Prince of Pop-ups 543
Ric writes "From the article lead paragraph: 'If you hate pop-up ads, you might blame Brian Shuster. A long-time figure in the Internet pornography world, Shuster recently received a patent for the ad format and is now looking to make some money off the sites that use it. And that's just the beginning - Shuster has a long list of pending patents, including one for pop-up audio ads that cannot be turned off.'"
Hooray! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Insightful)
No kidding. This is one patent holding that I will only object to from the sidelines, and not try to disprove. :-)
Re:Hooray! (Score:2)
Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Interesting)
However, more telling about where blame for frustrations will lie - is in the quote regarding the popups with sound that you cannot turn off. This is VERY upsetting.
I OWN MY COMPUTER - its fully 100% a resource of MINE and nobody else. I also PAY for my internet access, by the month.
If he wants to force feed me ads - then he better damn well PAY me. And protect himself while walking around in public.
Seriously - this is a major concern of mine and I am sure, many others.
Advertising is getting totally out of hand and something needs to be done. I can understand certain forms of advertising, like on free TV stations - where I am getting the service (TV for free) and in return I am agreeing to being subjected to ads.
However in any service where I actually pay for it - I should be asked, paid or otherwise consulted before being subjected to advertising.
In fact I am in the process of starting an ISP where advertising of ANY kind is absolutely forbidden and technically (as much as possible) prevented. No details on how I am doing this, sorry... but one thing is that for a nominally higher rate you can have an ISP that will not tolerate any sort of advertising to its clients.
Advertising is polluting the world we live in and even our minds with unproductive thoughts - and actually detracts from our quality of life. I hope to change this.
On a related note - would you sign up on this ISP?
Disable javascript. Disable Java. Problem solved. (Score:3, Insightful)
If he wants to force feed me ads - then he better damn well PAY me. And protect himself while walking around in public.
Given that it is your computer, why are you letting him execute hostile code on your computer? I mean, if you're using Explorer (for example) and your security level is set such that pop-up ads are able to execute, aren't you basically allowing pop-up ads?
Now, ration
Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Offtopic)
I certainly do not expect any or all content on the web to be free. As i am fully aware of the cost of operating a resource to provide to others - what I am saying is that my machine and bandwidth are not resources that I am supplying to marketers for ads and popups.
Its one thing to place a webserver and content on the web for people to see - and to seek and come to on a voluntary basis. Its another thing entirely to push your content to them and force them to see it - and to consume their resources (bandwidth and cpu) in order to force your content to them. Its also another level of that to do so in a manner that cannot be turned off.
Dont confuse a person/company providing content on the web - and having content forced down your pipe.
Take this example:
I pay SBC for $65 / month for DSL. I have a Yahoo mail account. SBC and Yahoo offer incentives for DSL users to sign up for DSL cobranded by them in a cheaper package. I have had my Yahoo account for almost 8 years now, and I have had DSL for 4. The SBC/Yahoo "partnership" now checks to see if I am logging into Yahoo from an SBC DSL provisioned IP - then redirects me to a full page ad before I have access to my yahoo account. Esentially hijacking my connection in order to FORCE me to watch or interact (close) an ad. I did not sign up for the Yahoo/SBC cobranded DSL - I certainly did not receive the incentive of a discount on the cost of DSL, yet - I am still subjected to push marketing - and both companies claim "too bad"
This is the type of ad force feeding that i think should be illegal or at least provide compensatory incentives for people. at a very *minimum* it should provide an OPT OUT. which currently it does not.
so, like I said - the content on the internet should not be free, but if you are going to force content on me - you damn well better make sure I want it, am compensated for it, and have a way to avoid it. permanently. period.
If I agree to get your crap push mind-waste, by EULA or otherwise fine, but if I do not then I should be free to enjoy a happy, ad free online experience.
Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hooray! (Score:4, Funny)
He should bill all the end users every time their browser violates his patent. If that proves too onerous, force a monthly fee levied on customers by the ISP.
I mean, if you are going to get greedy on the patent gravy train, you might as well go all out, no one's going to stop you for 20 years.
oh, it's better than that. (Score:5, Funny)
It's not just the money, it's who's collecting. Anyone who wants to use a pop up having to bow down before the porn master who dreamed up the sleazy idea? Classic. I hope someone makes a big fuss and that it becomes common knowledge that advertisers are paying porn masters to be able to irritate you. Guilt by association and tribute! Suffer, you dick heads!
Re:Hooray! (Score:2)
I don't care if he makes a killing, what matters if there will be less pop-ups.
