MS knows it can't fight open source software (legally or marketwise) and attempting to do so is futile as we've seen with FUD, SCO, and hinting around with patents. Open source can't be squashed, so the next best thing is getting you to run it on Windows instead of Linux. You can debate about Microsoft's motives and intent all day long but you have to remember it's a corporation. Individual psychology does not apply when understanding a corporation's motives. A corporation will attack a problem (ahem Linux) on all fronts, which can and does result in Microsoft performing confusing or opposing actions.
I happen to be a big fan of OSS on Windows (particularly Firefox, Apache/PHP/MySQL, Gimp, Cygwin, Perl, GCC, and a few others). Running those apps on Windows means you will continue funneling money to Microsoft by means of upgrades and support. It's actually rather frustrating to search for free apps for Windows only to discover most are trialware or castrateware. Sometimes you just want a really simple app and paying for it is not a desirable option for you.
I don't have any problem with anyone who opts to use or opts to write OSS for Windows. Windows may not provide value for you Linux or BSD elitists, but it does for those who want it.
OK. Now continue on your bitchfest, but know this. I'm not going to participate.:D
If the app is slowing you down the chances are that you're doing some thing algorithmically bad, or forcing the app server to do something that should have been done on the database - these problems are unlikely to go away with a platform change.
A web imaging server doesn't work well if it has frequent interaction with a database, particularly when image loading time in the browser is absolutely critical (where 0.5 seconds versus 2 seconds means everything).:) It's also more dependent on CPU speed and amount of RAM. Of course, using C to implement one for the performance gain goes in opposition for my request for non-performance reasons.:) The code I'm referring to was reimplemented in PHP and the performance was fine. It was also substantially more reliable with fewer segfaults, not to mention the code was more condensed and easier to read. The C code was problematic with maintenance and testing.
Let's ignore plugins or modules, because those are frequently C/C++; however, it's been my experience that writing modules is far less common than just implementing code in PHP or Perl. I'm talking about basic application logic, generally form processing and serving HTML content.
I have implemented barebones C and C++ HTTP servers because high performance was a critical requirement, but the percent gain wasn't really worth the effort. PHP with caching (apc, memcached, db pooling) is almost as fast as a bare C server. Debating 1,000 connections per second versus 10,000 connections per second is a bit moot when your system isn't topping 300 req/second, even at system peak.
So. Does anyone have a reason for C/C++ web code that's not based on performance? Say, a library wrapper for accessing a legacy data source for which there's no scripted library?
Last I checked with friends of mine who used to do this sort of thing, copper you put in the ground in large parts of Africa was being pulled back out just as fast and sold as scrap.
Makes a bit of a barrier to getting a healthy internet economy, no?
18,000 requests per second from iPhones knocking out dozens of access points at Duke Universit
I don't understand why no one thinks it's a problem that the iPhone didn't back off. It still generated thousands of requests (or responses) to the broken router. It should have detected that and backed off. But then, I'm not very familiar with how ARP works.
Most crashes are on take off and landing so they're usually belly flopping the ground, which would be a low G deceleration. There are some that just roll over on take off and nose dive into the ground though. That'd be similar to hitting a mountain, but only at 200 mph.
Spammers lie. Some money is being made. They lie about making lots of money to encourage suckers to buy their services.
Right... How do you figure that when email is generally CPA these days? Heh. Heh. Heh. By the way, I'm not going to explain CPA, if you don't know what it means you're just talkin about your butt. There's also no way to fake or forge conversions, whether you want to believe it or not. If the advertisers aren't getting conversions, they BAIL. They're actually very sensitive to profit loss. Of course, I can expect some of you to confuse "conversions" with clicks. Heh.
It just kills ya that some people make money with spam. Doesn't it?:D
Way to rationalize. The spammer "business model" is based on stealing the time, money and attention of a large number of people to make a sale to one person. Unsolicited advertising is the same but with a smaller ratio.
Hmmm. It'd be nice if you actually read my post properly. I wasn't rationalizing (you really meant defending) spam. I was explaining why so much money was made on spam. The parent post I responded to gave the impression no one is making money on spam, which is nonsense. A lot of money is being made. Email is one of the most effective ways of generating revenue. Far more effective than silly banner ads.
And spammer-sympathizers need to spend some face time with Sweet Lady Brick, too.
LOL. Nothing gets you people more riled up than a spam discussion. LOL.
