YHOO was mostly "DOA" indeed when Mayer took over.
However, with her initial efforts in being overly meticulous with the redesigning of the logo (the 30 days of logos), the bombardment of press releases concerning their Weather app and her Flickr changes, there was proof she was overly (too much?) involved in new projects.
But then there was YHOO's Daily Fantasy product being released and that's when you knew Mayer had checked out and YHOO was dead under her leadership. In an industry that's raising 100s of millions in VC, YHOO was poised to potentially take over a multi-billion dollar market because of their unique position - YHOO already had a huge fantasy sports community, already had fully functioning real-time data feeds, the server infrastructure and the engineers to blow away the "frat boy" level technical efforts of FanDuel and DraftKings (FanDuel was storing user password in plaintext as recently as Dec 2014). YHOO could have undercut the "vig" so dramatically on their product and still been profitable and could have gained market share rapidly.
Instead, YHOO rolled out a half baked idea where users couldn't even select a username, basically stole the interface from FanDuel and they let the project rot most of the 2015 football season. Their product was seen as a colossal failure and was universally described as underwhelming. It wasn't built right from a technical perspective, it wasn't marketed properly and was built with zero consideration to the user. (Yes, you could argue that the current DFS legal landscape could be a reason for the poor development efforts, but the end result will be regulation, not banning.)
TL;DR - YHOO seems totally uninterested in putting in the requisite effort to make itself a technology company again under Mayer's leadership even when well positioned to assume control of a multi-billion dollar industry. All YHOO wants to be now is a company trying to avoid it's BABA tax burden.
My boss telecommutes sometimes. All you need to know is this -
He billed 40 hours "General" time from home one week.
The week of Hurricane Sandy.
When his house didn't have power for 10 days.
If he was in the office, he'd be working on his personal e-commerce websites or looking for apps for his phone.
Yes, Mayer did it so she can fire people and cut costs. Yes, VPN is a crappy metric to use although I'm sure that isn't the only metric she used. Yes, telecommuting works for a lot of people and can be a huge cost saver for companies.
But please, let's spare me the "telecommuting is the Holy Grail" for all employees and for all businesses. Fact is every company has terrible employees and they will game the system no matter where they are.
Other than the Garmin Forerunner models, where I can definitely see the iWatch being a drastic improvement over the terrible Forerunner UI, I don't know how many markets this really disrupts. However, I do think the bigger loser would be Garmin as I don't know anyone who would buy their watch products as long as the iWatch improved battery/data collection life./perspective of an ultrarunner
Except the first mp3 players, including the 1st Gen iPod, were not solid-state anything. They were first 2.5" HDDs with moving parts and then Apple was able to make a big improvement by coming up with a 1.5" design.
We are actually in the midst of going through something similar at my company (a very open, not secretive environmental firm). We recognized through employee surveillance and traffic logs that cell phones were a huge security risk at our firm and the decision was made to control as much as we could while still maintaining our "Mom & Pop" company feel.
We switched all of our cell phones from one carrier to ATT and we purchased the MobileIron software (VPS and Sentry) to control all the aspects of the company phones that enter our buildings. In addition, for the people who chose the monthly subsidy as opposed to a company phone, we prevent them from getting WiFi access from within our offices as best we can (MAC whitelisting isn't foolproof but helps with 99% of our users). We don't allow the non-company provided phones to work if they are plugged into workstations via USB cable. With MobileIron I can control basically every aspect of their smartphones including camera control, data usage, app installs, etc.
Now, we don't have this fully running in production yet so I can't comment on the pitfalls I'm sure to face, but the short answer is workplaces don't necessarily need to ban smartphones as that could actually cripple some business processes; however, they are definitely a security threat that need to be managed just like other corporate and employee owned devices.
I'm a 33 year old homeowner with a full-time job and a LLC to do small consulting projects under. I have a fiance, a husky/samoyed/malamute mix and about a half acre of property to maintain now that it's spring time here in New York. I also have two small entrepreneurial ideas I am trying to subcontract out to some friends as a side project. I'm really well scheduled with my time and I decided to try and do 2 courses at once - Algo I and Cryptography.
I made it two weeks.
