NamelessMofo’s Techdirt Profile

On the post: More Lawsuits Against Google… To Protect The Children

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 05 May, 2006 @ 05:49am

Well, when you look into it

If you just read the headline, then you will be quick to say this is stuipid, or parents should be forced to raise their kids, not the internet, television or video games. etc etc etc.

But, if Google is selling advertising to child porn sites, this is another whole ball of wax.

I find that Google isn't selective in how they get their monies. If your a child porn website, Google will take your money and promote your website just like any other website. Google just wants money, they do not care about ensuring quality and acceptable content is promoted on the web.

Google allows phishing websites, websites filled with trojans and other viruses, and obviously now, child porn websites to proliferate on the web. These sites just pay Google X amount of dollars, and Google ranks their pages #1 and puts them first as sponsored links.

I DO NOT BELIEVE for one second that Google monitors these websites or removes illegal or inappropriate websites from their ad program. Face it, they don't care, its just more money for them. They might have guidelines and such, but this does not explain how these websites tend to always get ranked #1 and appear as sponsored links, even with searching for something completely unrelated.

Look, there are stringent laws and rules about advertising in newspapers, radio, and television. They can't have swear words in them, can't sell cigarettes or drugs (like in Canada, drug advertising is illegal), etc. A television, newspaper or radio station violating these rules may be fined, or even have their broadcast license revoked.

There needs to be these kinds of rules on the web. While you can't enforce the WORLD WIDE WEB with general rules, you can ensure companies like Google, who proliferate web advertising, can take more care to advertise for quality and appropriate websites.

Before speaking trash about this article, realize that Google does need to be taken down a notch or two. If they are not selective about who they advertise for, then they desever to be named in these kinds of lawsuits. Google can't just take peoples money and ignore the content they are trying to advertise, Google needs to take respect to become a RESPONSIBLE advertiser.

Google has this motto "Do No Evil", it doesn't say anything against spreading it around or being the axis of evil.

On the post: Misplaced Blame Over iTunes Pricing

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 04 May, 2006 @ 07:12pm

Why should the price go up?

Recently, I have been on a bit of a spending spree on music. I wanted to get the latest Coldplay, Pearl Jam and Tool CD's. I have been buying individual songs from other artists, but these were the first full CD's I have wanted in a long time. I was about to just buy them from the iTMS when I decided to check out Futureshop.ca.

What a surprise, I could buy each of those albums for $9.99.

So, I not only get the songs, but the CD and the Case along with all the artwork. Sure, I spent a little more money on the gas to get the the store, but I was on my way home from work and it was a short excursion.

I think Apple and the Music industry need their heads read because $.99 songs and $9.99 albums (actually, most albums are more then $9.99 because Apple includes stupid bonus videos nobody wants) is freaking rediculous. There is NO cost overhead. I am sure Apple is running their iTMS for cheap, they are their own equipment suppliers. I can get a domain and server space from GoDaddy for $5 a month, I know the iTMS is a little more complicated, but web space isn't that expensive these days.

The fact there is no physical media or materials involved means that iTMS songs should be like $0.50 each and the album cost $5.00.

BTW, the new Tool CD comes in a nifty case that includes stereographic glasses and artwork. Leave it to Tool to actually make the CD case part of the product and desireable. You can't even buy Tool from the canadian version of thes store.

I will not pay for iTMS again. It is a rip off unless they drop prices by at least 50%. Both Apple and the RIAA are ripping iTMS customers off because they are too lazy to get up off their asses and go to a store and get the same music for the same price, or even cheaper!

On the post: Would Spam Work Better If It Were Funny?

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 04 May, 2006 @ 08:23am

What, it ISN'T funny?

Sorry, when I get spam from Georgeta Demertitis about CtAl1ds and V1aGta or from Nilofer Blakeslee asking me if I want to be an FBI or CIA agent, I find that pretty humerous.

The way to make SPAM work, is not to make it spam, period. If spam was legitimate advertising for legitimate products by legitimate companies, then I would consider looking at spam. The problem is, they tend to be from phishing websites or scam artists trying to rip me off or finding ways of corrupting my computer.

The best way to make spam work is to get rid of the scam!