I'm not a spam sympathizer really. I find spam annoying and often potentially dangerous with respect to trojans.
I just had a connection to someone you would call a spammer, although he did it in a completely legal way (conforming to CANSPAM, processing unsubs and complaints, maintaining a physical place of business, etc), so I've had many discussions on how spam works. I no longer have that connection so you can settle down now.:)
By the way, if it helps you feel better, the guy was (is) a prick.:D
Bull. You doth protest too much, methinks, and you know far too much about this business "the owner you know" has to not be a part of it somehow. I suspect you see this owner every time you look in the mirror.
LOL. HA HA HA HA
If I was making money doing that, I wouldn't be posting here.... or would I? Hmmm. Anyway. I'd be occupying my time with leisure and what-ever-else if I were. The reason I don't is because I'm lacking two things: an email list and a sense of greed.
Actually, it's the other way around. With less than 1% response rate, for every one of us that won't there's another 100 of us that also won't.
Riggghht. Keep on thinkin that. 5% or more is possible, although difficult. No, I'm not going to say how but think about the women popping balloons example. Narrow & focused.
So what does it matter that one spammer makes lots of money. That is like saying that one pan handler makes a more than a living wage, so all pan handlers have more money than the average person. Some people are particularly good at what they do, and they know how to manage the economic forces,and can manage their scruples, so they do well.
Well. I think most underestimate just how many spammers there are. You can purchase spam software for $500, which lets you input a 50,000 email text file and away you go. I wouldn't be surprised if there are a lot of fly-by-night spammers making 50k a year on the side. They're under the radar because their volume is low and they can easily signup for various $20 a month cheap accounts.
Just like any other business, there are those who truly understand the business they're in and simply make it work better, which can propel them into shifting into large-scale production. There aren't that many making 10's of millions on spam err I mean commercial email, but I'd wager there are at least several hundred to a couple thousand that are. I can't prove it so it's a total guesstimate.
Again, I'm taking names, and you guys are _very_ easy to filter:
I'm not a spammer, so I object to your use of the "you" pronoun.
____
Anyway, nice sentiment in your post, however there's something you should realize. Your opinion doesn't matter because you're one individual among a group of spam recipients. You won't click an ad and purchase, but for every one of you there are 100 of your peers that will.
When it comes to understanding why spam works, you have to think in terms of group social behavior. Not individual behavior.
Remove the word "legitimate" and take the quotes off the word spam. There's no difference between what you (I'm sorry, the 'owner you know') do and what you call "true spammers" do. You are still dealing in unsolicited commercial mass emails that people don't want.
Legitimate as in.. not breaking any laws. There are lots of slimy things you can do that aren't illegal.
You are still dealing in unsolicited commercial mass emails that people don't want.
That's baloney. If they didn't want it, they wouldn't click on it and purchase. No money would be made off spam if that were not so. What people say is a lot different from what they do.
In fact, looking over your list of what makes this enterprise "legitimate", every single one of them involves circumventing and defeating the protections that people and ISPs spend a lot of time and money to put up and maintain to keep this mail away.
They can circumvent those "protections" because the burden of cost and method of delivery is flawed.
You mention the cost to the ISP in your last line, but utterly ignore that your "legitimate" version is ALSO at the cost of the ISP, in the increased manpower and hardware costs to adjust to your "legitimate" circumvention methods.
Duh. Heh.
Seriously though, most list owners don't give two hoots about the cost to the receiving ISP, which is part of the reason why everyone thinks they're slimy. Heh. However, when an industry builds an infrastructure open to sending enormous quantities of bulk mail with very little cost to the sender (by volume) and where the larger burden of cost is shifted to the receiver, who do you have to blame?
The architects of that flawed system? Or those who use it for their benefit?
______
By the way, there is one very important point I should make that many of you may not be aware of.
Some of your ISPs really don't give a crap about your spam complaints, because who do think their biggest customers are? Bulk emailers. Who generates traffic that's billable to a client flush with cash? Bulk emailers. Who pimps out their lists for commercial email? ISPs. The smaller ISPs care and are the ones who usually get it up the ass, but they're also not in a position to do much about it. These relationships are very complex and often hypocritical: ISPs want to profit on spam, but don't want to receive spam. The big players know what the deal is and they're making money.
