When the viewer blocks all ads, the content provider loses 100%...and this is 100% non-viable in the long term.
BTW, when Slashdot had their subscriptions, few bought them. I investigated, and found nothing I wanted to buy. Price was not an issue. Structure of the subscription was.
Ads are something no user wants, but every advertiser and content-hoster wants. Bottom line is ads will always be around in one form or another. And they will always be evolving and changing.
You can't get rid of them (permanently everywhere that is), and you do want some content to survive (e.g. Slashdot), so maybe an ad vetting/voting/whitelisting system has some merit.
Regarding ad voting, the potential for abuse of this is high (i.e. people hating every ad). One solution would be that your votes are always relative. In other words, do you like this ad more or less than other ads. This way some ads will always bubble to the top. And advertisers can then study/learn from those ads, and/or choose to run those ads more. And when they do that, people grow tired of those ads. So they bubble down the list and force new ads to appear.
This may not sound that great, but right now I am staring at sites that pad with screen after screen of white space, or force gigantic menus to overwrite content or display zero content when I try to ad-block them (via no JS and hosts anyway). Point is that we are already in the middle of an arms race.
People's browsers could be set for what they will allow through -- Javascript, or ad size, etc. Advertisers could pay according to how high up the ad rankings they want their ad to run -- "Top 10%", "Everyone". To reach everyone, your ad would cost more, and tend to be the best behaved.
Regarding ad voting, the potential for abuse of this is high (i.e. people hating every ad). One solution would be that your votes are always relative. In other words, do you like this ad more or less than other ads. This way some ads will always bubble to the top. And advertisers can then study/learn from those ads, and/or choose to run those ads more. And when they do that, people grow tired of those ads. So they bubble down the list and force new ads to appear.
This may not sound that great, but right now I am staring at sites that pad with screen after screen of white space, or force gigantic menus to overwrite content or display zero content when I try to ad-block them (via no JS and hosts anyway). Point is that we are already in the middle of an arms race.
They do seem to have an interesting approach. On that same FAQ page they discuss their philosophy on ad reduction, ad replacement and removal of tracking stuff. There could be a substantial discussion on ad replacement alone.
Ads are something no user wants, but every advertiser and content-hoster wants. Bottom line is ads will always be around in one form or another. And they will always be evolving and changing.
Maybe ad replacement is a potential solution. You can't get rid of them (permanently everywhere that is), and you do want some content to survive (e.g. Slashdot), so maybe an ad vetting/voting/whitelisting system has some merit.
I personally hate auto-scrolling of stories. (1) it turns a page into a performance dog, (2) I want to read every story on this site. Sometimes I get behind, so I go through the older posts until I am caught up. All very precise. Auto-scrolling equals I never feel caught up.
I remember when antivirus companies began talking about heuristics. The idea that they could dynamically figure out threat levels. Then I noticed a strange thing -- updates got bigger, DAT files grew and grew -- and they shut up about heuristics. They realized that this would kill the need to buy next year's AV product.
So, given that best practices for all kinds of stuff have been around for decades, isn't it at least a little curious how often patches come out? Grandparent's point is the most likely explanation. And is the same reason for the so called "data breaches" -- "Here you go, NSA, knock yourself out," followed by "We found a weakness and here's the patch".
I think I merged your two scenarios -- big and small companies -- together when I responded. And you never used "fun" but I did. Even though I hate the word "fun" as it is usually so poorly defined: "My idea of fun is to scare the snot out of you when you come around the corner!" So, mod props to you.
None of that sounds like fun.
I hear a ton of rules and mgmt interference.
Fun is...being creative.
Fun is...being trusted.
Fun is...managers that largely leave you alone and occasionally ask you reasonable -- i.e. non-cookie-cutter -- questions.
Fun is...systems that correct errors quickly. I know, I know, this almost never happens. But if you are doing some of the above, you might get there one day.
Re: making $ from Slashdot. When I was considering a paid membership, I learned that there are almost no benefits. Only two I remember? (1) Ability to read all comments by a poster (rather than some limit) and (2) Get stories shown earlier.
These were offset by (3) You get dinged/charged every time you read the main page. What a galatically bad idea.
A benefit I would pay for: (4) Ability to have ALL comments on one web page. When threads go above 200 to 300, this is only doable for the +4 or +5 comments. What I want is, at times, to be able to filter all -1 and 0 comments away and read everything else.
The ability to comment on the next story earlier is a sound benefit and should stay an option.
Maybe come up with a basketful of benefits -- either just more benefits, to get more to sign up, or you can choose which benefits you want to pay for (like the fee for *69, for example). Each benefit chosen costs $5/year or something.
For $5 a year your web site link could be red-highlighted. I'm sure others can be thought of. But ditch the "1000 views of the home page" negative-benefit. I ride in cabs about once every 10 years because I simply can't stand being metered.
