I also, ANAL, but if I recall correctly, it's a state to state matter. In some states, even in criminal cases, the defense doesn't allow for discovery - they only have to share exculpatory evidence. But the prosecutor gets to decide what is exculpatory. It's called "trial by ambush".
And what really pissed us IN. citizens off was that Congress decided that next year to play around with the definitions of DST and when they switch. Really? I always figured what really pissed off you IN citizens was having to live in Indiana.
But Microsoft doesn't want OSS software to just sit on top of Windows; the company wants this software to be tied into the Windows ecosystem by integrating with Active Directory, Microsoft Office, Expression designer tools, System Center systems-management wares and SQL Server database. If this is indeed their strategy, then it's not a good one. If GNU tools are available on Windows, then it would only be a matter of time acceptable OSS alternatives appear that interwork with Active Directory or SQL Server clones. Hell, clone the interface, and use LDAP and Postgres behind the scenes.
Any sufficiently powerful corporation becomes every bit as degenerated as a government. In a perfect world, Rand would be right - but it's not, and she isn't.
Some places do that. Everywhere I go it's completely free. Starbucks is about as indicative of American coffeehouse norms as McDonald's is to restaurant norms. Take away from it what you will.
It's not fraud and there's nothing particularly wrong with it unless you're running a frequent cron job to generate clicks redirected to/dev/null[1]. That's not fraud either. Google supposedly rejects large numbers of clicks from the same IP.
As far as I know, it's not illegal anywhere except in the minds of webmasterworld wankers. Hm. Why understand what you're talking about when you can just make crap up, eh?
The accepted definition of click fraud is closer to:
Click Fraud is a type of internet crime that occurs in pay per click online advertising when a person, automated script, or computer program imitates a legitimate user of a web browser clicking on an ad, for the purpose of generating a charge per click without having actual interest in the target of the ad's link Use of a computer to commit this type of Internet fraud is a felony in many jurisdictions, for example as covered by Penal code 502 in California, USA, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990 in the United Kingdom. There have been arrests relating to click fraud with regard to malicious clicking in order to deplete a competitor's advertising budget. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_fraud http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_40/b4003001.htm
Ya it may only be one cent but it makes me all warm and fuzzy inside. Well, if you really want to feel warm and fuzzy, know that the more general the search term, the more it is likely costing the advertiser. Some google keywords actually run up to $30 PER CLICK. No, I'm not joking.
Not that I recommend it - click fraud is probably illegal where you live.
So, really, what it's showing is that the web advertising market needs to be structured more like a traditional media buy. As my econ professor once said: people blame capitalism for pollution, but the real problem is no one owns the rivers or the sky. The problem isn't too much capitalism, it's not enough.
The answer isn't less technology (moving back to the old pay-per-impression model), it's more. The market is moving away from pay-per-click, to pay-per-action. Rather than paying an advertisement agency to buy google ads for me at 10 cents per click, I much prefer to pay the agency $10 per sale that gets made through their ads. Then the onus is on them to ensure that the ads they create are optimal. Capitalism and technology at work!
The best part of this "strategy" is that every division except the office/Windows division, loses money. Which leads me to wonder why they even try. That's not entirely accurate. MS XBox division profited $524M so far the first half of this financial year, and growing (they did lose money in the beginning - no surprise to anyone).
It only takes one success to make up for many failures - that's how VC companies make their money. That's a large part of what MS is: a giant technology VC company. But rather than just invest in other companies, they buy them.
This was actually th book I was going to recommend. Like everyone else here I suggest hiring a graphic designer/usability expert/marketing person - but if you understand the basics of this book, it will at least help you thin the herd when hiring for look/feel.
Even more depressing when you consider that women are actually not psychosexually pre-preogrammed in the way men are (can't find the article off hand). Whereas men are programmed - at birth (sorry Evengelicals) - to find women or men attractive, women only have a vague preference, and are more likely to be attracted to the sex of whoever pursues them. We've all seen it - women who get fucked over by men later in life becoming lesbians, when the sweet gay woman next door is so nice. But guys won't 'become gay' no matter how many times they've been fucked over by women.
A thing to remember though is that the average cost of developing a new drug easily runs into hundreds of millions of dollars and that they need to make that back to stay in business. My dad used to tell me a simple maxim: if you want to know if you're being overcharged, look at how much profit an industry makes. Drug companies, Oil companies, Banks and Starbucks make record profits every year.
It's hardly a terrible thing. These people make money because there are currently vast inefficiencies in the advertising market. As long as there is money to be made people will do it, forcing companies like Google to close up the holes, either making their process more efficient in the mean time - or creating a new, possible legitimate, market.
