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!

Google Keeps What Ask.com Erases

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the murky-waterse dept.

The Internet 59

Stony Stevenson passed us an ITNews article on the AskEraser service we discussed the other day. The Ask.com service is intended to obscure a user's search data - but does it really go away? "AskEraser may remove user search query data from Ask.com's servers, but deleted data may live on, in part at least, on Google's servers. That's because Google delivers the bulk of the ads on Ask.com, based on information provided by Ask ... It may well use the information for other purposes, such as measuring the responsiveness of its systems. However, Leeds said he could not disclose the specifics of the contractual relationship between Ask and Google."

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

URL's are dups ... and are rough on Firefox ... (1)

skitheboat (901329) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689462)

The two URL's in the story the same ... plus might want to use the printable URL [itnews.com.au] since in FF, it pegs the CPU meter (much worse than this overly busy site) [komar.org] ... maybe it's all that information being sent to Google?

that christmas website (1)

nozzo (851371) | more than 6 years ago | (#21691330)

oh I just spent an hour on that amazing website, please don't post that url again ;-)

Your ISP is still free to keep it all. (1)

twitter (104583) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689598)

This issue can only be solved with good privacy legislation. The OS, ISP, vendors and others in the data food chain are all allowed to do things they should not. If the site is not encrypted, your ISP can make the same database and sell you out the same way Google might. If the site is encrypted, your OS knows what you type. Even if you only use free software, encrypted sites and proxies, you are at the mercy of credit and banking institutions each time you shop. It should be against the law to accumulate more information about your customers than you need to get the job done and against the law to sell that information.

the only answer (1)

User 956 (568564) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689606)

Someone really needs to develop a diff tool for the internet.

Re:the only answer (3, Informative)

Andrew Nagy (985144) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689814)

I have it on pretty good authority that Ask.com will likely not renew their contract with Google for serving paid ads. Ask has been developing their own platform and is working pretty heavily to recruit advertisers to it. You can see it here [ask.com] .

Re:the only answer (4, Informative)

KingAdrock (115014) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690306)

They already renewed the deal and announced it about a month ago. Their own platform isn't even developed by them it is build on LookSmart's AdCenter technology and probably only accounts for 2-3% of their sponsored search revenue.

Re:the only answer (1)

Andrew Nagy (985144) | more than 6 years ago | (#21692814)

I stand corrected. I had spoken with Ask.com representatives, but obviously they were just trying to generate some additional revenue and I failed to do any additional research (doh!). Here's the scoop [searchengineland.com] and some analysis.

Re:the only answer (1)

DigitalPig (1013935) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693756)

Maybe they just want to combine these two ad at the same time during the transition edge.

Another Answer (1)

GreenLED (1202039) | more than 6 years ago | (#21694232)

We definitely have out-used Google.
I checked out this site called Way Back
Machine, and I was stunned at how many
websites we're "cached" from way back
like in the 90's. Anyone who thinks
there stuff is "safe" on the internet
is nuts. Even this message I just
posted!

Re:Another Answer (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 6 years ago | (#21695708)

Depends on your definition of "safe". It does make some quite safe backups.

Lawl (1)

dippitydoo (1134915) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689614)

Nothing is safe. So why bother?

Ask not... (3, Interesting)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689636)

My fellow Slashdotters: ask not what Ask.com can do with your data - ask what your data can do for Ask.com.

My fellow citizens of the Internet: ask not what Slashdot will do for your data, but what together we can do for the freedom of all data.

Ask me why (2, Funny)

zgregoryg (1061612) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689740)

I feel all Googley inside using a private proxy for all my web traffic...

Re:Ask not... (1)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689772)

Does Firefox+adblock+noscript kill most of this?

Re:Ask not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21695502)

it just kills the display of adds on your screen. it's not avoiding ggle or else to keep datas of what you search/surf.

Re:Ask not... (1)

quicktester (1202920) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690726)

test

Re:Ask not... (1)

veganboyjosh (896761) | more than 6 years ago | (#21692588)

that was indeed a quick test, my friend.

Re:Ask not... (1)

sdiz (224607) | more than 6 years ago | (#21691926)

Yes! Data should be freed!
That's why Google (and all other companies) should have unlimited access to it.

