Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Fast (Score 1) 345

I think you know incredibly little about me, and certainly not enough to state that I "expect to find the solution somewhere else".

Your latest post amounts to an Ad hominem thrust, followed by a deflecting "we're all different". While carefully avoiding further discussion of the uselessness of the peer-review process.

Well played, sir.

Comment Re:Fast (Score 1) 345

I think the answer is not so simple.

A small group of anyone you care to pick has the potential of being right, and of being wrong. In ways that are, frankly, impossible to predict.

A large group is quite likely wrong in its majority views, and certainly wrong in a greater number of ways. But it is also more likely to contain one or more correct views.

It is like comparing the +5 comments to every comment. Personally, I prefer to browse at -1.

Comment Re:No problem (Score 2) 654

The advertisers need to understand that they really can't win this war

Well, not in this manner, no.

I remember when Wired used to provide stories. Many were long and exactly the same as their print magazine.

Today, Wired has sold out to the "must please Google's absurd 'mobile-friendly' standard". Translation: You must have a bunch of giant graphics (with little or no text) first. Or else Google will down-mod you. Actual text content is worthless, so cut that back. Here, have some white bread.

So the Wired of today is worthless, and won't be missed.

As to why this move by Wired will fail? People share links with others. Let's say, hypothetically, that you have subscribed to Wired or turned off your ad block. Wired serves you an article. You say "Gee, this article is good. Me gonna share it." You share it. People email bomb you to complain about how they can't load the page. There is no rinse and repeat.

Comment Re:More nation-wrecking idiocy (Score 1) 592

Similarly, there may be a long straight stretch which is divided into two passing zones, one for each direction. If you have an oncoming vehicle at the start of the stretch there would often be plenty of room to complete a pass after it goes by, but now you only have half of your 'passing allowed' zone left.

This is not how it works. There are two common passing scenarios.

(1) Passing is provided every so many miles, with signs telling you when it is coming up and when you must "keep right except to pass". Routine, easy, safe. No biggie.

(2) Regarding the solid double yellow line and when it changes to say you can pass, this is based on road conditions. When you see passing dashes for one direction, that is because it is safe for them to do so. When it is ok for both directions to pass, the line with be a single dashed yellow line.

In summary, passing on the highway is easy (in the U.S.) Drivers are much better here than in Canada (where speed limits are typically artificially low, and rarely change as you drive) All in all, the American driving experience is great. The only limit is the speed limit (up to 70 in this state and depending on road conditions) and how much gas you can afford (not been this cheap in a decade or more).

Comment Re:No such thing (Score 1) 355

There is a lot more than click rate behind advertising.

Click rate is coarse, binary. Advertisers would like to know how long we stared at a product. How many people typed the name/keywords of the ad into YouTube. How long after a product was advertised do we retain information about the product. And a thousand other things.

So, turning all that around, if we (slashdotters) provide some of that, we don't have to necessarily "click on a link" to give advertisers something they want.

We (/.ers) love to comment and critique and reference. I think we need to address advertising like no one else ever has. And in so doing, help change the game. Because the game is broken, like shrapnel, thanks to the ongoing arms race.

Ads delivering malware, and sites serving white space instead of content? This can't continue...

Comment Re:No such thing (Score 1) 355

I use Ghostery, a 16MB hosts file and no Javascript unless I feel like it. Forbes balked. I turned the JS on. Forbes balked. I went with no hosts file. Forbes balked. Forbes went in my hosts file.

Slashdot should set up an ad group, with a couple of "outside of Slashdot or the ad community" members, to try to come up with something. I'd volunteer to help out. The thing is, Slashdot has the best comment+moderation+meta moderation system on the Internet. And I'm sure they could pull off something equally impressive regarding ads. If they lead, rather than followed.

Comment Re:No such thing (Score 1) 355

If you give people the ability to vote on if an comment is good or not, all it does is punish all but the most popular (and highest reward) comments (Eg a WoW comment might be favored over a comment for toothpaste, which might be favored over StartsWithABang's blog).

Welcome to Slashdot.

Clearly, the ad system should be modelled after the comment/moderation system. With subscriptions allowing a user to increase their ad karma. Enough bucks, and person #1 get no ads. Some bucks, and some ad voting, works for person #2. Person #3 pays nothing, sees the most ads, but can still vote given ads up or down. Metamoderation happens by tallying up our individual votes. "Sorry, Clearasil, but no one wants to look at your ads any more. Goodbye."

Slashdot Top Deals

In the future, you're going to get computers as prizes in breakfast cereals. You'll throw them out because your house will be littered with them.