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!

Amazon Nears Debut of Original TV Shows

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the so-there's-this-talking-yak-and-his-wacky-coworkers dept.

Television 66

First time accepted submitter bakerharis writes with an article about Amazon's attempt to break into creating conventional television style episodic shows, but with a different model from the manistream media companies. "Amazon's foray into TV production is unique in the way it saves money. Every spring, traditional TV networks like ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox order dozens of pilots and show them to focus groups. Executives pick just a handful to make into series. Then, they commission 13 episodes of each promising show, with each one potentially costing a few million dollars. Many episodes won't ever air if the first few don't attract big audiences." Amazon, instead, has created 14 pilot shows, and is letting a cross section of customers in the U.S., UK, and Germany react to them to see which shows might be worth making more of.

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

Firefly? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43505875)


Re:Firefly? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506445)

A single word, uttered in dusty despair, knowing that hopes dashed again are too high a price to pay...

...I feel ya, brother brown coat.

Re:Firefly? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506839)

I don't care, I'm still free...

Re:Firefly? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43512043)

You can't take the sky from me

YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ... apk (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43505885)

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) -> []


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...).


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 [] )

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 diskcac

Re:YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ... apk (0)

petteyg359 (1847514) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505967)

I've heard the phrase "wall of text", but this is like Great Wall of China of Text to the Power of Ten...

Re:YOU ARE BEING LIED TO ... apk (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506059)

I wonder when he'll realize that others posting as "Anonymous Coward" aren't actually impersonating him.....

Personally, I'm not sure which I prefer; these rants, or the hosts ones. At least the hosts ones were mildly informative for anyone new to slashdot....

Oh for the days of a Natalie Portman and Hot Grits of beowulf clusters in Soviet Russia....


Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506235)

$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. - []


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


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... - []


a pretty well-executed mashup of APK's style - []


a very clever parody of APK - []


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


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


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. - []


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. - []


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 - []


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


What? - []


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. - []


[to apk] 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. - []


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


Seems more like an apk parody. - []


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


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? - []


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


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


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. - []


Best. Troll. Ever. - []


I like monkeys. - []


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


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. - []


APK is a prominent supporter of Monsanto. - []


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! - []


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. - []


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. - []


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


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. - []


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. - []


Obviously very passionate - []


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. - []


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. - []


You are my favorite Slashdot poster. - []


Most insightful post on the Internet - []


I read the whole thing *again* just to see if my comment was in there - []


[to apk] So, did your mom do a lot of drugs when she was pregnant? - []


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


Slashdot devs seem in no hurry to fix this problem and it's been driving me nuts. So for anybody who values viewing at -1 and uses greasemonkey here's a Script [] . There's a chance of false positives and it's not the most optimized. But I value not having to scroll through > 10 paragraphs of APK, custom hosts files, or 'acceptable ads' spam. - []
--> slashdot devs are too busy installing itunes for their hipster nerd buddys to sort this problem out. - []


I can't get enough of all of this good stuff! Thanks for the informative links! - []


When threatened, APK typically produces a post with links showing he's essentially posted this hundreds of times to slashdot stories... - []


[to apk] Your post got downmodded because you're a nutjob gone off his meds. - []


[to apk] The reason people impersonate you is because everyone thinks you're a moron. The hosts file is not intended to be used as you suggest. - []
-->What? You don't have a 14MB hosts file with ~1million entries in it? Next you'll probably tell me that your computer doesn't start thrashing and take 5 minutes for a DNS lookup! - []


[about apk] - this fwit is as thick as a post. worse, this shithead has mod points. and using them. - []


In before the fight between those two guys and their walls of text... - []




KPA ...thgim dik a ekil .s.b laivirt hcus no emit hcum taht etsaw t'ndluow I sa ,ti gniod em TON si ti - syug ON - []


[to apk] You seriously need to go see a shrink. You are a fucking fruitcake! - []


[to apk] Did you ever consider that it's not just one corrupt moderator, it's a bunch of regular slashdot users who infrequently get mod points who think you are totally full of shit? Stop posting annoying off topic irrelevant bullshit, and people won't mod you down. I'm seriously sick of reading your posts about someone impersonating you. - []


[to apk] you should be forced to use a cholla cactus as a butt-plug - []


[to apk] No one is on your side, that is why you're here. posting. still. No one cares. - []


