3,065 karma · joined March 12, 2007
http://www.underengineering.com
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/ntoshev; my proof: https://keybase.io/ntoshev/sigs/-piodh_N3Iz_KHRDy9q8DwzUm8hyzhfGYMQHzguhJhI ]
They could enforce it by technical means, by just blocking your IP.
That's strange. Crawling Google's ads is prohibited by robots.txt and their terms of service. And Google tends to enforce this kind of rules.
I understand people would not make some API public until they are ready to support it, but here this guy seems offended because people somehow stole his work - which seems ridiculous.
I've seen slides from MIT's OCW that say "This slide is removed for copyright reasons" in half the slides of a particular lesson - they are just not helpful.
Google ads are displayed in the right column by default, and you can't simply buy your way to the search results column. Google displays the ad there only when it considers the ad as relevant as a search result, and relevance judgement is something you already trusted Google for.
Patio's ad is pretending to be curated and endorsed by the site where the ad is shown, and it is displaying a fake rating pretending to be from the users of this site. It's also way more similar to the non-ad text on that page.
For comparison, Google ads are displayed in a right column by default, and you can't simply buy your way to the search results column. Google displays the ad there only when it considers the ad as relevant as a search result, and relevance judgement is something you already trusted Google for.
You are supposed to know this, aren't you a SEO / AdWords expert?
In Google's case it's also much more obvious that they are displaying an ad and not a regular search result. If you claim otherwise, why don't you copy the yellow background and "Ad - Why this ad?" text in your advertisement and tell us where the CTR goes?
I've seen you say that Google is evil and claim a moral high ground a number of times, and now you are justifying something with "but look, Google does it too"? Even if you were correct, which I've shown you aren't and you know it, this would means you are just as evil as Google.
I wonder how much of Steve Jobs' visions about the future turned out wrong (didn't happen) but in the end it didn't matter.
"The memory limitations of iPad 1 (which are somewhere around 115 MB RAM per app) are just quite challenging. You have to have it running around 80-90 to keep it stable and the app has tons of timeline animations, the sources are 1 GB, all compiled into one single SWF file + some assets. The app was originally made for PC and upgraded for tablet devices. When you start creating tablet apps from scratch it's a whole different story. The game is now made with 'no compromises' compared to the desktop version and that keeps it unique."
Why is this even on HN, let alone #1?
First, you shouldn't judge anything by the worst of its kind.
Second, why I keep seeing related stories piling one misunderstanding on top of another on Hacker News?
SSD might be a solution, but we don't have any proof either way, and we also don't understand why is this problem happening.