Oh sure. There are complaint systems in place, but those keep the small number of complainers happy and give the appearance of doing something. Most people don't complain, which are the ones they make their real money on. Nobody makes money off complainers which is why there's a strong incentive to get them off a list as quickly as possible--preferably through an unsub, because unsubs are transparent to filtering systems like Brightmail.
Life is tough. You gotta be told Santa Claus doesn't exist at some point.
steady influx of new emails - the list will degrade over time, so you need to replace those emails to maintain a constant list size
Now with legitimate spammers, they will honor complaints and unsubscribes. Processing them quickly does help a lot, because you can just repurchase the email on another list and continue slamming the hell out of them until they unsub once again. Heh. You just purchase or create new "lists" ad nauseum to get keep them active. Heh.
The only thing separating you from millions of dollars is owning a list of several million verified names, but can you live with being a slimeball? Surprisingly, most people can. Money smooths over everything.
This also reinforces my assumption that for the most part spamming is just a way to make some easy money without much real work. Most people are not going to get rich off it, but if one is a country where a few thousand a year is good money, then hey, it beats doing honest work. It might even product the 20K a year one needs to live in the US. But like any organized crime, a few get insanely rich, and the rest get knocked off for pocket change.
I know an owner of a legitimate "spam" business. The owner grosses over $20 million a year with an approximate 50% margin of profit. The amount of money made depends on several factors that are difficult to maintain over time, which is why you don't see everyone making 10's of millions dollars off spam.
a clean email list - cleaning an email list requires sending an email and not receiving a bounce. There is risk in testing the email because if you test too many bad ones you can get blocked, but once it's tested it's worth considerably more than an unclean email.
list of active users - users who opened or clicked. An order of magnitude more valuable than a clean email.
relationships - avoiding email blocks and getting unblocked
distributed servers - avoid email blocks by sending from and rotating multiple IPs. The more you have, the more stable the delivery is.
delivery - your email has to make it to the inbox. An order of magnitude more valuable than Bulk box delivery. Bulk delivery is still better than no delivery, which can be the case if you're blocked.
If you have all those factors in your favor, you can sustain the profits, which is what the major "legitimate" commercial emailers do. The true spammers are usually a bit more shitty, using trojans and disposable accounts, but achieve the same effect, usually at the cost of the ISP, however they're risking jail time if they're caught.
Hmm. Regime change. What was safe to say today could be unsafe tomorrow. Only thing is, how do you know who will win the war? The militarists? The church? Or the secularists?
If we're run by the church today, how do you know beforehand you shouldn't say "I believe in God" if later the secularists take over and ban all religion? Or, how about "I am gay" but then the church takes over?
You'd have to post everything anonymously, or nothing, because you won't know which comment will get you into trouble.:D
It's too bad you were modded down, as you have a really good question. "Why do we need privacy?" is worth asking.
I just think it's a question people ought to think about instead of bitch about. I also wanted to fish for some unique answers.
I don't have to worry about whether someone in IT noticed that Google search for "guns" the other day, or if they're going to take it the wrong way.
I think that's unique enough. Heh. I think your other question touches something more abstract about human nature. People tend to assume Y if you searched on X, but your reason may have been Z, so by keeping your search private you avoid the problem entirely. Ex: you surfed for machine guns, so your boss thinks you're going to shootup the office, but you're actually writing a gun smuggling novel in your spare time.
You also could cause yourself to fall under moral discrimination if your boss knew your interests without your providing them. Boss = anti-abortion, You = pro-abortion, and after searching for an abortion clinic, your progress reports mysteriously tank and you have no idea why. You could also run into problems if your boss knew you were searching Monster for "unix+system+administrator", which coincidently is your job title.
Maybe you are so completely ignorant of the debate that your post really was credulous. In which case instead of lashing out at the people criticizing you, you would do well to understand WHY they are criticizing you.
I'm well aware of the issues of privacy under the items on the list I provided. I wanted someone to state specifically why it's important to them and to give me a reason that was unexpected or unique. I guess that's too simple a motivation for you to understand.
The criticism was simply the easier way out. Providing what I wanted was a lot more difficult. When in doubt.. SHRIEK!
In short, what you wrote and particularly the WAY you wrote it is very trollish to anyone who has seen this topic of discussion more than once or twice.
You mean the WAY in which you READ it. There was no connotation in my question. Only the pessimistic one in your head. Get a grip... paranoid boy. (Afraid to sully your real account.. eh?)
It is YOU who is the troll. Trolls want you to react. I wanted you to respond.
