I agree. It is not easy here.
At 01:24 PM 12/19/2001 +1100, you wrote:
>Michael makes a good point. While we may or may not approve of the content
>of porn sites - that's obviously a moral issue - the problems they face and
>the techniques they adopt to solve them are interesting indeed. For every
>concern we might have about hacking or theft or unauthorised entry, porn
>sites have the problem tenfold. I bet every problem you fret about,
>someone in a porn site has solved it already.
>
>
>While the morality or otherwise of adult sites is off topic here, it's got
>to be acknowledged that adult sites are driving many of the techniques of
>web business along and very fast. For example, it was the adult sites that
>forced the development of techniques of handling images and thumbnails.
>They were the ones to perfect credit card transactions on the net, they
>drove password protection schemes (stopping people sharing passwords) and
>many other things. Not to mention streaming of video, and the benefits (or
>otherwise) of popup windows, banners, the multitude of ever-more-creative
>ways of driving traffic from one site to another, using the same content on
>multiple sites. They are the ones that are driving the supply of ever
>increasing bandwidth.
>
>
>And of course don't forget the constant back and forth battle between the
>search engines and the porn sites is forcing the search engines to get
>better at what they do, in order to keep porn sites out and the sites they
>want in.
>
>
>Then there are the less-savoury techniques they're developing. Like
>stealing bandwidth, copyright issues that are being resolved in order to
>stop the wholesale theft of images. Then there is the scam I read about not
>so long ago where a porn site grabbed a legitimate and quite high-traffic
>domain name, and redirected it to their porn site. People reasonably
>trying to find out something about their electricity utility or some such
>were suddenly presented with a porn site, which promptly opened half a dozen
>windows for their other sites.
>
>
>All these things -both good and bad - are driving changes on the web. The
>bad things cause the rest of us to develop defences against hackers and
>unsavoury practices. The good things give us all benefits we can employ on
>our own sites.
>
>
>
>We ought to be watching the developments in porn sites - not for titillation
>but for professional education. Those guys are way ahead of us in
>technology. And while I don't know for sure, I'd be willing to bet that
>the real figures would show that at least 5 of the top ten money makers on
>the web are porn sites.
>
>
>Cheers,
>Mike Kear
>Windsor, NSW, Australia
>AFP WebWorks
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 6:30 AM
>To: CF-Talk
>Subject: RE: OT(apologies)
>
>For those who do not understand the reference, whitehouse.com is not a
>government site. It is an adult site that uses the whitehouse name to get
>people to come in. I can't say if it is using CF or not (I don't know) but
>I do know programmers for adult sites who use CF for their work. A lot of
>user and login managment is done in CF to protect these sites against fraud
>(multiple people logging in under a single username).
>While I don't approve of these sites, I do find the problems and solutions
>that they face interesting.
>
>At 02:21 PM 12/13/01, you wrote:
> >Dude. Don't post that in here. I don't really think that's appropriate...
> >
> >(Not that I care, but someone else just might...)
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Alex [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> >Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 9:51 AM
> >To: CF-Talk
> >Subject: RE: OT(apologies)
> >
> >
> >www.whitehouse.com
> >
> >On Thu, 13 Dec 2001, Kris Pilles wrote:
> >
> > > half.com victorias secret.com
> > > New York State
> > > New Mexico
> > > Federal Government
> > > Aol (corporate site)
> > > Eminem.com
> > >
> > > Theres tons of them
> > >
> > > Kris Pilles
> > > Website Manager
> > > Western Suffolk BOCES
> > > 507 Deer Park Rd., Building C
> > > Phone: 631-549-4900 x 267
> > > E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Moneymaker, Jon S CONT (WPNSTA Yorktown)
> > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:37 PM
> > > To: CF-Talk
> > > Subject: OT(apologies)
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok, I have lurked on this list for some time now and remember some
> > > time ago a brief flurry of activity about "who uses CF in the real
> > > world." I seem to recall a list somewhere or an article someone wrote
> > > about some of the big companies who use CF.... I was asked this
> > > question the other day and could only come up with a couple....(I
> > > choked actually).....
> > >
> > > any help would be appreciated.
> > >
> > > Ya'll (guess what part of the country I am in) are great....
> > >
> > > Jon S. Moneymaker
> > > Network Administrator
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more
resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm
FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
