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!

Political Ads Reach P2P World

michael posted about 10 years ago | from the missing-the-point-of-advertising dept.

Television 66

samuel4242 writes " Some of the Creative Commons folks wrapped a skin around the Internet Archive to create the P2P-Politics site filled with ads about this election. You've heard of this election, right? It's an interesting spin on the notion of P2P because the ads themselves are cached on the Internet Archives big servers, but email forwards links from P to P. Sort of like passing a pointer instead of the data structure. Some of the ads are thoughtful, some include stars, and some are a bit scary. For some reason, there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why."

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

Bush is a genius. People just don't understand him (0, Flamebait)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | about 10 years ago | (#10592107)

Bush is literally a genius. People don't understand his logic. Why won't they see the beauty of chaos? Peace has a price. The price of peace is constant war. In order to have peace on earth and prevent wars, we must be the ones to start all the wars. If we start and win all the wars then we can install a world government through force and act as the world global police. This is the best way to be secure, if we are the police we will always have the best weapons. The war in Iraq is a war for peace. Why do you refuse to see the beauty of war? War is peace. The war in Iraq was a catasrophic success.

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (1)

genrader (563784) | about 10 years ago | (#10592146)

Bush is as smart as a lima bean. Kerry is as smart as a pinto bean.

If you vote for either of them, you're wasting a vote. Third party all the way. Peroutka, Badnarik, Nader, Cobb...they all are vastly superior to Bush and Kerry.

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592246)

Peroutka isn't.

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (1)

Poppler (822173) | about 10 years ago | (#10592494)

Peroutka isn't [better than Bush or Kerry].

I'd venture to say he is. From his site:
Terror is not an enemy. Terror is the tactic of an enemy. A war on a tactic will, in all likelihood, never end because the object of the war, the tactic, can never be eradicated. This type of war will always be an endless, confusing tragedy.

That is, I fear, what we have in the case of Iraq. We should get the troops out now.

And we have John Kerry just saying he will do the same thing Bush is doing, only "better" and "stronger". You be the judge.

I'm assuming your objection to Peroutka is based on the fact that he's very conservative. Well, I'd rather have a real conservative in office than one of the neo-conservative or neo-liberal douchebags on the major party tickets. I don't agree with Peroutka's positions on seperation of church and state, women in the military, and his very strict anti-abortion platform (I support exemptions when the mother's life is in danger). But at least this guy seems to have a conscience.

Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10593357)

No, Kerry has made clear that he won't shoehorn Iraq into the "forever war" on Terror. Unlike Bush, Kerry doesn't have the criminally vested interests in oil, Halliburton and neocon apocalypse. Bush will lead us into a draft [enjoythedraft.com] the same way he's led us into a permanent recession, busted budget, and completely divided country: by "accident", somebody else's fault.

Just to indulge the inanity of considering voting for Peroutka: he's running on the "GOD FAMILY REPUBLIC" ticket (his words). Bush isn't zealously rightwing enough for this crank. For this wingnut, Bush is "pro-abortion", the Christian Coalition is failing to "properly educate God's people", and approaches the US as a christian kingdom he'd rule benevolently. C'mon - these people deserve to run, because the functionally insane deserve to vote. But you don't have to join them.

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

delus10n0 (524126) | about 10 years ago | (#10594540)

It's funny that the whole draft bill was introduced into the senate by democrats, and was completely shot down recently (only 2 people voted for it, and they were the ones who introduced it, go figure.)

So, anything else you want to try and scare college/high school kids with?

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10594989)

Sure: the backdoor draft [nwsource.com] , for those naive enough to think that enlisting for a tour will get the chances of being fed into the Iraqmire meat grinder over with quickly. Thanks for the invite. While we're at it, we can note that the Democrats tried to get a draft started before the war, to prevent rich and connected Republicans from avoiding the effects on their families of sending other kids to war for them. Bush's "no draft" plans will turn out to be "misunderstimations" of the failure to recruit, already underway [wsj.com] , when he flipflops to the "last resort" draft in a heartbeat (someone else's, of course).

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

delus10n0 (524126) | about 10 years ago | (#10601036)

It's great to call something what it isn't.

What you linked to is not a "draft", and it's stupid that they're calling it a "backdoor draft".

When you join the military, it's all right there. You may be required to commit longer than your actual term. If you don't understand or agree with that, then you probably shouldn't be in the military.