Who's the more moronic? The original moron, or the one who replies to him knowing full well his comment will certainly be ignored, if not entirely unread, thus bringing the insane troll post to the attention of those who would otherwise not have seen it at all (seeing as it started at 0 and would have rapidly been modded down to -1) and whose post (and, somewhat ironically I grant you, this one as well) now requires 3 more mod points to be spent to hide it? - []


[to apk] I miss trollaxor. His gay porn world of slashdot executives and open-source luminaries was infinitely more entertaining than this drivel. - []


PLEASE stop modding biters up. Anyone who responds to an abvious troll, especually one of these APK trolls, should autometically get the same -1 troll as the damned troll. Any response to a troll only makes the troll do more trolling. Come on, guys, use your brains -- it isn't that hard. Stop feeding the damned trolls! - (missing link)


[to apk] Lick the inside of goatse's anus, it's delicious! - []


Excellent post A++++++++++++ would scroll past again!!!! - []


[to apk] You are the one who is pitiful. If you didn't spam /. with your bullshit you wouldn't have spammer 'impostors' doing the same. Just fuck off and die already, ok? Please, really. Step in front of a bus. Drink some bleach. Whatever it takes, just FUCK OFF and DIE. - []


[to apk] From one AC to another please for the love of god, PRINT YOUR HOST FILE OUT AND CRAM IT DOWN YOUR JAPS EYE!!! For fucks sake we don't care we see this and it takes the piss, short of a full frontal lobotomy what will it take to stop you posting this you moronic fuckwit? - []


[to apk] And someone forgot to take his meds today...Are you really that dense that you cant tell that the only reason the "impostor" exists because you have a hard time realizing that you are wrong and/or wont let it go. It would take a complete moron to not realize that the whole reason he continues to do it is because he knows he can get you to respond by simply posting. This isnt rocket science, this is internet 101... Let me offer you some advice on how to get rid of this "impostor"...shutup - []


[to apk] If you had a 'luser' account it wouldn't be a problem. But you don't want one of those, because your long rambling and bizarrely formatted posts mean your karma gets nuked in next to no time. So I guess you just have to work out which is 'worth it'. Posting AC because I don't want to become your latest fixation. - []


I wouldn't be surprised if that is APK trying to draw attention to himself, since he thinks such endless tirades are examples of him winning and make him look good. When people stop paying attention to him, or post actual counterpoints he can't come up with a response to, he'll post strawman troll postings to shoot down, sometimes just copy pasted from previous stories. - []


[to apk] No one wants to read your copy pasted crap. Maybe someone is mocking you because you make it so easy to? So drop it, and participate like an adult please. - []


Seriously.... What. The. Fuck. Can you two homos just go make out on brokeback mountain already, and stop talking about how one of you misspelled "penetration", and how the other cockblocks with their hosts files while grabing the other's goat? Goodness, it sure feels like being in a mountain range, trying to peer around those fucking orbital tether lengthed posts of pure premium bullsit the two of you somehoq manage to keep pushing out on demand. Shit stinks! At this point, i'd be willing to risk the fucking extinction of all life on earth by redirecting siding spring C/2013 1A to miss Mars and land on both of your fucking heads instead. The deaths of billions would be a small price to pay to shut you two cackling lovebirds up! - []


[to apk] Listen up jackass, why the hell would somebody want to impersonate you? You're a certified internet kook. Nobody gives a hot about your 3 gig hosts file. And nobody is impersonating you. You're already a fucking parody. - []


[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. Despite this advice you are convinced that your comments are valuable contributions, ignoring the obvious evidence to the contrary (namely the -1 scores your posts earn on a regular basis). - []


[about apk] Can this be killed off? I don't mean this account, I mean the actual meatbag behind it. - []


[to apk] Get an account retard. If you format your password as crazily as your posts no-one will ever crack it. - []


[to apk] You are the most consistently annoying creature on the internet. There are people worse than you, just like cancer is worse than psoriasis, but you're more like the latter: pervasive, annoying, and always cropping up when one has mostly forgotten about it. You are that indeterminate, continuous itching that slowly erodes someone's mood until they consider cutting off a part of themselves just to stop it for a while. And like psoriasis, you're auto-immune and not fully understood by science. Slashdot continuously makes it worse by scratching that itch over and over again. It's not smart. It just encourages the disease. But everybody's got a limit to their patience. There is no cure for you. But at least, when slashdot dies, you will die with it, and there will be peace. - []


