×

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!

Wireless Sensors Monitor Glacier Behavior

simoniker posted more than 9 years ago | from the a-bit-like-starbucks dept.

Wireless Networking 77

Roland Piquepaille writes "In a world premiere, an interdisciplinary team of the University of Southampton, GlacsWeb, has deployed a network of wireless sensors inside a Norwegian glacier to record its behavior. This news release, "Sensor Technology Comes in from the Cold" says that the sensor probes, housed in 'electronic pebbles,' are buried 60 meters under the surface of the glacier. And they transmit wirelessly their observations about temperature, pressure or ice movement to a base station located on the surface, which relays the readings to a server in the UK by mobile phone. The researchers think that similar sensor webs will soon be deployed around the world to watch what is changing in our environment. You'll find more details and pictures in this overview."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

77 comments

Heh. (4, Funny)

Fjornir (516960) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297661)

This is great. Now I don't need to worry about being run over by a speeding glacier next time the ice age comes around.

Re:Heh. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297723)

Ugot fistr prsot!!1!

I LAUHG AS U SHIT UR DIEPARS!!!!!!!11!!1!!1!11!

Important Stuff

# Please try to keep posts on topic.
# Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads.
# Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said.
# Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about.
# Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)

Re:Heh. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297746)

pfft...my truck might not be great with fuel ekonomy , but atleast I know i'm safe in it and i'm the badest MF-er at the daycare parking lot [car.co.nz]
support our troops!!!!

Re:YOU SHIT UR DIEPARS!!!1!1!!! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297777)

Re:Heh. (Score:-1, Flamebait)

laf.

Possible Application? (3, Interesting)

Bowling Moses (591924) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298025)

This technology might also be useful for avalanche detection. I saw a program on PBS about the Mt. Blanc glacier [pbs.org]. In 1892 a lake hidden in the interior of the glacier breached the glacial ice it was trapped in, and the resulting flood/avalanche killed 200 people in the town of Saint Gervais. The glaciers on Mt. Blanc have been retreating, but in melting process have developed large liquid water filled caves--which on the PBS program they got some loonies to go dive in. Other mountains probably have similar melting features, so if you could deposit sensors like those in the article into these glaciers you might be able to avert disaster.

Re:Heh. (2, Funny)

Dr Caleb (121505) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298084)

Now I don't need to worry about being run over by a speeding glacier next time the ice age comes around.

Let me guess, you're one of the guys writing Duke Nukem Forever . . .

Is it just me? (-1, Offtopic)

Three Headed Man (765841) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297670)

Has anybody seen the movie "The Day after Tomorrow" yet? Awesome CGI, but it was terrible on the plot and science. Something about global warming causing an ice-age. This must be to quell fears of disaster.

Re:Is it just me? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297692)

Quite off topic, right?

NOBODY ON TROLLDOT GIVES A FUK ABOUT UR TOPIC!1!1 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297852)


IlaughASyouSHITyourDIAPERS iLAUGHasYOUshitYOURdiapers

OMG omg OMG omg OMG omg OMG omg OMG omg OMG omg OMG !!

i LaUgH aS yOu ShIt YoUr DiApErS I LAUGH i laugh OMG!!


Goatse mama is my baby baby yeah

goatse mama [goat.cx] rockin' rockin' on!

You see that ass

You know you wanna fuck it

that hanging cock

You know you wanna suck it

U so horney u shit ur diepars!!1!!!! OMG!!1!!!

Re:Is it just me? (5, Interesting)

(Maly) (742260) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297702)

Speaking of that movie. I saw it on the weekend, and I and my friends had a nice long discussion about the difference between improbable and impossible. This movie skirts that line, to say the least.

NASA's web site has a short article called Sudden Climate Change [nasa.gov] which briefly discusses the plausibility of that movie's scenario. It goes to great lengths to avoid naming the movie but it deals with the possibility of sudden climate change (prossibly to avoid legal trouble?).

