<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blogging for Money</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/</link>
	<description>Sharing my thoughts with the world.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 02:58:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: LonerVamp</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-77543</link>
		<dc:creator>LonerVamp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Jan 2009 09:10:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-77543</guid>
		<description>I think ads speak (between the lines) quite a bit when they are &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; present. When they are present, things get more grey between people who are obviously only posting for the (potential) money vs people who do it for the love and just wouldn&#039;t mind a little extra anything for the effort. Lack of ads pretty much means someone doesn&#039;t really need that $$ motive. Presence of ads, however, may not necessarily mean they are driven by $$.

And my opinion of ads hasn&#039;t changed in decades...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think ads speak (between the lines) quite a bit when they are &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; present. When they are present, things get more grey between people who are obviously only posting for the (potential) money vs people who do it for the love and just wouldn&#039;t mind a little extra anything for the effort. Lack of ads pretty much means someone doesn&#039;t really need that $$ motive. Presence of ads, however, may not necessarily mean they are driven by $$.</p>
<p>And my opinion of ads hasn&#039;t changed in decades&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cutaway</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-77453</link>
		<dc:creator>cutaway</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Jan 2009 14:20:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-77453</guid>
		<description>I have ads on my site.  After one and a half years and 25K spam messages I have generated approximately $30.  I don&#039;t apologize about this.  I can use the extra cash and, as I have indicated, will use it to attend conferences and training to increase my security knowledge.  Security knowledge that I share with the public.

All that said, there is one easy way to avoid the ads on my website.  It is actually a very good security measure I suggest everybody utilize.  

Download Firefox: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
Install NoScript: http://noscript.net/

Go forth and do good things,
Cutaway</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have ads on my site.  After one and a half years and 25K spam messages I have generated approximately $30.  I don&#039;t apologize about this.  I can use the extra cash and, as I have indicated, will use it to attend conferences and training to increase my security knowledge.  Security knowledge that I share with the public.</p>
<p>All that said, there is one easy way to avoid the ads on my website.  It is actually a very good security measure I suggest everybody utilize.  </p>
<p>Download Firefox: <a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/</a><br />
Install NoScript: <a href="http://noscript.net/" rel="nofollow">http://noscript.net/</a></p>
<p>Go forth and do good things,<br />
Cutaway</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LonerVamp</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19376</link>
		<dc:creator>LonerVamp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19376</guid>
		<description>I think ads speak (between the lines) quite a bit when they are &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; present. When they are present, things get more grey between people who are obviously only posting for the (potential) money vs people who do it for the love and just wouldn&#039;t mind a little extra anything for the effort. Lack of ads pretty much means someone doesn&#039;t really need that $$ motive. Presence of ads, however, may not necessarily mean they are driven by $$.

And my opinion of ads hasn&#039;t changed in decades...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think ads speak (between the lines) quite a bit when they are <b>not</b> present. When they are present, things get more grey between people who are obviously only posting for the (potential) money vs people who do it for the love and just wouldn&#8217;t mind a little extra anything for the effort. Lack of ads pretty much means someone doesn&#8217;t really need that $$ motive. Presence of ads, however, may not necessarily mean they are driven by $$.</p>
<p>And my opinion of ads hasn&#8217;t changed in decades&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kurt wismer</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19375</link>
		<dc:creator>kurt wismer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 14:31:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19375</guid>
		<description>i think it&#039;s a question of motives... or rather a question of being able to question motives... the presence of ads opens up the possibility that you&#039;re in it for the money instead of (rather than as well as) providing good content...

of course no one has to prove anything to anyone about what their true motives are, you don&#039;t have to answer to your readers, only to yourself - but i hate leaving those sorts of questions open... 

then again, maybe i am a purist, and maybe i am &#039;holier than thou&#039; as i&#039;ve recently characterized mainstream ad-driven news media as opportunistic parasites who&#039;ll try to turn any thought trend (even the misguided ones) that makes it onto their radar in to a positive feedback loop in hopes of drawing more eyeballs to their ads...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i think it&#8217;s a question of motives&#8230; or rather a question of being able to question motives&#8230; the presence of ads opens up the possibility that you&#8217;re in it for the money instead of (rather than as well as) providing good content&#8230;</p>
<p>of course no one has to prove anything to anyone about what their true motives are, you don&#8217;t have to answer to your readers, only to yourself &#8211; but i hate leaving those sorts of questions open&#8230; </p>
<p>then again, maybe i am a purist, and maybe i am &#8216;holier than thou&#8217; as i&#8217;ve recently characterized mainstream ad-driven news media as opportunistic parasites who&#8217;ll try to turn any thought trend (even the misguided ones) that makes it onto their radar in to a positive feedback loop in hopes of drawing more eyeballs to their ads&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christofer hoff</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19372</link>
		<dc:creator>Christofer hoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:54:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19372</guid>
		<description>Al...

