PDA

View Full Version : OT: Why direct linking is a really bad idea



Evan
11-09-2012, 04:49 PM
I was going through my server logs recently and found a number of sites that are directly linking to my content. This is otherwise known as "deep linking" or "hot linking". It is a very poor practice and consumes bandwidth for which someone else is paying. It is especially bad when the site doing the stealing is a commercial site such as this one.

http://ixian.ca/pics10/stealbw.png

You can find it here:

http://ebookbrowse.com/gdoc.php?id=298774670&url=5ca926f8feeb6a6bedc62ecb3b6d13dc

The content in question is a data sheet that explicitly allows non-commercial redistribution. It is in my datasheet archive here:

http://ixian.ca/gallery

I discovered that they have linked directly to a lot of my content so I wrote a short htaccess that cuts them (and others) off and replaces all access with the image above. I could be a lot less nice and get them in a lot of trouble. Think porn, for instance. In their case their system will display anything including an html page. That makes it trivial for me to write a page that would redirect to a child porn site. I would not be hosting the image or displaying it, only them.

What idiots.

Black_Moons
11-09-2012, 07:13 PM
lol nice.
I recall a great story about someone who had an image they put up hot linked in dozens of (facebook? myspace? some such thing) page layouts that where being sold by 3rd partys (Stolen from his page layout, image locations included)
He replaced the image with goatse and apparently goatse'd several thousand people.

Tony Ennis
11-09-2012, 08:09 PM
PSA - do not Google 'goatse'. If you do, be alone in the room.

Evan
11-09-2012, 08:36 PM
I have a few more images of varying degrees of, um... interest... Those go up if they continue for another week or so.

J Tiers
11-09-2012, 11:21 PM
The practice of hot-linking content from one site to use on another is silly, if for no other reason than the site may be rearranged, breaking the link. After that you start talking about bandwidth, etc.

What bugs me is folks who suggest something from a website, and provide a link........... which is nice, UNTIL you find that the link is simply to the home page of the site hosting what you were looking for......

Now, for some things that isn't really bad..... But if you want to give someone a link to a document in, say, the Eaton Cutler-Hammer site (which you know they will use in a short time), there is nearly no way the person will ever find what they wanted..... you almost HAVE to deep-link to give them a fighting chance. (In case you don't know, Eaton is a huge company, and almost any search will come up with 50 hits, usually more like 500).

Some sites set it up so you can NOT deep-link. Those are annoying for legitimate folks who want to point someone at the part they need, etc.

danlb
11-10-2012, 12:00 AM
I've never figured out what the big deal is.

If you want it private, put a password on it. If you make it public, the public will use it.

If you have restricted bandwidth on your web site, then you should not post large files there for public consumption. Use instead an account that provides more bandwidth off a server at an ISP or cloud provider. You then hotlink to your pictures from your web site.

It's not reasonable to think that you can post something with text on the page that restricts it's use. Among other things, most people do not read everything on every page that they look at, so chances are your restrictions will not be read.

I use the simple expedient of posting pictures at an ISP that includes a few hundred MB of storage as part of the $6 a month dial up and email account. They expect me to set up a web page, but I just hotlink to my pictures there.

Dan

Evan
11-10-2012, 01:46 AM
I've never figured out what the big deal is.

Simple. My server is limited to 50 simultaneous connections. I put much of the content on the server for display here, not for some unrelated commercial site to leech from my server instead of serving from their server. If they use up my connections it affects my intended usage for which I am paying. Also, the images on my server are copyright. They require permission to distribute. Further, there is also copyright content that belongs to others that I use with permission. They do not have permission.


If you make it public, the public will use it.

The site that is leeching is not "the public". The public is free to search for the content and copy it themselves.


If you have restricted bandwidth on your web site, then you should not post large files there for public consumption.

I have unlimited storage and unlimited data transfer but nobody has unlimited bandwidth. That is why the server is restricted to 50 users. It maintains quality of service.

Evan
11-10-2012, 02:05 AM
Some sites set it up so you can NOT deep-link. Those are annoying for legitimate folks who want to point someone at the part they need, etc.

It is a matter for the site admin and owners to decide. It is their business. In my case the information I have restricted can still be deep linked from this site in other posts. This site is allowed to deep link anywhere on my site. If it were not I wouldn't be able to post pictures. If anyone else has a legitimate reason to link to my sites all they need to do is contact me and I will allow their site to link in with appropriate attribution and permission.

danlb
11-10-2012, 03:59 AM
If you make it public, the public will use it.


The site that is leeching is not "the public". The public is free to search for the content and copy it themselves.



That is an interesting point of view. It is the public that is actually viewing the pictures, not some site. The sites don't download your pictures over and over. Some poor slob sitting at his computer is looking at them, and saying "wow, that's neat!" There is not much difference between that person and a participant of HSM.

But it's your choice to implement what you want to thwart those evil people who enjoy your work via some un-named commercial site while allowing the good guys doing the same thing via HSM to do exactly the same thing.

Dan

dp
11-10-2012, 04:04 AM
I was going through my server logs recently and found a number of sites that are directly linking to my content. This is otherwise known as "deep linking" or "hot linking".

It is been called leeching for as long as I can remember. And that is what it is. We've used redirects to substitute another photo when the referrer site is not the current site. Sometimes that can backfire and the substitute becomes the item of interest. I've most frequently redirected to a static image of Rush Limbaugh from his site. He gets the publicity that way, and all it costs me is a htaccess redirect. I've occasionally redirected to an "image" that is actually a perl cgi script that generates an endless loop gif file. It will run until the visitor moves away or their browser crashes.