A problem set, a homework and at least 4.5 hours worth of video without even looking at the suggested texts that were outlined in the first set of videos - and that was one course (Algos). With 1 week deadlines, there is a serious time crunch that doesn't allow for much in the way of "unexpected happenstance" like when I needed to do some electrical rewiring in my kitchen or assemble 3 pieces of outdoor furniture. I fully admit that I bit off more than I could chew signing up for two courses. I also fully admit that I probably need to sacrifice something on my list above in order to free up more time, but I'm not sure I can bury the fiance in the backyard legally. However, I fully understand now why people say it's _really_ (read - not impossible) difficult to continue schooling once "real life starts".
I wish the deadline schedule was a little more lenient although I do understand its purpose and I realize my outside commitments account for a large chunk of my problems. A little more leniency in the schedule would have really helped me "find the time".
Not only do most of my Facebook friends not play SC2, I don't want most of my Facebook friends knowing that I'm a total dork and play video games still. I have enough problems keepings girls as friends, I don't need any help from Blizzard.
I wouldn't pretend to know the first thing about video editing software, but it seems Dreamworks has found a Windows based solution good enough to be in a commerical about (tangentially). Not sure what program is on that right side monitor, but I would imagine if it's good enough for Dreamworks, it has to be at least "usable".
I hear this claim made a lot, though I never see any warrants to back it up. Lots of people have expressed how Facebook is "so much harder to use," but never say where.
You've obviously never used Facebook then.
First, they separated the feed into two - the News Feed and the Live Feed. No one could fully understand what the News Feed even was other than a bastardized version of the more complete Live Feed. Then, no matter how many times you selected Live Feed, after a certain period of time, your home page would default back to the News Feed. Then, they changed their privacy settings so that if you once had a locked down account, the default settings would share more info than you were previously.
Now, with the most recent update, the Live Feed has just disappeared, the News Feed isn't complete, the Top Stories feed lists things completely out of order with new posts buried down on the page, the Live Feed has somewhat been broken out under the Friends -> Status Updates/Recently Updated section, but even that section is incomplete as I have friends who have made status updates today that don't display under any category. My lady friend whom I stalk with computer nerd like determination posted a new video of her animals that doesn't show up anywhere unless I click directly on her profile.
Although in the minority I'm sure, I look at Google as the largest scraper of content there is. If you think about it, they give users snippets of your original content and then take that content and use it to deliver targeted advertisements before the user even clicks on your content.
Now, enter the same business model, add some revenue sharing and a whole bunch of smaller players with their own domains armed with CSS stylized IFRAMES and you will see the "authoritative portal/directory sites" grow pretty quickly. As someone who creates his own unique content (with no ads currently), moves like this do make me think twice about the future of search and creating content for other people to scrape and profit from. Sure, I understand the point of "without the search engine no one would ever find my site", but at some point content creators have to worry about others profiting off their efforts (/end violin playing).
Re:He's right about the rights
on
Ballmer Sounds Off
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Insightful? More like shortsighted.
There are more players in the video distribution game outside of YouTube and Google Video and many of them do not have the deep pockets of Google. By the rationale of the parent, then the old, played Slashdot joke applies:
1. Make video content distribution site
2. Have users post content protected by copyright.
3. Google will then swoop down and buy your site to avoid legal precedent to protect their own legal future and future business model.
4. ???
5. Profit.
It's absurd to think that Google bought YouTube to protect themselves against poor legal decisions. Legal decisions are not based on "scale" i.e. just because YouTube is the player in video distribution right now doesn't mean they are going to be the end all and be all of legal decisions.
The overanalyzation of this purchase is mind numbing. It's as simple as huge user base, it didn't cost them anything outside of stock (which is overvalued as is) and it protected themselves from other large players acquiring YouTube.
1) I really think that WoW just hit the market at exactly the right time where the competition was so thin and since they offered a grea product, they have seen the record subscriber numbers follow. EQ was losing steam. UO was losing steam. Asheron's Call was starting to fall apart balance wise between the classes. AC2 - a total and complete failure. Shadowbane? Too many early server problems to keep people interested. Not only did they provide a very easy to play title, they offered generally decent content with decent enough balance.
2) Once a community like WoW builds, it's hard to dismantle it. Take for instance a game I played for almost 4 years - Asheron's Call (boy would I love to have that time back now). If I take a look at my IM list, I have over 100 people still from AC that I talk to randomly. Two of my better "friends" who I talk to daily I have never met in person but through AC. The social community and the subsequent break-up is hard to lose for some players (i.e. me) and you constantly fall back into the community where "everybody knows your name". With such a huge and tight community, I forsee it taking a very long time before WoW is overtaken by another game in the MMORPG genre any time soon.