For some years now I've proposed something in between your two viewpoints regarding the overrated mod -- make it cost more. That can be in the form that using an OR mod pushes back the time you get your next set of mods. Or using an OR mod uses up 3 (or 5) of your mod points.
Not all mods are equal. Modding down an obvious AC troll is at the "who cares" end of the spectrum -- we all stop reading such posts quickly enough anyway. Modding down a well-worded comment that happens to be in the minority opinion is at the other extreme -- a gestapo tactic. That won't get corrected (on average) in the metamod process, btw.
The OR mod is the worst as the user of it doesn't even give a reason for using it -- "I vote you down...cuz." I would rather see more "4" and "5" posts that should be 2's and 3's, than see good thoughts buried.
Maybe add a punitive touch to the system -- "worst mod of the week" where you then feature the post, and the moderator's name is shown. Pretty sure that person won't do that again any time soon.
Since a big part of the goal of Slashdot is to encourage comments, why not have a thread on the moderation system say once a week? Maybe those who work at slashdot don't even post to it. Have it be a free-for-all, a true brain-storming session.
You could make the worst mod of the week the name of the weekly "comment on the mod system" thread. Bet it would be the most commented thread every week.
To that end, give him a coupon -- good for one long walk, whenever he wants to take one with you. It is not material gifts, but a part of ourselves that has any value whatsoever.
the easiest thing you can do to reduce injuries and death is to simply make everybody slow down
How do you propose to do that? Radar vans don't ticket vehicles unless they are doing 10mph or more over the limit. So *this* should be the measure of what true speeding is.
BTW, I'm not saying I'm an exceptional driver. I'm saying something very different -- that I'm typical, and that typical is good.
Monitoring should only trigger on extremes. Drivers who never go over the speed limit should be ticketed -- they are a true hazard on the road and cause countless accidents when people frantically try to pass them. I dealt with one yesterday -- 10mph under the limit, in the passing lane. Ticket worthy, if I was a cop.
Measuring speed vs speed limit is, to me, the worst possible thing to measure. I always exceed the speed limit...because I drive the same speed as (or slightly slower than) everybody else. Around here, 5 to 10 mph over is the average. How will any device fairly report this?
My money is on tailgating as being the best thing to measure. It astounds me how close others drive to the car in front.
Also, lateral g-force would be very good to know -- a sign of a bad driver, in my books. Whereas acceleration to speed would be meaningless (i.e. unjust) to record. But deceleration would be quite meaningful. Consistently high decelerations would indicate a driver consistently not anticipating road conditions, or overly relying on the ability of his vehicle to stop in time.
Good point if all she talked about was mega doses of Vitamin C.
"Davis wrote a series of four books, starting with a cookbook in 1947, that ultimately sold over 10 million copies in total. Although her ideas were considered somewhat eccentric in the 1940s and 1950s, the change in culture with the 1960s brought her ideas, especially her anti-food processing and food industry charges, into the mainstream in a time when anti-authority sentiment was growing. She also contributed to, as well as benefited from, the rise of a nutritional and health food movement that began in the 1950s, which focused on subjects such as pesticide residues and food additives, a movement her critics would come to term food faddism. During the 1960s and 1970s, her popularity continued to grow, as she was featured in multiple media reports, variously described as an "oracle" by the New York Times, "high priestess" by Life and was compared to Ralph Nader, the popular consumer activist, by the Associated Press. Her celebrity was demonstrated by her repeated guest appearances on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson, as she became the most popular and influential nutritionist in the country.
A significant part of her appeal came from her credentials, including her university training, and her apparent application of scientific studies and principles to her writing, with one book totaling over 2100 footnotes and citations. Some of her nutritional ideas such as the need for exercise, the dangers of vitamin deficiencies as well as the need to avoid hydrogenated fat, saturated fat and excess sugar consumption remain relevant even to modern nutritionists."
Adelle Davis was decades ahead of Linus Pauling regarding Vitamin C. Pauling wrote about it "In his later years" (circa 1968), whereas Davis was writing books in the 40s and 50s.
Comparing relative He pressures as you have done is fine...for figuring out the driving force causing He to escape. However, that balloon will also deflate if you fill it with regular air.
If you look back to my original comment, that is what I am referencing -- that the balloon will deflate for two reasons, one of which is that the contents are under pressure.
Slashdot Mirror
When the viewer blocks all ads, the content provider loses 100%...and this is 100% non-viable in the long term.
BTW, when Slashdot had their subscriptions, few bought them. I investigated, and found nothing I wanted to buy. Price was not an issue. Structure of the subscription was.
Most of what I said in another thread:
Ads are something no user wants, but every advertiser and content-hoster wants. Bottom line is ads will always be around in one form or another. And they will always be evolving and changing.
