clean layout that doesn't get in the way of the content (are you listening MySpace?)
I've never found MySpace to be about content; for me, it's always been the 'social' aspect of the site. It gives 'us teenagers' a place to be "unique", and yet still have a place to talk, a place for our "Shout outs", blogs, and even that gratifying feel of denying a friend request. It recreates the high-school atmosphere that we are either still in or just getting out of, and for better or worse, that is what we are used to.
For the content that is necessary, the default MySpace layout is pretty good, and the MySpace controlled parts of the site are good and readable (with necessary, though by no means excessibvely obnoxious ads). The only part of MySpace with grotesque layout, formatting, etc is the user profiles. Certainly not MySpace's fault, and without it, MySpace would not have been worth obscene gobs of money as it is.
The GP wasn't concerned with the word "Milankovitch Cycles", but the FUD brought up in this article. The problem (in my mind) that these groups have (Scientist, Democrats, Greenpeace, Republicans, Yahoo, everyone) is the arrogance in being concerned about *our* actions affecting *nature*.
This in itself is arrogant and redundant beyond all belief; *we* are just as much a part of nature as mice, Elephants, and Bumblebees. Whatever actions we take are normal, natural, and probably expected for a species at our level of technological development. Of course, we won't be able to prove this until we meet alien species, but our actions cannot be construed as "destroying nature".
The one argument I do accept against global warming and the wasting of Non-renewable resources is "think of the children"; unfortunately, this is the last argument used, if used at all.
I filled out the form for my Latitude 640 when I first heard about it (2, 3 years ago?) and got a prompt reply; the new brick was at my doorstep the next day (the overnighted it) and they payed for shipping and handling. Last year, my memory stick died. I called Dell, and had a technician out next day *at my house* to replace it, plus bring a new brick and battery (both almost dead from wear). Finally, last december, a metal tab connecting the screen to the chassis broke. Again, next day, service technician at my house with a replacement. Always friendly, always competent. There is a reason you have the option to pay for service, and when you do, it's nice to have it. My next notebook will definately be a Dell with the 3-year extended warranty.
But when I try the new McDonalds sandwich (for $5, because it's new), I don't expect to get the same sandwich as in the picture. Marketing in our society has become such a science that I naturally expect less of the product when it is released, wether it's a sandwich, a new computer, or an OS. I take that into account when making my purchase, and that decides any feelings of Buyer's remorse. The amoutn of money isn't the point, it's the collective disregard of Caveat Emptor we take for the excuse of a chance to bitch. Not that I should complain, I take advantage of it to bitch myself... but still!;)
So, Microsoft hyped a product (that seems to do take a good jab at it's niche), and someone says it *looked* like it might have done something else. When I see an add for a BigMac on TV, and go in to buy one, it's not *as* big or *as* juicy as in the commercial, but still worth it. So, marketers promoted a product? Big deal.
While the GP was a bit... overbearing, he did have a valid gut-level reaction to your post (especially for the/. crowd). If you're making enough money to live on and still play (new hardware/games/dvds) and travel, then myself I'd be thankfull, and join the Iron Butt Association.
If motorcycle riding isn't your thing (or MMOs, hiking, kayaking, whatev), and you just *have* to code, then I'd look towards some OSS projects, or something else for fun, and no money. No, there are no deadlines, but if you actually *need* deadlines to get you in gear, you aren't coding for fun, you're working because it *has* to be done. If that's the case, then I'd suggest Search & Rescue or Volunteer Firefighters. Both excellent jobs that give back to the community, and impose major "deadlines".
I'm in about the same position you're in, and I personally don't have a problem with Google having said information. I that it is *Google*'s information, and they will only use it to (try) to help ME. Having US citizenship and living in Switzerland, I know 1) that if any US government agents come knocking on Google's door, they'd better have a warrant if they want ANY information, and even then, it'd better be VERY specific, or Google will do everything possible to not give in. And in 2012, when the Awakening comes, I'll be one of the first thereafter to apply for Google citizenship.
Sure. But I think it's the same as a lot of people who feel that their wedding pictures, even thought taken by someone else, ought to belong to them as it's *their* event, and they paid for the pictures to be taken.
