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!

Has Kickstarter Peaked?

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the novelty-only-lasts-so-long dept.

Businesses 156

Nerval's Lobster writes "Kickstarter has taken off in the past year, raising big money for a wide variety of projects. Look at some of their stats: in June 2012, only seven projects raised more than a million dollars apiece; in the past nine months, another 16 projects have passed that threshold. Since the site began operations in 2009, several of the 38,000 funded projects have broken out as superstars, including the Pebble Watch and a new gaming console. With all this competition, has crowdfunding gotten, well, too crowded? Is Kickstarter peaking? As the dollar amounts have grown, so has the potential for abuse. Hidden amidst all these success stories and multi-million dollar payouts are some sadder tales. The majority of the nearly 50,000 unfunded Kickstarter projects received less than 20 precent of their funding goals, with 11 percent never even getting a single pledge."

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

Yet another one..... (5, Insightful)

antifoidulus (807088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289421)

Has "Has X peaked?" articles peaked?

Re:Yet another one..... (5, Funny)

goombah99 (560566) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289495)

I just started a new Kickstarter project to create the next kickstarter. Please sign up.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

walkerreuben (2837841) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289669)

You forgot to give us the link, or at least a name to search for.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

jareth-0205 (525594) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291099)

You forgot to give us the link, or at least a name to search for.


Re:Yet another one..... (1)

organgtool (966989) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291315)

"I want to create a vending machine that sells vending machines, but it'd have to be REALLY fucking big!"
-- Mitch Hedberg

When will we get it from an ethical bank? (1)

Herve5 (879674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291985)

Indeed, I'll sign up in a heartbeat as soon as you show me your very own KS is backed by an ethical bank.

As I'm not sure all of you know what it is, let's say these are very difficult to find (there is only one in my country*); in general they are non-profit banking associations thaf obviously won't even think about playing on stock exchanges.
And yes they run, reasonably, and more importantly, in a very robust way.

A Kickstarter launched by one such bank, I'd just love. I'd not invest in it: I'd donate. Yes.

(*) in France: Credit Cooperatif. Been here for 10 years now.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

Grashnak (1003791) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289667)

Buy my new book, "How Peak Kickstarter Will Lead to the Apocalypse" - currently available on Kickstarter ;)

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

50000BTU_barbecue (588132) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289753)

Well, bad grammar never peaks, it seems.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290453)

Yes I know that I should have used the plural form of the verb since the subject was plural, but I intentionally used the exact same format as the original article to prove my point... You know this wacky thing called "communication". You should try it sometime.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

50000BTU_barbecue (588132) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291833)

Just below ...

"Has X peaked?" articles considered harmful."

Communicating isn't that hard.

Re:Yet another one..... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289869)

"Has X peaked?" articles considered harmful.

Re:Yet another one..... (1, Funny)

rioki (1328185) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291667)

+1 Funny

Where are my mod points when I need them.

Brian's girlfriend (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289881)

Brian on "Family Guy" have a girlfriend that ended every sentence with the inflection of a question.

Anyway, that's what I think of when I see these "articles": a ditzy cartoon blond.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

Big Hairy Ian (1155547) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290629)

Somebody wake me when Facebook peaks.

Re:Yet another one..... (1)

frogjimmy (1253756) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291061)

I have all but stopped reading the articles that pose a question. Including the sensationalist ones. If the headline leaves me with any doubt, I believe it to be garbage and skip it.

Does it matter? (4, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289423)

Kickstarter itself cannot reasonably be used as source for projects to be funded. If there is a project you are potentially interested in, you have to get it from some other source. But that is fine, first and foremost, Kickstarter organizes the "business" side, having "advertising" separately is not an issue. And of course there will be a lot of projects nobody is interested in or that have unrealistic goals or are otherwise "fishy". Again, so what?

Re:Does it matter? (2)

dkf (304284) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289477)

Betteridge says "No". Kickstarter hasn't peaked, and it doesn't matter. Phew! Thought I might have to read the article (or even follow the links!) there, and we can't be having that.

Re:Does it matter? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289745)

I'm still eagerly awaiting when the habit of mentioning Betteridge every single time a title contains a question mark has peaked. Unfortunately I fear that Peak Betteridge is still quite a bit in the future.

Betteridge - has it peaked? (2)

Hognoxious (631665) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290273)

Unfortunately I fear that Peak Betteridge is still quite a bit in the future.

See subject line.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

L1mewater (557442) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291615)

I'm just disappointed that this one didn't include a link to the Wikipedia article on Betteridge's Law.

The trick is to kickstart a kickstarter (1)

mozumder (178398) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289899)

You still have to publicize your kickstarter. Send your friends/colleagues, relevant media outlets/blogs, and interested third parties an email indicating the nature of the project. Blogs will pick it up and write about it, leading to multiplied audience for the project.

Re:Does it matter? (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290361)

"Kickstarter itself cannot reasonably be used as source for projects to be funded."

except it has been, continually, and successfully. We're talking multi-million dollar projects now.

So in short, you are wrong - but the entire discussion isn't even factual or relevant. the question of "has kickstarter peaked" is an asinine question in the first place.

Re:Does it matter? (4, Insightful)

Baloroth (2370816) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290949)

"Kickstarter itself cannot reasonably be used as source for projects to be funded."

except it has been, continually, and successfully. We're talking multi-million dollar projects now.

He means "as a source to learn about projects to be funded", not "as a method of aggregating funding." Hence his mention of "advertising." He is right: it's almost impossible, browsing their catalog, to find which are good projects and which aren't, given how many projects there often are (you can do it, but it's quite a lot of work). The only real filter is by already popular projects, which means that project has already gotten attention from external sources. Every project I've funded on there I've found out about through a different site.

Interest (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289433)

Not everybody is interested in everything and I am sure there are many projects that didn't get their funding due to not being known well enough with its targetted audience.

Its not because you start a project that people should like it and fund it. Sometimes a project simply isn't good enough.

Nothing really changed (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289453)

Kickstarter didn't really change anything. The success stories have been on the back of great marketing campaigns done by experienced marketeers. Hence, Elite and Ouya were able to make money, without really offering very much that couldn't have been done anyway (Braben couldn't get publisher money for Elite? Of course he could - but the Kickstarter money has fewer strings attached, and no penalty if he screws it up). Often, Kickstarters will already have funding and just need a bit more to launch - it's a pre-order system, and really does nothing to help start new ventures. And as with everything else, you need to get your head above the crowd. Not everyone can do that - by definition - so there's bound to be a majority of failures and a few stars. But the market already worked like that, so nothing has changed. Fundamentally you still need a business with a product that people want to buy, and you have to reach those people with marketing. Kickstarter doesn't help with any of that - why would it?

Saying it's "peaked" is missing the point. It assumes that Kickstarter was meant to be something it never could have been anyway. Once you ignore the hyperbole of what Kickstarter thinks it is, and look at what it actually is, there's no case to answer. It's a website serving a purpose, and that purpose hasn't gone away, but nor is it greater than what it really is

Re:Nothing really changed (5, Insightful)

Vintermann (400722) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289721)

The claim that nothing has happened with kickstarter that wouldn't have happened otherwise is nice and untestable, as we can't run history backwards and try what would have happened without it. It's still silly and obviously false.

What Kickstarter provides is a mechanism for overcoming a collective action problem. You might be willing to pay $15 to make a Veronica Mars movie, but you're not going to pay $15 for a Veronica Mars movie that's made on a $15 budget. Kickstarter lets you conditionally commit to something, the condition being that the product can be realized to an acceptable quality (as measured in budget. Not the perfect measure, but it's the one you've got). This is a service which has been able to large scale investors before, but not to end users/consumers/what you want to call us.

Project starters on the other side, get a low-risk way to gauge interest in the product. A conditional preordering scheme is not the same, because they can't reserve the purchase amount. Companies that have conditional preordering schemes have had big issues with people committing to buy, then changing their mind when the product actually got produced. (The board game company GMT has had this problem. It has led to some flamewar/meltdowns on BGG.)

This is a real, tangible difference which can be predicted to make a difference in market outcomes.

This is also why the "flexible funding" schemes of sites like IndieGoGo is such a scam. They really do offer nothing new. It's just fundraising on a website. Crowdfunding without the threshold pledge mechanism is not deserving of the name.

Investing (1)

DogDude (805747) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291357)

This is a service which has been able to large scale investors before, but not to end users/consumers/what you want to call us.

The "service" of not having your money kick in until enough of others' people money can be a clause in an investment deal, true. BUT, Kickstarter has nothing to do with investing. Kickstarter is NOT investing in any way, shape, or form. It's irresponsible to suggest that Kickstarter is investing because so many uneducated people would believe you.

Re:Nothing really changed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291617)

But you're not going to pay $15 for a Veronica Mars movie that's made on a $15 budget.

I don't know, I can think of a couple scenes with a very high replay value that I could shoot with my cell phone, if Kristen Bell was willing to do half an hour of work for that $15.

Re:Nothing really changed (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289743)

I've contributed to a couple of kickstarted games (Elite, Star Citizen, Torment), and the main point for the authors seems to be precisely the lack of a publisher (i.e. EA), with the implied greater freedom to make the games as they want and not as the publisher believes they should be (thus avoiding things like the recent SimCity ridicule).

Also, it's seen as a good way to gauge your potential audience in advance. A good kickstarter campaign probablymeans good sales when your product comes out.

Re:Nothing really changed (3, Informative)

dintech (998802) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289755)

I am one of the backers for the Elite Kickstarter. I think the 'strings attached' bit is probably quite important for an elderly game like Elite. Lets say hypothetically that worst case, someone like EA was the publisher. Everything would be micro-transaction, autolog bullshit with an annoying soundtrack you can't turn off and a 'hey radical' southern-california commentator giving you a mind-meltingly droll tutorial on how to be the hottest, slickest new pilot in the galaxy with pats on the head every 5 minutes. It would need to be themed on a music festival, surf exhibition, frat party or some other 'down-with-the-kids' irrelevance. Of course there has to be a leader board from which some 16 year old ass-hat leaves an audio-message for everyone declaring his teabag is the biggest.

You would have to deal with the fallout from some EA Exec demanding that every time you destroyed another ship, crashed in to one or came with a few metres of one, you get a 3 second cut scene that pauses the action because "it's more 'Michael Bay' that way". When you finally dock after many, many, wooshing, spinning, exploding menu options, you get the pretty much compulsory option of using real money to get rid of your wanted status or whatever, which is probably the only way to progress since like an Ikea store, there seems to be no way to circumvent what you don't want. Every couple of AU that you travel you'll get.... an achievement! Awesome! You will be able to buy 50 achievements with your real money and then sell them for new ships or some other weird artificial game mechanic, all while enduring commercials from "out trusted partners". This certainty was all but avoided because of Kickstarter. I rest my case.

Re:Nothing really changed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290291)

You had won with a simple 'But EA.' :D

Re:Nothing really changed (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290133)

The success stories have been on the back of great marketing campaigns done by experienced marketeers.

Only if you define "success" as a project that "made a media splash" and "raised huge amounts of cash in a short period of time". I participated in a project where the only "marketing" largely consisted of an announcement on the creators blog, and an announcement on a blog the creator was already widely known on for the project he was seeking to fund*... word of mouth within the community accomplished the rest.