AskEraser is as evil as DRM.

Re:Ask not... (1)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693562)

My fellow citizens of the Internet: ask not what Slashdot will do for your data, but what together we can do for the freedom of all data.
Says the Slashdotter: "Information is meant to be free, but NOBODY HAD BETTER KEEP INFORMATION ABOUT ME DAMN IT"

Hrm.

Google Search History (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689714)

I have search history logging shut off in my google account, I suspect (out of paranoia) that they are still logging my data however.

Re:Google Search History (2, Funny)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689916)

Don't panic! Google will only remain logging when you are paranoid.

Re:Google Search History (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21692008)

Don't panic! Google will only remain logging when you are paranoid.

Just because you're paranoid don't mean they're not after you.

Re:Google Search History (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693644)

Yes it does. That's why they use the word "Paranoid" and not "adequately prepared."

Re:Google Search History (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693998)

If your a paranoid drug dealer, it doesn't mean the fuzz ain't tapping your phone.

That#s Why I Told Blackwater +10 PatRIOTic (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21689748)

to torture people outside of the United Gulags of America [whitehouse.org] .

Cheers,
W

Google: DUNT BE TEH EVIL!!!!111 (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21689762)

ZOMG, u meen teh Goog3l is staring teh too much nfo an viol8ing pplz privassy? TEH OMG, I THOT TEH GOOGEL WAS TEH NOT BE TEH EVIL?!?!?!

TEH GOOGEL HATES TEH MIKKKR0$$$l0th... hows cud tey be teh evilz? It dunt make teh cents?!!

Re:Google: DUNT BE TEH EVIL!!!!111 (1)

SMS_Design (879582) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693354)

Okay, that's cute and all.. But stop. Really. It has not been funny for years now. You're like that guy in the office that still gives the Fonzie "Heyyyyyy" all the time.

Re:Google: DUNT BE TEH EVIL!!!!111 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21700332)

Actually, it IS funny, has always been funny, and always will be funny.

If you think it's "old", it's probably because you were one of the choads who bought into teh "DUNT BE TEH EVIL!!!1" bullshit... and you are sick of having your own foolishly naive stupidity constantly thrown back in your stupid face. That's my guess, anyway!

You never truly know what Google keep and censors. (3, Interesting)

MindPrison (864299) | more than 6 years ago | (#21689790)

Yes, Ive noticed that Google keeps things that eventually gets erased somewhere else, but Google also censors - partially because of violations of various company rules, laws, and much more (too much more!). SO much more in fact - that a little "googling" around the world....from ...servers around the world - will yield different results from what you may get googling from your country, think that I am paranoid and kidding? Try it!

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (3, Interesting)

Dice (109560) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690008)

I would be surprised to learn that Google ever deleted anything. I know a few Googlers, and from what I gather information is generally made "unavailable to the public" rather than erased.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

Bellum Aeternus (891584) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690096)

"Googlers"? I thought we called them Googlebots. ;-)

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21690738)

Anyone else notice that responses to this story are rather sparce, apparently no one wants to attract attention to oneself on a topic like this.

Imagine, several years in the future, there is a knock on the door, and the authorities want to know if you are the one that has Googled "Bettie Page" from this IP address. If so, then down to Headquarters you go, to be questioned in a....

(There is a knock on the door...)
(You have posted something on this story...)

No, No, it's not me, apparently my neighbors have stolen my wireless bandwidth and have been posting on Slashdot about internet privacy, and Googling "Bettie Page" too.

Which neighbors? Those over there, maybe those down the street...

They don't believe you...

(You are asked to get into the car and go with them to Headquarters...)

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21690814)

That is rather paranoid.

Google uses your origin IP in addition to your browser agent when trying to rank results. Nothing sinister about it.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (4, Interesting)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21693030)

Google uses your origin IP in addition to your browser agent when trying to rank results. Nothing sinister about it.
I'm always behind a public NAT of some sort, my interests don't bear any general resemblance to any others who may be using it. I don't object to that on grounds of paranoia (you would be paranoid too, if everyone was out to get you), but it's kind of stupid.

I'm irritated at "targeted" home mortgage ads for California residents only popping up.

