As the loser who submitted this story, I'm a bit disappointed, cause a bunch of comments show that people didn't look at the RWB article (It is short, thoughtful and, to my small mind, worth a glance. I only included the BBC report because that is where I heard about the RWB report). Also:
1) When I submitted the story I didn't include that bit about China in my version of the summary. I think that quote wasn't a good one to include. It TOTALLY misses the point RWB was making in the article. A better quote would have been:
In 2005, the [Chinese] government sought to counter the surge in cyber-dissidence. It beefed up the law and drafted what might be called "the ten commandments" for Chinese Internet users - a set of very harsh rules targeting online editors. The regime is both efficient and inventive in spying on and censuring the Internet. Other governments have unfortunately imitated it.
In other words, China figured out how to most effectively silence those who wanted to use the web to promote political dissent by singling out online editors. Now many other countries are following suit, because the Chinese method works so well. You don't have to throw large number of people in jail, you just make a few draconian rules and get rid of the people who are causing the most trouble.
The story is not about bashing China, it is about how more than a dozen other countries are following China's lead, now that China has figured out how to censor the internet effectively.
2) I thought the last section - about western complicity - was thought provoking (or at least here would spark some debate). Their comments are not inflammatory, they just state what has happened. "Secure Computing, for example, sold Tunisia a programme to censor the Internet . .." and "Cisco Systems, created China's Internet infrastructure and sold the country special equipment for the police to use." I'd like to hear somone from each of those companies explain/defend themselves.
If you had read the article (at least the RWB report - it is only one page), you would have seen that there is strong criticism of the west. The BBC summary of the article is biased, only tossing in an offhand comment about western problems at the very end. BUT, the RWB Internet report places a good bit of the blame on the West (Governments and Corporations.).
If you don't like this, do something about it. What? Contact your representatives. I don't know what to tell those outside the US, but for those of you inside it:
"AdCenter will give advertisers sophisticated information about consumers, including their location, age, gender and sometimes, their level of wealth. That's more than what Google and Yahoo! offer, said Joe Doran, senior director for monetization in Microsoft's MSN ad-planning group."
I'm curious which of their many sources they plan to use to get this info. Will they just borrow as much personal data as they can from your windows box and plug it into their ad service? Will they "patch" windows the way other spyware companies do? Do they already have all this info? I suppose I simply don't the idea of another more invasive ad program out there, but then I suppose it won't effect me immediatly, since I never use IE.
Oh, BTW, how would you like your job title to be "senior director for monetization." Is "monetization" even a word?
I liked play-doh as a kid, but since when does the golden anniversary of play-doh deserve front page status here? I came looking for nerd news and important stuff.
Re:Why are we helping spammer?
on
Spam Gets Personal
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
They thought some peolpe would say that they shouldn't be doing this kind of research:
"Some might argue that publishing such research will only guarantee that the ideas are used by spammers, but the authors are convinced that such personalization will happen sooner or later anyway, and that it's better to be prepared for the inevitable than not to talk about it."
I don't know if I wholly agree with them, but at least give them credit for thinking that they can head the spammers off at the pass. Maybe they really think that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Great news. But, will this stop or even slow down spam? No. Even if they got half the spammers out there it would keep coming. Why? Too much easy money out there for the taking. Even if they got evey one who operates in the US we would still have a problem overseas . . . and I really doubt that any administration - yes even this one - would invade say Nigeria simply to cut down on spam. Anyway, how are we going to stop chineese spammers? Invade China? Ask their govenment to cut out illegal buisness practices? Yeah right. One spam king may fall, but another will rise in his place.
Sigh, I wish I had not just burned my mod points elsewhere. As the other two posts above me said, the parent here is not trolling (glad people with mod points fixed that!). I went (GC), I watched, and I can't fully disagree with him. He is harsh, but really, can't we do better than these five?
1. This is Hot. Best of the lot. But, it does remind me of some other adverts out there - so blair1q is right: it is predictable.
2.Give me the soap. - If they are looking for middle age family types this is the one. Lame, yes, but it would work with non-geek types.
3.Daredevil - Not bad. This one might actually cut it outside of geekdom. But, this isn't going to do well outside so cal and young people.
4. Fox Fever - lame, but might work.
5. Whee. - Give me a break. Funny: check. Makes fun of other lame browsers: check. Gives anti-microshaft people a good laugh: check. Would come off well on prime time TV: no way no how.
"As a precaution, people should not dial phone numbers received in an e-mail message and should double-check and dial the numbers printed on ATM and credit cards instead, it advised."
Um, duh! If you don't check the numbers you deserve to have these nice people borrow your money. Anyway how is this "new"? I've seen phone numbers in scam email before.
"Procter said VeriChip supports the spirit of Schneider's bill and would not work with companies forcing employees to get implants. However, he said the implants are superior to employee badges or key chains as a way to limit access.
"It's more secure. It's discreet and it can't be lost or stolen," he said."
They think an implated microchip can't be stolen? Um, it can't be stolen as easily as a identity card, but I'd rather have my identity card stolen than have some serious crook borrow my microchip.
"A cursory glance at the list of cinematic stinkers which have taken their lead from PCs, Xboxes and PlayStations reveals that there has never been a half-decent movie based on a computer game."
