 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
2006-03-20, 07:18 PM
|
#1 | |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
Quote:
It's why I said we needed a point man in the first place, to go to meetings and report back to us what the inner workings and discussions about finances were. Direct information rather than the massaged information usually given to members and outsiders. I've been studying the question a bit, it looks like most organizations like this have about a 30% overhead. It can probably be done for less, but not all that much less. |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-21, 08:49 AM
|
#2 | |
|
The Original Greenguy (Est'd 1996) & AVN HOF Member - I Crop Pics For Thumbs In My Sleep
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Blasdell, NY (shithole suburb south of Buffalo)
Posts: 41,929
 |
Quote:
http://web.archive.org/web/199801280...nk-o-rama.com/ (ugh - what was I thinking - LOL) Maybe try to think of it this way - if a local adult store had ads in the windows depicting hardcore sex & the door was open & there were no signs posted that it was an adults only store, would that fly? |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-20, 09:57 PM
|
#3 |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Not that Greenguy needs to justify his positions on warning pages, but here is some petty good reading for those that do not get xbiz. http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=13995
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 12:11 PM
|
#4 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
 |
Chop, that is one of the difficulties in all of this. The US senators do not realize that when it comes to the internet, they are but the tail attempting to wag the dog. They can apply certain means to force the issue, but at the end of the day, free porn will move offshore, membership porn will remain in the US, and nothing will have changed except who is cashing the checks.
They are still thinking in terms of magazines sold in stores. They don't realize that it is as easy (and really transparent) for an end user to get free porn from where ever it comes from. It doesn't become a longer wlak to the store or perhaps having to drive over state lines, but rather a click of the mouse that gets the same result, albeit from a different source. One of the reasons they are split on the .XXX thing for sure is I think many lawmakers are worried about creating any legitimacy for porn at all. It is the same reason none of them are running out to tax porn. Anything like that would mean they would have to accept porn as real and legal. That isn't in the cards. I think the next couple of years are going to be filled mostly with unenforcable laws, court challenges, constitutional challenges, and election year grand standing. Remember too, that the numbers typically don't lie. Even conservatives know that a large majority of americans have viewed one or more porn movies, and a good percentage surf, view, or rent adult material. While many people are too shy to admit it, taking their candy away from them would piss them off come voting time. Conservatives know this, and as a result, rather than attacking porn head on, they are trying the end run "zoning law" style attempts to put the hurt on the industry. It is funny as hell to watch them go at it. Alex |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 01:52 PM
|
#5 |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Damn lawyers! Wonder what would happen if a broken down old cpa and a few webmasters did one for free?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 05:51 PM
|
#6 |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
That's a concept Chop, I suggested something like that when that lawyer first published on his 'patent pending' system.
At the time I think I was thinking about using a form button with a radio check spot (or whatever it is that those form do-hickeys are called) as the way to get into a free site, so the person has to check a button saying they read the rules and agreed to them before they could enter. the problem with that is that linklists wouldn't currently accept that type of entry. However, planning it out so that we were ready to use it the day after the verification crackdown happened might be smart. |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 06:08 PM
|
#7 |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Bill, I missed the patent pending deal. Can you point me to it?
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 06:36 PM
|
#8 |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
I'll have to hunt it down Chop, and I'm not even sure where to start - but my memory of it was that this one fairly well known adult lawyer type said he had invented a javascript tool that worked as a legally viable age verification, and that he had submitted it for a patent, thus I called it "patent pending".
The tool required that a visitor enter his birthdate into a field before entry was allowed. The logic was that the birthdate was part of the current legal method of establishing identity (name and date of birth), and therefore was an acceptable way to anonymously collect a unique agreement to be bound by the rules for entry. If he was sucessful at getting a patent, that should mean no-one can use an age verification scheme that uses a bithdate identifier without paying him a fee. So, I was playing with ideas that didn't rely on that patent's concept. I'll look thru my bookmarks and see if I have it somewhere. |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 07:08 PM
|
#9 |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
Okay, I haven't found the original article in which he claimed to have filed a patent application (according to my memory of the article), but this is the tool thingy.
It was Larry Walters, and here's the link to his demo website, which looks exactly the same as the first time i saw it: http://www.birthdateverifier.com/details.html |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 07:14 PM
|
#10 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Javascript? There is a nice 1997 idea.
I wonder if Budweiser and other beer companies know about this product. Alex Last edited by RawAlex; 2006-03-30 at 07:19 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 07:20 PM
|
#11 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 06:34 AM
|
#12 | |
|
That which does not kill us, will try, try again.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conch Republic
Posts: 5,150
 |
Quote:
I see this at the top of their index page in Safari and in Firefox: =0)document.write(unescape('%3C')+'\!-'+'-') //--> <!------------------------------------------------------> The real problem is shown in the screenshot below, which shows Budeweiser's entry page with no way to enter for Mac users surfing with Safari, the standard browser on the Mac platform. Not just nowhere to enter or choose a birthdate, but absolutely not one clickable thing on the entire page. I see this all the time with sites that aren't careful about making sure their Javascript works in all browsers on all platforms, and that don't 'sniff' for browsers they don't support so they can supply an alternate way to enter. If it's important, I may keep switching browsers until I find one I can use to enter (like Firefox in this case). But sometime it's just "off to the next site" rather that trying to use a site that many have more problems for me just waiting inside. Mac users are a small segment of total Internet users, that's true. But it's just sloppy coding to completely lock your front door so someone can't get in at all. Simon P.S. Yeah, I'm letting them know.