To be fair, however, have you ever tried to read your site on a mobile device that isn&#039;t IE powered?  On a blackberry, I have to page down no less than 60 times given the frame setup to get past your Amazon &quot;ads&quot; in order to read the content...then there&#039;s the giant animated Symantec deal that clogs bandwidth, etc...

Also, these external ad and feed sources often cause the page to sometimes hang on load (esp. from slow speed connections) due to the normal Internet glut...

It&#039;s your site and it doesn&#039;t make you a bad person, but I (just me, personally) find it really, really distracting...swimming against the tide or not, I think it&#039;s a point worth listening to even if you choose not to do anything about it.

I&#039;d love to recover some $$ for the costs of hosting, etc., but I can&#039;t bring myself to display ads for the reasons above.

My $0.02.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Al&#8230;</p>
<p>To be fair, however, have you ever tried to read your site on a mobile device that isn&#8217;t IE powered?  On a blackberry, I have to page down no less than 60 times given the frame setup to get past your Amazon &#8220;ads&#8221; in order to read the content&#8230;then there&#8217;s the giant animated Symantec deal that clogs bandwidth, etc&#8230;</p>
<p>Also, these external ad and feed sources often cause the page to sometimes hang on load (esp. from slow speed connections) due to the normal Internet glut&#8230;</p>
<p>It&#8217;s your site and it doesn&#8217;t make you a bad person, but I (just me, personally) find it really, really distracting&#8230;swimming against the tide or not, I think it&#8217;s a point worth listening to even if you choose not to do anything about it.</p>
<p>I&#8217;d love to recover some $$ for the costs of hosting, etc., but I can&#8217;t bring myself to display ads for the reasons above.</p>
<p>My $0.02.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alan shimel</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19343</link>
		<dc:creator>alan shimel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:34:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19343</guid>
		<description>Tyler- we agree to disagree. I dont think the &quot;quality of my page&quot; is really at play here.  It is my content. If my content is compelling enough you will put up with the ads.  If it is not you won&#039;t.  I think it that simple.  I personally think you are swimming against the tide.  As ads get more targeted you are going to see them on more and more blogs.  BTW, Fred has taken heat time and again for his ads, but it has not stopped him.  He also has ads in his feeds.  Fred and Brad Feld were investors in feedburner and I know they use the same ad network I do.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tyler- we agree to disagree. I dont think the &#8220;quality of my page&#8221; is really at play here.  It is my content. If my content is compelling enough you will put up with the ads.  If it is not you won&#8217;t.  I think it that simple.  I personally think you are swimming against the tide.  As ads get more targeted you are going to see them on more and more blogs.  BTW, Fred has taken heat time and again for his ads, but it has not stopped him.  He also has ads in his feeds.  Fred and Brad Feld were investors in feedburner and I know they use the same ad network I do.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tyler Reguly</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19327</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyler Reguly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 00:08:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19327</guid>
		<description>Alan,

I don&#039;t see it as being a purist or having a &#039;holier than thou&#039; attitude. As I said a an ad or two on the sides or tops of pages isn&#039;t even noticeable.. Let&#039;s take Fred Wilson&#039;s page (since you brought him up.. I&#039;m assuming you were actualy referring to avg.blogs.com)... There are plenty of ads on that page... They don&#039;t bother me in the least. Why? They are down the sides of the page. They don&#039;t break up the content as I&#039;m trying to read. Even Martin&#039;s blog was a fairly bad example of what I meant... However it was ads surrounding the initial post which is what I find irritating but in Martin&#039;s case they are fairly non-intrusive. The giant Symantec flash ad on your page is hideous, but I could even live with that compared to the Symantec ads that are tagged onto every single post on your RSS feed. 

I don&#039;t think ads relate to the quality of content, but I do think they speak to the quality of the page. My opinion, when visiting a site, has always been that the more ads on the page, the less reputable the site is. Previously sites that were plastered in ads were there just to make money, and now people are popping ads everywhere... which makes me think of those &quot;less reputable&quot; sites from days gone by.