It amazes me how - when it comes to political articles - it seems the majority of Slashdoters are Libertarian Anarchocapitalists - yet when something like this comes up (a valid response to economic pressures), I read nothing but bashing the "parasites" for being "unscrupulous". That's what happens in an open economy, folks.
Althought I enjoy what they are trying to do, they missed one of the worst:
this. Seriously - it looks cool, but have you ever tried to type on one of these? Suuuck. And, though not a pc keyboard: iphone.
Jimmy Wales wants to make his billions off the free labor of the Wikidrones that presently donate their time and money to Wikipedia. Very ethically challenging. That's about as stupid as saying Google doesn't deserve to make money since all they do in provide the infra for indexing webpages, without actually creating them. It's like Layer Cake: the secret of success in business is being a good middle-man, not the poor suckers at the ends.
That is precisely the problem here in the US as well. I think we may have invented it, but then we're famous for always thinking that... You obviously don't know many Brits then...;)
That guy must have a HUGE ego...and looking at his douchey picture on his blog, he thinks he's major hot shit. It took me a moment to realize it was him... I thought it was a picture of Gus Hansen.
Slashdot Mirror
Incidentally, I can code you a new one for $250/hr.
I also, ANAL, but if I recall correctly, it's a state to state matter. In some states, even in criminal cases, the defense doesn't allow for discovery - they only have to share exculpatory evidence. But the prosecutor gets to decide what is exculpatory. It's called "trial by ambush".
That's all you need!
Any sufficiently powerful corporation becomes every bit as degenerated as a government. In a perfect world, Rand would be right - but it's not, and she isn't.
First AT&T makes major deals with Apple, now with Starbucks? What's next - NPR, Prius and The Daily Show?
ps: joke.
Some places do that. Everywhere I go it's completely free. Starbucks is about as indicative of American coffeehouse norms as McDonald's is to restaurant norms. Take away from it what you will.
As far as I know, it's not illegal anywhere except in the minds of webmasterworld wankers. Hm. Why understand what you're talking about when you can just make crap up, eh?
The accepted definition of click fraud is closer to: Click Fraud is a type of internet crime that occurs in pay per click online advertising when a person, automated script, or computer program imitates a legitimate user of a web browser clicking on an ad, for the purpose of generating a charge per click without having actual interest in the target of the ad's link Use of a computer to commit this type of Internet fraud is a felony in many jurisdictions, for example as covered by Penal code 502 in California, USA, and the Computer Misuse Act 1990 in the United Kingdom. There have been arrests relating to click fraud with regard to malicious clicking in order to deplete a competitor's advertising budget.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Click_fraud
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_40/b4003001.htm
Not that I recommend it - click fraud is probably illegal where you live.
The answer isn't less technology (moving back to the old pay-per-impression model), it's more. The market is moving away from pay-per-click, to pay-per-action. Rather than paying an advertisement agency to buy google ads for me at 10 cents per click, I much prefer to pay the agency $10 per sale that gets made through their ads. Then the onus is on them to ensure that the ads they create are optimal. Capitalism and technology at work!
It only takes one success to make up for many failures - that's how VC companies make their money. That's a large part of what MS is: a giant technology VC company. But rather than just invest in other companies, they buy them.
This was actually th book I was going to recommend. Like everyone else here I suggest hiring a graphic designer/usability expert/marketing person - but if you understand the basics of this book, it will at least help you thin the herd when hiring for look/feel.
Sure! They'll have the answer any day now... just, waiting on the result...
Even more depressing when you consider that women are actually not psychosexually pre-preogrammed in the way men are (can't find the article off hand). Whereas men are programmed - at birth (sorry Evengelicals) - to find women or men attractive, women only have a vague preference, and are more likely to be attracted to the sex of whoever pursues them. We've all seen it - women who get fucked over by men later in life becoming lesbians, when the sweet gay woman next door is so nice. But guys won't 'become gay' no matter how many times they've been fucked over by women.
It's hardly a terrible thing. These people make money because there are currently vast inefficiencies in the advertising market. As long as there is money to be made people will do it, forcing companies like Google to close up the holes, either making their process more efficient in the mean time - or creating a new, possible legitimate, market. It amazes me how - when it comes to political articles - it seems the majority of Slashdoters are Libertarian Anarchocapitalists - yet when something like this comes up (a valid response to economic pressures), I read nothing but bashing the "parasites" for being "unscrupulous". That's what happens in an open economy, folks.
Sure they are. "Parents" with Disney-aged kids are mid 20's to early 30's.... right smack in the middle of the High Def target demographic.
I'd appoint Ron Paul as Vice President, then resign.
Althought I enjoy what they are trying to do, they missed one of the worst: this. Seriously - it looks cool, but have you ever tried to type on one of these? Suuuck. And, though not a pc keyboard: iphone.