Also, if you've joined the military just to get a (nearly) free ride to college, you're probably in it for the wrong reasons as well.

I have a few friends in various branches of the service, and they all have expressed to me their desire to go back (re-up) after their commitment dates, and to actually _go back_ into Iraq/Afghanistan. Go figure. Maybe someone should do a poll about what the soldiers think.

While we're at it, we can note that the Democrats tried to get a draft started before the war, to prevent rich and connected Republicans from avoiding the effects on their families of sending other kids to war for them.

[Wasn't that from Farhenheit 9/11?] If that's truly the reason, it makes "Democrats" look incredibly silly and childish. The whole sending "kids" to war phrase needs to go away. Do you call someone who is 18+ a kid or child? Nor do I think "upper class" or "rich" people (not just Republicans) tend to avoid the service. I think you'll find a diverse population of people who want to serve just like you'll find a diverse population of people who don't want to serve.

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10604132)

People are calling it a draft because it's involuntary military servitude - they're not parsing the words like some White House lawyer [americanprogress.org] . Even people who are drafted signed agreements to comply with the Selective Service system - and involuntary service isn't voluntary, even though you signed up for it. Not enough are serving [wsj.com] to support Bush's chosen war in Iraq. And what happens when a nondiscretionary demand for our troops comes up?

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

Poppler (822173) | about 10 years ago | (#10598551)

I understand that Kerry is better than Bush on the war. Which is why I am voting for him if my state is close.
I would not vote for Peroutka regardless, I disagree with him on too much. I don't think he's completly insane, he's just VERY conservative. I personally put foreign policy pretty high on my list of prioreties, so to me he isn't the absolute worst candidate. While I am an atheist and am uncomfortable with some of his religious platforms, I would honestly prefer him to Bush.

I'm not joining them! I'm just not as freaked by this guy as many others seem to be - I'm much more afraid of Bush and his henchmen.

Re:Kerry's the only sane one left (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10598839)

Bush is scarier because he could win. That's scary not only because of the seriousness of the threat, but scary because tens of millions of Americans will vote for him. Hitler was almost elected Chancellor, by millions of Germans, then appointed by the ancient ruler. We're not that different now, just a somewhat different roster of scapegoats. BTW, don't let any bunch of nerds fool you into shutting off your brain by invoking some "Godwin's Law" claptrap: Hitler was a real person, not a mythological demon, and fascism hasn't changed much since its first wave of popularity.

You lack logic. (0, Troll)

Adolph_Hitler (713286) | about 10 years ago | (#10592326)

Bush is logical. He looks out for our best interests. He wants to protect snd secure the world. You liberals are submissive and are only valueable as slaves. The people who matter believe in being logical and doing whats in their own best interest. You believe in letting people boss you around and this is why you don't deserve to be rich. You believe people like us should just give you a job or money, believing you are entitled to it, but if you were a better stronger more logical person you'd be rich yourself. Liberals have the insane idea that by sharing their own wealth (which means less wealth for them) that it actually helps the economy. The economy works best when we compete with each other, the best people will float to the top and the people at the bottom belong there because they arent as valueeable. Not all people are worth the same and not all people are valueable to the world. This place is over populated.

Re:You lack logic. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592555)

hmmm... "Adolph Hitler".... "You liberals are submissive and are only valueable as slaves"..."the best people will float to the top and the people at the bottom belong there because they arent as valueeable"....

Been reading a little to much Nietzche lately?

Oh and for an elitist, you're a pretty bad speller.

Re:You lack logic. (1)

BandwidthHog (257320) | about 10 years ago | (#10593806)

He's a troll. A troll 'for' the left. I think he despises Bush as much as I do, but has adopted the tactic of pretending to speak for the Bush side in as offensive a manner as possible in an effort to discredit them. To each their own, I suppose.

I'd like to think that this administration's record speaks quite adequately to their inadequacy, but seeing as how almost half of us intend to vote for these assclowns, perhaps not.

Carry on then.

Re:You lack logic. (1)

Tyndmyr (811713) | about 10 years ago | (#10596898)

Attention:

As a result of your ability to grasp basic logic, and then accusing others of same, your posting priveleges and breathing rights have been revoked. Continuation of such is in violation of L-4678-B, often known as Catch 22. Have a nice rest of your life.