... isn't there a way that they could use a helicopter equipped with metal detection devices to determine if anything is buried on the property without actually digging? (I'm pretty sure I saw this on a Law & Order: Criminal Intent once).
I would assume that a non-intrusive "search" of the property would at least be a middle ground between the two sides.
You may not want to admit it, but the answer is yes "us" coders (read, I am a full-time programmer) do rely on the users for security.
Have you not heard the addage "a system is only secure as the person administering it"? Until systems are designed by and administered by infallible, AI capable machines, then we will always be strapped to the lowest common denominator - the user using the system.
I can write the most secure web application known to man, purchase a digital certificate, require users to set passwords to optimal lengths and character combinations, but if they write down their username and password on a sticky attached to their monitor (I walk around the office here in the morning and see it all the time), then does that mean we have failed as programmers?
As if fate wanted to make it challenging, the maximum size of the HTML input field for the email address was 25 characters, and it only accepted POST data, which is somewhat limiting. As a result, I had to "outsource" my cross-site scripting attack to a third server. The end result was that I had to make a user click on a link that first took the victim to my server.
Sounds more like a phishing victim than anything else to me. I understand that the rest of the article brings you through the process of session hijacking, etc., but to me the real problem here is the phishing "attack" and the misuse by the user. Is a system really insecure if the user is diligent in what links he clicks on in this instance? I mean, if I leave the keys to my car in the ignition it's not going to take a skilled theif or laser cut keys to steal my car and the security implementations taken by the manufacturer won't matter.
Here comes the mode down for not being a Google fanboy but... after transferring my calendar events over to GC, I'm pretty unimpressed by GC when compared to Planzo. For instance I found the following issues:
1) On 12/24 I made an event that stretches out over to 2am on Christmas morning. I then added an all day event for Xmas Day and the display overlayed on top of the 2 day event making the previous event unreadable.
2) I can enter descriptions for events, but clicking the event, clicking on the time on the agenda or nowhere else do I actually see the description I just entered. Even if it is a settings change, it should be displaying by default.
3) With all of the Web2.0/AJAX functionality Google has spearheaded, why would a user be require to click an event on the calendar instead of simply mousing over to get the event's details? Planzo does this and it's much better especially when you consider the X to close the popup is over to the right and requires the user to move the mouse all over.
Interface wise, when compared to other online calendars, this fails miserably. They should have just purcahsed a Planzo and incorporated their technology instead of building this app from "scratch".
The author states himself in TFA that he has no programming experience since the 3rd grade. Therefore, can this really be considered "hacker" camp?
In addition, the teacher showed the class SQL injection techniques, etc. However, wouldn't their time be better spent learning penetration testing techniques and how to use certain applications like Nessus? I don't see how learning how to package "Beast" with a screensaver really teaches anyone anything worth over 4 thousand dollars.
I'm a.Net Developer who just joined a new company where I am in charge of updating and upgrading an existing environmental tracking program. However, all the charting options (over 300) were written with Steema's Tee Chart ActiveX control. Now, I could use their.Net version that they have released to fix an ypotential problems, but I have a demo scheduled for April 15th which I can already forsee is going to be a potential disaster.
As this is an internal application, the use of ActiveX isn't too obnoxious, but since I have to deal with the existing code in the short-term, the "good riddance" atitude can only come from those who don't actually maintain old code.
... from having their entire business model come crashing to the ground. I have been thinking about the masses, the grandmas, etc. that don't have ad blocking software and that actually do see these advertisements, but how long will it take before the Operating System makers *cough* Microsoft *cough* start trying to "help" the user by blocking competitor ads by default through the OS and Windows Updates and deploying their own ads instead?
Many corporate enviroments already filter out ads through content blocking on their networks and that's a huge consumer market that aren't being reached (heck, I do all my "work" from work). How long until Cisco, Dell, etc. turn on this content filtering as their default policy?
Do these actions (blocking competitor content at either the network or OS level) constitute anti-trust activities?
I have a man crush on Google, no doubt, but I really wonder how they plan on succeeding with their current business model 10 years down the line. Or maybe, by then, everyone will be vested and no one from there will really care.
Slashdot Mirror
his opinions on Meyer's efforts: "DOA.".
