Slashdot Mirror

Don't forget that the patent establishment has invested a huge amount of money and effort, over the last 150+ years, to promote a mythology to support its claims to perpetuate its system of exclusive privileges. The myths are deep and taken as real by many who should be more skeptical. I debunked the main myths on Free Software Magazine.

One of the big old myths is the "inventor" and "invention" myths. In fact, innovation is well understood (since the mid-1800's at least) to be a social effect, driven by market demand for new products and enabled by technological progress. Produce a new material in cheap enough quantities, and dozens of "inventors" will come up with similar new applications for it.

Of course there cases of lone inventors who work outside the rest of society - these are so rare they prove the general case that invention is the result of a social network. And this social network, which may be less obvious in some industries, is absolutely central to the innovation process in software, which is why the concept of software patents is to utterly bogus and corrupt.

Patents of all kinds are just a form of protectionist economics, along with trade barriers, subsidies, legislated monopolies, and so on. These work for those who can work the system, everyone else pays the cost.

Right. And the hope is that once we make it sufficiently expensive to get a significant amount of spam delivered, it'll no longer be financially worthwhile. I think we're probably approaching that point. I wrote a spam-filtering recipe and now see maybe 1% of all the crap thrown at it. That means it's now 100 times more costly per delivered message than it used to be. We all know that spammers pay for only a fraction of the highjacked resources they use, but even then they still have to pay something. Well, that something costs a lot more than it did 5 years ago.

I love Python. In fact, I wrote a short magazine article about how much I like it (although I admit that the promised sequel never materialized; sorry Tony). Having said that, working with Plone was like pulling teeth. It's obviously a nice system with huge potential and excellent customization options, but the learning curve is enormously steep.

We ended up abandoning our Plone intentions and moving toward Drupal for pre-made CMS stuff; even if I don't like hacking in PHP, hundreds of other people have already done most of the work for just about anything we might conceivably want to do. For true web application development beyond content management, we switched to Django and haven't looked back. If you already know Python, Django's learning curve is exceedingly shallow.

I don't hate Plone. It's just that it didn't seem to offer anything more than its competition, and that's from someone who already built a large web application in Zope (which is the platform Plone is built upon). Having said that, this book and others like it can hopefully make it a lot easier to get started with Plone development. It has great possibilities if you can get past the startup cost.

Consider the source folks, this is the same online rag that hosts Maureen O'Gara articles. For those that aren't familiar with "MoG" she a SCO shill with an extreme anti-IBM bias that stalked Groklaw's PJ, posted her personal information and other sorts of gossipy crap which SYS-CON happily published. MoG is also the last holdout that believes the SCO lies (and who is, coincidentally, owed money by SCO as is shown in the bankruptcy debtors list).

At one time SYS-CON promised to get rid of MOG, right after a mass exodus by SYS-CON writers in protest over what was called a gross violation of professional ethics. Later in an interview for Free Software Magazine, Fuat Kircaali, CEO of Sys-Con, stated he felt Maureen did nothing wrong. Today they still let her secretly write pro-SCO rubbish, and in some cases outright incorrect information under a pen name.

Anyone who consideres SYS-CON an authoritive source of IT information would be better off reading eweek or TheOnion for that matter. Sys-Con has some sort of agenda and are (at least in my opinion) serving interests other than Free or Open source software.

As predicted here, http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/wikipedia_vs_software

...but still want to be invited to the OSI party.

And it looks like Steven Goodwin didn't get his way then :( http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/open_proposal_to_ms_certification

When de Icaza talks about OOXML being "FUDed" to death, he's probably referring to this sort of ignorant thing. Bullet point evangelism seems to work quite well with the Slashdot/Digg crowds, which are amusingly enough the first ones to complain about Microsoft doing the same things to them.

I don't particularly cherish the idea of XML-based file formats. A binary one could have been well-documented and work a hell of a lot better, so I dislike both ODF and OOXML. But the level of stupidity in the "criticism" being leveled at OOXML is just ridiculous. Complete with "OMFG the 1.0 implementation as a BUG!!! Therefore the standard SUCKS!!!" detailed articles that include blatant misconceptions about how certain things work, ignorant points about the compatibility sections and the number of pages in the fucking document.