On the post: Professors Say Ban The Laptops

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 03 May, 2006 @ 11:29am

First

Any real professor shouldn't care if students talk, browse the web, or play games in class. This ain't grade school or high school, and as long as the talking or playing isn't disrupting the class, a professor shouldn't care what is going on. It is the loss of the students if they don't pay attention in class, not of the professor.

Having said that, I do agree that laptops should be banned from the classroom, as they ARE disruptive. Hearing the rapid clicking of someone just brainlessly transcribing the course notes is just annoying. If someone is playing solitaire or browsing the web in front of you, it is hard to concentrate when there is obvious distractions. Also, I do believe that the purpose of a lecture it to engage the professor in debate or ask questions, and for the most part, Absorb the information flowing in the room rather then just getting it down on paper.

When I was in university, by my sophomore year, I stopped taking notes in class, period. I found that by paying attention to what the professor was saying, and understanding the information he was presenting, I learned more and did better in the courses then madly taking down notes that are largely available in your course text.

Laptops are great educational tools, but leave them out of the classroom.

On the post: Surprise! The War On Movie Piracy Isn't Working

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 03 May, 2006 @ 11:23am

Sorry I don't buy it, litterally

When Hollywood makes a good movie, I don't care about spending $10 to see it. Or $5 to rent it, and if its really good, $25 to buy the movie (haven't bought a DVD in almost 2 years). I can't stand when Hollywood rips me off time and time again by over hyping a movie the producers, directors, and actors know is crap. Hollywood is paying off movie critics to give it positive reviews (think Ebert isn't getting paid off, look at many of his thumbs up movies over the years).

The idea that Hollywood is losing $6 billion a year from piracy is a JOKE. What really is happening is that Hollywood can no longer STEAL $6 billion from customers who would otherwise unknowingly buy, rent or pay a ticket to see one of the hundreds of crappy movies Hollywood flings out every month. When these customers download a movie, it just proves they were justified for not paying a dime for it in the first place.

Hollywood is staying "Don't Steal Movies", my message to Hollywood, "Stop stealing OUR MONEY!".

On the post: DirecTV Install Techs Claim They Were Forced To Lie To Customers

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 03 May, 2006 @ 06:26am

When do customer representatives not lie?

I mean, this is common practice for a customer representative to not divulge the whole truth.

If I ask a sales associate if something is going on sale in a day or two they say they don't know even though they have all the sales promotions sitting in the coffee room.

Ask a cable tech if it is necessary to plug in the phone line and he is just going to say yes.

Ask a technical support staff why their product sucks and they are just going to tell you that the problem is at your end, their product is perfect and works perfectly.

I mean, I take anything said by any company representative with a grain of salt. Most times I know they are straight up lying to my face but what can you do? I have called people on it from time to time, and it just means you get less service and courtesy then you should expect.

The Internet is a wonderful place as you can find out for yourself the truth (or something close to it anyways). Articles like this will promote the truth and people like these techs can let the world know (or at least the people in Florida who should care about this) know what to think about their cable company.

On the post: Typosquatting A Growth Industry

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 01 May, 2006 @ 01:15pm

Google sucks

I had a website and made the mistake of enabling Google Ads on it while I was developing it. Through contant previews and testing of the website, Google claimed I was inflating my click through rates and thus banned me from being part of their program. I generated $.53 woth of revenue in one week and was banned for abusing Google Ads! Can you believe it?

Yet, Google contantly allows crap websites that are nothing more then ad portals to proliferate on the web. How many parked pages and "mis-typed" websites are generating thousands of Google Ad dollars and offer no real service. These people are blatantly violating Googles rules and regulations and yet are allowed to continue in the program.

The simple fact is, ANY website generating enough hits is worthy for Google to whore themselves on. My little website, despite milking Google out of a whopping $.53 wasn't big enough for Google to care about. They banned me after a review because, simply put, it wasn't worth their while to keep ads on a website that wasn't showing any traffic flow (um, because it was new maybe?). Instead, a website that has thousands of misdirected hits is worthy enough to keep on Google's Ad program, because it just increases Google's revenue generating ad exposure.

How many garbage websites are ranked number 1 simply because they paid Google enough money to be ranked above legit websites. Almost every sponsored link is just some spam generating BullSh*t phishing website.

