Slashdot Mirror

These are numbers from last year, so I'd imagine they're a little bit higher. Slashdot had 1.2 million page views a day. Between the halt of classic.themes.org and the new one, t.o was getting about 120,000 page views a day. When an article was posted on slashdot saying "help *link*themes.org" it jumped up over 300,000 for a day or so and went down over a week or two to get back to 120,000. The guy that humiliated bernard shiffman also documented his slashdot experience, pretty interesting stuff.

Awhile back, Slasdot posted a story about "Bernard Shifman (is a moron spammer)" who spammed his resume to 1000's of people then got irate as hell when anti spam activits called him on it. Well... Bernie threatened to sue everyone and their grandmother over this.

This sounds exactly like what Mr. Novak did, except this bigger moron actually went through with the threats. Unbelieveable. I seriously wonder if he thinks after word of his lawsuit gets out (and it obviously has) that he is going to have ANY customers? Espically in a rather small market of aquatic plants.

Suing your customers whom you've screwed over with shoddy service sure isn't the way I'd go about building a successful business. But then again, the RIAA/MPAA are still in buisness... and they're the kings of alienating customers...

Go figure

Jason

Apparently PetzWhorehouse doesn't want any more customers.

This kind of bad press only makes them look stupid and desperate. Kinda reminds me of Bernie Shifman

Is it just me, or do these people figure the world owes them just because they are alive?

*sigh*

FBI Headquarters, Director's Office, Present:

DATA ANALYST: Good Afternoon, Sir. Here is the latest report from Carnivore.

FBI DIRECTOR: Who the fuck is this Bernard Shifman?

DATA ANALYST: He's a moron spammer, sir. We're trying to get his e-mails excluded as we speak.

...has been forthcoming as to the identity of the dummy, but the Computing and Business worlds have their fingers crossed that it is Bernard Shifman.

Shifman Is a Moron Spammer

I think we all can enjoy another good laugh at the idiocity of one Bernard Shifman. I'm surprised he was still spamming as of 2/16.

for more about barratry, see the classic bernard shifman is a moron spammer.

If they're smart enough to grab my email addy, why can't they harvest my resume too and leave me alone?

Considering what some people do with résumé spam and the morons who send it, maybe you should consider yourself lucky that they aren't doing that.

I recieved a spam from the same company that was mentioned. Of all things, the spam was generated when I posted to an alumni message board of the high school I went to. To start with, the website is not mine, and second, I would much rather see the students in the web programming class learn how to promote the site. I forwarded the spam to Neil Schwartzman and he replied back to me stating that the best thing I can do is ignore it. I wouldn't expect a dime from this. If they do act, it would be a very interesting precedent that was set.

I hope Bernard Shifman is making enough money to be able to cover his advertising expenses at $50 per e-mail. I don't think he is because last reports had him still spamming message boards and a few other addresses.

Couldn't Californians bring suit against Shifman if they have recieved one of his silly resumes?

"granted Intel an unprecedented preliminary injunction to ban me from sending informative and educational e-mail messages to Intel employees."

hey, can we extradite bernard shifman to china... he can teach them proper e-mail ettiquet, then life will be good again.

It's just playing with words and being a political spin doctor. I, for one, am only surprised that email spam has not been used for campaigning earlier.

I don't think spam will ever became a widespread practice in political campaigns. The typical spammer operates more or less anonymously, and expects a very low rate of responses. The spammer has nothing to lose when some of the recipients get angry, complain, and even get the spammer's thowaway accounts revoked.

On the other hand, someone who has their real name connected to a spam sets themselves up for dire consequences. Witness the Bernard Shifman debacle. A candidate for public office has everything to lose, they could potentially piss off dozens of voters for every vote that is gained. Even the folks that aren't angered by spam are going to be affected by all the bad press surrounding incidents like this.

"...actions will soon be taken against a chosen few..."

"...not to mention the hits that you have generated for our site, much appreciated there..."

Does this guy remind anybody else of Bernard Shifman? =)

I'm not really suprised, in my experience anything free is a scam. Except those little food samples at grocery stores.

