Beta
×

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!

SourceForge Appeals To Readers For Help Nixing Bad Ad Actors

timothy posted about 10 months ago | from the please-don't-punch-the-monkey dept.

Advertising 198

Last week, we mentioned that the GIMP project had elected to leave SourceForge as its host, citing SourceForge's advertising policies. SourceForge (which shares a parent company with Slashdot) has released a statement about those policies, addressing in particular both ads that are confusing in themselves and their revenue-sharing system called DevShare, based on the provision of third-party software along with users' downloads. Among other things, the SF team is appealing to users to help them find and block misleading ads, and has this to say about the additional downloads: "The DevShare program has been designed to be fully transparent. The installation flow has no deceptive steps, all offers are fully disclosed, and the clear option to completely decline the offer is always available. All uninstallation procedures are exhaustively documented, and all third party offers go through a comprehensive compliance process to make sure they are virus and malware free."

cancel ×

198 comments

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

Missing the point (5, Insightful)

finkployd (12902) | about 10 months ago | (#45425988)

I don't want useless add on application/browser extension/etc being installed when I chose to download something. No matter how much vetting and transparency, this is simply wrong.

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

twocows (1216842) | about 10 months ago | (#45426110)

This, and I believe this was a big part of why GIMP left. Just because other download sites are doing it doesn't mean it's tolerable. Sourceforge is pretty much completely unusuable without ABP at this point (which, when enabled, makes SF completely bearable; forcing users to use ad blocking software means your advertising model isn't working).

Re:Missing the point (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426412)

Nothing personal but it seems kind of ironic coming from someone named twocows....

Re:Missing the point (1)

twocows (1216842) | about 10 months ago | (#45426500)

Oddly enough, I didn't base the name off the site, but I doubt anyone cares.

Re:Missing the point (1)

dalias (1978986) | about 10 months ago | (#45427576)

I would guess he based it on some ascii art from the infamous "annoy.irc" script (nsfw)...

Re:Missing the point (4, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about 10 months ago | (#45426542)

And there's the fact that the dumb things Sourceforge was doing was harming Gimp's reputation as a legitimate piece of professional software. That's a reputation they've been working hard to develop for years(name complaints aside).

Re:Missing the point (4, Insightful)

TapeCutter (624760) | about 10 months ago | (#45427598)

Exactly, it's so simple even a SF marketer could understand it, users with half a brain do not want crapware and do not trust it no matter how many times you scan it. Sure, plaster as many ads as you like on the project page, you can even make them blink if you must, but leave the fucking installer alone, it is not YOUR software.

SF are also shooting themselves in the foot for a few extra pennies. The hated (and I mean HATED by everybody) crapware is getting a free ride on Gimp's reputation and damaging both SF and Gimp's reputation in the process. That may be legal but it ain't right,

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 10 months ago | (#45426592)

I don't even think their statement is very honest. We have this line:

The installation flow has no deceptive steps

So, when I go to a project's download page, and I see a bunch of ads with giant green "DOWNLOAD NOW" buttons, that isn't supposed to be deceptive? Then there's this:

the clear option to completely decline the offer is always available

The "clear option" is a greyed-out "Decline" button on the bottom left of the installer. The green Accept button is on the bottom right of the installer, which is the place that people have been trained to click to go to the next step. While it's true that the decline button is always visible, making it appear greyed-out and away from the Accept button is not exactly clear (and possibly deceptive). Moreover, instead of "Decline" and "Accept", how about "Only Install Filezilla" or "Install Offer And Filezilla". THAT would be clear and non-deceptive.

Here's a hint for SF: if you want to identify bad actors, one indication is that they are an advertiser. The advertiser's goal is to steal attention and make people click on something, even (especially?) if it wasn't what they intended to click on. Advertisers ruin everything about the internet, they're the reason why we needed popup blocking in the first place. Whenever a new technology comes along, advertisers are there to shit all over it. Excuse me, "monetize" it. If you're putting ads on your site, and you have no control over the content of those ads (i.e. fed from a third-party network), then those ads are going to be annoying and deceptive. I fully expect to go to SF one day and see some ad screaming about how "one weird tip" can allow me to download Filezilla.

Re:Missing the point (3, Insightful)

yuhong (1378501) | about 10 months ago | (#45427494)

Well the deceptive part IMO is the "bait and switch" part where they showed one filename but in reality download a different file.

Re:Missing the point (3, Interesting)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about 10 months ago | (#45426804)

I would hope that at the very least, Sourceforge would make these add-on sales pitches to be turned off by default and make them opt-in instead of opt-out.