I don't believe in an instant that Google "Does no evil". They target legit websites for violating their rules and regulations and blatantly overlook those crap sites that are abusing them left, right and center simply because they do, after all, having significant traffic flow, enough for Google to keep them running. Google is promoting nefarious web activity and is funding spam and phishing websites by completely ignoring any website that pays enough money or generate enough hits.

On the post: Here's An Idea: If You Don't Like What's On TV, Don't Watch It

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 01 May, 2006 @ 12:58pm

How about this

Just let us pick the individual channels we want. Stop trying to lump content together.

How many crap channels are lumped in with the big 4 networks? Having said that, how much crap is on those big 4 networks.

But this kind of ranting is rediculous because if your are concerned what your kids are watching at home, get a freaking Clue!

There are all kinds of televisions and cable boxes that let you lock out channels. If you don't want your kids watching HBO at 10pm, then lock out that channel. The V-Chip was designed to ensure that you can set the rating of the shows allowed to air.

Too often, parents want the rest of the world to raise their kids. They want the game companies to be sued if their underage child plays GTA. They want the cable companies to ensure that there is only family friendly programming, they want the internet to become a bland wasteland of family values.

Parent HAVE TO BE PROACTIVE, period. Get involved in your kids lives and stop being selfish and self serving. Most parents are just to involve in their own affairs and don't spend enough time with their children. If your TV or Cable box doesn't allow channels to be locked out, get a new TV or cable box and LEARN how to use it.

The cable companies can't raise your kids, and not everyone in North America has 2.5 children and a white picket fenced yard. Leave the programming as is for those of use that are mature enough to enjoy it, and just learn how to be better parents and deal with it.

On the post: Google Claims IE's Searchbar Is Uncompetitive

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 01 May, 2006 @ 12:07pm

Pot calling Kettle black

Look, MS deserves most of the crap they get because of their questionable business "ethics" in the past, but I tire of these double standards.

Guess what. Google is the default search engine for FireFox, Safari, Opera, and a slew of desktop and browser toolbars.

Is Microsoft crying over Google being the defactor search engine in all these cases?

No, instead, microsoft is promoting their Own search technology in their OWN browser for their Own OS. I mean, to put it to Google another way, if you HAD your own Browser and HAD your own OS, would you ensure that people could select MSN as their default search engine too? F*ck no! You would ensure that its Google tools and technology for every freaking search, mail, spell checker feature in that bastard OS.

Yes, Google does dominate the search engine arena, but that is ONLY because they are guilty of the same anti-competitive practices that Microsoft has done in the past. Firefox did not ask my which search engine I want to use, it Defaulted to Google, so too did Safari and Opera. Google is forming relationships with anybody that will sleep with them, and that is a very long list.

IE7 WILL allow you to select Google in a simply options panel, change it once, and forget about it JUST LIKE FIREFOX AND SAFARI AND OPERA, etc. Why does everybody bitch when its an MS feature but the SAME thing happens with every other OS and browser.

So, get over it, period! Most of you won't even use IE7 when it comes out, you will stick with Firefox and stick with Google because that was the default search engine that Firefox set up.

On the post: Will Software As Services Wipe Out The Software Piracy Question?

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 01 May, 2006 @ 09:41am

No, it won't stop piracy

Software as a service will require subscriptions or some kind of registration program. I doubt companies like Microsoft or Apple will simply offer free online versions of Office or iLife without some pay for use senario.

So, while a person cannot physically copy and install the application as a service, they WILL find ways to cicumvent the registration and subscription logic. I.e. give away free registrations to users or find ways of unlocking the service for unpaid usage, or simply share registration usernames and passwords.

On the post: Supreme Court's Surprising Interest In Patent Law

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 01 May, 2006 @ 08:42am

Just wondering

If I could patent the process of filing frivolous lawsuits against big companies for the purpose of hopefully getting a large settlement in the millions of dollars range in order to make the case go away.

Once I get that patent then I would sue that dumbass woman that spilled hot coffee on her and won millions from McDonalds.

On the post: Who Else But The Newspapers Would Bank On eBooks?

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 24 Apr, 2006 @ 11:44am

Failed utterly

With podcasting being the current trend, cellphones, PDA's and a wide variety of notebooks, you would think that newspapers would have developed some form of solution that would keep them as a viable source of news and information in the digial age.