Even so, that's still a bit different. If I were to pay a professional photographer to take pictures at an event, then yes, I would expect to get what I paid for. On the other hand, my family and friends can take all the pictures they want, and they share the good ones with me. I don't see any difference between my mother taking pictures of my wedding and throwing away the blurry photos as I see Amazon realizing that the Children's book I bought was actually a gift, and not representative of my purchasing habits.
First, with a market like China, so much money is involved that if they were not trying to leverage the Chinese search morket, they would be held liable to the people that are *truly* important, their shareholders. They are a public company, therefore their first priority (moraly) is to return investments to their investors.
Second, let's look at their actions in China. They DO NOT host blogs, e-mail accounts, or any other (albeit in their opinion) information that could be used to imprison or otherwise harm their users. With censorship, we first need to look at whose ideas we are censoring. To Americans, Tiananmen Square is a symbol of an oppressive goverment crushing opposition. To the Chinese people, Tiananmen Square is the spiritual center of the Empire. A slight difference of opinion. Is it any surprise that you don't find pictures of the 1989 riots until page 4?
Finally, let's look at the alternatives. Microsoft offers an unusable interface (Live Beta) that has so turned me off I won't consider another Microsoft Live product, based on substantial, not intellectual, grounds. Yahoo offers poor search results, and their advertising is obnoxious to the point of making their interface as unusable as Live's. In grounds that are slightly more relevent to this disscusion, both have been implicated in assisting in the arrest of multiple Chinese citizens.
At the end of the day, Google comes out on top in every area against Yahoo, and every area against Microsoft Live, and I will continue to pledge my support and money (disclaimer: I own Google stock and have both an adSense and adWords account) to, very pessimistically, the least of the evils.
Why? You've bought the product, and it works well for you. You can either say "Sweet, I knew what I wanted" or "Nice! Not all salesmen are satan-spawn!" At least for me, the justification doesn't matter. Unless, of course, the product isn't all that good, and you have a perfectly good justification to say that salesmen indeed are the spawn of Satan.
But it is their data. It was put on their servers by their programs while they observered your shopping habits. And with most advertisers, I honestly don't mind. I use Amazon because it pretty much does my shopping for me. It (seems) to know what I like, and it knows what other people like. User reviews are nice, suggestions are nice, and all in all, I don't do much more than type "Java Swing" into their search field to find the three best books on Java Swing.
The same goes for YouTube, Google, MySpace, etc. If they are willing to spend money to serve me, I don't really care. My e-mail address is no different from my street address or mobile phone number. Both public records, and when I go to a B&N, nothing is stopping them from putting employees on the floor to record exactly what I look at, and come up to me with (theoretically good) ideas for a different book.
I, for one, welcome our new bend-over-backwards-to-sell-me-what-I-want overlords.
Oh, we're long ahead where it "counts." How much money are Pakistani ISPs making off this? Less than (the) US! Seriously, without a way for the ISPs to make money, their lobbyists will never let these networks get beyond a city/community level.
While I was traveling in Spain, I found this realy nifty flashlight that has a sqeeze handle. When I squeeze the handle, a flywheel catches a generator, and provides the electiricity. Plus a battery to store the excess energy, it works really great. The only problem is the cheap plastic; that being said, it was only 3 Euro.
The funniest part of the story, when I got back one of my (big boned, not fat) buddies joked, "Man, it'd be nice to have that in a car!" His girlfriend sweetly replied, "They do, honey, it's called a bicycle:D"
I've thought this was a good idea for a long time. Charge it at the net connection to companies or individuals. Privately, I send ~100 emails a month, professionally, ~200 on a busy month. Most of the professional ones are through Intranet, and $1.00 a month isn't going to put me in the hole.
Spammers, on the other hand, try sending in the hundreds of thousands to tens of millions range; $10,000 per batch pretty quickly adds up. Uh-oh, Granny caught a virus, and her PC is a zombie. First, her ISP probably already cut her off, second, make it easy to appeal. Prove (by being an old granny ) your PC is a zombie, the fine is lowered to $100. Teach her her lesson about not installing her virus definitions.