Dept of Stupidity Eradication

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (1)

An Onerous Coward (222037) | about 10 years ago | (#10592515)

The coward is correct about Peroutka [peroutka2004.com] . I was going to say that I would give Bush four more terms before letting this nutjob take the helm, but then I realized that the moment he took office, everyone would stop taking the presidency seriously. Having a complete loon occupying the White House would just be harmless entertainment.

If you see any difference between the two candidates at all, and you're in a close state, you should vote for the lesser evil, not the guy-you-really-want-but-doesn't-have-a-shot-at-get ting-elected. Try hopping over to Votepair.org [votepair.org] , and support your candidate without turning him into a dreaded spoiler.

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (1)

secolactico (519805) | about 10 years ago | (#10592840)

But he's got a Badwin as a viceprez! How bad can it be?

I hope it's either Stephen or Alec. The other 90 Baldwins in Hollywood haven't done anything interesting.

Re:Bush is a genius. People just don't understand (1)

BandwidthHog (257320) | about 10 years ago | (#10593834)

Having a complete loon occupying the White House would just be harmless entertainment.

You must be new here.

think before you vote (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10593253)

You might not like Kerry, but you can hardly fault his intelligence. How can you back that up? Then again, if you're voting for someone who is only a spoiler for Kerry, and therefore tacitly reelecting Bush, maybe you're not so smart yourself. The smart person who rejects Bush and Kerry votes for Kerry, because he's not destroying the country, and donates time and money to a third party. So next time the party can increase its chances not only of winning, but of breaking the party duopoly. Just voting for them merely makes you part of the 0.5% that keeps them a laughingstock in our sad system that makes elections a choice not among candidates, but among possible winners.

Re:think before you vote (1)

Brandybuck (704397) | about 10 years ago | (#10594748)

You might not like Kerry, but you can hardly fault his intelligence. How can you back that up?

Oh wow! I haven't seen rebuttals like that since kindergarten!

Ed: "Both your daddys are beans! Ha ha! One's a lima bean and one's a pinto bean! Ha ha!"

Ted: "Aaaah! Mom! He called daddy a name!"

Fred: "Shut up Ted, you sound like an idiot!"

Re:think before you vote (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10595034)

That's a fairly sophisticated playground technique you've nurtured. One twit says something stupid equating the intellects of a moron president and a brainy challenger, I ask for backup, and you reduce the equation to they are beans! By quoting us as if we were all children, not just you and the twit. That must get you beat up a lot, smarty pants.

Re:think before you vote (1)

Brandybuck (704397) | about 10 years ago | (#10595805)

I double checked your quote, and I was right the first time: you're all pissed because someone is equating the intelligence of a skull-n-bones yalie to a skull-n-bones yalie. I didn't reduce the equation to beans, the ORIGINAL post did that!

Re:think before you vote (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10598338)

From

'Bush is as smart as a lima bean. Kerry is as smart as a pinto bean.'

to

'Ed: "Both your daddys are beans! Ha ha! One's a lima bean and one's a pinto bean! Ha ha!"'

You changed the equation from "smart as" to "is". That's stupid. Almost as stupid as pretending you didn't. And stupider than changing "beans" to "skull and bones yalies". Almost as stupid as equating their college status to their intelligence, not nearly as stupid as calling Kerry stupid. Please don't bother replying; I don't want to have to use the word "stupider" again.

Re:think before you vote (1)

Brandybuck (704397) | about 10 years ago | (#10599931)

You awesome erudition and perspicacity has rendered me speechless...

Moderators Guide to This Comment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592189)

let's see, this post was.... FLAMEBAIT for the logon name INSIGHTFUL for making paralells between 1984 and the Bush Regime REDUNDANT for making paralells between 1984 and the Bush Regime OFFTOPIC for obvious reasons

bias (0, Flamebait)

pizza_milkshake (580452) | about 10 years ago | (#10592147)

For some reason, there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why.

well if there were this story likely wouldn't have been published on the /. homepage. i hate bush, but i hate bias as news more.

Re:bias (1)

Vile Slime (638816) | about 10 years ago | (#10592637)

> > For some reason, there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why.

> well if there were this story likely wouldn't have been published on the /. homepage. i hate bush, but i hate bias as news more.

I agree on the bias part. What's worse, is that somebody out there modded it flamebait...

Much more likely... (1)

temojen (678985) | about 10 years ago | (#10592666)

Most of them are from the "Bush in 30 Seconds" contest from moveon.org. The Bush campaign hasn't had a comperable contest.