As for people suggesting NoScript/AdBlock... I used to do that.. but these days I&#039;m fairly anti-NoScript... It was great was javascript was a &quot;once in a blue moon&quot; type thing... but not that it&#039;s everywhere it makes using the internet a pain... NoScript makes surfing the net feel like the Internet would feel without DNS</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alan,</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t see it as being a purist or having a &#8216;holier than thou&#8217; attitude. As I said a an ad or two on the sides or tops of pages isn&#8217;t even noticeable.. Let&#8217;s take Fred Wilson&#8217;s page (since you brought him up.. I&#8217;m assuming you were actualy referring to avg.blogs.com)&#8230; There are plenty of ads on that page&#8230; They don&#8217;t bother me in the least. Why? They are down the sides of the page. They don&#8217;t break up the content as I&#8217;m trying to read. Even Martin&#8217;s blog was a fairly bad example of what I meant&#8230; However it was ads surrounding the initial post which is what I find irritating but in Martin&#8217;s case they are fairly non-intrusive. The giant Symantec flash ad on your page is hideous, but I could even live with that compared to the Symantec ads that are tagged onto every single post on your RSS feed. </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think ads relate to the quality of content, but I do think they speak to the quality of the page. My opinion, when visiting a site, has always been that the more ads on the page, the less reputable the site is. Previously sites that were plastered in ads were there just to make money, and now people are popping ads everywhere&#8230; which makes me think of those &#8220;less reputable&#8221; sites from days gone by.</p>
<p>As for people suggesting NoScript/AdBlock&#8230; I used to do that.. but these days I&#8217;m fairly anti-NoScript&#8230; It was great was javascript was a &#8220;once in a blue moon&#8221; type thing&#8230; but not that it&#8217;s everywhere it makes using the internet a pain&#8230; NoScript makes surfing the net feel like the Internet would feel without DNS</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: alan shimel</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19299</link>
		<dc:creator>alan shimel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19299</guid>
		<description>Guys- i heard the same thing about ads originally on Yahoo and other sites back when the net was getting going.  Then I remember the same argument when paid for search was starting to get started by the company that Yahoo bought (i forget their names now) and google.  Ads are a part of life on the web (and off the web too for that matter).  It has nothing to do with ones passion for blogging, security or life.  It is a decision you make, as to would you like to try and monetize or not.  Guys like Fred Wilson (avc.com) make 30k a year or more off of their blog ads and give it all to charity.  Does it make him less passionate or his content less compelling?  Of course not.  My attitude is to each his own. If you think not having ads makes you some sort of purist, god bless you.  If however you think it makes you holier than thou, take a good look in the mirror.  I dont think ads are related to quality of content at all.

I do dislike blog summaries, because i hate having to click out of my RSS reader, but that is another story.  I vote on that by not clicking and reading the content.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guys- i heard the same thing about ads originally on Yahoo and other sites back when the net was getting going.  Then I remember the same argument when paid for search was starting to get started by the company that Yahoo bought (i forget their names now) and google.  Ads are a part of life on the web (and off the web too for that matter).  It has nothing to do with ones passion for blogging, security or life.  It is a decision you make, as to would you like to try and monetize or not.  Guys like Fred Wilson (avc.com) make 30k a year or more off of their blog ads and give it all to charity.  Does it make him less passionate or his content less compelling?  Of course not.  My attitude is to each his own. If you think not having ads makes you some sort of purist, god bless you.  If however you think it makes you holier than thou, take a good look in the mirror.  I dont think ads are related to quality of content at all.</p>
<p>I do dislike blog summaries, because i hate having to click out of my RSS reader, but that is another story.  I vote on that by not clicking and reading the content.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin McKeay</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19276</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin McKeay</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:16:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19276</guid>
		<description>Absolutely no offense take.  I&#039;m surprised anyone even pays attention to the ads any more.  Heck, I even have them blocked by Adblock and NoScript myself.  I have to fire up IE7 to make sure they&#039;re working.  By the way, the ads are only after the first two posts, not every post.  Minor point of clarification.

