Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Internet

samzenpus posted about 4 years ago | from the vicky-who? dept.

Firefox 92

MMBK writes "Our friends at JESS3 have unveiled The Ex-Blocker. It's a Firefox and Chrome plugin that erases all name and likeness of your ex from the Internet, even if they become a meme, or the president. You'll no longer have to threaten to delete your Facebook account or concoct an elaborate e-hoax to assuage the reality-shattering complications that are born from break-ups. Simply construct an Internet that omits bad vibes all together."

cancel ×


Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

first (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32886122)

First post (not including those by my exes)

Re:first (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32888294)

Dude, you're on slashdot. Everyone knows you've never had an "ex". :)

Re:first (1)

oldspewey (1303305) | about 4 years ago | (#32888402)

Well, if we broaden the definition of "ex" to include anyone who has taken out a restraining order ...

version 2.0 (2, Funny)

AffidavitDonda (1736752) | about 4 years ago | (#32886170)

next version will be able to replace the name with some nice insults...

Re:version 2.0 (1)

RevWaldo (1186281) | about 4 years ago | (#32887180)

As well as an option to only filter out reports of their successes; failures are allowed through.


Re:version 2.0 (1)

kimago (620628) | about 4 years ago | (#32889842)

No the next version will be to replace it with your own content. "Evil Ex just fell into a combine and used to fertilize your pumpkins in Farmville!" (Prehistoric Internet community The Well had the "bozofilter" for blocking annoyances, and "Bozo2" for overwriting them with humorous replacement content. They really were pioneering in alot of ways.)

Is the reverse possible? (5, Funny)

HopefulIntern (1759406) | about 4 years ago | (#32886204)

I don't wanna erase her. I just wanna stalk her more thoroughly. Is it open source? Can I just place a '!' somewhere and reverse the effect?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

ascari (1400977) | about 4 years ago | (#32886354)

place a '!' somewhere and reverse the effect?

Wonder how long will it be before somebody does precisely that to FaceBook's new panic button?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

T7g (725446) | about 4 years ago | (#32889518)

About seven years ago while I was dating my ex (whom left me for my other ex and did not include me in the fun) I made a similar program that worked as an AIM proxy- it would pass all messages except those that contained regex matched data. So whenever my ex tried to send a message like "Are you coming over?" to my then current girlfriend in an attempt to work her lesbian magic, the proxy would just drop the packet. I never actually used it on them, but I thought the proof of concept was funny enough. I showed it to my (now) ex, who wasn't very impressed ;D

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Darby (84953) | about 4 years ago | (#32894624)

I showed it to my (now) ex, who wasn't very impressed ;D

Why? Sloppy coding? No comments? Inefficient algorithms?

Re: My Story (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32895048)

Hey, don't feel too bad. I got dumped for something far worse: A Videogame.
My now ex wanted me to come visit her for a while, when I got there (after significant nagging on her part) she appears disinterested, spends her time gaming. Then decides (having not included me in this decision) that she doesn't actually want to do anything *ahem* fun while we're there. That's alright I tell her, how about we just go out to the beach, or around town, or we can exercise together (all things we're previously discussed and she's said sounded like fun.) No she says, all that stuff is boring, I'd rather play videogames. Long story short, she spent 4-12 hours a day during her vacation playing videogames. Got mad at me when I pointed out she considered me boring (after asking me 'What did you want me to do, be bored over vacation?', at which point I politely asked her what she expected ME to be doing for the length of time I was there, that was much longer than her vacation was.) Needless to say after a day or two of halfheartedly spending time with me she ignored me for a couple days, obstensibly needing space, then dumps me one night with the expectation that I'll be out by morning.

So I get to return home broke, single, and without anyone interested in me (The few girls that WERE lost their interest as soon as I was single again... funny how that works huh?)

Actually I think you can best sum it up by saying 'Most women are bitches, and the few that aren't are probably married or otherwise unavailable.' :)

Re:Is the reverse possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32886360)

+5 Insightful? Seriously /.?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (3, Insightful)

shikaisi (1816846) | about 4 years ago | (#32886398)

If this is configurable, there are truly a myriad applications. Right-wing Republican? ... just erase Obama from your world. Dutch football fan? ... pretend Spain never existed. Global warming denialist? ... evidence not a problem. Custom-made paradise beckons. The marketing possibilities are endless.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

JanneM (7445) | about 4 years ago | (#32886638)

"The marketing possibilities are endless."

As are the anti-marketing possibilities.

