×

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!

Iron Man 3 To Debut As a 4DX Film In Japan

timothy posted 1 year,1 day | from the wait-for-it-to-hit-the-basement dept.

Japan 158

adeelarshad82 writes "Marvel's Iron Man 3 will debut in select Japanese theaters later this month employing the 4DX system for the first time. Developed by South Korea's largest movie chain operator, the CJ Group, 4DX-equipped theaters deliver smells, seat motions, and additional effects such as strobe lights and fog, all in sync with events as they appear on the screen. Beyond South Korea, this full immersion approach to cinema is already in operation in countries such as Israel, Mexico, Brazil, and China."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

158 comments

Smells? (5, Funny)

bestgjs (2901263) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485529)

How can the movie theater product smells from the movie? What technology it uses, how does it work?

I hope we get this tech on all desktop computers. Imagine farts over the internet.

Re:Smells? (5, Funny)

tnk1 (899206) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485711)

They disperse LSD as a fine mist into the theater and then you start smelling the colors on the screen.

They did have to remove a part where Iron Man fights a giant mechanical spider because well.... spiders... spiders... SPIDERSSSSS!!!!! GET THEM OFF!!!!

Re:Smells? (5, Informative)

Stele (9443) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486885)

My wife and I once saw the Shrek 4D Experience at Universal Studios Florida. Every seat can emit mist, air blasts in your face, small water bursts in your face (such as when one of Donkey's kids sneezes on you), smells, and there are small air jets that can move up and down, positioned strategically at your ankles. At one point all these spiders drop down from the forest above, in 3D of course, and then they get the little air jets going on your ankles - it feels like little feathers (or SPIDERZZ OMG!) on your feet. My wife FLIPPED OUT. It was hilarious!

Re:Smells? (3, Informative)

nametaken (610866) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486055)

They do this at Disney for a few shows. It's fun for those goofy little features, but I honestly can't see myself choosing to watch a good movie this way.

Re:Smells? (4, Funny)

Zordak (123132) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486333)

There's a theater at the Tower of the Americas in San Antonio that does this with a little 30-minute show about Texas. I took my kids to it. The 3-D gave me a headache. And there was a part where a big bull snorts and it sprays a bit of water in your face, which was just gross and off-putting. And the smells all smelled like artificial scents out of a Glade air freshener (which is more or less what they are). And the hallway outside of the theater stunk from leftover artificial smells. And despite the advertisement that it would be "4-D," there was no actual time travel, except for shifting me forward in time about 30 minutes so that I was about 30 minutes and about $30 poorer. And get off my lawn.

Re:Smells? (1)

berashith (222128) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486657)

it must be a tourist-y thing. The atlanta aquarium has a theater that does this. The water spraying just pissed me off. The shaking seats were actually pretty cool, especially the first time. a big 3-D something coming out of the screen, with a big boom from teh speakers, while the seats give you a big jolt can add something, but I imagine that moderation is very important

Re:Smells? (2)

wylf (657051) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487243)

Not to be rude, but I imagine a few select theatres in Japan will be somewhat technologically superior to the equivalent in San Antonio...

Re:Smells? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43487365)

lol, san antonio, a backwater, redneck town in a hick state. so what's up cletus? YEE HAW, YEE HAW!!!

Re:Smells? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486933)

...but I honestly can't see myself choosing to watch a good movie this way.

Don't worry, you won't.

Re:Smells? (3, Informative)

emag (4640) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486087)

It's been done before... [wikipedia.org] The question is, is this implementation better?

Re:Smells? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486929)

It's been done before... [wikipedia.org] The question is, is this implementation better?

No, that's not the question. The question is the same as for 3D: it's been done before, the implementation is better this time around, but can it actually be used to improve a film?

The jury's still out on 3D. The jury will never even get called for this one.

Re:Smells? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486115)

Smelling things is just the act of tiny molecules of an object falling off, wafting through the air and landing on a bundle of nerves. So, to make the smells of a movie you would just need a device that aerosols small containers of your chosen molecules into the theater at triggered intervals.

Scene: Iron Man sits at a desk surrounded by complicated electronics, grilling bacon with a palm-beam, Pepper enters the room.

Cue: 2 grams from vial 2 (bacon) , 1/2 gram vial 34 (pepper perfume)

Suddenly, an explosion occurs.

Cue: 1 gram released from vial 54 (charcoal) and 1/4 gram released from vial 2 (bacon)

Iron man speaks: Hi, Pepper. Do you like crispy bacon?

Re:Smells? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486307)

HDR and HFR = refined. 3D and 4DX = smelly, tacky, fad

Re:Smells? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486415)

This was demonstrated in "Kentucky Fried Movie" . . . they called it "Feel-a-Round" . . . and they cut to the next sketch before the porn started . . .

