Let the Simpsons be Your Free ISP 387
Anthony Fuentes writes "Looks like Homer and company are getting into the free ISP business, click here for details. Offer applies to win32 users only." Probably because Homer uses Windows - and Internet Explorer, of course, because that's the only browser you can use with this service.
One word. (Score:3)
Repeat? (Score:1)
Check out Greg's Bridge Page!
Buy 'em out boys... (Score:3)
"Gee, they have the Internet for computers now! What will they think of next?"
MMMmmm....cookies (Score:2)
On the same note, i wonder if homer recomends you accept cookies from strangers...
...what about apletts?
homer... (Score:1)
_______________________________________________
There is no statute of limitation on stupidity.
I'd be skeptical.... (Score:1)
Bill Gates episode (Score:1)
These won't last. (Score:3)
Follow this link [useit.com] for a good article on this.
This is odd.. (Score:2)
Is this ISP using the media and characters without permission? 1stup.com doesn't sound like a Fox affiliate, and could be in a bit of trouble if they've not worked out the proper deals.
Anyways, it looks to be a standard "watch adds, receive free dialup" service.. And, like Altavista's service, it looks to be easily spoofed (just dialup, and have a little daemon pulling certain content
Not that I condone that kind of activity.. I'm on a cable modem, after all
---
The Catch is... (Score:2)
You don't have to use Internet Explorer. (Score:2)
Why do you have to have remote access services installed with NT?
Specifically why advertising here is a waste: (Score:4)
Re:Buy 'em out boys... (Score:5)
I think this is only a good idea if you have one of those novelty, drinking birds that Homer used when he worked from home to keep clicking it for you.
Another of Homer's wacky inventions (Score:1)
Sounds like a call to hackers (Score:2)
hmmm... (Score:1)
Doh!
Re:These won't last. (Score:1)
Tell me how many banner ads you click on or even notice. When I look at a page, I do not even notice the banners or the ads on the side.
AOL 5.0 - FAQ uniformity? (Score:1)
Why do I have trouble using the software if I have AOL 5.0 installed?
Welcome to the new addition to ISP based FAQ's all over the internet.
Actually semi-reliable service... (Score:2)
But I have found 1stup.com to be one of the more reliable free ISP services.. and I have experience with a bunch of them. Of course, your mileage may vary based on your location, dialup, and network traffic...
I am using altavista's free ISP which is a co-branded 1stup.com offering. They have free tech support, and the one time after a new upgrade when I was having trouble with the behaviour of their software and the connection, the guy was very friendly, understanding, and helpful; they were also quite aware of the problem and it was fixed shortly thereafter. [note I do not work for them, have no connection with them other than using them as an ISP.]
Lately, (for a month and a half) it has been the most reliable free ISP out of all the ones I have tried. And I have tried:netzero, yahoo-bluelight, freei.net... I also have experience with a friend's free-pc, which is pretty good, but since they no longer are offering free computers OR free access to new customers, that is kind of meaningless at this point.
My personal suggestion is to try them all, starting with NetZero - NetZero has an easy 5-disk sneakernet install that is easy to download and install on a computer that does not have any access yet, and go from there..
I'll be using free ISPs until I save up and/or decide to dive in for the Cable Modem or DSL line. And yes, I'm using windoze.
The article's predictions are quite accurate. (Score:2)
Typical click-through rates have fallen to under 0.5%, and are continuing to fall. Advertising networks are shifting to pay-per-click systems, from pay-per-impression ones.
And the vast majority websites which advertise make pocket change with it (I remember banner advertising network uses the slogan "it's found money!"). The reason so many sites advertise is because it's free and easy to do so, and if it brings in some cash, great! A very tiny proportion of them actually support employees and such producing the content. Profitable websites are mostly ones which leverage the work of others (no offense, but
Yet Another One (Score:1)
You wouldn't really think that such services would make any money, but we all know that AOL made heaps of cash, even when the transition to flat-rate service was pinching their subscription-fee cash flow. If they can even provice comparable service to AOL, but for free, they might just do alright. Frankly, AOL's interface (esp. after v5) sounds plenty worse than an ad bar floating on my desktop. Sure, I wouldn't put up with it, but it's not exactly being marketed to me, either.