* Trolling a site where you've been banned time and again as a troublemaker.
HA HA HA. I usually fake my hahas with the standard LOL, but this time it's legit. I really am going HA HA HA. Plus, you actually answered my question. You succeeded where others failed. Pretty tuff wasn't it? HA.
Slashdot Mirror
Flash.fla is to Flash.swf as Film Reel is to Movie.
I mean really, if we're going to be consistent here, ya really oughta bitch about the movie industry.
(Oh, and just to cut anyone off at the pass with the expected reply of "We can buy a DVD copy", that's nothing like a raw film reel (ie source).
MS knows it can't fight open source software (legally or marketwise) and attempting to do so is futile as we've seen with FUD, SCO, and hinting around with patents. Open source can't be squashed, so the next best thing is getting you to run it on Windows instead of Linux. You can debate about Microsoft's motives and intent all day long but you have to remember it's a corporation. Individual psychology does not apply when understanding a corporation's motives. A corporation will attack a problem (ahem Linux) on all fronts, which can and does result in Microsoft performing confusing or opposing actions.
:D
I happen to be a big fan of OSS on Windows (particularly Firefox, Apache/PHP/MySQL, Gimp, Cygwin, Perl, GCC, and a few others). Running those apps on Windows means you will continue funneling money to Microsoft by means of upgrades and support. It's actually rather frustrating to search for free apps for Windows only to discover most are trialware or castrateware. Sometimes you just want a really simple app and paying for it is not a desirable option for you.
I don't have any problem with anyone who opts to use or opts to write OSS for Windows. Windows may not provide value for you Linux or BSD elitists, but it does for those who want it.
OK. Now continue on your bitchfest, but know this. I'm not going to participate.
....programming?
Let's ignore plugins or modules, because those are frequently C/C++; however, it's been my experience that writing modules is far less common than just implementing code in PHP or Perl. I'm talking about basic application logic, generally form processing and serving HTML content.
I have implemented barebones C and C++ HTTP servers because high performance was a critical requirement, but the percent gain wasn't really worth the effort. PHP with caching (apc, memcached, db pooling) is almost as fast as a bare C server. Debating 1,000 connections per second versus 10,000 connections per second is a bit moot when your system isn't topping 300 req/second, even at system peak.
So. Does anyone have a reason for C/C++ web code that's not based on performance? Say, a library wrapper for accessing a legacy data source for which there's no scripted library?
- Publishing: news, info, blogs, editorials, research, statistics, etc
- Political commentary and organization
- Directories of phone numbers, businesses, professionals, resumes, jobs, etc
- Maps and yellow pages
- Email, telephone, video conferencing
- E-Commerce & trading
- Government services, taxes, forms, etc
- Online courses: particularly useful in rural African towns
- Technical support for machinery, computers, software
Africa needs the internet.Most crashes are on take off and landing so they're usually belly flopping the ground, which would be a low G deceleration. There are some that just roll over on take off and nose dive into the ground though. That'd be similar to hitting a mountain, but only at 200 mph.
It just kills ya that some people make money with spam. Doesn't it?
Life ain't fair. Sometimes the jerks profit. Heh.
I'm not a spam sympathizer really. I find spam annoying and often potentially dangerous with respect to trojans.
I just had a connection to someone you would call a spammer, although he did it in a completely legal way (conforming to CANSPAM, processing unsubs and complaints, maintaining a physical place of business, etc), so I've had many discussions on how spam works. I no longer have that connection so you can settle down now.
By the way, if it helps you feel better, the guy was (is) a prick.
Should read, for every one who responds, there are 99 others that won't. Heh.
If I was making money doing that, I wouldn't be posting here.... or would I? Hmmm. Anyway. I'd be occupying my time with leisure and what-ever-else if I were. The reason I don't is because I'm lacking two things: an email list and a sense of greed.
Riggghht. Keep on thinkin that. 5% or more is possible, although difficult. No, I'm not going to say how but think about the women popping balloons example. Narrow & focused.
Just like any other business, there are those who truly understand the business they're in and simply make it work better, which can propel them into shifting into large-scale production. There aren't that many making 10's of millions on spam err I mean commercial email, but I'd wager there are at least several hundred to a couple thousand that are. I can't prove it so it's a total guesstimate.