If a leeched object goes viral on Facebook or other social chasm it can tank your server(s). After 911 at a large stock photo site I worked at we had several images that did just that, and we thought we had a bullet-proof server farm behind Akamai caching services.

J Tiers
11-10-2012, 10:15 AM
If anyone else has a legitimate reason to link to my sites all they need to do is contact me and I will allow their site to link in with appropriate attribution and permission.

For you, sure... you aren't selling anything, and don't post data/catalogs/etc to which someone might need a referral.

For a commercial entity, when folks may need to refer someone (a client, perhaps) to data about a product on the commercial entity's site, which the "someone" may need to buy/rent/whatever from them, it is stupid and suicidal on their part to restrict linking.

Doing so means that either one must sieze the image by some means (screen capture if nothing else), OR give detailed instructions to the client on how to navigate to the page within the site. Both are such a pain that I make it a practice to boycott offending sites, to avoid referring anyone to such companies, if there is any other choice at all.

Tony Ennis
11-10-2012, 10:31 AM
We've been around this roundhouse a few times. Evan's been very consistent on this topic. If I had images etc worth harvesting and I was concerned about IP or attribution, I'd probably 'shop the attribution directly into the image. There are a few different ways, some being hard to remove without spoiling the image.

goose
11-10-2012, 10:55 AM
Making a mountain out of a mole hill. It's gonna happen anyways, part and parcel of what the internet is, and bandwidth isn't that much of an issue unless yahoo.com is hotlinking your images to their home page. The copyright issue you've got a point, but again, what can you do.

needlenose
11-10-2012, 11:42 AM
...I'd probably 'shop the attribution directly into the image...

This is the most expedient way to protect images. It only take about 10 lines of php to watermark images on the fly; no need to even run the images through photoshop.

If you're using mod_rewrite to capture the referer and cup-and-ball the image with another, you're not saving bandwidth. Your still serving out content to the end user. At least issue a redirect back to the referer's root domain, thus serving out the least content possible. Or simply 404 the request.

RancherBill
11-10-2012, 12:30 PM
Evan

An idea occurred to me. Maybe you could put a 'redirect' on those images/content and redirect them to your free gig of Google storage. Then you would only take performance hit for a small amount of headers and not for the images.

dp
11-10-2012, 03:16 PM
Making a mountain out of a mole hill. It's gonna happen anyways, part and parcel of what the internet is, and bandwidth isn't that much of an issue unless yahoo.com is hotlinking your images to their home page. The copyright issue you've got a point, but again, what can you do.

If someone creates an avatar from even a small image and they use that on a big board (Facebook, slashdot, etc), then it becomes an expensive issue. Especially if it becomes used by others who like it and adopt it. My bandwidth is purchased. It is sold like electricity - if you go over your 95th% percentile allotment then that becomes your new base and you can hear your billing server go ka-ching.

I used to buy my bandwidth in un-metered (best effort) form and the avatar incident actually happened. My bandwidth went through the roof - I didn't get charged but my provider did and he went out of business because he couldn't afford the rate hike. That put me out of business, too. I had 24 hours to migrate two servers to another location and network/provider.

dp
11-10-2012, 03:23 PM
This is the most expedient way to protect images. It only take about 10 lines of php to watermark images on the fly; no need to even run the images through photoshop.

If you're using mod_rewrite to capture the referer and cup-and-ball the image with another, you're not saving bandwidth. Your still serving out content to the end user. At least issue a redirect back to the referer's root domain, thus serving out the least content possible. Or simply 404 the request.

In my case copyright is a small point. I can make the leech look bad by stalling page loads and by providing image redirects to unintended content. In this business you can be a victim or you can own the leeches.

Here's another issue - unless you're running a server farm, having a leeched image that's gone viral goes way beyond just bandwidth. You get 10,000 visitors/hour on your system and it is going to tank. As Evan has said, he can support only 50 concurrent connections. If 49 of those are leeched content you are not serving your preferred audience. You cannot ignore leeches.

danlb
11-10-2012, 03:49 PM
I've worked for several companies that tried the "Tiered Bandwidth" based on use. All were eventually bitten when an unforeseen event pushed their rates through the roof. In one case they were simply done in by a publicity campaign that generated the expected response, and increased their bill by 10 times. Another case was high res video conferencing that the IT guys installed and encouraged us to use. All of them eventually went back to unmeasured data lines or put traffic shapers in to manage the peaks.

I guess I'm one of the few who remember that web sites are generally 1) for public use and 2) best effort. If I don't want it seen, admired or linked to, then it does not end up on a web site. If I need 100% reliability, then I would create a client/server application with all that implies. The fact that every web server has a setting for max connections is a hint that it's not unlimited.

Dan

dp
11-10-2012, 03:59 PM
I guess I'm one of the few who remember that web sites are generally 1) for public use and 2) best effort. If I don't want it seen, admired or linked to, then it does not end up on a web site. If I need 100% reliability, then I would create a client/server application with all that implies. The fact that every web server has a setting for max connections is a hint that it's not unlimited.

Dan

Leeching is theft. It can't be rationalized away. In the case of an avatar the cost is not bandwidth but server capacity costs. The memory and startup time to launch and instantiate web servers is based on expected LEGITIMATE need. Leeching is cheaper to stop than support.

There is a real-life corollary that has emerged. People with electric/hybrid cars are leeching electricity by parking outside places after hours and getting a free recharge. I expect this to be a growing problem. That is another kind of theft.

danlb
11-10-2012, 04:01 PM
In my case copyright is a small point. I can make the leech look bad by stalling page loads and by providing image redirects to unintended content. In this business you can be a victim or you can own the leeches.

