Publicity also tends to be expensive... the slashdot effect certainly generates a lot of that, too.
The funny part is that traditionally people pay to reach their audience, but on the internet, you pay when your audience reaches you. I guess this is one case where the Soviet Russia type inversion actually produces the correct answer. Maybe the internet *is* just like Soviet Russia?
i wonder if we will ever see a point in time
where an unauthorized linkage results in a legal
claim of damages, say for increased bandwidth
costs to the link host? Or possibly denial of
service? I suppose it all revolves around what
one would say is a reasonable expectation of
public use of a site, and could be dramatically
different for say cnn vs joeblow.org
Actually, during an interview last year they said that the major costs were not bandwidth, but personnel. It takes a lot of money to employ people full time to administer the site.
How many people does Slashdot employ? And just what do they all do? How many people does it take to copy/paste links (submitted by other people) to stories on other web sites?
But... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)
No. Only information wants to be free. Slashdot has managed to avoid that for a looong time.
Re:But... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)
Soko
Re:But... (Score:1)
Re:But... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:But... (Score:2)
Re:But... (Score:1)
If you don't want people to read it, don't put it on the Internet.
Re:But... (Score:5, Informative)
But yeah, bandwidth ain't free
Travis
Re:But... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:But... (Score:1)
Re:But... (Score:2)
Re:But... (Score:2)
How many people does Slashdot employ? And just what do they all do? How many people does it take to copy/paste links (submitted by other people) to stories on other web sites?
Re:But... (Score:2)