Your definitions are (in my opinion at last) valid. However not everybody necessarily agrees with them. One thing I find interesting about the original article on Slashdot is that it says he is "Circumventing CAN-SPAM" which in reality he is not. Political and Non-profit organizations are exempt from CAN-SPAM. As such he can hardly be Circumventing a law which does not apply to him. (All ethics aside of course!)
When it comes to spam, the hair can be split fairly finely I'm more than willing to concede. But I completely agree that its no excuse for his behavior.
Spam is often referred to as UCE "Unsolicited Commercial Email", which his emails were not. We tend to apply a broad label to spam. Often "Any email I don't want.", which may not be fair in all cases. In any case the law seems fairly clear that he was not technically breaking it.
However, as someone who says they are a proponent of anti-spam, engaging in "spam like" behavior can only undercut their position.
You can always use the Windows Services Update Server (WSUS)
It downloads all the updates released by Microsoft onto a server. You choose which ones are stored/released and point all computers on your network to it - you can even have all computers on your network go to this server on a schedule and download any updates available.
I've tried to wade throught most of the comments on this subject and its mind boggling the overwelming responce this post has generated.
I would like to point out however, that everybody here is preaching to the converted. Seriously, are there any non-geeks reading this?
I'm not opposing the opinions posted here, rather I'd like to point out that your just pulling your own wankers here and not getting a lot done. Orginze something, maybe step away form the computer and go forth and take action!
Slashdot Mirror
Your definitions are (in my opinion at last) valid. However not everybody necessarily agrees with them. One thing I find interesting about the original article on Slashdot is that it says he is "Circumventing CAN-SPAM" which in reality he is not. Political and Non-profit organizations are exempt from CAN-SPAM. As such he can hardly be Circumventing a law which does not apply to him. (All ethics aside of course!)
When it comes to spam, the hair can be split fairly finely I'm more than willing to concede. But I completely agree that its no excuse for his behavior.
Perhaps in a cynical way they are. And in a cynical way I agree with you. However, technically they are not.
Is it spam or not?
Spam is often referred to as UCE "Unsolicited Commercial Email", which his emails were not. We tend to apply a broad label to spam. Often "Any email I don't want.", which may not be fair in all cases. In any case the law seems fairly clear that he was not technically breaking it.
However, as someone who says they are a proponent of anti-spam, engaging in "spam like" behavior can only undercut their position.
You can always use the Windows Services Update Server (WSUS)
t eservices/default.mspx
It downloads all the updates released by Microsoft onto a server. You choose which ones are stored/released and point all computers on your network to it - you can even have all computers on your network go to this server on a schedule and download any updates available.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserversystem/upda
I've tried to wade throught most of the comments on this subject and its mind boggling the overwelming responce this post has generated.
I would like to point out however, that everybody here is preaching to the converted. Seriously, are there any non-geeks reading this?
I'm not opposing the opinions posted here, rather I'd like to point out that your just pulling your own wankers here and not getting a lot done. Orginze something, maybe step away form the computer and go forth and take action!
Oui?
Da Foxman