Forum Moderators: skibum
Full story:
[foxnews.com...]
So what happens when it is played in theaters with Coffee Republics in the Lobby?
Cure the disease (ms) and the symptoms (adware) will follow.
If I go to see film_001 and see Brad Pitt drinking Coke, it doesn't mean that adverts for coke are going to start to pop up ad random in other films I go to see.
How about cinema AdWare that popped up adverts for Pepsi everytime someone on screen said certain keywords?
Regardless of what shape or form AdWare takes, it is still intrusive and unwanted - and what's more it play's on the lack of knowledge of general users who mostly will assume that your site and my site are the ones throwing pop ups at them, not their own machine.
Scott
Thieves take your money without your consent. Con artists convince you to give them consent to steal your money.
[edited by: woop01 at 2:06 pm (utc) on May 20, 2004]
If I go to see film_001 and see Brad Pitt drinking Coke, it doesn't mean that adverts for coke are going to start to pop up ad random in other films I go to see.
Another HUGE difference is the makers of that film get PAID for placing that product in the movie.
No, you should read a 30 page incomprehensible legal document and have to click OK to install the Google toolbar? Ya, right!
If you don't put that 30 page incomprehensible legal document in there, you leave yourself open to get sued. It's a horrible Catch-22.
They don't put the stuff in there with 100% intent to confuse the general public, they also have to put it in there to cover their own back.
Brett, it's the same thing as you putting this [webmasterworld.com] in font size = "1" at the bottom of your pages here. You have to do it.
-Matt
That's a good analogy... though the methods used go past building confidence followed by substitution. A good deal of these employ deception masquerading as system messages, virus warnings etc. The Internet is becoming very predatory. I can't see anyone defending this business model unless from rationalization.
Scumware: If I get it from my surfing habits, its my own dang fault. I've been around long enough I should know better. I make it as difficult as I can for this to happen. I don't use IE, I have hardware and software firewalls, I have up-to-date anti virus. I have up-to-date anti-spyware/adware. I have too much of a time investment in what's on this machine to go around without protection. That would be like having sex with a stranger and not wearing a condom, (and then telling my wife about it so she could pull out a gun and shoot me).
BUT: the "Aunt Tillie's" of the internet aren't going to have this level of coverage. In many cases, they're afraid to change the settings and software on their computer. At best, they'll take it into their electronics dealer, where some under-qualified "MS Certified" moron of a tech will install a few patches throw on the anti-virus solution with the highest profit margin for the retailer, not explain how to use any of it, and hand the computer back to "Aunt Tillie" and assure her that everything is fine.
They WON'T instal anti-spyware/adware software, because there's no profit in it. "Aunt Tillie" trundles off onto the net thinking she's perfectly safe to click on anything she wants because "That nice young boy at the computer shop said my machine is protected." And KABLOOIE! Within 48 hours you have a machine so bogged down with malware/adware/spyware/scumware, that "Aunt Tillie" has to wade through a barrage of pop-ups just to get at her favorite Short Bread recipe.
So who's to blame?
Is it Redmond for making such a vulnerable system? I laugh out loud at this. Sit down with your resident security expert. They'll all sing the same song. "The only secure system is one that's encased in cement, with no net hook-up, no keyboard, no mouse, no way of getting any information at all into it."
Is it the computer tech at the local electronics store? Hardly, he's just a glorified salesperson installing whatever software his retail chain can turn a good profit on. That's his job, that's what he gets paid for, and thinking anything else is foolish.
Is it "Aunt Tillie" for being so hopelessly clueless? Come on. People have a certain basic right to expect that when they drop a few hundred, or a few thousand, on a piece of technology, that it will work as per claimed, without having to go to a course for 6 months on how to use it.
Is it the purveyors/creators of the scumware? Ding-ding-ding, we have a winner. These are the people who are out there intentionally gaming the sytem to get an unfair advantage to earn a buck. In any other real world business model, this is not only immoral, it would be illegal. If you make false, or even misleading statements about your company in your quarterly report in order to ballooon the stock price so you can make a quick buck, and you get caught, you go to jail. You also get your butt sued off. Argue what you want about disclaimers this and fine print that, 99.9999% of adware/spyware/scumware uses some sort of sneak to get onto your machine. Burying what the software does in a 100 page legaleze/borderline unreadable document is a sneak, its deceptive, and the people who make the stuff darn well know it, and that's why they do it. Becauseif the "Aunt Tillie's" of this world saw in big bold letters "CLICKING ON YES IN THIS BOX WILL INSTALL SCUMWARE ON YOUR COMPUTER", then even the most naive wouldn't do it.