Here's another issue - unless you're running a server farm, having a leeched image that's gone viral goes way beyond just bandwidth. You get 10,000 visitors/hour on your system and it is going to tank. As Evan has said, he can support only 50 concurrent connections. If 49 of those are leeched content you are not serving your preferred audience. You cannot ignore leeches.

First, Going viral is not a common occurrence. It happens, but not often and not for very long, especially if it's crashing your server. :) Most personal sites are not really damaged by being overloaded in this way. Most businesses can handle the occasional overload too.

Second, the "leaches" that you are trying to "own" probably don't know and don't care that you have subverted the link. The person who innocently found the link via Google is the one that is being inconvenienced. They don't know why their PC is tied up with your endless loop script.

The BEST thing to do is to set up your script so that hotlinked images are watermarked with an advertisement for your services. That way the innocent user gets his image, you get the credit and you might get extra business too.

Dan

danlb
11-10-2012, 04:19 PM
There is a real-life corollary that has emerged. People with electric/hybrid cars are leeching electricity by parking outside places after hours and getting a free recharge. I expect this to be a growing problem. That is another kind of theft.

Let us apply the web concept to the example.

In the web, you either make a site public, or you lock it down with passwords, locations, referrers and such. If public, then you expect people to use it.

In the real world, you make a resource public, or you use a barrier of some sort to lock it down. The barrier may be a fence, a lock, a sign or even a property line. If you put a charging station at a public parking spot, you can expect it to be used. My outdoor outlets include a provision for locking the cover. Obviously blocking electricity theft is not a new thing. Neither is having a car towed for trespassing.

BTW, there is a government program that is paying for those charging stations, and they don't work unless you sign up for them and swipe a card.

The web is different than real life in that the user does not know what your intentions are and, in most cases, is unaware that you are involved. They can't see your keep out signs until they have already been there. You have the tool (htaccess) that will keep people from seeing an image or document when the referrer is from another site. It's easy to implement, so what's the big deal?

Dan

dp
11-10-2012, 04:43 PM
The web is different than real life in that the user does not know what your intentions are and, in most cases, is unaware that you are involved. They can't see your keep out signs until they have already been there. You have the tool (htaccess) that will keep people from seeing an image or document when the referrer is from another site. It's easy to implement, so what's the big deal?

Dan

Your earlier posts have indicated disagreement with managing leeches. It is easy to implement, now you know why it is done, and it has never been a big deal - just misunderstood by those not paying the bills. Sharing that knowledge was the point of the OP as suggested by the thread title.

What I've learned from this thread is some people blow off leeching and some don't. Some are passive, some are proactive. Some are invested in controlling it and some aren't. No surprise there. The world of ideas is a big tent.

Black_Moons
11-10-2012, 05:57 PM
Why on earth would anyone support leechs?
it takes all of 30 seconds to download any picture you want, save it and upload it to your OWN server. And then your site won't get broken when someone else changes and you won't be wasting/stealing someone elses bandwidth.

danlb
11-10-2012, 07:52 PM
Here's the basic problem;

a) If you provide a click-able link to someone's site, that site might get overloaded, as often happens when a company is mentioned in the news. This is sometimes known as "being slashdotted", named after an early tech oriented site that would include links in their reports about new technology. being mentioned in a Slashdot article would cause massive overload of servers meant to handle a few hundred requests per day. So you should not mention other sites.

b) If you copy their pictures or documents and store them on your site, you will be accused of stealing their intellectual property. This happens even when the person has used stock photos or if the credit is given to the original artist. I guess we should all be taking unique photos for our web photos, and make sure that there are no copyrighted material in the background while we are at it.

c) If you include a link in your HTML that points to someone else's pictures, you are accused of stealing their bandwidth, even if they have no bandwidth problems. In the early 90's hot-linking was considered a desirable thing to do, since a single cached image could be used on several sites and decrease bandwidth demands.

It starts to look like the only solution is to never mention anyone else's site on yours. No links to other sites.

I guess that to be fair, you should also use a web browser set to not follow links that go to sites other than the one that provided the HTML. That's fair, isn't it? If you object to leeches, should you not also take steps to ensure that you are not profiting from the practice?

For myself, I host web pages from my own servers on a DSL line, with graphics served from an ISP's systems. If people have to retry, so be it. :) When I'm on a forum and provide a link to a commercial product I hotlink, since that's really what a smart company would want. When I link to a private person's site I try to provide a click-able link to an anchor tag somewhere on their site. The assumption is that an anchor is meant to be clicked on.

yeah, dead horse. :)

Dan

Evan
11-10-2012, 08:27 PM
The sites don't download your pictures over and over.

This one does. They aren't serving it at all. They are serving a link to the site. As far as most people will know they are the aggregator of the info and I get no credit. That isn't acceptable. I may wish to monetize the site in the future. I could use the money, small as it may be.


If you copy their pictures or documents and store them on your site, you will be accused of stealing their intellectual property. This happens even when the person has used stock photos or if the credit is given to the original artist. I guess we should all be taking unique photos for our web photos, and make sure that there are no copyrighted material in the background while we are at it.

The vast majority of the data I serve is my property. Everything else on my sites is used with permission or is explicitly public domain, no exceptions.


It starts to look like the only solution is to never mention anyone else's site on yours. No links to other sites.

Ridiculous. That is not the issue. Mention my site all you like. That isn't related to hot linking at all.

Evan
11-10-2012, 08:30 PM
But it's your choice to implement what you want to thwart those evil people who enjoy your work via some un-named commercial site while allowing the good guys doing the same thing via HSM to do exactly the same thing.

