Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 401

I actually support Trump at this point. Not b'cos of Cruz's 'Dominionist' underpinnings - honestly, I don't believe you conspiracy kooks

Go to YouTube, and search on "Cruz domionist" It will take you to some talks/sermons made by Ted Cruz'z father. If you think that words right out of th horses mouth are conspiracy theories, then you might reexamine who is a kook.

As for your man Trump, he's merely another ChickenHawk who is so very tough, He's going to tell the world where the bear shit in the buckwheat, but too cowardly to face Megan Kelly. He's a bully, and when you stand him down, he retreats. Not presidential material - all show, and no blow. Kelly would make a much better, and more effect president than Trump.

Although Alex Putin really likes him. I always think that it might be a sketchy choice when a KGB guy supports an American Candidate for president. MAybe they should get a room? Trump could be the first American Tsar, eh tovarishch?

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 1) 401

He wants to have america have a "spiritual rebirth" and he's making Bushlike pronouncements from aircraft carriers.

Are you sure you're not confusing Rand Paul with Ted Cruz? Sure, Paul gave a campaign speech on an aircraft carrier to make himself look tough, but Cruz is the Dominionist here talking about spiritual rebirths.

Glad you called me on that, because I completely misquoted the spiritual rebirth bit. So to correct myself I did a little research. http://time.com/3433033/values...

It was Cruz who spoke of a rebirth.

At the Values Voters Conference where both Cruz and Paul spoke, Paul instead noted “What America needs is not just another politician or promises,” he said. “What America really needs is a revival.” and

“Where the spirit of the lord is there is liberty,” Paul said in conclusion, quoting from Corinthians 3:17. Then he said the opposite was also true. “Where there is liberty, there is always space for God.”

Comment Re:We need to understand the answer to your questi (Score 1) 643

Why do/did they think they can just outsource their ads for their online product?

Because directly courting advertisers and vetting every ad adds overhead to a process which already isn't that profitable.

Perhaps they shouldn't be in business then. Is it our responsibility to make certain that Wired or Forbes stay afloat? Additionally, outsourcing the product makes the process more flexible; ads can be quickly tested and swapped out for better performing adds.

Which of course, is a whole hellava big part of the problem. You know, a lot of us would just be happy if they didn't infect our computers with malware. Or do they have to do that too?

I'm sure there are other benefits to outsourcing ads too.

Like no need for an advertising department?

I'm not defending online advertising practices. I'm just saying that there's a good reason that things evolved into the current state of affairs. It's hard to find a solution without really understanding the problem.

The problem stated in it's simplest terms is that the amount of advertising, and it's intrusion and interacting with itself and the malware that accepting the advertising puts on your computer has reached the point where not only geeks, but normal people are installing it.

To make it even shorter, present day webertising is killing itself.

Understanding the problem means being able to answer the question you posed without simply dismissing Wired and the likes as idiots.

I'll dismiss them as unable to think beyond the status quo. They are telling me that in order to see their content, I must accept malware onto my computer. It's my computer, and I'll not accept that any more than some stranger knocking on my door and telling me I have to share my wife with him or else he'll go away.

Answers are no, and no. I keep my computer and my wife's integrity, and the guy at the door doesn't get laid, and I don't see any of Wired's content. Or the ads.

The answer in concept is simple. They need to serve their advertisements up in a way that I will consent to watch them. If they cannot place ads any other way than serving them up with a side of malware, and tracking, andspending more time and data for the ads, than the content - well goodbye Wired, not my problem.

As I've noted before, the web is terribly terribly broken. Ad's have broken it, and if as I think you are suggesting, there is no fix - it must be exactly like it is now - the future isn't too bright for places like Forbes, wired, and the whole internet.

Comment Re:What do you propose that they do? (Score 1) 643

This arms race of screaming louder and louder for attention, like the monster truck voice selling cars at the dealership, can only go so high... eventually even the Zima crowd will tire of it.

1. Yes

2. We've hit that point now.

I've "fixed: a lot of balky computers for a lot of "Grandmas", because "It's running so slowly - can't you do something? And I say - yes, yes I can! so adblock goes on, and depending on their surfing habits, noscript.

Suddenly a nice running computer that they can use on the web.

And they tell their friends "That nice young man with the weird name really helped my computer problem - you should call him!

That horse is out of the barn, and your Zima people (do they still make that crap?) are installing them. They have tired of it.