Linux terminal server...

http://www.ltsp.org/ the core project.
http://www.k12ltsp.org/ a turnkey setup for schools just add crappy old throw away PC's and you have instant terminals for that one fast server.
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/linux _terminal_server TCO breakdown and executive overview of the above.

Implimenting a Linux terminal server environment is 90000% easier than citrix or windows, and is far FAR more stable. Many schools and business use such a setup. Autozone uses Linux terminal server in every store.

This is the close up shot of the raccoon that represents Minux.

Note: I like some of the ideas behind Minux, I'm not making fun of Minux software, I'm just disappointed in Andy's choice for a cuddly animal that represents Minux.. I don't think Raccoon's are all that cuddly, nor are they great looking, nor are they interesting, nor are they special in any way. Plus, it reminds me of someone who eats trash and lives in garbage cans. Why would this be a good choice for a mascot?

Information Week cultivating more Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt, and Dissension.

Misleading InformationWeek GPLv3 article

Here are two comparisons and a (shameless plug) novice user's perspective.

No, it's not the same way. Quote: in the US, ignorance of a patent is considered reason for clemency in cases of patent violation., see also Free Software Magazine.
It seems to me that this is different from the case you're describing, where someone sharing MP3s can't claim that he didn't know he violated copyrights.

A white paper based on a technical comparison between the ODF and OOXML formats

...the OOXML "standard" is terrible from a technical point-of-view, even if you forget about Microsoft's motivation behind it.

want to fix it? why not test something new like this?

It was covered last month in FSM. http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/gnu_linu x_on_the_desktop_a_modest_business_proposal

From here:

A reader contacted me to point out that Thomas Jefferson did not write the US Constitution, so he did not in fact write the langauge enabling copyrights and patents "for limited times". He was in France at the time, and James Madison is the one who is primarily credited with the language in the Constitution. Jefferson was, however, quite opinionated about this subject and several others embodied in the Constitution, and he wrote several commentaries on it. It's probably also safe to say that he was quite influential on the ideas that went into the Constitution.

- David Stein

This was in FSM last month,

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/blogs/how_to_h ate_free_software_in_3_easy_steps

To my knowledge, there is no other document format that is intended to work this way.

Errrr.... Tex?

http://www.latex-project.org/

And I ain't ever used it, but my friends here do their entire print magazine in it.

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/1890

"...the GNOME project for many years just added lots and lots of feature creep and otherwise unnamed bloat. "

Is this the same GNOME project Linus lambasted recently, saying "This 'users are idiots, and are confused by functionality' mentality of Gnome is a disease"? Or are you talking about something else? Or is that attitude an over-reacting backlash from the aforementioned era of feature creep? I could see that.

No project suffers from lack of vision; if there's no vision, there's no project.

"Bazaar-style development allows projects to be in a zombie state for long periods of time" ...as opposed to dead and buried. This is not a weakness; it's a strength.

"Not only did Dawes lack vision, he got in the way of everyone who did have vision."

How? You just got through telling us Xorg's fork solved the problem. Was there a some strange delay between the time it became apparent Dawes was stonewalling and the time Packard forked Xorg? If so, how do you propose to explain such a delay //in terms of Bazaar vs Cathedral methodologies//? Had Xfree86 been a cathedral'ed project, Packard would have been //helpless// to solve the problem, not better empowered.

There's actually a fairly simple way to get FOSS devs to obey your "vision": pay them. It's the same thing Cathedrals do; they just license their software differently. There's nothing in the licenses that says you can't pay for software development, to say nothing of copies. Ask Linus about it; I understand he's making a fine salary maintaining a fairly useful software project.

Really, this 'FOSS developers code at home in their underwear in their free time' mentality of some is a disease. It's really what puts the lie to the whole idea that the only way to make money with software is by withholding IP rights.

So I guess I'm not clear, then, on what you mean by "Cathedral". Based on your article, you might be talking about paying programmers. You could also be talking about withholding freedoms. But neither of these makes sense.

