Mark Zuckerberg Most Followed User on Google+

[JMcEntegart]

Google+ is being described as a Facebook killer so it may come as some surprise that the most 'circled' (followed) user on the site is none other than Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg.

Mark Zuckerberg Most Followed User on Google+ : Read more

 

[Guest]

He's probably there to look at (read:steal) google plus' features.
Big surprise there.

 

[digiex]

Know your competition. Competition almost always benefit the consumers.

 

[mayne92]

[citation][nom]alexkitch[/nom]I hate to sound like an ass, but no website of this much traffic/exposure should have such awful issues with basic spam robots. The fact that this is still an ongoing problem, after countless months/years, should serve as an absolute embarrassment to the developers of this site.How hard can it be to iterate a list of blacklisted strings for every new post? Even my IRC network (a protocol which is now 23 years old) is capable of automatically banning based on blacklisted spam strings.[/citation]
Because people cry when security is enhanced. People want 100% usability and simplicity while wanting 100% security but will CRY when strong security features are implemented. If you think development is so easy by just spatting "how hard can it be to iterate a list of blacklisted...bla bla bla" then why aren't you doing it? DDoS has been known for years but it is still extremely difficult to prevent. Will you come to everyone's rescue for a 100% awesome and expandable mechanism since you think it is easy???

 

[oneblackened]

Guys, a captcha. Simple as that.

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom]Because people cry when security is enhanced. People want 100% usability and simplicity while wanting 100% security but will CRY when strong security features are implemented. If you think development is so easy by just spatting "how hard can it be to iterate a list of blacklisted...bla bla bla" then why aren't you doing it? DDoS has been known for years but it is still extremely difficult to prevent. Will you come to everyone's rescue for a 100% awesome and expandable mechanism since you think it is easy???[/citation]

What does security have to do with anything?

I'm a professional developer (outside of a bedroom) and let me tell you that it IS easy to develop a simple spam filter. It is incredibly easy.

DDoS prevention doesn't even come into the equation...

 

[AerieC]

[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom]Because people cry when security is enhanced. People want 100% usability and simplicity while wanting 100% security but will CRY when strong security features are implemented.[/citation]

I'd wager that people would cry far less about a few small security measures than they currently do about the absurd spambots. In fact, a number of other sites I frequent have some of those measure in place and I have yet to hear any complaining about them.

[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom] If you think development is so easy by just spatting "how hard can it be to iterate a list of blacklisted...bla bla bla" then why aren't you doing it?[/citation]

I can't speak for alexkitch, but I do do development. I do it every day. And yes, most of these simple security measures are pretty easy to implement.

[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom]DDoS has been known for years but it is still extremely difficult to prevent.[/citation]

DDoS != spam. DDoS attacks exploit a physical vulnerability of the technology (i.e. the servers hardware can't physically handle huge numbers of requests simultaneously) while spambots exploit a software vulnerability (i.e. this site's code makes little or no attempt to detect or hinder spammers).

[citation][nom]mayne92[/nom]Will you come to everyone's rescue for a 100% awesome and expandable mechanism since you think it is easy???[/citation]

I doubt tom's would let me at their servers, but there are plenty of tools readily available already .

My guess is that spam blocking isn't really that big a priority for the devs, which is unfortunate.

 

[dstigue]

[citation][nom]AerieC[/nom]I'd wager that people would cry far less about a few small security measures than they currently do about the absurd spambots. In fact, a number of other sites I frequent have some of those measure in place and I have yet to hear any complaining about them.I can't speak for alexkitch, but I do do development. I do it every day. And yes, most of these simple security measures are pretty easy to implement.DDoS != spam. DDoS attacks exploit a physical vulnerability of the technology (i.e. the servers hardware can't physically handle huge numbers of requests simultaneously) while spambots exploit a software vulnerability (i.e. this site's code makes little or no attempt to detect or hinder spammers). I doubt tom's would let me at their servers, but there are plenty of tools readily available already . My guess is that spam blocking isn't really that big a priority for the devs, which is unfortunate.[/citation]

I have to agree it is unfortunate. It seems the comments here are dying and I thinks that is part of what brings people back. The news isn't fresh here either. It's the community and that is dying.

