spam costs the receiver money. magazine ads, TV commercials, and billboards do not. the first of those three are completely opt-in, as well, since you have to buy them or watch TV to see the ads. the third is fully paid for by the billboard owner. why is this concept so hard to grasp?
is it the bug with Mozilla's resolver? because that one is affecting several people i know, too, and is in bugzilla.
gethostbyname() is good enough for me.
Re:100 million mailboxes protected?
on
As the Spam Turns
·
· Score: 2
I am _well_ aware of Spamcop's DoS attacks - very, very well aware.
"Here's a list of ISP's we consider untrustworthy, because they refuse to kick off their spammers".
you forgot
"There might be ISP's on here who have kicked off the spammers 6 months ago. We don't really care. Yee haw, at least everyone trusts our opinions!!"
You seem to think I'm pro spam because I'm anti-SPEWS. You couldn't be more wrong.
My motives are simple. SPEWS says they'll do one thing, and they do another. They say they'll remove listings after the spammers are gone. They don't. Even 6 months later.
The only reason I even care is because I handle support requests, and every once in a while we get someone who can't send e-mail out to certain people. We have to tell him that the remote ISP is using faulty blocking software (because well, they are) and there's nothing we can do (because, well, we've done everything they've said we can do.)
SPEWS can rot.
100 million mailboxes protected?
on
As the Spam Turns
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I find that figure *very* hard to believe. How do they figure it's 100M?
Here's hoping this group is more responsible than SPEWS. With that (likely bogus) figure being announced, I doubt that they are.
"in time" should not mean >6 months. we were in the list for maybe 1 month before booting them. the spammer is *long gone*. IN FACT, the spammer moved before we kicked him off our network, and SPEWS recognizes this, and yet still lists us.
the reason i won't post to NANAE or here w/ the IP range is because it's pointless. SPEWS shows very clearly just how silly the anti-spam movement has become. dealing with anti-spammers is like talking to a brick wall.
SPEWS is lame. They do not even follow their own policies (specifically, that they will remove listings after spammers are terminated. 6+ months now, still listed. And they say you can't contact them (and posting to NANAE is _not_ an option).
SPEWS has made themselves completely irrelevant in my eyes.
Re:Great, there goes more of our freedom
on
Shrinkwrapped Books
·
· Score: 2
Sometimes you have to stop looking at things so cynically (I know from personal experience this is hard).
Governments also side with big business because big business employs people. Maybe not as many as you want them to but there are still a lot of paychecks written out by big business.
Well, yes, but that still doesn't explain your mistake.:)
It's been 14 seconds since you hit 'reply'!
Re:Get it out of the way
on
Penguin Airlines
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Only to then find out that Linus has deemed the previous method for retracting landing gear "inefficient" and that you'll be lucky if it works at all. There'll be a new way to do it. If you're lucky, you'll run across this obscure e-mail somewhere on Google.
It was never anyone else's address. It was an address on a domain I've owned for a long, long time. Microsoft failed to confirm the signup, so some random bozo got me added to their spam list.
This isn't some huge hurdle/burden - receive a signup request, send out a unique confirmation link. Microsoft didn't have that in place (I don't know if they do now), therefore they are spamming me, because I never requested it(confirmed it).
Wow. Hung up on by customer service 4 times? What do you say to them to make them do that? I've never, ever had trouble with their customer service. Do you just bitch them out or what?
Definitely. It's amazing what people will let their kids get in to. I can't get upset on this parent's behalf. Ultimately, the Internet was not built for children, and it will never be child-safe. People need to stop whining that it isn't.
I receive spam from Microsoft. Someone signed up a previously unused address for their service. I receive plenty of spam that comes from "mainstream" companies.
I agree that most spam is fraud/junk - however, I do not look forward to a future where spam is considered OK, and I start getting multiple daily e-mails (to each of my addresses) from Microsoft, IBM, General Motors (from each car division there), Ford, etc etc etc. That's where we're heading with some of the anti-spam efforts.
How is it well-written? It's some incoherent mess about going from System 9 to System X and then Microsoft black putty. "I still don't get it about System X". What?
Slashdot Mirror
I'd suggest reading my post again. I did not say billboards were opt-in. Thank you.
spam costs the receiver money. magazine ads, TV commercials, and billboards do not. the first of those three are completely opt-in, as well, since you have to buy them or watch TV to see the ads. the third is fully paid for by the billboard owner. why is this concept so hard to grasp?
Dear Will,
We are so cool, we're beyond cool. We are in orbit man. I don't do pre-game strategy.