I've had to sit my wife and daughter down and explain to them how when they update Java or Adobe anything they have to be sure to turn off all the BS programs that those installers will try to slip by them, because of their horrible opt-out malware installers.

Re:Missing the point (2)

dalias (1978986) | about 10 months ago | (#45427604)

Wouldn't it be better to just uninstall Java and Adobe-anything? Chrome can read PDFs and play Flash purely with the components packaged with it; there's no need to install third-party add-ons. And Java is pretty much 100% useless except in corporate intranets with Java-based in-house software.

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about 10 months ago | (#45426158)

Timmeh is paid to miss the point. Did anyone really expect Dice.com emoyees to speak against this adware?

Re:Missing the point (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about 10 months ago | (#45426556)

The weirdest thing about the lack of honesty here is that everyone reads slashdot for the comments. Did they think the facade of caring would last past the last word of the summary?

Re:Missing the point (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427054)

The comments are what drew me in after visiting here back in like '07 or so. They are pretty much all that keeps me here (that and the occasional tech or science-related thing I don't see elsewhere).

I'm just a schmuck with an MBA (who is fucking reviled here) who likes to read what really smart people have to say.

I'm a pro-gun MBA. That seems to make me a double pariah here lately........

Re:Missing the point (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427406)

Hey, it's not all bad. You could also like Apple and be conservative. (Of course, stereotypes being what they are, people will assume you're conservative if you're pro-gun.)

Re:Missing the point (3, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about 10 months ago | (#45427584)

The last sentence is also extraordinarily patronizing and seems to think we're dumb enough to fall for it. "It's okay that we installed this crapware that you didn't want because we document how to uninstall it!" I would like to think Timmeh doesn't actually believe such crap. It's one thing to parrot the company line it's another to actually believe it when it's so obviously absurd.

Re:Missing the point (4, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45426640)

Atleast they were honest enough to add "which shares a parent company with Slashdot".
This loosely translates to "everything here is lies, and you have been warned".

Re:Missing the point (1)

yuhong (1378501) | about 10 months ago | (#45427654)

I think the quote from the article directly should be enough of a warning.

Re:Missing the point (2)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#45426668)

Mod Parent UP.

Most people probably don't realize SF is owned by the owner of Slashdot.
SF is probably a good indication of what will befall Slashdot.

Re:Missing the point (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about 10 months ago | (#45427624)

Timmeh is paid to miss the point. Did anyone really expect Dice.com employees to speak against this adware?

"Miss the point" is a good way to put it. The point is not (entirely, anyway) that the "sideloads" are deceptive. The point is that people don't want to have to screw with it, deceptive or not.

Speaking of missing the point: Slashdot's new policy of having to wait 5 minutes between posts is causing me to hit the "post" button many times more than I used to. Arguably, that represents more network and server traffic, not less.

Re:Missing the point (4, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45426230)

I couldn't believe it when I installed some software from Sourceforge a while back and ended up with a malware toolbar in my browser (that was a huge PITA to remove, no less). At first I thought it was a mistake, that I *must* have gotten it from somewhere else. Then when I heard similar stories from others and realized it was intentional, just a cheap money grab--I knew the Sourceforge I once knew and trusted could never be trusted by me (or supported) ever again. Sad day.

Re:Missing the point (4, Interesting)

cffrost (885375) | about 10 months ago | (#45426558)

I couldn't believe it when I installed some software from Sourceforge a while back and ended up with a malware toolbar in my browser (that was a huge PITA to remove, no less). At first I thought it was a mistake, that I *must* have gotten it from somewhere else. Then when I heard similar stories from others and realized it was intentional, just a cheap money grab--I knew the Sourceforge I once knew and trusted could never be trusted by me (or supported) ever again. Sad day.

Was there a check-box to opt-out of the malware installation, or was the malware installed silently? I've installed several programs from SF recently, and I read all of the dialogs, but I haven't seen any opt-outs or malware.

Re:Missing the point (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45426654)

It's probably the big green download buttons that appear on every download page.
I never got quite as far as installing toolbars, but only because the downloaded executable name didn't look like the one I was expecting (and, 10 seconds later, the real download started).

Re:Missing the point (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 10 months ago | (#45427458)

It's probably the big green download buttons that appear on every download page.
I never got quite as far as installing toolbars, but only because the downloaded executable name didn't look like the one I was expecting (and, 10 seconds later, the real download started).