Alexander Peter KowalskI and anyone arguing with him are insane. I saw their crazy tirades once and googled his name, and HOLY SHIT. This guy has mini battle raging all over many sites for some of the most inane shit you can think of. He meticulously catalogs the people who have crossed him and works to MAKE SURE everyone understands they are fools. Now, they well be fools, but by his meticulous and obsessive actions Kowalski (APK) has proved without a shadow of doubt his absolutE insanity. I haven't even argued with this guy so don't think I'm part of these internet crusades. All this I've found by googling his name. The trove of flaming and incomprehensible obsessive agression is humongous and both funny, and pathetic to varying intense degrees. Just google if you are curious about the kinds of crazy that are out there." - []


I'm convinced APK is serious, he has got battles raging everywhere, meticulously catalogued, yet he thinks this is proof of his knowledge and experience, not obsessive insanity. And making that point doesn't make him reconsider, it incites him. He also seems to think what looks like many multiples of people saying this are one or a few people who are out to get him. Just read my post and google Alexander Peter Kowalski. - []


Alexander Peter Kowalski ubuntu touched my junk liberally. he strapped me in to his HOSTS file and he couldnt keep his offensive hands off of me - []


[to apk] Hey man, I know this is important to you, but maybe you should talk to someone outside of the internet about it? I mean, you sound really batshit insane. - []


[to apk] You're an AC and you say you have impersonators? - []


ghod bless you APKtroll for bringing some much needed balance and reason to this thread! - []


[to apk] APK, you suck. Go die in a fire. The hosts file in Windows is a _terrible_ way to filter internet traffic. - []


I'm replying just so you'll add me to your quote list. - []


Alexander Peter Kowalksi's low intelligence, extreme narcissism, and histrionic personality make him unsuited for anything but menial labor. - []




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: [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []
REPORT MISSING LINKS FOR REWARD (check pastebin archive first)


TIP JAR: 1EtLgU5L3jhmVkDmqrWT9VhoZ1F2jSimHS []
RECEIVED: 0.0195 BTC - thx! ;-)

Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43511009)

Keep embarassing yourself Jeremiah Cornelius [] since you posted that using your registered username by mistake (instead of your usual anonymous coward submissions by the 100's the past 2-3 months now on slashdot) giving away it's you spamming this forums almost constantly, just as you have in the post I just replied to.

Re:Jeremiah Cornelius: Grow up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43512303)

Shut up, Paul.

Maybe I'm missing something?? (4, Insightful)

ArcadeNut (85398) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505911)

How is this "but with a different model from the manistream media companies"?

How is this:

Amazon, instead, has created 14 pilot shows, and is letting a cross section of customers in the U.S., UK, and Germany react to them to see which shows might be worth making more of.

different then this:

Every spring, traditional TV networks like ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox order dozens of pilots and show them to focus groups. Executives pick just a handful to make into series.

They both make pilots and show them to groups of people who provide feed back, and based on that feedback the people producing the TV shows decide which ones continue.

So again, how is Amazon doing it differently? Looks exactly the same to me.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (5, Funny)

BradleyUffner (103496) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505965)

Amazon's is on the internet.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (4, Funny)

mwvdlee (775178) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506065)

Then they should apply for a patent on the process.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506505)

Just look at old process/software patents and add "ON THE INTERNET" at the end.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506041)

TV networks kill shows when they are failing on their network even when they are successfully sold to other countries. It depends on the show but the earnings from international licensing can be higher than the add revenue nationally.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506079)

Oh, I forgot.

The big Hollywood movies regularly earn more money internationally than in the US.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506679)

"The big Hollywood movies regularly earn more money internationally than in the US."

So why are there so many baseball and golf movies? Don't they need the money?

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (2)

isorox (205688) | about a year and a half ago | (#43509715)

"The big Hollywood movies regularly earn more money internationally than in the US."

So why are there so many baseball and golf movies? Don't they need the money?

I wayched a golm on a plane last wrek (seriously limited selection)

Rise of the guardians made 303 million on a budget of 145.

However this is apparently an 83 million loss.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506139)

All focus groups do is promote their own agenda either for advertisers or political purposes.
Why else has content on TV/Movies and Cable dropped to such a low standard.
Most shows are garbage these days.

