Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:When your only tool is a hammer (Score 1) 164

in my opinion, just because things like adblockers will come out doesn't mean the majority of people will use them. think of spam: why does it still exist? it's because of that 0.1% of people that view them. say 2 million people receive a piece of spam (a very low number by today's standards I'll bet) and only 0.1% view and respond to it by purchasing the service or product. that's 2000 people who bought your product. if you spent even $1000 on your spam services then you've still earned $1000. For a small business that's nice piece of cash for very little work. so they continue to send spam.

Anyway, my point is that the same thing works with something like ads on a cell phone. Sure, through viral discussion a large number of people will block their ads, but that large number will probably be quite small compared to the total number of people who opt for a FREE(!) cell phone. so google will continue to use ads to cover costs and make money - as long as the percentage of people watching and responding to ads stays high enough... but that's another story :)

French Town Tests Cashless Society 302

SamiousHaze writes to mention a Silicon.com article about an attempt in a French tourist town, Caen, to do away with cash in some locales. From the article: "Among [the locations in the trial] is an underground car park; the town hall; a bus stop which can transmit timetable information; a cinema poster which downloads video trailers to users' mobiles; a local supermarket, where people can pay for their groceries with a mobile phone, and a tourist information sign outside the historic Abbaye des Hommes. By touching the mobile against the 'Flytag' logo at each of these locations, users can pay for services or receive information straight to their phone."

Google Violates Miro's Copyright? 651

Anonymous Coward writes "In a homage to Joan Miro on his birthday, Google changed its logo as to spell out the word "Google" in Miro's style. Google has a history of changing its logo in order to commemorate events and holidays of particular significance. In this case, the homage was not well received by the Miro family or the Artists Rights Society which represents them, as reported by the Mercury News. According to Theodore Feder, president of the ARS, "There are underlying copyrights to the works of Miro, and they are putting it up without having the rights". The ARS demanded that Google removed the logo, and Google complied, though not without adding that it did not believe it was in violation of copyright. The ARS has raised similar complaints regarding Google's tribute to Salvador Dali in 2002. "It's a distortion of the original works and in that respect it violates the moral rights of the artist," Feder said." It seems to me that the art world has a glorious history of incorporating prior art into modern creations. It's amusing to me that ARS doesn't understand that.

Slashdot Top Deals

God may be subtle, but he isn't plain mean. -- Albert Einstein

Working...