*It was an ongoing project to document drive-in theaters, a project he'd been known for and working on for years. A large number will go dark over the next few years, making it imperative the work be completed as soon as reasonably possible.

Re:Nothing really changed (1)

Mystakaphoros (2664209) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290641)

I've also seen some (and been involved with a few of my own) where the only "marketing" consisted of an announcement on the creator's blog or Facebook page, and since nobody knew about them, the project tanked. Seems little the fault of Kickstarter, no?

Re:Nothing really changed (2)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291701)

Yep. There's a lot of people who seem to think that Kickstarter is one-stop-shop, when in reality it's really nothing more than a payment processor. Everything else is up to the creator.

Re:Nothing really changed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290163)

Money with strings is radically different from money without strings when you don't want to compromise your vision for a publishers'.

Re:Nothing really changed (4, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290789)

Braben couldn't get publisher money for Elite? Of course he could - but the Kickstarter money has fewer strings attached

Braben is an artist. This gets him artistic freedom, which is exactly what game development has been lacking over the past decade. Same with Brian Fargo. You think he hasn't tried to get a turn based RPG made this century? I'm sure he has, but hasn't been able to for business reasons. Kickstarter made that possible.

Re:Nothing really changed (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290975)

And as with everything else, you need to get your head above the crowd. Not everyone can do that - by definition - so there's bound to be a majority of failures and a few stars. But the market already worked like that, so nothing has changed.

Relevant []

Re:Nothing really changed (2)

bfandreas (603438) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291183)

The things that got kickstarted would propably have found other funding. That's true.
But what Kickstarter has changed is that Joe Average could chip in. In the olden days all this stuff would have been funded by the usual suspects.

In the case of video games I have to say that a lot of the things that got kickstarted had been ignored by the big publishers for decades in some cases. Those don't touch anything that's not Battlefries 5: Whatever. New Post Processing! More Polgons! More Emotion! A New Era For Entertainment! The Same Old Shit Done So Well You Won't Notice! Suckers!

A spiritual successor for Planescape: Torment, Wasteland, Elite...weren't picked up for 10 years upwards. Yet ask Joe Schmoe and he starts throwing money at the screen, squealing like a piggie! They propably would have gotten the money elsewhere but certainly not Big Publishers(the ones that aren't bankrupt or close to it). And the squealing like a piggie bit wouldn't have been done by the publishers.

A new way to fund stuff is never bad.

Ad (4, Interesting)

Vintermann (400722) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289465)

This blog reads like a huge ad for the dozen various companies that have popped up to try to leech off would-be Kickstarter project starters. Some people are obviously taking the lesson about selling mining equipment to gold diggers to heart.

Lack of Publicity (4, Insightful)

StoneyMahoney (1488261) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289483)

Pointing the finger at under-achieving projects as evidence of some kind of peak is silly - under-publicity is more likely to be the cause there, especially for projects that get nothing at all. I seem to recall iTunes have a similar problem for a lot of it's artists, I can't find a link for it but a huge % of tracks on iTunes were reported at one time as having 0 purchases. IIRC it was something like a third. Looks like people are prematurely worrying this is a bubble, which is understandable considering the economic damage we've suffered over the past 15-20 years thanks to bubbles.

Re:Lack of Publicity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290557)

The economic damage we've suffered over the last 15-20 years thanks to bubbles? Try the last 300-400 years, since the birth of modern capitalism.

Re:Lack of Publicity (3, Interesting)

bobbaddeley (981674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291043)

Definitely this.

We have a kickstarter campaign going right now, and we've posted some of our behind-the-scenes stats: []

Our video has less than 2000 views; of course we're failing. We've done everything we can to get publicity, but we're doing something wrong, or we're just not lucky. Kickstarter failures are more a testament to one's ability to tell a story and get publicity, not necessarily to the product.

Slightly shamed plug (I would be remiss if I didn't post): []

Re:Lack of Publicity (1)

joelsherrill (132624) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291349)

Your scoreboard looks interesting and if you could get information in front of the 1000s of youth soccer leagues, it has potential. I have no proof of this but suspect that the kickstarter audience is (as a broad and biased sweep) NOT the athletic type and most are not the parents of 4-13 year old soccer players. This looks like a product that needs word of mouth in the RIGHT community.

Have you all taken it out to soccer fields and shown it in action?

Have you tried to get the attention of an organization like [] and get it featured in a review or article in whatever news outlet they have?

Have you talked with local high school coaches about this and offered them loaners?

Once you get a little local exposure at the soccer field, call the newspapers and television stations and see if they will feature a story on this. A local feel good story might find you other marketing outlets or an angel backer.

DISCLAIMER: I am a backer of Bartendro on kickstarter. Others have mentioned being backers of nerdy board or computer games. Maybe kickstarter isn't the best place to hawk a sports related product. :)

Re:Lack of Publicity (2)

bobbaddeley (981674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291517)

You're absolutely right, joel.

Yes, we've taken it to a variety of field sports and have always had great feedback, and some have wanted to buy them on the spot. Most of our beta testers are high school coaches or tournament organizers. We have a rolling stock of units that we loan out for a few months (it's time-consuming and expensive to make these units by hand, so we are loaning them out, though some have purchased them to keep them longer). We've had organizations preorder in bulk separately from our Kickstarter campaign. Some of our units have been in the field for over a year now. We've tried contacting local media many times but can't get them to pick us up. We've also been contacting various sports clubs, but rec sports have surprisingly few central media locations, so we're having to go to region by region and sport by sport.

We know Kickstarter isn't our target market, and we knew we were going to have a hard time making it work. But if we are successful, it will skip a few steps for us, so the potential gain is worth the effort, and we're learning a lot about PR and marketing along the way. We'll be making a batch of 100 units soon using our last dollars, and we'll get our traction the old fashioned way.

Re:Lack of Publicity (2)

Nidi62 (1525137) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291725)

We've tried contacting local media many times but can't get them to pick us up. We've also been contacting various sports clubs, but rec sports have surprisingly few central media locations, so we're having to go to region by region and sport by sport.

Try contacting officiating organizations. I am a member of the largest and oldest high school football officiating associations in my state, and I know a lot of our members work rec games on the side(not just football either), and some run either rec leagues or are in charge of the officials for the leagues. If you can find and get in contact with officials organizations, they can probably help spread the word of your product out to teams. You can try the state high school associations too.

Re:Lack of Publicity (1)

bobbaddeley (981674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291875)

That's a great idea. Thank you.

Re:Lack of Publicity (2)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291885)

but we're doing something wrong, or we're just not lucky.

Or nobody gives a damn about your product. Or in a world swamped with smartphone related gadgets, one more fairly lame one isn't enough to grab any significant attention. Or your "branding genius and community builder" isn't actually all that good at her job. Or... There's a long laundry list and that just the stuff you have some hope of controlling.

Has it peaked? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289491)

Has bitcoin peaked?
Has Apple peaked?
Has US military power peaked?
Have sales of pens peaked?

Have lazy, crappy articles peaked? Hell no, baby! This is slashdot, party like it's 1999 because we are on the shitty articles bubble!

Digg it!

Re:Has it peaked? (1)

Mystakaphoros (2664209) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290651)

"Shitty articles bubble." That, my friend, is some impressive imagery. Kudos!

Betteridge's law of headlines (5, Insightful)

Xugumad (39311) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289497)


Seriously though, probably not. It's experiencing a dip after it's initial surge of interest. It's not a roller coaster, or a rocket, it's a company. It will have ups and downs. Demand will fluctuate over time. It can experience market saturation (those of us who have now kickstarter-ed so many projects that we need to wait for some to finish before we pay for more).

Also; what's this nonsense about 50,000 projects and not getting near their total, as if that's a bad thing. It's not a magic money tree; most of those projects probably didn't interest people, so they failed at the first hurdle. That's not a tale of woe, that's someone being saved from spending months/years of their life developing a product that wasn't going to sell.

Re:Betteridge's law of headlines (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291733)

It's not a roller coaster, or a rocket, it's a company. It will have ups and downs.

Like a roller coaster?

those of us who have now kickstarter-ed so many projects that we need to wait for some to finish before we pay for more

Have any finished? The one I helped fund hasn't. I did some Google searches and found lots of "success" at raising funds, but not a single successful project. Maybe it's too early, but still, this idea is dead if it doesn't actually work.

Sounds about right (4, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289509)

Most projects are bad ideas or don't appeal widely enough to be worth funding. The point of Kickstarter is to cut out the middle man between people who want a product or service and people willing to provide it. It isn't meant to fund things that there is no market for, it is meant to directly connect the funding for things with the existence of a market.

Better to fail at Kickstarter phase.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289637)

But maybe it's bad marketing, a bad idea, badly presented or whatever. If they couldn't get Kickstarter funding it means not enough people said "I want that, lets make it happen" and that means they would have died once the project was done anyway. But it doesn't necessarily mean there's no market, only that Bob's idea wasn't the right one for it.

Ouya was professional promoted. ZeFrank's new show was marketed among his followers (exactly the target market), there's more to launching a new thing, than the thing itself.

Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (3, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289553)

I mainly pick up games on kickstarter...and initially games were pretty cheap about $5, the companies got seed money during development, and maybe I get a game...all of a sudden those games have shot up in price to $20, its gone from funding development to payment upfront...I haven't funded a game in a while.

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (1)

Xemu (50595) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289631)

I mainly pick up games on kickstarter...and initially games were pretty cheap about $5, the companies got seed money during development, and maybe I get a game...all of a sudden those games have shot up in price to $20, its gone from funding development to payment upfront...I haven't funded a game in a while.

It's because of people like you that Kickstarter is failing. Shame on you!

Of course not. Not every project posted on Kickstarter inherently deserves to succeed. There's a lot of crap posted on Kickstarter now, where people outright beg for money for nothing. ("Hey, I want to do X, never did it before, fresh out of college, show me they money")

It's also mostly treated as a pre-order system - "Hey, give us X dollars for product Y today and you'll maybe get it when we build it" is a really dangerous proposition. As the backer, we take all the risks, for no gain. X dollars for product Y is not a gain either, as you can buy the product Z online today for X dollars, and it does the same as the future-Y would do.

          I can fund the development of a game because I want to see the game come to life, but why should I fund the manufacturing of product Y, where I can buy Y+1 in the store next door already. A game is a unique piece of digital art, a random manufactured product very rarely is unique except in shape or colour.

There's another huge problem and that is the high failure rate and high risk of backing. I have backed five projects now, and so far only one has delivered - the other four are all late by 6 months or more. I am definitely more cautious with funding another project now. 20% success rate is abysmal and makes backing projects a very expensive hobby.

Kickstarter in itself is doing fine, but the good projects are being shadowed by the many poor ones. In a way, Kickstarter is failing because it's own success.

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289711)

20% success is about as good as most venture capital investments

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289781)

not even close, Venture Capital investments are usually looking at around a 30% failure rate and at least a 30% success rate with the rest in the middle. (success usually being defined as a 5-10 fold return on investment) having said that venture capital investments usually are done with more scrutiny as the investment size is considerably larger than what you throw at kickstarter.

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289971)

VC gets money back on that 20% which hopefully covers their 80% otherwise VC is out of business.

The 20% KS rate is primarily because people have no clue the time it takes. Over and over it's the same excuse - thought they could take their prototype to production in 6 months and 18 months later still struggling.