The less noise/social control over a produced program gets from its inception to being viewed by a potential audience the better.
Amazon is basically cutting out the middle man, just like what MP3's have done to the music industry.

The result will be more geared and prone to what the people want, so long as the peoples opinions come first.
The less corporate head/group driven influence, the better.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (3, Interesting)

Cardcaptor_RLH85 (891550) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506553)

What focus group agenda? I was actually swept into a focus group for that idiotic movie Welcome to Mooseport back in 2003. I was at the mall down in Daytona Beach, Florida and my roommate and I were asked to join a focus group watching clips from the movie and giving our opinions on them. Many of these groups are just made up of random people in shopping centers and other public places. I don't see where an 'agenda' could be gleaned from that.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (3, Interesting)

AK Marc (707885) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506157)

So again, how is Amazon doing it differently? Looks exactly the same to me.

It's exactly the same, other than "focus groups" uses tiny groups that are presumed to represent the public at large, and Amazon actually reaches a large percentage of the public at large.

Also, the networks are not looking for "profitable" but looking to fill a slot. They have set line-ups, and try to get complimentary shows as part of a line-up. That's a concept unknown to an on-demand-only company. So the process may seem similar, but it's as similar in practice as a moped and space shuttle (both vehicles that run off combustion).

And why something like Firefly was so beloved and still failed. There wasn't a "slot" for it. It wasn't judged off its own merits.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43513339)

That Scientology is a bona fide religion is indisputable as proven repeatedly by courts the world over, including the United States Supreme Court.

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (1)

MpVpRb (1423381) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506413)

>>So again, how is Amazon doing it differently? Looks exactly the same to me

Focus groups are artificial, the internet public is real

But, the people who use focus groups believe that focus groups represent reality

This will be a very interesting experiment

Re:Maybe I'm missing something?? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506425)

the focus group is bigger and not composed of people selected on purpose?

Info on potential shows will leak to the public (1)

SteveFoerster (136027) | about a year and a half ago | (#43510029)

When the focus group is that big, it means that if a promising show isn't picked up, it will more likely become known to fandom in general, leading to the possibility that large groups will come together to ask that a particular show be made. I could see that making a difference.

New paradigm (2)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505919)

"... a different model from the manistream media companies."

They won't play half the episodes out of order on a shifting schedule then refuse to show the rest? That sounds positive.

don't think networks are the relevant comparison (4, Insightful)

Trepidity (597) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505929)

Sure, a non-TV-network producing original television shows for broadcast over the internet is going to have a different model than NBC or ABC do. But it's not like Amazon is the first company to do that. Netflix already produces original TV [] . I was hoping this article would compare to that, but it doesn't mention it at all. Is Amazon jumping in as a competitor of Netflix with roughly the same model? Or is their approach significantly different?

Re:don't think networks are the relevant compariso (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506495)

Is Amazon jumping in as a competitor of Netflix

Amazon has been positioning themselves as a competitor to Netflix for a long time. For example []

It wouldn't surprise me if Netfilx started selling books soon just to get revenge.

Different? How? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43505961)

but with a different model from the manistream media companies.

Does that mean that Amazon's shows won't be filled with blacks, fags and politically correct bullshit?

Re:Different? How? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506087)

I'm sure they won't try to compete with WWF, so probably "yes".

Uhhhhh (1)

cultiv8 (1660093) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505963)

so how's it different, other than 14 series and a different way of measuring viewer responses?

Re:Uhhhhh (1)

PRMan (959735) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506765)

The networks never just run a pilot anymore. They order 13 episodes and if it bombs they just show 5-11 of them and the rest is a waste. Amazon isn't in any hurry, so they just want a pilot episode each which will be voted on, and the winners will get a season made and then they'll see from there.

Re:Uhhhhh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43507185)

The networks don't "run a pilot" -- they screen the pilot for test audiences. If they order 13 episodes, that means their test audience responded well -- if it then flops when aired, it indicates they didn't have a representative sample, and they try to do better next time.

Amazon seems to be letting anybody watch the pilots, meaning their test audience is self-selected, meaning if it turns out to not be representative they're fucking screwed, because they can't tweak the selection process next time.

I'm not seeing how either is particularly better than the other... they both kinda suck. Clearly, they should just make me TV dictator, then all good shows and only good shows will get approved.