Re:Smells? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486551)

Actually there are pretty limited smells pallete (I went to see CROODS on 4dx and there was only 2 kind of smells, one for flowers and one for "rain")

Re:Smells? (1)

cant_get_a_good_nick (172131) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486995)

This is actually a revival of old tech from the 60's [wikipedia.org] and earlier. I remember some Internet company (mercifully stomped by the dotcom bust) that wanted to sell you some USB attach-y thingy that could generate scents.

The whole thing is to get asses in theater seats and not in front of your 60" tv at home.

Seat motion? (4, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485575)

"Hey, you got your sushi in my wasabi peas!"

"Hey, you got your wasabi peas in my sushi!"

Two great tastes together!

Re:Seat motion? (1)

phrostie (121428) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485907)

I think there was a Sponge Bob movie like that once.

Re:Seat motion? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486195)

You lie. If there was such a Spongebob movie, just knowing about it would make you shoot yourself in the face. Since you are still here, there was no such movie. QED.

better idea (5, Insightful)

slashmydots (2189826) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485587)

So there's that or a theater by me lets you place an order off a menu and you get a seat and table and then they bring the food out to you. I'd rather have that than fog and strobe lights in my face.

Re:better idea (4, Insightful)

Endo13 (1000782) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485879)

Yeah we have one of those near where I live too. The food is actually surprisingly good and not overpriced. This one's called Movie Tavern. And like you, I'd prefer that over fog and strobe lights. In fact, I'd prefer just a normal theater over fog and strobe lights.

Re:better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486049)

How does that work?

Do they bring the food before the movie starts?
There must be some lighting besides the screen so you can see what you're eating?
You must miss what's going on in the movie while you're eating

Re:better idea (4, Informative)

Endo13 (1000782) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486191)

They usually take the order before the movie starts, but bring the food out during the movie, unless you take their advice and show up early. All the servers wear black clothes so they're not distruptive. There's very dim lighting, just bright enough to see your food but not so bright as to affect the movie. There's two kinds of seating: fixed round tables with swivel chairs, and also kind of a bar-style table with comfortable office chairs. I'm used to eating while watching a movie or TV at home, so no, I don't really miss anything.

I would say the video and audio quality are a very small step down from some of the other theaters in town, but it's not significant enough to bother me in the least.

http://movietavern.com/ [movietavern.com]

Re:better idea (4, Interesting)

slashmydots (2189826) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486759)

I noticed the low price of food in general let alone "theater pricing" on stuff like popcorn at other theaters. Then one of my friends who works at Screen Vision (Marcus-related advertising firm selling ads for before movies) said they pay sooooo much more to show ads in that theater because their people come and do counts for 5, 10, 15 minutes out from start time, etc and sell ads based on average number of people seated. It's A LOT because of the food orders. Like 10x higher. So 10x the ad revenue so cheaper food since more money can be made on advertising than food profits.

Re:better idea (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486889)

That's very interesting, and does make sense.

Re:better idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43487219)

I disagree. A bag of popcorn costs, what 15 cents? Sell it for $3.00 to even 1/3 of the people there and you've just earned an average of nearly a dollar per person. Assuming most of those people add a drink you could easily exceed $2.00 per person average. If you know any advertisers willing to pay that kind of money PER PERSON for 5 to 15 minutes of ads I'd like to know about them. Even if targeted at "captive audience of people who paid good money to watch movie X at a somewhat upscale theater in community Y" that seems like quite a stretch.

I'm sure it helps though, and decent food prices can actually attract more patrons overall and make people complain less, and recommend the place to their friends, etc, so it's still likely a smart practice. They might also edge up prices after a while if they did it to attract people to a new venue though.

Re:better idea (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485967)

I wish those would take off all over the country.
Hell, even just serving adult beverages and snacks would be awesome.

Re:better idea (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486535)

Actually here (I'm from Mexico where Cinepolis has 4DX) you can place your order (food from a cart, wine, beer, etc.) on VIP cinema theaters anytime and they bring the food out to you. In the case of 4dx actually they limit the kind of food that you can bring to you (only popcorns and soda) and still they warning you.

The horror, the horror (2)

kruach aum (1934852) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485623)

The trolling potential for Smell-o-vision hooked up to the internet is... mind-boggling. It's like I'm seeing colours I've never seen before.

Re:The horror, the horror (5, Funny)

imikem (767509) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485707)

I am so looking forward to re-release of Blazing Saddles in 4DX. BEANS!

And why would I want to smell most movies? (2)

TiggertheMad (556308) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486265)

I am so looking forward to re-release of Blazing Saddles in 4DX. BEANS!

Or Schindler's list so you could smell the burning bodies? Yeah, I am pretty sure there are a lot of movies that introducing smell-o-vision would be a bad idea for....

