Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #4416 > unrolled thread

Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool'

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-08-16 15:10 +0000
    Re: Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-08-16 21:18 +0000
      Re: Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-08-16 22:00 +0000
      Re: Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> - 2014-08-16 23:07 +0100
        Re: Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-08-17 12:47 +0000
          Re: Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool' Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-08-17 14:44 +0000

#4416 — Creator of the Internet pop-up ad apologizes for 'hated tool'

http://www.cnet.com/news/creator-of-internet-pop-up-ad-apologizes-for-hated-tool/

   The man who created a type of ad that Internet users love to hate is now
   apologizing for his creation.

   Impeding and annoying all who use the Web, the dreaded pop-up ad was
   coded by Ethan Zuckerman, who worked on the feature in the mid-1990s
   when he was a programmer with a Web host called Tripod. In a column
   published by the Atlantic on Thursday, Zuckerman takes at least part of
   the blame for concocting this form of advertising and tries to explain
   how it happened.

   The pop-up ad may be hated by most who surf the Web, but it does tie
   into the question of who pays for the Internet content that we use every
   day. Advertising is often seen as a necessary evil that we have to face
   -- and complain about -- to use the Web without having to pay for every
   site and bit of information. But the more the advertising is
   in-your-face, the more we complain about it, which brings us to the
   pop-up ad.

   ...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#4431

In article <562fu3txQUSCaOGvfKNMYKda@dont-email.me>,
 Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> http://www.cnet.com/news/creator-of-internet-pop-up-ad-apologizes-for-hated-to
> ol/
> 
>    The man who created a type of ad that Internet users love to hate is now
>    apologizing for his creation.
>    ...

If he's really sorry, he'll allow us to administer a gentle electrical 
shock each time we have to click one ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4435

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> In article <562fu3txQUSCaOGvfKNMYKda@dont-email.me>,
>  Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> > http://www.cnet.com/news/creator-of-internet-pop-up-ad-apologizes-for-hated-to
> > ol/
> > 
> >    The man who created a type of ad that Internet users love to
> >    hate is now apologizing for his creation.
> >    ...

> If he's really sorry, he'll allow us to administer a gentle
> electrical shock each time we have to click one ...

I know that prior to the advent of pop-up blockers in browsers, I
wished I could have a button to push to electroshock the idiot that
dreamed up the technique.  Well, actually, it might have been more like
a button to apply a thumb and toe screws very slowly and painfully, but
much the same sentiment.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4437

On 16/08/2014 22:18, RS Wood wrote:
> If he's really sorry, he'll allow us to administer a gentle electrical
> shock each time we have to click one ...

Such a shock administered by the billions of internet users cursing the 
popup hence multiplied up by that factor would create some spectacular 
lightning.

Since popup blockers, I now curse web sites/apps which validly use 
popups and require explicit exclusions to be set up. Largely because 
much of the time you cannot know that they will be needed until someone 
complains that something isn't working.

-- 
Rod

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4448

In article <c5a30kFie4aU1@mid.individual.net>,
 polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> wrote:

> On 16/08/2014 22:18, RS Wood wrote:
> > If he's really sorry, he'll allow us to administer a gentle electrical
> > shock each time we have to click one ...
> 
> Such a shock administered by the billions of internet users cursing the 
> popup hence multiplied up by that factor would create some spectacular 
> lightning.
> 
> Since popup blockers, I now curse web sites/apps which validly use 
> popups and require explicit exclusions to be set up. Largely because 
> much of the time you cannot know that they will be needed until someone 
> complains that something isn't working.


Actually, I'm willing to (mostly) forgive that guy at this point.  But 
I've got my semi-automatic electric zartmeister remote laser pistol 
aimed squarely at the gonads of whichever numbnuts invented the "black 
out the web page and place something in the middle of the screen saying 
'subscribe to our newsletter' or 'log in for special deals' or 
whatever."  That technology sucks and frequently doesn't work.  

The Register - I think - is guilty of screwing it up, and on tablets the 
"close" button for that little bastard is off to the side of the screen 
because the code has misread the width of the tablet.  So you can't ever 
close that annoying thing, and therefore you can never get to the page 
you were reading.

I'm setting the voltage to "440" and squeezing the trigger if I ever 
find that bastard.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4452

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> In article <c5a30kFie4aU1@mid.individual.net>,
>  polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> wrote:

> > On 16/08/2014 22:18, RS Wood wrote:
> > > If he's really sorry, he'll allow us to administer a gentle
> > > electrical shock each time we have to click one ...
> > 
> > Such a shock administered by the billions of internet users cursing
> > the popup hence multiplied up by that factor would create some
> > spectacular lightning.
> > 
> > Since popup blockers, I now curse web sites/apps which validly use
> > popups and require explicit exclusions to be set up. Largely
> > because much of the time you cannot know that they will be needed
> > until someone complains that something isn't working.

> Actually, I'm willing to (mostly) forgive that guy at this point. 
> But I've got my semi-automatic electric zartmeister remote laser
> pistol aimed squarely at the gonads of whichever numbnuts invented
> the "black out the web page and place something in the middle of the
> screen saying 'subscribe to our newsletter' or 'log in for special
> deals' or whatever." That technology sucks and frequently doesn't
> work.

Most of those things are javascript and/or css triggered.  Noscript
(Firefox) https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/noscript/ can
help with the former.  For the latter, turning off css (alt-v y n in
Firefox) often makes them disappear, and therefore makes the obscured
text readable.

> The Register - I think - is guilty of screwing it up, and on tablets
> the "close" button for that little bastard is off to the side of the
> screen because the code has misread the width of the tablet.  So you
> can't ever close that annoying thing, and therefore you can never get
> to the page you were reading.

Of course, noscript as well as the "turn off css" option would only
work on tablets when the tablet browser provides an ability to have
something like noscript and an option to turn off css.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web