Any price larger than zero is bound to result in fewer pop-ups than today.
Tor
Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hooray! (Score:5, Funny)
Personally I would prefer a Mafia-Hitman public donation killing machine.
The idea is, everytime a public personality pisses you off you donate a buck to 5 bucks to kill them. The restrictions would be a limit of a maximum of 5 dollars per person per day. When the maximum bounty price is reached then whomever wants to claim the prize (with absolute proof of the resulting kill) goes out an kills that public personality. The money & day limit are to prevent the extremely wealthy from rigging a premature execution (as the extremely wealthy folks do not need charity murder events to reach their goals). This fund also would be limited only to those folks that are well known enough to be defined a "public personality".
So if Windows XP crashes, then drop a buck in the "Off Bill Gates Bounty". If Tom Delay makes an ass of himself then $5 to the "Bye Bye Tom Delay Bounty". If someone actually wants Bill Gates or Tom Delay to survive another day then they can donate to the "Save Bill Gates" fund (with the money limit of a maximum of $5 per day per person) and the money they donate will be used to randomly refund a donation from the "Kill Bill Gates" donation list.
Now the real Devil is in who is going to honestly and accurately administrate these funds and how will the public guarantee that the bounty will be paid in its entirety to the bounty hunter that does the job.
Its strength is in its "Power to the People" mindset (keeping loudmouths from staying obnoxious asses for the rest of their lives or at least shortening that period to a tolerable length). Its strength is in the "Behave Nice or Die" mindset. Its strength is that it can afford-ably deal with individuals that have gone beyond the confines of sane human behavior.
Its weaknesses lie in "The referendum of the pissed off". Its weaknesses lie in "Who can be trusted to set fair bounties and not rob the bank of the cash reward" (though another bounty on the crook that robs the first bounty would even things out I think). Its weakness is that every absolute power over life and death without a surefire method to prevent abuse will fail horribly in a very short time. Its weakness is that the wealthy and powerful will behave well at first then push lackeys into notoriety so they will be the fall guys to die for their criminal schemes (as is oddly already the case right now).
Of course, this wild idea is immoral on its face, a complete violation of everything America stands for, and fairly insane. It does seem to be a much more civilized method than having America re-enact the French Underclass slaughtering the monarchs and French Upper-class in the wee days of the civil revolts of the French Revolution. God knows there is nothing keeping the top wealthiest 1% of America from abusing the much less wealthy 99% and the eventual obvious slaughter that will occur if the richest 1% do not remove their collective heads from their collective asses and stop the money siphon and overseas tax-free money sinkholes that they are using now.
Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Informative)
--
Re:Hooray! (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because a fact used to be a fact, doesn't mean it always will be.
Say what? (Score:2, Funny)
I didn't know that any of these creatures actually exist. Please show me an example of one.
Excellent!! (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course I use mozilla with popup filtering enabled, so it's not really that much of an issue to me. =)
Re:Excellent!! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Excellent!! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Excellent!! (Score:5, Informative)
Although a pain in the ass, you can make it so you don't lose any fuctionality of sites that require popups.
Re:Excellent!! (Score:2)
Yeah (Score:2)
Re:Yeah (Score:3, Funny)
while(Sound == Obnoxious){
Axe->swing(Speaker);
}
return(Sound->Calm);
;- )
Use Mozilla ....... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Use Mozilla ....... (Score:2)
Re:Use Mozilla ....... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Use Mozilla ....... (Score:4, Informative)
Simple: just click-and-hold or control-click or right-click on the offending image and choose 'Block images from this server'. Most of the time those images are served from a dedicated ad-server.
JP
Just Wait (Score:2)
However, eventually, when these advertizers realize that more people are not using IE, they'll start coding ways to avert that security blanket.
My confusion around this issue is:
Why do these advertizers think we (the population who blocks this garbage) want to see their trash on our screen?
I'm sure this has been answered before, but the answers have not been satisfactory to me.
Re:Use Mozilla ....... (Score:2)
Why pay someone else to do what you can quickly do yourself? Just say no to pop-up blockers.
Re:Use Mozilla ....... (Score:5, Funny)
There's a simpler way... (Score:5, Funny)
It's the perfect plan. What could go wrong?
Re:There's a simpler way... (Score:5, Funny)
Way too much prior art...
Re:There's a simpler way... (Score:5, Funny)
Way too much prior art...
Since when has this stopped the USPO from issuing patents?
Re:There's a simpler way... (Score:3, Funny)
Way too much prior art...
Since when has this stopped the USPO from issuing patents?
In this case, they are the prior art, so I'm sure they'll figure it out...