I'm irritated at "targeted" ads for social networking sites when I'm reading email from my wife.

I'm irritated that there is even a concept called "click fraud" (and the only thing that irritates me more than that, is reading sites who defend the use of the word "fraud" in it).

I'm irritated at most things internet nowadays, but keeping search history and using that as special sauce on the results just doesn't work for me. I haven't been at a unique naked IP address since 1998.

I added ask.com to my search engine list thingie in Firefox and have been using it as my first choice search engine after I read about their privacy feature. So long as advertisers support the term "click fraud" and have a degree of hostility towards someone who does not shop on the internet (like blocking content to people who use AdBlock), I don't mind blocking content and I will never click on a random ad that pops up because if I clicked on it, it would be "click fraud" because I never buy things that way.

I do buy things over the internet and in fact spent several thousand dollars towards my family's Christmas/New Year's travel (plane/boat/hotel) that way, but I did it my way.

And yes, I do expect advertisers and those who depend upon them to cater to me. I can live without your content or your good will. You cannot survive without paying customers of which you just lost (a potential) one if you're annoying me. Don't bug me, but I'll call you if you have something I want to buy.

You folks who are happy with whatever Microsoft is peddling at the moment, or Google, or whomever ... you folks who are happy to share everything about you with whomever ... you foks who are happy to accept whatever is given to you ... I'm happy for you man! Enjoy! Some of us are different, O.K.?

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21693842)

You misunderstand me. I'm not referring to Google attempting to identify a particular user, merely Google using all available data to establish relevance (the GP mentioned search results specifically, not ads).

As I speak I am typing "beagle" into the google box in Konqueror. 1st result: beagle-project.org, the open source search indexer. Try it from Windows, you get dogs.

That's genuinely *useful* behavior. What they do with their ads I don't give a damn about, because I don't look at them and I don't click them. Google's actions don't require my cooperation, and the moment they suggest they do, I shall tell them to pound sand, as I tell the media execs who want me to watch commercials.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21694210)

As I speak I am typing "beagle" into the google box in Konqueror. 1st result: beagle-project.org, the open source search indexer. Try it from Windows, you get dogs.
I'll leave trying it from Microsoft Windows as an exercise for the reader as I can't do that. On Mac OS X with Firefox and via Google (and I'm logged into my gmail account all of the time), I get beagle-org as my first hit and via ask.com where I have the privacy thingie checked, I get dogs as the first hit and gnome.org as the 2nd hit. (All of the paid ads are for dogs both places). I'll try it from work tomorrow on my workstation and see if I get different results.

My point remains valid even with a hardcoded IP. I'm going to tend to do more searches about Microsoft because I have as little direct experience with them as I can manage and don't know what I'm looking for - that's the whole point of a search engine, right? I make Linux and Unix related searches very seldom because I *know* what I'm looking for and can narrow the search myself if I have to resort to a search engine at all. Presenting me with Microsoft hits when I'm looking for something else isn't useful. Likewise if I'm searching from work on something, it isn't useful to give me preferential Linux-related hits when I'm trying to figure how to work around breakage when interfacing to corporate Microsoft-based infrastructure.

Keeping search history and using it to base results on is a *stupid* idea.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

JFitzsimmons (764599) | more than 6 years ago | (#21695688)

No, actually the results are the same on both platforms.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

i_b_don (1049110) | more than 6 years ago | (#21694976)

ARE YOU TIRED OF ADS?

ARE YOUR HANDS GETTING SHAKY WORRIED ABOUT ACCIDENTLY CLICKING ON INTERNET BANNER ADS? WELL LIVE IN FEAR NO MORE!

DO I have the product for you! FOR A LIMITED TIME ONLY I will tell you FREE OF CHARGE how to improve your life! It's free Free FREE!

.
.
.

Dude man, just install firefox + Adblock plus + Adblock filterset.G Updater

Life is too short to waste with on an internet with ads.

d

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21702678)

You folks who are happy with whatever Microsoft is peddling at the moment, or Google, or whomever ... you folks who are happy to share everything about you with whomever ... you foks who are happy to accept whatever is given to you ... I'm happy for you man! Enjoy! Some of us are different, O.K.?