Re:And why would I want to smell most movies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486507)

On the other hand, Emeril [cookingchanneltv.com] would be a hit.

Gimmicks (5, Insightful)

Dan East (318230) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485635)

More gimmicks equals more expensive ticket prices. Yep, we'll see this happen in the US for sure.

Re:Gimmicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485717)

More gimmicks equals more expensive ticket prices. Yep, we'll see this happen in the US for sure.

We already did. There were films and theaters in the 50s and 60s that "enhanced" the movie "experience" with things like Sensurround, shaking chairs, canisters of odors released into the room, actors showing up during key scenes to scare the audience, etc, including that reliable old chestnut, 3-D!!!!!1!... it's a shame Wikipedia doesn't have a specific category for "stupid theater gimmicks in American cinema", that'd make this so much easier to link...

Re:Gimmicks (1)

boristdog (133725) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487013)

I admit to being old enough to have seen both Earthquake and Midway in SENSURROUND.

I thought it was really cool when I was a kid. I'm sure it would just annoy the crap out of me today.

Re:Gimmicks (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485787)

Already have:

http://www.cinepolisusa.com/

Re:Gimmicks (2)

rsborg (111459) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486767)

More gimmicks equals more expensive ticket prices. Yep, we'll see this happen in the US for sure.

You'll see it happen, then fail as people are too cheap (or like me, too wary of gimmicks) to pay for it.
I'd prefer an experience like http://drafthouse.com/ [drafthouse.com] any day.

We showed Willy Wonka in Smell-o-Vision (2)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485641)

Here in Seattle, at Christmas, the Seattle International Film Festival's Uptown Cinema showed Willy Wonka in Smell-o-Vision.

Do you want fries with that? There's a hamburger place across the street.

I'm not sure how keen I am on 4D, though, sometimes it gets in the way of the movie.

It's been done (1)

steveha (103154) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485651)

I've already seen a movie using similar effects: Captain EO [wikipedia.org]

I'd rather see a low-budget 2D movie with a good plot than an expensively produced 3D movie with smoke effects and lasers but with a poor plot.

(I do have some hope that Iron Man 3 will be worth watching on its own merits.)

I AM BEING DEFAMED... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485681)

A corrupt slashdot luser has pentrated the moderation system to downmod all my posts while impersonating me.

Nearly 230++ times that I know of @ this point for all of March/April 2013 so far, & others here have told you to stop - take the hint, lunatic (leave slashdot)...

Sorry folks - but whoever the nutjob is that's attempting to impersonate me, & upset the rest of you as well, has SERIOUS mental issues, no questions asked! I must've gotten the better of him + seriously "gotten his goat" in doing so in a technical debate & his "geek angst" @ losing to me has him doing the:

---

A.) $10,000 challenges, ala (where the imposter actually TRACKED + LISTED the # of times he's done this no less, & where I get the 230 or so times I noted above) -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3585795&cid=43285307 [slashdot.org]

&/or

B.) Reposting OLD + possibly altered models - (this I haven't checked on as to altering the veracity of the info. being changed) of posts of mine from the past here

---

(Albeit massively repeatedly thru all threads on /. this March/April 2013 nearly in its entirety thusfar).

* Personally, I'm surprised the moderation staff here hasn't just "blocked out" his network range yet honestly!

(They know it's NOT the same as my own as well, especially after THIS post of mine, which they CAN see the IP range I am coming out of to compare with the ac spamming troll doing the above...).

APK

P.S.=> Again/Stressing it: NO guys - it is NOT me doing it, as I wouldn't waste that much time on such trivial b.s. like a kid might...

Plus, I only post where hosts file usage is on topic or appropriate for a solution & certainly NOT IN EVERY POST ON SLASHDOT (like the nutcase trying to "impersonate me" is doing for nearly all of March/April now, & 230++ times that I know of @ least)... apk

P.S.=> here is CORRECT host file information just to piss off the insane lunatic troll:

--

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

http://news.slashdot.org/story/11/12/12/2213233/adblock-plus-to-offer-acceptable-ads-option [slashdot.org] )

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 -> http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082908-kaminsky-flaw-prompts-dns-server.html [networkworld.com] 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 (in-addr.arpa) 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:

GOOD INFORMATION ON MALWARE BEHAVIOR LISTING BOTNET C&C SERVERS + MORE (AS WELL AS REMOVAL LISTS FOR HOSTS):

http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org]
  http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org]
  http://hostsfile.org/hosts.html [hostsfile.org]
  http://hostsfile.mine.nu/downloads/ [hostsfile.mine.nu]
  http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download [hosts-file.net]
  https://zeustracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php?filter=online [abuse.ch]
  https://spyeyetracker.abuse.ch/monitor.php [abuse.ch]
  http://ddanchev.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]
  http://www.malware.com.br/lists.shtml [malware.com.br]
  http://www.stopbadware.org/ [stopbadware.org]
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:

http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1898692&cid=34473398 [slashdot.org]
  http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1896216&cid=34458500 [slashdot.org]

