What we really need is a hardware firewall that blocks all access to Microsoft domain names and IP addresses
Almost any router, personal or commercial, includes a firewall. You should look into using the one(s) you already own, if you're so afraid of Microsoft.
"Panic"? Really? Why would one "panic", even if it were somehow true that MS decided to collect all of the information about everybody on the planet? That doesn't seem like a response of a mentally stable person.
Super awesome for the people collecting data. Now, when people are using different accounts for personal or business or whatever kind of compartmentalizations they need, the data harvesters can tie them all together to the same person much easier. Congrats to them!
How does one block images from a web site that's in your address bar of your browser? You ask the web server for *some* of the images from a web site, but not others? That's my whole point. If I'm going to whatever.com, I'm fine with seeing content from whatever.com, whether it's "content" or advertisements. I'm not OK with seeing content from shittyadnetwork.com.
The problem is that you seem to think that the "virtual" world somehow is different than the "real" world. It isn't. I know lots of people who listen to NPR and very few people who listen to "regular" radio. Why? Partially, because they don't have screaming ads about gold scams and dick hardening pills. It's the same thing.
Tens of thousands of visitors should mean "take some time to earn money from this or I'm going to run out of money really fast." You didn't, and it fell over. I'm sorry. Your'e continuing to insist that what you did was the correct answer, when it obviously didn't work. If you can't learn from your own mistakes...
You're right, that fraud was possible, but less so than with TV or Radio or Print. Hell, I spend $$ on radio advertising, even that I have zero way to validate how many people are hearing those radio broadcasts. Advertisers will pay for unvalidated advertising.
If you had something that accidentally blew up on line, then you could have picked up a phone, called a big company that did something related to what this site was about, and ask them to advertise. That's how business works. You can't expect to sustain something that popular with spending zero effort on bringing in some kind of revenue. By using an ad network, that's what you're doing, and that's completely unsustainable. You're producing a service that a LOT of people are consuming, but you're spending zero effort to bring in any income from your work.
Right, sell ads. Dropping in an ad network blob of HTML is not selling ads. SELL ADS. I don't know how to make it any clearer in English or any other language.
"Selling ads". What the print industry (and TV and radio) have been doing for centuries. Calling advertisers. Asking them for money in exchange for advertising their goods/services. Putting ads on your web site.
$1K/month to serve a community need is an outlier. If you somehow had to pay that without having tens of thousands visitors a day, then I don't know what you're talking about.
If you had tens of thousands of visitors a day, then it would have behooved you to sell your own ads. That means:
1. Call big company that may be interested in advertising on your web site.
2. Tell them that this many people will see an ad for them if they pay you $$ per month.
3. You write HTML (with your fingers) that say, "Buy something from this company", and put it on your web pages.
What you did:
1. Copy-Paste "http://someshittyadnetwork.com/;asdiofulewrn.,n321412341324oip????&&&&"
Well, I am. But any site that gets more traffic than can be handled by a $10/month host can also afford to sell some of their own ads. That's my point. Web sites that are that large/popular need to call advertisers, ask them to advertise, create ads, and put them on their web sites. Same thing that's been happening in print for hundreds (thousands?) of years. Ad networks are a cheap shortcut that don't work as well as people hoped they would.
Sell it and host their own ads. Like print publications have been doing for hundreds (thousands?) of years. If you have thousands of people visiting a web site a day, it's worth it, financially, to hire a salesperson, and sell some ads, and put those ads on your web site. Instead, modern websites say, "Waaah, we don't want to spend money on ad salespeople. We'd rather spend 10 seconds to paste in some HTML from some ad network and let them pay us." I don't think that this is rocket science.
I block every ad. Any web site that can't figure this out can die, and I really don't care. Slashdot is getting sold every three weeks these days, so it's value is dwindling fast, and that's probably because 90% of it's visitors are using ad blockers. If whoever owns it today doesn't figure this out, oh, well.
No, I don't think it's an oversimplification. If you were paying $1K/month to host, then you were running a business, which is fine. Why didn't you go sell some ads? That's a ton of money in hosting, so that's a ton of traffic. It would have made financial sense to spend some resources on selling ads, instead of taking 5 seconds to plug in some HTML from some ad network, don't you think?
Slashdot Mirror
All y'all suckers should continue to thank your God, Amazon, for continuing to allow you to read their books.
Sir, put down the the Glenn Beck, and slowly walk away.
Short sighted and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
Actually, he's pretty astute. You, on the other hand, sound like a real asshole.
Smart for them! Much smarter than today's geeks who want every penny tracked!
Your version of Linux sends stuff out unencrypted? That's scary. You really think that's a better idea than using Windows?