I wrote basically the same article a year ago for Free Software Magazine. We've been using this setup at my office for the last year, and it's been working perfectly - to the point that an upset coworker told me yesterday that she's received four spams last week and wondered if something was wrong.

Hello,

I can see two problems with the way people are interpreting what happened.

The first one is that a lot of people are implying "One developer has left. Big deal. Somebody will step in". FALSE. A single, skilled developer can make the difference between a successful project and an unsuccessful one. As many good manages know, replacing a good worker is _very_ hard - sometimes impossible.

The second problem, is that a lot of people here have written comments without reading the mailing lists. Somebody implied "oh, it's the developer's fault, he shouldn't have been bothered in the first place". FALSE. Garrett really cares about the debian project; I generally agreed with what he said; lately, I was thinking "Geee, if I were him, I would quit". He found some of the tones grating as you guys would have if you cared about the project - and, above anything else, if you had read some of the messages in the mailing list. Accusatory. Unnecessary. Excruciating. Always coming from the "usual suspects" - who nobody seems to be able to shut up.

More and more people will leave, unless things change - rapidly.

Merc.
Editor In Chief
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/

Substitute cars with documents and "robotic parking lot" with DRM and you have the same result.

Do we really want to be held up for ransom by some company that has locked our data into their container ?

See also this article where vital information is held up if you do not pay... the point is that it is my data, not somebody else data !!!! as if since I put some money in the bank then the bank can refuse to give my money back or to stop moving to another bank. (I hope I am not giving new ideas to banks here...)

The article on locking medical data is here

The more effective way I have found to stop spam is grey listing. In the last two months, I have had zero spam messages go through to my mail server. I use GSLT (http://www.xmailserver.org/glst-mod.html), which is mostly for the XMail mail server ( http://www.xmailserver.org/) but will work anywhere.

You should also check this article http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/articles/focus _spam_postfix?page=0%2C0, lots and lots of good advice on spam filtering.

I wrote a blog for Free Software Magazine about the dangers of buying into a proprietary system. In summary, if you give up the freedom to make your own IT decisions, you can expect to pay for it (and dearly). It's no fun to have your core logic hostage to the whims of a third party who doesn't know you exist and wouldn't care if they did. We're doing new development in Python, and while I hope that people keep updating it, we don't go out of business if they stop.

Put another way, if you run your own mailserver and still get spam and viruses, it's because you haven't chosen to address the problem. If you use someone else's mailserver and still get spam and viruses, it's because they haven't chosen to address the problem. Nothing stands between you and a clean inbox but motivation, whether your own or your ISP's.

And no, broken hacks like DJB's "Internet Mail 2000" will never get real-world acceptance as they make it as difficult for legitimate bulk senders to broadcast as for spammers. SMTP is here to stay as the standard method for (somewhat) reliably routing messages between people on unaffiliated networks. Replacing it with a similar system with new pitfalls isn't the answer we're looking for.

"In 1999, Amazon obtained an injunction that forced rival bookseller barnesandnoble.com to go to two clicks"

So there you have it. Unless the USPTO vacates this patent, according to the logic in the injunction Amazon obtained, we'd have to let Barnes & Noble register ownership of "two click ordering" if they so desired. Then online bookstores & other retailers could logically follow suit, until Newegg was 84th in line & I had to write client-side auto-follow scripts to speed through the checkout process.

I have a virtual donut for anyone with a screenshot of what when Barnes & Noble's second click looked like when they first implemented it to comply with the injunction. I'd have done something like "Your order is almost complete. Please click here for no reason whatsoever except that a pissy competitor of ours fought in court to create this hassle for you. (More info)"

"[...] several other online businesses claimed [the patent] was overly broad and that the technology wasn't very original."

Well duh. For all the ink that's been spilt on this issue, I'm amazed that all it took was a dude from New Zealand willing to throw a few grand at the problem to get it reviewed. Krikey!

"Amazon.com remains confident in the validity of its 1-Click patent, which enables customers to shop conveniently without having to enter their shipping and billing information each time they purchase."

Uhhh... wait a minute. Was Amazon saying they own the idea of not having to re-enter one's shipping & billing information with each purchase? Really?

