Slashdot Mirror

http://postmaster.aol.com/

Talk to them about getting whitelisted. Since it's a government service (Indian River County) they should have little problems getting AOL to permanently whitelist the originating IP address.

Maybe they'll learn this time. :)

I work for a company that emails its clients once a month, of which a double digit percentage are AOL users.

Everything you need to know about getting your emails accepted by AOL is available at their Postmaster@AOL site.

Basically you need to have SPF records setup, clearly defined unsubscribe links and subjects, and preventative measures so you don't keep re-emailing bad AOL addresses. It's a pain to get on the list, but once you're on things go smoothly.

Broken spam filters are a serious problem, but this isn't really the best example of them (the fact that they catch personal, one-to-one email is a much more serious problem and harder to solve).

There are fairly well documented ways to help ensure that your legitimate email is not caught by spam filters at many ISPs. AOLs is one of the oldest and one of the simplest to sign up for. It's free, too.

Indian River County has chosen to A) not sign up for that system themselves and B) send their email themselves rather than using an outsourced provider that is experienced in sending bulk email. According to TFA they're now talking with AOL to fix their issues.

I strongly suspect that they're doing other stupid things in sending their email that make it look just like spam, but without seeing the mail it's impossible to say for sure. If so, though, they really need to talk to decent consultant to fix their mail problems rather than going to the press.

Yes, what about all these fossils! Perhaps the biggest threat to the theory of evolution is marked absence of such a theory in the fossils. Sure, some "scientists" in the past have carefully arranged sets of bones in an order to give the impression something evolved over time. Even some frauds still exist in the textbooks today (horse evolution example) that are taught as valid. Carefully arranging data to fit a preconceived notion is one of the pillars of evolution. Don't you dare try to tell somebody that because you will be met with personal attacks, namecalling, stereotyping, etc. But the fact still remains is evolution is based on assumption, supposition, superstition, etc. Evolution is jokingly classified as SWAG science (Scientific Wild @$$ Guess). Whatever you want to call it but it doesn't bear any resemblance to science, since science is simply knowledge gained by observation.

There is a verse in scripture that says "God uses foolish things of the world to confound the 'wise'". God knew full well that some would reject Him and He will give them enough ammo to allow them to make complete fools of themselves. Here's a prime example. The verse found in 1Kings 7:23-26. You will find the measurements of King Solomon's brass bowl. Atheists, and Bible scoffers and the ilk will point to that verse and claim that the Bible somehow implies that the value of pi is 3.0. And if you glance over that scripture without doing the math yourself, you will think the same thing! But if you take all of the measurements INCLUDING THE thickness of the bowl, you will find the measurements are correct and pi doesn't come out to 3.0 as some foolishly contend. God uses foolish things of the world to confound the "wise". For more info. on the vers in 1Kings 7:23-26 see http://members.aol.com/gillslits

Pasteur, (a real scientist!) said that a little knowlege in science estranges man from God but a lot of knowledge in science brings them back to Him. Before someone tells you that all life as we know it is the result of organic evolution, don't be afraid to challenge such a notion, even though it is fashionable for the "scientific community" to personally attack you, rather than hear your argument.

http://users.aol.com/s6sj7gt/picode.htm

Quite an entertaining read :)

Have you looked at AOL's SPF records? I recently did, because I was getting spoofed AOL mail through our SPF-checking server. Here it is, from their SPF page:

v=spf1 ip4:152.163.225.0/24 ip4:205.188.139.0/24 ip4:205.188.144.0/24 ip4:205.188.156.0/23 ip4:205.188.159.0/24 ip4:64.12.136.0/23 ip4:64.12.138.0/24 ptr:mx.aol.com ?all

The "?all" at the end says, "if it isn't from one of our approved servers, don't block it anyway."

yes, actually- they interviewed me by phone, reviewed the signup process, and read through the newsletters in question while I was on the phone with them. They were pretty thorough. They also checked out our DNS / SPF records, and checked that we weren't running an open relay.

They also make you set up a special mail address for members who mark your message as spam- the member's email address is scrubbed off, but they forward the message to your address- if you embed a unique ID into the mail message, you are required to block them from receiving further message.