Exact same thing??? Hardly. When I post something here it is clear who posted it and it is in context. There is no comparison at all.

Evan
11-10-2012, 08:41 PM
If I had images etc worth harvesting and I was concerned about IP or attribution, I'd probably 'shop the attribution directly into the image. There are a few different ways, some being hard to remove without spoiling the image.

I don't care about people using my images. I don't post images that I may want to use for other purposes where exclusivity matters or I wish to somehow sell. What I care about is the server load and correct attribution with appropriate context. If it matters at all I do stick my name in there and very occasionally a hidden watermark. If I really want to get fancy I can stega code data in the image.

If I find one of my images on somebody else's low traffic non commercial website I am unlikely to make any fuss unless it somehow violates my moral copyright. Moral copyright is a legal term.

Paul Alciatore
11-10-2012, 09:59 PM
First, .....<snip>.....
The BEST thing to do is to set up your script so that hotlinked images are watermarked with an advertisement for your services. That way the innocent user gets his image, you get the credit and you might get extra business too.

Dan

Or even better than that, watermark them with an advertisement that you can sell to others. Perhaps a border on the image. Make money directly off of it. The more hits, the more you can make.

Black_Moons
11-11-2012, 04:06 AM
I don't care about people using my images. I don't post images that I may want to use for other purposes where exclusivity matters or I wish to somehow sell. What I care about is the server load and correct attribution with appropriate context. If it matters at all I do stick my name in there and very occasionally a hidden watermark. If I really want to get fancy I can stega code data in the image.

If I find one of my images on somebody else's low traffic non commercial website I am unlikely to make any fuss unless it somehow violates my moral copyright. Moral copyright is a legal term.

Agreed, its pertty much accepted anything you put on the internet will be copied. You can't 'steal' it by downloading it... Hot linking however embeds the image into there webpage and they don't even pay for there OWN bandwidth, but do infact 'steal' it from you, every time someone views there webpage, They will likey never know where that image came from, or care.

The diffrence being people who copy it at least have the decency to pay for there own bandwidth for there own sites use, They don't inconviance you in the process by using up your bandwidth that you DO pay for.

See the diffrence? One costs you nothing, the other costs you money. Someone costing me money for there own gain is not acceptable in my book. If they can gain without costing me money they can go ahead.

Evan
11-11-2012, 06:03 AM
Make money directly off of it. The more hits, the more you can make.

That is not why I run my own server. It is to provide content to the visitors to this board. Leeching interferes with that purpose. It also interferes with the other web sites that I host and a couple of them are commercial. Leeching is stealing from me and my legitimate customers. For a long time I allowed it because it was never at an objectionable level but the site I posted above is leeching 22 different files from my site with the largest file being a little over 7 megabytes. They also pretend to be supplying the files themselves. Because of this I have been forced to disable all direct linking except for my whitelist. If anybody has a good reason to be on the whitelist just let me know.

There is also a con element on their site. If the link is broken they then offer a "sponsored link" to the file which doesn't download the file at all. Instead it downloads an exe which I haven't bothered to check out. It probably isn't harmless. The "content" may well be just bait and the exe is what they really want to deliver. They know that leeching will be discovered and the links will break. They deliver the preview content using Google cached content which also doesn't cost them anything. The site is highly suspicious.

They also still haven't noticed that my links are now broken. That means they either don't care, are totally incompetent or most likely, want it that way. The notice will change to something more objectionable in a few days.

Barrington
11-11-2012, 10:38 AM
They also still haven't noticed that my links are now broken.

Of the 21 files of yours I could see the only ones with broken links are:-

fundamentals of machine tools.pdf
I Electrons by Weston C Bye.pdf
us army machinist course lathe operations od1645 ww[1].pdf
Designing V T Amplifiers.pdf
SABIC Lexan Glazing.pdf
timing belt specs.pdf
Copper Plating.pdf

- the other 14 work just fine.

Also, on the broken links there is no image displayed, just the text of the html:-

<html>
<head>
<title>NO HOTLINKING</title>
<body bgcolor="#000000">
<center>
<br clear=all><br clear=all>
<br clear=all><br clear=all>
<img src="nh.png">
</center>
<br clear=all><br clear=all>
</body>
</html>


They deliver the preview content using Google cached content which also doesn't cost them anything.

The previews do use google doc 'gview' function, but the content isn't cached - it's pulled from your site, and just formatted by the gview.

Cheers

.

Evan
11-11-2012, 11:41 AM
The HTML is displayed correctly here on Chrome and IE8. It isn't coming from my cache either. What makes you think the the preview isn't cached? If the others seem to be working then they are cached at their end. Try loading that content by direct URL in your browser to see where it is coming from. Make sure your cache is empty. Also, Google is probably caching the image content since it is accessed frequently.

Barrington
11-11-2012, 01:48 PM
The HTML is displayed correctly here on Chrome and IE8. It isn't coming from my cache either. What makes you think the the preview isn't cached? If the others seem to be working then they are cached at their end. Try loading that content by direct URL in your browser to see where it is coming from. Make sure your cache is empty. Also, Google is probably caching the image content since it is accessed frequently.
Hmmm... I just get the text of the html on Chrome(22), IE8, and Firefox(15). (Produced by a Google java script 'do_pretty_print' which I assume is for the html syntax highlighting.)

I had emptied my cache, but tried it again just to make sure - no difference.

If I try to access the pdf directly on your site I do indeed get the 'stealing bandwidth' image so there must be caching somewhere.

