> it is bad enough when they have the little ghost bugs of their > channel logo/whatever in the corner; but they also have the relatively > HUGE animated/video adlets which overwrite OUR SCREEN with bullshit > advertising their next shitty show we don't want to watch OVER TOP THE SHOW WE ARE WATCHING
It was a gradual process. But I found a solution.
I simply quit watching.
If I can't find it on Netflix, then it doesn't exist.
I can find plenty to watch in the limited time that I have for watching TV. There are better things to do in life. Yes really.
Go out and buy a Raspberry Pi starter kit. Learn to play a musical instrument. Read a book. (horrors!) Watch fantastic lectures on YouTube. (I'm currently watching videos from Clojure Conj, and watching a series on introduction to advanced mathematics, currently in groups, rings, etc -- which I want to absorb in order to work on polynomial factoring in software.)
If half of advertisers' budgets are wasted, as they say, it looks like they have found a solution.
Spend the wasted half of their budget on litigation. That will fix everything and make people want to watch ads again. Only ads. All ads. All the time.
Advertisers seriously need to get legislation passed requiring everyone to have Google Glass.
My cry-tear-ia: * not flashing * not swf * NO AUDIO * NO POPUPS * not pr0n, ever * not a page filled with ads, and a tiny bit of 'content'
If an advertiser has unobtrusive ads, providing information about goods / services offered, I wouldn't mind. But it has gone way, way beyond this.
Here's a clue: if I am looking for the thing that you offer for sale -- I WILL FIND YOU and I WILL CONTACT YOU.
The whole approach of every vendor with their hand out trying to directly get in front of my eyeballs is UNSUSTAINABLE and UNSCALEABLE from my PoV.
(some) web ads, and tv ads are bad for the same reason that Spam is bad. There a million vendors out there that want to directly contact me. That simply cannot work if I want to have a life.
It needs to work the other way. If I want what you offer for sale, I will find and contact you. Not vice versa.
Google's search results are Google's opinion of what is most relevant to your query.
Other search engines, or persons may have a different opinion. Advertisers definitely have a different opinion. People engaging in the evil practice of SEO don't give a **** about the relevance to your query.
I seem to recall Google won a court case against some vile SEO scum, I think it was called Search King (iirc). Search King was crying boo hoo because Google adjusted it's algorithms to outsmart the way evil Search King was gaming Google's results. Google's argument was a free speech argument, that the search results, even though mechanically generated, were Google's opinion about what is most relevant.
the Court held that plaintiff was unlikely to prevail because Google's determination of how a page is ranked in response to a search query is an expression of opinion protected by the First Amendment
The EU wants to tell Google what it's opinion should be about the relevance of search results.
So now we know why they never take a law off the books.
Who knows when some government official may someday need to twist and stretch some ancient irrelevant law to achieve some end that cannot honestly be achieved by the intended meaning and purpose of any current modern law.
You should have the right to be forgotten whenever someone submits the proper notification to Google that you should be forgotten.
Google should have a simple machine callable API so that automated programs from the RIAA / MPAA can submit "right to be forgotten" requests without human intervention.
Sites suspected of piracy could be forgotten. Embarrassing stories about copyright maximalists infringing others' copyrights could be forgotten. Stories of bumbling clown circus copyright trolls could be forgotten. Stories which suggest wrong thinking, or modes of thinking contrary to established political policy could be forgotten. Unfavorable stories about Internet Service Providers and Mobile Wireless Network operators could be forgotten.
Such a tool would make the world a wonderful place. :-)
It seems every slow growing phenomenon results in the entrenched dinosaurs burying their heads in the tarpits. Let's see:
Switching from the reliable horse and buggy to noisy, smelly, unreliable automobiles that can break your arm when cranking them. Check.
Switching from newspaper and books to radio. Check.
Switching from radio to television. Check.
Switching from snail mail to e-mail. Check.
Switching from land line phones to cell phones. Check.
Switching from printed books to e-books. Check.
Switching from brick and mortar stores to online stores. Check.
Switching from Microsoft Windows to mobile OSes like Android or Chromebooks, for uses where it makes sense. Check.
Switching from broadcast and cable tv to internet streaming . . . um, this is not happening. It will never happen. You are crazy . . . um, are you some kind of a radical criminal pirate terrorist or something?
