> Maybe ISIS's "vast worldwide network" isn't such a big threat after all.
Yes, but "anti-ISIS" bullshit government project is big. Too big to fail. Too bureaucratic to cancel.
I keep repeating this, but who listens? The number one reason why there is law enforcement effort against Islam is Kafkaesque, not Orwellian. Bureaucratic, not partocratic.
- Event - Use event to create bureaucracy - Use bureaucracy for self-serving purposes by creating cases out of thing air - And, as you have guess exactly, profit.
That is a ridiculous statement. History shows exactly what are most dangerous things that humans can do to themselves.
First, nothing. The human population is so large, the peace is so stable (as never before) that any assumptions that currently existing trends will lead to human extermination are ridiculous.
The most dangerous is still a nuclear self-annihilation. But the past showed us that we have already a multilevel system of preventing it.
Caribbean incident, other incidents show exactly we are capable of in terms of _preventing_ disasters.
We need to take burning fossil fuels seriously not because of global warming, not because of potential extermination of human race, but for more pragmatic reasons like fossil fuel peak.
This is actually the answer to alarmists: we will run out of fossil fuel faster than any serious effect of CO2 on the humanity.
On all ads? Destroy this industry, revolutionize economy.
In the past ads perfomed information function, now they don't. People can search for information now, any information.
The only acceptable way of advertisement should be word of mouth. If someone is caught paying or being paid for "word of mouth", astroturfing, shilling etc, they need to be executed on the spot.
How can people that tasted ad-blocking software have anything good to say about ads?
Every single government uses propaganda against other countries, even friendly countries (BBC publishes sneaky anti French articles on a regular basis)
Not false, but it's also true that ad-blocking (ublock) and script-blocking (flashblock, noscript) extension have done more for user privacy and security than most any other software, sometimes by working against the aims of the browser makers
Correcto mundo. I would claim that ad-blocking extensions of internet browsers are even more significant inventions than the internet itself. The impact of these two humble guys ADP and NS on my life is more than internet itself.
They completely eliminated advertisement from my life at home.
My home is ad free. It is hard to overemphasize how important this is.
monetization claim: this is the most interesting part for me: prediction of the future.
The future is behind content identification, not behind content blocking. All content will be quickly identified and ISP will be paying content owners a fee from the money they collect from our ISP fees.
Pirate site and owner site - both will exist and compete in technology and convenience of content delivery (for example, a site might to choose to slap ads on the content, the other site might choose not to, the third site might choose that you pay an additional fee for content delivery, guess, who will be winning the users?) but the ISP will pay only content owners for our clicks.
Never mind this particular monetization claim is ridiculous. 2 min excerpt should be covered by Fair Use act, but in general, that's how it will work in the future.
Users will pay a fixed fee and get all the content on the Internet for the price of that fee. ISPs will take care of owners.
Your ISP already knows all your URL visits. In nearest future it will start identifying content and paying content owners their share proportional to number of views.
>This will be a big test for all those people who claim to block ads because they have gotten so bad
These stupid, stupid, stupid people. ALL ads are bad, without any exception. It's junk, it's propaganda. Kill advertisement industry with fire. I do not care if this will be a radical economical revolution.
A person has a right not to be harassed. Period. That includes ads.
That's why I will never switch to Chrome. Firefox became almost completely unworkable (both on mobile and desktop), but this is the only browser that allows me to fend of all ads.
Once Firefox becomes a complete crap, I will switch to lynx.
Slashdot Mirror
> Maybe ISIS's "vast worldwide network" isn't such a big threat after all.
Yes, but "anti-ISIS" bullshit government project is big. Too big to fail. Too bureaucratic to cancel.
I keep repeating this, but who listens? The number one reason why there is law enforcement effort against Islam is Kafkaesque, not Orwellian. Bureaucratic, not partocratic.
- Event
- Use event to create bureaucracy
- Use bureaucracy for self-serving purposes by creating cases out of thing air
- And, as you have guess exactly, profit.
I did that.