As with any law or tax, it needs to be implemented right, but I would love to see this, especially opposed to a tiered internet (different groups, I know, but same basic comcepts).
So, you hacked their servers. Great. We've all done this to get around the NYT subscribtion. Looking closer at the license, it is to inform you that this is still a work in progress, and if you use this, and they break it in the final version, they're not responsible. If you choose to give them feedback, that feedback may be used by anyone, and you agree there are no trade secrets involved in your feedback.
You don't have to be a lawyer to read some text on a website.
" 1. You may review these Materials only (a) as a reference to assist You in planning and designing Your [...]("Product") to interface with a Microsoft [...] ("Microsoft Product") as described in these Materials; and (b) to provide feedback on these Materials to Microsoft. [...] 2. These Materials may contain preliminary information or inaccuracies, and may not correctly represent any associated Microsoft Product as commercially released. All Materials are provided entirely "AS IS." To the extent permitted by law, MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, [...] 4. You have no obligation to give Microsoft any [...] ("Feedback") relating to these Materials. However, any Feedback you voluntarily provide may be used in [...] "Microsoft Offerings" which in turn may be relied upon by other third parties to develop their own products, services or technology ("Third Party Products"). Accordingly, if You do give Microsoft Feedback on any version of these Materials [...] You agree: (a) Microsoft may freely use [...] Your Feedback [...](b) You also grant third parties, without charge, only those patent rights necessary to enable Third Party Products to use, implement or interface with any specific parts of a Microsoft Product that incorporate Your Feedback; and (c) You will not give Microsoft any Feedback (i) that You have reason to believe is subject to any [...] intellectual property claim [...] of any third party; or (ii) subject to license terms which seek to require any Microsoft Offering incorporating or derived from such Feedback, or other Microsoft intellectual property, to be licensed to or otherwise shared with any third party.
AJAX still uses page requests, albeit in a rather exotic way. If you have a peak in calls to `functions.js`, you know you have a bunch of people starting sessons; if you have a peak of hits to `dynamicRefresh.php`, you know you have a bunch of people using your application. It's not hard, it just takes a slight "PS" (paradigm shift, TFA).
This is exactly what the grandparent is talking about. Yes, I did bother to play Balders Gate (2), and I found them unplayable for more than a couple hours. I know they have a good story, and I know they have a huge fanbase (Yourself a prime examle), but I find them unplayable. With one or two characters, I was doing fine, but the level of micromanagement for a 4+ character party made the game unplayable. The point of this thread wasn't "My game is better than yours", it was "Why can't we just agree to disagree?"
You make an excellent point, but Google won't mind shifting its ad revenue from partner sites (EBay, A9, etc) to Content sites (davidsouther.com, euclideanspace.com), eg. the little man that has a blog/personal website with some content, and advertises with adsense.
If Google does this well, they will have their own little "Google Base" that includes a bunch of smaller websites, some buying and some selling ads, all through Google. Their brand loyalty will ensure that Google always has enough money to continue to provide and improve service to these smaller groups.
This brand loyalty is already there; as a previous poster stated, he is considering no longer purchasing from Amazon because they no longer use Google for their search. Your mother-in-law doesn't care, she'll just use whatever you tell her too; these combined will ensure Google remains a strong leading force in the web world, forcing other companies to either quit playing Big Business Buy It All or to continually play the catch-up game with whatever the Google engineers haven't come up with.
I didn't read the paper yet, but if I were doing this I'd run a bayesian style filter over the site, and decide if it has harmfull JS/ActiveX or an unusally high number of advertising-style links. If the site "looks" like a spam/malware site, pop up a window saying it looks suspicious; let the user decide yes or no. Put the option in a white/black list, and you're set.
Slashdot Mirror
Either that, or your in for the biggest boom-town rush since 1849. If it does come about, let us know how it goes.
clean layout that doesn't get in the way of the content (are you listening MySpace?)