Don't like Coca-Cola or Pepsi? Gone. Apple's turtlenecky hipness is getting cloying? Never hear of them or their fanboys again.

And of course, if you're one of the less morally scrupulous companies out there (as in, pretty much all of them), it could be very tempting to have a botnet provider silently install a filter that removes any trace of your competition on a few million computers out there.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32887160)

The notion of a world free of any word or mention of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, or Sarah Palin is pretty enticing, I have to admit.

Too bad it wouldn't work on TV and Radio too.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 4 years ago | (#32887970)

Liberals though already have the ability to see the world as they want to without letting reality intrude at all. Just use that built in ability and there will be no need for the program.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 4 years ago | (#32888372)

Yes, the reality is that only liberals are capable of this. You are sure you are not just constructing a world that looks like you want it too, right?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (0, Offtopic)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 4 years ago | (#32888910)

As sure as one can be. I just think that people should have the right to succeed in life with as little government intervention as possible.

Like with Unemployment. 99 Weeks?! Seriously?

Now I understand that an incredibly small percentage of those who have been unemployed for 99 weeks spent all their time trying to get a job but failed for reasons not their fault.

But it is not the job of the government to pay people who are not working for 2 years or more. I get that some will suffer. To be fair though these are issues to be solved individually through family and community.

These are the things that we lose when we believe in unlimited federal powers to "Make things Right".

I do believe I understand the problem and I know what the solutions are, and I can see what other peoples problems with the solution are.

I just do not think that the Federal Solution is the correct one. I think I am a middle of the road kind of guy. I believe in the right to choose. I do not believe in abortion myself though. I believe in freedom and the personal responsibility that comes with it. I would not trade my freedom to make my life any easier. Some would. I would not.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 4 years ago | (#32889272)

That is all well and dandy, but it isn't what I was getting at. Do you really think that liberals are the only group of people that can construct a skewed version of reality only seeing what they see fit? If so you are just as much in a fantasy world as those "liberals" you claim are doing the same thing. Do you really think that Glenn Beck's inner idea of reality is so much more accurate than Keith Olberman's? Who's fooling who now? I think both of them have very skewed ideas of what is "real" in the world. (Note I do not subscribe to either the "liberal" or "conservative" agendas becasue I think they are both dumb. But I am not so foolish to think either side is worse than the other. They are just opposite sides of the very same coin.)

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Dishevel (1105119) | about 4 years ago | (#32890038)

I understood what you were "getting at". I ignored the assumption on your part that I have no idea that there are such things as right-wing wackos.

I did however in my post answer the only question you asked.

As to what I think about the wackos on either side of the coin? Pointless. I gave my views and that should be clear enough. The reason I brought up liberals is because your op mentioned ONLY right wing conservative wackos. No mention of the flip side of the coin in your post. That is why my post pointed the opposite way. Not because I can not believe in anything other than one side being fucking nut jobs but because your words pointed to only one side being nut jobs. But thank you for assuming I am the one with blinders on. I am sure that you needed to do that being that you could only see that avenue of communication due to your blinders.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 4 years ago | (#32890824)

Please point out to me where my "words pointed to only one side being nut jobs". I was not the OP, and my entire point was that not only one side are nutjobs. Talk about blinders. It is obvious you had no clue what I was "getting at" in your responses, or if you did you were deliberately ignoring it. I wasn't assuming you didn't know about right-wing wackos. I was assuming you thought that liberals have a monopoly on fantasy, which is blatantly false. I would have responded exactly the same if you had said "right-wing wackos" instead of "liberals". You can assume I am trying to make one side or the other look better, but you would only be constructing more of your own fantasy as I think both extremes are stupid, and have no interest in making either side look good.

BOTH liberals AND conservatives do this (1)

mengel (13619) | about 4 years ago | (#32889552)

They adjust what they see/hear/read based on their biases.

Once you realize everyone does this, the strangeness of the world starts to make more sense.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

operagost (62405) | about 4 years ago | (#32887386)

Right-wing Republican? ... just erase Obama from your world.

That seems to pretty much be the opposite of what a conservative or a libertarian wants. After all, they observe the realities of the world and deal with them while the progressives like to implement their own idealistic policies, regardless of the consequences.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (2, Insightful)

hoggoth (414195) | about 4 years ago | (#32887740)

He didn't say conservative or libertarian. He said right-wing Republican. The nut jobs currently running (ruining?) the Republican party don't have much in common with conservatives from, say the Barry Goldwater era.