Reality: A lot of people treat job hunting as a full time job in and of itself, spending hours a day sending out resumes, querying employers, researching, etc.

Yes, let us not forget Bernard Shifman.

Yeah, Bernard Shifman sent out like ten million resumes via email and is still unemployed! Go figure, an unemployed spammer!

guy in Chicago won't be in any sort of danger. Perhaps spam is the answer...

(Example that guy that spammed to get a job... I dont recall the name.)

You're looking for Bernard Shitman. Check out his #1 fan-club site: Bernard Shifman Is A Moron Spammer.

This always makes me think of BSIAMS and to whatever may have happened to him lately, after his spamming activities (and threats to sue!!) were originally reported on slashdot.

Anyone has had some news, or has received a resume from him ?

I think a death penalty for spammers is a good place to start.

But with that, we'd get no more entertainment from the likes of Bernard Shifman.

The site that the previous story referenced has quite a bit of funny correspondence - if you look at his complaints section, you can see all the negative feedback the guy got, and then forwarded to Neil as some sort of revenge for posting the story in the first place. My favorite so far is an e-card somebody sent Bernard, seen here.

There isn't really a reason to take someone to court just because they sent you an unsolicited resume.

I'm in complete agreement with you -- presuming that you work in a company's HR department. These folks get paid to sift through crap like that. Bulk-mailing stuff to people who have no reason to look at it should be punishable by death.

Then you're not familiar with the case of Bernie Shifman. What your friend did was look through jobs on a job search site, and indiscriminately submit his resume to every listing. That's not spam - the recipients have ASKED for resume submissions, and your friend submitted them.

What Bernie did WAS spam. He sent his resume (through e-mail, not a job site) to thousands of e-mail addresses, including non-HR addresses. Many of the addresses never asked for resume submissions. When people complained, he went berzerk and started threatening them with lawsuits. Then he spammed AGAIN, after he was asked not to.

What your friend did was fine - what Bernie did was not OK.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say to all the above repliers:
You are all interpreting him wrong.

As you have all pointed out, the services == daemons, but I doubt his point is, that he wants to be able to enable/disable daemons in an easy to use GUI-tool.

Considder this scenario:
Aunt Petunia got on the latest trend, and bought herself a brand new Athlon XP system, and installed Linux on it (let's say Mandrake, as everybody and their dead dog are raving about it's usability). Being a smart distro, Mandrake automagically sets the USE_AMD_ENHANCMENTS (or what have you) flags, and the USE_CREATIVE_AUDIGY_ENHANCEMENTS etc., so her new computer is up and running perfectly and it optimized for her computer at kernel level (the distro recompiles her kernel during the install procedure).

Three years down the road, aunt Petunia decides she wants a new computer.
"Everybody on alt.w3.d16.l1n00x says I can just put my harddrive into my new computer, so I'll just do that instead of installing Mandrake again."

So, she puts her harddrive into the new system, but it won't work, because her new computer is an Obscurium Pendulum Mobilum, and it doesn't work with USE_AMD_ENHANCMENTS and USE_CREATIVE_AUDIGY_ENHANCEMENTS.

Now she can't use her other system to fix the problem, because there aren't any easy to use tools for her to update her kernel. End result? She's screwed. Which is nice, because we all know - aunt Petunia hasn't gotten any since she was but a lass, but she's still stuck with a new computer, she can't use.

Now - I know I'm off by a mile or so in this little story (except for aunt Petunias sexlife), but the point is - why SHOULDN'T she be allowed to play around with her kernel? It's HER kernel - it's not yours, it's not mine, it's HERS! What are you all afraid of? That by making it simple for aunt Petunia to reconfigure her kernel, you'll lose your status as "l337 k3|\|31 ]-[@(k3r5"?