I've never found MySpace to be about content; for me, it's always been the 'social' aspect of the site. It gives 'us teenagers' a place to be "unique", and yet still have a place to talk, a place for our "Shout outs", blogs, and even that gratifying feel of denying a friend request. It recreates the high-school atmosphere that we are either still in or just getting out of, and for better or worse, that is what we are used to.
For the content that is necessary, the default MySpace layout is pretty good, and the MySpace controlled parts of the site are good and readable (with necessary, though by no means excessibvely obnoxious ads). The only part of MySpace with grotesque layout, formatting, etc is the user profiles. Certainly not MySpace's fault, and without it, MySpace would not have been worth obscene gobs of money as it is.
I was always under the impression that eather was gaseous, and in no way connected with my personal physical form...
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R)
That was a typo. It should read: California Gov. Arnold (The Governator (R)) Schwarzenegger.
The GP wasn't concerned with the word "Milankovitch Cycles", but the FUD brought up in this article. The problem (in my mind) that these groups have (Scientist, Democrats, Greenpeace, Republicans, Yahoo, everyone) is the arrogance in being concerned about *our* actions affecting *nature*.
This in itself is arrogant and redundant beyond all belief; *we* are just as much a part of nature as mice, Elephants, and Bumblebees. Whatever actions we take are normal, natural, and probably expected for a species at our level of technological development. Of course, we won't be able to prove this until we meet alien species, but our actions cannot be construed as "destroying nature".
The one argument I do accept against global warming and the wasting of Non-renewable resources is "think of the children"; unfortunately, this is the last argument used, if used at all.
Hey! It's a true story!
Though I guess I was a little... "glowing".
I filled out the form for my Latitude 640 when I first heard about it (2, 3 years ago?) and got a prompt reply; the new brick was at my doorstep the next day (the overnighted it) and they payed for shipping and handling. Last year, my memory stick died. I called Dell, and had a technician out next day *at my house* to replace it, plus bring a new brick and battery (both almost dead from wear). Finally, last december, a metal tab connecting the screen to the chassis broke. Again, next day, service technician at my house with a replacement. Always friendly, always competent. There is a reason you have the option to pay for service, and when you do, it's nice to have it. My next notebook will definately be a Dell with the 3-year extended warranty.
But when I try the new McDonalds sandwich (for $5, because it's new), I don't expect to get the same sandwich as in the picture. Marketing in our society has become such a science that I naturally expect less of the product when it is released, wether it's a sandwich, a new computer, or an OS. I take that into account when making my purchase, and that decides any feelings of Buyer's remorse. The amoutn of money isn't the point, it's the collective disregard of Caveat Emptor we take for the excuse of a chance to bitch. Not that I should complain, I take advantage of it to bitch myself... but still! ;)
So, Microsoft hyped a product (that seems to do take a good jab at it's niche), and someone says it *looked* like it might have done something else. When I see an add for a BigMac on TV, and go in to buy one, it's not *as* big or *as* juicy as in the commercial, but still worth it. So, marketers promoted a product? Big deal.
While the GP was a bit... overbearing, he did have a valid gut-level reaction to your post (especially for the /. crowd). If you're making enough money to live on and still play (new hardware/games/dvds) and travel, then myself I'd be thankfull, and join the Iron Butt Association.
If motorcycle riding isn't your thing (or MMOs, hiking, kayaking, whatev), and you just *have* to code, then I'd look towards some OSS projects, or something else for fun, and no money. No, there are no deadlines, but if you actually *need* deadlines to get you in gear, you aren't coding for fun, you're working because it *has* to be done. If that's the case, then I'd suggest Search & Rescue or Volunteer Firefighters. Both excellent jobs that give back to the community, and impose major "deadlines".
Just my $0.02
I'm in about the same position you're in, and I personally don't have a problem with Google having said information. I that it is *Google*'s information, and they will only use it to (try) to help ME. Having US citizenship and living in Switzerland, I know 1) that if any US government agents come knocking on Google's door, they'd better have a warrant if they want ANY information, and even then, it'd better be VERY specific, or Google will do everything possible to not give in. And in 2012, when the Awakening comes, I'll be one of the first thereafter to apply for Google citizenship.