But, alas, newspapers (like the music industry) failed to recognize the potential for the Internet marketplace and so are being quickly run out of town by the prevalence of quick news blurbs and blog type sites that we all know and love.

Sure, some newspapers have tried to be digitally viable. I have heard of solutions in the past like having the daily news printed off your printer fresh each morning. But, for the most part, newspapers haven't broken into this market the way they should have, and are still stuggling to find a voice in the digital era.

I get tired of getting calls from newspapers asking me if I want to subscribe to their paper rags. I did get a free trial subscription for several weeks, and this is what I have found out:

1) By the time I read the newspaper in the morning, it is covering news I have already read online the night before.

2) A LOT of the stories are simple rewrites of the kind of articles often found online. For instance, any newspaper that has a technology column usually regurgitates news posted on Slashdot or even Techdirt.

3) Have to sift through pages of ads to find something I am interested in reading, and 80% of the content in a newspaper is of no appeal to me.

4) Get a huge stack of garbage at the end of the week to recycle.

5) Still get black fingers from reading the newspaper.

I don't find anything compelling about getting newspapers these days. I like getting news updates dynamically throughout the day, rather the reading yesterdays news on paper.

Newspapers are dead, and if they think eBooks will be their salvation, the nails are being driven in the coffin as we speak.

On the post: How Many Phone Calls Does It Take To Get A $218 Trillion Phone Bill?

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 11 Apr, 2006 @ 08:01am

What I would do

Sit on the bill and don't pay it, and don't even bring it to their attention. Let them send continued late payment notices and when they start to threaten sending a collection agency after you or they affect your credit score, sue them for damages in the amount of only $218 million (your not greedy right).

If a company lets this get to the point where a collection agency is involved in trying to collect a 218 trillion bill, then they deserve to be sued and bankrupted. It demonstrates massive ignorance and a complete lack of customer care for them to miss this mistake this late in the process.

On the post: MovieBeam: What Happens When Technology Obsession Surpasses User Needs

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 10 Apr, 2006 @ 08:09am

Why not work with digital cable?

What they really don't understand is that most cable companies are offering on demand content through existing cable boxes. Why can't Disney simply work out a deal where users can subscribe to a special digital cable channel to access their content. In Canada, we have the Movie Network on Demand and specialty channels like Treehouse on Demand for children's content. We even had free Winter Olympic coverage on Demand.

While digital cable may not be available in all markets, and movie beam hoped to have greater range by using a proprietary wireless network to reach rual America, digital cable is expanding and becoming more feature rich, and it makes sense to invest in this technology rather then creating a proprietary system.

Another example of how Disney has more money then brains, and has quickly become a money making engine rather then a family entertainment enterprise.

On the post: Missing The Point Of Cameraphones

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2006 @ 12:31pm

Who is missing the point?

Why should I want to take lots of crappy resolution and quality pictures just because I have a cellphone on me at all times?

When did quality every lose to quantity?

Instead, why not offer GOOD to EXCELLENT quality pictures from a camera phone by just putting in a decent 3 - 4 megapixel CCD in it. I mean, they are starting to offer lots of storage space and expansion slots on cellphones, so offering larger resolution CCD's make more sense.

Where you are also missing the point is that since cell phones rely on subscription based data transfer charges, or even a per kilobyte charge, sending larger photo files will make cellular service providers more money because of more killobytes and longer transfers.

Sorry, I don't use my cameraphone simply for the reason it takes crappy pictures. I have never emailed or sent a photo through my cell phone. From my perspective, cameraphones ARE a failure because my celluar provider has not earned one penny in profit by offering me a cheap cameraphone. Perhaps if I was able to take lots of good quality pictures on my camera phone, I would actually be a customer that paid for more digital data service, rather then using my cell phone just to talk on.

ANY service on a cell phone is designed to increase profits by phone companies. Cameras, MP3's, Text messaging, ringtones, TV, video, etc are not put on cameraphones for our enjoyment, its to offer "value added" features that will make the phone comanies more money. If cameraphones are not generating revenue for phone companies, then they are a failure, period.

On the post: No Email, But At Least The FBI Has Really Sweet Pens To Write Letters

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 22 Mar, 2006 @ 09:37am

I think that that is the point

It isn't expensive to setup an email server, just get any 386 and a linux distro. The expense comes from ensuring that your email server is secure (I mean, national secrets secure, not just secure from Windows bugs) and that the email being sent and received is encrypted and secure. That is where the expense is.