Comment Re:What do you propose that they do? (Score 1) 643

I see this type of comment fairly frequently, and I understand the sentiment, but what exactly do you propose that they do instead? Just go bankrupt? Can they somehow regain your trust by running non-abusive ads?

Change the paradigm. At this point in time there are sites out there that are becoming so ad and script laden that they actually don't work. Without an adblocker, the Internet is about 80 percent of the way toward unuseable. Who will see the ads when they hit 100 percent unusable?. The sites are the problem, not the users. It has become safer to go to porn sites than to mainstream new and story providers. Read that last sentence a couple times, and think about it.

Comment Re: Ok. (Score 1) 643

Right. Nobody is forcing me to go there.

So I can only say to them what I kept saying the RIAA for the past decades: I can live without you. Can you without me?

I can't understand why you aren't modded at 5 yet. Aside whatever I am doing for research or purchasing, sites like Forbes and Wired are 100 percent voluntary, and only as entertainment value. My need actual need for them is zero.

And if they go away, it might just free up a little banwidth - so a net plus.

Comment Re: Ok. (Score 1) 643

Or complaining that a TV station is using your electric to show you TV commercials.

If Television stations loaded malware onto my computer, I'd be plenty pissed.

You have to work pretty hard to keep your computer from turning into your personal Krojack spying machine. And if you aren't using adblock and noscript and bettersurfing - that one goes after the cookies they try to hide form you - guess what you got one.

I did an experiment and reported it here a few years ago, when the bandwidth/tracking/malware epidemic wasn't anything like is now. It's here somewhere in the bowels of Slashdot. I'm paraphrasing but here's teh basics:

I installed and activated noscript and adblock, as well as better surfing.

First I blocked everything, then started unblocking the scripts after finding out who they were On some of the popular pages, there were as many as 30 scripts that ran. So I took the time to look 'em up.

Google analytics was there - no surprise.

One surprise was the amount of information that went to facebook on one site I checked, there were maybe ten facebook serves my computer was phoning home to.

note 1 - Facebook knows all about you even if you were wise enough to never open an account there.

There was I think 2 I never figured out. Use your imagination.

Out of all these scripts, there was exactly one that was actually trying to help, and not track or infect my computer. It was a script to help with fonting across platforms and Browsers.

And now? It's even worse. I've seen websites refuse to load for some people who have their computers so bitched up with malware. Grandma is starting to use adblockers, no so much because of the reasons I gave, but because it's getting hard to surf.

The web is in critical condition, and it isn't our fault. It's a failed paradigm, where you can go to a site that should be reputable, but it serves you malware.

So if Forbes or Wired doesn't let me in, they can go cry me a fsckin river. I consider them a malware provider, and they are a malware provider, and I don't give a rats ass if they go out of business. In fact, its just fine with me if they do. Either way, I'm not looking at their stupid ads. I call it the website self suicide option.

Comment Re:OpenOffice kind of sucked (Score 1) 145

These days if I want someone to have an exact copy of a document, I produce it in LibreOffice (or OpenOffice) and export to PDF.

If exact were the metric, sure. But you don't think that the same program for two computers that you paid hundreds of dollars for shouldn't at least look sortakinda similar on both?

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 0) 401

Oh, so you want to debate what Cruz believed when he was 18?

I would suggest that you do a little research on Ted Cruz, before you deify him.

Cruz is a Christian Dominionist. Christian Domnionists have a slightly alterd version of fundamentalism. The short story of it is exaplained by his father. There are two types of leaders in Dominionism, the Priests, and the Kings.

The Priest's job in life is to spread the dominionist's word of God. That would be like Ted's father. Ted, on the other hand, is considered a Domnionist King. A dominionist King's job in life is to declare war on the enemies of God, defeat them, and take all of their wealth. What do they do with that wealth? They give it to the Dominionist priests, to further Their version of god's worth.

Check it out on Youtube, to see who you are supporting. Actual sermons, not even opinion.

To compare a Dominionist to a Randian - even as corrupted as Paul's version has become, is seriously far fetched when you know the background and facts.

Comment Re:Hammerheads in Vermont (Score 4, Insightful) 401

you might hold your nose and accept Sanders' economic policy rather than accept the Dominionist totalitarianism that the rest of the Republican candidates want.

This needs modded up. It's good to see that someone is paying attention. Dominionist is exactly where the Pubs are heading, and everyone should do some research on exactly what they are and stand for.

Slashdot Top Deals

% "Every morning, I get up and look through the 'Forbes' list of the richest people in America. If I'm not there, I go to work" -- Robert Orben

Working...