____
Anyway, nice sentiment in your post, however there's something you should realize. Your opinion doesn't matter because you're one individual among a group of spam recipients. You won't click an ad and purchase, but for every one of you there are 100 of your peers that will.
When it comes to understanding why spam works, you have to think in terms of group social behavior. Not individual behavior.
That's baloney. If they didn't want it, they wouldn't click on it and purchase. No money would be made off spam if that were not so. What people say is a lot different from what they do.
They can circumvent those "protections" because the burden of cost and method of delivery is flawed.
Duh. Heh.
Seriously though, most list owners don't give two hoots about the cost to the receiving ISP, which is part of the reason why everyone thinks they're slimy. Heh. However, when an industry builds an infrastructure open to sending enormous quantities of bulk mail with very little cost to the sender (by volume) and where the larger burden of cost is shifted to the receiver, who do you have to blame?
The architects of that flawed system? Or those who use it for their benefit?
______
By the way, there is one very important point I should make that many of you may not be aware of.
Some of your ISPs really don't give a crap about your spam complaints, because who do think their biggest customers are? Bulk emailers. Who generates traffic that's billable to a client flush with cash? Bulk emailers. Who pimps out their lists for commercial email? ISPs. The smaller ISPs care and are the ones who usually get it up the ass, but they're also not in a position to do much about it. These relationships are very complex and often hypocritical: ISPs want to profit on spam, but don't want to receive spam. The big players know what the deal is and they're making money.
Oh sure. There are complaint systems in place, but those keep the small number of complainers happy and give the appearance of doing something. Most people don't complain, which are the ones they make their real money on. Nobody makes money off complainers which is why there's a strong incentive to get them off a list as quickly as possible--preferably through an unsub, because unsubs are transparent to filtering systems like Brightmail.
Life is tough. You gotta be told Santa Claus doesn't exist at some point.
- steady influx of new emails - the list will degrade over time, so you need to replace those emails to maintain a constant list size
Now with legitimate spammers, they will honor complaints and unsubscribes. Processing them quickly does help a lot, because you can just repurchase the email on another list and continue slamming the hell out of them until they unsub once again. Heh. You just purchase or create new "lists" ad nauseum to get keep them active. Heh.The only thing separating you from millions of dollars is owning a list of several million verified names, but can you live with being a slimeball? Surprisingly, most people can. Money smooths over everything.
- a clean email list - cleaning an email list requires sending an email and not receiving a bounce. There is risk in testing the email because if you test too many bad ones you can get blocked, but once it's tested it's worth considerably more than an unclean email.
- list of active users - users who opened or clicked. An order of magnitude more valuable than a clean email.
- relationships - avoiding email blocks and getting unblocked
- distributed servers - avoid email blocks by sending from and rotating multiple IPs. The more you have, the more stable the delivery is.
- delivery - your email has to make it to the inbox. An order of magnitude more valuable than Bulk box delivery. Bulk delivery is still better than no delivery, which can be the case if you're blocked.
If you have all those factors in your favor, you can sustain the profits, which is what the major "legitimate" commercial emailers do. The true spammers are usually a bit more shitty, using trojans and disposable accounts, but achieve the same effect, usually at the cost of the ISP, however they're risking jail time if they're caught.Hmm. Regime change. What was safe to say today could be unsafe tomorrow. Only thing is, how do you know who will win the war? The militarists? The church? Or the secularists?
:D
If we're run by the church today, how do you know beforehand you shouldn't say "I believe in God" if later the secularists take over and ban all religion? Or, how about "I am gay" but then the church takes over?
You'd have to post everything anonymously, or nothing, because you won't know which comment will get you into trouble.
You also could cause yourself to fall under moral discrimination if your boss knew your interests without your providing them. Boss = anti-abortion, You = pro-abortion, and after searching for an abortion clinic, your progress reports mysteriously tank and you have no idea why. You could also run into problems if your boss knew you were searching Monster for "unix+system+administrator", which coincidently is your job title.
The criticism was simply the easier way out. Providing what I wanted was a lot more difficult. When in doubt.. SHRIEK!
You mean the WAY in which you READ it. There was no connotation in my question. Only the pessimistic one in your head. Get a grip... paranoid boy. (Afraid to sully your real account.. eh?)
It is YOU who is the troll. Trolls want you to react. I wanted you to respond.
I'll call you the assumer. Since you can assume so much from such a simple question.
And to think I actually thought I might get some smart answers. Boy, was I wrong.
I consider that victory.