Re:bias (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10593184)

"The facts are clearly biased against George Bush" - John Stewart

And the Slashdot mods are clearly biased against fairness, I can say from ample experience.

Re:bias (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10593216)

Well, "ample" = biased; I have vastly more experience being mod'ed than mod'ing.

The facts are biased (4, Funny)

antizeus (47491) | about 10 years ago | (#10593734)

Actually it was Rob Corddry who said that (or rather, something close to that).

Corddry: How does one report the facts in an unbiased way when the facts themselves are biased?

Stewart: Im sorry, Rob, did you say the facts are biased?

Corddry: Thats right Jon. From the names of our fallen soldiers to the gradual withdrawal of our allies to the growing insurgency, its become all too clear that facts in Iraq have an anti-Bush agenda.

Re:The facts are biased (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10594960)

Those guys are doing the best TV since the Original Not Ready for Primetime Players. Thanks for the reference; how well do you think
"the facts are clearly biased against George Bush" - a la _The Daily Show_ maintains their implicit GPL ;)?

Those who support Bush are not book readers. (0, Flamebait)

Futurepower(R) (558542) | about 10 years ago | (#10594730)


Those who support George W. Bush probably are not book readers. They cannot have seen these 3 movies and read these 35 books: Unprecedented Corruption: A guide to conflict of interest in the U.S. government [futurepower.org] .

Thinking about the presidential campaign has caused me to discover something I didn't know before. Most people have little idea of the activities of their government. Instead, they believe the sound bites.

--
Government data compares Democrat and Republican economics. [hevanet.com]

Re:Those who support Bush are not book readers. (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10595015)

TV and relative wealth lets us believe that politics is for "experts" who "know best" and have the "public trust". Since our country was founded on opposite principles of participation and distrust, the ease of that path is seductive, until it comes home to roost. By then, it's too late, as the media has moved to serve the powers that be: the government that controls their profits, and vice versa. That corporate/government mutual perpetuation was called "fascism" by its Italian founders, and it hasn't changed much.

Re:bias (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10593592)

That's like 'people who say 2+2=4 are biased toward arithmetic'

Re:bias - Cluestick time! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10594676)

Unbelievable that someone hasn't belted you with the obligatory "You must be new here" comment. Slashdot isn't unbiased news, nor does it pretend to be. The "News for Nerds" subtitle nonwithstanding, it's a discussion community that tends to focus on some topics more than others.

If you have half a brain, you'll get your real news from a variety of international sources and try to sort through the bias to see the facts.

Don't blame Slashdot for your own stupidity.

I thought P2P's were illigal (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592155)

so when can we see the law suits started, the democrates have already higherd alot of laweres, they could start right after they finish trying to steal the election.

no firefox support (1)

mabu (178417) | about 10 years ago | (#10592244)

You gotta love a site that doesn't appear to support Firefox.

It said I lacked the proper plugin. I even installed the latest version of Quicktime and it still didn't work.

Re:no firefox support (1)

Fubar420 (701126) | about 10 years ago | (#10592503)

Works fine in Camino, on OSX...

Re:no firefox support (1)

evilmousse (798341) | about 10 years ago | (#10592763)


it worked for me, and i had quicktime
installed months before i ever installed
firefox.

Re:no firefox support (1)

mabu (178417) | about 10 years ago | (#10592870)

That's what I get for upgrading to newer versions of QT probably. I hate that stupid virus-like program.

YOUR FORMATTING SUCKS, STOP IT NOW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10598116)

you type like a
total fucking moron
please stop with
the non sensical spacing
thank you very much
you nutless wonder

also note
your refusal to use caps
which i am mocking in this post
is a femine typing trait

i believe you are lacking testosterone
talk to your doctor

Quicktime? (2, Informative)

temojen (678985) | about 10 years ago | (#10592821)

They're mpegs.

I view source, copy out the address, and use wget. That way I also get to keep the file.

Re:no firefox support (1)

BandwidthHog (257320) | about 10 years ago | (#10593879)

Works fine for me (Firefox 0.10.1, Mac OS X 10.3.5, 3mbit cable).

My mom (WinXP SP2, Firefox 0.10.1, dialup at work) said the video was fine, but the sound was garbled.

Maybe you're just not doing it right.

