A Revolution is the Solution
|
|
Yapbrowser was the last straw to be honest.
Akn |
11.30.06 - 9:24 am | #
|
|
PG FTMFW!
LoPhat |
11.30.06 - 12:03 pm | #
|
|
Who are those people ???
im totally confused now let me get this right, All that stuff is just 1 company ?? busy arn't they the Cyberscumbags
kaleidoscope eyes |
11.30.06 - 2:02 pm | #
|
|
Zango is to darknets as the drug trade is to terrorism. It provides money.
Dave |
11.30.06 - 2:04 pm | #
|
|
@paperghost:
"CEO Keith Smith, when asked what was "going on with the FTC", said the below:
It's a great thing for us. It's a great thing for the industry. For the first time now we have the federal government coming out and saying specifically yes, we do think that in order to install software on a user's computer you should use plain language, notice and consent, and there're are the rules around that.
...that's an interesting way of rephrasing WE JUST GOT FINED 3 MILLION DOLLARS, LOL. I don't really see how that could be a "great thing" for anybody, but whatever."
this should be a no-brainer... it really IS a good thing for them... think CAN SPAM - the government is laying out rules by which something gets called bad so the bad guys just find ways around those rules so that their stuff can't be called bad (maybe they'll even get to sue people that call their stuff bad) and continue on their merry way making money with new legal protection because they're following the letter of the law (though probably not the spirit)...
kurt wismer |
Homepage |
11.30.06 - 3:34 pm | #
|
|
Hahahaa! Trying to cover up $3 million fine with positive spn is something only zano would do.
kimson |
11.30.06 - 3:49 pm | #
|
|
"think CAN SPAM - the government is laying out rules by which something gets called bad so the bad guys just find ways around those rules so that their stuff can't be called bad (maybe they'll even get to sue people that call their stuff bad) and continue on their merry way making money with new legal protection because they're following the letter of the law (though probably not the spirit)..."
That was always going to happen eventually. It doesn't mean we can't keep calling them out on it. Plus, a lot of Zangos biggest screwups might not actually fall under any of these new rulings coming through. Take yapbrowser - they give consent (such as it is). everything was disclosed. there was no hijack. yet the browser took you to kiddy pr0n. How would someone legislate for that? No idea.
Paperghost |
Homepage |
11.30.06 - 4:04 pm | #
|
|
WE JUST GOT FINED 3 MILLION DOLLARS, LOL. I don't really see how that could be a "great thing" for anybody, but whatever.
PG, do the math, like I did:
http://temerc.com/phpBB2/viewtop...opic.php?
t=2832
Theyre tickled pink at 3mil... I know I'd be laughing my ass off at the fine. Especially when you consider that, as you have so valiantly been tracking.........NOTHING'S CHANGED!!!
The money just keeps rolling in....and what has the FTC done??......................
....................
Anyone???......HELLO!!!!..I'm waiting.............prolly shouldn't hold my breath tho should I?
TeMerc |
Homepage |
11.30.06 - 5:53 pm | #
|
|
Did anyone ever trust those Guys ?
i mean they all they do all day is Push Junkware onto peoples systems
Trust does not come into this at all
They talk a good game,but thats about it
milligansgohst |
11.30.06 - 6:00 pm | #
|
|
and i would like to state for the record that although im One of the loud detractors of Zango, most of them, if not all of them, have a direct financial benefit ..
i get no financial benefit from doing so :-P
milligansgohst |
11.30.06 - 6:03 pm | #
|
|
OH PG http://theinquirer.net/default.a...x?
article=36027 what you think of that
milligansgohst |
11.30.06 - 6:27 pm | #
|
|
The sad thing is, some of the folks at Zango really believe what they're saying.
Bill Pytlovany |
Homepage |
11.30.06 - 7:35 pm | #
|
|
Well their Spin doctors believe it :-P
milligansgohst |
11.30.06 - 9:32 pm | #
|
|
Hello milligansgohst ???
thats interesting or was it just a typo i wonder ?
Anyway i just read a report on how much money these people are making and frankly its Shocking that 3 million fine is just pocket change to those guys :-( and people are still falling for their games
kaleidoscope eyes |
12.01.06 - 12:25 pm | #
|
|
Yes kaleidoscope eyes it was a typo lol and i agree the level of profit is Crazy considering they really make nothing at all...
milligansghost |
12.01.06 - 6:30 pm | #
|
|
Interesting arcticle or statement of facts.
Passing by reader |
12.03.06 - 8:13 am | #
|
|
yapbrowser.com is for sale.
10k $
yapbrowser |
Homepage |
12.03.06 - 10:51 am | #
|
|
No offense but you damn well know you make money from your adsense ads so don't even play that worn out record!
Just stopping in |
02.03.07 - 1:59 pm | #
|
|
...what a spurious, tortured point. If Zango didn't fill up a bunch of pages, it would simply be someone else on them instead. The google ads have been on the site since it launched, long before i started writing about zango. zango are incidental to the ads, not the *cause*. If zango never appeared on here again, the ads would still remain to help cover the costs of bandwidth. so please elaborate how "direct financial benefit" (which in the context used by Smith when applied to your accusation would mean writing about zango for the SOLE purpose of getting people to click adverts) equates with "adverts that happen to be on the same page as articles about them". Unless of course, you'd prefer people NOT to write about dubious practices online which just makes your accusation come off like a pro-zango strawman post.
/ rolls eyes
Even better, maybe you're suggesting that writing about zango is specifically geared towards having people click a bunch of google adverts, which is patently nonsense - if the content was irrelevant, devoid of useful information and simply designed to suck in traffic like a spam blog, nobody would care about it, would they?
Also, congratulations on completely missing the point of the post, which is that Zango are really pushing it for having a dig at people with jibes regarding profit - like THATS the important thing here - while COMPLETELY FAILING to address the notion that people might have wrote about those things in the FIRST PLACE because they happened to, you know, find things like partnering with a group pushing child porn adverts offensive and unacceptable.
Oh, those terrible security researchers attacking us, boo hoo. Don't bother to think about the horror and pain of the kids used on those websites or anything else, will you?
If zango dont want to have stuff written about them, then they simply need to not be involved in stupid activity online. its pretty straightforward.
as for "no offense", sorry, that doesn't cut any slack. You HAVE offended me with your weak, lame reinforcement of Zangos "messaging" that the only important thing at stake here is a profit margin.
Paperghost |
Homepage |
02.03.07 - 2:41 pm | #
|
|
|
Commenting by HaloScan
|