<end rant>
I know, but I thik in this context... you really can't separate the two because no one would be stupid enough to use LL's name in a print ad nor would they use it on their website proper. So why is it o.k. to use it for a click from scumware? Obviously it isn't o.k. to LL. Scumware created this "gray" area by infiltrating Joe Surfers household computer. Advertisers support this business model. Nobody wants the ads any more than they want spam email. The question is who should police it?... what are the rules? At what point in policing this stuff will we lose the freedom of the internet to the regulators? In the meantime think twice about supporting a business model that is killing the "goose" we all have come to rely on in some way or another. ;)
I'd be interested to know who of those who defend AdWare also have a vested financial interest in doing so because frankly that's the only reason I can see for defending it. It's intrusive and unwanted and I see no long term business benefit of having those feelings associated with any business.
I have no interest in AdWare and could care less whether the concept succeeds or fails. I am against GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION in the progress of the Internet in any shape or form. I don't want the government of any country telling me or any other company what they can or can't do on the Internet. After radio had been around for a little while, the FCC was established in 1934 to control and legislate it. They broke up NBC, limited the amount of time a network could broadcast on any given day, decided what was "acceptable" to be aired, and so on. Most of us weren't alive back then but maybe our parents or grandparents were, and you should ask them some time what people thought about the FCC... they HATED it. They were INSULTED that their government didn't trust their judgement and discretion. Afterall, they all had the ability to TURN OFF THE RADIO if they didn't like something they heard. They were a generation with discipline and pride - something that this generation seems to lack. They didn't want someone to hold their hand and tell them what was OK and put pads and bumpers on everything to make it "safe" - they wanted the freedom to make their own choices AND their own mistakes.
I say this because what happened in 1934 is happening TODAY with the Internet, only the difference is you idiots are WELCOMING it. Are you all so tired of freedom that you'll so readily and willingly give it up? I'm not. I may not like a company's practices, heck I may not like the color of their website - but I will support their RIGHT to run their business the way they want. They're not ripping people off, they're not hurting anyone, they're not even HIDING anything - everything their software does is fully disclosed in the license agreement. If you fail to read and understand it, it's not THEIR fault it's yours.
digitaltv and others - I would love to hear a defense for the repeated uninvited re-installs... certainly, you can't argue that this is consensual.
I've never seen this so I can't comment - although I do know that there are Viruses out there that will do this and you may have one of those on your system. A virus is separate from AdWare - AdWare is legal software with a license agreement. I am still waiting for someone to send me a link that installs software on my system from a web page without prompting or a license agreement. Such a thing does not exist. There may be software out there that re-installs itself after you uninstall the app that delivered it to your system, but I would be willing to bet that if these re-installers you speak of DO exist, it's in the license agreement of whatever application delivered it to your system. Had you bothered to read it, you could have decided that the long term affects aren't worth the software you were installing.
I agree with the sentiment, but when the terms are incomprehensible to an average person, then they are nonapplicable. It is true that ignorance of the law is no defense, but one should not have to have an attorney with them while surfing the internet.
This is totally the wrong way of thinking. First off, software license agreements aren't nearly as complex as the contracts you see when you buy a house or a car. I'll admit that when I bought my first house I was confused as all hell by the terms and general wording of the contract. Luckily my realtor (who happened to be my Dad) was there to explain it to me. I have yet to see a software license agreement that I didn't understand, and if there WAS one would it hurt to make a phone call? I mean really, how stupid can you be? The argument that if you don't understand it it should be void is just about the funniest thing I've read all week. Educate yourself so you don't agree with something you'll regret.
I've visited L.L. Bean's website a few times in the past, but never purchased anything. I plan to visit the site today and find SOMETHING to buy. After that, I am sending an email to them to let them know that their suit against these advertisers (and directed at the Claria/Gator model) is the reason I chose to purchase from them.