I do both (well, I work for a guy who owns a business), but neither my home account nor my coworkers' inboxes get nontrivial amounts of spam. I've written instructions on how I did it, and if you follow them, you can probably get rid of your spam problem as well.

It's not easy if you're J. Random Enduser, but any qualified system administrator should be able to take the steps needed to win back control of his servers. You can choose to do this - with today's software - if you're willing to exert a modest amount of effort.

The Postfix server never dies unexpectedly (99.99+% uptime last year, including maintenance downtime) and we automatically have a backup MX for when Exchange falls over - incoming mail just spools up in Postfix until Exchange comes back online. There have been no problems whatsoever, and my boss thanked me for eliminating our spam (and reliability) problems. Don't rule it out until you check into it!

1. Requiring HELO,
2. Rejecting non-FQDN HELO strings ("foo.bar" will get you in, but "myleetmailserver" won't), and
3. Rejecting HELO strings that blatantly lie (you're not "localhost" or my public IP address, no matter how many times you ask).

More and more ISPs are starting to implement the same compliance checks. Would any of these reject your system's mail? Several of our customers had misconfigured outbound servers and we helped them fix their systems. We were only early adopters, though; if we hadn't caught the problem then a major ISP or five would have started rejecting their email without being so helpful.

Maybe VZ is in the right this time. Are you sure they're not?

I stopped accepting spam and wrote an article about it. Free tools exist today to restrict almost all UCE, so I'm not sure why there's a great rush to fix a non-broken system by replacing it with a giant unknown.

You need to get them away from the IT "RAGS" as their only source of IT information, they use "shock value" to sell an issue. You can almost always find an article by the same publication that contradicts a previous postion (sometimes event the same author).

Use your vendors to help back your position. For instance I got my Oracle, IBM and HP reps together to support our Linux push. All they had to say was x% of their growth was in the Linux space. Belive it or not, if you have a good relation with a vendor, your management will be very willing to hear what they have to say.

Also, take a look at this article, it really says it all. http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_10/convince_management/.

Hope this helps and good luck. Just remember don't recommend a technology just becuase it is cool, management hates cool!

Well I guess you don't wanna pay people... There's an article about recruting people to work for free on an IT related project. You would know if you searched on my site :)

It's also been long postulated on Slashdot, by a multitude of posters, that the Earth is flat. Stupid ideas don't magically become un-stupid simply because enough people believe in them.

There are many effective anti-spam measures out there, today, that we can use. I even wrote an article about how I eliminated spam from my system with near-zero risk of false positives. And yet, a major ISP like AOL can only focus on the idea of making spam a profit center.

From now on, every time an AOL user complains to me about spam, I'm going to tell them that AOL probably got paid for it, and ask them if they got a check for their share of the profit. If they think it's fair to levy a one-sided tax on me for no legitimate reason, then I guess I can play that game, too. Call it "JSG's Gullibility Cuts Both Ways Surcharge".

(Terry Hancock)

I used VariCAD successfully for a short while. It was a very good program, as far as it went. Probably not as full-featured as AutoCAD, but considerably more intuitive to use (it compared well to DesignCAD, I believe).

In the end, I let my license expire and didn't upgrade, though (without an upgrade, with a binary-only package, the old package became obsolete quickly due to upgraded shared libraries on my Debian system).

I found that in the end, I was dissatisfied with it not being a free-licensed open source software. With proprietary software on Linux, you still have a lot of the baggage that you get with proprietary software everywhere.

And of course, being Czech, I'm not sure VariCAD was in a position to offer a full service and support model in the United States (they could've tried it of course, but they'd need support reps with good English skills and so on -- which would likely have been more expensive than selling licenses).

So I would personally say that what the world needs is not "AutoCAD for Linux" but rather a true FLOSS CAD package that interoperates well with AutoCAD (and other CAD packages). I think such a creation would be not only valuable, but profitable, since it's the perfect sort of package for a "services-based" vendor to get behind (but it involves a substantial investment, too).

Of course, you could predict that I would say that, since I recently wrote an article advocating it:

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_10/free_matter_economy_4/

but I still believe it, and this data, biased as it may be, encourages me that it's true. There are a number of resources in the bibliography of my paper for anyone interested in pursuing such a project (I'm sorry to say that my CAD links wiki is not yet one of the better ones -- still working on it. But I'd particularly recommend following up on the STEP and EXFF projects).