I look forward to some personal time with you.
ooOooo! you go boy!
is it the bug with Mozilla's resolver? because that one is affecting several people i know, too, and is in bugzilla.
gethostbyname() is good enough for me.
I am _well_ aware of Spamcop's DoS attacks - very, very well aware.
"Here's a list of ISP's we consider untrustworthy, because they refuse to kick off their spammers".
you forgot
"There might be ISP's on here who have kicked off the spammers 6 months ago. We don't really care. Yee haw, at least everyone trusts our opinions!!"
You seem to think I'm pro spam because I'm anti-SPEWS. You couldn't be more wrong.
My motives are simple. SPEWS says they'll do one thing, and they do another. They say they'll remove listings after the spammers are gone. They don't. Even 6 months later.
The only reason I even care is because I handle support requests, and every once in a while we get someone who can't send e-mail out to certain people. We have to tell him that the remote ISP is using faulty blocking software (because well, they are) and there's nothing we can do (because, well, we've done everything they've said we can do.)
SPEWS can rot.
I find that figure *very* hard to believe. How do they figure it's 100M?
Here's hoping this group is more responsible than SPEWS. With that (likely bogus) figure being announced, I doubt that they are.
i'm not going to post the IP range.
"in time" should not mean >6 months. we were in the list for maybe 1 month before booting them. the spammer is *long gone*. IN FACT, the spammer moved before we kicked him off our network, and SPEWS recognizes this, and yet still lists us.
the reason i won't post to NANAE or here w/ the IP range is because it's pointless. SPEWS shows very clearly just how silly the anti-spam movement has become. dealing with anti-spammers is like talking to a brick wall.
SPEWS is lame. They do not even follow their own policies (specifically, that they will remove listings after spammers are terminated. 6+ months now, still listed. And they say you can't contact them (and posting to NANAE is _not_ an option).
SPEWS has made themselves completely irrelevant in my eyes.
Sometimes you have to stop looking at things so cynically (I know from personal experience this is hard).
Governments also side with big business because big business employs people. Maybe not as many as you want them to but there are still a lot of paychecks written out by big business.
Ha, I'd want her to divorce me if she was so petty as to have some "need" for a diamond to stay with me.
"There's no way that the few thousand dollars you'd save would be worth the years of misery you'd be setting yourself up for."
Which is worse, the misery of mindless materialism or the misery of being free of it? Heh..
Flowers don't cost as much as a new car. That's the difference there.
Well, yes, but that still doesn't explain your mistake. :)
It's been 14 seconds since you hit 'reply'!
Only to then find out that Linus has deemed the previous method for retracting landing gear "inefficient" and that you'll be lucky if it works at all. There'll be a new way to do it. If you're lucky, you'll run across this obscure e-mail somewhere on Google.
Yeah - MS has no reason to add addresses randomly to the list, that is true. I'm sure there is no malice there.
If we don't call it spam (I'm not saying you don't) then this is how the spammers will get us. "Someone submitted your address, sorry!"
It was never anyone else's address. It was an address on a domain I've owned for a long, long time. Microsoft failed to confirm the signup, so some random bozo got me added to their spam list.
This isn't some huge hurdle/burden - receive a signup request, send out a unique confirmation link. Microsoft didn't have that in place (I don't know if they do now), therefore they are spamming me, because I never requested it(confirmed it).
Wow. Hung up on by customer service 4 times? What do you say to them to make them do that? I've never, ever had trouble with their customer service. Do you just bitch them out or what?
The LIAA has officially blamed P2P Piracy networks for its low sales.
Definitely. It's amazing what people will let their kids get in to. I can't get upset on this parent's behalf. Ultimately, the Internet was not built for children, and it will never be child-safe. People need to stop whining that it isn't.
I receive spam from Microsoft. Someone signed up a previously unused address for their service. I receive plenty of spam that comes from "mainstream" companies.
I agree that most spam is fraud/junk - however, I do not look forward to a future where spam is considered OK, and I start getting multiple daily e-mails (to each of my addresses) from Microsoft, IBM, General Motors (from each car division there), Ford, etc etc etc. That's where we're heading with some of the anti-spam efforts.
That show is OK, but they need to give up on the helicopter commentator.
I doubt Saddam bought them to control missles after being fooled the last time.
How is it well-written? It's some incoherent mess about going from System 9 to System X and then Microsoft black putty. "I still don't get it about System X". What?
Sounds like you'd be doing them a favor giving them a reason to get away from Hotmail. :-)
His use of "effecting" in his joke was correct, at least according to the dictionaries I have. So it wasn't a very good joke.
Argh. I mean bill. Not law. Damn.
Blah blah 2 minutes blah blah blah. Silly slashdot.