It helps when you have a reasonably reputable brand name to reference- they figure that you won't want to drag it through the mud and get fired. I assume that's why they were willing to spend the time checking us out and making sure we weren't flogging viagra.

Check out their whitelist guide. For folks who run big lists, it's important to adhere to these rules- and they really do enforce them, particularly the 10% bounce/complaint rule.

My mum is on AOL, and half the time I can't respond to her emails because AOL have decided to RBL my ISP's entire subnet because, apparently, someone has been spamming.

Here's the message they send back:

A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its
recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed:

foo@aol.com
SMTP error from remote mailer after initial connection:
host mailin-03.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.249]: 554- (RTR:SC) http://postmaster.info.aol.com/errors/554rtrsc.htm l
554- AOL does not accept e-mail transactions from IP addresses which
554- generate complaints or transmit unsolicited bulk e-mail.
554 Connecting IP: 62.3.252.235

The URL leads to a page telling me that my IP address was responsible for excess floods. Well it wasn't - it must have been someone else on my subnet. When I chased it up with their "feedback loop form" (whatever that might be) they proceeded to completely ignore me.

I'm so glad they finally got a taste of their own medicine!

You need to look at the facts a bit closer. AOL *has* cleaned up its act, more than anyone else on the entire internet. It's stunningly clean for an ISP of its size.

This was caused by one spam. Let me just repeat that: out of 60 million users MAPS saw one spam coming from AOL's outbound mail servers.

Now AOL does have a set of IPs out of which some spam does emanate - the rlyIPXX block (64.12.138.(7-9)). This is the IPs that they redirect direct-to-port25 mail through, and they actively encourage people to block this range. It's been publicly stated that they intend to shut this activity down real soon now, but in the meantime most people just block that range and don't see a problem.

Check the anti-spam newsgroups and mailing lists some time. AOL is hugely respected in anti-spam terms these days. And deservedly so.

You need to look at the facts a bit closer. AOL *has* cleaned up its act, more than anyone else on the entire internet. It's stunningly clean for an ISP of its size.

This was caused by one spam. Let me just repeat that: out of 60 million users MAPS saw one spam coming from AOL's outbound mail servers.

Now AOL does have a set of IPs out of which some spam does emanate - the rlyIPXX block (64.12.138.(7-9)). This is the IPs that they redirect direct-to-port25 mail through, and they actively encourage people to block this range. It's been publicly stated that they intend to shut this activity down real soon now, but in the meantime most people just block that range and don't see a problem.

Check the anti-spam newsgroups and mailing lists some time. AOL is hugely respected in anti-spam terms these days. And deservedly so.

So here is an article that has a few tidbits about climate change. An excerpt:

NASA's global temperature tracking between 1979 and 1998 reveal the typical weather anomalies--unseasonably hot summers and warmer winters--during that period; but overall, NASA data from 1979 forward clearly shows there has been no sustained planetary warming. Nor has any been recorded in all of the years that weather tracking data has been compiled. In fact, during the very mild winters that North America experienced since the El Nino winter of 1998, the global temperature departure has been -0.094 degrees.

And here's one from earlier this year. An excerpt:

All predictions of global warming are based on computer models not historical data. In order to get their models to produce predictions that are close to their designers expectations, modelers make adjustments to unknown variables that are many times greater than the effect of doubling carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. For example, knowledge of the amount of energy flowing from the equator to the poles is uncertain by an amount equivalent to 25 to 30 Watts per square meter (W/m2) of the earth's surface. the amount of sunlight absorbed by the atmosphere or reflected by the surface is also uncertain by as much as 25 W/m2. The role of clouds is uncertain by at least 25 W/m2. The heat added to the atmosphere by a doubling of CO2 is not uncertain. It is easily measured in laboratory experiments and amounts to only 4 Watts per square meter (4 W/m2) of the earth's surface. Obviously the uncertainties are many times larger than the input of energy resulting from a doubling of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

... the more things change, the more they stay the same ... http://members.aol.com/suprdave/classiccmp/512_hd2 0.htm

