An Internet Wish-List

Not everything, about the Internet, is the way I would prefer. Even the little, could improve a lot. I publish a wish list, here - a few, for

Remote Payment - without the credit-card

pay with cash, through Cyber/internet Cafes and/or through local offices

This is very easily realizable, either with buying prepaid cheques, and selling them at a cyber/internet cafe, when a customer, for example, wants to buy something from Yahoo store, Amazon, or from a domain registrar, etc. The token-money, in a person's account, is already a starting poiint to build even an exchange-market for it. i.e: If that company, pays you US$100, if you spend it at that site, but pays you US$98 if you want cash, then I may pay you US$99, and make profit, too, when I sell that token-money to those customers who want to buy at that site. I may network with friendly/franchise companies (mostly, internet/cyber cafe, but even supermarkets, too), and you may purchase on-line, by paying at the nearest company/office that joins such a network. The proof-of-payment is on the screen, when your purchase, and payment-through-token-money, is authorized.

Another simple alternative is to get registered as the authorized money-transfer person, at your own street/town/city, for example, for Yahoo/geocities, and pay/receive the payments throughout a day, with real-time transactions, and transfer the money as a batch (through a bank, or other), at the end of the day, or at mid-day.

Both of these are very simple for a customer. You buy something on-line, and pay the money to the cafe-operating person, and your purchase is authorized.

On another page, I discuss yet another, a bit more sophisticated, more versatile, money-transfer mechanism. For mere internet-shopping/payments, these two simple alternatives are sufficient, though.

through an ATM

That who does not do what I suggest, probably keeps the money at a bank. Then, the most trivial, is to announce the bank-account ID. For example, what is the bank-account (e.g: at Citibank, or at HSBC), to pay for a Yahoo e-mail account, and what is the ID for It is probably very easy for any firm, to keep a bank-account (or, a few) at every country, and to gather the money, every 24-hour. e.g: At Istanbul, there is Citibank, and it is probably no extra difficulty - although it eases the case a lot, for the people who pay a two-digit money, to a remote recipient.

To re-iterate, if Yahoo! may have a bank account in every country/city, people may pay conveniently, through an ATM. Although I know people who have credit cards, they do not use it, on Internet, even for themselves. The easier payment, may foster not only the Yahoo!mail & geocities, but also the Yahoo!shop, if Yahoo! may receive the payments for them, too. (Another idea, is to publish token-money, and sell it. After that, people may register it online, and buy whatever. This idea is already well-known in various applications.)

honesty, revised?

I suspect that, the heuristics of (some) search-engines, cannot identify a revision, as opposed to a dummy duplication. And therefore, to attempt to keep extra-honest (let people read the full-history), is perceivable as an offensive manipulation.

An html-tag, or a few, may help. Although there is an html meta-tag, ROBOTS, it is tangent. It is only about listing or not listing a page, and even that is with difficulty. e.g:

For example, if I want those old pages to get listed only as old-pages, there is no way for it - except the way does it itself (i.e: Put a link, within that page, to read "the most recent version." But if the page is renamed, or re-shuffled, that may take page-re-load steps. e.g: dm.00.htm, defense.01.htm, and arm.02.htm, all to arm.htm)

An anchor attribute, or a few, may let identify a page as a revision. On a list page, with a lot of old-pages, as I keep, the <a href="..." rev="..."> entries, would function as if they were database-record entries.

There is the Javascript question, too. Does the search-engine robot work through Javascript, too? To hide the revision-page, I had hoped they would not, although in other cases, I hope it does. The optimum case is to do the (non-interactive) Javascript, and do it with the fine tag-attribute that I propose.

the context

I have a policy of keeping (most) old versions of every published page/frame. However, I let a web-link to an old page, only indirectly, through a list page. For more information, please read the copyright statement.

I reflected/guessed when I noticed that AltaVista did not return any search results with "zElQarneyn" and next, I read in the e-mail bulletin of, that advised against common-search-engine-optimization-mistakes. It informs about some search engines ban a site, if it contains pages with similar content, because they think it is an attempt to abuse the web-search robot, to impress it better. In my case, I post the stable (version-numbered) document, along with the current-version document. They are identical, unless it is only a typo-correction version that I do not release a stable version. i.e: The web-robot sees a page-duplication, and thinks it is an attempt to fool it, although vice versa, it is my attempt to keep everything public. i.e: I keep honest to the bone, but the robot (falsely) interprets it exactly the opposite.

free or ad-free? Is that all or none?

A paid web-host may offer various services. A popular page, may exceed the traffic limit. I wish, for example, that if a page, hosted by geocities, may exceed the monthly limit, then it is shown with the sponsor-advertisement (as for the free option), although no other service is in problem. Is it that way already? I have not noticed that policy-idea (at geocities, or elsewhere).

i.e: Is there a two-phase for gocities visit-limit? If the traffic-limit is exceeded for that month, geocities may show advertisement. The other niceties of a paid-service, remain, though. i.e: I may do FTP upload, but the visitors find the page with the Yahoo!-attached ad.

Forum: . . (Fair Menu . . . . . Fault Report? . . . . . Remedy for your case . . . . . Noticed Plagiarism?)

Referring#: 1
Last-Revised (text) on Apr. 29, 2005 . . . that was
mirror for, on Mar. 16, 2009
Written by: Ahmed Ferzan/Ferzen R Midyat-Zila (or, Earth)
Copyright (c) [2002,] 2004, 2005, 2009 Ferzan Midyat. All rights reserved.