It's licensed under the Creative Commons "Attribution-Share-alike" License, so feel free to pass it around if you want to.

It's licensed under the Creative Commons "Attribution-Share-alike" License, so feel free to pass it around if you want to.

I built a Kubuntu machine for my in-laws. When they want to read their email, they click on the envelope icon. When they want to browse the web, they click on the spider web icon. When they want to copy photos from their digital camera, they click on the camera icon.

Which part of saving $200 and giving them an easy-to-use system is bad or difficult in your opinion?

Hello,

I am in touch with John Buswell: he is really dedicated, and I am sure the magazine will go far.
What I don't understand, though, is why O3 made it on Slashdot the minute it came out, while Free Software Magazine didn't - never.

No wonder Digg is going strong the way it is. Moody moderator to pick stories make moody decisions.

Merc.

they are completely different - this article discribes the difference pretty well.

Thats absolutely right. Since the dawn of time humans have been trading in a free competitive market economy, sharing ideas, changing (modding) their tools to better suit themselves and their needs, and overall pushing forward technology and innovation.

The US of A, became powerful, just like Britain before it, by having a competitive free market economy where ideas are shared and move everyone forward. But now the US is leading the world in restrictive laws and monopolies on ideas - i.e. restricting others from using ideas.

This trend is indeed bad for all of society. For society to improve, it must be able to freely share ideas and to change (mod) and their tools in the way the people see fit.

These restrictive practices will become evident within a generation how negative an effect it can have on society and the USs technological lead.

And some links:

1.1 Free Matter Economy, Part 1:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_07/free_matter_economy/
1.2 Free Matter Economy, Part 2:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_08/free_matter_economy_2/

2.
A Groklaw article complete with discussion:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200510251 65105685

3.
An Economist article:
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory .cfm?story_id=5014990

4.
Slashdot discussion on Economist article:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/23/17 37218&tid=187&tid=155

5.
The GNU Organisation for the development of software, its official stance on the negative effect of IP on software development:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml

6.
A longish non-academic article, but starts getting to the point eventualy:
http://www.reason.com/0303/fe.dc.creation.shtml

7.
A pdf:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/pci23.pdf
( http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/pci23.htm )

8.
Discussion on the above pdf:
http://activeclub.homeip.net/forums/view.php?bn=ac discussions_activeclubreflections&key=1046014645

Thats absolutely right. Since the dawn of time humans have been trading in a free competitive market economy, sharing ideas, changing (modding) their tools to better suit themselves and their needs, and overall pushing forward technology and innovation.

The US of A, became powerful, just like Britain before it, by having a competitive free market economy where ideas are shared and move everyone forward. But now the US is leading the world in restrictive laws and monopolies on ideas - i.e. restricting others from using ideas.

This trend is indeed bad for all of society. For society to improve, it must be able to freely share ideas and to change (mod) and their tools in the way the people see fit.

These restrictive practices will become evident within a generation how negative an effect it can have on society and the USs technological lead.

And some links:

1.1 Free Matter Economy, Part 1:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_07/free_matter_economy/
1.2 Free Matter Economy, Part 2:
http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/free_issues/is sue_08/free_matter_economy_2/

2.
A Groklaw article complete with discussion:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=200510251 65105685

3.
An Economist article:
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displaystory .cfm?story_id=5014990

4.
Slashdot discussion on Economist article:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/23/17 37218&tid=187&tid=155

5.
The GNU Organisation for the development of software, its official stance on the negative effect of IP on software development:
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml

6.
A longish non-academic article, but starts getting to the point eventualy:
http://www.reason.com/0303/fe.dc.creation.shtml

7.
A pdf:
http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/pci23.pdf
( http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/papers/pci23.htm )

8.
Discussion on the above pdf:
http://activeclub.homeip.net/forums/view.php?bn=ac discussions_activeclubreflections&key=1046014645

I became a fan of Free Software Magazine the first time I saw it advertised. I immediately subscribed, and am grateful for every issue that has been released. Yes, there are some other very important magazines out there, ACM comes to mind, but if you want to support a grass-roots magazine dedicated to free software, and what developers like you and I can accomplish, this project definitely deserves your attention and support.