YHOO was mostly "DOA" indeed when Mayer took over. However, with her initial efforts in being overly meticulous with the redesigning of the logo (the 30 days of logos), the bombardment of press releases concerning their Weather app and her Flickr changes, there was proof she was overly (too much?) involved in new projects. But then there was YHOO's Daily Fantasy product being released and that's when you knew Mayer had checked out and YHOO was dead under her leadership. In an industry that's raising 100s of millions in VC, YHOO was poised to potentially take over a multi-billion dollar market because of their unique position - YHOO already had a huge fantasy sports community, already had fully functioning real-time data feeds, the server infrastructure and the engineers to blow away the "frat boy" level technical efforts of FanDuel and DraftKings (FanDuel was storing user password in plaintext as recently as Dec 2014). YHOO could have undercut the "vig" so dramatically on their product and still been profitable and could have gained market share rapidly.
Instead, YHOO rolled out a half baked idea where users couldn't even select a username, basically stole the interface from FanDuel and they let the project rot most of the 2015 football season. Their product was seen as a colossal failure and was universally described as underwhelming. It wasn't built right from a technical perspective, it wasn't marketed properly and was built with zero consideration to the user. (Yes, you could argue that the current DFS legal landscape could be a reason for the poor development efforts, but the end result will be regulation, not banning.)
TL;DR - YHOO seems totally uninterested in putting in the requisite effort to make itself a technology company again under Mayer's leadership even when well positioned to assume control of a multi-billion dollar industry. All YHOO wants to be now is a company trying to avoid it's BABA tax burden.
What a great way to save on $10 million dollar backdoor fees - have your ex-employees build the devices themselves!
My boss telecommutes sometimes. All you need to know is this -
He billed 40 hours "General" time from home one week.
The week of Hurricane Sandy.
When his house didn't have power for 10 days.
If he was in the office, he'd be working on his personal e-commerce websites or looking for apps for his phone.
Yes, Mayer did it so she can fire people and cut costs. Yes, VPN is a crappy metric to use although I'm sure that isn't the only metric she used. Yes, telecommuting works for a lot of people and can be a huge cost saver for companies.
But please, let's spare me the "telecommuting is the Holy Grail" for all employees and for all businesses. Fact is every company has terrible employees and they will game the system no matter where they are.
Other than the Garmin Forerunner models, where I can definitely see the iWatch being a drastic improvement over the terrible Forerunner UI, I don't know how many markets this really disrupts. However, I do think the bigger loser would be Garmin as I don't know anyone who would buy their watch products as long as the iWatch improved battery/data collection life. /perspective of an ultrarunner
Except the first mp3 players, including the 1st Gen iPod, were not solid-state anything. They were first 2.5" HDDs with moving parts and then Apple was able to make a big improvement by coming up with a 1.5" design.
I find it telling that Security isn't listed on either list and thus the proliferation of insecure software.
We are actually in the midst of going through something similar at my company (a very open, not secretive environmental firm). We recognized through employee surveillance and traffic logs that cell phones were a huge security risk at our firm and the decision was made to control as much as we could while still maintaining our "Mom & Pop" company feel.
We switched all of our cell phones from one carrier to ATT and we purchased the MobileIron software (VPS and Sentry) to control all the aspects of the company phones that enter our buildings. In addition, for the people who chose the monthly subsidy as opposed to a company phone, we prevent them from getting WiFi access from within our offices as best we can (MAC whitelisting isn't foolproof but helps with 99% of our users). We don't allow the non-company provided phones to work if they are plugged into workstations via USB cable. With MobileIron I can control basically every aspect of their smartphones including camera control, data usage, app installs, etc.
Now, we don't have this fully running in production yet so I can't comment on the pitfalls I'm sure to face, but the short answer is workplaces don't necessarily need to ban smartphones as that could actually cripple some business processes; however, they are definitely a security threat that need to be managed just like other corporate and employee owned devices.
I'm a 33 year old homeowner with a full-time job and a LLC to do small consulting projects under. I have a fiance, a husky/samoyed/malamute mix and about a half acre of property to maintain now that it's spring time here in New York. I also have two small entrepreneurial ideas I am trying to subcontract out to some friends as a side project. I'm really well scheduled with my time and I decided to try and do 2 courses at once - Algo I and Cryptography.
I made it two weeks.
A problem set, a homework and at least 4.5 hours worth of video without even looking at the suggested texts that were outlined in the first set of videos - and that was one course (Algos). With 1 week deadlines, there is a serious time crunch that doesn't allow for much in the way of "unexpected happenstance" like when I needed to do some electrical rewiring in my kitchen or assemble 3 pieces of outdoor furniture. I fully admit that I bit off more than I could chew signing up for two courses. I also fully admit that I probably need to sacrifice something on my list above in order to free up more time, but I'm not sure I can bury the fiance in the backyard legally. However, I fully understand now why people say it's _really_ (read - not impossible) difficult to continue schooling once "real life starts".