I would have said "thanks" but your post contains many weasel words.

Google is the only search engine I use lately, and I find their sponsored ads quite useful. I was recently searching for monogrammed towels to buy for my brother for Christmas, and searching for them on Google resulted in more relevant content among the sponsored ads than than among the search results. I got what I wanted and was satisfied.

Sometimes when I'm at a site that's new to me and they have AdSense installed, I'll see an ad for a similar site that sounds interesting and will check it out (though this has yet to result in a purchase).

I hate ads that cover the sites' content until you close them, or that play sound or animations, and when I come across an ad that does that, I edit my hosts file and redirect all subsequent traffic from that ad server to 127.0.0.1. Like with everything in life, ads are not black and white. Some are useful, some are unacceptably obnoxious.

Your thinking about this issue is deeply flawed. Nobody buys "whatever Microsoft is peddling at the moment". Nothing on the web makes it possible to share "share everything about you with whomever". Nobody accepts what is given to them without running it through some process of critical thought. What you've done is draw a caricature of a person that does not exist in real life, and are implying that the caricature is the only possibility other than being just like yourself.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

SL Baur (19540) | more than 6 years ago | (#21703862)

I would have said "thanks" but your post contains many weasel words.

Google is the only search engine I use lately, and I find their sponsored ads quite useful. I was recently searching for monogrammed towels to buy for my brother for Christmas, and searching for them on Google resulted in more relevant content among the sponsored ads than than among the search results. I got what I wanted and was satisfied.
I'm not sure what you think I was weaseling out of, but O.K. I have experience like yours. Perhaps the most spectacular "hit" I got was a side bar ad from gmail when I writing someone with regards to the current state of affairs of preinstalled-Linux notebook computers in the US. I didn't buy anything, but the ads pointed to sites which pretty much had everything I wanted to know on the subject.

The California-only home mortgage ads were from Yahoo! served up to me whenever my mother sent me email. There's no word other than "stupid" for targeted ads like that being aimed at a computer in the middle of the jungle in Mindanao. Heh, Yahoo! always serves me up US Green Card lottery ads when I login to webmail outside of the US. That's a wonderful bit of targeting too.

I'm not against advertising in general - I've seen it proven in economic experiments I participated in as a lab rat in college that advertising when it includes pricing results in lower prices for purchasers.

But look. There are webmasters who consider it verging on criminal when AdBlock is in use calling it "theft of service". (That seems to be the general consensus on webmasterworld.com, there are a fair number of people here who do as well). There are also those who call clicking on ads without intent to buy "click fraud". I can't find my original reference on this now, maybe they've toned it down and maybe I'm thinking of the most radical people on webmasterworld. The current definition on Wikipedia is more reasonable that what I first read. At any rate, "theft" and "fraud" is pretty strong language and I do object to that.

Your thinking about this issue is deeply flawed. Nobody buys "whatever Microsoft is peddling at the moment". Nothing on the web makes it possible to share "share everything about you with whomever". Nobody accepts what is given to them without running it through some process of critical thought. What you've done is draw a caricature of a person that does not exist in real life,
Look at yesterday and today's dupe articles on the EU/Opera and Microsoft dispute (read at -1) and consider what many people are writing there. Many people here disagree with you.

There is a reason why the most used browser by percentage is Internet Exporer v6. There is a reason why eventually the most used PC O/S will be Microsoft Vista. Neither of them have anything to do with the quality of the product (one way or the other) or critical thinking.

and are implying that the caricature is the only possibility other than being just like yourself.
Nope, that was not my intent. Sorry to give you that impression.

Re:You never truly know what Google keep and censo (1)

metalcoat (918779) | more than 6 years ago | (#21691240)

Also perhaps they store what you have searched on before? It seems that when I have been searching lately it directs me to things around my area. Also caters to my system (Ubuntu). Maybe it's just me (being paranoid?) but is it possible they really personalize search?

Google saves searches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21689918)

You mean Google keeps all my searches?? I guess I misspelled "clown pork" a million times then.

Re:Google saves searches? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21692074)

Google saving searches is not troublesome in and of itself. Now, if Google saves the IP addresses tied to searches, THAT is troublesome.
As always, use a proxy.