Re:There's a simpler way... (Score:5, Funny)
The USPTO is definitely a $2 whore, but they do demand some small amount of originality in patent applications. For example, this would be acceptable:
Add those three magic words, and the patent office will grant your wildest wishes.Re:There's a simpler way... (Score:2)
> Way too much prior art...
Dammit, you beat me to it!
Asshole.
No Lawyer would draft that patent! (Score:3, Funny)
Anyone have this guy's address? (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a problem with this... (Score:4, Insightful)
While it's a clever sort of revenge, it's not very practical. You don't send mail to a person, you send it to a building. If the person gets 'snail mail spammed,' all they have to do is move. The building remains 'spammed' for the next tenant, and the next...
Nope, don't like it, don't like it one bit...
Re:I have a problem with this... (Score:3, Insightful)
In many situations, this is non-trivial. If I am an apartment-dwelling college student, then, sure, moving is no big deal. If I just bought my new $2.5M mansion built off my spam profits, then, for me, moving isn't quite so easy. Same goes for businesses with lots of employees.
Good (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, and I think I devised a way to turn off the pop-up audio:
1. Press the power button on your computer's speakers.
2. When you're done with the site, press the power button again.
Gee, maybe I should patent this.
Re:Good (Score:2)
I've got a better one
1. Enter site
2. Realize site sucks because they have audio popups you can't tur off
3. Edit host file
4. Never come back even by accident
<rant>If people would choose not to block plain banner ads (without javascript or cookies or other shit) while blocking the rest, things might improve. Sooner or later advertisers have to realize that the more obnoxious and annoying they make their ads the smaller the chance of getting positive attention gets. I will never visit a site throug
poetic revenge (Score:5, Funny)
Re:poetic revenge (Score:2)
His last name... (Score:2)
Then it would be more accurate....
Good! (Score:5, Interesting)
Heck, I wish somebody had patented spam as well!
How Ironic (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How Ironic (Score:2)
[Muahahahahahhahahha or insert-your-favorite-nefarious-chuckle-here]
Great.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Unfortunately, the mass population HATES this idea and in fact people have gone so far to block this technology with software.
This should get intresting...
Popups are similar to telemarketers. Often, the consumer is not intrested in the product. People who disliked this technology came up with devices to block telemarketers and now there is a legislative "do not call" list. It would be pretty hard to have a "do not popup"
Re:Great.. (Score:4, Insightful)
People throw around phrases like "vote with your wallet" but seldom practice what they preach. Don't like a certain method of advertising? Don't visit those sites.
Same as if (for example) Nickelodeon started running ads for cigarettes and beer during "The Wiggles". Stop watching nickelodeon.
But everyone sits through it, not wanting to be inconvenienced by their principles, and waits for some sort of law to make it alright.
And now we have a billion zillion conflicting laws restricting what we can or cannot do. Bah.
Re:Great.. (Score:2)
Agreed, people confuse this with spam too much, going to a website means you are soliciting everything the website has to offer, you can't complain about that.
I think he'll find... (Score:5, Insightful)
including one for pop-up audio ads that cannot be turned off
I think he'll find that everything can be turned off.
Ways to turn off audio (Score:3, Funny)
2) Turn off your speakers
3) Cut off your ears. See note regarding dremel tool in 1)
-Pete
Not Possible (Score:2)
"...including one for pop-up audio ads that cannot be turned off."
Ha. Hahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA.
Too bad there is no moderation for "not terribly insightful but damned succinct."
um... (Score:2)
when was the last time pr0n resulted in a turn off? Oh yeah -- that goat website.
Re:um... (Score:2)
I haven't played with 1.4, dunno if it's different.
Jeez....this guy will never stop (Score:2)
Whats to prevent this guy from opening a page to a site which opens a pop-up ad, which opens a page to another, rinse...repeat?
Patents are good and all, but they need to be analyzed for abuses.
I'm conflicted!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Pro: He promotes porn on the Internet.
Pro: He will sue a few people into not using pop-ups, at least for a little while.
Con: He "created" annoying pop-up ads.
The situation would be similar if Hillary Rosen, remaining the bitch that she is, was really hot and liked to give me blowjobs...
Okay, well, the blowjobs would easily win out. But you get the idea.
Re:I'm conflicted!!! (Score:5, Informative)
Patent (Score:2, Funny)
It is worth their while (Score:2)
It is worth their while to do so.
If my bank had annoying popups, I would write and complain.
You can use browsers that disable this.
Like spam, if people refused to buy services from companies that use these techniques, they would stop. But they DO work, and as long as they work, they will do this.