Disclaimer: I'm on a school net, and hardly in need of a dialup ISP.
A truly frightening thought (Score:2)
Burns: Who is that man, Smithers?
Smithers: It's, ahhh, Homer Simpson, sir. The irresponsible network administrator responsible for the twenty system outages this week.
Burns: Ah, yes. Keep up the good work, Simpson!
---
To continue, please press any key.... Which key's the 'any' key??
Re:This is odd.. (Score:1)
However, the offical Simpsons-site [thesimpsons.com] has a link to them (the big green button), so it should be offical...
Re:This is odd.. (Score:2)
It's pretty thinly disguised though. Usually these cobranding things are more hidden - under the fox.com domain, for example.
Re:Yet Another One (Score:2)
Plus, linux users probably use more bandwidth on average. Though I'm surprised macs aren't listed for this reason.
Re:wasnt there an episode (Score:1)
Re:Actually semi-reliable service... (Score:1)
Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
Re:This is odd.. (Score:1)
Anyways, it looks to be a standard "watch adds, receive free dialup" service.. And, like Altavista's service, it looks to be easily spoofed (just dialup, and have a little daemon pulling certain content :-)).
Sure, but consider who the service is being marketed to. Windows users only, probably the AOL/webTV crowd. Somehow, I suspect that the fraction of this demographic that is both capable of and interested in reverse-engineering their protocol to fake ad-bar feedback is negligible.
Free ISP... only fools use or provide them (Score:1)
Oh, wait... I forget I am a fool...
Re:Buy 'em out boys... (birdies) (Score:1)
might be worth it with a script like that. now all someone needs to do is figure out how to emulate the software for linux/bsd/mac/solaris/irix/xxxx
Lea
Who cares? (Score:1)
Re:These won't last. (Score:1)
This model has been proven successful.
These systems have been hacked to remove such integrated spam.
pro for end user: a free dial up connection
pro for advertiser/provider: generated revenue
con for end user: integrated spam
con for advertiser/provider: hacks to system rendering it spamless; majority of bandwidth wasted (this is built into the service they provide, though)
Should these providers find their niche, they will be a blight on future generations.
Minty Toothbrush
.oo.
..
If an infinite number of monkeys typed at an infinte number of
Re:These won't last. (Score:5)
The real question is "how much do people notice those ads?" and studies on that are still inconclusive. For some unknown reason, early INet pundits thought that Web ads would be like infomercials, where you immediately call the 800 number (or click through) and order the product.
But they aren't like that, and nobody should ever have thought they would be. Banner ads are more like billboards; they put the idea and name of the product in the back of your head.
This idea of click-through has kept web ads restricted to web companies for the most part. But that's changing. We're already seeing significant web advertising budgets coming from the motion picture industry; there's a good chance other industries will follow.
BTW, simpsons free ISP does more than just try to get banner ad money. It also advertises the Simpsons quite effectively.
PS. Kinda hard to believe nobody patented the idea of ad-supported ISPs,isn't it?
Re:MMMmmm....cookies (Score:3)
And we thought Intel was OS-indifferent... (Score:3)
--
Re:You don't have to use Internet Explorer. (Score:1)
Studies are not inconclusive. (Score:2)
Good studies give people access to the web and let people screw around and do whatever they want (or at least give them realistic tasks to perform), while tracking which ads were viewed. The result: web surfers never even look at ads, unless they are really bored or the ads are cleverly disguised in a form the viewer hasn't seen. Believe the data. [useit.com]
Claiming that because studies disagree they are, as a whole, inconclusive is a well known logical fallasy (the name of which escapes me).
My own take on the situation.. (Score:2)
"Typical click-through rates have fallen to under 0.5%, and are continuing to fall. Advertising networks are shifting to pay-per-click systems, from pay-per-impression ones."