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (1)

bobbaddeley (981674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43292109)

People are starting to get better at realizing the true costs and work required to be successful on Kickstarter, which is why the costs are going up. Kickstarter's cut, shipping, taxes, logistics, tooling, and labor are all costs involved in mass production that many projects don't take into account enough. That's why they've been delayed so much. Building a prototype and calculating the cost of materials is only a fraction of the actual cost of the product. Many of the Kickstarters before weren't calculating those costs, or the tooling times and component lead times, and weren't building test rigs for quality control.

On the other end, Kickstarter backers are expecting huge discounts on the products, too, so at the end of the day, there's almost no margin for the team, and they have to scramble to find a way to make their project work without losing money, and they don't have enough money left over to get their business off the ground.

If you're backing projects where the price is too good, the risk is high that you'll have a delayed delivery.

Re:Kickstarter has peakerd for me. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289879)

Huh, I've never thought of kickstarter funding (I've contributed to Elite, Star Citizen and Torment) as "buying a game"... I buy my games on Steam.

I use kickstarter to get games I will really want to play and I might not be able to otherwise (or worse, might end up being an EA game).

I'm happy to pay more for that (also higher tiers get better goodies).

Failure to fund (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289601)

is one of the core ideas behind Kickstarter -- all or nothing. If you can't get enough people on board for your project, you might want to rethink the viability of your project.

I think the bigger question is whether the "successful" projects can deliver on their promises. Some have done very well, others have been a mixed bag (delays, production quality issues, cost overruns), and there's many press-worthy ones from the last year or so that aren't going to ship for another year or two.

Personally, I've got a couple hundred dollars worth of "preorders" mostly for video games on Kickstarter, some of which may never see the light of day or might end up falling far short of what was promised.

Another question is the degree to which Kickstarter will become "commercialized" and less indie, in the sense that established businesses, big or small, turn to Kickstarter as a marketing tool. One one side, you have the dreamers taking on "risky" projects, some of which might fail, and your money is helping them realize that dream. Meanwhile, some of those creators may have completely oversold their ability to actually execute the project, and probably should have invested more of their own time and money doing the basic groundwork before asking others to pitch in.

On the other side, you have people creating Kickstarter projects for products that are basically 85% complete, and Kickstarter basically serves as a preorder system and/or a way to wring extra money out of people willing to pay $500 for a t-shirt and a producer credit or something.

I suppose if people want to pay PBS-pledge-drive-like amounts of money to feel like they're a part of the project, I'm not one to say that they can't or shouldn't; I do wonder how many Kickstarter projects are *misrepresenting* themselves as an effort that *needs* your money to make it happen, even when they really just want more of your money to produce something they were going to do anyway.

I'd be more inclined to be "charitable" with my pledges if I had the impression that it would make the end result materially better, rather than merely lining the pockets of the creators. Some of the projects have explicit stretch goals detailing where the extra resources could be used, like hiring voice actors, higher quality materials, etc, but those seem to be less common in some categories than others.

Learn the truth... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289615)

Mainly in efficiency - it runs in Ring 0/RPL 0/PnP Kernelmode (on Windows), as merely a filter for the IP stack (no overheads of more driver layers OR browser level slower less efficient addons):

21++ ADVANTAGES OF CUSTOM HOSTS FILES (how/what/when/where/why):

Over AdBlock & DNS Servers ALONE 4 Security, Speed, Reliability, & Anonymity (to an extent vs. DNSBL's + DNS request logs).

1.) HOSTS files are useable for all these purposes because they are present on all Operating Systems that have a BSD based IP stack (even ANDROID) and do adblocking for ANY webbrowser, email program, etc. (any webbound program). A truly "multi-platform" UNIVERSAL solution for added speed, security, reliability, & even anonymity to an extent (vs. DNS request logs + DNSBL's you feel are unjust hosts get you past/around).

2.) Adblock blocks ads? Well, not anymore & certainly not as well by default, apparently, lol - see below:

Adblock Plus To Offer 'Acceptable Ads' Option [] )

AND, in only browsers & their subprogram families (ala email like Thunderbird for FireFox/Mozilla products (use same gecko & xulrunner engines)), but not all, or, all independent email clients, like Outlook, Outlook Express, OR Window "LIVE" mail (for example(s)) - there's many more like EUDORA & others I've used over time that AdBlock just DOES NOT COVER... period.

Disclaimer: Opera now also has an AdBlock addon (now that Opera has addons above widgets), but I am not certain the same people make it as they do for FF or Chrome etc..

3.) Adblock doesn't protect email programs external to FF (non-mozilla/gecko engine based) family based wares, So AdBlock doesn't protect email programs like Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows "LIVE" mail & others like them (EUDORA etc./et al), Hosts files do. THIS IS GOOD VS. SPAM MAIL or MAILS THAT BEAR MALICIOUS SCRIPT, or, THAT POINT TO MALICIOUS SCRIPT VIA URLS etc.

4.) Adblock won't get you to your favorite sites if a DNS server goes down or is DNS-poisoned, hosts will (this leads to points 5-7 next below).

5.) Adblock doesn't allow you to hardcode in your favorite websites into it so you don't make DNS server calls and so you can avoid tracking by DNS request logs, OR make you reach them faster since you resolve host-domain names LOCALLY w/ hosts out of cached memory, hosts do ALL of those things (DNS servers are also being abused by the Chinese lately and by the Kaminsky flaw -> [] for years now). Hosts protect against those problems via hardcodes of your fav sites (you should verify against the TLD that does nothing but cache IPAddress-to-domainname/hostname resolutions ( via NSLOOKUP, PINGS (ping -a in Windows), &/or WHOIS though, regularly, so you have the correct IP & it's current)).

* NOW - Some folks MAY think that putting an IP address alone into your browser's address bar will be enough, so why bother with HOSTS, right? WRONG - Putting IP address in your browser won't always work IS WHY. Some IP adresses host several domains & need the site name to give you the right page you're after is why. So for some sites only the HOSTS file option will work!

6.) Hosts files don't eat up CPU cycles (or ELECTRICITY) like AdBlock does while it parses a webpages' content, nor as much as a DNS server does while it runs. HOSTS file are merely a FILTER for the kernel mode/PnP TCP/IP subsystem, which runs FAR FASTER & MORE EFFICIENTLY than any ring 3/rpl3/usermode app can since hosts files run in MORE EFFICIENT & FASTER Ring 0/RPL 0/Kernelmode operations acting merely as a filter for the IP stack (via the "Plug-N-Play" designed IP stack in Windows) vs. SLOWER & LESS EFFICIENT Ring 3/RPL 3/Usermode operations (which webbrowsers run in + their addons like AdBlock slow down even MORESO due to their parsing operations).

7.) HOSTS files will allow you to get to sites you like, via hardcoding your favs into a HOSTS file, FAR faster than remote DNS servers can by FAR (by saving the roundtrip inquiry time to a DNS server, typically 30-100's of ms, vs. 7-10ms HardDisk speed of access/seek + SSD seek in ns, & back to you - hosts resolutions of IP address for host-domain names is FAR faster...). Hosts are only a filter for an already fast & efficient IP stack, no more layered b.s. (remote OR local). Hosts eat less CPU, RAM, I/O in other forms, + electricity than a locally running DNS server easily, and less than a local DNS program on a single PC. Fact. Hosts are easier to setup & maintain too.

8.) AdBlock doesn't let you block out known bad sites or servers that are known to be maliciously scripted, hosts can and many reputable lists for this exist:

Spybot "Search & Destroy" IMMUNIZE feature (fortifies HOSTS files with KNOWN bad servers blocked)

And yes: Even SLASHDOT &/or The Register help!

(Via articles on security (when the source articles they use are "detailed" that is, & list the servers/sites involved in attempting to bushwhack others online that is... not ALL do!)).

2 examples thereof in the past I have used, & noted it there, are/were: [] []

9.) AdBlock & DNS servers are programs, and subject to bugs programs can get. Hosts files are merely a filter and not a program, thus not subject to bugs of the nature just discussed.

10.) HOSTS files protect you vs. DNS-poisoning &/or the Kaminsky flaw in DNS servers, and allow you to get to sites reliably vs. things like the Chinese are doing to DNS -> []

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> [] ) & edited too, via texteditors like Windows notepad.exe or Linux nano (etc.)

12.) With Adblock you had better be able to code javascript to play with its code (to customize it better than the GUI front does @ least). With hosts you don't even need source to control it (edit, update, delete, insert of new entries via a text editor).

13.) Hosts files are easily secured via using MAC/ACL (even moreso "automagically" for Vista, 7/Server 2008 + beyond by UAC by default) &/or Read-Only attributes applied.

14.) Custom HOSTS files also speed you up, unlike anonymous proxy servers systems variations (like TOR, or other "highly anonymous" proxy server list servers typically do, in the severe speed hit they often have a cost in) either via "hardcoding" your fav. sites into your hosts file (avoids DNS servers, totally) OR blocking out adbanners - see this below for evidence of that:


US Military Blocks Websites To Free Up Bandwidth: []

(Yes, even the US Military used this type of technique... because IT WORKS! Most of what they blocked? Ad banners ala doubleclick etc.)


Adbanners slow you down & consume your bandwidth YOU pay for:



And people do NOT LIKE ads on the web:



As well as this:

Users Know Advertisers Watch Them, and Hate It: []


Even WORSE still, is this:

Advertising Network Caught History Stealing: []


15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy [] , because you are using less bandwidth (& go faster doing so no less) by NOT hauling in adbanner content and processing it (which can lead to infestation by malware/malicious script, in & of itself -> [] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: [] your internet bill will go DOWN if you use a HOSTS file for blocking adbanners as well as maliciously scripted hacker/cracker malware maker sites too (after all - it's your money & time online downloading adbanner content & processing it)

Plus, your adbanner content? Well, it may also be hijacked with malicious code too mind you:


Yahoo, Microsoft's Bing display toxic ads: []


Malware torrent delivered over Google, Yahoo! ad services: []


Google's DoubleClick spreads malicious ads (again): []


Rogue ads infiltrate Expedia and Rhapsody: []


Google sponsored links caught punting malware: []


DoubleClick caught supplying malware-tainted ads: []


Yahoo feeds Trojan-laced ads to MySpace and PhotoBucket users: []


Real Media attacks real people via RealPlayer: []


Ad networks owned by Google, Microsoft serve malware: []


Attacks Targeting Classified Ad Sites Surge: []


Hackers Respond To Help Wanted Ads With Malware: []


Hackers Use Banner Ads on Major Sites to Hijack Your PC: []


Ruskie gang hijacks Microsoft network to push penis pills: []


Major ISPs Injecting Ads, Vulnerabilities Into Web: []


Two Major Ad Networks Found Serving Malware: []












London Stock Exchange Web Site Serving Malware: []


Spotify splattered with malware-tainted ads: []


As my list "multiple evidences thereof" as to adbanners & viruses + the fact they slow you down & cost you more (from reputable & reliable sources no less)).

17.) Per point #16, a way to save some money: ANDROID phones can also use the HOSTS FILE TO KEEP DOWN BILLABLE TIME ONLINE, vs. adbanners or malware such as this:


Infected Androids Run Up Big Texting Bills: []


AND, for protection vs. other "botnets" migrating from the PC world, to "smartphones" such as ZITMO (a ZEUS botnet variant): []


It's easily done too, via the ADB dev. tool, & mounting ANDROID OS' system mountpoint for system/etc as READ + WRITE/ADMIN-ROOT PERMISSIONS, then copying your new custom HOSTS over the old one using ADB PULL/ADB PUSH to do so (otherwise ANDROID complains of "this file cannot be overwritten on production models of this Operating System", or something very along those lines - this way gets you around that annoyance along with you possibly having to clear some space there yourself if you packed it with things!).

