New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
Or we could look at the total number of handy for the site small files added and see wow they do make a difference.
It's about consent (and being reasonably implied consent) and, closely related, about the "hidden to the user".
Of course the vast majority of users are dumb like turd piles (as are most of your customers, the guys running web sites) and ignorant, too.
But the bloated images can be seen and users consent to bloat and ad crap can be reasonably assumed to have been given. A hidden script that is not needed for the proper working of the site content, however, can not be assumed as having users consent.
And again: The way law works stealing is stealing, no matter how much. Btw. every district attorney worth his salt will present the fact that the script is intentionally hidden to the user as evidence of criminal intent.
If there is a notification somewhere it's not hidden to the user.
Where is there consent in a website displaying an ad to the user? I gave no consent to this forum to show me ads before opening the page and yet, I was monetized and tracked without prior knowledge and it stole bandwidth from me.
Again, you are stating conflicting arguments and looks like you just want to come out special.
Similarly, Google Analytics is stealing bandwidth from me all the time. I guess I should sue Google.
I am not happy with that either. But the thing is that, yes, we did consent (e.g. by coming again) and we know about the ad and stat crap.
It's understandable you're not happy about it, but you're not going on and on about how illegal it is for stealing bandwidth.
As for consent, that implies I am a returning visitor. When I visited LET for the first time a few years ago I had no idea what will open, So if I see a website doing a 2kb benchmark test I will see a notification in the footer for example and consent by returning. Sure, it's not perfectly fine and I'm not trying to say it is. It's not ideal, but it's still better or I guess very similar to what 99% of the websites do with Google Analytics and I don't see you causing drama over that.
I believe its no longer Thailand, those girls are expensive now. The cheaper ones a little bit more to the south.
lol
Please guys, stop using third-party scripts - they're bad an illegal.
Case closed.
Now.. @BunnySpeed - to fix it, just make it a script running locally on the users site, then it's ok :-D
There's a reason these consortiums exist...
http://optout.networkadvertising.org
There's a point beyond which discussion doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's obvious that the two sides will never agree. That's OK; both sides have laid out their view and ... oh well, not every fuck results in a pregnancy.
But let me try a last time - well noted, not to convince you that I am right and you are not, nope, but because I think you simply fail to see an important factor.
Just imagine for a moment that surfers are like girls and that - happily!! - we are in a pre sjw, snowflake situation. So, it's OK to fuck her iff she consented or if at least you have a good basis to assume she's consenting. But, kindly note, although in the good old times of reason she couldn't come 5 years later and "feel abused" and, bang, some insane modern "judge" put you behind bars, it's still about consent. Same thing here.
Now, buying her a drink, we both know that, doesn't happen because we guys want, oh so much, that she feels well; nope, we want her to go flat on her back. No problem, we still can say "your honour, we wanted her to feel well so we bought her plenty tequila and vodka and she seemed to like it" - the point being that she at least might have gotten some fun out of it. Now, however, you want me to believe you that she consented to have some blood sample taken? Nope. No fun in that. Plus, important point, you can not say "oh based on common sense and on common practice I had every reason to believe that she liked to have a syringe needle in her arm". So instead you argue that she has liters of blood and you took just 3 ml. Technically that is a valid proposition - but consent isn't about technicality, it's about an important legal point. Same here.
Oh, and: Unless your company is a many tens of billions $$ giant like google, nope you can't use their legal interpretation. Simple reason: Of fucking course google, fb, etc are acting criminally and shitting on laws - but they can afford it; fuck, if they need to, they can afford to have the congressmen in their pockets make new laws to their liking.
@BunnySpeed your view of consent is a bit skewed in my opinion. By browsing a website you are by way of status quo (valid legal precedent) you are granting permission for the site you are visiting to execute Javascript to the extent required to reasonably complete your request (navigation menus, animations, adds, tracking codes etc). I would say as long as permitted by the site owner/authorised representative as a form of income this would include a benchmark script or similar.
I'd probably recommend that if the site has a Privacy Policy note however and that @jimaek anonymize any data gathered (IP etc) and be upfront about any and all logging and data collected.
@jimaek Make sure if you are setting cookies (and probably local storage too) that you are asking for consent.
But that’s exactly my point. By visiting a website you in a way give permission and can expect the website to execute reasonable scripts. From my perspective a website using a script that would allow us to improve the speed of that same website and therefore the user experience is quite reasonable. I’m assuming all data would be completely anonymous and he would not be saving any kind of sensitive data. I also forgot to mention that I’m not talking about serving the script instead of ads on random websites. That does sound a bit sketchy indeed.
I said multiple times that I am aware of there’s potentially being a concern to the 0.00001% of users (just like other scripts that i keep mentioning) and that I would strongly suggest an explanation and notice on the site like in the footer or terms of service. What I’m trying to say is that it’s not as dramatic as bsdguy is making it to be. He just keeps going on and on about rape and gas and stealing blood god knows what with absurd analogies trying to prove a point that I’m perfectly aware of but is completely off from what I’m going at. All of his posts are just repeating the same thing ignoring everything else stated with a mentality of arguing for the sake of arguing. There are much worse things going on and nobody even blinks an eye. There’s so many examples of things that are much more sketchy and controversial when you think about it. Even google analytics sends back the website load time but that’s not stealing bandwidth is it? Because we load tens of kilobytes of data to first track the user and then send back a shit ton of analytics of data back. Yet we’re fine with it because we better understand why it’s for, which I think this is the main problem here. But anyway I’ve already said all of this, yet we’re still just repeating the same things.
So fine, let’s give big corps the ability to do whatever they want but let’s form angry mobs and sue people from a for serving a 2kb file and sending maybe a few simple metrics (I don’t know what he plans to do) but ignore all the third party tracking scripts that make hotmaps of your mouse and conversion tracking, tracking cookies and god knows what the big websites such as facebook are doing. I did not consent to my mouse being tracked on websites, but I’m sure it happened multiple times today without me ever knowing.
So for the last time, I never said it was fine, but what I’m trying to say is that in my opinion it’s relatively reasonable compared to some other things that go on so please stop trashing this topic. Yes google analytics is sketchy too and that doesn’t allow us to be sketchy as well, but if you’re not complaining about that, why complain about this to such an extent and wih such strong analogies. He asked a simple question and instead got a bunch of crap. And please don’t reply with more analogies.
This whole discussion is quite absurd to be honest.
Heh, existential conversation in thread request...
OP let us know what kind of price/volume you're already looking at. IIRC you can buy as low as $0.10 CPM for certain traffic (at least, non-bots) but I imagine it'd be more concentrated around certain geographical areas.
I think it boils down to what you're willing to pay but apparently youre not bothered if its bots... no doubt you're aware that you can buy traffic from compromised machines. That's one avenue depending on your perception of that (no life story required here about morality)
Alternatively look for a reasonably popular sponsored/free site like memtest.org that would have enough traffic and would entertain including the JS.
It totally depends on your budget, but getting essentially random untargeted traffic should be about $0.10/CPM.
Check out who's serving ads on torrent sites.
Yeah I know about cheap CPM, but it doesn't make sense to me because I don't have anywhere to send the users. And even if I created an empty page with just the js code running, it feels like a waste of visits.
Especially since I need millions of pageviews and not just a few thousands.
I think my best bet is big sites that can't monetize their content like funny images/memes, image hosting, torrent sites, adult content...
I will try to get in contact with them.
The newest sponsor of The Pirate Bay @jimaek