Which is much worse, as it forces users to load things without them really wanting to (in most cases).. Kinda like those popup windows you find on "shadier" sites, like Netscape.com. Portals? Basically repackaged push that doesn't require a special client.
"The reason so many sites advertise is because it's free and easy to do so, and if it brings in some cash, great! "
This is why things like Cybergold or AllAdvantage are starting up. Paying a person for advertising impressions.. They are trivially defeated, of course, as you can't ever trust a client on a nonsecure machine
What they don't seem to understand is that advertisements don't work, and never really did. Now adays, it's easy for a person who recognises a need to go out and find information on products. Need some way of turning off lights remotely, and don't like "the clapper" ? Simply go and find a site about
---
Re:Who cares? (Score:1)
>surfing and spamming.
>
>BTW, www.nocharge.com is anonymous and no banners >(not like that matters). Great for spamming heheh
That's exactly my point. You can give them false info, from a public terminal, and have an account to freely abuse. Not that anyone with an IQ greater than that of a banana slug couldn't get someone else's account info anyway, but this lowers the bar by a large amount.
As for spamming, PLEASE don't do it. I know my pleas will fall on deaf ears, but if there is any shred of humanity in you, STOP. The original spirit of the internet is being killed quickly enough by commercialization that your actions could hurt things a LOT more than you think.
what so great about it ? (Score:1)
nothing original or creative in it ?
Isn't really an ISP, seems to me. (Score:1)
Side Note: The FAQ also says that all traffic is monitored so they can "tailor" their advertising banners. That probably doesn't sit too well with folks around here.
This is pretty base commercialism on the part of the Simpsons. They seem to have lost any counterculture satirical edge they may once have had. Now they're just another plastic lunchbox.
Re:Who cares? (Score:1)
But I digress. I am against spam in all of its forms. Really, I would almost prefer that you break into sites, so long as you didn't deface their web pages.
Re:My own take on the situation.. (Score:1)
I'm afraid you're being incredibly optimistic here. Can you realistically say that most advertising exists to inform consumers of a products' existence? I don't think so. How many people do you think are unaware of the existence of Coca-Cola? If they were to cut their advertising budget in half, would there be a significant drop in their brand recognition? I doubt it.
Only the momentum of the "consumerism" of the 1950s through 1980s keeps people advertising in this day and age.
In his book Democracy In America, Alexis De Toqueville commented on how pervasive he found commercial advertising to be in the US. He was writing in first part of the 19th century. Advertising has been with us since long before the 1950s.
I can't wait for it to die.
I can, but only because I'm afraid I don't have much choice about it.
Not really (Score:1)
Same is happenning with the banners. Yea, there're some of us out there messing with little mouse-movement macro utils and variations thereof to turn off annoying ads. So what? Ten times as many users will never have heard of these techniques. And even if they had -- the advertisers wouldn't notice until much later, and they'd still pay for click-thrus. The whole system, it seems to me, rests on two basic human characteristics -- laziness and stupidity. No, scratch that, just one -- laziness. The rest is being too lazy to go out and learn how to get around the minor annoyances which are the banner ads.
VIC-20 BEOWULFS (Score:1)
*chuckle*
Probably the only post on the page that made me laugh....
--Joe--
Re:Studies are not inconclusive. (Score:2)
I would, except that the link you provided didn't reference a study. The InternetWorld "study" was purely anecdotal. I'd be interested in seeing the studies you're referring to though.
But I'm not denying that most banner ad campaigns are failures - so are most e-commerce companies. That doesn't mean there's no market there; just that it's brand new and most companies don't use it correctly.
For example, why are movie companies suddenly pouring money into web ad research? Two words: "Blair Witch". And more importantly, there's more to web advertising than the banner ad idea. Free ISPs are one attempt, for example.
(Free ISPs and) other "deals"... (Score:3)
If I'm not mistaken, Gateway [gateway.com] and others have, for a little while, at least, been giving a year's worth of "free" access with the purchase of certain models from them.
