FWIW, most (?) state antispam laws include a clause that indemnifies ISPs from their users' actions -- as well they should, IMHO. See suespammers.org for details.
Yep, this kills one of my ideas: I was thinking of building sub-$200 Linux boxen from the MachZ "PC-on-a-chip". Oh well... guess I'd better stick to PPC.
In their words, "Name servers MUST be already registered with InterNIC or use CORE-registered domains." You can do that somewhere on the Network Solutions site. Don't even bother trying unless you meet those conditions.
If you have an InterNIC-registered nameserver, it then has to be registered with CoreNIC. NetSol apparently isn't sharing their databases.
After the CORE nameserver registration goes through, you can register your domain(s).
Unfortunately, there's currently no way domains from InterNIC to CoreNIC except to let the contract run out and then snap it up again when your domain goes dead. Extremely suboptimal.
What do you get in return? Cheaper registration ($60/two years), real customer service, and an explicit antispam policy.
With published specs out there for PPC CHRP (PPCP) machines out there it's only a matter of time until someone produces a PPC machine on the cheap that will run linux.
People interested in doing this are gathering even as we speak at http://www.openppc.org.
With an ATX style MB you'd pay a slight premium over x86 hardware
After the 20,000th unit, maybe. Economies of scale, you know. But getting to that point will be a challenge.
but they benefits would be great
What he said!
Hopefully Apple isn't able to put pressure on anyone to prevent them from doing this.
The biggest thing Apple can do is pressure IBM to stop giving out these mobo designs. All the more reason to download them now at http://www.openppc.org/make.html
I just called the 888 number and asked to have the account removed. The first person said, "You have to respond to the 'remove' instructions at the bottom." I pointed out that that would only stop mail to my @tgeller.com account, and would not remove the dotcomnow account. "No," she said, "it does both." I asked to speak to her supervisor, and he insisted that was correct. I doubt it, but there it is. --Tom
Keep your eyes on The Open PPC Project, currently at http://www.tgeller.com/openppc. It's a meeting place for folks interested in building PPC-based boxes, and there's been a lot of talk about G3->G4 upgradeability. Based on the preliminary schematics (available through the site under "Plans"), it won't be that hard.
Right now, x86 is the cheap platform. Hell, that's what I bought myself, even though I've used Macs since 1985. But lowering the price of PPC boxes will -- I hope -- become the whole point of this exercise.
I've made a few calls to price this all out. If it looks possible, you'll be hearing from me.:) But to tell the truth, I'm not too optimistic about being able to match x86's price/performance ratio. (I'm especially interested in entry-level boxen.) And if you can't do that, why bother?
If any businesspeople are interested in helping out with getting cheap PPC boxen together, send me a note. The e-mail address is on my site.
This is, indeed, great news. More Linux, more platforms, more business opportunities, more More MORE!!!
But it won't change anything unless someone big enough to afford it actually starts building the Mobos. Steve Kahng (of PowerComputing fame), where are you when we need you?
Look, you and I know that Red Hat isn't substantially different from other Linux companies -- but the market is driven by mania first and reason second. If everyone thinks Amalgamated Dog Poop is hot, by definition it is.
Roblimo writes: "Chris is a truly nice person, which may be why so many customers figured they could get away without paying him. If so, this is a sad commentary on the current Internet business climate."
God, I second that. I did about $1,500 worth of work for a prominent Linux company at cut-rate -- plus fronting them $800 worth of supplies -- and it's taking a court order and collection agency to get the money.
Want a recipe to sink a free-software project? Don't pay your bills... don't show up to meetings... go back on your word... take weeks to ship orders.... The real shame is, you not only sink your company -- you could minimize the honest work done by dozens of volunteers.
If you want your project to be taken seriously, you have to act like a real business. Free software demands extra responsibility to promulgate and promote the work done by contributors.
Anyway, sincere condolences to Chris and others involved in LinuxBox. Sadly, you're not alone.:-/
I hadn't planned to announce this for a while, and in fact won't do a real "public" announcement until I have a few things squared away. This is just for the slashdot.org community -- let's keep this under our hats, shall we?
Because the laws are only good if we use them, I've been working on a project to help ISPs and network administrators sue spammers using existing laws. The URL is (drum roll, please)... http://www.suespammers.org. Thanks to Paul Vixie of MAPS for hosting it.
If you'd like to get involved, sign up for the mailing list and/or write to me directly. I need state coordinators, commentators, tech support, legal advice... just about everything. Mum's the word...