*ducks*

Re:no firefox support (1)

Nacon74 (809996) | about 10 years ago | (#10597634)

I had the same problem, I don`t remember exactly what I did to fix it. It was some setting in Quicktime, preferences -> MIME Settings -> "and then I forgot what I did :)"

Conservatives have big butts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592297)

it's a fact!

Re:Conservatives have big butts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10594678)

sorry it is all put together stupid lame filter, fuck /.
Oh my god, Becky, look at her butt It is so big She looks like one of those rap guys girlfriendsWho understands those rap guysThey only talk to her because she looks like a total prostitute, ok? I mean her buttIt's just so bigI can't believe it's so roundIt's just out thereI mean, it's grossLook, she's just so blackI like big butts and I can not lieYou other brothers can't denyThat when a girl walks in with an itty bitty wasteAnd a round thing in your faceYou get sprungWanna pull up frontCuz you notice that butt was stuffedDeep in the jeans she's wearingI'm hooked and I can't stop staringOh, baby I wanna get with yaAnd take your pictureMy homeboys tried to warn meBut with that butt you gotMe so hornyOoh, rub all of that smooth skinYou say you wanna get in my BenzWell use me, use me cuz you ain't that average groupyI've seen them dancin'The hell with romancin'She sweat, wet, got it goin' like a turbo 'VetteI'm tired of magazinessaying flat butt's the only thingTake the average black man and ask him thatShe gotta pack much back, soFellas (yeah), fellas (yeah)Has your girlfriend got the butt (hell yeah)Well shake it, shake it, shake it, shake it, shake that healthy buttBaby got back(LA face with Oakland booty)I like'em round and bigAnd when I'm throwin' a gigI just can't help myselfI'm actin like an animalNow here's my scandalI wanna get you homeAnd ugh, double ugh, ughI ain't talkin' bout PlayboyCuz silicone parts were made for toysI wannem real thick and juicySo find that juicy doubleMixalot's in troubleBeggin' for a piece of that bubbleSo I'm lookin' at rock videosWatchin' these bimbos walkin' like hoesYou can have them bimbosI'll keep my women like Flo JoA word to the thick soul sistasI wanna get with yaI won't cus or hit yaBut I gotta be straight when I say I wanna fuckTil the break of dawnBaby, I got it goin onA lot of pimps won't like this songCuz them punks like to hit it and quit itBut I'd rather stay and playCuz I'm long and I'm strongAnd I'm down to get the friction onSo ladies (yeah), ladies (yeah)If you wanna role in my Mercedes (yeah)Then turn aroundStick it outEven white boys got to shout Baby got bac

No Bush Supporters? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10592504)

"...there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why."

The Internet is where the godless go to view child porn. Once you find Jesus, you'll vote for Bush and quit using the Internet.

Re:No Bush Supporters? (1)

genrader (563784) | about 10 years ago | (#10592946)

I found Jesus, would rather vote for Bush than Kerry (Although I see Peroutka and Badnarik as better choices and will vote for one of them), and use the Internet. Know at least a hundred people like that too.

Re:No Bush Supporters? (1)

flyingsquid (813711) | about 10 years ago | (#10594140)

There's a hilarious Mad Magazine spoof of the Bush campaign and how it might treat Jesus Christ. http://www.dailykos.com/images/user/3/jesusbush.jp g [dailykos.com] However, it does a good job of raising a serious issue, though: Bush talks like a Christian, but he doesn't act according to Christian values. Humility? Charity? Turning the other cheek? Compassion? Love of your fellow man? Hardly.

Re:No Bush Supporters? (1)

genrader (563784) | about 10 years ago | (#10595200)

Funny, people only use the most popular verses (which are usually taken out of context anyway) to support claims to not being Christian-like. The Bible says turn the other cheek, and America's turned cheeks plenty of times when a few Americans died here and a few there, but I think we have run out and we needed to attack terrorism.

Monster Slash (1)

druske (550305) | about 10 years ago | (#10592580)

Hey, it's almost Halloween; don't leave out Bobby Pickett's Monster Slash [monsterslash.com] , a rework of his 1962 Monster Mash that sings the praises of Bush's environmental policy. You'll need flash to see the movie. Enjoy!