They have a very nice Cotton Poplin field shirt and Dress Chinos that closely resemble what Indiana Jones wore in Raiders and Temple of Doom. I own one of each and highly recommend them. heh.
Regardless of what shape or form AdWare takes, it is still intrusive and unwanted - and what's more it play's on the lack of knowledge of general users who mostly will assume that your site and my site are the ones throwing pop ups at them, not their own machine.
Yep. So do warranties, insurance, car sales, home sales, credit cards, cell phones, roofers, etc. That's why they have contracts and license agreements - where everything that goes on is laid out in front of you. If you don't understand it, it's your responsibility to ASK FOR CLARIFICATION before you agree to it.
Is it "Aunt Tillie" for being so hopelessly clueless? Come on. People have a certain basic right to expect that when they drop a few hundred, or a few thousand, on a piece of technology, that it will work as per claimed, without having to go to a course for 6 months on how to use it.
Would she buy a car if she didn't know how to drive? Of course not - she needs to take a course to get her drivers license so she can prove she knows how to handle a car. Just because there is no law that requires you to know what you're doing "behind the wheel" of a computer doesn't mean you shouldn't take the initiative yourself to learn a little bit about what's out there first. If you want to learn through trial and error that's fine, but ERROR is part of learning that way.
COME ON PEOPLE, WAKE UP! How many times do I have to say the same thing over and over? It is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to educate yourself, it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to choose what you want or don't want on your system, and it is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY to READ EVERY FRIGGIN DETAIL of every piece of software you install (and heck, even do a search on Google for opinions/reviews if you want to go a step further) BEFORE you install it. The software gets on your system because you CHOSE to install it ... the only way you wouldn't know what you were installing was if you didn't read the license agreement.
Nonsense. AdWare is 100% pure creative genius.
So are the emails we get from Nigeria. You know, the 419 scam emails.
All of this nonsense about AdWare needs to point at the realy problem - Redmond.
Nonsense. Absolute uneducated ignorant nonsense.
I do not have ANY anti-virus protection. I have NEVER gotten a virus/spyware program that I did not deserve to get.
Lucky you. I heard your same argument from a friend a few years ago regarding practicing safe sex. Died from AIDS recently. I wonder how many viruses are lurking on your system?
Who is being deceived or tricked? It says right in the license agreement what software is being put on your system and what it does.
The problem is the license agreements are not written in standard english. They are also written with intent to decieve and to hide.
If I download some freeware, I can "reasonably expect" to get a pile of scumbagware along with. Fine. My fault and I deserved it.
This is silly. Got a great laugh from it. It's like saying if I pass a store and they give me a free sample, it's okay that it's infected with anthrax because, well, it was free, wasn't it?
Running Internet Explorer with the default security settings is not recommended
Actually, the default security setting are the defacto recommendation because they are the default.
I'm still waiting for someone to send me a URL that will install Spyware on my computer without requiring me to click anything manually to approve it. Even Internet Explorer's DEFAULT SETTINGS will not allow this, and as I said earlier I'll PayPal $20 to anyone who can prove otherwise to me. I set up my laptop with IE6 default settings. Prove me wrong.
The problem is that the install message looks harmless and appears normal. Many people will simply press return or click on the OK button simply because they don't know. It looks just like IE is trying to update itself - in other words, many people believe this is normal.
But seriously, there is a "learning curve" to the Internet and just like everything else in life the lazy, ignorant, and stupid will ultimately suffer.
When you pull a machine out of a box, plug it into the wall and the phone jack and it just works, well, you've made it very simple. People just expect it to work and it's not clear they need to do anything else.
Ignorance is no excuse.
Untrue. It's impossible to know everything.
Lucky you. I heard your same argument from a friend a few years ago regarding practicing safe sex. Died from AIDS recently. I wonder how many viruses are lurking on your system?
That has to be the most insane thing I've ever heard for a comparison.
Give me a copy of whatever virus detector you want me to use, and I'll report back the honest results.
Untrue. It's impossible to know everything.
Get back to reality. Stating that ignorance can be used as a valid excuse is nonsense.