__________________
"If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka Last edited by Simon; 2006-03-31 at 06:37 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 07:14 AM
|
#13 | |
|
If you don’t take a chance the Angels won’t dance
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Earth on occasion
Posts: 8,812
|
Quote:
 |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 07:38 AM
|
#14 | |
|
That which does not kill us, will try, try again.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conch Republic
Posts: 5,150
|
Quote:
There aren't that many of us, true, but I don't think I know one without a credit card, or a healthy pre-disposition to spend more money than they probably should on things they think are cool. The trick is just to make them think your porn is cool.  But you know that already. 
__________________
"If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 08:00 AM
|
#15 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
Your comments do make me wonder why Apple doesn't fix that problem |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 08:28 PM
|
#16 |
|
Oh no, I'm sweating like Roger Ebert
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,773
|
I'll be damned the dude really does have a patent (# 6,959,861) for having someone enter their birthdate, calculating against todays date, entering a name (digitally signing) and storing that information along with the IP address.
Budweiser must be getting around the patent issue since you don't digitally sign for their age verification. And this is somehow better than a warning page? |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 09:27 PM
|
#17 | |
|
Lonewolf Internet Sales
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,826
|
Quote:
Higher CYA yes, but at quite a price. It's search engine suicide, since spiders will only be able to see the entry page. |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-30, 11:59 PM
|
#18 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Walrus, probably the reverse - bud has had that on their site for as long as I can remember (more than 5 years I am sure). Me thinks that not everything that has a patent pending is in fact, well, original.
Alex |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 08:52 AM
|
#20 | |
|
Nothing funnier than the ridiculous faces you people make mid-coitus
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sin-City USA
Posts: 4,973
|
Quote:
 ******back on the subject at hand so to speak******** i had a dream last night that somehow we held an election and GG was elected to represent us in the Porn Congress. It was really kind of a weird dream. |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 09:17 AM
|
#21 | |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 08:15 AM
|
#22 |
|
That which does not kill us, will try, try again.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conch Republic
Posts: 5,150
|
Sure, they drink Bud... 'cause they think the Budweiser commercials, including the Clydesdales, are cool.
(Plus, if you don't drink Bud, the terrorists have already won.) Not sure which problem you wanted Apple to fix though. Was it the amazingly strong brand loyalty or the willingness to pay a higher price that you thought needed attention..?
__________________
"If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka |
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 08:54 AM
|
#23 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 09:39 AM
|
#24 | |
|
That which does not kill us, will try, try again.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Conch Republic
Posts: 5,150
|
Quote:
(I think we're hijacking this thread...wasn't my intent.)
__________________
"If you're happy and you know it, think again." -- Guru Pitka |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-03-31, 09:46 AM
|
#25 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Actually, this is pretty funny: The reasons that the bud site don't work is the reason why a java or user end script style system is not a functional idea for protecting both minors and free speech - it often doesn't work exactly right.
Re-writing huge numbers of websites and pages to check a script for login status at every turn is going to require much more server horsepower (imaging every gallery hit from the hun having to run a php session cookie... yowsa!) and very likely small errors will creep in that will either disable pages or block client access without reason. Assume for a minute that the population of the US is exactly evenly spread over the age groups (it isn't because of the baby boomers, but we wil play nice). Let us also assume that the only people under 18 with unrestricted and unmonitored web access are over 12 years of age. Let's say everyone over 72 doesn't surf the web at all. 60 year time frame. 12-13-14-15-16-17 are all unacceptable ages to view porn. 6 out of 60 years, or 10% of the potential surfers are not legally allowed to view porn. Walters (and many other) idea is to make a system that enforces special rules on 90% of the people, and on top of it won't stop the other 10% from lying and seeing porn anyway. Let's take this a little further. Average gallery type por surfer maybe visits 50 pages on his way around on any day. Average underage surfer is sneaking over to see porn when nobody is looking, maybe looks at 25 pages. So now you are also looking at only 50% page views by 10% of the population... so now you are going to make a big system to control 95% of your total page views to protect 5% of the page views.... ... and that is without considering the effects that this sort of system would have on search engine rankings, traffic flow patterns, and such. Most current browsers (way more than 95%, I am sure) have parental controls built in already. Make page labelling manditory, make the fines for not labelling adult material to be very high, and the issue resolves itself ongoing. Then nobody has to make major ongoing and endless efforts to cotrol 5% of page views while pissing off the 95% that are from valid and acceptable clients. As a side note, I am confident that the number there is far below 5%... I would suspect that number to be closer to 1-2%, as I suspect most minors are obtaining porn from downloads, file trading, picture hosts, friends, and other "non-industry" sources. Defining the problem and refining the message based on who really is affected by change is important. Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hybrid Mode