I'd guess I use the big green button about 67-75% of the time, and never got a download I didn't want. I suppose ABP, NoScript, RequestPolicy, Ghostery, PeerBlock, HOSTS, or referer/user-agent spoofing might have something to do with it.

The user above who said that Adblock is security software is right — I consider the countermeasures I listed above to be so as well.

Re:Missing the point (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | about 10 months ago | (#45426360)

Exactly. Its scummy, gives a bad taste to sourceforge. It will only drive people to github.

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 10 months ago | (#45426410)

What's really funny is how they completely failed to understand who their customers were. It'd be like Whole Foods spritzing free Pesticides on your produce as you checked out.

Re:Missing the point (5, Insightful)

rudy_wayne (414635) | about 10 months ago | (#45426506)

What's really funny is how they completely failed to understand who their customers were. >

No, they know exactly who their customers are. their customers are the people who pay them to display ads and inject extra crap into downloads. That's where SourceForge's revenue comes from. Not from you.

Re:Missing the point (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 10 months ago | (#45427276)

their customers are the people who used to pay them to display ads before everyone left for the competitor sites that didn't spew disingenuous ad buttons over every download.

TFTFY.

Re:Missing the point (1)

tqk (413719) | about 10 months ago | (#45427500)

What's really funny is how they completely failed to understand who their customers were.

No, they know exactly who their customers are. their customers are the people who pay them to display ads and inject extra crap into downloads. That's where SourceForge's revenue comes from. Not from you.

If you get it for free, you're not the customer. You're the product. True from Facebook through to The Salvation Army.

Re:Missing the point (5, Interesting)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 10 months ago | (#45427574)

I'm tired of this ridiculous argument. It sounds stupid when you say it but you think you're technically correct. Well you're not. They actually have 2 sets of customers. They get something non-monetary from one set, which they trade to the other set for cash. If they lose either customer they are going out of business.

Re:Missing the point (2)

mcgrew (92797) | about 10 months ago | (#45426858)

Agreed, that's one reason people ditch Windows. Windows users are use to that sort of bullshit, open source folks won't stand for it.

SourceForge, this shit needs to stop. Advertising is fine, but damn it, leave the trickery to the corporate... oh, oh... Dice owns SourceForge now, doesn't it?

SourceForge is SO screwed...

Re:Missing the point (1)

TLHarrell (3035907) | about 10 months ago | (#45427318)

Use Ninite for install of most usual programs. www.ninite.com Checkbox all the software you want, download their installer app, run it. It downloads and installs everything you asked for in the background and bypasses all the crapware and other offers. Just used it on my wife's new box and it was glorious!

Don't make users opt-out (5, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | about 10 months ago | (#45426038)

If you don't want complaints then make the DevShare program opt-in instead of opt-out.

You may argue that few people would choose to opt-in, but that's the point, isn't it?

Re:Don't make users opt-out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426144)

This is the best solution for the users.

Re:Don't make users opt-out (2)

Desler (1608317) | about 10 months ago | (#45426184)

Which is why it won't be done. Dice.com cares about ad revenue not the users. They've gotta make their money back somehow on these purchases. Squeezing blood from a stone seems to be their tactic.

Re:Don't make users opt-out (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426166)

The vast majority of everything on the Net should be opt-in.

Or, to put it a different way: deceptively exploiting the techno-challenged is not an ethical business model.

Re:Don't make users opt-out (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426560)

From the article:

Currently in the Pilot phase, we only have 3 projects participating in the DevShare program all of which explicitly opted-in. This represents 3 out of 300,000+ projects in our entire catalog. This is a 100% opt-in program for the developer, and we want to reassure you that we will NEVER bundle offers with any project without the developers consent

Sounds pretty opt-in to me.

Re:Don't make users opt-out (1)

Unknown Lamer (78415) | about 10 months ago | (#45426570)

Although still iffy, DevShare is entirely op-tin (FTA): "Currently in the Pilot phase, we only have 3 projects participating in the DevShare program all of which explicitly opted-in. This represents 3 out of 300,000+ projects in our entire catalog. This is a 100% opt-in program for the developer, and we want to reassure you that we will NEVER bundle offers with any project without the developers consent."

Of course, with all the ill-will caused by the mere existence of the program...

Re:Don't make users opt-out (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45426746)

Of course, with all the ill-will caused by the mere existence of the program...

Does the DevShare program warn about it's inclusion in software before the user requests a download?
Otherwise it's just a case of users being uncertain whether any particular download can be trusted or not.

how about... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426062)

just not doing the installation share thing AT ALL. I don't care how well it gets documented, it's a tactic that is built to take advantage of the large group of people that will do nothing but hit "next" 7 or 8 times and not look at anything.