The current Republican party is purchasing votes from an extremist religion while demonizing a different extremist religion.
All very similar to the current Democratic party who is purchasing votes from the poor, disenfranchised minorities and immigrants.

No matter which party wins, guess who ends up paying the bill for these purchases?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#32888154)

"Extremeism in defense of liberty is no vice" -- Barry Goldwater. Even Nixon was too ashamed to be associated with Goldwater. And for all the under-handed stupidity that Nixon engaged in, he did open up trade with China and get us out of Vietnam where as LBJ just wanted to keep escalating the war. On the other hand, Goldwater was the one who said "you don't have to be straight to shoot straight".

JFK was all about pushing the best and brightest to succeed for the good of the nation, but little brother Teddy was instrumental in pushing No Child Left Behind, which is perhaps one of the stupidest pieces of legislation ever conceived. Bleeding Heart Bobby Kennedy was a counsel to the McCarthy committee, helping to smash Reds, then busted the Mob as Attny General. But hey, let's forget about that, too...

Frankly, I think they've all been kind of lame since Andrew Jackson.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

hoggoth (414195) | about 4 years ago | (#32888710)

I'm on board.
Next presidential election I am writing in "the undead corpse of Andrew Jackson."

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

shikaisi (1816846) | about 4 years ago | (#32889122)

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 4 years ago | (#32890228)

No Child Left Behind . . . is perhaps one of the stupidest pieces of legislation ever conceived

What makes you say that? I had some teacher friends who were complaining about it, and they said it was unfair to rate a teacher's performance by the performance of their students on a standardized test. And they complained that the testing was not a fair reflection of the quality of education received. I'm sorry, but when you make your living literally determining students futures by judging their performance with tests, you have no right to complain when you employer does the same to you. And you know what else? When you distribute a test over a hundred students, you are much more likely to get a accurate result then when you give a student a test individually, so in reality NCLB is much more fair to teachers than teachers are to their students.

And what's the alternative? Not tracking performance at all?! That is a recipe for failure.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#32894602)

I just think resources should be distributed in such a way as that the students who are going to make better use of them get first dibs. AP and Honors classes should get first crack and shouldn't have to have their time wasted by putting remedial kids in their classes to suck up the teacher's time and attention.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 4 years ago | (#32895252)

It sounds like you object to it because of it's name (because you want to leave some children behind) rather than it's content. The bill holds schools accountable for the performance of their students, with the goal being removing federal funding from failing schools (so that it can be given to schools that achieve results). It isn't a mandate specifically for the performance of individual students (though it's name implies that).

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | about 4 years ago | (#32895670)

There is a difference between wanting to leave some children behind and wanting to just call a spade a spade. Some kids don't care. Some kids aren't able to "get it." Not everyone is created equal. Perhaps morally equal, but not mathematically equivalent. I dunno, frankly I'd just as soon stay out of it. My mother's a high school teacher (undergrad from an ivy in Romance languages with a concentration in French and Italian; masters in Spanish; teaches Spanish 4 and 5, with the AP classes) so most of what I get about the actual implementation of the law comes from her. I guess the point I'm trying to make is, when she was in school she had become fluent in Italian before 5th grade and these days they don't even teach foreign languages in most elementary schools, if any. But we're not trying to train future generations of CIA covert agents and diplomats to thwart the Soviets. We're not trying to push people into science and engineering or encouraging them with a kick-ass maned space program like they did back then, either. Maybe its because we don't have a big, tough enemy to make us stronger anymore, and that means we're going to grow soft. China could have fit the bill, but Nixon did sort of fuck us on that. Now we're too dependent on them for trade to go to war, or compete in space.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

mosb1000 (710161) | about 4 years ago | (#32896860)

I'm starting to get a better understanding of our disagreement. NCLB does not actually make any effort to leave no children behind. The entire bill is designed solely to shut down failing schools by eliminating funding.

You really shouldn't listen to a teacher about it (apologies if she is your mother), because that would be like listening to a police officer's opinion of internal affairs. No one believes they should be held accountable for their performance, because they know that a lot of it is out of their hands.

But the fact is that there are some really shitty schools out there, and they have to be shut down. There are also some really shitty teachers out there, and sometimes closing down the school they work at is the only way to get rid of them (thank you teacher's unions).

I don't know about any of those other things you've said. I don't believe schools have ever been worth anything. They exist solely for the purpose of indoctrinating people while they are young so that they will willingly go along with a system and a culture that is obviously dysfunctional.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

omar.sahal (687649) | about 4 years ago | (#32891164)


guess who ends up paying the bill for these purchases?