An interesting read for anyone wondering about it. Not very long though. The conclusion is essentially to not believe everything you see in the movies.

Re:Is it just me? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297710)

I heard it was edited by the Office of the Vice President.

Re:Is it just me? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297915)

I don't see why NASA can't name the movie.. the movie named NASA after all :)

Re:Is it just me? (0, Troll)

alwaystheretrading (750171) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297955)

...the difference between improbable and impossible. This movie skirts that line, to say the least.

Skirts the line? This movie is fantasy from the opening credits. Global warming is still just a theory and to think that us humans are capable of causing it is bad science from the start.

Case in point, the 1990 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo [about.com] ejected more "greenhouse" gasses into the atmosphere than the human race has created since the start of the industrial revolution. This one volcano cooled the planet by half a degree for two years. How can we be causing "global warming" if a volcano capable of more than all of us together only slightly affect the earth's temperatures?

Global warming is a scare tactic to make us all guilty for having cars.

Re:Is it just me? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9298742)

Your post is theoretically a bad troll from the start. In case it's not, bear in mind Mt. Pinatubo did nothing of the sort. It *did* eject about as much sulfur dioxide as the human race does in a decade. Sulfur dioxide causes acid rain and exacerbates ozone depletion. It is *not* a greenhouse gas. Also bear in mind Pinatubo was a single event, with very different effect than humans' gradual pressure. Human behavior modifies climate all over the place, from urban heat islands to irrigation humidifying to desertification.

Global warming denial is a symptom of people's memories being limited by their lifespan.

Re:Is it just me? (3, Interesting)

detritus` (32392) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297709)

Actually the concept of a large influx of cold water into the ocean altering the major currents is quite possible, at least in theory, but as a theory it must as always be taken with a grain of salt. (who's to say that such current changes dont occur every couple thousand years for various reasons? we just dont have enough data) But its no reason to start moving to the higher places on Earth anytime soon.

Re:Is it just me? (4, Insightful)

RayBender (525745) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297826)

who's to say that such current changes dont occur every couple thousand years for various reasons? we just dont have enough data

Well, let's be careful here. We DO have data from ice cores, sediment beds, tree rings and other similar sources that indicate when these changes in ocean circulation have occurred. In the past, these events have happened at the end of Ice Ages, when large amounts of meltwater have entered the oceans . They don't "just happen" for various reasons; there are pretty well-defined condistions for when the circulation changes.

But its no reason to start moving to the higher places on Earth anytime soon.

If the Gulf Stream shuts down you'll want to move SOUTH, not UP. At least if you live in Europe.

I haven't seen the movie, so I have no idea how badly they butchered the science. But I am concerned that "skeptics" are using this crappy movie as an excuse to belittle the very valid science that is being done in this area....

Re:Is it just me? (1)

Fjornir (516960) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297848)

UP is for when a hunks of ice fall off the polar cap and raises sea level by 20 meters overnight.

Re:Is it just me? (4, Informative)

syphax (189065) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297861)

For more info, start with this paper [washington.edu] by Wallace Broecker. One good quote:

The fact that we are unable to provide satisfactory estimates of the probability that a conveyor shutdown will occur or of its consequences is certainly reason to be extremely prudent with regard to CO2 emissions. The record of events that transpired during the last glacial period sends us the clear warning that by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, we are poking an angry beast (Fig. 5).

Here's another good site [columbia.edu].

Re:Is it just me? (1)

Thing 1 (178996) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297875)

but as a theory it must as always be taken with a grain of salt.

I saw the movie last night, and when they started talking about the polar caps melting and dumping tons of fresh water into the ocean and the rapid desalinization being a bad thing, I was thinking, "Morton to the rescue!"

(Morton makes salt, for those who aren't in Morton's distribution area...)

You're just saying that... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297907)

to discourage others from moving there before you! Nya nya, I'm off! Your desparate strategy didn't work on me!!