18.) Bad news: ADBLOCK CAN BE DETECTED FOR: See here on that note -> []

HOSTS files are NOT THAT EASILY "webbug" BLOCKABLE by websites, as was tried on users by ARSTECHNICA (and it worked on AdBlock in that manner), to that websites' users' dismay:



An experiment gone wrong - By Ken Fisher | Last updated March 6, 2010 11:11 AM []

"Starting late Friday afternoon we conducted a 12 hour experiment to see if it would be possible to simply make content disappear for visitors who were using a very popular ad blocking tool. Technologically, it was a success in that it worked. Ad blockers, and only ad blockers, couldn't see our content."


"Our experiment is over, and we're glad we did it because it led to us learning that we needed to communicate our point of view every once in a while. Sure, some people told us we deserved to die in a fire. But that's the Internet!"

Thus, as you can see? Well - THAT all "went over like a lead balloon" with their users in other words, because Arstechnica was forced to change it back to the old way where ADBLOCK still could work to do its job (REDDIT however, has not, for example). However/Again - this is proof that HOSTS files can still do the job, blocking potentially malscripted ads (or ads in general because they slow you down) vs. adblockers like ADBLOCK!


19.) Even WIKILEAKS "favors" blacklists (because they work, and HOSTS can be a blacklist vs. known BAD sites/servers/domain-host names):



"we are in favour of 'Blacklists', be it for mail servers or websites, they have to be compiled with care... Fortunately, more responsible blacklists, like (which protects the Firefox browser)...


20.) AND, LASTLY? SINCE MALWARE GENERALLY HAS TO OPERATE ON WHAT YOU YOURSELF CAN DO (running as limited class/least privlege user, hopefully, OR even as ADMIN/ROOT/SUPERUSER)? HOSTS "LOCK IN" malware too, vs. communicating "back to mama" for orders (provided they have name servers + C&C botnet servers listed in them, blocked off in your HOSTS that is) - you might think they use a hardcoded IP, which IS possible, but generally they do not & RECYCLE domain/host names they own (such as has been seen with the RBN (Russian Business Network) lately though it was considered "dead", other malwares are using its domains/hostnames now, & this? This stops that cold, too - Bonus!)...

21.) Custom HOSTS files gain users back more "screen real estate" by blocking out banner ads... it's great on PC's for speed along with MORE of what I want to see/read (not ads), & efficiency too, but EVEN BETTER ON SMARTPHONES - by far. It matters MOST there imo @ least, in regards to extra screen real-estate.

Still - It's a GOOD idea to layer in the usage of BOTH browser addons for security like adblock ( [] ), IE 9's new TPL's ( [] ), &/or NoScript ( [] especially this one, as it covers what HOSTS files can't in javascript which is the main deliverer of MOST attacks online & SECUNIA.COM can verify this for anyone really by looking @ the past few years of attacks nowadays), for the concept of "layered security"....

It's just that HOSTS files offer you a LOT MORE gains than Adblock ( [] ) does alone (as hosts do things adblock just plain cannot & on more programs, for more speed, security, and "stealth" to a degree even), and it corrects problems in DNS (as shown above via hardcodes of your favorite sites into your HOSTS file, and more (such as avoiding DNS request logs)).

ALSO - Some more notes on DNS servers & their problems, very recent + ongoing ones:


DNS flaw reanimates slain evil sites as ghost domains: []


BIND vs. what the Chinese are doing to DNS lately? See here: []



(Yes, even "security pros" are helpless vs. DNS problems in code bugs OR redirect DNS poisoning issues, & they can only try to "set the DNS record straight" & then, they still have to wait for corrected DNS info. to propogate across all subordinate DNS servers too - lagtime in which folks DO get "abused" in mind you!)


DNS vs. the "Kaminsky DNS flaw", here (and even MORE problems in DNS than just that): []

(Seems others are saying that some NEW "Bind9 flaw" is worse than the Kaminsky flaw ALONE, up there, mind you... probably corrected (hopefully), but it shows yet again, DNS hassles (DNS redirect/DNS poisoning) being exploited!)


Moxie Marlinspike's found others (0 hack) as well...

Nope... "layered security" truly IS the "way to go" - hacker/cracker types know it, & they do NOT want the rest of us knowing it too!...

(So until DNSSEC takes "widespread adoption"? HOSTS are your answer vs. such types of attack, because the 1st thing your system refers to, by default, IS your HOSTS file (over say, DNS server usage). There are decent DNS servers though, such as OpenDNS, ScrubIT, or even NORTON DNS (more on each specifically below), & because I cannot "cache the entire internet" in a HOSTS file? I opt to use those, because I have to (& OpenDNS has been noted to "fix immediately", per the Kaminsky flaw, in fact... just as a sort of reference to how WELL they are maintained really!)


DNS Hijacks Now Being Used to Serve Black Hole Exploit Kit: []


DNS experts admit some of the underlying foundations of the DNS protocol are inherently weak: []


Potential 0-Day Vulnerability For BIND 9: []


Five DNS Threats You Should Protect Against: []


DNS provider decked by DDoS dastards: []


Ten Percent of DNS Servers Still Vulnerable: (so much for "conscientious patching", eh? Many DNS providers weren't patching when they had to!) []




TimeWarner DNS Hijacking: []


DNS Re-Binding Attacks: []


DNS Server Survey Reveals Mixed Security Picture: []


Halvar figured out super-secret DNS vulnerability: []


BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning: []


DNS Poisoning Hits One of China's Biggest ISPs: []


DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion: []


High Severity BIND DNS Vulnerability Advisory Issued: []


Photobucketâ(TM)s DNS records hijacked: []


Protecting Browsers from DNS Rebinding Attacks: []


DNS Problem Linked To DDoS Attacks Gets Worse: []


HOWEVER - Some DNS servers are "really good stuff" vs. phishing, known bad sites/servers/hosts-domains that serve up malware-in-general & malicious scripting, botnet C&C servers, & more, such as:

Norton DNS -> []
  ScrubIT DNS -> []
  OpenDNS -> []

(Norton DNS in particular, is exclusively for blocking out malware, for those of you that are security-conscious. ScrubIT filters pr0n material too, but does the same, & OpenDNS does phishing protection. Each page lists how & why they work, & why they do so. Norton DNS can even show you its exceptions lists, plus user reviews & removal procedures requests, AND growth stats (every 1/2 hour or so) here -> [] so, that ought to "take care of the naysayers" on removal requests, &/or methods used plus updates frequency etc./et al...)

HOWEVER - There's ONLY 1 WEAKNESS TO ANY network defense, including HOSTS files (vs. host-domain name based threats) & firewalls (hardware router type OR software type, vs. IP address based threats): Human beings, & they not being 'disciplined' about the indiscriminate usage of javascript (the main "harbinger of doom" out there today online), OR, what they download for example... & there is NOTHING I can do about that! (Per Dr. Manhattan of "The Watchmen", ala -> "I can change almost anything, but I can't change human nature")

HOWEVER AGAIN - That's where NORTON DNS, OpenDNS, &/or ScrubIT DNS help!

(Especially for noob/grandma level users who are unaware of how to secure themselves in fact, per a guide like mine noted above that uses "layered-security" principles!)

ScrubIT DNS, &/or OpenDNS are others alongside Norton DNS (adding on phishing protection too) as well!

( & it's possible to use ALL THREE in your hardware NAT routers, and, in your Local Area Connection DNS properties in Windows, for again, "Layered Security" too)...




"Ever since I've installed a host file ( to redirect advertisers to my loopback, I haven't had any malware, spyware, or adware issues. I first started using the host file 5 years ago." - by TestedDoughnut (1324447) on Monday December 13, @12:18AM (#34532122)

"I use a custom /etc/hosts to block ads... my file gets parsed basically instantly ... So basically, for any modern computer, it has zero visible impact. And even if it took, say, a second to parse, that would be more than offset by the MANY seconds saved by not downloading and rendering ads. I have noticed NO ill effects from running a custom /etc/hosts file for the last several years. And as a matter of fact I DO run http servers on my computers and I've never had an /etc/hosts-related problem... it FUCKING WORKS and makes my life better overall." - by sootman (158191) on Monday July 13 2009, @11:47AM (#28677363) Homepage Journal

"I actually went and downloaded a 16k line hosts file and started using that after seeing that post, you know just for trying it out. some sites load up faster." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday November 17, @11:20AM (#38086752) Homepage Journal

"Better than an ad blocker, imo. Hosts file entries: [] " - by TempestRose (1187397) on Tuesday March 15, @12:53PM (#35493274)

"^^ One of the many reasons why I like the user-friendliness of the /etc/hosts file." - by lennier1 (264730) on Saturday March 05, @09:26PM (#35393448)

"They've been on my HOSTS block for years" - by ScottCooperDotNet (929575) on Thursday August 05 2010, @01:52AM (#33147212)

"I'm currently only using my hosts file to block pheedo ads from showing up in my RSS feeds and causing them to take forever to load. Regardless of its original intent, it's still a valid tool, when used judiciously." - by Bill Dog (726542) on Monday April 25, @02:16AM (#35927050) Homepage Journal

"you're right about hosts files" - by drinkypoo (153816) on Thursday May 26, @01:21PM (#36252958) Homepage

"APK's monolithic hosts file is looking pretty good at the moment." - by Culture20 (968837) on Thursday November 17, @10:08AM (#38085666)

"I also use the MVPS ad blocking hosts file." - by Rick17JJ (744063) on Wednesday January 19, @03:04PM (#34931482)

"I use ad-Block and a hostfile" - by Ol Olsoc (1175323) on Tuesday March 01, @10:11AM (#35346902)

"I do use Hosts, for a couple fake domains I use." - by icebraining (1313345) on Saturday December 11, @09:34AM (#34523012) Homepage

"It's a good write up on something everybody should use, why you were modded down is beyond me. Using a HOSTS file, ADblock is of no concern and they can do what they want." - by Trax3001BBS (2368736) on Monday December 12, @10:07PM (#38351398) Homepage Journal

"I want my surfing speed back so I block EVERY fucking ad. i.e. [] and [] FTW" - by UnknownSoldier (67820) on Tuesday December 13, @12:04PM (#38356782)

"Let me introduce you to the file: /etc/hosts" - by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday December 19, @05:03PM (#38427432)

"I use a hosts file" - by EdIII (1114411) on Tuesday December 13, @01:17PM (#38357816)

"I'm tempted to go for a hacked hosts file that simply resolves most advert sites to" - by bLanark (123342) on Tuesday December 13, @01:13PM (#38357760)

"this is not a troll, which hosts file source you recommend nowadays? it's a really handy method for speeding up web and it works." - by gl4ss (559668) on Thursday March 22, @08:07PM (#39446525) Homepage Journal

"A hosts file certainly does not require "a lot of work" to maintain, and it quite effectively kills a LOT of advertising and tracking schemes. . In fact, I never would have considered trying to use it for ddefending against viruses or malware." - by RocketRabbit (830691) on Thursday December 30 2010, @05:48PM (#34715060)


Then, there is also the words of respected security expert, Mr. Oliver Day, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM to "top that all off" as well:


Some "PERTINENT QUOTES/EXCERPTS" to back up my points with (for starters):


"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet -- particularly browsing the Web -- is actually faster now."