-Matt
1. Those who blame Microsoft.
2. Those Who Have something to gain and support Scumware.
3. The rest of the world.
I agree that govt. legislation is a slippery slope... BUT laws are there for protection.
We can throw analogies around left and right, but those who are supporting scumware are fighting an uphill battle... when you base your entire business on unethical practices and expoiting the average user... you will ultimately fail.
It's a Karmic universe.
I in no way am supporting scumware. I have nothing to gain. I hate scumware as much as the rest of you.
My whole purpose in arguing this thread is whether or not the user is at fault for being ignorant. My opinion is that the user is wrong every time.
Ignorance is bliss, just not an excuse.
-Matt
Those programs are great because they help me make a fortune! You see ... I repair computers on the side ... and right now I am making a fortune removing spyware like this that infests computers. I think it's great! at $50 a pop it's easy money!
now I am ducking and running! :-)
TC
Would she buy a car if she didn't know how to drive? Of course not - she needs to take a course to get her drivers license so she can prove she knows how to handle a car. Just because there is no law that requires you to know what you're doing "behind the wheel" of a computer doesn't mean you shouldn't take the initiative yourself to learn a little bit about what's out there first. If you want to learn through trial and error that's fine, but ERROR is part of learning that way.
Poor analogy. it is one thing to learn how to drive. It is quite another to learn how to do mechanical work (even maintenance) on your vehicle. When I ask the pump jockey to "fill 'er up" I don't expect that I will have to stand there and make sure there are no additives put into the gas. I am old enough to remember when the pump jockey would come to the window with the dipstick to show you if you needed oil (and $.19 a gallon gas:)).
Scumware takes over the inner workings of the machine. It's like sugar in the gas tank or sawdust in the differential.
COME ON PEOPLE, WAKE UP! How many times do I have to say the same thing over and over?
When I find myself repeating things I usually take it as a sign that people are not listening, which is usually because they either a) are not interested, or b) do not agree.
Repeating yourself will not sway opinions. I doubt may accept your thesis regarding "Net Nazis". Freedom is a two edged sword. Individual freedom is often limited to protect the rights of others. Just as I can not paint graffiti on your fence, I should not be able to put scumware on your hard drive.
WBF
Just as I can not paint graffiti on your fence, I should not be able to put scumware on your hard drive.
That right there says it all. You cannot paint graffiti on anyone's fence because it's illegal. You CAN put scumware on someone's computer, because it's NOT illegal. I made the statement before... The problem lies within the judicial system not banning the crap. Write to your senators, your congressmen, whoever. If you want stuff done, you have to take a pro-active stance. Don't just talk a big game, get out and do something about it.
-Matt
PEOPLE ARE STUPID STUPID STUPID...
and they are IGNORANT IGNORANT IGNORANT....
These people know this and take advantage of it. My company is in a service biz and we have to talk to our clients every day and you know what? Most of them are ignorant to the nth degree.
Nobody reads disclosure statements and these people are counting on this. It's silly to compare this to purchasing a house, you have lots of 3rd parties (escrow, title, real estate agents) to help and/or protect you, but not with software issues.
I have no idea how much business I have lost to scum like this, I wish I could find out, but I most likely will not. They will eventually all be put out of business and I will do the "Dance of Happiness" when this occurs...
Lucky you. I heard your same argument from a friend a few years ago regarding practicing safe sex. Died from AIDS recently. I wonder how many viruses are lurking on your system?That has to be the most insane thing I've ever heard for a comparison.
If your WINDOWS system does not include antivirus software you are vastly increasing the chances your computer will die and, guess what, infect other computers, which will then die.
Practice safe sex. And practice safe computing. It does not matter what you think and whether or not you have been infected - if you are not running antivirus software (and running a firewall and keeping your system patched) AND you are running windows, then your computer is on borrowed time, and it WILL die and it most likely will infect others. Period.
The analogy seems pretty solid to me.
And before you jump all over me, I am a security expert, this is what I do for a living and I've done it for almost 25 years. (I remember the outbreak of the FIRST worm in 1988). I've heard many people say they are safe because, well, they've never been infected and they are too smart to open an email attachmed which says "I love you". And then, wonder of wonders, blaster and welchia and sasser came along and their computers DIED. These worms do not arrive via email.