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 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org]

11.) HOSTS files are EASILY user controlled, obtained (for reliable ones -> http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] ) & 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:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/16/0416238/US-Military-Blocks-Websites-To-Free-Up-Bandwidth [slashdot.org]

(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:

ADBANNERS SLOW DOWN THE WEB: -> http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/11/30/166218 [slashdot.org]

---

And people do NOT LIKE ads on the web:

PEOPLE DISLIKE ADBANNERS: http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/04/02/0058247.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

As well as this:

Users Know Advertisers Watch Them, and Hate It:

http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/04/02/0058247.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Even WORSE still, is this:

Advertising Network Caught History Stealing:

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/07/22/156225/Advertising-Network-Caught-History-Stealing [slashdot.org]

---

15.) HOSTS files usage lets you avoid being charged on some ISP/BSP's (OR phone providers) "pay as you use" policy http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] , 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 -> http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com] ).

16.) If/when ISP/BSP's decide to go to -> FCC Approving Pay-As-You-Go Internet Plans: http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/08/2012243/FCC-Approving-Pay-As-You-Go-Internet-Plans [slashdot.org] 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:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/16/bing_yahoo_malware_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Malware torrent delivered over Google, Yahoo! ad services:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/24/malware_ads_google_yahoo/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Google's DoubleClick spreads malicious ads (again):

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/24/doubleclick_distributes_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Rogue ads infiltrate Expedia and Rhapsody:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/30/excite_and_rhapsody_rogue_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Google sponsored links caught punting malware:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/16/google_sponsored_links/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

DoubleClick caught supplying malware-tainted ads:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/13/doubleclick_distributes_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

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

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/11/yahoo_serves_12million_malware_ads/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Real Media attacks real people via RealPlayer:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/10/23/real_media_serves_malware/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Ad networks owned by Google, Microsoft serve malware:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/13/doubleclick_msn_malware_attacks/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Attacks Targeting Classified Ad Sites Surge:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/02/02/1433210/Attacks-Targeting-Classified-Ad-Sites-Surge [slashdot.org]

---

Hackers Respond To Help Wanted Ads With Malware:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/01/20/0228258/Hackers-Respond-To-Help-Wanted-Ads-With-Malware [slashdot.org]

---

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

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2007/11/doubleclick [wired.com]

---

Ruskie gang hijacks Microsoft network to push penis pills:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/12/microsoft_ips_hijacked/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

Major ISPs Injecting Ads, Vulnerabilities Into Web:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/04/19/2148215.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Two Major Ad Networks Found Serving Malware:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/12/13/0128249/Two-Major-Ad-Networks-Found-Serving-Malware [slashdot.org]

---

THE NEXT AD YOU CLICK MAY BE A VIRUS:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/09/06/15/2056219/The-Next-Ad-You-Click-May-Be-a-Virus [slashdot.org]

---

NY TIMES INFECTED WITH MALWARE ADBANNER:

http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/13/2346229 [slashdot.org]

---

MICROSOFT HIT BY MALWARES IN ADBANNERS:

http://apcmag.com/microsoft_apologises_for_serving_malware.htm [apcmag.com]

---

ISP's INJECTING ADS AND ERRORS INTO THE WEB: -> http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/04/19/2148215.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

ADOBE FLASH ADS INJECTING MALWARE INTO THE NET: http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/08/20/0029220&from=rss [slashdot.org]

---

London Stock Exchange Web Site Serving Malware:

http://www.securityweek.com/london-stock-exchange-web-site-serving-malware [securityweek.com]

---

Spotify splattered with malware-tainted ads:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/03/25/spotify_malvertisement_attack/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

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:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/03/01/0041203/Infected-Androids-Run-Up-Big-Texting-Bills [slashdot.org]

---

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

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=ZITMO&btnG=Google+Search [google.com]

---

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 -> http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com]

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:

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT FROM ARSTECHNICA THEMSELVES:

----

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

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2010/03/why-ad-blocking-is-devastating-to-the-sites-you-love.ars [arstechnica.com]

"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."

and

"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):

---

PERTINENT QUOTE/EXCERPT (from -> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/12/16/wikileaks_mirror_malware_warning_row/ [theregister.co.uk] )

"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 stopbadware.org (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 ( http://adblockplus.org/en/ [adblockplus.org] ), IE 9's new TPL's ( http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/ [microsoft.com] ), &/or NoScript ( http://noscript.net/ [noscript.net] 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 ( http://adblockplus.org/en/ [adblockplus.org] ) 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:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/02/16/ghost_domains_dns_vuln/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