At the first link you supplied in post#1:-
(http://ebookbrowse.com/gdoc.php?id=298774670&url=5ca926f8feeb6a6bedc62ecb3b6d13dc (http://ebookbrowse.com/gdoc.php?id=298774670&url=5ca926f8feeb6a6bedc62ecb3b6d13dc))

- I see the 'stealing bandwidth' image, but if I click on 'Go to PWM Generator SG3525.pdf' link above it:-
(http://ebookbrowse.com/pwm-generator-sg3525-pdf-d298774670 (http://ebookbrowse.com/pwm-generator-sg3525-pdf-d298774670))

- it takes me to a page where the pdf is displayed correctly - which makes it look like this pdf is cached on the ebook site.

The gview link to display page 1 of the pdf seems to be this:-
https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fixian.ca%2Fgallery%2Falbums %2Fdatasheetdriver%2FPWM_generator_SG3525.pdf&docid=c12157dc28779848de04ff05ed20930d&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=841 (https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fixian.ca%2Fgallery%2Falbums %2Fdatasheetdriver%2FPWM_generator_SG3525.pdf&docid=c12157dc28779848de04ff05ed20930d&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=841)

- But... remove the document id:-
https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fixian.ca%2Fgallery%2Falbums %2Fdatasheetdriver%2FPWM_generator_SG3525.pdf&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=841 (https://docs.google.com/gview?url=http%3A%2F%2Fixian.ca%2Fgallery%2Falbums %2Fdatasheetdriver%2FPWM_generator_SG3525.pdf&a=bi&pagenumber=1&w=841)

- and it still works, so the document id appears to be a bit redundant as regards accessing the cache...

(The 'Put this preview on your site' code uses no doc id and also works.)

My mistake - I thought gview didn't cache because I tried the ebook site code supplied for previews patched to point to various file types on my own site. That worked, but immediately after I removed each file the preview changed to:-

"Sorry, we were unable to find the document at the original source. Verify that the document still exists. You can also try to download the original document by clicking here."

- So Google didn't cache any of those automatically, so maybe the ebook site is saving them explicitly as 'Google Docs' hence the id...who knows???

Cheers

.

Evan
11-11-2012, 01:58 PM
What you are seeing is the preview page. It IS showing the HTML code because the Google cache has expired. If you then try the download link at top left it goes to the download page and it shows you the actual picture. They don't have any monitoring running it seems. I still think the site is suspicious but I don't feel like wasting time to examine the exe they are offering.

Google usually caches everything for a limited amount of time. That time limit depends on how often it is accessed. The more popular sites are pre-cached by Google on a regular basis. That is a bone of contention with a lot of admins because of the extra server load that Google applies.

Evan
11-11-2012, 02:31 PM
I found out how the e-browse site is making money. They are using a service at http://www.addthis.com/ to build an advertising database which is characterised by the type of content that people download tied to their IP address. I have software that sniffs all packets and all objects that are downloaded when I visit any web page. It captures them and saves them in a separate folder. That way I can see exactly what is happening on any particular site.

dp
11-11-2012, 04:39 PM
I found out how the e-browse site is making money.

They probably also use third-party cookies or cookie sharing via google or other megasnoop. That allows tracking regardless of the connecting IP. It gets to your specific browser, smart phones, included, that change IP's and other identifiers as they move from cell to cell. That is how it is that you can go into a big store and a clerk will greet you by name, as they've just seen your picture on some social site and tracked you to the store.

Black_Moons
11-11-2012, 04:40 PM
"More hits make you more money!"
No, Not when its just to an image. Also not everyone wants to advertise on there website. Some old, outdated people like myself believe a website should contain information and not advertising, if you wish to make money off said website, Sell a service or product. Don't sell out your visitors.
Or ask for direct donations. But don't subject vistors to potentialy malware infested, full motion with sound, flashing advertising that is targeted to whatever bull profile of you they have built up through all there other tracking scams.
(Then claim its not your fault when YOUR website infects people, after all, your only getting paid to put embeded ads* How could that be your fault? you only put the ads there, you didn't select them to be malware. Its not like you could of checked to see how often this happens with the company before using them, Cough. cough.)

* to insecure 3rd party websites that get paid to disaply ads and not fined when they infected people and hence have no motivation to screen ads as that would eat into profits.

vincemulhollon
11-12-2012, 01:25 PM
I recall a great story about someone... He replaced the image with goatse and apparently goatse'd several thousand people.

Jason Scott the documentary film director. Runs textfiles.com, works at archive.org, created "The BBS documentary" etc. Tells the story on a fairly regular basis. And it was myspace and a "grim reaper" pic being used as a background image. The funny part is his description of people's reactions.

I like his documentary films and his speeches at computer conferences are always entertaining. I'm sure someone with more motivation than I could find a video of him telling his story on youtube or maybe archive.org (which is where he works). He's the only film director I know whom I'm a fan of, can you tell?

Here's the question of the day... Why do computer conferences always seem to devolve into 2 to 5 tracks of speech / presentation / roundtables but to the best of my knowledge machinist shows don't do that, or at least not to the extent that computer cons do?

I think a "machinist con" of a couple tracks of demos / speech / presentations / roundtables would be pretty interesting and educational.

Having not been able to afford a machinist show, and only seeing pics, maybe you guys do this and keep it a secret I donno. I could only afford the HOPE conference (computer stuff in NYC) one time in the 00s and it was a blast but really expensive (like 4 figures for me to attend). I'm completely uninterested in the stories about how its possible to do a con for $1.25 if you hitchhike to/from NYC, catch and eat raw pigeon in an alley, and sleep in central park under some newspapers, if you wanna do it "civilized" it ends up being a grand or so as an outta towner.