Of course, these Golden Keys would never fall into the wrong hands*.
*wrong hands includes but is not limited to: the NSA, CIA, FIB, other government agencies, state and local police forces, and other criminal organizations.
I'm sure it was an honest mistake. The PRS droid must have heard the guy's original compositions and thought to itself 'hey, this sounds good! It must be something we own! This sounds better than anything I've seen in our catalog!'.
> Considering that opposing this bill puts you on the > side of sex traffickers and child exploitation . . .
This is the fundamental problem. We need to get past this idea that being against a bad solution means we are somehow in favor of keeping the problem that is was supposed to solve.
What? You're against a bill that tries to catch kidnappers by allowing the government to search any private home, anytime, anywhere, with no judicial oversight? You must be in favor of kidnappers!
On the post: French Publishers Think They Can Fix Online Advertising By Suing The Company Behind AdBlockPlus
Re: Re: Acceptable Ads
> channel logo/whatever in the corner; but they also have the relatively
> HUGE animated/video adlets which overwrite OUR SCREEN with bullshit
> advertising their next shitty show we don't want to watch OVER TOP THE SHOW WE ARE WATCHING
It was a gradual process. But I found a solution.
I simply quit watching.
If I can't find it on Netflix, then it doesn't exist.
I can find plenty to watch in the limited time that I have for watching TV. There are better things to do in life. Yes really.
Go out and buy a Raspberry Pi starter kit.
Learn to play a musical instrument.
Read a book. (horrors!)
Watch fantastic lectures on YouTube. (I'm currently watching videos from Clojure Conj, and watching a series on introduction to advanced mathematics, currently in groups, rings, etc -- which I want to absorb in order to work on polynomial factoring in software.)
On the post: French Publishers Think They Can Fix Online Advertising By Suing The Company Behind AdBlockPlus
Re:
On the post: French Publishers Think They Can Fix Online Advertising By Suing The Company Behind AdBlockPlus
Re: Half of the budget on advertising is wasted
Spend the wasted half of their budget on litigation. That will fix everything and make people want to watch ads again. Only ads. All ads. All the time.
Advertisers seriously need to get legislation passed requiring everyone to have Google Glass.
On the post: French Publishers Think They Can Fix Online Advertising By Suing The Company Behind AdBlockPlus
Re:
* not flashing
* not swf
* NO AUDIO
* NO POPUPS
* not pr0n, ever
* not a page filled with ads, and a tiny bit of 'content'
If an advertiser has unobtrusive ads, providing information about goods / services offered, I wouldn't mind. But it has gone way, way beyond this.
Here's a clue: if I am looking for the thing that you offer for sale -- I WILL FIND YOU and I WILL CONTACT YOU.
The whole approach of every vendor with their hand out trying to directly get in front of my eyeballs is UNSUSTAINABLE and UNSCALEABLE from my PoV.
(some) web ads, and tv ads are bad for the same reason that Spam is bad. There a million vendors out there that want to directly contact me. That simply cannot work if I want to have a life.
It needs to work the other way. If I want what you offer for sale, I will find and contact you. Not vice versa.
On the post: French Publishers Think They Can Fix Online Advertising By Suing The Company Behind AdBlockPlus
Acceptable Ads
On the post: Defining The Patent Troll
Patent Troll is too offensive a term
I recommend using NPE (Nauseating Putrid Excrement) which all parties to a discussion can agree puts the NPEs in a much more positive light.
On the post: Forget EU's Toothless Vote To 'Break Up' Google; Be Worried About Nonsensical 'Unbiased Search' Proposal
Re: Re: Re: What do you expect from the EU?
Then the book.
Then the faux news talking head.
On the post: Forget EU's Toothless Vote To 'Break Up' Google; Be Worried About Nonsensical 'Unbiased Search' Proposal
Re: What do you expect from the EU?
Those who can't, become managers.
Those who can't manage, teach on the subject.
Those who can't teach, become consultants.
Those who can't succeed in consulting, run for office.
On the post: Forget EU's Toothless Vote To 'Break Up' Google; Be Worried About Nonsensical 'Unbiased Search' Proposal
Search results are an OPINION
Other search engines, or persons may have a different opinion. Advertisers definitely have a different opinion. People engaging in the evil practice of SEO don't give a **** about the relevance to your query.