A: YOU!! ah where would we be wid out da white man

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

hoggoth (414195) | about 4 years ago | (#32892104)

No, actually I was thinking 'The struggling middle class' (all colors).

But enjoy your rage anyway.

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

omar.sahal (687649) | about 4 years ago | (#32892640)

no rage just questioning

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

L4t3r4lu5 (1216702) | about 4 years ago | (#32886516)


$foo = " = $NameOfEx";
$foo =~ s/=/!=/;

Nope, I can't write Perl and just copied this from an instructional website. What of it?

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

gfilion (80497) | about 4 years ago | (#32887284)

I once wanted to write a perl script that would go to my ex's facebook profile and email me when something was posted or she commented something. But I was too lazy to write the darn script so I decided to meet new people...

Re:Is the reverse possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32887394)

> I don't wanna erase her. I just wanna stalk her more thoroughly

What worries me is not so much this post in itself. It is the fact that it is modded "Insightful" instead of "Funny"

Re:Is the reverse possible? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | about 4 years ago | (#32887858)

Well, it IS in fact an “automated religion”. Or in other words: An automated distortion of reality, twisted to repress something you can’t stand. Your own little North Korea / China. Your own little schizophrenia.

True to the popular motto to never ever face your fears, but always run away from them, ’till the end on time, no matter what the costs (in freedom) may be.

Face it, everything your ex loved will still remember you of her. You can not run away from it all, and still live a normal and healthy life.

It’s sad that most of medicine still lives deep in the dark ages on this class of problems (not being able to stand something, and your brain coping with some distortions or running away), despite them being as common as a headache (something that a pain killer also is no cure but just a “ignorer” for.), and also as easy to solve.

The thing is, to actually get over it, you also actually have to face it and win.
If that sounds too hard, that does not make you a wuss, as it sometimes simply is.
What people need in this case, is assistance in the form of someone giving security at the price of not letting them run away anymore.
That way, it becomes manageable.
And once you can stand right in the flames of it, and be OK with it, the problem is gone. Cured. I mean REALLY cured. Not just hidden away.

But of course the best way, is to not get into that situation in the first place.
By splitting up in a way, that both sides are OK with. (Cause even if your partner won’t admit it, they just as much feel bad for leaving you. Ask any psychotherapist.)
But for that, you also have to stop making your happiness dependent on one person. Stop with the one-itis. Stop with the unhealthy fixation on one person.
Or do you, as a grown up person, still always have to wait until you split up, to notice that she/he is NOT special. She is NOT “the one”. Ever.
(She/he’s just a normal person. Like everyone else.)

And now a primitive slogan: Real men don’t run away anyway! Real men fight their dragons, and win!
Oh, and it took me a long time, to realize and accept, that real men don’t cry in public, BECAUSE they cry in private. :)

Could be used to (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32886218)

... remove the name of some over mediatised politicians...

What about Justin Bieber (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32886246)

What about Justin Bieber, nothing on that front yet?

Re:What about Justin Bieber (1)

Rhaban (987410) | about 4 years ago | (#32886424)

I'd answer your question, but as I have already blocked him I couldn't see your comment.

Re:What about Justin Bieber (1)

Reilaos (1544173) | about 4 years ago | (#32886456)

The obvious workaround would be to get into a deep, loving relationship with Justin, then break up with him and use this software.

Re:What about Justin Bieber (1)

Hatta (162192) | about 4 years ago | (#32886612)

The only times I've ever heard people talking about Justin Bieber is when they're complaining that people talk too much about Justin Bieber. Is that the joke?

Re:What about Justin Bieber (1)

tx2 (1646817) | about 4 years ago | (#32886630)

STOP! Justin is winning!

Re:What about Justin Bieber (0, Redundant)

Grimbleton (1034446) | about 4 years ago | (#32886656)


What is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32886428) ex? :D

Will it block itself? (1)

certron (57841) | about 4 years ago | (#32886536)

What if your ex-girlfriend's name is JESS3?

Re:Will it block itself? (1)

vlm (69642) | about 4 years ago | (#32887842)

I thought you wrote "Jesus" at first glance. Nice.

Yeah, my girlfriend's name is, uh .. "world cup" yeah I never want to see any of that waste of time again.