I wish the deadline schedule was a little more lenient although I do understand its purpose and I realize my outside commitments account for a large chunk of my problems. A little more leniency in the schedule would have really helped me "find the time".
I'll stick to my pan galactic gargle blasters thank you very much.
Not only do most of my Facebook friends not play SC2, I don't want most of my Facebook friends knowing that I'm a total dork and play video games still. I have enough problems keepings girls as friends, I don't need any help from Blizzard.
I wouldn't pretend to know the first thing about video editing software, but it seems Dreamworks has found a Windows based solution good enough to be in a commerical about (tangentially). Not sure what program is on that right side monitor, but I would imagine if it's good enough for Dreamworks, it has to be at least "usable".
I hear this claim made a lot, though I never see any warrants to back it up. Lots of people have expressed how Facebook is "so much harder to use," but never say where.
You've obviously never used Facebook then.
First, they separated the feed into two - the News Feed and the Live Feed. No one could fully understand what the News Feed even was other than a bastardized version of the more complete Live Feed. Then, no matter how many times you selected Live Feed, after a certain period of time, your home page would default back to the News Feed. Then, they changed their privacy settings so that if you once had a locked down account, the default settings would share more info than you were previously.
Now, with the most recent update, the Live Feed has just disappeared, the News Feed isn't complete, the Top Stories feed lists things completely out of order with new posts buried down on the page, the Live Feed has somewhat been broken out under the Friends -> Status Updates/Recently Updated section, but even that section is incomplete as I have friends who have made status updates today that don't display under any category. My lady friend whom I stalk with computer nerd like determination posted a new video of her animals that doesn't show up anywhere unless I click directly on her profile.
That enough examples for you?
"Don't call me IT Guy, IT Buddy. Don't call me IT Buddy, IT Friend."
Although in the minority I'm sure, I look at Google as the largest scraper of content there is. If you think about it, they give users snippets of your original content and then take that content and use it to deliver targeted advertisements before the user even clicks on your content.
Now, enter the same business model, add some revenue sharing and a whole bunch of smaller players with their own domains armed with CSS stylized IFRAMES and you will see the "authoritative portal/directory sites" grow pretty quickly. As someone who creates his own unique content (with no ads currently), moves like this do make me think twice about the future of search and creating content for other people to scrape and profit from. Sure, I understand the point of "without the search engine no one would ever find my site", but at some point content creators have to worry about others profiting off their efforts (/end violin playing).
Insightful? More like shortsighted.
There are more players in the video distribution game outside of YouTube and Google Video and many of them do not have the deep pockets of Google. By the rationale of the parent, then the old, played Slashdot joke applies:
1. Make video content distribution site
2. Have users post content protected by copyright.
3. Google will then swoop down and buy your site to avoid legal precedent to protect their own legal future and future business model.
4. ???
5. Profit.
It's absurd to think that Google bought YouTube to protect themselves against poor legal decisions. Legal decisions are not based on "scale" i.e. just because YouTube is the player in video distribution right now doesn't mean they are going to be the end all and be all of legal decisions.
The overanalyzation of this purchase is mind numbing. It's as simple as huge user base, it didn't cost them anything outside of stock (which is overvalued as is) and it protected themselves from other large players acquiring YouTube.
1) I really think that WoW just hit the market at exactly the right time where the competition was so thin and since they offered a grea product, they have seen the record subscriber numbers follow. EQ was losing steam. UO was losing steam. Asheron's Call was starting to fall apart balance wise between the classes. AC2 - a total and complete failure. Shadowbane? Too many early server problems to keep people interested. Not only did they provide a very easy to play title, they offered generally decent content with decent enough balance.
2) Once a community like WoW builds, it's hard to dismantle it. Take for instance a game I played for almost 4 years - Asheron's Call (boy would I love to have that time back now). If I take a look at my IM list, I have over 100 people still from AC that I talk to randomly. Two of my better "friends" who I talk to daily I have never met in person but through AC. The social community and the subsequent break-up is hard to lose for some players (i.e. me) and you constantly fall back into the community where "everybody knows your name". With such a huge and tight community, I forsee it taking a very long time before WoW is overtaken by another game in the MMORPG genre any time soon.