Re:how about... (5, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about 10 months ago | (#45426618)

Exactly.

I just checked yesterday, and the thing is still loaded with malware Download buttons.
This morning, it looks slightly different, but on four different projects the biggest button
on the page was MALWARE download button. (Adblock switched off).

Why can't they just put them all in a separate box labeled MALWARE - DON'T CLICK!.
Or header the column they are in with a ADVERTISEMENT - Not the software you were looking for" banner.

SourceForge has definitely suffered since being picked up by Dice Holdings, and it is probably
an indication of what will happen to Slashdot over time.

Horse, Stable, Bolted (3, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | about 10 months ago | (#45426092)

All they are doing now is stepping up their tap dancing in the hopes that people will fail to see the obvious about their bundled downloads.

Re:Horse, Stable, Bolted (3, Interesting)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 10 months ago | (#45426290)

Nothing they could ever say or do will ever win me back. When you install malware on my system, we're done--for good.

Re:Horse, Stable, Bolted (5, Insightful)

i kan reed (749298) | about 10 months ago | (#45426594)

When you try to install things of any sort I don't ask for, it's malware, by the way. It doesn't matter if you're screening for things you consider malware, it's my system, and configuring it in ways I don't intuitively intend to configure it is abusing your power as an installer, thus is malicious.

Re:Horse, Stable, Bolted (0)

Princeofcups (150855) | about 10 months ago | (#45427100)

All they are doing now is stepping up their tap dancing in the hopes that people will fail to see the obvious about their bundled downloads.

Ads are targeted at the gullible, i.e. idiots. It's just another form of spam. Their statements are written by the sales/marketing/MBAs who have taken over SourceForge. They are targeted at the idiots who may believe it. Their previous customers are less susceptible to advertising and BS. Therefore, we are no longer their customers. I too got virused on my last visit to them. SourceForge is dead to me. Hopefully Slashdot gets a new overlord soon, lest the same shit happen here.

Unfortunately... (2)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 10 months ago | (#45426098)

With rare, mutually beneficial, exceptions, it seems to generally be the case that if I can get paid for putting an 'offer' in front of a user, no matter how transparent and not-spyware and whatnot, that's a good sign that the value to the user is negative.

Gosh, yes, I'd love to receive offers from your carefully selected content partners!

Obviously, a continuum exists, from pure drive-by malware to the-box-isn't-even-checked-by-default opt-in stuff; with various levels of 'all the boxes start checked; but you can uncheck them if you can find them' and 'sure, just go down the stairs, take a left at the sign that says "beware of the leopard", pick the lock on the third door on your right, and choose the 'advanced install' package from the bottom drawer of the filing cabinet'; but just because sleaze occupies a continuum doesn't mean you want to get any on you...

Re:Unfortunately... (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45426866)

Even if unchecked by default, it's easy to encourage mistakes...

[ ] Install for all users
[ ] Install shell extensions
[ ] Include common file format plug-ins
[ ] Include third party informational tools
[ ] Enable automatic updates
[ ] Disable anonymous usage statistics

Yeap Dont want it at all (2)

ghinckley68 (590599) | about 10 months ago | (#45426100)

dont mind ads and most people that use Sf are smart enough to see around them.

But SF had a reputation for be clean installs that could be trusted. That is no longer the case.
SF you blew your done and gone.

People still use Sourceforge? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426126)

SVN is lame; Gimp is where it's at, baby.

Github is 6th Street. Sourceforge is the old Main Street, with mostly boarded-up buildings.

Ad vendors are scum. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426130)

I have I better idea. Don't partner with ad vendors/networks that try to put malware on your user's computers.

Adblock plus is security software.

Re:Ad vendors are scum. (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 10 months ago | (#45427154)

I have I better idea. Don't partner with ad vendors/networks that try to put malware on your user's computers.

Adblock plus is security software.

I thought we had a civic duty to download and absorb corporate propaganda in order to earn a profit for individuals or organizations that want to publish information on the Internet, but don't feel that their information is important enough for them to pay the cost of publishing it themselves, like the individuals with Internet access in the early 1990s did.

Now that the Web is commercialized, it's all "hey asshole, install this malware that's disguised as corporate propaganda, so I can make money..," or "hey dumb-ass, gimme all your private and personal information so I can sell it for shitloads of money, and you get to use this crap-SaaS with no privacy or guarantees, instead of that quality FOSS that you install locally and have control over..."

the whole concept is messed up (4, Insightful)

Chirs (87576) | about 10 months ago | (#45426146)

When I want to download software, I want that software, not other piece of software that's going to install itself in my browsers and mine my information.

