h a l f b a k e r y[marked-for-tagline]
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
The web should be restructured to allow any browser to delete
any
site at any time. This would promote the democratic proliferation
of good sites.
Prior art would be the "Mirror, Mirror" episode of Star Trek where
the captain could instantly kill anyone on the ship at the push of a
button.
Jeff Bezos Laughing
https://www.google....=bv.142059868,d.eWE
[theircompetitor, Dec 23 2016]
[link]
|
| |
Isn't that what blacklists are for? personal choice and all. |
|
| |
A drug where you just don't see a specific person would be similar. |
|
| |
So... you want hb filters on the entire internet? |
|
| |
I would like that. As in Amazon - marked for deletion -
reason greedy humorless arseholes that destroy bookshops.
Zap! Next would be Monsanto - Zap! Then Exxon - Zap! The
list will be long. Let zapping commence. (Note how I have
extended the idea to remove the entire companies as well
as their sad websites) |
|
| |
//democratic proliferation of good sites// |
|
| |
You mean, "proliferation of sites so bland that no-one dislikes them". [-] |
|
| |
// the list will be long // humorless? See link |
|
| |
Imagining [xenzag] waking up every morning to the march of
the Marseillaise |
|
| |
Imagining [xenzag] not waking up ever again. |
|
| |
Bonsaikitten could never have existed under this system, so [-]. |
|
| |
// Prior art would be the "Mirror, Mirror" episode of Star Trek // |
|
| |
Actually the Agony Booth seemed a lot more usefu than the Tantalus device. We could have a lot of fun with that. |
|
| |
I agree on the surface this idea is stupid. But what
happens after the initial massacre of sites? Most sites
would come back and perhaps be deleted again. Site
owners would likely not be discouraged and try for a third
time. Admittedly many would be deleted again. But the
fourth time round, ha! Have any of you given that any
thought? |
|
| |
I argue, quite lucidly, that this would be an evolutionary
crucible of websites. What we get out of the other end,
we cannot conceive, as much as an amoeba can conceive
an auroch. |
|
| |
//I argue, quite lucidly// [marked-for-tagline] |
|
| |
What would the "deletion" actually involve, on a technical level? Mere deletion of the files on the server? Or, physical shut down of the the server and all connected backups, and de-registration of the domain name with its subsequent auto-relisting "for sale" at the standard rate through the registries? |
|
| |
Not only is is a let's all, it's a terrible idea with no redeeming features whatsoever. |
|
| |
Yes, but if it could be implemented for those telemarketers that call your home we'd all be upvoting like it was hot biscuits and tea. |
|
| |
<finds Voice's homepage; presses delete> Take that! |
|
| |
<realizes it was the wrong page; finds real page and presses
delete> |
|
| |
[pocmloc], the idea could be implemented by de-
registration or through the DNS. |
|
| |
The technical implementation matters, in the sense of how onerous is the task of reinstating the site after deleting it. |
|
| |