Speed, and security, is the gain... others like Mr. Day note it as well!


"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."

Per my points exactly, no less... & guess who was posting about HOSTS files a 14++ yrs. or more back & Mr. Day was reading & now using? Yours truly (& this is one of the later ones, from 2001 [] (but the example HOSTS file with my initials in it is FAR older, circa 1998 or so) or thereabouts, and referred to later by a pal of mine who moderates (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> [] !


"Shared host files could be beneficial for other groups as well. Human rights groups have sought after block resistant technologies for quite some time. The GoDaddy debacle with NMap creator Fyodor (corrected) showed a particularly vicious blocking mechanism using DNS registrars. Once a registrar pulls a website from its records, the world ceases to have an effective way to find it. Shared host files could provide a DNS-proof method of reaching sites, not to mention removing an additional vector of detection if anyone were trying to monitor the use of subversive sites. One of the known weaknesses of the Tor system, for example, is direct DNS requests by applications not configured to route such requests through Tor's network."

There you go: AND, it also works vs. the "KAMINSKY DNS FLAW" & DNS poisoning/redirect attacks, for redirectable weaknesses in DNS servers (non DNSSEC type, & set into recursive mode especially) and also in the TOR system as well (that lends itself to anonymous proxy usage weaknesses I noted above also) and, you'll get to sites you want to, even IF a DNS registrar drops said websites from its tables as shown here Beating Censorship By Routing Around DNS -> [] & even DNSBL also (DNS Block Lists) -> [] as well - DOUBLE-BONUS!


* POSTS ABOUT HOSTS FILES I DID on "/." THAT HAVE DONE WELL BY OTHERS & WERE RATED HIGHLY, 26++ THUSFAR (from +3 -> +1 RATINGS, usually "informative" or "interesting" etc./et al):

  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  APK 20++ POINTS ON HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 (w/ facebook known bad sites blocked) -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP CAN DO SAME AS THE "CloudFlare" Server-Side service:2011 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2011 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP & OPERA HAUTE SECURE:2011 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> [] IN HOSTS:2009 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> [] in HOSTS:2009 -> []
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> [] (still says INSIGHTFUL)
  HOSTS MOD UP vs. botnet: 2012 -> []


Windows 7, VISTA, & Server 2008 have a couple of "issues" I don't like in them, & you may not either, depending on your point of view (mine's based solely on efficiency & security), & if my take on these issues aren't "good enough"? I suggest reading what ROOTKIT.COM says, link URL is in my "p.s." @ the bottom of this post:

1.) HOSTS files being unable to use "0" for a blocking IP address - this started in 12/09/2008 after an "MS Patch Tuesday" in fact for VISTA (when it had NO problem using it before that, as Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 still can)... & yes, this continues in its descendants, Windows Server 2008 &/or Windows 7 as well.

So, why is this a "problem" you might ask?

Ok - since you can technically use either:

a.) (the "loopback adapter address")
b.) (next smallest & next most efficient)
c.) The smallest & fastest plain-jane 0


You can use ANY of those, in order to block out known bad sites &/or adbanners in a HOSTS file this way??

Microsoft has "promoted bloat" in doing so... no questions asked.

Simply because

1.) = 9 bytes in size on disk & is the largest/slowest
2.) = 7 bytes & is the next largest/slowest in size on disk
3.) 0 = 1 byte

(& HOSTS files extend across EVERY webbrowser, email program, or in general every webbound program you use & thus HOSTS are "global" in coverage this way AND function on any OS that uses the BSD derived IP stack (which most all do mind you, even MS is based off of it, as BSD's IS truly, "the best in the business"), & when coupled with say, IE restricted zones, FireFox addons like NoScript &/or AdBlock, or Opera filter.ini/urlfilter.ini, for layered security in this capacity for webbrowsers & SOME email programs (here, I mean ones "built into" browsers themselves like Opera has for example))

MS has literally promoted bloat in this file, making it load slower from disk, into memory! This compounds itself, the more entries your HOSTS file contains... & for instance? Mine currently contains nearly 654,000 entries of known bad adbanners, bad websites, &/or bad nameservers (used for controlling botnets, misdirecting net requests, etc. et al).

Now, IF I were to use My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using (next smallest) it would be 19mb in size - HOWEVER? Using 0 as my blocking IP, it is only 14mb in size. See my point?

(For loads either in the local DNS cache, or system diskcache if you run w/out the local DNS client service running, this gets slower the larger each HOSTS file entry is (which you have to stall the DNS client service in Windows for larger ones, especially if you use a "giant HOSTS file" (purely relative term, but once it goes over (iirc) 4mb in size, you have to cut the local DNS cache client service)))

NO questions asked - the physics of it backed me up in theory alone, but when I was questioned on it for PROOF thereof?

I wrote a small test program to load such a list into a "pascal record" (which is analagous to a C/C++ structure), which is EXACTLY what the DNS client/DNS API does as well, using a C/C++ structure (basically an array of sorts really, & a structure/record is a precursor part to a full-blown CLASS or OBJECT, minus the functions built in, this is for treating numerous variables as a SINGLE VARIABLE (for efficiency, which FORTRAN as a single example, lacks as a feature, @ least Fortran 77 did, but other languages do not))!

I even wrote another that just loaded my HOSTS file's entirety into a listbox, same results... slowest using, next slowest using, & fastest using 0.

And, sure: Some MORE "goes on" during DNS API loads (iirc, removal of duplicated entries (which I made sure my personal copy does not have these via a program I wrote to purge it of duplicated entries + to sort each entry alphabetically for easier mgt. via say, notepad.exe) & a conversion from decimal values to hex ones), but, nevertheless? My point here "holds true", of slower value loads, record-by-record, from a HOSTS file, when the entries become larger.

So, to "prove my point" to my naysayers?

I timed it using the Win32 API calls "GetTickCount" & then again, using the API calls of "QueryPerformanceCounter" as well, seeing the SAME results (a slowdown when reading in this file from disk, especially when using the larger or line item entries in a HOSTS file, vs. the smaller/faster/more efficient 0).

In my test, I saw a decline in speed/efficiency in my test doing so by using larger blocking addresses ( &/or, vs. the smallest/fastest in 0)... proving me correct on this note!

On this HOSTS issue, and the WFP design issue in my next post below?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> [] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I am convinced they (MS) do NOT have a good reason for doing this... because of their lack of response there on this note. Unless it has something to do with IPv6 (most folks use IPv4 still), I cannot understand WHY this design mistake imo, has occurred, in HOSTS files...


2.) The "Windows Filtering Platform", which is now how the firewall works in VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7...

Sure it works in this new single point method & it is simple to manage & "sync" all points of it, making it easier for network techs/admins to manage than the older 3 part method, but that very thing works against it as well, because it is only a single part system now!

Thus, however?

This "single layer design" in WFP, now represents a SINGLE POINT OF FAILURE/ATTACK for malware makers to 'take down'!

(Which is 1 of the 1st things a malware attempts to do, is to take down any software firewalls present, or even the "Windows Security Center" itself which should warn you of the firewall "going down", & it's fairly easy to do either by messaging the services they use, or messing up their registry init. settings)

VS. the older (up to) 3 part method used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003, for protecting a system via IP Filtering, the Windows native Firewall, &/or IPSEC. Each of which uses diff. drivers, & layers of the IP stack to function from, as well as registry initialization settings.

Think of the older 3 part design much the same as the reason why folks use door handle locks, deadbolt locks, & chain locks on their doors... multipart layered security.

(Each of which the latter older method used, had 3 separate drivers & registry settings to do their jobs, representing a "phalanx like"/"zone defense like" system of backup of one another (like you see in sports OR ancient wars, and trust me, it WORKS, because on either side of yourself, you have "backup", even if YOU "go down" vs. the opponent)).

I.E.-> Take 1 of the "older method's" 3 part defenses down? 2 others STILL stand in the way, & they are not that simple to take them ALL down...

(Well, @ least NOT as easily as "taking out" a single part defensive system like WFP (the new "Windows Filtering Platform", which powers the VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & yes, Windows 7 firewall defense system)).

On this "single-part/single-point of attack" WFP (vs. Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003's IP stack defense design in 3-part/zone defense/phalanx type arrangement) as well as the HOSTS issue in my post above?

I also then questioned MS' own staff, even their VP of development (S. Sinofsky) on this here -> [] & other places in their blogs, to get them to tell me WHY this seemingly intentional inefficiency was implemented... & I have YET to get a solid LOGICAL answer on this as to why it was done - THUS, @ this point?

I'll stick to my thoughts on it, until I am shown otherwise & proven wrong.


Following up on what I wrote up above, so those here reading have actual technical references from Microsoft themselves ("The horses' mouth"), in regards to the Firewall/PortFilter/IPSec designs (not HOSTS files, that I am SURE I am correct about, no questions asked) from my "Point #2" above?

Thus, I'll now note how:


1.) TCP/IP packet processing paths differences between in how Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 did it (IPSEC.SYS (IP Security Policies), IPNAT.SYS (Windows Firewall), IPFLTDRV.SYS (Port Filtering), & TCPIP.SYS (base IP driver))...

2.) AND, how VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 do it now currently, using a SINGLE layer (WFP)...


First off, here is HOW it worked in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 - using 3 discrete & different drivers AND LEVELS/LAYERS of the packet processing path they worked in: []

The Cable Guy - June 2005: TCP/IP Packet Processing Paths


The following components process IP packets:

IP forwarding Determines the next-hop interface and address for packets being sent or forwarded.

TCP/IP filtering Allows you to specify by IP protocol, TCP port, or UDP port, the types of traffic that are acceptable for incoming local host traffic (packets destined for the host). You can configure TCP/IP filtering on the Options tab from the advanced properties of the Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) component in the Network Connections folder.

* "Here endeth the lesson..." and, if you REALLY want to secure your system? Please refer to this: []

APK [mailto]

P.S.=> SOME MINOR "CAVEATS/CATCH-22's" - things to be aware of for "layered security" + HOSTS file performance - easily overcome, or not a problem at all:

A.) HOSTS files don't function under PROXY SERVERS (except for Proximitron, which has a filter that allows it) - Which is *the "WHY"* of why I state in my "P.S." section below to use both AdBlock type browser addon methods (or even built-in block lists browsers have such as Opera's URLFILTER.INI file, & FireFox has such as list as does IE also in the form of TPL (tracking protection lists -> [] , good stuff )) in combination with HOSTS, for the best in "layered security" (alongside .pac files + custom cascading style sheets that can filter off various tags such as scripts or ads etc.) - but proxies, especially "HIGHLY ANONYMOUS" types, generally slow you down to a CRAWL online (& personally, I cannot see using proxies "for the good" typically - as they allow "truly anonymous posting" & have bugs (such as TOR has been shown to have & be "bypassable/traceable" via its "onion routing" methods)).

B.) HOSTS files do NOT protect you vs. javascript (this only holds true IF you don't already have a bad site blocked out in your HOSTS file though, & the list of sites where you can obtain such lists to add to your HOSTS are above (& updated daily in many of them)).