As others have said, make it purely opt-in and I can live with it. The opt-out stuff just pisses me off because it is so transparently trying to profit off people that aren't paying attention.

Re:the whole concept is messed up (1)

SrLnclt (870345) | about 10 months ago | (#45426386)

When I want to download software, I want that software, not other piece of software that's going to install itself in my browsers and mine my information.

I know computer savvy users who have refused to give Chrome a try precisely because it has been bundled with so many other things over the years.

If your software is bundled with something I am installing, I assume your software is junk unless I already know otherwise. Even if your software is decent (e.g. Chrome), I can decide independently for myself when or if I want to install it.

SourceForge has shown it can't be trusted. (4, Informative)

Animats (122034) | about 10 months ago | (#45426156)

SourceForge has shown it can't be trusted. The only way they could regain trust at this point is by legally committing themselves to never bundling anything with an installer, and using an open source installer. Instead, their terms [slashdotmedia.com] still read "We reserve the right at our sole discretion and at any time to ... change the terms and conditions of this Agreement."

Sorry, SourceForge. You got caught. Promising you won't do it again isn't good enough. That's just PR spin.

Re:SourceForge has shown it can't be trusted. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426308)

Worst case study happened to me.,

Clicking too fast installed the bundled crap. loaded all three browsers with toolbars. System restore didn't get rid of all of it. Stuff from Conduit still would not delete. Had to nuke from orbit and reformat to get rid of all of it. Couple days lost to reinstall everything.

Interestingly, the bundled installer pulls the junk from the internet during the moment of install. This means the spyware bypasses the automated download scanner, and that it can be avoided altogether by disconnecting the internet during installation.

So now you know...

SourceForge also shown it's hard to use (5, Interesting)

Chemisor (97276) | about 10 months ago | (#45426462)

In the wake of the scandal I have just finished moving all my projects to GitHub, and man, it's been worth it. I mean, have you noticed how incredibly slow SourceForge is lately? I've been using it for over ten years now, and it's been getting slower and slower. I got used to it, but now on GitHub I'm constantly amazed that I don't have to wait a few minutes for the project page to load. Or the fact that I don't even have to go there any more because I can make releases by creating a tag and project web page is just another git branch. How do you update a SourceForge web page again? I'll have to look it up, 'cause I don't remember at all. I only remember that ssh, scp, and lots of manual copying was involved. SourceForge's release system is a pain, and really, the only feature SourceForge has that GitHub does not is access statistics, but this feature hasn't worked properly ever since the big UI overhaul a few years back. Frankly, I don't see any reason to ever go back to SourceForge.

Re:SourceForge has shown it can't be trusted. (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 10 months ago | (#45427222)

Why the hell does SF even need an installer?

Don't. Just don't. Serve the files people upload into their projects, and hands-fucking-off.

download.com did it... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426182)

... and I left them too, almost a decade ago. it cost me downloads, but saved my customers from their intrusive bundled downloads.

"Advertising policies"? Try borderline malware. (4, Insightful)

Alphanos (596595) | about 10 months ago | (#45426228)

The bottom line is that GIMP didn't want to be associated with tricking its users into installing borderline malware. If a program's installer is filled with traps that you have to carefully watch for to avoid - that sets off huge blaring alarms in the heads of most experienced users.

This is especially a problem for the open-source community, which still struggles to get a fair comparison with commercial software in the corporate IT world. If even major software gets saddled with nonsense like SourceForge is trying to pull, it could set back progress by years.

SourceForge had better smarten up before it becomes a ghost town. GIMP is certainly not going to be the last high-profile departure if things don't change.

While we're at it, the summary of this story was blatantly whitewashed. Mentioning the parent company link should be a bare minimum, not an excuse to abandon all pretense of impartiality.

Re:"Advertising policies"? Try borderline malware. (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 10 months ago | (#45426338)

If a program's installer is filled with traps that you have to carefully watch for to avoid - that sets off huge blaring alarms in the heads of most experienced users.

This is why I will never willingly install Chrome. Just once too often I found it was going to be installed by default with a java update. McAfee AV now seems to be the beneficiary of such stealth installation.

And worse are the ones where it isn't just stealth by having small text somewhere during the download, it's complete secrecy. I needed an AC3 codec for my PVR device and found myself the proud owner of a new web search provider that would reset itself to be my search provider every time I unset it.