We all need to Maximize profits NOW (4, Informative)

xiando (770382) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690110)

Ask needs to make a profit, just like everybody else. If it were not for advertisements there would be no Askeraser, and Ask will naturally choose the partner they think will give them the most money. I use Google Adsense on many of my websites too, for exactly the same reason. I know that Google spies on my visitors, and I really would like to avoid them doing so, but at the end of the day I want dinnar and no advertisement revenue, no dinner. That being said.. I personally use (polipo+)privoxy for all my normal browsing and Tor+privoxy for the majority of my browsing. And this is kind of how I make lame excuses for myself and my Adsense usage: It's really up to each one of us to educate ourselves on how to avoid internet tracking & surveillance. It really is up to each and every one of us. If people choose to use Windows and Internet Explorer and have lots of spyware installed and not filter unwanted parts of webpages and not use Tor then so be it and if I can make a profit off it then atleast I get to eat. And I don't cry or think twice about people using things like Tor+Privoxy to visit my sites, since it's only a small percentage who are smart enough to do so. But they should. And they should not trust that I, or AskEraser, or anyone else for that matter (scroogle, and such services) do not track people - because that is not needed. See, if you trust Askeraser to erase you records then you have already decided to trust a third party. Maby they really do erase. Perhaps they just say they do. BUT if you choose to ensure that they don't track you by running software which makes sure they CAN'T track you - such as Tor - then you don't NEED to trust Askeraser (or anyone else). That is the only real solution imho, putting your faith in a third party is stupid, regardless of them being trustworthy or not for the time being.

Re:We all need to Maximize profits NOW (2, Insightful)

Windwraith (932426) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690888)

Yes, your point is pretty much valid, but knowing what we know about TOR nowadays...it's still relying on a third party. You can't know if the end of the TOR network is run by a person interested on helping people or a data harvester. Same can apply to proxy servers, I think.

Re: The Tor Network, in bullet summary (1)

xiando (770382) | more than 6 years ago | (#21691816)

In bullet summary, Tor is only for traffic in the categories:

- 1. Who cares if they log this anyway?
- 2. Encrypted traffic

And this is all explained in the documentation - which you should read in order to benefit from using it. Yes, you really should assume that all Tor exit nodes are run by a bad guy. But the exit node does not see the rest of the path. This means that someone who is looking at a Tor exit node (I run a few, and I can do this - and you should assume I do) really can see that SOMEONE just fetched this page. Who cares if some bad guy sees someone fetching Slashdot?


If the traffic is encrypted (https, OTR-encrypted IM, and so on) then it's alright that some bad guy is looking at your traffic: The adversary does not know WHO is transmitting data and also does not know what is transmitted.

It IS important to know that Tor is absolutely NOT for plaintext http POST requets. Sladshdot does not offer https, which means that you really should login (unless you think it is alright that someone steals your username and password) using Tor. This is - again - explained in the documentation.

Yes, it is true that someone running a Tor exit node can harvest data. Your data. But it is NOT connected to YOU. It is not possible for someone running a Tor exit node to see how many times YOU visited slashdot, but they can (and assume they do) collect data on how many people visit slashdot (and so on).

And Tor does not make you rely on A third party. There are about a thousand Tor-servers and each circut goes through 3 randomly picked nodes. This means that one party would have to operate (or be in bed with) a very huge amount of Tor-nodes in order to see the whole path.

Read this again, Windwraith, and then go read the actual documentation. And if have a look at the sourcecode if you know enough C to understand it. You really should not use Tor or even consider using it until or unless you do.

Re:We all need to Maximize profits NOW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21691592)

That's a stupid argument you make.

I don't get why an action is less evil when done on less qualified people.

Re:We all need to Maximize profits NOW (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 6 years ago | (#21697814)

I don't get why an action is less evil when done on less qualified people.
Some people would argue that targeting people who are less able or qualified to understand what's being done and/or protect themselves from it is in fact more evil - hence the vitriol reserved for those who prey on children or the elderly.

"Ask... (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690650)

And it shall be yours..."

That must've been promised to GOOGLE, not Ask...