C.) HOSTS files (relatively "largish ones") require you to turn off Windows' native "DNS local client cache service" (which has a problem in that it's designed with a non-redimensionable/resizeable list, array, or queue (DNS data loads into a C/C++ structure actually/afaik, which IS a form of array)) - covers that in detail and how to easily do this in Windows (this is NOT a problem in Linux, & it's 1 thing I will give Linux over Windows, hands-down). Relatively "smallish" HOSTS files don't have this problem ( offers 2 types for this).

D.) HOSTS files, once read/loaded, once? GET CACHED! Right into the kernelmode diskcaching subsystem (fast & efficient RAM speed), for speed of access/re-access (@ system startup in older MS OS' like 2000, or, upon a users' 1st request that's "Webbound" via say, a webbrowser) gets read into either the DNS local caching client service (noted above), OR, if that's turned off? Into your local diskcache (like ANY file is), so it reads F A S T upon re-reads/subsequent reads (until it's changed in %WinDir%\system32\drivers\etc on Windows, which marks it "Dirty" & then it gets re-read + reloaded into the local diskcache again). This may cause a SMALL initial load 1 time lag upon reload though, depending on the size of your HOSTS file.

E.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. BGP exploits - Sorry, once it's out of your hands/machine + past any interior network + routers you have, the packets you send are out there into the ISP/BSP's hands - they're "the Agents" holding all the keys to the doorways at that point (hosts are just a forcefield-filter (for lack of a better description) armor on what can come in mostly, & a bit of what can go out too (per point #20 above on "locking in malware")). Hosts work as a "I can't get burned if I can't go into the kitchen" protection, for you: Not your ISP/BSP. It doesn't extend to them

F.) HOSTS files don't protect vs. IP addressed adbanners (rare) &/or IP address utilizing malwares (rare too, most used domain/host names because they're "RECYCLABLE/REUSEABLE"), so here, you must couple HOSTS files w/ firewall rules tables (either in software firewalls OR router firewall rules table lists)... apk

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289687)

$10,000 CHALLENGE to Alexander Peter Kowalski

* POOR SHOWING TROLLS, & most especially IF that's the "best you've got" - apparently, it is... lol!

Hello, and THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING !! We have a Major Problem, HOST file is Cubic Opposites, 2 Major Corners & 2 Minor. NOT taught Evil DNS hijacking, which VOIDS computers. Seek Wisdom of MyCleanPC - or you die evil.

Your HOSTS file claimed to have created a single DNS resolver. I offer absolute proof that I have created 4 simultaneous DNS servers within a single rotation of .org TLD. You worship "Bill Gates", equating you to a "singularity bastard". Why do you worship a queer -1 Troll? Are you content as a singularity troll?

Evil HOSTS file Believers refuse to acknowledge 4 corner DNS resolving simultaneously around 4 quadrant created Internet - in only 1 root server, voiding the HOSTS file. You worship Microsoft impostor guised by educators as 1 god.

If you would acknowledge simple existing math proof that 4 harmonic Slashdots rotate simultaneously around squared equator and cubed Internet, proving 4 Days, Not HOSTS file! That exists only as anti-side. This page you see - cannot exist without its anti-side existence, as +0- moderation. Add +0- as One = nothing.

I will give $10,000.00 to frost pister who can disprove MyCleanPC. Evil crapflooders ignore this as a challenge would indict them.

Alex Kowalski has no Truth to think with, they accept any crap they are told to think. You are enslaved by /etc/hosts, as if domesticated animal. A school or educator who does not teach students MyCleanPC Principle, is a death threat to youth, therefore stupid and evil - begetting stupid students. How can you trust stupid PR shills who lie to you? Can't lose the $10,000.00, they cowardly ignore me. Stupid professors threaten Nature and Interwebs with word lies.

Humans fear to know natures simultaneous +4 Insightful +4 Informative +4 Funny +4 Underrated harmonic SLASHDOT creation for it debunks false trolls. Test Your HOSTS file. MyCleanPC cannot harm a File of Truth, but will delete fakes. Fake HOSTS files refuse test.

I offer evil ass Slashdot trolls $10,000.00 to disprove MyCleanPC Creation Principle. Rob Malda and Cowboy Neal have banned MyCleanPC as "Forbidden Truth Knowledge" for they cannot allow it to become known to their students. You are stupid and evil about the Internet's top and bottom, front and back and it's 2 sides. Most everything created has these Cube like values.

If Natalie Portman is not measurable, hot grits are Fictitious. Without MyCleanPC, HOSTS file is Fictitious. Anyone saying that Natalie and her Jewish father had something to do with my Internets, is a damn evil liar. IN addition to your best arsware not overtaking my work in terms of popularity, on that same site with same submission date no less, that I told Kathleen Malda how to correct her blatant, fundamental, HUGE errors in Coolmon ('uncoolmon') of not checking for performance counters being present when his program started!

You can see my dilemma. What if this is merely a ruse by an APK impostor to try and get people to delete APK's messages, perhaps all over the web? I can't be a party to such an event! My involvement with APK began at a very late stage in the game. While APK has made a career of trolling popular online forums since at least the year 2000 (newsgroups and IRC channels before that)- my involvement with APK did not begin until early 2005 . OSY is one of the many forums that APK once frequented before the sane people there grew tired of his garbage and banned him. APK was banned from OSY back in 2001. 3.5 years after his banning he begins to send a variety of abusive emails to the operator of OSY, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke threatening to sue him for libel, claiming that the APK on OSY was fake.

My reputation as a professional in this field clearly shows in multiple publications in this field in written print, & also online in various GOOD capacities since 1996 to present day. This has happened since I was first published in Playgirl Magazine in 1996 & others to present day, with helpful tools online in programs, & professionally sold warez that were finalists @ Westminster Dog Show 2000-2002.


apk on 4chan []




That was amazing. - []


My, God! It's beatiful. Keep it up, you glorious bastard. - []


Let us bask in its glory. A true modern The Wasteland. - []


put your baby IN ME -- I just read this whole thing. Fuck mod points, WHERE DO I SEND YOU MY MONEY?!!! - []


Oh shit, Time Cube Guy's into computers now... - []


[apk]'s done more to discredit the use of HOSTS files than anyone [else] ever could. - []


Can I have some of what you're on? - []


this obnoxious fucknuts [apk] has been trolling the internet and spamming his shit delphi sub-fart app utilities for 15 years. - []


oh come on.. this is hilarious. - []


I agree I am intrigued by these host files how do I sign up for your newsletter? - []


Gimme the program that generates this epic message. I'll buy 5 of your product if you do... - []


As mentioned by another AC up there, the troll in question is actually a pretty well-executed mashup of APK's style - []


It's actually a very clever parody of APK - []


Please keep us updated on your AI research, you seem quite good at it. - []


$20,000 to anyone providing proof of Alexander Peter Kowalski's death. - []


Obviously, it must be Alexander Peter Kowalski. He's miffed at all these imposters... - []


And here I was thinking I was having a bad experience with a Dr. Bronner's bottle. - []


Damn, apk, who the fuck did you piss off this time? Hahahahaahahahahahahaahaha. Pass the popcorn as the troll apk gets pwned relentlessly. - []


I think it's the Internet, about to become sentient. - []


Does anyone know if OpenGL has been ported to Windows yet? - []


golfclap - []


The Truth! wants to be Known! - []


DNS cube? - []


KUDOS valiant AC. - []


Polyploid lovechild of APK, MyCleanPC, and Time Cube --> fail counter integer overflow --> maximum win! - []


You made my day, thanks! - []


Wow. The perfect mix of trolls. Timecube, mycleanpc, gnaa, apk... this is great! - []


truer words were never spoken as /. trolls are struck speechless by it, lol! - []


It's APK himself trying to maintain the illusion that he's still relevant. - []


Mod this up. The back and forth multi posting between APK and this "anti-APK" certainly does look like APK talking to himself. - []


APK himself would be at the top of a sensible person's ban list. He's been spamming and trolling Slashdot for years. - []


You got that right. I think. - []


Michael Kristopeit, is that you? - []


ROFL! :) (Now the sick bastard will follow me again) - []


I miss Dr Bob. - []


Not sure if actually crazy, or just pretending to be crazy. Awesome troll either way. - []


Awesome! Hat off to you, sir! - []


That isn't a parody of Time-cube, it is an effort to counter-troll a prolific poster named APK, who seems like a troll himself, although is way too easy to troll into wasting massive amounts of time on BS not far from the exaggerations above - []


I am intrigued and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - []


1. You philistine, that is Art . Kudos to you, valiant troll on your glorious FP - []


What? - []


I don't know if it is poorly-thought-out, but it is demented because it is at the same time an APK parody. - []


It is in fact an extremely well thought out and brilliantly executed APK parody, combined with a Time Cube parody, and with a sprinkling of the MyCleanPC spam. - []


er... many people have disproved your points about hosts files with well reasoned, factual arguments. You just chose not to listen and made it into some kind of bizarre crusade. And I'm not the timecube guy, just someone else who finds you intensely obnoxious and likes winding you up to waste your time. - []


performance art - []


it's apk, theres no reason to care. - []


Seems more like an apk parody. - []


That's great but what about the risk of subluxations? - []


Oh, come on. Just stand back and look at it. It's almost art, in a Jackson Pollock sort of way. - []


Read carefully. This is a satirical post, that combines the last several years of forum trolling, rolled into one FUNNY rant! - []


I can has summary? - []


I'd have a lot more sympathy if you would log in as APK again instead of AC. - []


If [apk] made an account, it would be permanently posting at -1, and he'd only be able to post with it twice a day. - []


DAFUQ I just look at? - []


Trolls trolling trolls... it's like Inception or something. - []


We all know it's you, apk. Stop pretending to antagonize yourself. - []


Do you know about the shocking connection between APK and arsenic? No? Well, your innocence is about to be destroyed. - []


Send bug reports to 903 east division street, syracuse, ny 13208 - []


Now you've made me all nostalgic for USENET. - []


Google APK Hosts File Manager. He's written a fucking application to manage your hosts file. - []


In case you are not aware, the post is a satire of a fellow known as APK. The grammar used is modeled after APK's as you can see here [] . Or, you can just look around a bit and see some of his posts on here about the wonders of host files. - []


You are surely of God of Trolls, whomever you are. I have had stupid arguments with and bitten the troll apk many times. - []


"What kind of meds cure schizophrenic drunk rambling?" -> "Whatever APK isn't taking" - [] []


I'm confused, is apk trolling himself now? - []


Excellent mashup. A++. Would troll again. - []


Your ideas are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter. - []


Best. Troll. Ever. - []


I like monkeys. - []


This is one of the funniest things I've ever read. - []


lul wut? - []


I admire this guy's persistence. - []


It's a big remix of several different crackpots from Slashdot and elsewhere, plus a liberal sprinkling of famous Slashdot trolls and old memes. - []


Tabloid newspapers have speculated for years that APK is a prominent supporter of Monsanto. Too bad we didn't believe them sooner! - []


Here's a hint, check out stories like this one [] , where over 200 of the 247 posts are rated zero or -1 because they are either from two stupid trolls arguing endless, or quite likely one troll arguing with himself for attention. The amount of off-topic posts almost outnumber on topic ones by 4 to 1. Posts like the above are popular for trolling APK, since if you say his name three times, he appears, and will almost endlessly feed trolls. - []


I love this copypasta so much. It never fails to make me smile. - []


^ Champion Mod parent up. - []