China would love this! (1)

tx2 (1646817) | about 4 years ago | (#32886576)

This must be a cheaper solution than what they doing now!

scary (1)

chichilalescu (1647065) | about 4 years ago | (#32886640)

reminds me that a lot of people are living in fantasies completely cut off from reality.

I just want a plugin (2, Funny)

zish (174783) | about 4 years ago | (#32886666)

that gives worms to ex-girlfriends.

Re:I just want a plugin (1)

LordNightwalker (256873) | about 4 years ago | (#32886926)

The plugin is called a knife, and you'll have to wait a bit for the worms to appear... Not speaking of personal experience, of course.

Re:I just want a plugin (2, Funny)

zish (174783) | about 4 years ago | (#32888886)

Knife would take too long to learn how to do correctly. Remember, the goal is only worms. Poking a hole in the security layer only invites other forms of malware to intrude. The plugin needs to make use of an already available connector or API (Aperture Pervasion Interface).

Re:I just want a plugin (2, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | about 4 years ago | (#32887238)

that gives worms to ex-girlfriends.

Make sure you think about all possible meanings of that sentence before you make your genie-wish.

Re:I just want a plugin (1)

zish (174783) | about 4 years ago | (#32888586)

I did.
I stand by my aspirations (by all definitions. You can look 'em up in your Funk and Wagnalls.).

Re:I just want a plugin (1)

bar-agent (698856) | about 4 years ago | (#32904416)

Granted! The next girlfriend you have will now have worms. She was someone's ex, after all.

Re:I just want a plugin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32887846)

How about crabs?

Re:I just want a plugin (1)

zish (174783) | about 4 years ago | (#32888650)

Is there a plugin for this?

Re:I just want a plugin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32889542)

and would this plugin work with, say, ex-boyfriends as well?

Re:I just want a plugin (1)

gblackwo (1087063) | about 4 years ago | (#32891818)

I am a braincandy lover too!

more options (1)

hort_wort (1401963) | about 4 years ago | (#32886680)

Can we have options to block annoying public figures without having to type in all their names? Like an "every guest who was ever on fox news" button would be nice for me.

Re:more options (2, Funny)

operagost (62405) | about 4 years ago | (#32887428)

President Obama, is that you?

Re:more options (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 4 years ago | (#32888770)

Obama was a guest on Fox News...

Re:more options (1)

Mister Whirly (964219) | about 4 years ago | (#32891020)

A guest who has apparently overstayed his welcome there.

Re:more options (1)

operagost (62405) | about 4 years ago | (#32891810)

Sorry, I just couldn't see him being on there.

Difference (1)

gatzby3jr (809590) | about 4 years ago | (#32886734)

And for Slashdot, the internet looked the same...

Tomorrow's announcement... (5, Funny)

silverglade00 (1751552) | about 4 years ago | (#32886740)

Software company JESS3 announces service providing lists of available women for sale. Using the blocklists provided by their Ex-Blocker software, they have amassed lists of recently single women and are making them available to you for a low, low price!

Re:Tomorrow's announcement... (1)

StikyPad (445176) | about 4 years ago | (#32888314)

Obviously this is for *women*, not men, otherwise why would they mention the possibility of an ex getting elected!?!?

Plus, moving on...? That's not how we roll.

That's great, but... (3, Interesting)

LSD-OBS (183415) | about 4 years ago | (#32886880)

won't somebody please write a plugin that strips all that horrific fucking waste of space we all know as "Urchin" from all URLs? I want something thorough. It must strip all that "&utm_source=xxx&utm_campaign=xxx" etc off every link rendered in the html, and off every URL pasted into the browser, and everything copied into the clipboard. It's not that I fundamentally hate being tracked (well, I do, but...), it's just that when you have a URL consisting of 200 chars, 150 of which are Urchin tracking bullshit, you know YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. The necessary information could easily be stored in a single GUID, with a bit of forethought.

In case you're wondering, yes, Urchin and I were an item until she ate my last Rolo, punched my mom and ran away with my siamese twin sibling.

Privoxy (1)

xororand (860319) | about 4 years ago | (#32889318)

It's not a browser plug-in but otherwise, Privoxy [] is your friend. Quoting from their home page:
"Privoxy is a non-caching web proxy with advanced filtering capabilities for enhancing privacy, modifying web page data and HTTP headers, controlling access, and removing ads and other obnoxious Internet junk. Privoxy has a flexible configuration and can be customized to suit individual needs and tastes. It has application for both stand-alone systems and multi-user networks."