Like many others around here, I don't expect this trend to disappear any time soon. How many co-branded credit cards are there, anyway?
One positive thing about their service is that although you have to use Win32, you get a choice of email clients, which is more than I can say for MSN (yes, I fell for that trap). You see, I didn't like the way Outlook Express handled replies (the Right Way (IMO) is to put the reply and signature after the quoted text), so I downloaded Netscape and gave it a try. Imagine my surprise when it failed to connect and retrieve my email! I checked and compared between the MS and Netscape, and the only significant difference between the two configuration screens was an option for something called Secure Password Authentication. I later found a HOWTO-like document telling how to access MSN from Linux. (I became interested in Linux after I got my computer and fell for the trap.) It turns out that UUNet [uu.net] actually provides the connectivity. A couple items in the document explained things, though:
and (near the end): Things seem to be turning out all right, though, as I've just started a new job at an ISP (and get free access (even DSL after I've been there a little bit!)), and MSN has been unable to charge my credit card (tee hee!). (They haven't mentioned anything about the $400 yet. I've got to check my contract, though, after that Slashdot story [slashdot.org] a couple weeks back -- one of the postings told of someone in Columbus, OH who was able to get out of his contract with no strings attached!)Alas, I fear I've started to ramble. Perhaps a combination of sleep deprivation and caffeine OD.
--
This post brought to you by the elements N, H, C, and O, and the alkaloid caffeine.
Cheap Linux SOB's (jk) (Score:1)
Now that I've ensured a few -1's, I'l be serious for a moment...
I wouldn't feel so left out with their Windows-only support. There are a couple of "free" computing options out there. In one corner, you can get a free computer by locking yourself into a three year contract of paid dialup access. In the other, you can get a free dialup ISP of your choice by paying for the entire computer.
Either way, you have only two free beer choices -- skunky or skunkier. Financially, free Internet seems like the better option, because you'd recoup the $400 "rebate" in half the time of a three year, $22/mo. contract. OTOH, AOL and Compuserve aren't quite as annoying about advertising as NetZero and company, but you also get locked into a contract for an inferior service with poorly specified upgrade options to DSL, which they aren't doing (much of?) anything with, or AOL/Time Warner cable access.
Dialup sucks anyway. The only thing that would get me to go back to using dialup (spare necessity) would be ~$50/mo., so I could have a separate phone line and a Win9x dialup box so I could have a cool "@TheSimpsons.com" email address. It's likely that free Internet businesses are struggling to get revenues of $15 per head just to cover their costs, so I doubt that's ever going to happen.
--
Re:MMMmmm....cookies (Score:1)
Under NT4 and NT5, I've had no real problems with IE, except that IE5 refuses to use my proxy. However, I don't use IE very often anymore, as I use Opera for 90% of my browsing.
--
Re:Actually semi-reliable service... (Score:1)
Re:This is odd.. (Score:3)
people always love getting something for nothing, even if it cost nothing to begin with...
______________________________________
um, sigs should be heard and not seen?
Re:Yet Another One (Score:1)
Back to the point: Lynx - no images - no bandwidth.
Ad-based companies (Score:1)
Not quite correct (Score:1)
If anyone is interested in learning more about free ISPs, you can visit The FreeNET List Home Page [cjb.net] or The USA's Free ISPs [nzlist.org] page
Also Available,.. (Score:1)
Explanations here:
--
Re:MMMmmm....cookies (Score:2)
the only thing stable about it is the box, and even then, only when it's already fallen over.
dave "And once you go FAT32 you're doomed, I tell ya, doooooomed!"
Re:That episode DASHED WELL IRRITATED ME!!! (Score:1)
Yeah! This is disgusting! And all the people are drawn in Yellow. And do they really expect us to believe that someone can withstand that many knocks on the head.
Although thats not the worst offender. I saw this cartoon called Road Runner. The physics in that were shockingly inaccurate. At one point, the road runner - Who I believe was the title character - even managed to walk along air without any support.