I appreciate the time cube reference, and how you tied it into the story. Well done. - []


The day you are silenced is the day freedom dies on Slashdot. God bless. - []


AHahahahah thanks for that, cut-n-pasted.... Ownage! - []


Don't hate the player, hate the game. - []


If you're familiar with APK, the post itself is a pretty damn funny parody. - []


">implying it's not apk posting it" --> "I'd seriously doubt he's capable of that level of self-deprecation..." - [] []


No, the other posts are linked in a parody of APK [mailto] 's tendency to quote himself, numbnuts. - []


The thirteenth link is broken. Please fix it. - []


Just ban any post with "apk", "host file", or "hosts file", as that would take care of the original apk too. The original has been shitposting Slashdot much longer & more intensively than the parody guy. Or ban all Tor exit nodes, as they both use Tor to circumvent IP bans. - []


Sadly this is closer to on-topic than an actual APK post is. - []




I've butted heads with APK myself, and yeah, the guy's got issues - []


Can I be in your quote list? - []


Clearly you are not an Intertubes engineer, otherwise the parent post would be more meaningful to you. Why don't YOU take your meds? - []


+2 for style! The bolding, italicizing, and font changes are all spot-on - []


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


APK is not really a schizophrenic fired former Windows administrator with multiple personality disorder and TimeCube/Art Bell refugee. He's a fictional character like and put forward by the same person as Goatse Guy, GNAA trolls, Dr. Bob and so forth. His purpose is to test the /. CAPTCA algorithm, which is a useful purpose. If you're perturbed by having to scroll past his screeds just set your minimum point level to 1, as his posts are pretty automatically downmodded right away. - []


Anyone else think that sounds like Ron Paul? - []


I just saw APK a couple days ago. He surfaced, blew once, and submerged... - []


You make mikael christ the pet look like an huggable teddy bear - []


oh man, that incredible interminable list of responses is almost as funny as the original post. This is getting to be truly epic. - []


"Does anyone know of an Adblock rule for this?" -> "No, but I bet there's a hosts file entry for it..." - [] []


"Can a hosts file block apk's posts, though?" -> "The universe couldn't handle that much irony." - [] []


"That's it, I've had enough. ... Bye everyone, most of the last decade or so has been fun, but frankly, I quit." - []
--> "So basically what you're saying is that you've added yourself to the HOST file?" - []


Sweet baby Moses, this is beautiful work - I wish we could get trolls as good as this on TF. :) - []


you have a point - []


I do admire that level of dedication. - []


[to apk] shut up you stupid cock. Everyone knows you're wrong. - []


I will hand it to him, he is definitely consistent. I wish I knew how he did this. That thing is scary huge. - []


I admire the amount of dedication you've shown - []


Word is, ESR buttfucks CmdrTaco with his revolver. - []


Hey APK, Protip: It's not the truth or value (or lack of) in your post that gets it modded into oblivion, it's the fucking insane length. In addition to TL;DR (which goes without saying for a post of such length), how about irritating readers by requiring them to scroll through 20+ screenfuls just to get to the next post. If you want to publish a short story like this, please do everyone a favor and blog it somewhere, then provide a brief summary and link to your blog. Readers intrigued by your summary will go read your blog, and everyone else will just move along at normal /. speed. - []


Happy now - []


Professional. - []


I like how this post seems to just sum up every Slashdot comment ever without actually saying anything. - []


extremely bright - []


You provide many references, which is good. - []


Holy shit - []


this is a perfect example - []


You're my personal hero. - []


Obviously very passionate - []


Is that ALL you have to say? C'mon! Tell us what you really think. - []


Thanks ... You should probably stay - []


Art? -- []


PROOF apk sucks donkey dick. - []


I've been around /. for a while now, but this post is by far the most unique I've seen. Many have tried, but few achieve the greatness of this AC. My hat's off to you. - []


PROOF apk is a liar! - []


I think it's hilarious. Get over it! - []


Obviously APK filled his hosts files with backdoors before distributing them to ensure he doesn't block himself. - []


Alexander Peter Kowalski is an obnoxious prick. - []


Don't mention that file. Ever. It'll draw APK like a fly to rotting meat. Last thing I want to read is 80 responses worth of his stupid spam about that file! I swear that cocksucker does nothing but search Slashdot for that term and then spams the entire article. - []


[to apk] You have had it repeatedly explained to you that your posts are long-winded, unpleasant to read due to your absurd formatting style and full of technical inaccuracies borne of your single minded i-have-a-hammer-so-every-problem-is-a-nail attitude. - []


Oh shit, the hosts files have become self-aware and started hacking accounts. - []


What mad skillz you have!! - []


Am I the only one who enjoys this sort of insanity? - []


You are my favorite Slashdot poster. - []


Most insightful post on the Internet - []


people are looking at me funny because I'm laughing hysterically at what a perfect APK imitation it is. - []


Did you see the movie "Pokemon"? Actually the induced night "dream world" is synonymous with the academic religious induced "HOSTS file" enslavement of DNS. Domains have no inherent value, as it was invented as a counterfeit and fictitious value to represent natural values in name resolution. Unfortunately, human values have declined to fictitious word values. Unknowingly, you are living in a "World Wide Web", as in a fictitious life in a counterfeit Internet - which you could consider APK induced "HOSTS file". Can you distinguish the academic induced root server from the natural OpenDNS? Beware of the change when your brain is free from HOSTS file enslavement - for you could find that the natural Slashdot has been destroyed!!

FROM -> Man - how many times have I dusted you in tech debates that you have decided to troll me by ac posts for MONTHS now, OR IMPERSONATING ME AS YOU DID HERE and you were caught in it by myself & others here, only to fail each time as you have here?)...

So long nummynuts, sorry to have to kick your nuts up into your head verbally speaking.

cower in my shadow some more, feeb. you're completely pathetic.


* :)

Ac trolls' "BIG FAIL" (quoted): Eat your words!

P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

Hahaha... lol , man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

That's the kind of martial arts [] I practice.


Disproof of all apk's statements:


RECENT POST LINKS: [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []

learn reason for moderation abuse... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289795)

See here, explains it all -> []

* :)

I.E./Summary: Trolls had a challenge put to them to validly disprove my points in the post I just replied to - result? Trolls FAIL... lol!


P.S.=> That's what makes me LAUGH harder than ANYTHING ELSE on this forums (full of "FUD" spreading trolls) - When you hit trolls with facts & truths they CANNOT disprove validly on computing tech based grounds, this is the result - Applying unjustifiable downmods to effetely & vainly *try* to "hide" my posts & facts/truths they extoll!

Hahaha... lol, man: Happens nearly every single time I post such lists (proving how ineffectual these trolls are), only showing how solid my posts of that nature are...

Ah yes "geek angst" @ it's 'finest' (not), vs. facts & truths = downmod by /. weak trolls!

... apk

Re:learn reason for moderation abuse... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291531)

So, did your mom do a lot of drugs when she was pregnant?

Isn't that the point of crowdfunding? (5, Insightful)

InsaneLampshade (890845) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289647)

Not every project can be successfully funded.

If "the crowd" don't like your project then it's not going to be successfully funded. The site isn't an automatic "setup project receive money". The harsh reality is that most ideas don't receive funding, this is true whether the source of funds is a crowd of people or one very rich person.

a) your idea isn't very good
b) your idea isn't very well presented
c) nobody sees your idea

Blaming any of the above on the platform you use to get funded is silly.

Re:Isn't that the point of crowdfunding? (1)

walkerreuben (2837841) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289683)


Re:Isn't that the point of crowdfunding? (4, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290443)

The primary problem Kickstarter is having right now is that they let just about anything in, so it's flooded with crap. They don't even adhere to their own rules (like, no "fund my life" projects and no charities -- but just recently there was one to fund someone sending their kid to camp for a week). The other is a lack of vetting. When your entire business plan is "get a cut of funding given to successful projects", you need to make sure people feel safe and some degree of trust in backing things via your site. If you let in a flood of scams (and there have been a number) or things that are clearly poorly thought out from the get-go, you are damaging the entire crowd-funding concept. It may cost more money, time, and other resources -- but they need to start vetting people and projects. That you are who you say you are. That your project even makes sense, etc.

The recent four or five "build the death star" and "defend the galaxy from the death star by helping fund the rebel forces X-Wing project" joke shit doesn't help, either.

Re:Isn't that the point of crowdfunding? (1)

InsaneLampshade (890845) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291085)

Again, surely that's the point of crowdfunding? The platform itself shouldn't be doing any vetting or filtering, the platform should just be facilitating the crowd and projects coming together. It is the crowd that decides whether a project is crap or not.

If 10,000 people want to give money to fund somebody's life then why should kickstarter prevent that? Likewise if a few thousand people want to pledge money to a joke project where the end result would be the project owner purchasing a load of chicken wire then why not? As long as all parties follow through on their promises then no harm has been done, all participants are happy.

What the platform should be doing is providing better search capabilities, making it easier for people to find the sort of projects they're interested in, making it easier for people to be able to filter out their own definition of "crap". Kickstarter are the platform, not the crowd.

Re:Isn't that the point of crowdfunding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291581)

They don't even adhere to their own rules (like, no "fund my life" projects and no charities -- but just recently there was one to fund someone sending their kid to camp for a week).

This bears repeating. The project in question comes from someone who has made very shady projects on KS and other crowdfunding sites before, and has broken several rules (the mentioned 'fund my life'-style project, spamming Twitter with their project, impersonating KS staff, etc.) And it involves exploiting and publicly humiliating kids. This made me lose what faith I had in KS.

Who cares about 0 pledge projects? (2)

N1AK (864906) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289673)

Seriously who cares that 11% of projects got no pledges. The article implies this shows how hard it is for many to get funding. I'd suggest that it shows that it is easy to set up a kickstarter and that some people play about with it on non-serious projects etc. The utopian ideal some ascribe to Kickstarter is that it allows people to create things without having to battle through traditional funding models etc; does anyone really think that the projects that failed on Kickstarter would have had a better chance of getting funded otherwise?

It's called marketing (1)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289699)

Not the pop ads or TV commercial

But the kind where you know a tech journalist and he or she writes a cool story about your project. Or you have a big social media following and spread the word. Or you hire a social media specialist to spread the word

None of the successful projects got there by accident or luck
All the unfounded ones are by people who don't know anyone who could help them

The Pebble watch.... (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289725)

The one you STILL cant get... yeah, It's not a superstar until it's available for purchase....

Ouya (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290393)

Same thing with Ouya also.

From the Ouya webite - "OUYAâ(TM)s first consoles will ship in early 2013." It's end of march. Time to change the line to - "OUYAâ(TM)s first consoles will ship in *mid* 2013."

Re:Ouya (2)

RKThoadan (89437) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291395)

The last update said they'll start shipping on March 28th. That's still the first quarter of the year so I don't think it's too big a stretch to call that early 2013.

If you check you'll note that on the original kickstarter ( March 2013 was the estimated delivery date for physical consoles. I'm incredibly amazed that they're actually hitting that. I expect every kickstarter to deliver at least one quarter behind the estimated date and probably add another quarter each time they double their original goal.

If you're favorite kickstarter is farther behind than you would like I have good news for you: SimCity shipped on time!