*Moves to the equator*

Ahahhahaa Now I'm going to build my massive island fortress... Humorously shaped like a gigantic head, carved into the side of a volcano!

Re:Is it just me? (2, Insightful)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297820)

I saw the movie, but I was a little disappointed... I expected more CGI devastation though!

The plot was alright IMO, considering it's not exactly scientifically accurate.

I thought that the vice-president character was so Dick-Cheney-like that it was scary.

I guess icebergs are more interesting (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297691)

... when you can't play with rocks on the moon.

offtopic (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297693)

Did anyone else want to vomit during the viewing of "The Day After" ?
What an embarrassing piece of shite.

New annoying cellphone calls (3, Funny)

panurge (573432) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297717)

Yeah, I'm in the glacier. Looks like we're sliding about three centimetres a year. I guess I might be late for the meeting...sorry, you're breaking up. That's better. Look, if I give you the readings could you turn them into a quick Powerpoint?

Mars (1, Insightful)

Sinful_Shirts (784047) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297743)

I think it would be interesting if they could put these on Mars sometime in the future.

Re:Mars (1)

fshalor (133678) | more than 9 years ago | (#9300554)

Why?

We already have more data coming from mars than we can deal with:
http://geomag.gfdi.fsu.edu/

Excuse the god-aweful MSFP Orsted subpage. But LOTS of cool mars magnetic field data.

Lets hold off for a few years and get the rest of this stuff processed first. I have to add though, we've found some amazing stuff about the mars magnetic fields.

Don't believe what you read!!! (4, Funny)

nev4 (721804) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297758)

It's all BS it's part of an extension to the Patriot Act that allows them to wiretap eskimos. They don't care about the glacier's, they are trying to spy on eskimoan extremists.

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (1)

rich_r (655226) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297818)

Nah, they're more interested in frolicking norwegians.
mmmm... frolicking...

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (3, Funny)

autiger (576148) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297835)

But of course. It's a well-known fact that the glacier is just a weapon of the Iceberg Liberation Front (ILF) used to target capitalist shipping fleets.

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (2, Funny)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297880)

I was waiting for a stupid comment about the glaciers' "constitutional right to privacy".

Yours will do, though.

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (1)

Siniset (615925) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297917)

you mean those crazy lapp landers right? I don't trust them at all either. They know where santa is, and they ain't telling. Well, hopefully, this way we'll find out one way or another.

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (1)

g0at (135364) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298107)

eskimoan extremists

Whoa... some kind of new outdoor winter sex? "I love it when you eskimoan like that!"

-b
(yeah, I do have a gf)

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (1)

Richard_L_James (714854) | more than 9 years ago | (#9299586)

they are trying to spy on eskimoan extremists

SSShhhh... before you know it some student will dig a sensor up and then show it to the press! :)

Re:Don't believe what you read!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9301766)

Hmmm - except this is driven by a glaciologist interested in pure science... ;-)

radio link (4, Informative)

j1m+5n0w (749199) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297768)

I'm surprised they got a radio link to work through 60m of ice. They're apparently [soton.ac.uk] using 1.8 ghz radios.

-jim

Sensors' heat emission (Re:radio link) (1)

otisg (92803) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297894)

And I'm wondering how sticking electronic devices inside the iceberg affects their immediate surrounding, and how that affects their reports. All electronic devices that I know of, even LEDs, emit heat...

Re:radio link (4, Informative)

alriddoch (197022) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298232)

The presentation you linked is a bit old, and I'm not sure where the 1.8 ghz figure comes from.

I am one of the field researchers on this project, and radio propagation through the ice has been one of the major difficulties. Initial work based on 868MHz has had limited success, so the followup work will use 433MHz with a backup low bandwidth 50kHz link.

Initial tests done last October with 433MHz indicated that we should be able get the range we need. The key is that ice has very different radio properties from water. It is much less conductive. This is countered by the problem that for much of the year there is a lot of water inside and on the gacier.