Re:"Advertising policies"? Try borderline malware. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426448)

I needed an AC3 codec for my PVR device and found myself the proud owner of a new web search provider that would reset itself to be my search provider every time I unset it.

I have found that FFDShow is all you need for codecs, and has no crapware. Most of the other things you'll come across seem sketchy.

Re:"Advertising policies"? Try borderline malware. (1)

TangoMargarine (1617195) | about 10 months ago | (#45427038)

If I can't run it in vanilla VLC, it ain't worth it. (Granted, this is on a desktop)

Confused! DevShare *is* opt-in for developers (1)

dwheeler (321049) | about 10 months ago | (#45426348)

I actually read the article (I know, you can't do that on Slashdot). It says DevShare is opt-in for developers, not opt-out, and that's what inserts the additional stuff in the executables. So were the GIMP folks just confused? It sounds like GIMP left over something that was in their control in the first place. (No, I don't work for any of these folks.)

Re:Confused! DevShare *is* opt-in for developers (1)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about 10 months ago | (#45426604)

They also noted on their front page http://www.gimp.org/ [gimp.org]

In the past few months, we have received some complaints about the site where the GIMP installers for the Microsoft Windows platforms are hosted.

SourceForge, once a useful and trustworthy place to develop and host FLOSS applications, has faced a problem with the ads they allow on their sites - the green "Download here" buttons that appear on many, many adds leading to all kinds of unwanted utilities have been spotted there as well.

I've seen those ads on the sf pages as well and am not fond of them but sf doesn't offer a premium developer account that provides ad free project and download pages.

Re:Confused! DevShare *is* opt-in for developers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426624)

I think they were more concerned about the on-site ads that look like download buttons.

Re:"Advertising policies"? Try borderline malware. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427134)

This is especially a problem for the open-source community, which still struggles to get a fair comparison with commercial software in the corporate IT world.

Does it? Every Fortune (insert ever decreasing numbers) company I've worked with has been all over open source.

Where it makes sense.

Office alternatives rarely make sense. Gimp never makes any sense. Apache/Lighty/nginx? Absofuckinglutely everywhere. Various open source content management solutions? As far as the eye can goddamned see.

So yeah, I don't buy the age old excuse. (Baaaw, they don't like us, because, uh, just cause!) It hasn't been the case for at least a decade.

Fuck Advertising. (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426260)

And those who promote, err advertise it.

Cesspool of reality.

zenlessyank was here..

PS. Fuck your karma ratings slashdot....

Meh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426266)

I just want a clean layout without adding additional code to my installers and passing it off as something i added. Seems fraudulent, and there are other people who will offer me clean installs with fewer ads.

Just another download site now (2)

symbolset (646467) | about 10 months ago | (#45426304)

I hope they don't mess up /. too.

Re:Just another download site now (4, Informative)

i kan reed (749298) | about 10 months ago | (#45426466)

Have you been to beta.slashdot.org [slashdot.org] ? It's only a matter of time until they deploy it and I'm gone.

Re:Just another download site now (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426676)

Ditto that. I told them as much in their surveys about it. It's like they're trying to out-AOL:Engadget AOL:Engadget. Slashdot needs to be more than just another tech blog. Posting anon to keep mods, but I'm ElectricTurtle.

Re:Just another download site now (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426818)

Holy fuck that's ugly.

Re:Just another download site now (1)

duke_cheetah2003 (862933) | about 10 months ago | (#45426900)

I just glanced at beta.slashdot.org [slashdot.org] (the actual one, your link is incorrect, its just a link back to this story).. and .. I don't see the problem? Looks pretty good to me.

Re:Just another download site now (1)

X0563511 (793323) | about 10 months ago | (#45427310)

WTF is that garbage? DO NOT WANT. [google.com]

Re:Just another download site now (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45427032)

To be fair, http://beta.slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] looks a lot less crap than it did when they first announced it.
It's still form over function though, so still crap.

They just need to make a more sane font and color choices and it might just work.
I know hairlines and white are "hip" these days, but they also make things indistinguishable.
There nothing wrong with conventional design; there's a good reason it became convention.

Re:Just another download site now (1)

symbolset (646467) | about 10 months ago | (#45427090)

I actually don't mind that one. The modern look is fresh and it remembers most of my preferences. The "read more comments" button doesn't work on my browser though, and the right side boxes for notifications is not there. Of the left column all I use is the "submissions" link, which could be moved over to the right side, maybe in a pulldown. It seems incomplete. I'm sure they'll keep classic slashdot [slashdot.org] maintained for us geezers if they go that way. It has been in beta unchanged since the turnover though, I believe.