Way to miss the mark Amazon. (1)

Jartan (219704) | about a year and a half ago | (#43505977)

Amazon is testing the market with kidâ(TM)s show and comedies

The networks have people overloaded on comedies. Kids content isn't exactly lacking either. They need to put out something different if they want any interest.

Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (1)

mitgib (1156957) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506037)

I watched a few of them, one really sucked, but they was no scripted-reality, so that was refreshing.

Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506197)

I watched a few of them, one really sucked, but they was no scripted-reality, so that was refreshing.
Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation

Bad spelling & grammar is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation.


Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43507159)

I watched a few of them, one really sucked, but they was no scripted-reality, so that was refreshing.


Being a spelling & grammar Nazi is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation

Bad spelling & grammar is a sign you do not poses the intelligence to contribute to the conversation.


Using "poses" when you mean "possess" is a sign you possess bad spelling, though not necessarily bad grammar.

Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (1)

Jherico (39763) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506621)

There are a bunch of comedies and a bunch of kids shows because Amazon is probably going to start of producing a comedy and a kid's show, because they're both proven genres. Having decided to do so, they produced a bunch of pilots in each genre with the intent of picking one or two of the best results. People keep reacting to these pilots as if they're the first episodes of a set of series Amazon will make, but they're not.

Also, while the networks are overloaded on comedies, they're sadly lacking in stuff that includes the way real human beings talk (i.e. saying fuck) or stuff that can include drug humor, so there's plenty of room for doing stuff that hasn't been seen before.

Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (3, Interesting)

PRMan (959735) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506791)

Kids content isn't exactly lacking either.

Really? Find a single scripted show rated less than TV-14 from the networks in prime time. There is NOTHING like the shows that I grew up on (Happy Days, Cosby, Home Improvement, etc...), which were shows the whole family could enjoy together.

Now, the kids shows are so annoying and poorly-acted that no adult could stand them, and the adult shows are so "gritty" and "dark" and "sexy" that no kids like them. Amazon could make a lot of money by investing in the type of shows that make a ton of money, because apparently the networks are too busy trying to be "edgy" to make a fortune.

Re:Way to miss the mark Amazon. (1)

Albanach (527650) | about a year and a half ago | (#43507109)

This exactly. For younger kids, older than 1st grade but younger than teen/pre-teen there are almost no dramas. Nothing with actors at all. Take a look at netflix/redbox family selections. There are almost no decent movies aimed at the age group that aren't Disney/Pixar cartoons.

Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots... (4, Insightful)

garcia (6573) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506011)

So I was bored and decided to watch a few of the pilots. As someone who loved Netflix's House of Cards, I was excited to see what Amazon had in store for us of similar caliber. Well, suffice to say that spreading their dollars across numerous pilots instead of one single show gets you what you expect: utter trash.

Those Who Can't, a story about three teachers (gym, history, and Spanish) was utterly terrible. They hated a jock in the school who was constantly annoying them and being the stereotypical douchebag. The script was jerky, the acting was bad, and the entire premise was overdone. Not impressive in the least, in fact in many instances it was downright painful.

Alpha House starts out great with Bill Murray getting arrested and John Goodman watching as he freaks out but it goes downhill from there mostly because Murray is not on the show after that first 45 second cameo. The vulgarity (something I don't mind in the least and use regularly myself) is there for vulgarity's sake, not because it makes sense in the dialogue. The show itself is slow, boring, and pointless. It's like Amazon was trying to make fun of House of Cards on SNL but failing as SNL tends to do so well.

While I haven't watched all the pilots yet, I really don't think I have much desire to do so. I am still waiting for more House of Cards and certainly more Arrested Development on Netflix but this Amazon shit is just bad. They need to get their shit together and up their game if they think they're going to compete with Netflix's first-run flagship.

Re:Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots (1)

lennier1 (264730) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506251)

Gave it a try and already lost interest again before any video even had a chance to start.

The German page didn't have any content, the US page wanted me to install Microsoft's Silverlight (was kinda surprised to see that this stuff is even still in use) and then ran into a region block.

Germany will most likely only get some dubbed versions with the usual delay (even their streaming services over here usually don't include access to the original audio for US-made content) and after that Silverlight crap I've already lost the interest necessary to get me to activate the proxy options.