IQ tests are subject to too many variables. I generally write in the 140s but when I spent a few weeks studying IQ tests I upped my score to 160. Plus memory plays a big role. If you can recall a question type, a solution comes much more quickly. I've spent much of my life in Vancouver, Canada, noted for the potency of its pot. I don't smoke often but also I haven't noticed any deleterious effects. Interestingly psilocybin mushrooms, which I've also experimented with, along with LSD, have recently been shown to be very close to seritoninin their chemical makeup. One of the strange characteristics of mushrooms and LSD is that they tend to induce geometric halllucinations. While it's completely off the wall as conjecture, it's fun to note that nearly, perhaps all, ancient civilizations used hallucinogens, so it may be that our unusual, perhaps unique, method of analysing the world geometrically, in terms of Euclidean geometry for example, may have had its start from the use of drugs.

For over a thousand generations..

http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction1_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction2_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_unite_480_dl.mov

http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction1_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction2_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_unite_480_dl.mov

http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction1_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_jediaction2_480_dl .mov
http://pdl.stream.aol.com/aol/us/moviefone/movies/ 2004/lucasfilm/hyperspace/epiii_unite_480_dl.mov

I'm seeing a lot of comments about AOL ignoring this here, but this page seems to suggest differently:

http://dns.info.aol.com/time.shtml

not sure what they mean by 'cached by recursion' - but I guess that just means normal operation...

First one

Second one

Third one

First one

Second one

Third one

First one

Second one

Third one

That's about 40km per litre, or about 3.5 times the fuel efficiency of my Camry.

Of course, not practical every day, but who cares?

Beiderbecke78@aol.com heheheh xcvb

I wouldn't say we're 95% there yet. My doctor, for one, asks me in I'm in pain, he doesn't scan for firing c-fibers.

Furthermore many reject your belief that is is only a matter of time. There is a so-called explanatory gap that science may never conquer. Just because there's always a physical correlate/identity to mental states doesn't mean they're the same thing.

How a bat "sees" with just sonar and how it can be explained by physics are very different. Speaking of which, Nagel's bat essay and this bibliography have more on this if anyone's interested.

Sometimes, too many links can obfuscate important content instead of helping to direct interested parties to it.

"Well that is all well and good, but AOL doesn't whitelist."

Yes, they do. Please see:

http://postmaster.aol.com/

And in particular:

http://postmaster.aol.com/whitelist/

"Well that is all well and good, but AOL doesn't whitelist."

Yes, they do. Please see:

http://postmaster.aol.com/

And in particular:

http://postmaster.aol.com/whitelist/

You probably meant pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.

See Mike Combs' space settlement FAQ which says:

What advantages would orbital settlements have over a colony built on another planet?

1. Access to 24-hour-a-day sunlight. This makes solar power a consistent, economical energy source. Photovoltaic panels can convert sunlight into electrical current, and solar mirrors can concentrate it for process heat in industrial operations (such as the smelting of ore). A space-based solar concentrator the size of a football field (which could still weigh less than a car) could provide process heat equivalent to the burning of 1 million barrels of oil over 30 years.
   
   Sunlight also drives the life-support system of the habitat, so the day/night cycle can be set to whatever is convenient. Compare this to the moon, where there is 14 days of continuous daylight, and then a 14-day-long night. Here, some alternate energy source would probably have to be used half the time.
   
   
2. Access to zero gravity. This may have a number of industrial and entertainment possibilities. Structures (such as the above-mentioned solar mirrors) could be built many times larger and flimsier in space than on a planet.
   
   Zero G would be a liability if there were no alternative to it. Astronauts experience loss of bone mass and muscle tone after prolonged exposure to weightlessness. But most of a space habitat would be under Earth-normal gravity, although there would be easy access to regions of reduced gravity and zero G (perhaps for personal flight). With planets, on the other hand, you have to take the gravity that's there, and it's often the wrong kind of gravity to keep us healthy. Lunarians or Martians would probably not be able to visit the Earth (nor accelerate at 1 G).
   