Well, yeah. Banner ads are what I'm talking about. (Score:2)
A better example of effective web advertising is affiliate programs. Give people valuable content, then try to sell them something related to that content right there, integrated with the content.
This post is another example. I'm advertising the link at the bottom of the post, and getting a pretty damn good click-through, at that (my apologies, BTW, to people who anyone who went through the previous evil link, which I will now erase from my memory to go on with my life). Not by spamming, but by posting the best stuff I can come up with and still have something to say (my karma has doubled since last week).
In the last few days, I've put up more posts on slashdot.org than in the last few weeks before that, because I've got a new web page that I want to promote. Usually I have to slap my own hands to keep myself from wasting too much time slashdotting, but for the moment I consider it productive. (yes, there's a certain irony to this which you'll understand if you look at my site - my site with banner ads, and broken ones at that... ^_^ )
Is it just me... (Score:1)
-Chris
Damn, missed my point again. (Score:2)
"Believe the Data" was the title of the article, not a suggestion regarding the article.
Re:My own take on the situation.. (Score:1)
You are missing the point. (Score:1)
Re:Isn't really an ISP, seems to me. (Score:1)
My my.. how quickly people forget. The simpsons were never about counterculture. As soon as they came on the air (way back in '90), we were bombarded by t-shirts, hats, toys, and yes, i had a plastic lunchbox. Anyone remember the "bartman"? Matt Groening never had a problem selling all this. If anyone, it is Fox that has become more restrictive of the simpsons products as their popularity has skyrocketed. I love all my simpsons junk. I don't particularily want the ISP, but i say, give it a shot. Its an interesting theme.
Where's the Profit? (Score:5)
Income: Web Advertising rates. Common rates for a banner add are in the 1 to 10 cents per "eyeball", or pair thereof, depending mostly on how well-targeted the ad is. Absent very sophisticated (and rare on an ISP level) profiling, the ISP cannot really identify what the user is interested in, in order to carefully target ads. Moreover, the free-ISP user demographic is likely to be mostly internet newbies, which is the kiss of death for an e-commerce site. So it's very unlikely that a free ISP will be getting more than 1 cent per ad. Click-throughs can be worth as much as 25 cents in some cases, though it's likely to be much less, especially since a forced click-through doesn't signify real interest and is therefore less valuable to the advertiser than a voluntary click-through. Porn sites, which often use pop-up windows to essentially force a click-through, rarely get more than 3 or 4 cents per click-through. And porn is very profitable. Posit a maximum of 5 cents per click-through of revenue.
Expense: Based on Earthlink's SEC filings, and the data of other companies (including my own employer), it is generally accepted that about $13 per user per month is the minimum cost for an unlimited time or > 15 hrs per month dialup account. That covers only direct costs, not advertising. Moreover, that level of efficiency requires on the order of 1 million users. Cost per user looks more like $20 per month for most smaller companies. Further, it tends to cost about $15 - $20 in initial costs (including advertising) to get a user. 18 months is a fairly average length of time for a user to stick with an ISP, so the ISP *must* recover its initial investment within that time to make a profit. Given the annoyingness of ads, it's unlikely that a free ISP will have a better retention rate. Let's suppose J. Random Free ISP is doing about $15 per month, at best. Further, they need to recoup $18 (to be simple) in 18 months. So they need $18 per user per month to break even. Add another 10% to make it sufficiently profitable to bother, and you need $20.
That's 2,000 ads or 400 click-throughs (or some combination thereof) per user per month. At best. Our average unlimited-time user logs about 15 hours a month. At that rate, the free ISP needs to serve each user 125 adds an hour (or 24 click-throughs) to break even. That's a pretty weak proposition. I wouldn't put any money on it.
I can see it now. (Score:2)
*Ballmer* We've succeeded in grinding the competition into the ground again today sir. We've even added a half-dozen brand new annoyances to Windows 2000!