Re:radio link (1)

j1m+5n0w (749199) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298548)

I was refering to this [soton.ac.uk] rather confusing slide, but lower frequencies do sound more plausible (not that I'm a radio engineer or anything)

-jim

Standards? (3, Interesting)

bigattichouse (527527) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297798)

Are there any standard protocols for data transmission from these things (I mean above the wireless/transport layer)? just curious.

Re:Standards? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297876)

Most sensor network research groups are developing their own protocols since TCP/IP and other standard protocols are perceived to be too heavy-weight, and usually do not match the specialized application conditions in the wireless network. For instance, a wireless sensor in most cases do not need a unique identity such as an IP address - it is the sensor data that is important, not the individual sensor devices. There is a very commonly used protocol called "Directed Diffusion" (link [isi.edu]) that is used to gather sensor data from a wireless network. This protocol runs directly on top of the physical link layer, without any protocol layers beneath it.

That said, there are people working on bringing the TCP/IP protocols to wireless sensor networks (a project at SICS in Sweden [www.sics.se]) but it hasn't reached wide-spread usage yet.

Carrier (2, Interesting)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297810)

What mobile phone carrier has towers in that region? Perhaps they meant satellite phone instead?

Also, what kind of battery life do transmitters packed in ice get?

Re:Carrier (2, Interesting)

arcade (16638) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297890)

Without exact knowledge, I would think most norwegian mobile phone carriers has towers in that regions - just as most of the rest of norway is covered by the mobile phone carriers.

We're talking about norway here, not the uS. ;-) Norawy has _very_ good mobile phone coverage.

(NB: I'm a norwegian).

Re:Carrier (2, Informative)

alriddoch (197022) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298321)

There is very good mobile phone coverage on the glacier, as there are antennas on the roof of a hotel in the valley below. This combined with excellent accessibility are the reasons this glacier was chosen for the study.

The hardware has to be very carefully designed to get the batteries to last. We believe that we can get up to a year worth of operation from a probe. I don't have the details of the batteries to hand, but this is the aproximate time period, taking into account the reduced performance due to the cold.

Re:Carrier (1)

wiremind (183772) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298501)

the article showed the devices with AA batteries in the picture, and then, the power point presentation said they would use 6 AA batterys to get 7volts of power, and then, at the usuage they descibe the batteries will basicly last 1 year.

icecap measuring (4, Insightful)

DoctorDeath (774634) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297811)

Careful measurements of the glaciers and polar ice caps is one of the most important types of research done at the polar research labs. The figures are used for calculations of global warming, polution, and tidal currents among other things. This new method means less people having to endure the extreme cold and horrible weather in order to achieve the much valued information. Currently sensors are placed on top of the ice to measure movement and laser measurement is done to determine shrinkage.

Re:icecap measuring (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297916)

I haven't read the article (this is Slashdot, right?) but I thought that Norwegian glaciers were unusual in that a large number are actually advancing. This is mainly due to increased snowfall in the winter, which may or may not be to do with warmer temperatures increasing the amount of moisture in the air.

I visited (climbed up) a couple of glaciers in the Breheimen region and they certainly appeared to be advancing rather than retreating, judging by the vegetation.

Re:icecap measuring (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9299183)

Norwegian glaciers were unusual in that a large number are actually advancing

It's not just Norwegian glaciers. There are a lot of glaciers worldwide that are advancing. Ice Age Now [iceagenow.com]

Actually I'm glad ... (3, Funny)

SuperDuG (134989) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297829)

... Seeing as the icebergs could fall into the ocean, and then drift out to warmer sea, and then cause the ocean to desalinate.

Thus then affecting the ocean current and temperatures of said currents. Then cause the climate to abruptly change.

Then when you think it couldnt get any worse, super storms would emerge and cause hurricanes to form over land. The hurricanes would have such a strong force that they'd (bear with me here) ...