The parasite is not a program that installs AdWare - the problem is with a browser that would allow such nonsense to be perpetrated on your system. The problem continues to be in Redmond. They could shut this whole thing down with 1 update of a few lines of code.
And actually, thinking about it, Brett is correct. The root of the problem, the very root, is a poorly designed operating system from a security point-of-view. Even the highly-touted windows 2003 is insecure. Sigh. Sorry for my harsh comments on this earlier - I didn't read the post all the way through.
Just as I can not paint graffiti on your fence, I should not be able to put scumware on your hard drive
Technically, the USER is putting the AdWare on their computer, not the author of the software. The software clearly describes what it does in the license agreement, and you the user choose whether you want to install it or not. If you don't read the license agreement but click that you agree to it anyway, YOU are putting the AdWare on your system.
Sure, I can't walk up to your fence and start painting grafiti on it, but I *ALSO* can't just force AdWare onto your system without an agreement. If I knock on your door with an agreement which clearly spells out that if you agree to this I'm going to paint grafiti all over your fence and you just say "whatever" and agree to it without reading it, guess what's going to happen? :)
This is pretty black & white, folks ... pay attention to what you're doing.
This is pretty black & white, folks ... pay attention to what you're doing.
It's not black and white. Computers have become appliances, and just like people don't expect a DVD to take over their television, they don't expect software to tke over and pervert their computer. And certainly software which sticks around and reinstalls itself after being uninstalled, regardless of any license agreement, is just plain wrong.
My whole purpose in arguing this thread is whether or not the user is at fault for being ignorant. My opinion is that the user is wrong every time.
The user is not ignorant and is not wrong. Your average user is treating the computer as an appliance, much like a television or game console.
What the users are is TRUSTING. Users do not expect evil (which is what companies like Gator are) and thus do not expect these programs to do more than show some advertisements. A little tracking is also fine with most users, and although, in my experience, it's a surprise it's shrugged off as the price for a cool tool. What is not expected is the other more scummy, downright unethical actions taken by these companies.
And the excuse that "it's in the license agreement" is just idiocy. Those who support scumware use this argument all of the time, usually after loudly proclaiming they do not support scumware (me thinks they doth protest too much).
And oh yes, some of this software DOES install itself without permission. If a system is not up-to-patch, there are vulnerabilities which allow programs to automatically install without prompting. I've seen it happen many times.
Pressing a "Yes" button can happen simply through a wrong twitch or absent-mindedness.
Think about handicapped people: blind people, people typing with their toes, people crippled by carpal tunnel syndrome after spending days trying to remove scumware from their friends' computers.
I assume the PR troops of Gator have not been victims of a horrible chainsaw accident, trying to surf the web with one finger...?!
***
Some people recommend to disable the ability to download plug-ins or ActiveX objects. But this comes at the cost of not participating in innovation. If I remember correctly, even the current Gmail requires ActiveX enabled.
If the bad guys didn't spoil it for all of us, there could be even more innovation in the internet world. Right now, everyone has to be on guard and no-one can risk setting up a computer (with internet connection) without reading for hours first on what to do, which programs to use and at which settings, when to trust a computer's messages and when not to, etc.
I thought the internet was meant to be a democratic medium that can be used by everyone. It's a sad situation.
> I can't believe some of the people
> actually defending this stuff.
Lets be clear, we are trying to put the focus back where it belongs on the disease (Microsoft) and not on the symptoms (Adware). You can't cure cancer with a band aid, so focus on the disease and not the symptoms.
By constantly focusing on adware programs like Gator and WhenU, the real perpetrator sets back and laughs. Your wasted energy is getting in the way of a real campaign to do something about the problem.
I would have liked to see a little more play here when the FTC had got together about this recently, was hoping for some front page WebmasterWorld coverage, nothing.
I agree MS needs to get their stuff together and what we can do is focus on getting people's computers clean and educating the average computer user about this stuff. And from reading some of the papers sent into the FTC and other studies it's about 75% of computer users uninstall this stuff, have no idea how it got on their computer, don't want it. So maybe short term $$$ wise it's good for merchants but long term not very good for a merchant concerned about their brand to get involved with something where consumers really don't like them popping advertising all over the place, IMO.