You can't get rid of them (permanently everywhere that is), and you do want some content to survive (e.g. Slashdot), so maybe an ad vetting/voting/whitelisting system has some merit.
Regarding ad voting, the potential for abuse of this is high (i.e. people hating every ad). One solution would be that your votes are always relative. In other words, do you like this ad more or less than other ads. This way some ads will always bubble to the top. And advertisers can then study/learn from those ads, and/or choose to run those ads more. And when they do that, people grow tired of those ads. So they bubble down the list and force new ads to appear.
This may not sound that great, but right now I am staring at sites that pad with screen after screen of white space, or force gigantic menus to overwrite content or display zero content when I try to ad-block them (via no JS and hosts anyway). Point is that we are already in the middle of an arms race.
People's browsers could be set for what they will allow through -- Javascript, or ad size, etc. Advertisers could pay according to how high up the ad rankings they want their ad to run -- "Top 10%", "Everyone". To reach everyone, your ad would cost more, and tend to be the best behaved.
Why Is Blue Light before Bedtime Bad for Sleep?
Blue light has a dark side
Study Finds Compulsive Exposure To Blue Light Increases Sleep Deprivation
Regarding ad voting, the potential for abuse of this is high (i.e. people hating every ad). One solution would be that your votes are always relative. In other words, do you like this ad more or less than other ads. This way some ads will always bubble to the top. And advertisers can then study/learn from those ads, and/or choose to run those ads more. And when they do that, people grow tired of those ads. So they bubble down the list and force new ads to appear.
This may not sound that great, but right now I am staring at sites that pad with screen after screen of white space, or force gigantic menus to overwrite content or display zero content when I try to ad-block them (via no JS and hosts anyway). Point is that we are already in the middle of an arms race.
They do seem to have an interesting approach. On that same FAQ page they discuss their philosophy on ad reduction, ad replacement and removal of tracking stuff. There could be a substantial discussion on ad replacement alone.
Ads are something no user wants, but every advertiser and content-hoster wants. Bottom line is ads will always be around in one form or another. And they will always be evolving and changing.
Maybe ad replacement is a potential solution. You can't get rid of them (permanently everywhere that is), and you do want some content to survive (e.g. Slashdot), so maybe an ad vetting/voting/whitelisting system has some merit.
(3) or in the hosts file.
I personally hate auto-scrolling of stories. (1) it turns a page into a performance dog, (2) I want to read every story on this site. Sometimes I get behind, so I go through the older posts until I am caught up. All very precise. Auto-scrolling equals I never feel caught up.
Very well said. Comment of the year nominee.
Eloquent, and full of specifics. And I don't believe it.
Qualcomm's Eudora email program is proof you can create a perfect program. And proof that when you do, your income stream stops.
In the Eudora case they took the high road so few do and gave it all away. Until October 11, 2006 [needle scratching across a record].
Perfection is a different mindset from profit.
I remember when antivirus companies began talking about heuristics. The idea that they could dynamically figure out threat levels. Then I noticed a strange thing -- updates got bigger, DAT files grew and grew -- and they shut up about heuristics. They realized that this would kill the need to buy next year's AV product.
So, given that best practices for all kinds of stuff have been around for decades, isn't it at least a little curious how often patches come out? Grandparent's point is the most likely explanation. And is the same reason for the so called "data breaches" -- "Here you go, NSA, knock yourself out," followed by "We found a weakness and here's the patch".
By way of deception...
I think I merged your two scenarios -- big and small companies -- together when I responded. And you never used "fun" but I did. Even though I hate the word "fun" as it is usually so poorly defined: "My idea of fun is to scare the snot out of you when you come around the corner!" So, mod props to you.
None of that sounds like fun. I hear a ton of rules and mgmt interference.
Fun is...being creative.
Fun is...being trusted.
Fun is...managers that largely leave you alone and occasionally ask you reasonable -- i.e. non-cookie-cutter -- questions.
Fun is...systems that correct errors quickly. I know, I know, this almost never happens. But if you are doing some of the above, you might get there one day.
Thanks for your thoughts
Re: making $ from Slashdot. When I was considering a paid membership, I learned that there are almost no benefits. Only two I remember? (1) Ability to read all comments by a poster (rather than some limit) and (2) Get stories shown earlier.
These were offset by (3) You get dinged/charged every time you read the main page. What a galatically bad idea.
A benefit I would pay for: (4) Ability to have ALL comments on one web page. When threads go above 200 to 300, this is only doable for the +4 or +5 comments. What I want is, at times, to be able to filter all -1 and 0 comments away and read everything else.
The ability to comment on the next story earlier is a sound benefit and should stay an option.