I wish the mobile site [slashdot.org] would remember I prefer the "classic desktop view". It's a pain to have to tell my phone to request it every time I come to /.

Shove your crapware up your ass (5, Insightful)

Desler (1608317) | about 10 months ago | (#45426328)

All uninstallation procedures are exhaustively documented, and all third party offers go through a comprehensive compliance process to make sure they are virus and malware free.

Except that you and the Sourceforge people know damn well that next to no one actually wants that crapware. 99% of cases it will be installef by someone merely clicking through not expecting crapware in the installer.

Re:Shove your crapware up your ass (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426718)

Worst case study happened to me...

Clicking too fast installed the bundled crap even though I do know better, usually. Loaded up all three browsers with toolbars. Removed those. System restore didn't get rid of all the rest of it. Leftover directories from Conduit/Sweetpack were still in use and would not delete. Had to nuke from orbit and reformat as only way to be sure. Couple days lost productivity to reinstall everything.

Interestingly, the bundled installer pulls the junk from the internet during the moment of install. What bundle option you get depends on what server it connects to is passing out. This means the spyware bypasses the browser's automated download scanner, and that the crap can be avoided altogether by disconnecting the internet during installation (until they mandate a live connection during install).

So now you/we both know how this scam works ...

I was pissed but cool headed enough to be glad I diagnosed it and realized it wasn't the wonderful utility that had afflicted me, but the poor choice of installer wrapper from Sourceforge host.

I had adored the utility enough to previously donate something and had been thinking about doing more again...until this, I'm currently feeling in the hole effortwise...though I may change my mind favorably again.

Re:Shove your crapware up your ass (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 10 months ago | (#45427046)

All uninstallation procedures are exhaustively documented

Also, it would be nice if those uninstallation procedures could be found by googling for it and if they didn't involve installing yet another untrusted application.

Re:Shove your crapware up your ass (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427136)

Even worse if it's not the same crapware. I once helped someone clean their computer and they had over 10 toolbars on their browser. 3-4 different search bars, a few weather bars, a couple of "antivirus" (I use the term loosely here) bars. They were wondering why the internet was so slow... If it wasn't for RevoUninstaller, that machine would have needed rebuilding.

Wait, what? (2)

d18c7db (1031260) | about 10 months ago | (#45426414)

They are putting these ads on their site and they are getting the revenue from the ads and they want me to to tell them which ads are appropriate and which are not. For free! Screw you, I already have a paying job, I don't need to do your job for you as well.

Sourceforge is dead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426432)

Thousands of apps have already left the site. They just don't announce it.

They just stop using it.

I've run into more than a few programs that sourceforge was outdated on by a long time.

SourceForge now added to my HOSTS block (1)

Khyber (864651) | about 10 months ago | (#45426472)

Won't go there any longer. Devs better start leaving in droves and hosting their own stuff.

SF and Oracle (1)

Dracolytch (714699) | about 10 months ago | (#45426474)

This is near the top of a(quickly growing) list of reasons I no longer tolerate, and now simply hate, Oracle. Gee SourceForge, want to be bucketed with Oracle? Yeah... kind of thought not.

As far as I'm concerned third-party inclusion-ware might as well be called parasite-ware, and is a form of Malware that's just easier to remove. It's the same level as crapware that comes pre-installed on a laptop.

Stop providing services that I don't need.
Stop giving me software I don't want.
Stop getting in my way.

If I need something, I'll come find it. Promise.

Many companies are afraid I won't come to them. That's often because they provide inferior tools / services. Make better things that I actually need, and I'll give a damn (For a counter-example, see Atlassian and JetBrains).

Dice doesn't need our help (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426498)

What a transparent sham. Dice knows full well what misleading advertising is - that is what they are selling.

The answer is simple - eliminate the MITM installer and make all adds click-proof.

Obviously that is not going to happen, so good bye SF, I'm moving my projects elsewhere.

Reason # 1 to Avoid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426546)

Their explanation sound like the lawyers/marketing people have been heavily involved.

Don't be evil (3, Insightful)

onyxruby (118189) | about 10 months ago | (#45426736)

Don't bundle /anything/ other than what the user wanted with the download. Don't bundle toolbars, helper programs, utilities, assistants, or anything else you choose to call your advertising product.