That they'd cause the STRATOSPHERE to come to the surface of the earth. Causing instantaneous freezign of everything in the eye of said land based hurricanes.

As if that wasn't bad enough I predict this would cause 3/4 of the north america, europe and asia's populations to be killed. Thus causing the rest of the populations to move to mexico.

But alas, this can all be prevented if we stop burning fossil fuels, hug a tree, and act like RMS.

Also note, in the event a land based hurricane does bring the STRATOSPHERE down to the earths surface immediately find the nearest library or wendy's and stay there. If you have a tent, be sure to set the tent up in the kitchen of wendy's.

You know what, this whole plot seems like the story for a HORRIBLE movie, I better write it down and call 20th century fox.

That's a good joke ... what about a poem? (2, Funny)

CemeteryWall (587346) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298019)

One performance only
We'll fly you over burning forests
We'll walk you through the starving hoardes
We'll show you drowned and bloated corpses
At a price you CAN afford

You'll glide above the sky in comfort
You'll sleep your nights in quiet hotels
You'll sit and watch our views in comfort
Of mankind in a thousand hells

Arma G Heddon
Alternatively we could really try to understand the science. It's a bit of a bore.
But we could start with the BBC [bbc.co.uk].

Damn, where was the SPOILER ALERT? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9298078)

Now I won't be able to enjoy the movie.

Political Monitor (2, Funny)

greyhoundofdeath (783411) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297832)

Great now they have a tool to measure progress in Congress.

"progress in Congress"... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9298079)

If "pro" is the opposite of "con"....

wireless through ice? (2, Insightful)

pedantic bore (740196) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297844)

It doesn't mention that they're using anything special to do the wireless, but IIRC 60M of ice (or water) will defeat a fairly powerful radio signal. Anyone know if (a) I'm simply wrong, or (b) they're using something special? If the latter, how is it done and how well would it penetrate say 60M of rock?

Piquepaille, Call it what it is: BLOG / SPAM (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297866)

"You'll find more details and pictures in this overview."

Hey Roland, stop being MISLEADING and DISHONEST and say up front that you've taken other people's pictures and links (NOT more details), posted them at your BLOG, and that you want everyone to visit your BLOG so you can make more MONEY from increased traffic and ADVERTISING.

I have never seen anyone so shameless about directing so much traffic to their own blog for financial self-gain. It brings a new definition to the term blog spam [weblogs.com]

This overview of Roland Piquepaille spam [slashdot.org] activities is the most insightful that I have ever read. Even Slashdot's moderators agree that it's insightful.

MOD PARENT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9298159)


i hate spammers,

maybe a few catalogues and mail order leaflets to rolands house might do the trick

Re:Piquepaille, Call it what it is: BLOG / SPAM (1)

nev4 (721804) | more than 9 years ago | (#9343165)

So you are saying that by 1) Having a website which contains posts about and links to technology / science related news 2) Selling advertising on said website and 3) Writing stories good enough that they are linked to by other major sites that you are a spammer? Wow, sounds like /. must be a spammer too. Let's see here... Slashdot sells ads, has articles about technology that they don't even write, the articles are usually just a paragraph with a few links and slashdot is pretty damn popular. Wow, I guess we'd better boycott slashdot, they are SPAMMERS!!! For those of you hailing from Japan: Wow, I guess we'd better boycott slashdot, they are SPAMMERS!!!

Re:Piquepaille, Call it what it is: BLOG / SPAM (1)

nev4 (721804) | more than 9 years ago | (#9343169)

Sorry the for those of you hailing from Japan part was supposed to read: (sarcasm) Wow, I guess we'd better boycott slashdot, they are SPAMMERS!!! (sarcasm) yeah, yeah... I know, preview...

How are these pebbles powered? (2, Interesting)

arcade (16638) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297911)

This may be a stupid question, but I'll ask it anyways.