Re:That's great, but... (1)

samael (12612) | about 4 years ago | (#32897028)

Re:That's great, but... (1)

LSD-OBS (183415) | about 4 years ago | (#32897232)

Aha, I figured there would be a greasemonkey script for it

Hey, kdawson: (1, Interesting)

Rogerborg (306625) | about 4 years ago | (#32887096)


likeness? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | about 4 years ago | (#32887342)

Facial recognition? I suppose they could tune it with old photos and count false positives as positives.

Amazing! (1)

Ibetthisisvalid (1845368) | about 4 years ago | (#32887466)

If only it could be /kickandban. Take that bitch, no more internet for you.

Re:Amazing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32889406)

Ah, well, some of us work at the local monopoly ISP. Such a thing can be done...

You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (2, Insightful)

pinkushun (1467193) | about 4 years ago | (#32887986)

While preaching anti-censorship at the same time. Think about it. The best you can do about ex'es is to forget they exist. Mental programming is much more effective than a browser plugin :P

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about 4 years ago | (#32888884)

You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool while preaching anti-censorship at the same time.

Completely wrong. If you defend personal liberty, you defend the right to censor yourself. The problem is forcing that on to others.

In fact, that's what anti-internet censorship people say: if you don't want to see porn or whatever, instal a filter on your PC - don't try to filter everyone. This is exactly the same thing.

I wouldn't do it, but it's not hypocrisy in any way.

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32888888)

I want to forget your misused apostrophe.

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | about 4 years ago | (#32890280)

Censorship, as people object to it, is when someone else prevents you from seeing something they don't want you to see.
This browser tool, by contrast, allows YOU to choose things you don't want to see on the Internet.

So no, this is not hypocrisy. It's only censorship in the sense that choosing not to look at something is censoring your vision.

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (1)

JSBiff (87824) | about 4 years ago | (#32891170)

"Censorship, as people object to it, is when someone else prevents you from seeing something they don't want you to see."

Or, more generally, when someone else (C) prevents or alters communication between two other people (or groups of people, etc).

If the government stops you from making a political speech, that's censorship.

If I choose not to spend time listening to you, that's not censorship.

You have a right to speak, but there's no right to be heard.

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (1)

Larryish (1215510) | about 4 years ago | (#32894512)

I can choose to censor myself, as well as filter what I bring in.

Censorship becomes a problem when others try to forcefully censor me, or filter what I bring in.

I see no hypocrisy.

Re:You're a hypocrite if you think this is cool (1)

pinkushun (1467193) | about 4 years ago | (#32897044)

Everyone makes very good points about it not being hypocrisy, perhaps in some cases this might not be true.

Example: I can prevent myself from seeing bestial porn, because it goes against my moral values;

While: blocking updates from my ex, who describes her latest cooking expedition, and causes no objective moral dilemma, just proves that I'm a childish ignorant fool who doesn't want to deal with reality.

Censorship is preventative if it occurs *before* the said expression is made public, and punitive *after* it is made public.

I focused on the punitive context in this case, I should have made that more clear :-)

Misery loves company (1)

StikyPad (445176) | about 4 years ago | (#32888148)

I don't get it.. how is this better than just breaking their ankles and keeping them tied up on a bed? They can't get elected if they can't run. (Get it?) Plus they'll probably fall in love with you all over again while you nurse them back to health. Win-win.

Political use (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32888762)

Could I use this to erase any memory of the Bush II administration?

JESS3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32888958)

I've worked with these guys directly and cleaned up work they did for other clients. I can assure you this plug-in's code is dog shit, will leak memory, and not work in the end. In other words, you'd be better off getting back together with your ex.

My "ex" is named Sarah Palin (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32889402)

Seriously, if I could never hear about this woman again...

Awwww... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 years ago | (#32889458)

Dammit, I was hoping to block Twilight and Eclipse. But it only accepts first and last names...

General content obstruction? (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | about 4 years ago | (#32889688)

That's cool and all, but what I really want is a way to block certain sites and content from search results and "delink" them from pages. For Google it would be a maintained list of -site: switches, and for general sites it would be the removal of the anchor tag when targeting a site in the same list of sites. Probably a Grease Monkey script would be the easiest route, but I'm better at making Slashdot comments than I am at making scripts, so here I am.

robots.txt => ex.txt (1)

mounthood (993037) | about 4 years ago | (#32890146)

We just need a universal cookie that's sent to all websites. It would say something like:

The current user has had all memories of <ex's name> removed from their memory.

Please do not mention this person.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>