He literally holds the bloody head of Dr Damore in his hands, and tells to the crowd:
- Now, if any of you sons of bitches got anything else to say, now's the ... time!
> notice Slashdot is the latest science/tech site to fall before the coordinated onslaught of relentless, right wing Global Warming deniers.
Slashdot has always been more or less stable rational source of opinion due to unique balanced system of moderation that stood the test of time.
You are talking complete nonsense.
> If we kill ourselves off at +4C
Seriously?
That is a ridiculous statement. History shows exactly what are most dangerous things that humans can do to themselves.
First, nothing. The human population is so large, the peace is so stable (as never before) that any assumptions that currently existing trends will lead to human extermination are ridiculous.
The most dangerous is still a nuclear self-annihilation. But the past showed us that we have already a multilevel system of preventing it.
Caribbean incident, other incidents show exactly we are capable of in terms of _preventing_ disasters.
We need to take burning fossil fuels seriously not because of global warming, not because of potential extermination of human race, but for more pragmatic reasons like fossil fuel peak.
This is actually the answer to alarmists: we will run out of fossil fuel faster than any serious effect of CO2 on the humanity.
is selectively posting only extreme results of computer modeling of the future/
On all ads? Destroy this industry, revolutionize economy.
In the past ads perfomed information function, now they don't. People can search for information now, any information.
The only acceptable way of advertisement should be word of mouth. If someone is caught paying or being paid for "word of mouth", astroturfing, shilling etc, they need to be executed on the spot.
How can people that tasted ad-blocking software have anything good to say about ads?
Somewhere TV producers started applauding in unison.
Dying young is my retirement plan A.
The amount of my savings I will have to spend after retirement is staggering.
They will take my office keycard from my cold dead hands.
"that's anekdotal evidence"
(presents statistics)
"that's result of centuries of brainwashing"
(presents genitalia)
We need common sense restoration. Enough Kafkaesque absurdities.
.... got really low.
Every single government uses propaganda against other countries, even friendly countries (BBC publishes sneaky anti French articles on a regular basis)
Correcto mundo. I would claim that ad-blocking extensions of internet browsers are even more significant inventions than the internet itself. The impact of these two humble guys ADP and NS on my life is more than internet itself.
They completely eliminated advertisement from my life at home.
My home is ad free. It is hard to overemphasize how important this is.
monetization claim: this is the most interesting part for me: prediction of the future.
The future is behind content identification, not behind content blocking. All content will be quickly identified and ISP will be paying content owners a fee from the money they collect from our ISP fees.
Pirate site and owner site - both will exist and compete in technology and convenience of content delivery (for example, a site might to choose to slap ads on the content, the other site might choose not to, the third site might choose that you pay an additional fee for content delivery, guess, who will be winning the users?) but the ISP will pay only content owners for our clicks.
Never mind this particular monetization claim is ridiculous. 2 min excerpt should be covered by Fair Use act, but in general, that's how it will work in the future.
Users will pay a fixed fee and get all the content on the Internet for the price of that fee. ISPs will take care of owners.
And what do I do now with my fiery diatribe against pet owners?
I hate the insightful slashdotters. They ruin everything.
no
The problem starts when the union becomes a monopoly on work force.
with a server. that's what Uber and Lyft are
Your ISP already knows all your URL visits. In nearest future it will start identifying content and paying content owners their share proportional to number of views.
Everybody will pay flat ISP fee.
>This will be a big test for all those people who claim to block ads because they have gotten so bad
These stupid, stupid, stupid people. ALL ads are bad, without any exception. It's junk, it's propaganda. Kill advertisement industry with fire. I do not care if this will be a radical economical revolution.
A person has a right not to be harassed. Period. That includes ads.
That's why I will never switch to Chrome. Firefox became almost completely unworkable (both on mobile and desktop), but this is the only browser that allows me to fend of all ads.
Once Firefox becomes a complete crap, I will switch to lynx.
K'bye.
... to "the city that never sleeps"
... where I was at that moment.