*Gates* Excellent Smithers^H^H^H^Good job Steve.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Who's selling, who's buying, and what? (Score:2)
For-profit corporations do not willingly lose money. If they're not selling something to you, they're selling you to someone. Would you rather be they customer or the product? Which do you think gets better treatment?
Re:Your the dork here! (Score:1)
not his user info (Score:1)
The only conclusion I can draw here, is that you are an idiot
[ c h a d o k e r e ] [iastate.edu]
Re:Ad-based companies (Score:1)
A British Perspective: X-Stream (Score:1)
The first free ISP here, X-Stream [x-stream.co.uk] (unfortunatly w32 clients only), though was and is funded through advertising, taking up a couple of lines at the top of the screen.
They have also been trialling free phone calls for the past month or so, supposedly 24/7 access, although I have only had success during evenings and weekends...
One simple way to bypass the ads is by using W98SE's Internet connection sharing - the adds only appear on your host, the clients displays are clean!
A British Perspective: X-Stream (Score:1)
The first free ISP here, X-Stream [x-stream.co.uk] (unfortunatley w32 clients only), though was and is funded through advertising, taking up a couple of lines at the top of the screen.
They have also been trialling free phone calls for the past month or so, supposedly 24/7 access, although I have only had success during evenings and weekends...
One simple way to bypass the ads is by using W98SE's Internet connection sharing - the adds only appear on your host, the clients displays are clean!
Banner hiding software (Score:1)
Maybe time for a poll?
Re:Q2 (Score:1)
Re:Where's the Profit? (Score:2)
Re:These won't last. (Score:1)
treke
Actually... (Score:2)
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
treke
Re:My own take on the situation.. (Score:2)
Which is why I said:
"What they don't seem to understand is that advertisements don't work, and never really did. Now adays, it's easy for a person who recognises a need to go out and find information on products. "
The Coke adds do not serve to inform the potential customer. The market has been saturated for years, and no one is going to leave their favourite brands because of that silly lady who sips an obviously marked cup of a certain fizzy beverage, and then expresses pleasure through cooing (gack, I want to retch just thinking of it). They merely serve to reinforce the belief by existing users that their choice was right. Another example of the same is that a survey found that people who had bought brand X of automobile felt a lot better watching advertisements about it (especially the overly positive ones). Advertisements no longer teach or inform, they merely reinforce consumerism. "Gee, it sure was great I bought that thing. I'm such a smart, sexy person for doing it. Look at the other smart, sexy people enjoying these same products. I think I'll go buy more, I feel soo good."
"In his book Democracy In America, Alexis De Toqueville commented on how pervasive he found commercial advertising to be in the US. He was writing in first part of the 19th century. Advertising has been with us since long before the 1950s."
I agree. However, back in the early 20th, advertisments were less instrusive (compared to now). Gee, was that an X automobile being driven by that handsome movie star in that movie? Wow, Neo sure does like X brand of cola. Hmm, what brand of cellphone was that again? Let's all go to the lobby, and buy more popcorn. The subliminal advertisements tell me to. Wow, time to reduce the amount of time spent on the episode -- more good commercials are comming along. (Speaking of commercials, have you noticed how US TV averages between 2.4 and 2.9 minutes vs 1.7 to 2.2 minutes of advertisement time on Canadian TV?)
When some store (can't remember which) wanted to spread their name around the small city of New York, they purchased branded umbrellas and gave them to street vendors. This helped the vendors, who now had protection from the weather, and helped the consumers, who became aware of a new store that could serve their needs. Cities like New York couldn't have grown without ideas like that. Now, however, it's increasingly easy for the customer to evaluate their own needs, and select the appropriate solution with little effort. Without advertisements. If I go to a website to buy something, I don't need to see unrelated advertisements that waste my bandwidth and CPU time. A related products link could be tasteful, though.
I'm hopeful that a nice device to screen out TV advertisements will be available soon. Look at the Tivo, it's certainly possible to do it for prerecorded programs. I'd certainly pay to not see commercials. Heck, I might even watch more TV... then again, it's increasingly banal bullshit (especially stuff like "Who wants to be a millionaire?"). Oh well, at least I can still watch the Simpsons.