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

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/11/29/1755230/Chinese-DNS-Tampering-a-Real-Threat-To-Outsiders [slashdot.org]

---

SECUNIA HIT BY DNS REDIRECTION HACK THIS WEEK:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/26/secunia_back_from_dns_hack/ [theregister.co.uk]

(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):

http://www.scmagazineus.com/new-bind-9-dns-flaw-is-worse-than-kaminskys/article/140872/ [scmagazineus.com]

(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:

https://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/dns-hijacks-now-being-used-serve-black-hole-exploit-kit-121211 [threatpost.com]

---

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

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/12/08/1353203/opendns-releases-dns-encryption-tool [slashdot.org]

---

Potential 0-Day Vulnerability For BIND 9:

http://it.slashdot.org/story/11/11/17/1429259/potential-0-day-vulnerability-for-bind-9 [slashdot.org]

---

Five DNS Threats You Should Protect Against:

http://www.securityweek.com/five-dns-threats-you-should-protect-against [securityweek.com]

---

DNS provider decked by DDoS dastards:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/11/16/ddos_on_dns_firm/ [theregister.co.uk]

---

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

http://it.slashdot.org/it/05/08/04/1525235.shtml?tid=172&tid=95&tid=218 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS ROOT SERVERS ATTACKED:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/02/06/2238225.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

TimeWarner DNS Hijacking:

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/23/2140208 [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Re-Binding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Server Survey Reveals Mixed Security Picture:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/07/11/21/0315239.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

Halvar figured out super-secret DNS vulnerability:

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/has-halvar-figured-out-super-secret-dns-vulnerability/1520 [zdnet.com]

---

BIND Still Susceptible To DNS Cache Poisoning:

http://tech.slashdot.org/tech/08/08/09/123222.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DNS Poisoning Hits One of China's Biggest ISPs:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/08/08/21/2343250.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

DDoS Attacks Via DNS Recursion:

http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/03/16/1658209.shtml [slashdot.org]

---

High Severity BIND DNS Vulnerability Advisory Issued:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/11/02/23/156212/High-Severity-BIND-Vulnerability-Advisory-Issued [slashdot.org]

---

Photobucketâ(TM)s DNS records hijacked:

http://blogs.zdnet.com/security/?p=1285 [zdnet.com]

---

Protecting Browsers from DNS Rebinding Attacks:

http://crypto.stanford.edu/dns/ [stanford.edu]

---

DNS Problem Linked To DDoS Attacks Gets Worse:

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/11/15/1238210/DNS-Problem-Linked-To-DDoS-Attacks-Gets-Worse [slashdot.org]

---

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 -> http://nortondns.com/ [nortondns.com]
  ScrubIT DNS -> http://www.scrubit.com/ [scrubit.com]
  OpenDNS -> http://www.opendns.com/ [opendns.com]

(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 -> http://safeweb.norton.com/buzz [norton.com] 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)...

---

20++ SLASHDOT USERS EXPERIENCING SUCCESS USING HOSTS FILES QUOTED VERBATIM:

---

"Ever since I've installed a host file (http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm) 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: http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm [mvps.org] " - 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. http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/ [someonewhocares.org] and http://winhelp2002.mvps.org/hosts.htm [mvps.org] 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 127.0.0.1" - 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:

A RETURN TO THE KILLFILE:

http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491 [securityfocus.com]

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 http://www.furtherleft.net/computer.htm [furtherleft.net] (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 NTCompatible.com (where I posted on HOSTS for YEARS (1997 onwards)) -> http://www.ntcompatible.com/thread28597-1.html [ntcompatible.com] !

---

"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 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/12/09/1840246/Beating-Censorship-By-Routing-Around-DNS [slashdot.org] & even DNSBL also (DNS Block Lists) -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSBL [wikipedia.org] 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):

BANNER ADS & BANDWIDTH:2011 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2139088&cid=36077722 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1907266&cid=34529608 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1490078&cid=30555632 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1869638&cid=34237268 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1461288&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=30272074 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1255487&cid=28197285 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1206409&cid=27661983 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1725068&cid=32960808 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1743902&cid=33147274 [slashdot.org]
  APK 20++ POINTS ON HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1913212&cid=34576182 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1862260&cid=34186256 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2010 (w/ facebook known bad sites blocked) -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1924892&cid=34670128 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS FILE MOD UP FOR ANDROID MALWARE:2010 -> http://mobile.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1930156&cid=34713952 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP ZEUSTRACKER:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2059420&cid=35654066 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP vs AT&T BANDWIDTH CAP:2011 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2116504&cid=35985584 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP CAN DO SAME AS THE "CloudFlare" Server-Side service:2011 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2220314&cid=36372850 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS and BGP +5 RATED (BEING HONEST):2010 http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1901826&cid=34490450 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS & PROTECT IP ACT:2011 http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2368832&cid=37021700 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457766&cid=37592458 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP & OPERA HAUTE SECURE:2011 -> http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2457274&cid=37589596 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1197039&cid=27556999 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 IN HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1143349&cid=27012231 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1198841&cid=27580299 [slashdot.org]
  0.0.0.0 in HOSTS:2009 -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1139705&cid=26977225 [slashdot.org]
  HOSTS MOD UP:2009 -> http://hardware.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1319261&cid=28872833 [slashdot.org] (still says INSIGHTFUL)
  HOSTS MOD UP vs. botnet: 2012 -> http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2603836&cid=38586216 [slashdot.org]

