This would really irritate me if I ever encountered it:
Apple patents technology that requires users to interect with ads
Its distinctive feature is a design that doesn’t simply invite a user to pay attention to an ad — it also compels attention. The technology can freeze the device until the user clicks a button or answers a test question to demonstrate that he or she has dutifully noticed the commercial message. Because this technology would be embedded in the innermost core of the device, the ads could appear on the screen at any time, no matter what one is doing.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”
kramer wrote:This would really irritate me if I ever encountered it:
Apple patents technology that requires users to interect with ads
Just reading this article has made me mad...
The NYT app for the iphone has a new 'feature' that covers an article to load an ad. There is a button in the corner to 'skip this ad'. It is scary to think that this sort of technology will be considered acceptable in the future. I will avoid its use for as long as possible. I'm sure many others will embrace it as the 'cost' of free or discounted stuff.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former”
– Albert Einstein
Government - If you think the problems we create are bad, jut wait until you see our solutions.
Logic.in.LN wrote:
The NYT app for the iphone has a new 'feature' that covers an article to load an ad. There is a button in the corner to 'skip this ad'. It is scary to think that this sort of technology will be considered acceptable in the future. I will avoid its use for as long as possible. I'm sure many others will embrace it as the 'cost' of free or discounted stuff.
Yeah, I come across these types of ads every week. It's not too much of a bother to find the "skip" button and click it unless the button is very tiny.
But, if I going to be quizzed to make sure I've read an ad or else my computer (or whatever) will be frozen? No effing way! This is wrong. And this is war.
“We should have been warned by the CFC/ozone affair because the corruption of science in that was so bad that something like 80% of the measurements being made during that time were either faked, or incompetently done.”
Logic.in.LN wrote:
The NYT app for the iphone has a new 'feature' that covers an article to load an ad. There is a button in the corner to 'skip this ad'. It is scary to think that this sort of technology will be considered acceptable in the future. I will avoid its use for as long as possible. I'm sure many others will embrace it as the 'cost' of free or discounted stuff.
kramer wrote:Yeah, I come across these types of ads every week. It's not too much of a bother to find the "skip" button and click it unless the button is very tiny.
But, if I going to be quizzed to make sure I've read an ad or else my computer (or whatever) will be frozen? No effing way! This is wrong. And this is war.
Just a thought, but you might want to email Apple and tell them how you feel. If enough Apple customers did the same thing it might stop it cold.
Who in their right mind uses a welcome sign to mean people who would come into their home uninvited, paid by their neighbors who are using their illegal labor, overrun the neighborhood, and refuse to leave?
And now they want to make even more money by forcing people to click these ads? Don't they get enough from the sales of their devices? Anyways, I understand its business, and a pretty slick move to be honest. It's just our experience will suffer a little. Not a big deal though.
Apple creates patents for all sorts of things that never make it to market. Sometimes they do it so that if anyone else wants to create something similar, they have to buy it from Apple.
In this case I'm guessing that they may be thinking of offering an iPad "with special offers" like the Kindle (or the early eMachines "internet" PC). They have to find a way to compete at a lower price point and that may just be the way. Advertisers would subsidise the cost for consumers, but only if the advertisers could somehow be assured that their ad would be seen.
Thousands of tired, nerve-shaken, over-civilized people are beginning to find out that going to the mountain is going home; that wildness is necessity;John Muir http://www.quotesdaddy.com
kramer wrote:
Yeah, I come across these types of ads every week. It's not too much of a bother to find the "skip" button and click it unless the button is very tiny.
But, if I going to be quizzed to make sure I've read an ad or else my computer (or whatever) will be frozen? No effing way! This is wrong. And this is war.
You guys ought to get to work developing an app that allows ME to right-click an add and send a mesasge back to the organization in the ad.
They start getting a taste of their own medicine (unwanted intrusion), they might do something about it.
No offense but why is everyone mad about this? They're still trying to find ways to monetize the internet effectively.
I mean you don't get mad when movie previews come up do you? I understand answering the question is a pain, but I doubt it's any brainbusters. It would probably be like what does this device do, or how much is it?
In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 15 minutes) Most users ever online was 1865 on Fri Oct 30, 2020 3:05 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