   
3. Location near the top of Earth's gravity well. We here on Earth are the "gravitationally disadvantaged". We are at the bottom of a pit 6,400 km (4,000 miles) deep. This is what makes space launches from the surface so difficult and expensive. Settlers near the top of the gravity well would be ideally situated for departures to points beyond.
   
   
4. Control of the environment. The weather and other aspects of the surroundings would be those of the inhabitants' choosing. Agriculture in space will benefit from weather control (fresh fruits and vegetables year-round!) and the absence of pests.
   
   
5. Mobile territories. Although the first generation of space habitats will doubtless reside in High Earth Orbit, there's no reason why space settlers couldn't attach engines to their habitats, and over the course of months or years gradually change their orbit to whatever solar system location they found preferable.
   
   
6. Long-term expansion of the land area available to the human race. Let's be optimistic and assume that Mars could be made totally Earth-like in the near-term. This would basically double the land area available to humanity, meaning problem solved...until the population doubles again. Right now, that is happening roughly every 40 years. By contrast, if we were to conservatively limit ourselves to using only the resources of the asteroid belt, we could build, in the form of space habitats, 3,000 times the livable surface area of the Earth. This makes space settlement a long-term solution.

Nah, what you really want is a dish. At 2.4 Ghz, a surplus Directv or similar dish with a patch antenna at the feed would be the real deal. Check out the K5OE Website for some ideas.

The following programming will be available on MSN Video Downloads according to this AOL news article:

-- MSNBC.com. News and business headlines updated throughout the day, as well as segments from "Today"

-- BreakTV. Behind-the-scenes footage and exclusive interviews television's hottest celebrities

-- COOKIE JAR Entertainment Inc., a global producer and marketer of children's entertainment, offering children's programs such as "Paddington Bear," "Animal Crackers" and many other popular kids' television series

-- DIY Network. Videos about home improvement, crafts, hobbies, indoor-outdoor living, and kitchen and bath remodeling

-- FINE LIVING TV Network. Inspiring programs featuring travel destinations, mind and body enrichment, ideas for entertaining and home design as well as videos for automobile enthusiasts

-- FOX Sports. In-depth news, analysis and unparalleled national and regional coverage of the National Football League, Major League Baseball, NASCAR, the National Basketball Association, and select college basketball and football highlights, as well as FOX Sports Net original programming including "The Best Damn Sports Show Period" and "Beyond the Glory"

-- Food Network. Fun and interesting videos featuring grilling tips, ideas for entertaining, healthy eating, quick-and-easy recipes and pop-culture food specials

-- Fun Little Movies. Specializing in original, live-action comedy content; new "Fun Funny Phone Films" including the following series: humorous headlines in "Comedy USA," sci-fi parody "Spacey Movie," and the "Mini-Bikers," where little people on little motorcycles fight crime, a little at a time

-- Headliners Entertainment Group Inc. (OTC Bulletin Board: HLEG), the operator of Rascals Comedy Clubs, presenting a selection of comedy clips from Rascals Comedy Classics, including performances from popular stars such as Tim Allen, Rosie O'Donnell, Drew Carey and Ray Romano; only Rascals can bring viewers comedy superstars, before they were stars, and the breaking stars of tomorrow, today

-- Home & Garden Television (HGTV). Selected programs featuring remodeling, home-building, design and decorating, kitchen and bath to enhance a home's curb appeal

-- IFILM. Movie trailers, viral videos, short films and other IFILM- exclusive content

-- TotalVid. Deep selection of action sports clips including surfing, snowboarding, skiing, windsurfing, street racing, kiteboarding, skateboarding, climbing, kayaking, off-road, Moto X, mountain biking, inline skating, BMX and more

-- Want Media. Music videos, live concerts, Broadway shows, extreme sports and motor sports programs, full-length films from independent filmmakers and underground cinema

The following are content partners for Windows Mobile-based devices:
-- ATI Technologies
-- BreakTV*
-- CinemaNow Inc.
-- COOKIE JAR*
-- DIY Network
-- FINE LIVING TV Network*
-- Food Network*
-- FOX Sports*
-- Hauppauge Computer Works Inc.
-- Headliner Entertainment Group*
-- HGTV*
-- IFILM*
-- MediaPass Network LLC
-- MLB.com
-- MSN Music
-- MSNBC.com*
-- MTV Networks
-- Napster
-- NVIDIA
-- Pinnacle Systems Inc.
-- SnapStream Media Inc.
-- TiVo Inc.
-- TotalVid*
-- Want Media*
-- watchmusichere.com

* Content provider for MSN Video Downloads service

http://members.aol.com/crebigsol/awards.htm

That AFP?