---

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.) 127.0.0.1 (the "loopback adapter address")
b.) 0.0.0.0 (next smallest & next most efficient)
c.) The smallest & fastest plain-jane 0

PER EACH HOSTS FILE ENTRY/RECORD...

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.) 127.0.0.1 = 9 bytes in size on disk & is the largest/slowest
2.) 0.0.0.0 = 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 127.0.0.1? My "huge" HOSTS file would be approximately 27mb in size... using 0.0.0.0 (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 127.0.0.1, next slowest using 0.0.0.0, & 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 127.0.0.1 or 0.0.0.0 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 (127.0.0.1 &/or 0.0.0.0, 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 -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] & 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...

AND

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 -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/09/recognizing-improvements-in-windows-7-handwriting.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage [msdn.com] & 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:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb878072.aspx [microsoft.com]

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:

http://www.bing.com/search?q=%22HOW+TO+SECURE+Windows+2000%2FXP%22&go=&form=QBRE [bing.com]

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 -> http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Browser/TrackingProtectionLists/ [microsoft.com] , 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)) - mvps.org 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 (mvps.org 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 diskcac

Re:I AM BEING DEFAMED... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485855)

Busted. It's me. I hacked into your Anonymous Coward profile a very long time ago and have been using it regularly. I'll stop. Promise.

Re:I AM BEING DEFAMED... apk (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485947)

No, I'M SPARTACUS!

Uh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485743)

theaters deliver smells

Iron Man 3

With how much Iron Man flies around and such, the whole theater is scheduled just to smell like smoke.

Yawn! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485757)

Let me know when I can:

Feel Gwyneth Paltrow's legs up and down and up and down.

Feel Rebecca Hall's everything.

and Feel every other hottie in the move.

Re:Yawn! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486031)

LOL, so you want the 'feelies' [wikipedia.org] from Brave New World then?

this is already a feature (5, Funny)

nimbius (983462) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485829)

in most of americas cinemas such as lowes, thanks to their generally poor quality
smells: enjoy the stench of burnt popcorn and rancid palm kernel oil from a cooker that hasnt seen regular service since the carter administration. the smell of butter mysteriously absent from the product is provided through the carpets at no charge!

seat motions: folding seats with fewer bolts and screws remaining than the last republican vice presidential candidate. Most patrons find watching a film to be indistinguishable from a light pilates and yoga session, other than the slightly higher cost of the film.

additional effects such as strobe lights and fog: check out the popcorn maker in the lobby as it synergizes with the weenie roller and the nacho cheese melter for its daily 4:00 meltdown. the ensuing blast, if experienced during the 3:15 showing of the Dark Knight Rises, transports viewers directly into the movie (through the screen, past the drywall, and into the parking lot in most cases!)

Re:this is already a feature (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486101)

Please replace all political references with car analogies.

Remastring to 4DX (1)

T.E.D. (34228) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485883)

I wonder if they could remaster old films to use this technology. I can't wait to experience the Bog of Eternal Stench [wikia.com] from Labyrinth in 4DX

Re:Remastring to 4DX (1)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486141)

I think Zardoz would also be a good candidate.

Re:Remastring to 4DX (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43487231)

I think "Basic Instinct" would be a good idea. At "the moment" everyone used to talk about, you get a little whiff.

But seriously, I hope this doesn't take on, because one producer won't want to be outdone by the other, so there's going to be a smell-race.

The next thing might be localized climate control, so when you're in the shire you get a nice warm breeze and when out in the snowstorm a freezing cold.

They did it better in 1977 (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485909)

http://www.hapi-project.com/posts/view/29
Feel-a-Round in Kentucky Fried Movie

Medical Issues (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485911)

I know so many folks with smell related issues, particularly allergies, scent memory, and migraine triggers that this cannot be a good idea. I won't even go to a 3D film because of the potential eye strain issues, let alone the potential for migraines induced from volatile organic compaounds (VOCs - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatile_organic_compound). I'll pass on all of that, thanks.
sTc

Re:Medical Issues (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486681)

Nose plugs provided at the counter for 2$!