The big question for me is .. how is these pebbles powered? They have to be powered by battery, but are they turned on/off with certain interval, doing measurements, then turned off? Or are they continously online? In either case, how does one make batteries last this long? How long has they already been deployed? The article mentiones 1988, but I really, really doubt that the batteries have been active in those tiny pebbles since that long ago ... when were they put into the ice?

Re:How are these pebbles powered? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9297969)

Easy.. Cold fusion.. huh. hu. hu.. ghaa.. I need a life.

Re:How are these pebbles powered? (1)

benhocking (724439) | more than 9 years ago | (#9297994)

They're battery powered, and these type of devices (Google on "deeply embedded networks") are typically turned on/off based on varying criteria in order to conserve power. To extend battery power, you can add more devices and use less frequent "on" cycles. Nevertheless, it would be very unlikely that they've been there since 1988 since (1) the technology is younger than that, and of course (2) the batteries are very unlikely to last that long. My impression is that the devices either have not been actually implanted yet, or have just been implanted. (I must have read a different article than you, because I saw no mention of 1988.)

Re:How are these pebbles powered? (4, Informative)

alriddoch (197022) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298413)

The glacsweb probes contain about 4 small batteries. They contain a realtime clock, and are in a minimal power sleep mode for most of the time. They wake up once a day to talk to the base station on the surface. The probes are designed to last for a year, and the first batch were deployed in August 2003.

Can you hear me now? (1)

FreakyControl (751781) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298001)

"which relays the readings to a server in the UK by mobile phone". I wonder if they have to pay roaming charges.

Nova (3, Interesting)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298091)

There was an episode of Nova a while back called Descent into the Ice [pbs.org], which talked about a group of glacier explorers who were concerned about huge lakes of water forming inside glaciers.

Anyway, one of the people they talked to also did observation/research underneath a glacier. There had been tunnels dug through the mountain and up to the bottom of the glacier, and he set up a time lapse camera underneath the glacier.

It was one of the most amazing things I've ever seen. Ever.

Mobile phone connection? (2, Funny)

markh1967 (315861) | more than 9 years ago | (#9298110)

How is it that they can get a mobile phone signal from ontop a glacier yet I can't get a signal from my house?

Piquepaille == spammer == scammer (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9298184)

Its not "his site"

Its Radio Userland's site AKA radio.weblogs.com AKA the company that Dave Winer [harvard.edu] founded. Winer is the RSS / OPML / XML guy who is now at Harvard.

Piquepaille == spammer [weblogs.com], Instead of using email to spam [weblogs.com], he spams [weblogs.com] sites like Slashdot (and many others) using his blog.

Piquepaille == scammer [weblogs.com]

Here is a direct quote from Piquepaille's Blogads advertising entry:

My stories are often mentioned by Slashdot, BoingBoing or Nanodot. Smart Mobs and Mindjack Daily Relay are also sites where I put summaries of my stories, giving this blog a traffic of 150,000 visits per month. So if you have an interesting technology to promote, put your ads on this blog.

Why doesn't he just say "So if you want to associate yourself with a spammer [weblogs.com] ,give me your money."?

Ignore the fact that he has no "stories" of his own, offers no original content and zero insight.

Like most spammers [weblogs.com], he has no incentive to stop because it's profitable for him to spam [weblogs.com] Slashdot and other sites.

Make it unprofitable. Stop visiting his weblog. Express your displeasure to the editors. Express your displeasure to Radio Userland (they are a quiet participant in his spamming [weblogs.com] since Userland has a small ad on the blog). Express your displeasure to the advertisers. Let them know you won't buy products they advertise there. Last of all, express your displeasure about his spam [mailto] [mailto] to Piquepaille himself.

You make Piquepaille's continued spamming [weblogs.com] possible with your traffic.

(As for all the spam [weblogs.com]references in this post, some might call it poetic justice. Maybe Google will pick it up and let everyone know.)


Batteries Not Included (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#9299068)

What happens when the batteries run out?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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

Loading...