What we really need is a hardware firewall that blocks all access to Microsoft domain names and IP addresses
Almost any router, personal or commercial, includes a firewall. You should look into using the one(s) you already own, if you're so afraid of Microsoft.
"Panic"? Really? Why would one "panic", even if it were somehow true that MS decided to collect all of the information about everybody on the planet? That doesn't seem like a response of a mentally stable person.
By buying books, instead of stupid gadgets.
Oh, yes, many people using many different OS's is UTOPIA!
In the Information Age why is it exactly we are physically commuting to work on a daily basis?
To DO things, perhaps? Your idea that (all? most? a lot?) work can be done with a computer and Internet connection is bizarre.
Well, best of luck with those ad networks. I think you'll see rates continue to drop as more and more people block that junk.
If you're running web site that gets big traffic, then I'm guessing yes, they would.
No, I have no idea. Thank you for educating me.
Super awesome for the people collecting data. Now, when people are using different accounts for personal or business or whatever kind of compartmentalizations they need, the data harvesters can tie them all together to the same person much easier. Congrats to them!
Ok, you're right. Your failure to break even with ad networks proves that ad networks work, and that using your own internal ads doesn't.
How does one block images from a web site that's in your address bar of your browser? You ask the web server for *some* of the images from a web site, but not others? That's my whole point. If I'm going to whatever.com, I'm fine with seeing content from whatever.com, whether it's "content" or advertisements. I'm not OK with seeing content from shittyadnetwork.com.
The problem is that you seem to think that the "virtual" world somehow is different than the "real" world. It isn't. I know lots of people who listen to NPR and very few people who listen to "regular" radio. Why? Partially, because they don't have screaming ads about gold scams and dick hardening pills. It's the same thing.
Tens of thousands of visitors should mean "take some time to earn money from this or I'm going to run out of money really fast." You didn't, and it fell over. I'm sorry. Your'e continuing to insist that what you did was the correct answer, when it obviously didn't work. If you can't learn from your own mistakes...
You're right, that fraud was possible, but less so than with TV or Radio or Print. Hell, I spend $$ on radio advertising, even that I have zero way to validate how many people are hearing those radio broadcasts. Advertisers will pay for unvalidated advertising.
If you had something that accidentally blew up on line, then you could have picked up a phone, called a big company that did something related to what this site was about, and ask them to advertise. That's how business works. You can't expect to sustain something that popular with spending zero effort on bringing in some kind of revenue. By using an ad network, that's what you're doing, and that's completely unsustainable. You're producing a service that a LOT of people are consuming, but you're spending zero effort to bring in any income from your work.
Right, sell ads. Dropping in an ad network blob of HTML is not selling ads. SELL ADS. I don't know how to make it any clearer in English or any other language.
"Selling ads". What the print industry (and TV and radio) have been doing for centuries. Calling advertisers. Asking them for money in exchange for advertising their goods/services. Putting ads on your web site.
$1K/month to serve a community need is an outlier. If you somehow had to pay that without having tens of thousands visitors a day, then I don't know what you're talking about.
If you had tens of thousands of visitors a day, then it would have behooved you to sell your own ads. That means:
1. Call big company that may be interested in advertising on your web site.
2. Tell them that this many people will see an ad for them if they pay you $$ per month.
3. You write HTML (with your fingers) that say, "Buy something from this company", and put it on your web pages.
What you did:
1. Copy-Paste "http://someshittyadnetwork.com/;asdiofulewrn.,n321412341324oip????&&&&"
Well, I am. But any site that gets more traffic than can be handled by a $10/month host can also afford to sell some of their own ads. That's my point. Web sites that are that large/popular need to call advertisers, ask them to advertise, create ads, and put them on their web sites. Same thing that's been happening in print for hundreds (thousands?) of years. Ad networks are a cheap shortcut that don't work as well as people hoped they would.
Sell it and host their own ads. Like print publications have been doing for hundreds (thousands?) of years. If you have thousands of people visiting a web site a day, it's worth it, financially, to hire a salesperson, and sell some ads, and put those ads on your web site. Instead, modern websites say, "Waaah, we don't want to spend money on ad salespeople. We'd rather spend 10 seconds to paste in some HTML from some ad network and let them pay us." I don't think that this is rocket science.
I block every ad. Any web site that can't figure this out can die, and I really don't care. Slashdot is getting sold every three weeks these days, so it's value is dwindling fast, and that's probably because 90% of it's visitors are using ad blockers. If whoever owns it today doesn't figure this out, oh, well.
No, I don't think it's an oversimplification. If you were paying $1K/month to host, then you were running a business, which is fine. Why didn't you go sell some ads? That's a ton of money in hosting, so that's a ton of traffic. It would have made financial sense to spend some resources on selling ads, instead of taking 5 seconds to plug in some HTML from some ad network, don't you think?