Not for me ... (3, Interesting)

gstoddart (321705) | 1 year,1 day | (#43485953)

4DX-equipped theaters deliver smells, seat motions, and additional effects such as strobe lights and fog, all in sync with events as they appear on the screen

I already get headaches from 3D films, so I don't watch them.

Smells, strobe lights, fog, and moving seats? No thanks.

There's only a few movies I'll see in a movie theater each year (with Iron Man 3 being one of the planned ones), but for the most part I'd rather watch it at home on my own setup, which lets me enjoy the movie more and be able to eat/drink what I like and pause it to hit the head.

My home theater and my lazy-boy sofa are fine for me for most movies.

The first thing that came to mind was ... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43485999)

What will anime panty shots smell like?

and I am not even Japanese:{)

Japan? (3, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486007)

If you plan on going to see Iron Man 3 in Japan, remember to look under your seat to disable the robotic tentacles.

Re:Japan? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486123)

or spy cameras in public washrooms.

Rocky Horror (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486051)

Just have the patrons bring squirt guns. It works for the Rocky Horror Picture show.

Hulk smell (1)

WillgasM (1646719) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486073)

The first, and only, thing I thought of when I read this: I wonder what a sweaty hulk smells like.

Re:Hulk smell (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486139)

You won't like him when he's sweaty...

Far Too Gimmicky (1)

erroneus (253617) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486081)

3D movies are a bit too gimmicky but "once in a while" an Avatar might appear and it might be fun to get a little more into it... it was yet another advancement of some sort of another, so trying out the experience is kind of a geek imperitive. But at the end of the day, it wasn't "all that" and certainly nothing that every movie production should do.

Now this? I'm sorry, but I don't think I need to even try to to know it would be far too distracting to be immersive.

Mexico?!? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486129)

How in the hell did Mexico beat us to anything except women who birth children but don't know that they are pregnant?

So this system is in all the advanced countries... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486163)

"...Beyond South Korea, this full immersion approach to cinema is already in operation in countries such as Israel, Mexico, Brazil, and China."

But not, apparently, in the US.

We can't afford the technology? Or we can't understand how to do it? Or, more likely, we've slapped a ban on it until an American company can come up with a copy...

watch human centipede 3 follows with 4dx (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486185)

human centipede 3 things are about to get crappy

Nah, sorry (2)

TheSkepticalOptimist (898384) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486217)

I find it very annoying when some kid kicks the back of my seat, so I don't want to sit through a whole movie with that kind of "seat vibration" experience.

Also while movie smell's might be a welcome change over body odor, cigarette's lingering stank from the smokers in front of you, and over buttered burnt popcorn, not sure any movie would be enhanced by the experience.

Also in what reality would someone pay $50 for a night out at the movies only to have the theater fog up and have people dropping with seizures from strobe lights a;; around up?

Pretty much 4DX encourages people to stay home to watch movies without all the excessive bullshit, unless Sony decides to shove this into the PS4 experience.

Disney Did It (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486299)

Isn't there a Disney show that already does this? Wasn't worth it.

Spinal Tap reference (1)

gurps_npc (621217) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486411)

"These go to 11. It's one louder.'

D does not stand for 'better", it stands for dimension. The 4th Dimension is time.

A 4D show would be one that is different every single time you observe it, not something that childishly and stupidly throws in extra sensory experiences.

At best this kind of marketing, should be called 4S shows - sight, sound, smell, and touch (water).

When some marketing idiot calls it 4d, it just make think "Do you like making the world a stupider place?"

Piffle! The U.S. did it in 1977! (1)

sgtrock (191182) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486433)

Just watch that award winning documentary, "Kentucky Fried Movie" to see it demonstrated. ;-)

I'll trade in... (4, Informative)

JBMcB (73720) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486437)

...smells and strobe effects gimmicks for the following:

- A well maintained projector, screen and speakers
- THX Certification, meaning mostly that everything is maintained and properly calibrated
- A properly spec'd out 4K projector, or two 4K projectors with 8K upsampling

It doesn't seem like much, but movie theaters like to pull the following:
- Running the projector bulbs dim to make them last longer, or using a projector designed for a small screen for larger screens
- Not maintaining their speakers at all - you can hear the broken cones rattling most of the time
- Using 2K projectors for 4K material, or two cheap 2K projectors for 4K material. This is very common.
- Not calibrating anything, especially their speakers. This is obvious when something is supposed to be moving from one side of the theater to the other, and it sounds like it's going over your head, or it sounds totally different. The surround array probably wasn't calibrated at all.

Re:I'll trade in... (4, Informative)

iluvcapra (782887) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487267)

- THX Certification, meaning mostly that everything is maintained and properly calibrated

THX certs haven't meant anything since the late 1990s, all THX really certifies these days is that the check from the theater owner cleared.