Everybody is whining about "we want to get linux to the desktop" or "why don't people understand, that linux is better than windows?" Here's a clue-by-four (stolen from Joe Greco in an email about Moron Spammer, Bernard Shifman):

People won't switch from one thing to another, unless they get more at the trade-in. Want them to dump windows? Tell them what they get AS A BONUS, when switching to linux - like compiling your very own kernel. If the engine blows? Who cares - the system keeps backups of previously working kernels and automagically switches back to the previous edition (one step back at a time), if the bits hits the fan and tells you in polite languge: "you fucked up, try again".

They don't care about stuff like "this is way more secure than Windows" because aunt Petunia never had a virus. Well - she did, but no one told her, and to be honest "what's the harm? It's not like anybody died or anything."

Safety doesn't sell, if it doesn't save lives or prevents loss of life. Neet new features DOES sell - as witnessed by the effects of Microsofts campaigns. "OOH, now I can print out my letters in cyrillic - yay - must have!"

In other words: If someone wants to build a smart interface for reconfiguring the kernel, you have two options.
Listen carefully, I shall say this only once. I 'ave a massage:

1) Put out.
2) Butt out.

There are no other choices. Don't want to use it? Fine, don't - it's a free world (well, most of it anyway, except for some third world countries and the US of A), but don't put down people who wants to make things more accessible.

and on what software does the "point-and-drool" tools run? and who writes that?

anyone who has taken an automata and computability course at college level can tell you that such software is non-trivial to write/maintain.

you paint a nice, dismal view of the industry in 15 years, and as you say SOME jobs may be moved offshore. what do i care if some "point-and-drool" master coder is out of a job because of it?

Ask Bernie!

Read up on Bernard Shifman

I know hes been featured here on slashdot, but Shifman just goes to prove you can't legislate against stupidity

Frankly, it's easier for me to give a 2 line note "Hi, I don't own MS Word, please export your document to HTML or text and resend it" than to continually download and install 3rd party software on the rare occasions that anybody sends me a .doc file. Let's face it, few people send .doc files to known Linux advocates (with the exception of that loser Bernie Shifman, of course -- yes, I got his MS-Word format resume!).

And don't even get me started on people who require resumes in Microsoft Word format. I generally shrug and send them the HTML version of my resume. I haven't been unemployed in 6 years now (except for 4 days earlier this year between the end of my previous job and being hired at my current job), so apparently it hasn't been a problem.

-E

From the now famous Bernard Shifman is a Moron Spammer page: "You may want to run a spell checker over your resume, as well as consider sending it in plain text format. I realize it's prettier as a Word document, but we're primarily a *nix shop and reading Word documents is sometimes more hassle than it's worth. In this case, it was *SO* much more trouble than it's worth. Then again, I should have guessed anyone sending a Word document wouldn't have any *nix clue."

QUESTION 1: Nazi Germany was a Democratic government whose actions were determined by a mandate of the people (majority rule). The majority of the German people at the time decided Democratically to launch a program of terror and murder against everyone not in the majority -- a program that left over ten million people dead. Given that you have stated you do not acknoweldge a concept of universal human rights, but acknowledge "the will of the people" as the only legitimate source of governmental authority, do you accept the Democratically-mandated murders perpetuated by Nazi Germany, or do you condemn the Democratically-mandated murders perpetuated by Nazi Germany, and thus renounce your belief in "the will of the people" as the only legitimate source of government authority?

This article wouldn't have been sent in by Bernard Shifman about this website, would it?

Slander, defamation, hate speech, lawsuit threats?

I hear Bernard Shifman might have some knowledge pertaining to this...

http://petemoss.com/spamflames/index.html

This is one of the funniest parts from the webpage...

AH! SOMEONE TOLD HIM ...
From: Bernard Shifman
[mailto:bshifman@cometlink.com]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2001 2:37 PM
To: 'abuse@google.com'
Cc: 'forumadmin@geminione.com'
Subject: FW: Article regarding Bernard Shifman


ABUSE@GOOGLE. = This person is using your search
engine to host a link. please read entire e-mail
below to understand how this berson is abusing
your service. It is your job to put a stop to this.

[I am "using their search engine to host a link"? Oh geez. Talk about clueless]


This guy is beyond clueless! How can he claim he's a computer consultant? What would he do if someone really hired him?