I seem to recall Google won a court case against some vile SEO scum, I think it was called Search King (iirc). Search King was crying boo hoo because Google adjusted it's algorithms to outsmart the way evil Search King was gaming Google's results. Google's argument was a free speech argument, that the search results, even though mechanically generated, were Google's opinion about what is most relevant.
Just doing some quick googling . . . see this.
The EU wants to tell Google what it's opinion should be about the relevance of search results.
On the post: DOJ Using Antiquated 1789 'All Writs Act' To Try To Force Phone Manufacturers To Help Unlock Encrypted Phones
So now we know why
Who knows when some government official may someday need to twist and stretch some ancient irrelevant law to achieve some end that cannot honestly be achieved by the intended meaning and purpose of any current modern law.
On the post: EU Thinks It Has Jurisdiction Over The Global Internet: Says Right To Be Forgotten Should Be Global
Everyone should have this right
You should have the right to be forgotten whenever someone submits the proper notification to Google that you should be forgotten.
Google should have a simple machine callable API so that automated programs from the RIAA / MPAA can submit "right to be forgotten" requests without human intervention.
Sites suspected of piracy could be forgotten.
Embarrassing stories about copyright maximalists infringing others' copyrights could be forgotten.
Stories of bumbling clown circus copyright trolls could be forgotten.
Stories which suggest wrong thinking, or modes of thinking contrary to established political policy could be forgotten.
Unfavorable stories about Internet Service Providers and Mobile Wireless Network operators could be forgotten.
Such a tool would make the world a wonderful place. :-)
On the post: After Calling Cord Cutting 'Purely Fiction' For Years, Nielsen Decides Just Maybe It Should Start Tracking Amazon, Netflix Viewing
Slow Growing Phenomenon
Switching from the reliable horse and buggy to noisy, smelly, unreliable automobiles that can break your arm when cranking them. Check.
Switching from newspaper and books to radio. Check.
Switching from radio to television. Check.
Switching from snail mail to e-mail. Check.
Switching from land line phones to cell phones. Check.
Switching from printed books to e-books. Check.
Switching from brick and mortar stores to online stores. Check.
Switching from Microsoft Windows to mobile OSes like Android or Chromebooks, for uses where it makes sense. Check.
Switching from broadcast and cable tv to internet streaming . . . um, this is not happening. It will never happen. You are crazy . . . um, are you some kind of a radical criminal pirate terrorist or something?
On the post: T-Mobile Still Doesn't Understand (Or Simply Doesn't Care) That Their 'Music Freedom' Plan Tramples Net Neutrality
Re:
On the post: NSA Chief Warns Of Pending Cyberattack... Which He Wants To Make Easier With Backdoors
The Golden Key
Of course, these Golden Keys would never fall into the wrong hands*.
*wrong hands includes but is not limited to: the NSA, CIA, FIB, other government agencies, state and local police forces, and other criminal organizations.
On the post: Class Action Filed Against Rightscorp For Shaking Down People With Robocalls
Re:
On the post: When A Fourth Of Small Businesses In England Complain About Collection Societies, It's No Coincidence
Re: PRS
On the post: Reuters, Re/code Care So Very Much About 'Conversation' That They're Asking Commenters To Leave
they did not throw out the baby with the bathwater
On the post: EU Parliament Wants To Break Up Google... Because It's Big & American Or Something
They're just doing their job
The job of the EU is to punish companies for being successful.
On the post: FISA Judge To Yahoo: If US Citizens Don't Know They're Being Surveilled, There's No Harm
New interpretation of the 4th amendment
On the post: Human Rights Groups Ask Senate To Reject Proposed Sex Trafficking Law That Strips Long-Held Protections For Website Owners
Who's side are you on?
> side of sex traffickers and child exploitation . . .
This is the fundamental problem. We need to get past this idea that being against a bad solution means we are somehow in favor of keeping the problem that is was supposed to solve.
What? You're against a bill that tries to catch kidnappers by allowing the government to search any private home, anytime, anywhere, with no judicial oversight? You must be in favor of kidnappers!
Next >>