Not really a surprise (1)

JewGold (924683) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690758)

This is the first thing I thought of when I read the article the other day. Google ads gets your referer string which contains the search query you used on Ask.com and much of the same information Google would have gotten had you simply used Google for the search.

Plus odds are pretty much any link you click on from the search (and pretty much and page you visit for that matter) will contain either Google ads or Doubleclick ads. Even if it's an ad-free site, you'd be surprised how many sites have google-analytics web bugs implanted that also track your behaviors online.

We should all really, really hope Google keeps its 'do no evil' promise, because something tells me they have enough blackmail information on enough powerful people to do a whole lot of 'evil' if they so desired.

Re:Not really a surprise (1)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 6 years ago | (#21695088)

Oddly enough using something like http://noscript.net/ [noscript.net] and you start to learn exactly how many sites are running the googlites anal-ytic web script, well at least until you disable script notifications of.

As for obscuring your searches try this http://mrl.nyu.edu/~dhowe/TrackMeNot/ [nyu.edu] it doesn't use much overhead and well, by far the majority of searches originating from my IP address have nothing to do with me at all, sometimes I wonder who google is targeting those adds at.

As far as I know the "do no evil" has already been edited from google's corporate policy with the more marketdroid speak version "6. You can make money without doing evil." http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html [google.com] . Now WTF is that meant to mean anyhow, of course I simply read it as, but you can temporarily make more money with doing evil, well, at least until you get caught and you marketddoid trolls can't out shout or can't shut down the critics.

Ask's parent is breaking up. (3, Interesting)

Animats (122034) | more than 6 years ago | (#21690994)

Ask's parent company, IAC, is breaking up. They're a conglomerate; they own things like the Home Shopping Network, TicketMaster, Lending Tree, and CondoDirect. All those are being sold off. They're keeping all their "internet properties", like Excite (yes, that's where Excite ended up), CitySearch, Evite, Popular Screensavers (!), iWon, Match.com, and Zwinki. IAC collected many of the major losers from Web 1.0 under one corporate roof.

At this point, it hardly seems relevant what Ask does.

Get Off My Lawn! (2, Informative)

meehawl (73285) | more than 6 years ago | (#21692834)

I think your assignation of "Web 1.0" to all of these things is not warranted. For Match and evite, aren't these classic early example of almost entirely user-driven content creation and social networking? I *think* that's what Web 2.0 is about. Unless it's really just about the rounded corners and candy colours.

Maybe this'll get noticed this time (0)

achenaar (934663) | more than 6 years ago | (#21691838)

There's this puzzle I can't finish.
The clue is "_______ Ask.com and the horse they rode in on."
But I just can't get it. Maybe I'll search online for the answer...

Adblockplus. (2, Insightful)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#21692500)

Who downloads ads any more? They make the internet too slow for me.

Click Now for your Free Censorware. (1)

Smordnys s'regrepsA (1160895) | more than 6 years ago | (#21695662)

Who downloads ads any more? They make the internet too slow for me.



I could be wrong, but I believe your comp still downloads them, and you are still paying for that bandwidth. Adblock simply stops them from being displayed, not from existing. The only time you're saving is the few seconds you might have been tempted to swat the fly for a free iPod nano.

Re:Click Now for your Free Censorware. (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#21704658)

If I recall correctly, Adblock (not plus) would, by default, not download ads. You could manually turn on a feature that would download them, but not display them. Some people would turn this feature on so that the webmaster would still get per-view credit, although the ads were not actually viewed.

I have been using Adblock Plus for some time. Adblock can't keep up with the latest versions of Firefox. Adblock Plus does not download ads by default. I can't find the equivalent feature to make it download them.

I am saving bandwidth, time, and privacy by using Adblock Plus.

Re:Click Now for your Free Censorware. (1)

WK2 (1072560) | more than 6 years ago | (#21704764)

I just checked. The "sponsor websites" ability has not been in Adblock Plus since 0.5. See this forum thread: http://adblockplus.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5980#5980 [adblockplus.org]

Is anyone familiar with this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#21700868)

A few years ago I stumbled onto a site which logs Google searches. I would go to Google, do a search, wait a few minutes, and go to the other site. Sure enough, what I typed into Google showed up on this other site. Is anyone here familiar with that site, and does it still exist?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?