It's the new /. profit strategy:
Sure. But I think it's the same as a lot of people who feel that their wedding pictures, even thought taken by someone else, ought to belong to them as it's *their* event, and they paid for the pictures to be taken.
Even so, that's still a bit different. If I were to pay a professional photographer to take pictures at an event, then yes, I would expect to get what I paid for. On the other hand, my family and friends can take all the pictures they want, and they share the good ones with me. I don't see any difference between my mother taking pictures of my wedding and throwing away the blurry photos as I see Amazon realizing that the Children's book I bought was actually a gift, and not representative of my purchasing habits.
First, with a market like China, so much money is involved that if they were not trying to leverage the Chinese search morket, they would be held liable to the people that are *truly* important, their shareholders. They are a public company, therefore their first priority (moraly) is to return investments to their investors.
Second, let's look at their actions in China. They DO NOT host blogs, e-mail accounts, or any other (albeit in their opinion) information that could be used to imprison or otherwise harm their users. With censorship, we first need to look at whose ideas we are censoring. To Americans, Tiananmen Square is a symbol of an oppressive goverment crushing opposition. To the Chinese people, Tiananmen Square is the spiritual center of the Empire. A slight difference of opinion. Is it any surprise that you don't find pictures of the 1989 riots until page 4?
Finally, let's look at the alternatives. Microsoft offers an unusable interface (Live Beta) that has so turned me off I won't consider another Microsoft Live product, based on substantial, not intellectual, grounds. Yahoo offers poor search results, and their advertising is obnoxious to the point of making their interface as unusable as Live's. In grounds that are slightly more relevent to this disscusion, both have been implicated in assisting in the arrest of multiple Chinese citizens.
At the end of the day, Google comes out on top in every area against Yahoo, and every area against Microsoft Live, and I will continue to pledge my support and money (disclaimer: I own Google stock and have both an adSense and adWords account) to, very pessimistically, the least of the evils.
Why? You've bought the product, and it works well for you. You can either say "Sweet, I knew what I wanted" or "Nice! Not all salesmen are satan-spawn!" At least for me, the justification doesn't matter. Unless, of course, the product isn't all that good, and you have a perfectly good justification to say that salesmen indeed are the spawn of Satan.
But it is their data. It was put on their servers by their programs while they observered your shopping habits. And with most advertisers, I honestly don't mind. I use Amazon because it pretty much does my shopping for me. It (seems) to know what I like, and it knows what other people like. User reviews are nice, suggestions are nice, and all in all, I don't do much more than type "Java Swing" into their search field to find the three best books on Java Swing.
The same goes for YouTube, Google, MySpace, etc. If they are willing to spend money to serve me, I don't really care. My e-mail address is no different from my street address or mobile phone number. Both public records, and when I go to a B&N, nothing is stopping them from putting employees on the floor to record exactly what I look at, and come up to me with (theoretically good) ideas for a different book.
I, for one, welcome our new bend-over-backwards-to-sell-me-what-I-want overlords.
age-check-before-download - there has to be a single, cool word in German for that
vordownladenalterscontrolliere
Oh, we're long ahead where it "counts." How much money are Pakistani ISPs making off this? Less than (the) US! Seriously, without a way for the ISPs to make money, their lobbyists will never let these networks get beyond a city/community level.
While I was traveling in Spain, I found this realy nifty flashlight that has a sqeeze handle. When I squeeze the handle, a flywheel catches a generator, and provides the electiricity. Plus a battery to store the excess energy, it works really great. The only problem is the cheap plastic; that being said, it was only 3 Euro.
:D"
The funniest part of the story, when I got back one of my (big boned, not fat) buddies joked, "Man, it'd be nice to have that in a car!" His girlfriend sweetly replied, "They do, honey, it's called a bicycle
Sender- 1 cent (Euro, Dollar, whatever)
I've thought this was a good idea for a long time. Charge it at the net connection to companies or individuals. Privately, I send ~100 emails a month, professionally, ~200 on a busy month. Most of the professional ones are through Intranet, and $1.00 a month isn't going to put me in the hole.