See my post for a great site describing the use of this weapon on more interesting specimens.

An Army testing lab in Natick, MA used an enormous array of mirrors to simulate the thermal flash pulse of a thermonuclear detonation, for the purpose of testing a sunscreen that the labs were developing for GIs in a nuclear battlefield. Best part is, they tested using pigs! Sound like some loony conspiracy to you?
Check it out.
It's real-world stuff like this that keeps sci-fi writers going.

Here's a link to the script of that EPCOT show, called "Ellen's Energy Adventure". I don't see anything particularly wrong with it.

For dirtbike riding, rather than a help, weight is a huge impediment. It makes the bike less responsive to rider input, harder landing when you jump, and more dangerous when you fall off (which you do a lot more often on a dirtbike than a streetbike).

In any case, crosswinds are something you just have to deal with on a bike, light or heavy. I never had too much trouble on my 100kg (200-odd pound) trailbike ridden on roads, provided I paid attention. If you're not paying attention on a bike you're going to die soon enough anyway...

Fud, fud, glorious fud, Nothing quite like it for boiling the blood. So follow me, follow, down to the hollow And there let us wallow in glorious fud. http://members.aol.com/HippoPage/hippsong.htm#hipp osong/Hippo Song

...Juberti's blog (the chief architect for the AIM service):

AIM Privacy and Slashdot

OK, I am getting tired of hearing about how "The new AIM TOS allows AOL to have all rights to anything you say on IM, AOL reads/stores all your IMs, etc."

I take this kind of personally, because that is not something I would want to be associated with.

First off, that blurb in the TOS only refers to AIM forum posts, not IMs. I agree that it is vague and should be reworded to be clear.

Second, the amount of IM traffic is on the order of hundreds of gigabytes a day. It would be very costly, and we have no desire to record all IM traffic. We don't do it.

Thirdly, if you still don't trust us, we have Direct IM (aka Send IM Image) and Secure IM in all recent versions of the AIM software. In other words, you can send your IMs in such a way that they never go through our servers, and/or are encrypted with industry-standard SSL and S/MIME technology. I know this since I designed these features. There are no backdoors; I would not have permitted any.

I am saying this as a concerned invidual, and not as a corporate mouthpiece.

OK, I agree that the techology is old news. But, as can be seen in the image that accompanies the article, the innovation of tying employees to their desks with fiber optic tubes is a truely inspired idea. I'm sure the CEO's of many hitech companies will find this method more in keeping with company's public image than the traditional employee restraint system.

OK, I am getting tired of hearing about how "The new AIM TOS allows AOL to have all rights to anything you say on IM, AOL reads/stores all your IMs, etc."

I take this kind of personally, because that is not something I would want to be associated with.

First off, that blurb in the TOS only refers to AIM forum posts, not IMs. I agree that it is vague and should be reworded to be clear.

Second, the amount of IM traffic is on the order of hundreds of gigabytes a day. It would be very costly, and we have no desire to record all IM traffic. We don't do it.

You can read the rest on his blog.

My opinion is that the AOL flaks are doing a spectacularly awful job handling the fallout. Just saying something like, "Gee, you misunderstand," isn't strong enough. Why the TOS wasn't entirely reworded today is beyond me.

Here are the facts.

First and foremost, AOL does not monitor, read or review any user-to-user communication through the AIM network, except in response to a valid legal process. The AIM privacy policy (which is part of the AIM TOS) makes that crystal clear:

AOL does not read your private online communications when you use any of the communication tools offered as AIM Products. If, however, you use these tools to disclose information about yourself publicly (for example, in chat rooms or online message boards made available by AIM), other online users may obtain access to any information you provide.