+ or - Zero
11-12-2012, 07:22 PM
Jason Scott the documentary film director. Runs textfiles.com, works at archive.org, created "The BBS documentary" etc. Tells the story on a fairly regular basis. And it was myspace and a "grim reaper" pic being used as a background image. The funny part is his description of people's reactions.

I like his documentary films and his speeches at computer conferences are always entertaining. I'm sure someone with more motivation than I could find a video of him telling his story on youtube or maybe archive.org (which is where he works). He's the only film director I know whom I'm a fan of, can you tell?

Here's the question of the day... Why do computer conferences always seem to devolve into 2 to 5 tracks of speech / presentation / roundtables but to the best of my knowledge machinist shows don't do that, or at least not to the extent that computer cons do?

I think a "machinist con" of a couple tracks of demos / speech / presentations / roundtables would be pretty interesting and educational.

Having not been able to afford a machinist show, and only seeing pics, maybe you guys do this and keep it a secret I donno. I could only afford the HOPE conference (computer stuff in NYC) one time in the 00s and it was a blast but really expensive (like 4 figures for me to attend). I'm completely uninterested in the stories about how its possible to do a con for $1.25 if you hitchhike to/from NYC, catch and eat raw pigeon in an alley, and sleep in central park under some newspapers, if you wanna do it "civilized" it ends up being a grand or so as an outta towner.

I love your idea of a "machinist con", it would be fun.

I manage to make DEFCON, BH, and B-sides every year, but I don't live far away and get comped a lot of stuff, and spend most of my time couch surfing anyway (the presentations/demos are cool but often the interesting hacks and things are in the semi private or private rooms).

So part of the fun of a "machinist con" would be watching all that heavy machinery being lugged from conference room to conference room (often from hotel to hotel) and the "Wow!" factor for seeing a couple of lathes and a mill or two on the carpet in a private room at one of the big (or even smaller) hotels would be priceless. Would really be an over the top event compared to some laptops and a few lock picks...

And think of the swag you might get!

Now all we need is a multimillionaire to fund the thing and we're gold.

Seriously, I do think a "machinist con" would be great, even in the rational sense you meant it (but I can't get the picture of a hotel room filled with machines outta my head now).

danlb
11-12-2012, 07:47 PM
First: Apologies for being off topic.

Conventions often have a lot of heavy machinery involved. I've been to half a dozen as a participant, and it is wonderful to watch all the behind the scenes activity. Even the annual National Association of Broadcasters shows a lot of impressive equipment used to capture, process and broadcast television content. The battery convention I attended had huge booths filled with automated manufacturing equipment.

On a smaller scale, the Makers Fair in SF had a whole building filled with equipment from a local Tech Shop (time shared shop equipment and work space). They had 3D printers and CNC hardware running in several areas.

I always feel bad about all the swag I collect from conventions that I attend as an individual. I still collect it, but I try not to be greedy. I'm often encouraged to take stuff anyway, since the common feeling is "If you don't take it, I have to haul it back with me.".

A home shop machinist convention would be fun. The expos I've been to have been fairly small but still quite entertaining.

Dan

Black_Moons
11-12-2012, 08:05 PM
Heres an idea for a machinist convention.
We start off with 40' of 1" rebar that will fit through the bore of a lathe. Then we all take turns trying to get a good finish on it. Hahahah...

+ or - Zero
11-12-2012, 08:27 PM
First: Apologies for being off topic.


I wonder, does one really need to apologetic for being OT in an OT thread?

Well probably, but sometimes I think when a thread has begun to fork into pretty opposed and not likely to change positions, a bit of sideways movement might be desireable, and not so much to be apologized for... of course we could now fork that idea into a whole new area of dispute --try and laugh at that, OK? :)



Conventions often have a lot of heavy machinery involved. I've been to half a dozen as a participant, and it is wonderful to watch all the behind the scenes activity. Even the annual National Association of Broadcasters shows a lot of impressive equipment used to capture, process and broadcast television content. The battery convention I attended had huge booths filled with automated manufacturing equipment.

On a smaller scale, the Makers Fair in SF had a whole building filled with equipment from a local Tech Shop (time shared shop equipment and work space). They had 3D printers and CNC hardware running in several areas.


Yes they do, which is why they don't move the the stuff around much (everything big is located in one place for the duration, pretty much. Art cars at Burning Man being a noteworthy exception) --computer conventions often move the whole demo/presentation through the lobby and into a taxi to the next location every hour or two.

I just find the notion of someone putting their lathe under their arm and walking through the lobby of a hotel funny. But it also sorta shows why a "computer con" evolves (or devolves) in ways that a "machinist con" wouldn't/couldn't (which might be a good thing).



I always feel bad about all the swag I collect from conventions that I attend as an individual. I still collect it, but I try not to be greedy. I'm often encouraged to take stuff anyway, since the common feeling is "If you don't take it, I have to haul it back with me.".


I never feel that way, mostly because I then give it to people that couldn't be there and they usually value it much higher then I do --I had the pleasure of being there, they just get it second hand, so I try to improve their second hand experience with the swag I scored for them.



A home shop machinist convention would be fun. The expos I've been to have been fairly small but still quite entertaining.

Dan

I really agree with that.

+ or - Zero
11-12-2012, 08:45 PM
Heres an idea for a machinist convention.
We start off with 40' of 1" rebar that will fit through the bore of a lathe. Then we all take turns trying to get a good finish on it. Hahahah...

It's a great idea, but the cool factor would be the spider that keeps that 30+ foot of rebar hanging out the back from beating everyone to death. Oh wait, you meant...