Maybe come up with a basketful of benefits -- either just more benefits, to get more to sign up, or you can choose which benefits you want to pay for (like the fee for *69, for example). Each benefit chosen costs $5/year or something.
For $5 a year your web site link could be red-highlighted. I'm sure others can be thought of. But ditch the "1000 views of the home page" negative-benefit. I ride in cabs about once every 10 years because I simply can't stand being metered.
For some years now I've proposed something in between your two viewpoints regarding the overrated mod -- make it cost more. That can be in the form that using an OR mod pushes back the time you get your next set of mods. Or using an OR mod uses up 3 (or 5) of your mod points.
Not all mods are equal. Modding down an obvious AC troll is at the "who cares" end of the spectrum -- we all stop reading such posts quickly enough anyway. Modding down a well-worded comment that happens to be in the minority opinion is at the other extreme -- a gestapo tactic. That won't get corrected (on average) in the metamod process, btw.
The OR mod is the worst as the user of it doesn't even give a reason for using it -- "I vote you down...cuz." I would rather see more "4" and "5" posts that should be 2's and 3's, than see good thoughts buried.
Maybe add a punitive touch to the system -- "worst mod of the week" where you then feature the post, and the moderator's name is shown. Pretty sure that person won't do that again any time soon.
Since a big part of the goal of Slashdot is to encourage comments, why not have a thread on the moderation system say once a week? Maybe those who work at slashdot don't even post to it. Have it be a free-for-all, a true brain-storming session.
You could make the worst mod of the week the name of the weekly "comment on the mod system" thread. Bet it would be the most commented thread every week.
Who needs the book? Good NYT article on the subject by JR right here
To that end, give him a coupon -- good for one long walk, whenever he wants to take one with you. It is not material gifts, but a part of ourselves that has any value whatsoever.
How do you propose to do that? Radar vans don't ticket vehicles unless they are doing 10mph or more over the limit. So *this* should be the measure of what true speeding is.
BTW, I'm not saying I'm an exceptional driver. I'm saying something very different -- that I'm typical, and that typical is good.
Monitoring should only trigger on extremes. Drivers who never go over the speed limit should be ticketed -- they are a true hazard on the road and cause countless accidents when people frantically try to pass them. I dealt with one yesterday -- 10mph under the limit, in the passing lane. Ticket worthy, if I was a cop.
Measuring speed vs speed limit is, to me, the worst possible thing to measure. I always exceed the speed limit...because I drive the same speed as (or slightly slower than) everybody else. Around here, 5 to 10 mph over is the average. How will any device fairly report this?
My money is on tailgating as being the best thing to measure. It astounds me how close others drive to the car in front.
Also, lateral g-force would be very good to know -- a sign of a bad driver, in my books. Whereas acceleration to speed would be meaningless (i.e. unjust) to record. But deceleration would be quite meaningful. Consistently high decelerations would indicate a driver consistently not anticipating road conditions, or overly relying on the ability of his vehicle to stop in time.
We are least aware of what our minds do best.
- Marvin Minsky
Good point if all she talked about was mega doses of Vitamin C.
"Davis wrote a series of four books, starting with a cookbook in 1947, that ultimately sold over 10 million copies in total. Although her ideas were considered somewhat eccentric in the 1940s and 1950s, the change in culture with the 1960s brought her ideas, especially her anti-food processing and food industry charges, into the mainstream in a time when anti-authority sentiment was growing. She also contributed to, as well as benefited from, the rise of a nutritional and health food movement that began in the 1950s, which focused on subjects such as pesticide residues and food additives, a movement her critics would come to term food faddism. During the 1960s and 1970s, her popularity continued to grow, as she was featured in multiple media reports, variously described as an "oracle" by the New York Times, "high priestess" by Life and was compared to Ralph Nader, the popular consumer activist, by the Associated Press. Her celebrity was demonstrated by her repeated guest appearances on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson, as she became the most popular and influential nutritionist in the country.
A significant part of her appeal came from her credentials, including her university training, and her apparent application of scientific studies and principles to her writing, with one book totaling over 2100 footnotes and citations. Some of her nutritional ideas such as the need for exercise, the dangers of vitamin deficiencies as well as the need to avoid hydrogenated fat, saturated fat and excess sugar consumption remain relevant even to modern nutritionists."
Adelle Davis was decades ahead of Linus Pauling regarding Vitamin C. Pauling wrote about it "In his later years" (circa 1968), whereas Davis was writing books in the 40s and 50s.
Because (frequent) submitter runs Peace Corp Online.
Comparing relative He pressures as you have done is fine...for figuring out the driving force causing He to escape. However, that balloon will also deflate if you fill it with regular air.
If you look back to my original comment, that is what I am referencing -- that the balloon will deflate for two reasons, one of which is that the contents are under pressure.