Trust that is lost can't ever really be regained, especially on the Internet. The quick dollars gained came at the expense of the dollars in the long run. You need to start with an apology that acknowledges what was wrong along with a promise in plain English never to do it again.

Now, I didn't say anything about not running advertising on the pages. Advertising is what makes sites run, and anyone with any length of time in the industry understands their importance. Google style ads that aren't disruptive are generally respected and static graphical ads from companies like Microsoft and IBM must work as they have advertised here for years. The problem is if things get pushed too far and the content can't be read without irritation.

If the website isn't functional (loads within 1 second without distractions or intermission ads) than you site has gone over too far and the next visit and every visit thereafter will be filtered. We also understand how these things work on the back-end, know how to implement ABP, No Script, Ghostery and other things with advertising gets overbearing.

At this point it is up to the WebMasters to show that they understand "don't be evil". You can't do it with fine print though, for this audience, reads the fine print.

Chrome was promoted this way (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45426838)

I was quite disgusted that Chrome used to be pushed on the unsuspecting this way, sad to know SourceForge has joined the dodgy crowd too.

Nothing but excuses. It's still wrong. (3, Insightful)

FSWKU (551325) | about 10 months ago | (#45427056)

All uninstallation procedures are exhaustively documented, and all third party offers go through a comprehensive compliance process to make sure they are virus and malware free.

You clowns at SourceForge/Dice are missing the point. Users DON'T WANT this garbage on their system. You are deliberately trying to get them to install it, even if it's by mistake.

And what about all the institutions providing you with mirroring? Are they getting a cut of this revenue now? If they're not, then you are DELIBERATELY attempting to profit from their charity and generosity. Personally, I hope every single mirror deletes any SourceForge related material from their servers and tells you to go die in a fire. You are attempting to profit from the work and resources of others who believed they were contributing to the free software community. For that, you are to be shamed, shunned, and written off as yet another group of clueless MBA's out to monitize the entire fucking world at the expense of others. Go fuck yourselves and look for a real job where you have to WORK instead of ruining other people's reputations by bundling useless shit with their software.

Re:Nothing but excuses. It's still wrong. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427152)

Sourceforge gets a lump of coal in its stocking, followed by its metaphorical rotational application upside their head.

Capture was "yearned"!

Who Cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427060)

Everybody in the know has already migrated to a GitHub [github.com] .
At this point, hosting a project on SourceForge just seems quaint.

The big question is where to start.... (1)

argStyopa (232550) | about 10 months ago | (#45427094)

I mean, I don't really understand why SourceForge is behind this, but hey, I definitely support the effort:

Pauly Shore
Keanu Reeves
Sarah Jessica Parker
Stallone and Schwarzeneggar, of course, but they're almost too old to be worth the effort. Same for Madonna....

Aside from that off-the-cuff list, there's a host of really bad female and male actors that are hot, so I'd say give them a pass.

Hey Dice! (2)

tunapez (1161697) | about 10 months ago | (#45427210)

I haven't posted much since the takeover but I wanted to log in one last time to say:
 
1) Thanks for ruining SF, that was remarkably fast.
 
and

2) FUCK OFF!
 
All /. feeds will be deleted now, no more clicks to read comments for you parasites.

what concerns me (1)

swschrad (312009) | about 10 months ago | (#45427352)

are the slopbucket add-ons. I download Audacity and GIMP, and I can't find a way to get rid of sneakware throwing "congratulations! take my survey" when I open another tab, or "you need to upgrade Chrome now," both of which are adware that should NOT be served in the first place. two thumbs down.

Dear SourceForge: Don't. Fucking. Care. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427400)

Hey SourceForge: Here's a hint you clueless idiots. We don't care how much vetting you've done with the third party shitware you're trying to convince us to install. We do not use your site so we can be convinced to install a bunch of crap we're never going to use. The community has voted, and you lost.

Too late, Adforge (3, Informative)

fluor2 (242824) | about 10 months ago | (#45427430)

You ate too much of your own cake.
The migration to other services has begun.
You might never recover from this.
May it be a lesson for all other "free" services trying to make hasty profit.

What? (5, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | about 10 months ago | (#45427432)

"Find and block misleading ads"

Why is this our job?

Why do you not know what's being advertised on your own website?

Why do you run a business based on something you can't control?

Why don't YOU go through your ads and start removing the misleading crap?

No Way (1)

BenSchuarmer (922752) | about 10 months ago | (#45427434)

William Shatner has to make a living some how.

Cut to the chase (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 months ago | (#45427536)

In short SourceForge, fuck you.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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