I rather thought Final Fantasy was at very least a half-decent movie. I know some people didn't think much of it, but it was better than a ton of non-game-movies I've seen. In any case there have been so few movies based on computer games that it isn't right to write off the genre yet. Just because there has yet to be a gem doesn't mean that there can't be.
If I was a poor middle class Indian geek I don't think I would mind interning with microshaft for a year. Would you? It certainly wouldn't hurt to have "winner of the Code4Bill" contest on your resume.
But, give me a break, can't he come up with a better name for this contest? It sounds both egotsitical and condescending to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually that story was also slow news . . . http://officemax.mediaroom.com/index.php/press_rel eases/47 . . . since it looks like the OfficeMax press release was back on May 26th.
Michael Geist's page (linked in the summary) contains this link to a mirror of the site that caused the furor: http://www.youthforvolpe.no-libs.com/p
1) When I submitted the story I didn't include that bit about China in my version of the summary. I think that quote wasn't a good one to include. It TOTALLY misses the point RWB was making in the article. A better quote would have been:
In other words, China figured out how to most effectively silence those who wanted to use the web to promote political dissent by singling out online editors. Now many other countries are following suit, because the Chinese method works so well. You don't have to throw large number of people in jail, you just make a few draconian rules and get rid of the people who are causing the most trouble.The story is not about bashing China, it is about how more than a dozen other countries are following China's lead, now that China has figured out how to censor the internet effectively.
2) I thought the last section - about western complicity - was thought provoking (or at least here would spark some debate). Their comments are not inflammatory, they just state what has happened. "Secure Computing, for example, sold Tunisia a programme to censor the Internet . . ." and "Cisco Systems, created China's Internet infrastructure and sold the country special equipment for the police to use." I'd like to hear somone from each of those companies explain/defend themselves.
If you had read the article (at least the RWB report - it is only one page), you would have seen that there is strong criticism of the west. The BBC summary of the article is biased, only tossing in an offhand comment about western problems at the very end. BUT, the RWB Internet report places a good bit of the blame on the West (Governments and Corporations.).
https://secure.eff.org/site/Advocacy?JServSessionI dr011=kftdaz9nm1.app13b&cmd=display&page=UserActio n&id=163
I'm curious which of their many sources they plan to use to get this info. Will they just borrow as much personal data as they can from your windows box and plug it into their ad service? Will they "patch" windows the way other spyware companies do? Do they already have all this info? I suppose I simply don't the idea of another more invasive ad program out there, but then I suppose it won't effect me immediatly, since I never use IE.
Oh, BTW, how would you like your job title to be "senior director for monetization." Is "monetization" even a word?
Slashdot. News for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
I liked play-doh as a kid, but since when does the golden anniversary of play-doh deserve front page status here? I came looking for nerd news and important stuff.
"Some might argue that publishing such research will only guarantee that the ideas are used by spammers, but the authors are convinced that such personalization will happen sooner or later anyway, and that it's better to be prepared for the inevitable than not to talk about it."
I don't know if I wholly agree with them, but at least give them credit for thinking that they can head the spammers off at the pass. Maybe they really think that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Great news. But, will this stop or even slow down spam? No. Even if they got half the spammers out there it would keep coming. Why? Too much easy money out there for the taking. Even if they got evey one who operates in the US we would still have a problem overseas . . . and I really doubt that any administration - yes even this one - would invade say Nigeria simply to cut down on spam. Anyway, how are we going to stop chineese spammers? Invade China? Ask their govenment to cut out illegal buisness practices? Yeah right. One spam king may fall, but another will rise in his place.
1. This is Hot. Best of the lot. But, it does remind me of some other adverts out there - so blair1q is right: it is predictable.
2.Give me the soap. - If they are looking for middle age family types this is the one. Lame, yes, but it would work with non-geek types.
3.Daredevil - Not bad. This one might actually cut it outside of geekdom. But, this isn't going to do well outside so cal and young people.
4. Fox Fever - lame, but might work.
5. Whee. - Give me a break. Funny: check. Makes fun of other lame browsers: check. Gives anti-microshaft people a good laugh: check. Would come off well on prime time TV: no way no how.
Um, duh! If you don't check the numbers you deserve to have these nice people borrow your money. Anyway how is this "new"? I've seen phone numbers in scam email before.
1) The Mailers started white then turned red (Embarrassment about obscene profits?)
2) They switched between side and top openings.
3) They fixed barcode issues.
4) They perfected their "secret sauce"
5) Now this may be irrelevant soon if video-on-demand takes off.
So how does the brief history of the Netflix envelope make the front page anyhow?
How does this make the news at CNN?
Why don't we have a brief history of slashdot interfaces instead? Now that would make for some fun debate.
Does that mean I can take the Mona Lisa, sign it, give it a new frame, call it "the smile" and then claim it as my masterpiece?
If he will work for bananas, I'd gladly pay him to sling poo at CmdrTaco.
If I was a poor middle class Indian geek I don't think I would mind interning with microshaft for a year. Would you? It certainly wouldn't hurt to have "winner of the Code4Bill" contest on your resume. But, give me a break, can't he come up with a better name for this contest? It sounds both egotsitical and condescending to me.