Based on the California laws, you can sue anybody who send spam *to* your server -- you need not have a prior business relationship with them. Here are the three references:
* California Business and Professions Code, Section 17538.45
* California Business and Professions Code, Section 17538.4
* California Penal Code, Section 502
The first two were the result of a bill by Gary Miller; the last (which sucks rocks) is from Bowen. I'm collecting all these resources (including full texts of the bills) for a site to be launched as soon as I get my Linux server to talk with my router. Until then, you can look them up on FindLaw.
1) NSI's definition of "customer" is bogus. Yes, a company has certain rights to communicate with its customers (see below). But the status of "customer" implies the meeting of a willing buyer and willing seller. Because NSI has had a monopoly these past few years, we can't assume "willing buyer". Who knows how many people would have gone to a different source for TLDs had one been available? I know I would have. Therefore, we as buyers are in an *enforced* customer relationship, and NSI shouldn't assume that the usual privileges apply.
2) Even if we were truly NSI's "customers", opt-out bulk e-mail is still not part of the "usual privileges" package vendors earn from such a relationship. I've seen the e-mail in question -- it's a pure sales pitch, *not* administrative. It's not central (or even related) to the functioning of the relationship, and one has no opportunity to opt-out at the time the relationship is started. In short: appallingly bad marketing. But what moves NSI from the world of Bad Marketing and into the sphere of Theft is the cost-transference nature of e-mail.
I second that. Cyclic has done a great job of keeping CVS vibrant while staying true to free-software ideals. I'm glad to see Jim shepherded it into new hands rather than let it wither when it was time for him to move on to other things.
I don't know SourceGear as well as Cyclic, but was impressed with their showing of AbiWord at the last LinuxWorld in San Jose. (An anecdote: Linus came up and started playing with it while I was in the booth, and seemed quite impressed.) Their commitment to free software is clear, and I have no worries about the future of CVS under them.
Plus, Real is a bunch of unrepentant spammers. They get your e-mail address, they'll send you their marketing crap forever -- there's no way to opt-out. (Not that having an opt-out vindicates spam anyway...)
"I'd settle for simply requiring unsolicited emails to say in the subject that they were spam."
This shows a fundemental misunderstanding of how SMTP works. The header is part of the DATA segment, which also carries the body of the message. So if you let the header through, you're also allowing full trespass and theft of service.
Besides spam's annoyance factor, it carries a considerable cost: about 10 percent of your ISP bill, according to various sources (including the Gartner Group's recent report. So while header warnings might cut down on the annoyance factor some, it won't do anything to lessen spam's postage-due costs. Warnings in the HELO segment are a bit more acceptable, but still not great.
Yes, I know electrons are technically subatomic, as are protons and neutrons. I meant particles like bosons, quarks, fruity pebbles.
I've never heard of any research on passing current using such particles. Has it been done? That would change the playing field quite a bit; it's well beyond my practical understanding, though. If anyone could point to a URL about such research (preferably in layperson's terms), I'd love to see it.
Slashdot Mirror
Now let's see what kind of loser would be on the computer right after midnight instead of at some party... whoops, that would be me.
[gildaradner] Nevermind. [/gildaradner]
--Tom
See The Suespammers Project.
Tankyouveddymuch.
--Tom Geller, Founder, The Suespammers Project.
This is the perfect moment to quote legendary VC John Doerr: "No conflict, no interest".
--Tom
--Tom Geller
Founder, The Suespammers Project
--Tom
--Tom
- Go to http://www.corenic.org and find a registrar. I used NetWizards, http://www.netwiz.net. They've been quite good -- they even answer the phone!
- In their words, "Name servers MUST be already registered with InterNIC or use CORE-registered domains." You can do that somewhere on the Network Solutions site. Don't even bother trying unless you meet those conditions.
- If you have an InterNIC-registered nameserver, it then has to be registered with CoreNIC. NetSol apparently isn't sharing their databases.
- After the CORE nameserver registration goes through, you can register your domain(s).
Unfortunately, there's currently no way domains from InterNIC to CoreNIC except to let the contract run out and then snap it up again when your domain goes dead. Extremely suboptimal.What do you get in return? Cheaper registration ($60/two years), real customer service, and an explicit antispam policy.
--Tom
Want to be that source? See http://www.openppc.org.
--Tom
People interested in doing this are gathering even as we speak at http://www.openppc.org.
With an ATX style MB you'd pay a slight premium over x86 hardware
After the 20,000th unit, maybe. Economies of scale, you know. But getting to that point will be a challenge.
but they benefits would be great
What he said!
Hopefully Apple isn't able to put pressure on anyone to prevent them from doing this.