Hmm (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hmm (Score:4, Interesting)
rhetorical question (Score:2, Funny)
I have to p (Score:5, Funny)
Patents pending for porno pop-up prince?
Re:I have to p (Score:5, Funny)
Precisely.
Postscript: pounding penis to pornography, provided by pop-up prince, prevalent among programmers posting postulations on slashdot.
Swift, merciless, brutal death is required (Score:5, Funny)
He must be murdered immediately. The consequences of any other course of action are too dire to even be conceptualized.
Murder.
Re:Swift, merciless, brutal death is required (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Swift, merciless, brutal death is required (Score:2)
Re:Swift, merciless, brutal death is required (Score:5, Funny)
I propose the "Hampster Dance" song.
Re:Swift, merciless, brutal death is required (Score:5, Funny)
This post should be modded +1 Inciteful.
For once I agree...eep... (Score:3, Funny)
Also Patented . . . (Score:2)
Doh (Score:2)
Can't be turned off? (Score:2)
Re:Can't be turned off? (Score:3, Informative)
Good thing (Score:2, Redundant)
Maybe more patents could be used in this way in order to stop other anoying internet irritants.
Just my two cents.
Lets face it IE should pay licence or stop pop-ups (Score:2)
Mostly serious thoughts . . . (Score:2)
Do I think he'll get ahead on this? Probably not, but only probably - it takes a few people caving to enrich his coffers and get capital flowing in, so he could become a noteable pain in the rump if things go well.
I think the best bet is to keep outing this guy as a jer
Copyright != patent (Score:2)
When the people responsible for reporting the news can't even bother to get their facts right, how can we expect that the average person on the street will get any understanding of these issues.
He wouldn't sent out copyright infringement notices, because it is a patent.
Makes me wonder. (Score:2)
If I owned that patent... (Score:2)
Not a moment too soon (Score:5, Interesting)
(The popups appear when you click a "next page" or "previous page" link in the article, so Mozilla must be treating it as a requested popup. In addition to a whitelist of sites that are allowed to throw popups, Mozilla needs a blacklist of sites that are never allowed to throw popups.)
As good of place as any (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:As good of place as any (Score:4, Insightful)
Good, right?
No, that means they come up with some other really annoying way of forcing you to look at ads.
Re:As good of place as any (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that many of their MSN.com sites use 'em?
Re:As good of place as any (Score:4, Insightful)
I would imagine this is similar to TV manufacturers not including commercial-blocking features with their TV sets by default. Sure, you can buy equipment to do this, but you have to specifically take that course of action yourself. Commercials, while annoying, are healthy for the TV business, and TV manufacturers cannot destroy this industry without hurting themselves. The feature can exist, but it cannot be included by default.
Microsoft, as the de-facto standard of web browsers, needs to think carefully before swiping out entire features altogether. After all, "window.open" is technically part of the javascript spec, and there are some (though not many
What's the deal? (Score:3, Funny)
block sites that use popups :) (Score:2)
However, some sites seem to be alot less annoying about it then others. And I say... get ISP's and backbones to start null routing traffic from all sites that use obnoxious advertising practices.
Needs a good /.ing (Score:2)
A patent on cyberhijacking?
"The reason the Internet has stalled out so badly is that advertising is a non-profitable segment," he added. The use of "hijacked traffic" is a question of balance, Shuster said, but there has to be effective advertising so "a provider of c
"audio ads that cannot be turned off" (Score:2)
As Dave Barry once said... (Score:5, Funny)
Oh no audio ads that can't be turned off? (Score:3, Funny)
But.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Shuster, Shyster... what's the difference? (Score:5, Funny)
shyster
n. Slang
An unethical, unscrupulous practitioner, especially of law.
Seems to fit Shuster quite well.
Not on general popups, but misleading popups only. (Score:5, Interesting)
So he patented misleading people via a web browser...
Intersting.
yeah, great. I've got some patent ideas too (Score:5, Funny)
I think I'll file for a patent on "Honking a truck's horn in a residential area from 1 a.m. to 5 a.m., advertising a sale of one or more goods". I think I could get some license fees for that. To up my income, I will also file for "Yelling at a carefully chosen target group of people at prominent city places until they agree to buy one or more goods".
Jeez. Indeed, leaving the oceans was a bad idea, after all.
Any volunteers.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I don't get it... (Score:3)
Re:I've applied for a patent... (Score:2)
Somewhat Lousy Advertising Supporting Hypocrisy
Not that I agree with you, but it would have been funnier that way.