products would still be used (buy from non-member country and ship/smuggle in), just M$ would have legal deniability.
-nB
rotfl
that's all I've got to say about that.
-nB
" As long as they stick to Jpegs and PNGs, I'm not complaining. But as soon as they allow animated GIFs, I'm blocking them."
and dropping them from my site. I use google ads to offset some of my hosting costs (pays for about 1/2 year of hosting. If they do anything animated I'm not using them as an advertiser, and I'm blocking thier ads.
-nB
Funny, M$ is doing something _right_ for once.
turning over a new leaf for new years resolution early?
-nB
free housing in KS, I live in CA where the median price is topping $350,000-$400,000 and I'll never own a home.
-nB
yes. damned lysdexia coupled with that particular inversion being a real word. . .
-nB
While sad he was beaten, it must have been $diety's will no?
.
.
.
On a related note, remind me that I should never move to Kansas. Even if there are other reasons to consider doing so.
-nB
[OT, Re, your sig]
/. have a +1 troll as well as a -1 troll?
Why can't
-nB
If I had mod points I'd give everyone an insightful . . .
-nB
how so?
Since the whole web construct is artifical in nature, I suppose that you could use that argument.
My reasoning is that our interaction with the web is its natural state, our changes to our interaction is changing that nature, thus changing our browser behaivour to not download ads is a selection for ad free or reduced annoyance ads. This selects for sites that carry ads which are not overly imposing, thus those sites will prosper while sites that rely on annoying ads will flounder. This is the same premis of natural selection (competition for a limited resource, the better prepared site/creature gets it).
-nB
Yes, they monitor the site monthly and spider it.
I think they are basically waiting for me to exceed my legally protected rights and then pounce.
I will give them no such satisfaction.
-nB
It is unnerving when you get one of those letters.p age=E1_First_Takedown.html
here's mine:
http://farmersreallysucks.com/cgi-bin/QAD_CMS.pl?
Anyway, my first reaction was "Oh Shit, Oh Shit, Oh Shit" then I took some time and realised that they were using baseless assertions, thus I got a little pissed. Finally I spent the next week looking up laws in US Title 15 and writing my rebuttal (the red text).
-nB
So long as you understand that most judges are elected officals, and as such are eligable for a recall. Start a petition to put a recall on the next election if the oversight board won't do anything about it.
-nB
My only concern is the thought that everyone will be web mail.
I highly doubt that IT depts will want to put their internal systems and users on web mail (not that I think it is bad, just that it "aint gonna happen"). The key to linux at home is linux on corp desktops, and the key to that is a _fully_ compatible office suite, admin panel and all.
-nB
I used to do that, but I realized that there are two paths:
1) Adblock everything -> Content providers make no money -> content goes away or costs money
2) Adblock selectively -> Content providers make more money from "nice ads" -> content providers replace "bad ads" with profitable ads -> content stays free with a cleaner and less annoying ad format.
Both paths are basically an example of natural selection at work. The first selects for extinction, the second for evolution.
-nB
you can config Adblock to either download and hide or not download. I choose the latter specifically because if a page is poorly designed (waiting on an external ad server to load before loading page content) you will still have to wait for the page to load.
Besides hopefully the web master will compare page hits to ad impressions and notice the blinky ads have less impressions than the nice ads. Maybe (hopefully?) they'll get a hint.
-nB
I don't particularly care . . .
:P
but on a different note, I've never heard that ditty before, so I guess its* a push.
-nB
*Yes it is it's not its, just thought I'd give you more fodder
-nB
All I know is that there are enough ads already.
Thank $diety for adblock.
If it hinders page loading and is a remote ad server: adblock
If it blinks: adblock
If it blinks with high eye bleeding contrast: adblock and an oath to kill the designer in the afterlife
If it moves more than a simple rolling static images at a "nice" pace: adblock
If it's text only, not clashing contrast with the article, or otherwise noticable but unobtrusive: no problem.
If ad spending is increasing that is a GoodThing, because presumably it implies more free content. I just hope that ads evolve into the less painful types.
-nB
"You know, it's very easy to slam someone for not being able to pay their bills. But why don't you take a look at the credit industry sometime before sticking up for them. A lot of them are bloodsucking motherfuckers that pray on people."
I worked in the car business about 8 years ago. I worked for the "nice guy" dealership (Saturn). We got way more people with bad credit in proportion to good credit than dealerships with similarly priced new cars because of the "No Hassle, No Haggle" policy they were pushing so hard at the time. There was this one gal who managed to have two BKs in the last 7 years, here credit was crap Fair Issacs in the mid 500's. She had about half a new cars cash to put down with the desire to finance the other half. I all but pleaded with here to not buy a new car, but rather to pay cash for a used car (I even convinced the sales manager to give a $1K break on the price, but I'd lose all commission on the sale). That way she'd be free and clear. The car was only three years old (lease turn in) was decent on the miles and clean. She insisted on the new car and was actually financed (which to tell the truth surprised me). Later that day I found out what she ended up signing for with the finance guys: 22% over 72 months!. Twenty-two fsking percent!!! over a six fsking year term!! I quit the following day, just couldn't do it anymore after that.
So, to respond to the quote above, yes the industry is blood sucking. . . But, at least in the case above, what do you expect them to do? Personally I would not have financed her, but they are in it to make money for their shareholders.
-nB
point of interest on the BK laws: If you're actually poor (family income below the poverty line) the rules didn't change. They only changed for the folks that make enough that getting into financial trouble should have been avoidable.
-nB
"When people start telling you a P2 is too slow, and you need a special distribution, it's a sign that they're running bloatware."
Especially since I still have a 286 running on my network. Granted it's running DOS, but it is still running. (entropy catcher ala hotbits).
Also, to whomever said 8 gig limit, how's a 32 meg limit for you huh O_O (per partition, 540 meg max drive == 17 partitions . . . yech.)
-nB
"Microsoft isn't exactly alone in releasing first, fixing later. They're probably not even the worst at the game"
;)
:-)
I call bullshit
M$ has a long and venerable history of doing this, everyone else is either a younger company or gone out of business. **
-nB
** everyone who disagrees with the above is right to do so, IBM is older and still in business
Historically Intel has been very _very_ agressive about these things. Expect a resolution within a couple days (possible delay for the holiday).
-nB
True enough about the BSA. We have automated software audits that run as system, thus as a user (even with admin rights as us devs have) you can not bypass or cancel the audit. If the audit sees software not in it's list of approved software (known freeware &&|| OSS, Site Licensed software, or software the system knows you should have), you are asked to confirm you have a licence. Perodically a LivePerson (TM) checkes that you did not lie, if you did you get your pee-pee whacked (officially, and perminant record). Do it too many times and you will be fired. The rule even extends to shareware. You can't use it if you've passed your free trial (those with unlimeted use, but reduced functinality are fine). All that I agree with, it's a legal issue.
As to Linux, my company does not mind if you install a second HDD and run linux (unless you violate security policy). They assume if you are smart enough to get Linux running on the network to the point of logging in and connecting to the servers, you are smart enough to adhere to the common sense security policy we have. You do, however, loose IT support if you install Linux on the same drive as the IT build of Windows. As it is I've had issues with some security patches killing CygWin, and I was on my own for that as well.
-nB