Periodic Dosage Archive 2015-09
Debian Linux Founder, Ian Murdock (1973 to 2015) Killed Himself
There's a blog, titled Why It's OK to Block Ads. See:
[Why It's OK to Block Ads By James Williams. At http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2015/10/why-its-ok-to-block-ads/ , accessed on 2015-10-26 ]
What a idiotic article.
I spent 30 min to write a comment, and decided it's not worth posting to. Why? then it's the same old to-ban-or-not-to-ban thing, and i even spent time to check their comment policy. And, in the end, i don't get candy except helping the idiotic essay's popularity.
Here's my comment, scathing as intended.
I concur on the correctness of your opinion, that the advertising industry spend millions to exploit psychology. Almost every big commercially run website, is designed to max ads, down to color and font choice.
But, the way they are, is because our behavior made it so. Facebook et al don't have a paid version because nobody would pay. As simple as that.
One big chuck of opinion on this issue is that “Info Should be Free.”, “Best things are free, look at air.”. But, your opinion isn't this.
I couldn't tell in a minute what site is this. Your essay, nary a citation or scientific research, and seems just a opinion piece, yet this site seems to be associated with University of Oxford? So, am i right that my attention just got robbed by a university? And what does university want? Not my money, but my intelluctual attention?
In one minute i couldn't find out who you are. Are you a professor in the area of ethics/philosophy? or student? So, one of the design flaw of this seemingly academic website/university/blog, is failing to clearly identify authors.
Now, back to ads. So, you are saying, it's ok to block ads because the industry exploit people's psychology. In fact, it's a moral obligation to block ads!!! Then, by the same token, it's ok to not pay tax because a tax system is broken? By not paying taxes, i let my government know that something's wrong?
In modern society, lots things are broken. Are we supposed to just get angry and become HULK?
I was thinking, i couldn't find a merit in this essay, and that i just wasted half-an-hour reading and commenting about it. But wait! It got us thinking, communicating, thanks to, ads!
DMCA takedown notice of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction 2004 photo
The Wolf of Wall Street
Jonathan G. Lebed (born September 29, 1984) is an American stock trader prosecuted by the SEC at age 15 for stock manipulation.
Lebed was the first minor prosecuted by the SEC.[7][8] Between September 1999 and February 2000, Lebed made hundreds of thousands of dollars from the computer in his bedroom in Cedar Grove, New Jersey by posting in Internet chat rooms and on message boards encouraging people to buy penny stocks he already owned, thus, according to the SEC, artificially raising the price of the stock. Between September 1999 and February 2000, his smallest one-day gain was $12,000 while his biggest was $74,000.[9] The SEC, under Arthur Levitt, prosecuted him. In 2001, Lebed and the SEC negotiated an out-of-court settlement in which Lebed forfeited $285,000 in profit and interest he had made on 11 trades without admitting any wrongdoing -- allowing him to keep close to half a million dollars.[10]
Jordan Ross Belfort[5] (/ˈbɛlfɔːrt/; born July 9, 1962) is an American author, motivational speaker, and former stockbroker who pleaded guilty to fraud and related crimes in connection with stock market manipulation and running a boiler room as part of a penny stock scam. Belfort spent 22 months in prison as part of an agreement under which he gave testimony against numerous partners and subordinates in his fraud scheme.[6] He published a memoir, The Wolf of Wall Street, which was adapted into a film, released in 2013. It was directed by Martin Scorsese and starred Leonardo DiCaprio as Belfort.
Gamer SWATTED Phenomenon (on its own page)