Slashdot Mirror
Spamford Wallace Draws A Restraining Order
Steve Rock writes "According to an article in the Associated Press, a temporary restraining order has been issued by a judge against Stanford Wallace and his companies. The case marks the first anti-spyware action taken by the Federal Trade Commission, and while there is some argument about permitting unsolicited commercial e-mail because of free speech it appears a tougher approach will be taken with alleged spyware distribution."
When will Gator and WhenU be similarily restrained?
Do they even know that they're bad guys, or do they have themselves fooled?
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Nobody reads it. In essence, it's an end-run around the legal system.
If spam is such a problem for networks and humans (and definitely it is, and getting worse), then why aren't we seeing TV/Radio PSAs explaining why it is inherently a bad thing? Since everyone universally hates spam, this lack of public service information seems to be an implicit blind eye to the problem. Intel, AMD, Apple, etc. could bump up the corporate goodwill by publicly denouncing that which 99.9% of all email users consider to be a scourge of the internet. What would it cost, a few dozen millions in order to saturate the popular media for a few weeks? That's peanuts to these guys.
I have a feeling that spammers make a huge amount of money selling lists to other would-be spammers.
It's all in how you define "bad", and your own personal moral compass.
Take me, for example : Despite a sense of outrage at the way the world runs, it seems people consider me to be a little too moral. Hell, I know I do - I could never deliberately hurt a friend, and when I do accidently, it causes me great guilt. Hell, I still feel guilty over minor little incidents that involved nobody else! when I was a kid.
However, there's a guy here in Australia who's currently in the news because of a share "scam" - basically, he's sending letters to small shareholders, little old ladies and men etc, offering to buy their share parcels at considerably below their value. People seem to find this reprehensible...
Now I could quite happily do that, and not feel a twinge of guilt. Don't ask me why, I just wouldn't - maybe it's because I feel very strongly that one should be aware of these things, and make decisions accordingly.
Or, maybe I'm just one very fscked-up person. That's a possibility too...
What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
Interestingly, I noted a significant decrease (75 percent, roughly) in SPAM for a week or so after the series of hurricanes disrupted power et al in Florida. What's that stat, something like 90 percent of spam sources from one or two people in Florida?
If a hurricane can do it, so can a jail cell.
Ignorance is curable, stupid is forever.
quote: "and rightly shouldn't be, as there is a very low signal to noise ration in graffiti." An intrinsic part of the free speech is that you cannot infringe a person's right to free speech because it was inarticulate or unintelligible due to the ignorance or lack of education in the communicator. To do so allows groups to silence the minority when they try to voice an unpopular opinion. Graffiti is illegal because it is destroying either public or private property, not because of any message inside.
>>Blacklists, etc, don't work now because of address forgery
I assume you're talking about address/domain-based blacklists? Those would be the only one affected by "address forgery." I've not seen an address-based or domain-based blacklist in a very long time.
Most current blacklists are IP-based. Those can't be forged if you realize how the email system works. Yes, false IP addresses can be injected into the Received: headers, but this is not news. Every correctly configured mailserver puts the IP address of the previous server in the "hop list", INCLUDING the receiving server. The admin of that server can look at the headers, and since he (hopefully) can trust his own server, the previous server in the list, the one whose IP was added by the destination, is the source of the spam.
Blacklists DO work. 3rd parties don't like them because they may inconvienience them (sharing a mailserver with a spammer? Then you're going to be blocked). However, the opinions of 3rd parties (non-customers) are irrelevant.
"Food on the table," always the refuge of those breaking the law that think it's ok. Of course, it seems that usually "food on the table" means "Quality food on the nice teak dining set in my tastefully appointed 3 bedroom house in a good neighbourhood with a new Audi and Subaru parked out front."
To quote Chris Rock: "Please cut the fucking shit."
There are many, millions in fact, people in this nation that put food on the table and sustain themselves doing menial jobs, often for minimum wage. I've done that before. There are plenty of low level jobs doing construction, washing dishes, etc out there. If you need work to feed yourself, it is always available. For that matter, there are plenty of social services available that will get you fed as well.
So let's not play this game. You got out of a job, probably because your ethics are in the shiiter and you aren't very good at what you do. I mean who wants to hire someone who has crappy work eithic and general eithics where it's ok to break the law so long as it puts them ahead?
So you turn to spam, something which was clearly immoral and receantly became illegal. Why? Not because you need to eat, as I said, there is ample oppertunity out there to get shit work that'll give you money enoug to get food and shelter, but becuase you think you're special, and deserve more. You seem to think that you ahve a right to make lots of money doing computer shit and if you can't do it legally, well than dammit doing it illegaly is justified.
Give it up, you have no moral high ground here.
The really funny thing is I know many people in It who are in a position where they hire other people. Nearly all of them are looking for people to hire, that's right, they want to give more people a job. The problem is, they can't find people qualified for the job. They find many people who's skills just aren't up to their talk.
So get off it. Also, you might want to update your homepage, if you truly are in the grips of unemployment. Gabbing about how spam is what you must do to put food on the table while proclaiming to have employent with a large chain on your page doesn't help your stance.