The biggest thing Apple can do is pressure IBM to stop giving out these mobo designs. All the more reason to download them now at http://www.openppc.org/make.html
--Tom
I just called the 888 number and asked to have the account removed. The first person said, "You have to respond to the 'remove' instructions at the bottom." I pointed out that that would only stop mail to my @tgeller.com account, and would not remove the dotcomnow account. "No," she said, "it does both." I asked to speak to her supervisor, and he insisted that was correct. I doubt it, but there it is. --Tom
The real action's in the mailing list. :)
--Tom
I've made a few calls to price this all out. If it looks possible, you'll be hearing from me. :) But to tell the truth, I'm not too optimistic about being able to match x86's price/performance ratio. (I'm especially interested in entry-level boxen.) And if you can't do that, why bother?
If any businesspeople are interested in helping out with getting cheap PPC boxen together, send me a note. The e-mail address is on my site.
--Tom
But it won't change anything unless someone big enough to afford it actually starts building the Mobos. Steve Kahng (of PowerComputing fame), where are you when we need you?
--Tom
But still, this is a minor bug compared to the problems I had with Windows NT4. Sheesh...
--Tom
Ever hear of Tulipmania?
--Tom
God, I second that. I did about $1,500 worth of work for a prominent Linux company at cut-rate -- plus fronting them $800 worth of supplies -- and it's taking a court order and collection agency to get the money.
Want a recipe to sink a free-software project? Don't pay your bills... don't show up to meetings... go back on your word... take weeks to ship orders.... The real shame is, you not only sink your company -- you could minimize the honest work done by dozens of volunteers.
If you want your project to be taken seriously, you have to act like a real business. Free software demands extra responsibility to promulgate and promote the work done by contributors.
Anyway, sincere condolences to Chris and others involved in LinuxBox. Sadly, you're not alone. :-/
--Tom
You're welcome. :)
--Tom
Because the laws are only good if we use them, I've been working on a project to help ISPs and network administrators sue spammers using existing laws. The URL is (drum roll, please)... http://www.suespammers.org. Thanks to Paul Vixie of MAPS for hosting it.
If you'd like to get involved, sign up for the mailing list and/or write to me directly. I need state coordinators, commentators, tech support, legal advice... just about everything. Mum's the word...
--Tom
* California Business and Professions Code, Section 17538.45
* California Business and Professions Code, Section 17538.4
* California Penal Code, Section 502
The first two were the result of a bill by Gary Miller; the last (which sucks rocks) is from Bowen. I'm collecting all these resources (including full texts of the bills) for a site to be launched as soon as I get my Linux server to talk with my router. Until then, you can look them up on FindLaw.
--Tom
1) NSI's definition of "customer" is bogus. Yes, a company has certain rights to communicate with its customers (see below). But the status of "customer" implies the meeting of a willing buyer and willing seller. Because NSI has had a monopoly these past few years, we can't assume "willing buyer". Who knows how many people would have gone to a different source for TLDs had one been available? I know I would have. Therefore, we as buyers are in an *enforced* customer relationship, and NSI shouldn't assume that the usual privileges apply.
2) Even if we were truly NSI's "customers", opt-out bulk e-mail is still not part of the "usual privileges" package vendors earn from such a relationship. I've seen the e-mail in question -- it's a pure sales pitch, *not* administrative. It's not central (or even related) to the functioning of the relationship, and one has no opportunity to opt-out at the time the relationship is started. In short: appallingly bad marketing. But what moves NSI from the world of Bad Marketing and into the sphere of Theft is the cost-transference nature of e-mail.
--Tom
I don't know SourceGear as well as Cyclic, but was impressed with their showing of AbiWord at the last LinuxWorld in San Jose. (An anecdote: Linus came up and started playing with it while I was in the booth, and seemed quite impressed.) Their commitment to free software is clear, and I have no worries about the future of CVS under them.
This is a good match.
--Tom Geller
P.S. A version of the P.R. letter with a quote from Jim is at http://www.cyclic.com/cvs/letter_cvs.html
Please, please, please, Rob -- anything but Real.
--Tom
"I'd settle for simply requiring unsolicited emails to say in the subject that they were spam."
This shows a fundemental misunderstanding of how SMTP works. The header is part of the DATA segment, which also carries the body of the message. So if you let the header through, you're also allowing full trespass and theft of service.
Besides spam's annoyance factor, it carries a considerable cost: about 10 percent of your ISP bill, according to various sources (including the Gartner Group's recent report. So while header warnings might cut down on the annoyance factor some, it won't do anything to lessen spam's postage-due costs. Warnings in the HELO segment are a bit more acceptable, but still not great.
--Tom
I've never heard of any research on passing current using such particles. Has it been done? That would change the playing field quite a bit; it's well beyond my practical understanding, though. If anyone could point to a URL about such research (preferably in layperson's terms), I'd love to see it.
-Tom
Oh, yeah -- first post! :)
--Tom