But true, any government organization or department will have tons of questionable wastes of money, and fancy pens and highlighters rank right up their of the kind of excess the government is used to.

On the post: CD Player Dropped From Inflation Data, Phonograph Next?

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 20 Mar, 2006 @ 08:52am

I don't get inflation period?

Why do things have to increase in price at all?

I mean, lets say we drop inflation, and everything is fixed in price as is today. Why should the fact that people get raises and pay increases cause the price of products to increase? Doesn't this mean that people will just buy more products thus making the companies selling these products richer?

Intead, it seems that everytime I get a wage increase, taxes go up, the cost of living goes up, the cost of homes and cars go up, I don't ever seem to get ahead, so the net effect is that I am making the same (if not less) net profit year after year.

Inflation also causes the poverty line to increase, as people who don't have a decent income or yearly wage hikes find it more and more impossible to make ends meet.

I think inflation just some artificial occurance that justifies economics as a valid thing, and not just a science of statistics for meaningless things.

On the post: TV's Protectionism In Reruns Again

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 16 Mar, 2006 @ 12:28pm

Internet content much better?

Honestly, after spending a few hours looking at endless rants and meaningless blogs, TV is the least of our worries. The Internet is just as vapid a wasteland filled with poor thoughts and ill conceived notions as television ever has been. I think people only laud the Internet over television because, well, at least we can easily contribute to that wasteland.

But, stop being so cynical. You forget that its the goal to be entertained that is the reason for movies, television, internet, sports, etc, etc, etc. Not to educate, not to inspire, not to grow, but to be entertained, to fill in the moments of monotony that many people face in their everyday life. To fill in the gaps that education left behind.

Sure, reading a book or learning something is preferable to watching television, but does your brain have to be ON all the times? Can't you simply enjoy a few hours of guilt filled fun requiring only a small amount of thought? Is a Dan Brown novel any more an intelligent choice for reading over watching Survivor (the answer is no if you are wondering).

I know an older couple that used to disdain television. One was a computer science PhD geek that actually has about a dozen patents under his belt related to the telecommunications industry, the other is headmistress of a private school. Both speak multiple languages. Both are book worms and can't have a conversaion that doesn't involve political commentary about Canada and other foreign countries. Both will spend a $100 on a bottle of wine or take an evening out at the opera. Nearing both of their retirements, I laugh and congratulate them that after years of owning a cheap quality TV being fed by over the air signals (in Canada that means about 4 clear channels only) they now own a 42" Sony Bravia, Digital Cable (they are considering getting an HD PVR), and now enjoy such shows regularily as WifeSwapping and That 70's show.

Don't try and portray yourself as being smarter then thou by shunning television. You obviously don't understand its purpose, which makes you smarter then everyone else?

On the post: Simple Typo Causes Million Dollar Budget Problems

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 13 Feb, 2006 @ 09:53am

Unfortunately, probably was a city employee

Also, it probably took months and lots of headaches with the city to correct the problem because nobody there had enough common sense (or brains) to realize the problem was rediculous.

On the post: How Not To Cook An Egg With A Phone (But Still Create A Viral Hoax Sensation)

NamelessMofo ( profile ), 08 Feb, 2006 @ 05:52am

Sad and scary

This brings up probably the single biggest problem with the Internet. It's not security exploits and viruses, not phishing scams or malicious spyware, its the simple nature for humans to be gullible.
People are quick to believe everything they read in a book, see on television, and apparently now, anything blogged or listed on the Internet.
Is it that people are being knowingly or wantonly deceptive by fooling people, no. Its just that the Internet is an outlet for both brilliance and substantially more ignorance. People push their personal opinion onto other people because there is always a ready audience willing to gobble it up.
Unfortunately, not everybody has a good rounded education or simply good common sense to weed through the chaff and find the truths and facts out there. They are quick to promote this ignorance by linking to it on their blogs or listing it in their "news" services.
So, my advice is to take everything seen on the web with a big grain of salt. Even if you find a story corroborated on many other sites, understand that all these sites didn't independently come to the same conclusion, they are all commenting off the same source.

NamelessMofo 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (160)