Evan
11-13-2012, 02:15 AM
I went to the very first computer convention in SF back in the late 70s. I happened to be down there on other business so took a day to attend. I'm talking about the latest equipment being a Sol-20 running the text game Hammurabi and 8" disk drives with 10 meg of storage for $3500. CP/M was the latest OS not to mention the first for small computers. That was half a lifetime ago.

achtanelion
11-14-2012, 09:35 AM
Sorry to go back on topic guys.

You might want to check your .htaccess Evan. I was googling around and came upon this thread: http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/archive/index.php/t-44077.html which has a link in your own post to http://ixian.ca/pics6/cermet2000.jpg which is getting caught in your .htaccess.

Thanks;

J

+ or - Zero
11-14-2012, 09:49 AM
Sorry to go back on topic guys.

- - - snip - -

Thanks;

J

Pure Gold.

Evan
11-14-2012, 01:51 PM
You might want to check your .htaccess Evan. I was googling around and came upon this thread: http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/arc...p/t-44077.html which has a link in your own post to http://ixian.ca/pics6/cermet2000.jpg which is getting caught in your .htaccess.


Not if you access from here which is all that is permitted. If you copy the link into the address bar then it will be caught. The referrer must be bbb.homeshopmachinist.net

Note: I will be changing that in the future so that using the address bar will work. For now I am limiting all access to this forum and no other way. I want to see exactly how many hits come from the forum directly.

achtanelion
11-14-2012, 05:38 PM
Not if you access from here which is all that is permitted. If you copy the link into the address bar then it will be caught. The referrer must be bbb.homeshopmachinist.net

Note: I will be changing that in the future so that using the address bar will work. For now I am limiting all access to this forum and no other way. I want to see exactly how many hits come from the forum directly.

Ahhh... that makes sense. Thanks.

Back to your regularly scheduled interruption folks! ;-)

J

loose nut
11-15-2012, 07:38 PM
Seriously, I do think a "machinist con" would be great,

Isn't that what Cabin Fever, names are basically. Wouldn't take to much to up the game a bit to get to the Con level.

+ or - Zero
11-16-2012, 12:29 AM
Isn't that what Cabin Fever, names are basically. Wouldn't take to much to up the game a bit to get to the Con level.

Yep, now if they just could do stuff like that out here on the west coast (they could but I suspect the pop density, or lack of it) plays into the issue. We do have some stuff here but it's usually to far away for me to get to (and there isn't any exact equlivent to Cabin Fever that I know of --but I could be wrong about that). :(

And if it's not in Las Vegas then it's hundreds of miles one way to anyplace of any size, for me (and Vegas isn't all that close to me). And that would be pretty much true of any city on the west coast --hundreds of miles from one to the other large city (San Diego and Los Angeles area being more east coast like, as they are almost one city --in terms of proximity, and with a bunch of small cities clustered around and between them).

You probably knew that, but I'm always surprised just how hard it is to get through to some people who don't live in the US or have not traveled here (at least fairly extensively) just how big this country is (physical size).

I'm even more surprised at the ones that do live here and still haven't a clue (I once had a devil of an argument with a auto club dispatcher in Florida, I was in the Mohave desert in CA, that yes there was a place that the nearest place she could dispatch a tow truck from was close to 100 miles away from where I was --just a few miles off an interstate freeway, yet and no less).

There are some good size trade shows in Las Vegas, but none that I know of that are Machinist centric. Maybe someday --or maybe someone will jump in here and point out some show I don't know about. That would be really neat. :)

danlb
11-16-2012, 01:01 PM
I have met people who have traveled from all over the US to get to Las Vegas for conventions. I know of many that drive for 9 hours or more to get to a comics convention. The US is a big place, but it's still navigable.

Little Machine Shop goes to a lot of conventions. They might be able to to tell you what is up in your area.


Dan

+ or - Zero
11-16-2012, 01:53 PM
I have met people who have traveled from all over the US to get to Las Vegas for conventions. I know of many that drive for 9 hours or more to get to a comics convention. The US is a big place, but it's still navigable.

Little Machine Shop goes to a lot of conventions. They might be able to to tell you what is up in your area.


Dan

Yes, I agree with you about it being navigable, and no doubt many people are willing to drive even more then 9 hours to go to a place they want to go.

The question is, I think, of a given population that would have to drive (go to a considerable expense), what percentage would do so? If there are not lots of much closer (less expense to go there) people to 'fill the tent' so to speak, would the event be able to actually pay it's way?

And that's the problem I was trying to point out --on a comparative scale lots of sparsely populated country out this way --that's just in comparison to the east coast, and especially the upper north east states.

True San Francisco or LA or any large city may well have enough people to 'fill the tent' and make an event profitable enough, but the percentage of people that come from some distance away will fall with distance. That is also true on the east coast, or anywhere, but the more sparsely populated the area is the fewer people that percentage will represent.

Even the circus and carnivals must break into smaller units to be able to draw enough people to make showing up in the smaller towns profitable --they just can not count on any real 'draw' from the rural areas, even if every last person in that area showed up for the event (and given I'm talking about local fairs here, about everyone that can get there does).

So the thing is that they can have the worlds best 'Con' anywhere, but if I can't get to it then for me it might as well not exist (not quite that bad but you see the point). Just like I'm not going to be going to eat or see a show on the strip, even though 'comparatively' close to me because the cost exceeds the value for me.