IAAMPSD. I am a motion picture sound designer. The inventor of THX was my instructor in college.

I'll be avoiding these theaters. (1)

Krojack (575051) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486533)

As it is now, I won't even sit in those D-Box seats. Just annoying. If I'm forced to smell shit then count me out.

Odorama (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486569)

You youngins may not remember (posting AC because I forgot my PW), but there was a movie released called Polyester that was in Odorama. The way it worked was you were handed a pack of cards numbered (I think) 1-10. Each card had a little scratch and sniff spot using the bead encapsulation technology from 3M. During the movie at points a number would flash on the screen, and everyone was supposed to scratch and sniff that card, filling the theater with the heady aroma of whatever was on the card. The problem was, instead of taking a movie and picking out scents to use, they sort of wrote a movie around odors they could successfully chemically create at the time. Scene: Wife is having an affair with the pizza boy. /*scratch*/ /*sniff*/ Pizza. Scene: in a locker room /*scratch*/ /*sniff*/ dirty socks. Scene: someone had an accident in bed. /*thinks about it for a second, throws card away unscratched*/

Inhaling chemicals (1)

valkenar (307241) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486619)

Who is going to certify the chemicals they use for these smells? I barely trust the FDA to certify food additives, I'm not sure Iike the idea of sitting in a movie theatre inhaling whatever chemicals this company found that smells like strawberries and gunpowder.

Re:Inhaling chemicals (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43487461)

Who certifies the chemicals for all the other things you smell every day?

Waw! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486651)

Google Nose already on the market?!! Super!

North vs South (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,1 day | (#43486733)

I'm glad this wasn't developed in North Korea. There, to capture that sense of realism in gun battles, they really shoot at the audience.

I heard Dakota is topless in her next film... (1)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | 1 year,1 day | (#43486927)

I really don't want zombie rotting meat smells, nor assal-derived ones.

I'm fine with Anne Hathaway or any other starlet's freshly-unholstered areolar or underboob scents, though, which I imagine is like a slightly musty fallen log found in the woods when you went on a hike some years ago.

Good for Japan (1)

bobjr94 (1120555) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487023)

Here in the US I usually pick the standard 2D version of a movie vs 3D, even if the price is the same. At our local theater, Sunday-Thursday they do not charge extra for the 3D movies but even for no upcharge 3D seems like more trouble than it's worth. A 4D movie is something people may do once so they can say they tried it.

Worst Idea Evah (4, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487031)

Smell is really a personal thing. Something that smells wonderful to one person could be nauseating to another. I know someone who thinks the smell of gasoline is heavenly (no, she's not a huffer).

I mean, I understand that the entertainment/industrial/advertising-complex are desperate to get people to come to theaters again because they are afraid that there is still a small amount of money left in peoples' pockets that they have not gotten their hands on, but until they can say they're making the best movies that they can, they should not be looking for gimmicks.

If they want to get me back into a movie theater, and they really believe that the movies they make represent the very best possible quality, then they could start by tearing down the shoebox multiplex theaters and start building real movie palaces again.

There's a theater here in Chicago, The Patio, that is a bona-fide movie palace. Built in the Pre-WWII period, it's got the ceiling with the stars and moving clouds and a balcony and all the trimmings. I used to go there when I was in High School decades ago. Saw the original Dirty Harry there, Charles Bronson movies, like that. Well, a couple of brothers bought the place some years back, before it was torn down, and they renovated it lovingly. Put in great seats, cleaned the place up, made everything sparkle. Put in an A-Number-One concessions stand with actual popcorn and reasonably priced goodies, and a great sound system. They play second run movies and carefully selected classics. Some rare Hong Kong and Kung Fu flicks. Charge $5-6 for admission. Goddamn, I love that place. It's not downtown, but in one of the neighborhoods on the Northwest Side. I can be there in 10 minutes on the Kennedy Expressway, so a lot of times my wife and I are thinking about Netflix or something, instead we hop in the car and go to the Patio. Twenty bucks and it's a great night out watching a movie on a whopping big screen. It's about a million times more enjoyable than going to a shopping mall and sitting in some nasty little multiplex closet with a bunch of assholes on cellphones. People who go to the Patio really love movies. The Chicago Cinema Society programs the place sometimes.

It's not rocket surgery, getting people to go to theaters. But Smell-a-Vision is not the solution.

They forgot to list Canada (1)

slashdyke (873156) | 1 year,1 day | (#43487033)

The vancouver Aquarium had a movie on penguins last spring (2012) featuring typical effects as well as in theatre snow, rain, fog, tentacle slaps behind the ankles and jiggling seats. We did miss the smells however.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...