US presidential debates 1960-1984 (4, Interesting)

jamienk (62492) | about 10 years ago | (#10592832)

I ripped these older Presidential debates from various websites. It was a pain to get them. Dowload the torrent here [torrentbox.com] or here [torrentreactor.net] or here [jdandrpm.com]

  • 1960: JFK vs Nixon first TV debate (4 debates, only 1st one in total)

  • 1976: Ford vs Carter (Johnson didn't debate Goldwater in '64, Humphrey didn't debate Nixon in '68, Nixon didn't debate McGovern in '72)

  • 1980: Carter vs Reagan

  • 1984: Reagan vs Mondale

Low quality Real Video files ripped from streamings from the web.

If you have other debates, 1988, 1992, 1996, 2000, Presidential and/or VP, or higher-quality of the above, PLEASE POST!

Re:US presidential debates 1960-1984 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10593224)

Thanks. Good stuff.

my guess (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10593615)

there seem to be very few from the Bush supporters and it's anyone's guess why

Don't worry. They'll learn to to use computers as soon as they're allowed to.

Ouch, my karma.

HULK is going to be angry there is no HULK ads!!! (2, Interesting)

Hulkster (722642) | about 10 years ago | (#10593690)

Hulk check out Puny Human P2P web site.
Hulk notice no ads for Hulk.
Hulk is running for President [komar.org]
Hulk is getting angry - may SMASH Puny Human P2P site - GRRRRR!!!!!

Re:HULK is going to be angry there is no HULK ads! (1)

finkployd (12902) | about 10 years ago | (#10594188)

OOG THE CAVEMAN you are not.

Content-disposition (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10593705)

This email/WWW wrapper is exactly what the email MIME header "Content-disposition:" is for. You send me a message, including "Content-disposition: " including some state arguments describing the object that the URL points to. When I read (not just receive) the message, my email reader gets the object at the URL, subject to my preferences, including "retrieve on receive". If your URL points to coral or some other web cache, or your proxy caches URLs for your entire organization, the URL persists, or your email reader just caches it. This way, the sender sends "attachments" only to those who want it, when we want it. And instead of just including URLs in messages, there's a well defined behavior for encoding and retrieving them, that the UI makes seamless.

Content-disposition has been part of the MIME standard for a decade, during which the WWW and URLs have passed it by, to their mutual detriment. I've never seen a good, certainly not popular, email client that implemented it. I'd hack it into my Evolution source code, but I don't know if Ximian/Novell would integrate it, and it's worthless unless both ends use it. I wish the Net would catch up with MIME - and not just to stop it from its incessant "walking against the wind" ;).

Re:Content-disposition (1)

irc.goatse.cx troll (593289) | about 10 years ago | (#10595858)

Wouldn't that work a little too well for spam harvesting? like the current trick of embeding img's with unique ids in the url, only less known.

Re:Content-disposition (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | about 10 years ago | (#10598392)

It could, if you automatically retrieved all URLs. But it's the same as HTML email: the default is "off", and senders are matched against your contacts list. The strength of C-d is *not* downloading the URL, unless confirmed by the reading user.

And they say .... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10594030)

... that Rome fell on a monday.

Here's an interesting advert ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 10 years ago | (#10594048)

http://www.mvp-seattle.org/pages/pageFascism.htm [mvp-seattle.org]

Maybe voting for Kerry over Bush will only delay the inevitable.

It's not just P2P !! Online games too! (1)

forgotten_my_nick (802929) | about 10 years ago | (#10607715)

Anyone who plays city of heroes go to Pinnicle server and Atlas city. There you will see "Vote Bush 2004" character actively advertising and has been for some time.

Some of the players have taken offense by it, and created rebuttal characters but it appears that the advert is intentionally there.

LotR Spoof - Fellowship 9/11 (1)

rm3friskerFTN (34339) | about 10 years ago | (#10614263)

There is also the iFilm website [ifilm.com] with several political homebrew short films

Fellowship 9/11 (Runtime: 14:49)

Michael Moore's searing examination of the Aragorn administration's actions in the wake of the tragic events at Helms Deep.

With his characteristic humor and dogged commitment to uncovering - or if necessary fabricating - the facts, Moore considers the reign of the son of Arathorn and where it has led us.

He looks at how - and why - Aragorn and his inner circle avoided pursuing the Saruman connection to Helms Deep, despite the fact that 9 out of every 10 Orcs that attacked the castle were actually Uruk-hai who were spawned in and financed by Isengard.

The official site is fellowship911.com [fellowship911.com]
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?