Re:Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots (1)

Jherico (39763) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506605)

Well, suffice to say that spreading their dollars across numerous pilots instead of one single show gets you what you expect: utter trash.

You can't compare the budget with House of Cards with the budget spent on these episodes. Amazon didn't make these pilots as an alternative to spending a lot of money on a single show. They did it as a prelude to spending a bunch of money on one or two shows.

I'm pretty certain Netflix produced a bunch of pilots which were equally as shaky as the Amazon work. The only difference is that those weren't shown to the general public, just focus groups and Netflix execs, and they picked the ones that they thought had the most promise. Many, if not most shows start out with a pilot that isn't nearly as good quality as the finished product, and not all series air a pilot as the first episode.

Your reaction to the pilots is pretty much why pilots don't get shown to the general audience: because most people go in with an expectation built up over years of watching final products.

Re:Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506683)

Sounds like back to the '80s, exactly what you'd expect with the conflict of interest (Amazon can't do anything really edgey or they'll get boycott threats from this and that group).

Re:Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots (1)

tibman (623933) | about a year and a half ago | (#43510621)

Most pilots suck, that's just the way it is. Leave you feedback and watch another : )

Zombieland (the series) (1)

Flere Imsaho (786612) | about a year and a half ago | (#43511787)

The Zombieland pilot was mildly amusing. I'll probably watch a couple more to see how it's going to develop.

Re:Coincidentally I just watched two of the pilots (1)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about a year and a half ago | (#43515349)

The vast majority of pilots are utter crap. That's why they usually don't release them to the public. Very proposed series that produce pilots get greenlit, even fewer last beyond one season, and much rarer than even that is one that's actually any good.

Don't like the Amazon approach, prefer Netflix (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506025)

Why would i go to the trouble of seeking out the pilots? Pilots are often kind of badly made, and hard to see how you might care about the main characters or subjects going forward.

I really like the approach Netflix is taking here, in that they are taking a bigger risk but producing a real series. That means more time to think out the characters carefully, to have a story that doesn't evolve on the fly but can be tweaked in an overall package that makes the whole season work before release. It also allows you to get much more into a show rather than viewing a bunch of pilots, that even if enough other people like you will not see more of for months or years. That's the part I like least about episodic viewing, and Amazon wants to potentially wrench my heart 14 times over?

Amazon's approach is also scraping the bottom of the barrel for content that even the networks would not touch, yet was crafted specifically to target the many limitations of network TV. It seems unlikely to find many winners out of the leftovers.

Netflix in the meanwhile is thinking more in terms of "Fantasy TV" - like "wouldn't it be awesome if we could see any show made by Director X that also has stars Y & Z"? Then they don't even care exactly what show gets made, they just throw the delicious self-aware ingredients together and let it all work.

I come off as sounding quite a lot like a Netflix infomercial here but I think it's just because I am amazed at the quality of what Netflix has produced out the gate in comparison to how much I detest most network TV shows. Netflix's approach also means that even if a show is canceled after a season, at least you get one strong season so it's worth the attempt to start watching. Although I thought Terra Nova was kind of ridiculous in a lot of ways and I wouldn't say I enjoyed it much, after watching a few episodes I at least wanted to see how it ended and it really left people hanging.

Correction on barrel thing (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506031)

Aha, I missed somehow that it was net network leftovers they were watching but that they were specifically created as pilots for Amazon.

Still, it seems like it's the exact same approach that traditional networks have used and yielded so little of value. All my other points stand.

Re:Correction on barrel thing (1)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about a year and a half ago | (#43515403)

If they're making them for Amazon, chances are they were already turned down by the networks and cable channels. Even "House of Cards" was first pitched to HBO, Showtime, and AMC. If no one else was even willing to produce a pilot, you can bet they're pretty godawful.

Re:Correction on barrel thing (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43515971)

Even "House of Cards" was first pitched to HBO, Showtime, and AMC. If no one else was even willing to produce a pilot, you can bet they're pretty godawful.

"House of Cards" was pretty good though, leaving some room for the possibility that grabbing network leftovers may be feasible.

Re:Don't like the Amazon approach, prefer Netflix (2)

denzacar (181829) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506711)

Netflix in the meanwhile is thinking more in terms of "Fantasy TV" - like "wouldn't it be awesome if we could see any show made by Director X that also has stars Y & Z"? Then they don't even care exactly what show gets made, they just throw the delicious self-aware ingredients together and let it all work.