... isn't there a way that they could use a helicopter equipped with metal detection devices to determine if anything is buried on the property without actually digging? (I'm pretty sure I saw this on a Law & Order: Criminal Intent once).
I would assume that a non-intrusive "search" of the property would at least be a middle ground between the two sides.
You may not want to admit it, but the answer is yes "us" coders (read, I am a full-time programmer) do rely on the users for security.
Have you not heard the addage "a system is only secure as the person administering it"? Until systems are designed by and administered by infallible, AI capable machines, then we will always be strapped to the lowest common denominator - the user using the system.
I can write the most secure web application known to man, purchase a digital certificate, require users to set passwords to optimal lengths and character combinations, but if they write down their username and password on a sticky attached to their monitor (I walk around the office here in the morning and see it all the time), then does that mean we have failed as programmers?
Personally, I think not.
As if fate wanted to make it challenging, the maximum size of the HTML input field for the email address was 25 characters, and it only accepted POST data, which is somewhat limiting. As a result, I had to "outsource" my cross-site scripting attack to a third server. The end result was that I had to make a user click on a link that first took the victim to my server.
Sounds more like a phishing victim than anything else to me. I understand that the rest of the article brings you through the process of session hijacking, etc., but to me the real problem here is the phishing "attack" and the misuse by the user. Is a system really insecure if the user is diligent in what links he clicks on in this instance? I mean, if I leave the keys to my car in the ignition it's not going to take a skilled theif or laser cut keys to steal my car and the security implementations taken by the manufacturer won't matter.
It never ceases to surprise me how cheap surrending all the time is.
Here comes the mode down for not being a Google fanboy but ... after transferring my calendar events over to GC, I'm pretty unimpressed by GC when compared to Planzo. For instance I found the following issues:
1) On 12/24 I made an event that stretches out over to 2am on Christmas morning. I then added an all day event for Xmas Day and the display overlayed on top of the 2 day event making the previous event unreadable.
2) I can enter descriptions for events, but clicking the event, clicking on the time on the agenda or nowhere else do I actually see the description I just entered. Even if it is a settings change, it should be displaying by default.
3) With all of the Web2.0/AJAX functionality Google has spearheaded, why would a user be require to click an event on the calendar instead of simply mousing over to get the event's details? Planzo does this and it's much better especially when you consider the X to close the popup is over to the right and requires the user to move the mouse all over.
Interface wise, when compared to other online calendars, this fails miserably. They should have just purcahsed a Planzo and incorporated their technology instead of building this app from "scratch".
The author states himself in TFA that he has no programming experience since the 3rd grade. Therefore, can this really be considered "hacker" camp?
In addition, the teacher showed the class SQL injection techniques, etc. However, wouldn't their time be better spent learning penetration testing techniques and how to use certain applications like Nessus? I don't see how learning how to package "Beast" with a screensaver really teaches anyone anything worth over 4 thousand dollars.
Unfortunately, this is a very bad thing for me.
.Net Developer who just joined a new company where I am in charge of updating and upgrading an existing environmental tracking program. However, all the charting options (over 300) were written with Steema's Tee Chart ActiveX control. Now, I could use their .Net version that they have released to fix an ypotential problems, but I have a demo scheduled for April 15th which I can already forsee is going to be a potential disaster.
I'm a
As this is an internal application, the use of ActiveX isn't too obnoxious, but since I have to deal with the existing code in the short-term, the "good riddance" atitude can only come from those who don't actually maintain old code.
... from having their entire business model come crashing to the ground. I have been thinking about the masses, the grandmas, etc. that don't have ad blocking software and that actually do see these advertisements, but how long will it take before the Operating System makers *cough* Microsoft *cough* start trying to "help" the user by blocking competitor ads by default through the OS and Windows Updates and deploying their own ads instead?
Many corporate enviroments already filter out ads through content blocking on their networks and that's a huge consumer market that aren't being reached (heck, I do all my "work" from work). How long until Cisco, Dell, etc. turn on this content filtering as their default policy?
Do these actions (blocking competitor content at either the network or OS level) constitute anti-trust activities?
I have a man crush on Google, no doubt, but I really wonder how they plan on succeeding with their current business model 10 years down the line. Or maybe, by then, everyone will be vested and no one from there will really care.
Just an honest question - why is it forward slashdot? Backslashdot just not as cool? Programming reason why?