Spammers, on the other hand, try sending in the hundreds of thousands to tens of millions range; $10,000 per batch pretty quickly adds up. Uh-oh, Granny caught a virus, and her PC is a zombie. First, her ISP probably already cut her off, second, make it easy to appeal. Prove (by being an old granny ) your PC is a zombie, the fine is lowered to $100. Teach her her lesson about not installing her virus definitions.
As with any law or tax, it needs to be implemented right, but I would love to see this, especially opposed to a tiered internet (different groups, I know, but same basic comcepts).
So, you hacked their servers. Great. We've all done this to get around the NYT subscribtion. Looking closer at the license, it is to inform you that this is still a work in progress, and if you use this, and they break it in the final version, they're not responsible. If you choose to give them feedback, that feedback may be used by anyone, and you agree there are no trade secrets involved in your feedback.
You don't have to be a lawyer to read some text on a website.
"
1. You may review these Materials only (a) as a reference to assist You in planning and designing Your [...]("Product") to interface with a Microsoft [...] ("Microsoft Product") as described in these Materials; and (b) to provide feedback on these Materials to Microsoft.
[...]
2. These Materials may contain preliminary information or inaccuracies, and may not correctly represent any associated Microsoft Product as commercially released. All Materials are provided entirely "AS IS." To the extent permitted by law, MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND,
[...]
4. You have no obligation to give Microsoft any [...] ("Feedback") relating to these Materials. However, any Feedback you voluntarily provide may be used in [...] "Microsoft Offerings" which in turn may be relied upon by other third parties to develop their own products, services or technology ("Third Party Products"). Accordingly, if You do give Microsoft Feedback on any version of these Materials [...] You agree: (a) Microsoft may freely use [...] Your Feedback [...](b) You also grant third parties, without charge, only those patent rights necessary to enable Third Party Products to use, implement or interface with any specific parts of a Microsoft Product that incorporate Your Feedback; and (c) You will not give Microsoft any Feedback (i) that You have reason to believe is subject to any [...] intellectual property claim [...] of any third party; or (ii) subject to license terms which seek to require any Microsoft Offering incorporating or derived from such Feedback, or other Microsoft intellectual property, to be licensed to or otherwise shared with any third party.
AJAX still uses page requests, albeit in a rather exotic way. If you have a peak in calls to `functions.js`, you know you have a bunch of people starting sessons; if you have a peak of hits to `dynamicRefresh.php`, you know you have a bunch of people using your application. It's not hard, it just takes a slight "PS" (paradigm shift, TFA).
Mod Parent Down
This is exactly what the grandparent is talking about. Yes, I did bother to play Balders Gate (2), and I found them unplayable for more than a couple hours. I know they have a good story, and I know they have a huge fanbase (Yourself a prime examle), but I find them unplayable. With one or two characters, I was doing fine, but the level of micromanagement for a 4+ character party made the game unplayable. The point of this thread wasn't "My game is better than yours", it was "Why can't we just agree to disagree?"
Then again, the parent is "Informative"
You make an excellent point, but Google won't mind shifting its ad revenue from partner sites (EBay, A9, etc) to Content sites (davidsouther.com, euclideanspace.com), eg. the little man that has a blog/personal website with some content, and advertises with adsense.
If Google does this well, they will have their own little "Google Base" that includes a bunch of smaller websites, some buying and some selling ads, all through Google. Their brand loyalty will ensure that Google always has enough money to continue to provide and improve service to these smaller groups.
This brand loyalty is already there; as a previous poster stated, he is considering no longer purchasing from Amazon because they no longer use Google for their search. Your mother-in-law doesn't care, she'll just use whatever you tell her too; these combined will ensure Google remains a strong leading force in the web world, forcing other companies to either quit playing Big Business Buy It All or to continually play the catch-up game with whatever the Google engineers haven't come up with.
I didn't read the paper yet, but if I were doing this I'd run a bayesian style filter over the site, and decide if it has harmfull JS/ActiveX or an unusally high number of advertising-style links. If the site "looks" like a spam/malware site, pop up a window saying it looks suspicious; let the user decide yes or no. Put the option in a white/black list, and you're set.