You may want to rethink that "Fantasy TV" view.
Not only is Netflix picking up shows in a traditional way, most of their current and future programming [] is basically "sold" one way or the other even before the production starts.

House of Cards - a remake of a successful UK show.
Hemlock Grove - based on a novel.
Lilyhammer - made jointly for a Norwegian broadcasting company. I.e. pre-sold to Norwegians.
Arrested Development - a revival of a popular show.
Derek - based on an Ricky Gervais old character.
Turbo: F.A.S.T. - a spinoff from an upcoming DreamWorks cartoon.
Orange Is the New Black - based on a book.

On top of that, every single one of those productions is "sprinkled" with recognizable names - either acting or in production.

They are not trowing shit at the wall to see what will stick or carelessly throwing money at "Director X that also has stars Y & Z".
They are aiming at existing audiences.
Classic Hollywood game.
Get the rights to existing "content" with existing audience, slap some stars on the production, make your own thing out of all that and then sell the shit out of it.

Nothing bad about that, just nothing fantastic either.
Though... While you may not end up with wall to wall "Friends" clones (no star appeal at the beginning), but you may end up with the entire comedy line-up of "Joey" and "Two And a Half Men" clones, and the "drama" section full of "Sex and the City" clones.

Re:Don't like the Amazon approach, prefer Netflix (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#43507197)

But as I said, the story doesn't matter much - just the pairings. House of Cards was more about what David Fincher and Kevin Spacey could do together, as Netflix had viewing data to show that people who watched stuff from the producer also really liked Kevin Spacey movies.

That's the core, more than the story (though it does not hurt to pick stories they already know are popular).

But even considering just the story, simply chosing to make great versions of already existing material is still 99.99999% better than approach of TV today which are generally shows that have almost zero new material and are totally crappy.

On top of that, every single one of those productions is "sprinkled" with recognizable names

Yes, exactly, that is my EXACT point about what Netflix is doing being better. These people are recognized because they have produced things others enjoyed. THAT is "Fantasy TV", just as in Fantasy Baseball you get to pick a team with players from all over.

They are aiming at existing audiences.

Of course they are, I never said they were not. I said what was different was about how they are approaching making shows.

Get the rights to existing "content" with existing audience, slap some stars on the production

Sure that's done in movies a lot (overdone) but NOT IN TV.

While you may not end up with wall to wall "Friends" clones (no star appeal at the beginning), but you may end up with the entire comedy line-up of "Joey" and "Two And a Half Men" clones, and the "drama" section full of "Sex and the City" clones.

Nothing we are seeing supports that. All of Netflix's shows are totally different from one another, none of them classically formulaic so far.

Re:Don't like the Amazon approach, prefer Netflix (1)

denzacar (181829) | about a year and a half ago | (#43510213)

Nothing we are seeing supports that. All of Netflix's shows are totally different from one another, none of them classically formulaic so far.

That's because you only have a few shows at the moment.
Let it run for a while and wait for the shows to start getting renewed based on the lowest common denominator.

As for the "NOT IN TV"... "Two And a Half Men" is the example of that, so is "Sex and the City", so is "Medium", so is "Battlestar Galactica", so is "Justified", "Boardwalk Empire", "Game of Thrones", "Blue Bloods"...
Star Appeal has been a major TV show ingredient for a while now.

But as I said, the story doesn't matter much - just the pairings. House of Cards was more about what David Fincher and Kevin Spacey could do together, as Netflix had viewing data to show that people who watched stuff from the producer also really liked Kevin Spacey movies.

Fincher had planned on doing that show since 2008, and they went with it to other networks - Netflix just offered the most money.
Spacey-Fincher quote is a post-facto explanation of why they offered that much - not a reason for the existence of the show. []

Also, you should check out the original show. Ian Richardson is... Well, what Palpatine should have been like.
You know that he's an evil bastard, but you just can't help yourself cheering for him.

Free advice for Amazon. (2)

khasim (1285) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506767)

Drop the idea of "TV show". They've been done and you probably do not have any better ideas than the networks have.

Instead, look at the books you're selling. Create "mini-series" type programming from the literature that is already out there. Focus on story arcs where you can have a beginning and an end.