The AIM Terms of Service section to which folks are referring comes from a section of the Terms of Service is called "Content You Post" and, as such, logically and legally it relates only to content a user posts in a public area of the service.

If a user posts content in a public area of the service, like a chat room, message board, or other public forum, that information may be used by AOL for other purposes. One example of this might be a user who posts a "Hot or Not" photo and thus allows AIM to post it for other AIM users to vote on it. Another might be taking an excerpt from a message board posting on a current news issue and highlighting it in a different area of the service.

Such language is standard in almost all similar user agreements, including those from Microsoft and most online news publications (MSN and Houston Chronicle TOS excerpted below). That clause simply lets the user know that content they post in a public area can be seen by other users and can be used by the owner of the site for other purposes.

Finally, some ill-informed postings say that this change was recently made. In fact, the current AIM Terms of Service was last updated in February 2004 and has been in place for more than a year. The prior terms of service had almost exactly the same language reserving the same rights.

AIM user-to-user communication has been and will remain private, the AIM TOS was not changed, and the TOS includes a standard clause on publicly posted material.

MSN TOS: 6. MATERIALS YOU POST OR PROVIDE; COMMUNICATIONS MONITORING For materials you post or otherwise provide to Microsoft related to the MSN Web Sites (a "Submission"), you grant Microsoft permission to (1) use, copy, distribute, transmit, publicly display, publicly perform, reproduce, edit, modify, translate and reformat your Submission, each in connection with the MSN Web Sites, and (2) sublicense these rights, to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law. Microsoft will not pay you for your Submission. Microsoft may remove your Submission at any time. For each Submission, you represent that you have all rights necessary for you to make the grants in this section.

HOUSTON CHRONICLE TOS: 3.4 Your Submission of Messages. You hereby grant to The Chronicle a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, display and use for any purpose all messages posted by You on the Service or any e-mail sent by You to The Chronicle (in whole or in part) and to incorporate any such messages or e-mails in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

Krista Thomas
AOL Corporate Communications
703.265.5880
kristadthomas@aol.com

Speaking as an individual who happens to be the chief architect for AIM...

* The TOS is confusing, but was meant to apply to AIM Forum posts, not IMs. I agree that we should amend it to clarify this.
* The AIM network has hundreds of gigabytes of IMs flowing through it per day. Recording this would be extremely costly (especially for a free service). We don't do it.
* If you don't trust us, we have Direct IM and Secure IM in all recent AIM clients that let you send your messages peer-to-peer and/or with industry standard S/MIME, SSL, and AES encryption. There are no backdoors. I know since I designed these features.

More info: http://journals.aol.com/juberti/runningman

Krista Thomas
AOL Corporate Communications
703.265.5880
kristadthomas@aol.com

This is unfair and unethical business practice. It should be illegal. Send your comments to AOL at this page.

Since when is Saudi Arabia a warzone?

everyone knows that gnomes are fat...

http://members.aol.com/TheRobots2/jpeg/gnome.jpg

btw: i'm a kde user...
kde 3.4 Rocks.... and kde 4 (with qt 4) will rock even more...

If disabling access to listed sites is all there is to it, then IPs can simply provide a "Net Nanny" type service to their customers. I'm pretty sure AOL is already in compliance, as are many/most other big ISPs.

http://members.aol.com/wergames/ahreprom.htm
http://grognard.com/titler.html#r6

Searched for it in the discussions, but didn't find it mentioned. It's by far the best tabletop game I've ever played.

It's more a game of politics than a war game, but it has its share of war scenarios. The political intrigue of Roman times is well captured, and the battle aspects are a result of political decision making.

The last time I checked lying, cheating, and stealing were evil.

You are morally bankrupt if you think this is a 'low' threshold.

The test you should use with Microshaft is ask yourself the following question: "Would I be willing to admit to my parents/spouse/friends that I as a person did what Microsoft did?" If the answer is no - then it is clearly wrong - even if it is technically 'legal'.

If nothing Microsoft has done bothers you - then please share your name with the rest of us so we can avoid you because you will obviously be the person who doesn't return the power tools you borrow, steals money from my kid's piggy bank, and thinks it's okay to enter my home uninvited and help yourself to the food in my pantry.