Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Spammers, Privacy, Anti-Spam, and Lawsuits

Posted by Hemos on from the oh-my dept.

Digital Eco Freak writes "The Washington Post is running a story about a spammer suing to keep his address and personal info private. George Allen Moore Jr. of Linthicum, MD has sued Francis Uy for posting his contact information on the web. He has gotten threatening phone calls and messages, as well as an over-abundance of unsolicited catalgs and packages as a result of Uy's actions. The spammer is getting a taste of his own medicine, but the guy's business address turns out to be the same as his home address, so there may be real safety concerns. Should spammers get some privacy protection too?"

3 of 386 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Home/Business by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Now apply your reasoning to the Middle Eastern reaction to the United State's actions, and 9/11 becomes a bit more understandable. I don't say this to bait flames, I say it as an oft-repeated but rarely undersood warning that the USA's current actions in Iraq will have undesireable consequences. If you think unsolicited email is bad, imagine how the Iraqis feel about unsolicited bombs. Worse, think about how the disenfranchised Islamic extremists who are nowhere near Iraq feel about it. I doubt the next 9/11 will come from Iraq, but it will come in the name of Iraq.

    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  2. Re:Home/Business by Rick+the+Red · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Do you really believe that the terrorism would not have continued regardless of what goes on in Iraq?
    I never said that. But I do believe it will now get worse, as does the US Government (they went from "mauve" - worried, to "pink" - scared)
    Do you really believe that leaving Saddam in power would have brought peace to the region?
    I never said that. But Dubya has certainly brought war to the region.
    Do you think that the people of Kuwait asked for the bombs and invasion 12 years ago?
    I never said that, and this has nothing to do with Kuwait.
    Do you believe that Muslim fanaticists hate the Americans only because of their involvement in the Middle East and not because of the fact that they preach death to all non-believers (American or not)?
    Yes. I don't believe that Islam preaches death to all non-believers. The extremists do, but so do other, non-Islamic extremists. Many claim to be Muslim but don't act like it. Bush claims to be Christian but doesn't act like it.
    Do you not believe that more civilians have died since Saddam took power than in both of the gulf wars combined?
    I have no data on that, and it's irrelevent to the discussion. Bush didn't cite that as his justification for war.
    Do you not believe that given in time Saddam would attack Kuwait again?
    No, I don't. Not after what we did to him last time he attacked Kuwait. Remember, this time he hasn't attacked anyone, Bush has. And Bush didn't cite any threat to Kuwait as his justification for war, he cited a (still not demonstrated) threat to the USA. "The threat is real, but we can't show you the proof -- it's secret."
    Do you not believe that Saddam has been producing banned weapons over the last 12 years even though he destroyed some of them only several months ago?
    No, I don't. They still have no "smoking gun" and I think they should not have attacked until they had one.
    Do you believe that Saddam really cares how many of his people die?
    Do you believe that Bush really cares how many people die? In war, people die. Who started this war, Saddam or Dubya? I believe whoever started it gets the credit for those who die.
    Who do you think has made more of an effort to protect the lives of civilians - the US or Iraq?
    Well, given that the US attacked first...
    How many wars do you know of that a concerted effort was made to not just protect the civilians but to make sure they are supplied with food and water?
    I believe the Allies made a concerted effort to protect civilians in WWII. That is not new, but the ability to protect civilians has improved with every conflict. As has the ability to protect combatants; in future wars expect more remote-controlled drones, on land and in the air, the better to protect the combantants, not the civilians.
    --
    If all this should have a reason, we would be the last to know.
  3. Re:Home/Business by changa_pc · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    First of all, who cares why Bush wants the war.
    I care, because he's the one causing the war.

    As for the smoking gun of weapons - he just destroyed some banned weapons only a few months ago.
    Untrue. Those small missiles were not banned weapons, and Saddam destroyed them, not Bush.

    That is not just a smoking gun but a signed confession.
    Propaganda, nothing more.

    This is a war that should have been finished 12 years ago by Bush Sr. but he got cold feet.

    It was finished. Iraq surrendered and we were at peace with them when George started up his new war.

    Saddam is and always will be a threat to the US and its allies.
    Saddam has never been a threat to the USA.
    Kuwait is not an American ally.
    Israel bombed Iraq in 1982, remember that?

    The USA gave Saddam permission to invade Kuwait after the Iranian war. I'm not even sure why they had to ask, since the feifdom of Kuwait technically belonged to Iraq anyway.

    "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

    Exactly why I encourage you to learn some history instead of merely repeating propaganda like this.