---
Re:(Free ISPs and) other "deals"... (Score:2)
Noveltly.
The Simpsons (r) branded free ISP is a novel thing. FreeDSL is not novel, just interesting. However, judging by the website, this is more targetted at the marketters and advertisers with wonderful statements like:
"our service will offer direct access to a large high-speed Internet audience supporting general network advertising, content affinity, and demographic targeting."
Translation:
"We will monitor the browsing habits of the people, so you'll know if they're into those 'special interest' items. And thanks to content affinity and the broadband, you'll be able to push large, streaming media of your 'special interest' items in action in order to entice them to buy.."
Yeah, I love being a captive audience.. Considering reliable broadband is available for 40$ Cdn (28$ US) in the form of Cable Modem access through a local @Home monopoly, I don't think it's really worth it..
Linux can easily provide protection from the @Home portscanning via ipchains
---
Re:Not quite correct (Score:2)
Ahh, so it will be vulnerable to whatever proxy you set IE to use, ne? The problem with these programs that use the IE API for web stuff, is that the API doesn't expose the proxy setup to the program... A very trivial man in the middle attack is very easy to setup in this situation. The thing is, do you want to show your own little ads, or do you want to simply return a blank, transparent gif?
I'll leave that as an exercise to the reader
---
Re:Studies are not inconclusive. (Score:2)
I used to believe this myself, until an experience this past week convinced me otherwise.
I manage the web site for a local public transit organization on the side: DART First State [dartfirststate.com]. We sponsor Operation Snowflake [wjbr.com] at a local radio station. Operation Snowflake reports school and business closings when the weather sucks.
As part of that sponsorship, we got banner ads on that operation snowflake page. Nothing big and exciting at all. Doesn't even offer anything.
Well, on Jan 20 (a snow day here with 3-4 inches), traffic to the transit web site doubled and hit a new high which hasn't been seen since we were giving away free bus tickets for visiting the site last July. I greped the logs and found that more than half of the traffic could be tracked back to that banner ad on the radio website. Each visitor, once on the site, on average visited four other pages.
Best I can guess is the following occured a lot:
Re:My own take on the situation.. (Score:1)
Oh, but they do. Even perfectly sane and intelligent people who are totally convinced that they don't let themselves be influenced by ads are much more inclined to buy something if they've heard about it before, and prefer it to the unknown brand. Amn is a creature of habit.
Re:Yet Another One (Score:1)
a) usable over SSH where X is not available;
b) operable with exactly four keys for most normal purposes;
c) can be used where your system is so badly screwed that you can't get X to display locally.
Anyway, there are lynx-alikes (eg w3m, links) which DO have mouse support.
Thus, you lose graphics (which for certain sites is a distinct advantage), and plugins (which are very rarely have anything of interest anyway).
Also, using the keys IS faster; it means you have to learn keystrokes, but I spent most of the summer using Microsoft Word as a secretary (audio/copy typing), and it is radically faster to use hotkeys than to take your hands off the keyboard. Mice are good for lowering the entry barrier to computer use, but they are no panacea.
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Per day. :)
--
I think this is AltaVista (Score:1)
Ad Targeting (Score:1)
I think a good example of this is slashdot. All the banners I have seen on slashdot have been geek or linux oriented.
Some companies, like ThinkGeek, I clicked on because their banners looked neat (and who doesn't want a 'grepmaster' mug?) and I'll probably buy something from them.
Other banners, like the one for AIBO, put the product name in my head, but I would never actually buy one.
Then there are banners for stuff that you would buy, but you already have one, like computers from Penguin Computing. It would be much more effective if they could sell in computer stores alongside the windoze PCs, but that is a very exclusive market.
Re:The Catch is... (Score:1)
Am I the only one that thinks this is really an evil Tamagochi plot here?