 

[alextheblue]

[citation][nom]anonymous279[/nom]He's probably there to look at (read:steal) google plus' features.Big surprise there.[/citation]His introduction should read "I steal things."

 

[fir_ser]

I don’t see a point in following him.

 

[eddieroolz]

I'm somewhat curious why Zuckerberg is even on the circle.

 

[Reynod]

I'd wager that people would cry far less about a few small security measures than they currently do about the absurd spambots. In fact, a number of other sites I frequent have some of those measure in place and I have yet to hear any complaining about them.



I can't speak for alexkitch, but I do do development. I do it every day. And yes, most of these simple security measures are pretty easy to implement.



DDoS != spam. DDoS attacks exploit a physical vulnerability of the technology (i.e. the servers hardware can't physically handle huge numbers of requests simultaneously) while spambots exploit a software vulnerability (i.e. this site's code makes little or no attempt to detect or hinder spammers).



I doubt tom's would let me at their servers, but there are plenty of tools readily available already .

My guess is that spam blocking isn't really that big a priority for the devs, which is unfortunate.

As the banhammer here with over 1100 kills I can tell you I am busy terminating these spambots as they come up ... as are the two other mods who monitor news comments.

The developers are busy revamping the site ... which you would know if you took the time to go to the parent site and access the Beta.

With nearly a dozen mirrors in half a dozen languages and getting more than 40,000 hits per hour this is no simple web site of the likes that you have probably played with ... this is the big time ... sites with rankings under 1200 on Alexa are huge ... with massive server space requirements spread all over the place.

Toms is one of the oldest sites on the net, and services geeks all over the planet ... and I'd like to think we do it well.

We have 20 volunteer moderators like me who give it our best to help out others who share an interest in computing ... and we have some awesome staff here too.

Put it this way ... if Skynet ever does become intelligent we will know about it here first.

 

[dread_cthulhu]

[citation][nom]reynod[/nom]As the banhammer here with over 1100 kills I can tell you I am busy terminating these spambots as they come up ... as are the two other mods who monitor news comments.The developers are busy revamping the site ... which you would know if you took the time to go to the parent site and access the Beta.With nearly a dozen mirrors in half a dozen languages and getting more than 40,000 hits per hour this is no simple web site of the likes that you have probably played with ... this is the big time ... sites with rankings under 1200 on Alexa are huge ... with massive server space requirements spread all over the place.Toms is one of the oldest sites on the net, and services geeks all over the planet ... and I'd like to think we do it well.We have 20 volunteer moderators like me who give it our best to help out others who share an interest in computing ... and we have some awesome staff here too.Put it this way ... if Skynet ever does become intelligent we will know about it here first.[/citation]

Honestly, while the spambots are annoying, you guys really do a great job taking care of them. I know I report probably 2-3 spambots most times I hit an article that just recently posted, and by the time I check the comments a second time (Usually 30mins to an hour later), the adverts are gone. Keep it up, you guys do great! Some people are just whiners, and can't stand to be annoyed for even a second...

 

[Reynod]

I appreciate the spam is flipping annoying and sometimes after cleaning it up and going for a coffee and coming back to more of it is a pain ... but that is the price you pay when you are inclusive.

We could just ban one very large country (the one that invented firecrackers) and solve most of the problem ... but what about all of the good people there who deserve access to a great tech site?

We keep bashing away nuking the spam for those people ... so they can enjoy something we take for granted here.

So its a case of the price you pay for freedom on the net.

/gets off milkcrate

Anyway ... sorry Jane.

 

[someoneelse]

bad photo markberg ... next time try smiling