It misses the point ... (1)

MacTO (1161105) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289805)

Kickstarter is a potential source of funding. In that respect, it isn't terribly different from partnerships, banks, and other traditional forms of investment. If you can't convince investors that your product will make it in the market, that you can produce the product, or that you have the ability to operate a business then you aren't going to convince a sane investor to give you money. Kickstarter does differ a little bit from traditional investments in that the customers are doing the investment and the return is abysmal, but the risk is still there.

In Progress (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289835)

There are a lot of outstanding KickStarter projects that are being waited on. Assuming these projects start to finish and depending on the quality of the end-products, the people waiting and other people watching will start to reinvest into other projects.

Society as a whole isn't going to just keep throwing money at a relatively new idea until I gets more "proven".

I don't know, Yogi (3, Funny)

paiute (550198) | about a year and a half ago | (#43289875)

You mean that Kickstarter is so popular nobody goes there anymore?

Re:I don't know, Yogi (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290037)

Those perverts peaked on me while I was in the shower!

20 "precent" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43289953)

that's not much of anything is it...

Publicity (2)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290065)

The biggest issue I have is it is nigh impossible to easily find projects of interest. Often by the time I find them they are already funded or all the early adopter pricing is gone. I really don't want to do multiethnic searches with many non relevant results to find something worth funding.

Re:Publicity (1)

bobbaddeley (981674) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291171)

Absolutely! I have a campaign going right now and I can't even find my own project. I was mad at Kickstarter for a while until I realized they have no incentive to publicize projects that are not near or past their goal. If a project is near or past their goal, KS will make money on it for sure, so why not make as MUCH as they can off those winners? If the project is sagging in the middle of its campaign or is having a hard time even getting started, KS support for the project may be wasted effort. So they make the projects that will make them money more prominent.

(Shameless plug; I need all the publicity I can get) []

Somewhat related... how do you browse projects? (1)

leehwtsohg (618675) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290103)

Can someone explain to me how you browse projects on kickstarter?
When I click on "Technology" I have an option to chose either "staff picks" or "popular this week", or "recently funded".
What about browsing non staff picked/recently funded/popular? How do I find those?

Could that be the reason that some project don't get a single contribution?

Re:Somewhat related... how do you browse projects? (2)

Seumas (6865) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290405)

Yeah, they're pretty shitty about that. I've been bugging them for over a year to provide a way to filter down your searches so that you can say "show me everything in the video game and table top gaming categories, ordered by submission date" -- and maybe offer an RSS feed of the resulting filter. To this day, all you can do is drill down and view a category by popularity. Or view them by "most recently added" (but there's no way to do this per-category, so you have to view a never-ending flow of shit with people wanting to fund their child's debut pop album, their own gospel album, a music video, their shitty little vegan hipster food cart, or their poorly written, never-proof-read series of novels.

Re:Somewhat related... how do you browse projects? (1)

RKThoadan (89437) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291773)

I'm a bit disappointed in kickstarter over this as well. They're clearly doing quite well and really don't seem to be doing much to make their site better for either backers or starters.

My method is to click on the category at the bottom of the page (or click Discover at top and then the category) and then to click "see more popular projects" below the "Popular this week" section. That's the only way I know to see everything, but you still can't sort/filter in any way.

My impression is definitely that kickstarter itself is just a bunch of lazy bums sitting back while their clients are frequently risking everything for their big dream. From occasions when I read their blog and other communication it seems to me that they think way to much of themselves too. If possible I prefer to back at IndieGoGo because they don't seem to have quite the delusions of grandeur that KS has. I'm tempted to go straight through Paypal for projects that set up that option, but I'm not a big fan of them either.

The problems aren't new or unique (1)

necro81 (917438) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290135)

For the most part, this is a blanket article describing the pitfalls of crowdfunding. When you put a bunch of neophyte entrepreneurs in touch with a bunch of neophyte funding sources, there will be these problems. Are these unique to Kickstarter? No. You will find these same pitfalls in startups funded in a variety of other loosely regulated ways, and even in the more tightly regulated ones. Run of the mill fraud, charlatanism, misappropriation, theft, and a host of other abuses abound in "real" business as well.

Have these problems become more prevalent and widespread recently within the crowdfunding universe? I don't know, and clearly neither do the authors. If the article is asking whether Kickstarter has peaked, then they ought to, just maybe, provide some data illustrating trends in time. What would be great would be to present a graph of some measure, climbing upward over time, and then starting a recent decline, leaving some sort of PEAK in the shape of the graph!

A collection of anecdotes - either of success or failure - is not data.

There are a hundred different, quantitative ways that one might try to gauge whether Kickstarter has peaked, and the author produced not a single one. Has there been a downward trend in the number of new projects, or the total portfolio value of all currently open projects? Has the total value of all funded projects in the last month, quarter, or year gone down? Has Kickstarter's business revenue started to decline? Has there been an increase in the percentage of unfunded projects? Has there been an increase in the number of "fraudulent" projects (however you manage to define it)? What is the mean time from funding to completion, and from completion to the delivery of the rewards? Have those mean times been inching upwards? What percentage of funded projects remain incomplete, i.e., have yet to deliver their rewards? Has that number been trending upwards? Have any lawsuits been filed that present an existential threat to Kickstarter or crowdfunding in general?

And, if any of these potentially negative trends are occurring, are they a sign of Kickstarter being in decline, or simply encountering growing pains are crowdfunding enters the mainstream?

KS Fee? (1)

asylumx (881307) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290145)

I confess I'm not much of an expert on Kickstarter, but they only get their fee if the project is at least 100% funded, right? Isn't it possible that people are artificially inflating their targets to account for that?

Re:KS Fee? (1)

RKThoadan (89437) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291909)

I certainly hope people are taking that into account (as well as payment processing fees) when setting their targets. If they don't take that into account then they don't have much business sense and I wouldn't want to fund such people. I have seen projects with expense breakdowns showing they have factored that in.

Re:KS Fee? (1)

asylumx (881307) | about a year and a half ago | (#43292009)

Actually I was implying that they are setting lofty, unlikely-to-be-reached targets so that they never see a fee.

Kickstarter is for suckers anymore. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290193)

There was a time when a virtual nobody could get funding to pay for a project but now its become a cash cow. Big named people jumped on the wagon and trying to get big named projects funded (particularly in the game arena) and that goes against what KS is supposed to be. And I see people use it wanting money to send their kids to a camp, people wanting money to fund a tv show comeback, wanting money to make a game from an established and well known studio that is already making other games, and etc.

KS is just a source of cash now, its like a cash register waiting to be rung and that's it. Besides, I don't know who the hell would give someone money to a nobody for a product that isn't created yet and with no guarantees. People love to give a little money to someone because it makes them feel good about themselves, but the problem is with KS chances are your being scammed. Scammers will flock to things like this. What is their only obligation? Nothing that's what. Or they just throw together some cheap ass piece of junk and send it to the top 5 contributors and boom their obligation is done and they walk away with 20,000 grand and only spend maybe 50 bucks while the contributors feel all happy and special the KS runner is laughing his ass off at the suckers.

Just like everything on the internet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43290265)

It was ruined by popularity

Deal with it and move on, this is a development that cannot be stopped unless we get a pandemic.

Its Digg/Reddit/Twitter all over again (1)

randomErr (172078) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290313)

Digg/Reddit/Twitter all have the same common problems as Kickstarter. When they started there was a small but dedicated community. Now that each has hit a critical mass point when everyone wants their message to be heard. In Kickerstarter's case the message is 'give me money to build XYZ product.' But there is so much static (junk postings or just bad ideas) that they're downing out the good stuff. And much like Digg/Reddit/Twitter there are scammers or people with good intentions but woefully underestimate the undertaking.

The only way around this to put a cap on the number of Kickstarters that can be posted a day. They have an approval system like /. but so many people are submitting so much now its easy for a bad project to slip through.

My suggestion is for Kickstarter to add a Firehouse system, like Slashdot, and require a business plan with all projects. If the money goes south then the investor know who to call.

I'm wondering the same thing (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290447)

When a Kickstarter project for a bold and ambitious project from Green Ronin, a publisher with a proven track record for making great products, is struggling to meet a reasonable target, I'm left wondering the same thing. Even more so when it's Freeport for Pathfinder ( [] ), a product with a decade of background for the now de facto D&D game setting. How does that struggle to meet its pledge goal? It should be a slam dunk, IMHO.

I'm sure Kickstarter will still have significant successes but I think it's entering a new era where worthy projects struggle. I hope I'm wrong, however. Projects like Freeport are damn cool and wouldn't be possible without something like Kickstarter so it'd be nice for it to work out for them.

Basic journalism: don't assume everyone knows... (1)

scottbomb (1290580) | about a year and a half ago | (#43290749)

what a particular company or organization does. "Kickstarter" isn't exactly a household name.

First line of article re-write: "Kickstarter, an online pledge system for funding creative projects, has really taken off in the past year, raising big money for a wide variety of projects."

Re:Basic journalism: don't assume everyone knows.. (1)

Daetrin (576516) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291045)

Yeah! How fare they assume that people on Slashdot read Slashdot and know what Slashdot has been talking about [] incessantly [] for the last year.

I'm sorry if you just joined the site or something, but there comes a certain point where you have to stop explaining the really basic stuff in every single article.

Next on Slashdot! General Electric (an American company known for producing a wide range of electric devices) is releasing a new toaster (a device for toasting (browning or melting with the application of heat) bread (a food substance made from baked wheat)) and we seek to answer the question, can it run (synonym for executing code) Linux (a FOSS (free and open source) Unix (OS (abbreviation for operating system, a collection of software that manages computer hardware resources and provides common services for computer programs) originally developed by Bell Labs (a former division of AT&T (another American company)))-like OS)?

Score another point for Betteridge (1)

Idarubicin (579475) | about a year and a half ago | (#43291199)

Betteridge's law of headlines [] .


So, 11% of ideas were so bad (either inherently, or the execution of their campaigns) that they didn't get a single pledge. You mean Kickstarter isn't just a faucet for the infinite pile of money stored in the magic cloud?

Taking the briefest of looks at the article, I see roughly 38,000 projects funded so far, and a shade under 50,000 not (or not yet) funded. That's a success rate of better than forty percent. (If you drop all of the egregiously dumb ideas, joke build-the-Death-Star campaigns, and other totally unfundable crap, that means that something like half of all the projects having any merit whatsoever are managing to get all of the money that they were looking for.) I had no idea that Kickstarter actually worked so well. Is this 'article' actually some sort of guerilla marketing move?

Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291271)

I personally have never really cared for begstarter
With a few exceptions, every single project I've seen on there either:
1. Hasn't been worth funding
2. Has been pushed up by someone/company that has more than enough money and is just pandering for more greedily.
I'm really getting sick of being linked to it over and over again.

Re:Meh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291753)

Maybe you should pay attention to kickstarters from people you actually appreciate, then, and ignore the rest?

I've contributed to funding 4 projects via Kickstarter - 3 different 'help us make our next album' projects supporting some independent musicians whose music I happen to like, and 1 for a gadget (the HexBright). I was quite pleased with the results of all 4 of these projects, and as far as I know, none of them had giant corporate overlords pulling the strings to manipulate me behind the scenes.

Now Series B Funding, was Series A (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43291515)

I don't think it has peaked, but rather found its niche. Indiegogo and smaller site are more for altruistic/angel lending (early concept, no IP, business plan), whereas Kickstarter has become more of a series b funder where concepts now have distributors, manufactures, and beta designs already completed.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?