The Black Company by Glen Cook.
Vlad Taltos by Steven Brust.
A steam-punk version of Doc Savage.
Perry Rhodan.
Neal Stephenson either The Baroque Cycle or Cryptonomicon.

Go big. Bigger than the networks. Bigger than the movie studios. Fill the niche they aren't willing to.

They should do a nature show (1)

Megahard (1053072) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506169)

Featuring the Brazilian jungle. Or maybe a strong-woman competition. Just a couple of thoughts.

Onion News Empire (2)

Vrallis (33290) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506193)

I'm guessing Onion News Empire is one of them, just started watching the pilot a few minutes ago. A few recognizable actors (not just a bunch of unknowns), funny so far.

Hopefully others work out this well too.

Re:Onion News Empire (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | about a year and a half ago | (#43507293)

Yup, hence the words "Amazon Original Pilots" on the show's Amazon page. []

As a huge fan of both The Onion and Jeffrey Tambor, I hope they pick this one up.

Re:Onion News Empire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43508041)

I like the onion, but it feels like they are trying to parody the newsroom a bit too much for my taste. It really inhibits the comedic effect.

Hilarious PR work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43506333)

After the pilot for 'Zombieland' (which was godawful, BTW), comes a video promotion message from Amazon's PR people. The message literally has imaged quotes from viewers saying things like "fantastic show", "best program ever" and "why can't all TV be this good", and then suggests the problem with ordinary TV networks is that don't get to hear all the positive thoughts we have on their various output. Then, we are told this great Amazon initiative gives us a chance to lavish praise on all the pilots, with the promise that now the program makers will notice the praise, and greenlight the shows.

There is no suggestion at all of any possible negative or ambiguous viewer response to the show. No, the geniuses at Amazon instructed their PR team to ONLY include imagined glowing responses from the imagined viewer. Can you imagine anything more condescending? And yet surely WE thought the idea was to vote the winners up, and the losers down, so only the good shows moved forward. Such a process surely needs to hear the 'boos' as well as the 'cheers'?

Better again would be a mechanism for constructive criticism- allowing the viewer to 'repair' promising shows that had clear issues in their pilots. 'The Munsters', 'Star Trek' and 'Lost in Space' (to name but three) experienced massive retooling after their pilot episodes. Indeed, the pilots to these shows were actually clear flops (at least in the eyes of the people financing the shows).

Shouldn't Amazon, therefore, be crowd-sourcing the viewers to improve the premise of shows described by their pilots. Changing some of the actors, perhaps. Or the tone of the show. Or the pace? Take 'Zombieland'. On paper, the idea has potential (although the successful film was also a stinker). On screen, a post-apocalyptic zombie infested world with no emotional 'weight', or budget for post-apocalyptic sets, is just dreadful beyond words. Add the cheapest, nastiest cast almost no money can buy, and the recipe for disaster is complete.

Methinks Amazon is going to strike out with every one of their pilots (and I say 'theirs' although various studios normally responsible for programs on other channels made the pilots- who knows how the funding responsibility was split).

Re:Hilarious PR work (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43512077)

Take 'Zombieland'. On paper, the idea has potential (although the successful film was also a stinker).

Huh, I thought the film was quite good.

I didn't even get as far as the trailer for the pilot on Amazon,though. The casting director clearly needs to be shot.

Nears? (1)

antdude (79039) | about a year and a half ago | (#43506733)

They were released yesterday! You're slow, /.! :(

They might be fantastic ... but I'll never know (1)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about a year and a half ago | (#43507557)

I pay for Amazon Prime, all the the pilots are available for me to watch, and I'll bet some of them are great ... but I'll probably never know.

The steam consistently dies in exactly the same spot a few seconds in. No, not buffering, just dead in the water.

My browser and flash player are up to date, no other sites have a problem streaming flash video to me. It sounds like a lot of other people are having similar problems, if Amazon's discussion boards are any indication.

Seriously, Amazon? These kinds of problems are sooo five years ago. If your actually expect this to take off, you need to get your shit together.

Germany (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43507707)

I can see the comedies flopping in Germany, after all they are the least funniest people in the world !

Re:Germany (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#43508655)

That made me LOL. I'm German, so "Thank You" for bringing some humor into my life!

Betas (1)

Memroid (898199) | about a year and a half ago | (#43508497)

Betas wasn't too horrible. It was a bit cliché, but entertaining and applicable to the entrepreneurial/tech crowd.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?