I don&#039;t think there&#039;s anything wrong with making money off of your passion, otherwise I wouldn&#039;t have done many of the things I&#039;ve done in the last 18 months, such as writing for Computerworld and taking on a podcast sponsor.  It&#039;s helped me procure the equipment I need to do a better job at my podcasting and video blogging.  It&#039;s also given me the money I need to be less stressed about finding a job immediately after leaving my job in February and leaving StillSecure.

I understand your point of view, I just don&#039;t subscribe to it.  I don&#039;t want to be a starving artist, paying for my craft.  I want to share what I find and what I know, but I also want to make a living at it.  I don&#039;t see making a profit off of my blog as any different from working a regular job doing something I love.  I don&#039;t think it ruins the &quot;purity&quot; of my work in any way.

I do have to say, earning money off of something I&#039;d be doing anyways is a little different from many sites out there that are aimed at making money first and providing content second.  Some of the forums I&#039;ve seen out there definitely fall into that category, with so many ads that you can&#039;t even read a thread without flash overload.    

Last thought: my ads don&#039;t even come close to paying for my internet connection, which costs about $80/month.  It may pay for the electricity the server consumes running here at my house, but it&#039;s doubtful.  So overall I guess I&#039;m still not breaking even.  I could switch to typepad or another hosted service that&#039;s cheap, but I have a deep seated need to control my server myself.  Go figure, a security professional with control issues.  :-)
Martin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely no offense take.  I&#8217;m surprised anyone even pays attention to the ads any more.  Heck, I even have them blocked by Adblock and NoScript myself.  I have to fire up IE7 to make sure they&#8217;re working.  By the way, the ads are only after the first two posts, not every post.  Minor point of clarification.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s anything wrong with making money off of your passion, otherwise I wouldn&#8217;t have done many of the things I&#8217;ve done in the last 18 months, such as writing for Computerworld and taking on a podcast sponsor.  It&#8217;s helped me procure the equipment I need to do a better job at my podcasting and video blogging.  It&#8217;s also given me the money I need to be less stressed about finding a job immediately after leaving my job in February and leaving StillSecure.</p>
<p>I understand your point of view, I just don&#8217;t subscribe to it.  I don&#8217;t want to be a starving artist, paying for my craft.  I want to share what I find and what I know, but I also want to make a living at it.  I don&#8217;t see making a profit off of my blog as any different from working a regular job doing something I love.  I don&#8217;t think it ruins the &#8220;purity&#8221; of my work in any way.</p>
<p>I do have to say, earning money off of something I&#8217;d be doing anyways is a little different from many sites out there that are aimed at making money first and providing content second.  Some of the forums I&#8217;ve seen out there definitely fall into that category, with so many ads that you can&#8217;t even read a thread without flash overload.    </p>
<p>Last thought: my ads don&#8217;t even come close to paying for my internet connection, which costs about $80/month.  It may pay for the electricity the server consumes running here at my house, but it&#8217;s doubtful.  So overall I guess I&#8217;m still not breaking even.  I could switch to typepad or another hosted service that&#8217;s cheap, but I have a deep seated need to control my server myself.  Go figure, a security professional with control issues.  <img src='http://www.computerdefense.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /><br />
Martin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cutaway</title>
		<link>http://www.computerdefense.org/2007/07/blogging-for-money/comment-page-1/#comment-19275</link>
		<dc:creator>cutaway</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:16:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computerdefense.org/?p=352#comment-19275</guid>
		<description>I have ads on my site.  After one and a half years and 25K spam messages I have generated approximately $30.  I don&#039;t apologize about this.  I can use the extra cash and, as I have indicated, will use it to attend conferences and training to increase my security knowledge.  Security knowledge that I share with the public.

All that said, there is one easy way to avoid the ads on my website.  It is actually a very good security measure I suggest everybody utilize.  

Download Firefox: http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/
Install NoScript: http://noscript.net/

Go forth and do good things,
Cutaway</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have ads on my site.  After one and a half years and 25K spam messages I have generated approximately $30.  I don&#8217;t apologize about this.  I can use the extra cash and, as I have indicated, will use it to attend conferences and training to increase my security knowledge.  Security knowledge that I share with the public.</p>
<p>All that said, there is one easy way to avoid the ads on my website.  It is actually a very good security measure I suggest everybody utilize.  </p>
<p>Download Firefox: <a href="http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/</a><br />
Install NoScript: <a href="http://noscript.net/" rel="nofollow">http://noscript.net/</a></p>
<p>Go forth and do good things,<br />
Cutaway</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