We can start somewhere and treat the symptoms in the meantime and work towards a cure. This is what doctors do.
By constantly focusing on adware programs like Gator and WhenU, the real perpetrator sets back and laughs.
The above poster is right. Your analogy is like claiming it is the fault of the home owner for leaving his/her door unlocked rather than the thief who comes through the door and steals the TV.
The above poster is right. Your analogy is like claiming it is the fault of the home owner for leaving his/her door unlocked rather than the thief who comes through the door and steals the TV
I would say a better analogy is having someone knock on your door with an agreement, and the text in that agreement gives them the RIGHT to walk in and take your TV. Pretty stupid of you to sign it without reading it, eh?
There are two distinct types of AdWare out there. I'm not defending anything that installs itself through sneaky methods that aren't disclosed - which I have NEVER SEEN and STILL no one on this board has sent me a link to one that does this, even after offering $20 through PayPal for every URL you can send me. That's not really what I'm talking about.
I AM defending legitimate AdWare that comes bundled with another application that you are installing voluntarily, and is FULLY DISCLOSED IN THE LICENSE AGREEMENT. If you're too lazy to read the license agreement, it just shows how dumb you are.
You can't just lump "all AdWare" together like that - there are legit programs out there that come bundled with software you want so the developer can make some money for himself WITHOUT CHARGING YOU. If you don't happen to "like" it, then don't install the software that comes with it. Read the friggin license agreement, I can't make this any more clear to you knuckleheads.
You notice they have to bundle it with applications or thru a driveby because if they knew what it did, they wouldn't download it. How many do you actually think go to the site and download it? I've never heard of anybody doing that. Yes, legally they download it since it's bundled and what it does is usually buried at the end of the EULA. So legally yes, probably not knowingly and the software makers take advantage of this because they know most don't read. And these things could say one thing then be changed up later, but that's buried in the EULA too, so i guess that's ok then.
[benedelman.org...]
These things also don't really uninstall do they? Even people who know their way around the computer have trouble installing some of this stuff and they plan it that way. They want to get this on people's computers anyway they can and make it as hard as possible to get rid of it.
I AM defending legitimate AdWare that comes bundled with another application that you are installing voluntarily, and is FULLY DISCLOSED IN THE LICENSE AGREEMENT. If you're too lazy to read the license agreement, it just shows how dumb you are.
First, I don't have that stuff on my computer.
Second, your example is nothing more than the difference between a con artist and a thief posted earlier in this thread.
Which one are you with?You notice they have to bundle it with applications or thru a driveby because if they knew what it did, they wouldn't download it. How many do you actually think go to the site and download it? I've never heard of anybody doing that.
Heh, how ignorant can you get? OF COURSE it's bundled with other applications, and OF COURSE it's not something you would download and install separately - that's the way it's designed!
Would you tune in to a T.V. station if they did nothing but show commercials? Of course not. You watch television because you enjoy the CONTENT - whatever show you happen to be enjoying - and the advertisers who sponsor that show pay the networks bills and allow you to enjoy the programs you like free of charge.
The AdWare I'm talking about works the same way. Programmers who develop software want to get paid for their work, so they bundle AdWare with the applications they design. You get to enjoy the program without paying for it and in exchange advertisements are shown to you. It's clearly disclosed, there is nothing sinister about it, I don't understand why you people can't separate the difference between THIS type of AdWare and the "evil" crap you're talking about with forced installs and difficult removals. I'm not defending those, they are totally separate. You can't just lump it all together.
I don't care for AdWare in any shape or form. When I read the license agreement and see that a piece of software wants to install Gator or something similar to it, I decline the agreement and either purchase the "ad free" version of the app, or see if an alternative program is available.
It's EXTREMELY unfair of you people to sit here and say that programmers should do all of their work for free. Most of the programs I'm referring to give you a choice, free version with ads or paid version with no ads. You, on the other hand, don't want to pay for software but ALSO don't want ads. Quit being so cheap, you can't have it both ways.
Second, your example is nothing more than the difference between a con artist and a thief posted earlier in this thread.
This couldn't be further from the truth. See above.