*waits patiently for Tony Mobily, editor in chief of FSM, to extend his subscription for his evangelical work*

That's your own choice. I hate spammers, too, but I've chosen to do something about it; you can, too. Trust me - you can dislike them just as much while getting 2-3 spams per day instead of 2500.

I personally think that hypervisors are overhyped (pun fun!), and that the most practical and useful form of "virtualization" is actually separation as is achieved by Solaris Zones, FreeBSD jails and (the most advanced of them all IMO) Linux Vservers. A pretty good article on it here.

Separtion carries nearly zero overhead, simplifies administration because there is one kernel and one filesystem. It allows for simple "entry" into a virtual server from the main server, and there are other subtle advantages that I can't think of right now probably....

I'll plug this again.

Basically each email goes through the following:

1. Reject any HELO messages claiming to be your own server.
2. Reject any email with unresolvable from headers.
3. DNS Blacklisting.
4. SPF
5. Greylisting
6. SpamAssassin
7. ClamAV
8. Procmail moves tagged messages to my spam folder.

The order is important. Every step 1-5 drops the email entirely. After that, they just get tagged. The more expensive options occur at the end, so they deal with less email.

I have been using this for a few months now. I'm only seeing about one spam a month now, and those are appropriately tagged and filtered into my spam folder.

A couple of times I have had to whitelist mailing lists because they don't make it past the greylisting, but other than that, I haven't had any false positives.

I drop email based on SPF, but you could always add a header instead. In fact, SpamAssassin has support for SPF and can use it as part of its scoring system when determining whether an email is spam or not.

To answer your question, I don't think this is an option for large companies. I agree it would be very effective at least temporarily (and save them money, probably, because most spam would be dropped at the door). Large companies are probably less tolerant of false positives than you or I might be. They probably won't/can't use greylisting and DNS blacklisting.

Still, they could use most of the things in this type of system and tag everything rather than drop it.

It's an interesting phrase. Most often, in discussions of economics, the "tragedy" is assumed to be the overuse by one person of a common resource --specifically, the overgrazing of a village's common land because each farmer figures they can add a few more sheep to their flock. This tragedy scenario is used to argue that common resources will be destroyed by use, and therefore must be removed from common ownership and owned by some particular person or organization in order to preserve them.

Except that the whole idea is historically inaccurate. In reality, this scenario was avoided by a complex set of social norms. Everyone in the village had a stake in keeping the commons useful and generally managed to keep it so, despite the theories of economists. This worked until the land was enclosed -- divided up and put under private ownership, less practical on a small scale, and generally forcing small farms out, or forcing them to rent from a few giant landowners. In general, the few large landowners profited, and the many smaller landowners became poorer.

It's been noticed by many that the copyright of music and other intellectual "property" is the same kind of enclosure. It takes valuable things -- Beethoven's music, say -- out of common hands and places them into the hands of a few giant corporations. And in the case of the IP commons, we don't even have Hardin's argument for enclosure: no matter how many people listen to a piece of music, or run a piece of software, it's not going to get used up or worn out.

FWIW, in my experience a 5 minute timeout is every bit as effective as a 4 hour (?!?!?) delay, so don't assume that more is better.

<plug>More good ideas at Free Software Magazine.</plug>

I wrote an article about my Postfix + Amavisd + SpamAssassin + ClamAV + Greylisting setup; I'm down from many-thousand spams per day to one or two. We've reached the point where technology can do an excellent job of separating the wheat from the chaff, but people seem slow to adopt it. I'd go as far as to say that if you or your company still get significant amounts of spam, then it's a voluntary decision.

My only wish is that SPF were more widespread. One of my domains, honeypot.net, seems to be a favorite for spoofing, and it wouldn't hurt my feelings to never receive another whiny email from someone who just decided that they've had enough and wants to start fighting back.

...is avalaible in plain html _and_ .pdf.

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/

Looks like Mr. Kircaali wants his editors back :)

Robert