I understand that. You would still see the item in the web interface, still see the big message on the outside to make you aware of the brand, but you would not get the physical item unless you say you want it. Brands can still get you the big message for cheaper, but not have the spend the extra money on sending out the details unless you actually care.

Why is opt-in and opt-out so sacrosanct when it comes to email and phone calls, but when it comes to regular mail there is so much resistance? We get so much junk, and its an environmental issue too, but opting out of junk mail is just too much effort, and we are opted in so easily with no action of our own much of the time.

Advertising is the insidious glue that greases and pays for so much culture and so many services, so its is a necessary evil of western capitalism. Advertising is something I wish was scaled back a little. Doing that does mean some realignment in what things cost and how some things work, but I do think its worth thinking about, instead of us all just resigning to a fate of constant marketing bombardment. While technology can and has made some things worse in this regard, it also can give us some creative ways to get a better balance back.

In my post I just said the front and back would be scanned, not the contents. The post office already scans and OCRs the addresses on each item, regardless of type. Taking a full front and back scan or photo would not be such a problem. If I want to see the full item and its contents, I just click to have it delivered.

Would the increased revenue minus the costs of the storage and processing work out to a profit? I don't know, but I think it could. Right now I can rent a PO box and it is manually filled by someone, so I don't see this as being so different, but it would be more automatic and centralized.

Mass marketers could be offered a new product, virtual mail. Instead of sending me the real thing, an image of what they want to send me appears in my virtual PO box. If I want it, only then does the marketer actually mail it, so they can save on printing and postage costs, and know they have a good potential customer, and the post office does not have scanning or storage costs for that item.

I do agree that intentionally ambiguous mail is a problem. Credit card companies love to do this, sending me cash advance checks I don't want disguised as something that might actually be important. That has to get dealt with other ways.

The post office has already been doing a lot to decrease its labor force and do odd things to manage part-time vs full-time, etc. If the variables are adjusted correctly, this could produce a smaller more stable post office that now also has a reason to focus on the needs of mail receivers as well as senders.

I have had this idea for a long time for the postal service to both make and save money. I would pay a small monthly fee for the post office to NOT deliver my mail.

Specifically, I want a virtual PO Box. All my mail would go to a processing center where the front and back of each item is scanned, OCRed, and placed on a web site where I can look at it all. I can then direct them to send or shred any individual item. Because the return address, etc, is OCRed, I can also set up filters for mail I want automatically delivered, like bills.

I don't have the deal with the hassle of sorting through and recycling junk mail, the post office makes some extra money, and they save money by having to deliver less mail. Direct marketers might not like it, but maybe they could be notified of send or shred decisions and can use it to help cull their mailing lists.

My high school teachers said that college is not so much about learning how to do something, but learning how to think. In the technology field, the specifics are going to change constantly, but you need to know the theories and principles behind the specifics so you can adapt as the world changes. I got a Bachelors of Science in Computer Science in 98, and while not every class I took is necessarily directly useful to me now, they did expose me to a pretty wide range of different kinds of problems and concepts that give me an additional ability to design and organize well when programming that I don't always see in my peers who didn't go through a computer science program.

I think our education system in US has gotten really out of whack, although in many ways its nothing new. Education is about being a better person, not just a better worker. You should look for that sort of approach in a school, online or not, in order to get your money's worth and have something that will actually better your life, and not just be a piece of paper that shows you jumped through the right hoops.

Why did you even join up with this place that is making you take so many classes you don't need? Didn't you look at the requirements and the sample course lists, etc, before joining? There are tons of choices out there. People take months to pick a real life college usually, with several visits, looking at course catalogs, talking to students, etc. You should place the same care into an online education if it is going to be the same sort of multi-year commitment.

I've seen a ton of bsa ads show up in my slashdot rss feeds, and they are often pretty onerous, looking for people to turn in their employers. So why is there a Slashdot article that tries to be somewhat backhandedly sympathetic to the BSA? I hope its just a coincidence.

I consider them to be a protection racket much like the RIAA is, and one that is much easier to step in. If you never run file-sharing software, you will probably never hear from the RIAA. If you have a disgruntled and misinformed employee, you may hear from the BSA, and they can get you for essentially not keeping records the way they want you to.

I think all members of the BSA should be required to include clear and obvious documentation with all of their products about just exactly what is considered proof of license, how to deal with audits, and how to get replacement proof if needed, and also clearly label their web home-pages and product packaging with the fact they are members. Consumers can then make an informed choice to either opt out and not buy from BSA members, or to take steps to protect themselves from this racket.

Our economy is collapsing around us in a series of bubbles. Advertising, although hit hard, may have further down to go, as companies looking to save money realize what works and what doesn't. Just think of your own usage of the web. What sort of advertising do you respond to, what do you find annoying and useless? There comes a point when the ad industry can no longer hold up under its own self perpetuating hype and is cut back. As revenue from this dries up as a result, how do you replace it?

I do like the idea of news sources independent to potential influence by advertisers, I don't really like the idea of different universes of news being behind different walls. With the huge amount of choice people have lately, most of us cope by sticking to sources we feel align well with and reinforce our own views. Fox News exploits this fact brilliantly on cable. The fact that I won't watch it is just as important as the fact that so many people do. But even though I am not someone interested in paying for News Corporation anything, I can still go over there and take a look at what they are saying when I feel like, and get a different point of view to consider. With these pay walls, I think there needs to be care to not also create walls around discourse and ideas, where self selected fragmentation gets even worse.

Although it does beg the question, if you have to pay with money, instead of time, to be in each "club", how much would people invest to belong? How many would drop out entirely?

If we are going to have to pay for content, I would like to see something like the cable television model, but without the local monopolies. You can pay content providers directly, al la cart, but those same providers can make bulk deals with content aggregators, and I can then pay the aggregator for discounted access to a wide range of content. This is kind of AOL used to be before it imploded, because they didn't get that when people pay, they expect a certain amount of respect and objectivity in return.

In the end, I would like everything to be freely available to everyone. But making news takes money, and if the ad bubble bursts, where will that money come from? I would hope there could be a strong not-for-profit component in whatever happens, like we have in TV with PBS, that can be free for all.

So the whole ad blocker issue may be moot, for precisely the reason why people use them in the first place.

I think a general problem with education today is we get really caught up with making "good workers" instead of "good people".

College is there to make you a better person. To make you aware of the world and how to think, question, and create, both in a specific field, and in general. The particular language and the depth of how it is taught and how useful that is for employment are secondary to learning the concepts behind letting your create something useful with whatever tools you may be using. Of course concrete examples and hands on experience are part of this, but they are just part of the means and not the ends.

Of course we all need to work for a living, but you never know what the future holds. Job requirements and environments change, our interests change, our abilities develop, and we keep on being presented with new challenges. While in college you have a chance to explore and not get bogged down in the details that may be required for survival. Learn all you can from other subjects especially the humanities, because they give you background on ways to look at the world and examine your place in it. With this background you'll find you can pick up any specifics you need rather quickly, but more so, you'll be able to apply them that much better.

Good employers do recognise good people who can solve problems, communicate well, and be creative within their field, and reward them. If you need to "pay your dues" to get in the door and get some experience with some deep knowledge of something particular (like a certification or the like), don't let the pursuit of that detract from the kind of personal development that you now have a unique opportunity to gain.