Re:And we thought Intel was OS-indifferent... (Score:1)
I hate Freewwweb (Score:1)
Their $15/incident live tech support is laughable, but it took 3 emails (the final being very stern), and over a week of no email (and everyone receiving messages that my box is over quota) before they contacted me back, at my work email, saying that they can wipe all my mail out.
As of this date, I still have no email access.
And don't get me started on NetZero. Their nav bar had serious memory leaks, and would lock any of our computers solid if we ever went into command.com.
There has yet to be, IMO, a reliable free ISP. You can't live off advertising forever.
They should have called it what it was in the show (Score:1)
Gramatic errors vea software bugs (Score:1)
[Daemon as in Unix background program NOT demon as in biblical evil being]
Anyway
It is posable the problem is in Slashdot not the poster...
Keep in mind ANY CGI has to do some filtering and transformation to keep crackers from sending garbage...
Junkbuster script (Score:1)
If you like spam (not the tm), you'll love 1stUp (Score:2)
It sure looks to me like they reserve the right to sell your name, address, e-mail address, etc.
Contrast this with the policies for NetZero, FreeI, FreeWWWeb. In fact, FreeI doesn't even collect personal identification data in the first place.
More evolution in action. (Score:1)
Crack the software that runs the ads.
Set up a daemon that fakes a click on every nth advert.
Surf for free indefinitely.
In fact - even better, generate a Linux client that fakes the clicks, run that on your firewall (you do have a firewall system, right?) and use your desktop box for regular surfing.
And yes, this is (sort of) about evolution. These companies have set up an environment which is subject to exploit by those who live within it. Learn to exploit that environment better and you'll survive better :-)
Re:Sounds like a call to hackers (Score:2)
Re:MMMmmm....cookies (Score:2)
Re:Buy 'em out boys... (birdies) (Score:2)
might be worth it with a script like that. now all someone needs to do is figure out how to emulate the software for linux/bsd/mac/solaris/irix/xxxx
I hacked up a quick program in Delphi (doing one in C++ now) to keep Alladvantage fooled for me. It takes about 30 seconds to make something that will move the mouse from the top of the screen to the bottom, click the banner, and start over. Works real well too.>:)
Kintanon
Shameless plug follows:
www.alladvantage.com
EBS-939
Sign up and kneel to the all powerful lord of rampant consumerism! All hail the dollar!
Re:Where's the Profit? (Score:2)
Hmm... if it costs about $13/user to provide 15 hours/mo of ISP service, then how can Galaxy Internet Services [gis.net] afford to let me be online about 180 hours a month for only $9.95?
Misrepresenting the Truth? (Score:2)
Anthony Fuentes writes "Looks like Homer and company are getting into the free ISP business, click here for details. Offer applies to win32 users only." Probably because Homer uses Windows - and Internet Explorer, of course, because that's the only browser you can use with this service.
What the actual ISP page said:
You must have a copy of Microsoft Internet Explorer, version 4.0 or higher, to access the free Internet system, but you may surf the web with any browser. Click on the following link to download the latest version of Internet Explorer.
Wow... there's a difference. Slashdot reports that Internet Explorer is the only browser you can use with this service, where the actual page says that you can use any browser to surf the web, but you must have a copy of IE 4.0. Maybe because Microsoft bundled additional libraries with IE 4.0 in the form of a service pack? You think?
I object to this editorialization of "news". Why does the news on Slashdot have to be anti-Microsoft? "News for Nerds"? Or "News for Linux users"? Why don't we call it what it really is? I run Linux on a dedicated Linux box. It's really stable, hasn't crashed in 3 months. Linux is nice, I like it. But face it: it's a cheap Unix hack. That's all it was designed to be, that's all it will ever be, until they make it "user-friendly." "Intuitive". It's not, and no one can successfully argue with me.
So let's start being a little less biased in reporting "news", shall we?
- Burton Simmmons
mrwhite@d198-192.uoregon.edu (linux box)
Re:Your the dork here! (Score:2)
---
Oh no! This is an _illegal_ sig! It has three dashes instead of two!