|
ormonds wrote: by the time you get back you can see the answer
... but we were talkin Java here!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow.
So at least one person has woken up and smelled the coffee -- about 20 years late, but at least he got there.
On a couple of the major points:
The fake advertising clicks/views thing will never go away, and will, in fact, get worse until it achieves the downhill slope on the balance of how much the main web-advertising businesses can screw out of businesses.
Google and fb don't care if clicks/views are faked, because they get paid a lot more per click/view than the scammers do.
And their customers don't care too much, because the money comes out of their tax-deductible advertising budget, so as long as they can say "this campaign drew n more sales, which covered our costs, they will continue to cough up -- until, as I say, that happy balance tips the wrong way, and the costs outweigh the investment by too big a margin.
The outcome of that will probably be a reduction in the per-click/view price, which will make it less attractive to some of the scammers, so the balance will level off -- until the next time.
___
The bot traffic will never go away, partly because a reasonable proportion of it (perhaps as much a 15%) is genuine stuff, which helps the Interwebs function and is there for proper business purposes; but mostly because there will always be a huge supply of people who want to do things that no decent person would do -- and it's unlikely that there will ever be a reliable, robust way of telling the bad bots from the genuine ones.
There will always be enough bandwidth for you to stream your funny cat videos, so live with it.
___
One change that we are pretty much guaranteed to see, over the next couple of years, is a reduction of the reliance on unregulated news sites, half-arsed blogs, and wikis (yes, I'm looking at you, wikipedia), because, thankfully, the majority is beginning to recognise the fact that their accuracy (or, at least, their professionalism in attempting to be accurate) cannot be relied upon.
Such sites will, of course, always exist, but the tendency to cite them is already on the way down, because people don't like being ridiculed for having believed made-up or distorted crap from click-bait web-sites. We can be thankful that the words "reputation" and "trust" are being used more, where it comes to news.
___
Faked videos?
Bring 'em on! I look forward to seeing how creative and satirical people can get!
Who doesn't want to watch a "fixed" oscars ceremony, where everyone admits how much they hate the guts of the @rseholes they worked with; or see a certain inhabitant of a particularly coloured house open his mouth and something true come out of it?
Click-baiting, unregulated news sites will of course jump on such videos and try to portray them as real, but this will only push everyone to treat such sites as entertainment, while they rely the more professional sites for the real news.
___
It's the Interwebs. It will never be perfect, because no three people will ever agree on what perfect is, in this context; but it's been in a bad dip, where ontrustworthiness became the norm, and it's beginning to recover, so it ain't all doom and gloom.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: but this will only push everyone to treat such sites as entertainment, while they rely the more professional sites for the real news
Just checked on Fox and CNN, they're still not funny.
|
|
|
|
|
Really?
They always make me laugh.
Or cry, depending on the grammar.
I'm pretty sure that neither reaction is their intention, but that's about all they ever get out of me.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
And MSNBC. Their news is real but the interpretation should be questioned.
|
|
|
|
|
Whenever you find one that leaves the interpretation to me, tell me please.
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: One change that we are pretty much guaranteed to see, over the next couple of years, is a reduction of the reliance on unregulated news sites, half-arsed blogs, and wikis (yes, I'm looking at you, wikipedia), because, thankfully, the majority is beginning to recognise the fact that their accuracy (or, at least, their professionalism in attempting to be accurate) cannot be relied upon.
there is a problem in your theory cause i do get to see tons of brainwashed people who do believe in their fake sites and fake news and believe in what they seen or read there and will defend it till the end, and when you show them the evidences of it being fake they just say its the other sides propaganda and that everyone lies. And i just lose my will to argue with them or try and open their eyes.
|
|
|
|
|
This is a real reply by a real human containing real content...damn forgot what I was going to say!
I may not be that good looking, or athletic, or funny, or talented, or smart
I forgot where I was going with this but I do know I love bacon!
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Hankey wrote: damn forgot what I was going to say!
That's the most convincing proof in the world that you're real.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
and older than dirt!
I may not be that good looking, or athletic, or funny, or talented, or smart
I forgot where I was going with this but I do know I love bacon!
|
|
|
|
|
So if they can replace pizza makers with robots why can't the replace ad viewers with robots?
|
|
|
|
|
That’s a whole different subject. Don’t get me started. Besides, are robots smart enough know they are viewing the same ad?
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't that like asking whether the dog should be watching cat food commercials?
|
|
|
|
|
He is everywhere;
In the Heavens, and in the Earth.
He makes the stars shine;
Yet He cannot be seen.
He is noble, abundant;
And fills the Universe.
He can lift you into the sky;
And bring you gently down.
He can help heal;
He can help kill,
He can help create;
And He can help destroy.
Praise be unto Helium!
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
What the H was that about? O - I C.
Socialism is the Axe Body Spray of political ideologies: It never does what it claims to do, but people too young to know better keep buying it anyway. (Glenn Reynolds)
|
|
|
|
|
DRHuff wrote: What the H He was that about?
|
|
|
|
|
Na - my way W As O K
Socialism is the Axe Body Spray of political ideologies: It never does what it claims to do, but people too young to know better keep buying it anyway. (Glenn Reynolds)
|
|
|
|
|
There's Hydrogen and Helium
Then Lithium, Beryllium
Boron, Carbon everywhere
Nitrogen all through the air
With Oxygen so you can breathe
And Fluorine for your pretty teeth
Neon to light up the signs
Sodium for salty times
Magnesium, Aluminium, Silicon
Phosphorus, then Sulfur, Chlorine and Argon
Potassium, and Calcium so you'll grow strong
Scandium, Titanium, Vanadium and Chromium and Manganese
CHORUS
This is the Periodic Table
Noble gas is stable
Halogens and Alkali react agressively
Each period will see new outer shells
While electrons are added moving to the right
etc. etc. 
|
|
|
|
|
What is Cross Page Posting?
|
|
|
|
|
Your question shows you didn't read the red text at the top of the page. Google would have been a better resource for you: LetMeGoogleThatForYou[^]
<sig notetoself="think of a better signature">
<first>Jim</first> <last>Meadors</last>
</sig>
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Meadors wrote: Your question shows you didn't read the red text at the top of the page.
Which part?
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
The part that says, "Click here to ask programming questions". Yet his question was clearly a programming question.
<sig notetoself="think of a better signature">
<first>Jim</first> <last>Meadors</last>
</sig>
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Meadors wrote: his question was clearly a programming question.
I disagree.
0. First of all, you can't assume it is a he, we can't assume gender in 2018. 
1. Secondly, it's a technical question, not a programming question. The user did not ask how to write code to prevent cross page posting or how to code to DO cross page posting. The OP simply asked what it was.
In fact, if the rest of you would READ the rules at the top, it clearly states "Technical discussions are encouraged" 
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
0. I realized the gender faux pas after I posted but was too lazy to go back and edit it. Hoping it wouldn't offend the OP.
1. The question looked exactly like the typical QA question so I guess I mistook it for something that should have been posted in QA.
<sig notetoself="think of a better signature">
<first>Jim</first> <last>Meadors</last>
</sig>
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