Of course there are always some people with the money and time to go any distance or overcome any obstacle to go do something they want to do --but the percentage of those people just isn't a large portion of the population, so us merely average folks, unless we live someplace fairly close to the event, won't be helping fill the tent.

loose nut
11-16-2012, 07:46 PM
The New England states have a larger amount of Model Engineers, Live Steamers, HSM'ers or what ever you want to be called then the rest of the US, mostly because they have been doing it longer.The cities are closer together so a large show is feasible. LA or Frisco should be big enough to put on a con. Why not Vegas? It is frequently possible to get really cheap air fair to there and special rates for conventions at some of the hotels. They know many that come for the show will stay to loose the house and car at the tables.

danlb
11-16-2012, 08:26 PM
The New England states tend to have more hobbyists simply because there are months at a time that people stay inside .

In sunny California we are too busy driving around to actually participate in hobbies. :)

There is a yearly show in Sacramento. I can't remember the name. Anyone know?

Dan

Evan
11-16-2012, 10:21 PM
It better be a good show because there is no other reason to go to Sacramento. Like most state capitol cities it is pretty much a dump. At least, it used to be. I have no reason to suspect it has changed since it is powered by politics...

+ or - Zero
11-16-2012, 10:34 PM
The New England states have a larger amount of Model Engineers, Live Steamers, HSM'ers or what ever you want to be called then the rest of the US, mostly because they have been doing it longer.The cities are closer together so a large show is feasible. LA or Frisco should be big enough to put on a con. Why not Vegas? It is frequently possible to get really cheap air fair to there and special rates for conventions at some of the hotels. They know many that come for the show will stay to loose the house and car at the tables.

True, they could put on a show in Vegas --the question is who would "they" be? I suspect that the convention people in Vegas have drug that cart passed everyone imaginable --it's a big industry in Vegas. I have a friend that does nothing but try to get conventions for one of the larger venues in Vegas, it's her full time job, and she's just one of hundreds, maybe thousands of people trying to get business for the venue they work for.

So I can't tell you why there isn't a machinist con in Vegas, I do wish there was --now there are trade shows, big ones, that show some sorta related stuff, and I think there are some places that sell new lathes/mills etc. in Vegas. But a 'machinist con', well not that I know of.

Maybe you could talk the idea up at the next Cabin Fever or similar show you go to and see what they say about the idea. One of the problems with Vegas is that there are no small surrounding towns to the same degree as in the north east, for example. --just Vegas, North Vegas, Henderson and not much else for anywhere in a two hundred or more mile (radius) circle around the Vegas area. And even then you don't start finding any large population centers for quite a long ways further, except the Los Angeles/San Diego area and so the con might as well be held in the LA area (bigger base to start with).

And I don't want any more lost houses or cars --gambling is a fools game. Of course I'll admit there seems to be an endless supply of fools...

(they don't build all those mega big destination casinos because they loose money)

+ or - Zero
11-16-2012, 10:44 PM
It better be a good show because there is no other reason to go to Sacramento. Like most state capitol cities it is pretty much a dump. At least, it used to be. I have no reason to suspect it has changed since it is powered by politics...

If Chicago is the arm pit of America, then Stockton is the crotch.

I wish I could remember who to attribute that quote to --it's really an old quote.

Stockton has it's roots in cattle I think (hence the name), and if you've ever been near an old style feed lot the quote becomes self evident. I think the stock yards are long gone --or moved far away, but there still isn't much to draw one to the area that I know of.

Still, stock yards or no, there is a lot of bull floating around there --as you pointed out.

Evan
11-16-2012, 11:22 PM
Been to all of them and many more including Lodi as per Creedence Clearwater Revival that began next door to Berkeley in Albany. I ran into many of the people in the bands from that time as I worked volunteer at KPFA on an occasional basis. Creedence, Country Joe (MacDonald) and the Fish, guitarist John Fahey and others. Berkeley was a very interesting place to grow up in. One time I hitched across the US to New York City in five days flat just before Christmas just to visit a girlfriend. Got a job as an IBM 360-30 computer assistant operator and stayed for a few months then flew back to Berkeley.

Rambling, must be getting old.

J Tiers
11-16-2012, 11:24 PM
The problem with a convention in Vegas is that you have to go to Vegas....

it's a schlep, and expensive for non-business travelers. I've been there several times, starting in 1972, and the one time I went with a college room-mate whose father knew people who worked the light booths for a lot of the shows was the most fun. The others were (when not on the convention floor) basically an exercise in not getting "took" too badly when it came to dinner and so forth. (I'm not a gambler... no interest)

+ or - Zero
11-16-2012, 11:56 PM
The problem with a convention in Vegas is that you have to go to Vegas....


My hat is off to your ability to be concise and on point.




it's a schlep, and expensive for non-business travelers. I've been there several times, starting in 1972, and the one time I went with a college room-mate whose father knew people who worked the light booths for a lot of the shows was the most fun. The others were (when not on the convention floor) basically an exercise in not getting "took" too badly when it came to dinner and so forth. (I'm not a gambler... no interest)

I don't care much for Vegas --I spend a lot of time in, and own property in, Nevada --but it's in rural Nevada. The rural counties might as well be in a separate state from Reno and Vegas, in so far as attitude and life style. Unfortunately for us we are not, and as Vegas goes, so goes the state --they have all the population, by far. But we fight every inch of the way, and on occasion win... at least a small battle here and there.

danlb
11-17-2012, 12:38 AM
I heard that Stockton was not the worst. Bakersfield gets that distinction.

I think the quote I liked best was "If the earth ever needed an enema, Bakersfield is where it would go."

Next best was "If I die I know I'm going to heaven, since I've already been to Bakersfield.

Dan

dp
11-17-2012, 12:57 AM
If Chicago is the arm pit of America, then Stockton is the crotch.

And they recently files for bankruptcy. It is a very old city that time, paved highways, and changing markets have left behind.