I haven't kept up with the literature, but I believe those on cutting edge of statistical research no longer believe this to be the best way of obtaining representative samples.
Last IP address before your own in the Received: section. Essentially unforgeable (without a severe network hijacking), since that's whats used to establish the SMTP connection.
But is not an annoyance of a few users (and there are workrounds, as you're aware, which would inevitably become better integrated into products) a price well worth paying to massively reduce the spam problem that annoys *everyone*.
Would you prefer the major inconvenience of spam to the minor inconvenience of SSH tunneling.
Does anyone know what metric was used to determine these rankings?
I imagine it was "source of last verifiable SMTP transfer", since nothing else is reliable. The person who relays the spam to my server is the ONLY person I can prove is involved in the transport of the spam. Everything else can be (and often is) forged.
That was due to a mangled tt HTML tag, that obliterated a partial sentence. It should have read:
a lot of Canadian spams come from compromised machines at
shawcable / shaw.ca and videotron.ca. Like client*.comcast.net and attbi.com, the abuse departments are too lazy^H^H^H^Hoverwhelmed to do anything about them
Well, thats the point. If Spam that comes through Open Relays, then the Open Relay is treated as the source of the spam, as its their bad netizenship thats allowing it to propogate.
Close the open relays and de-trojan the zombie machines and the spam problem pretty much goes away.
No. I'll bet they used whois lookups on the originating IP addresses, because they're not amateursm, and because the IP address used in the final inbound connection to your own servers is just about the only thing you can trust in email headers.
Its also the single best thing to filter on, IMHO. Goodbye bbtec.net, goodbye, client-foo.comcast.net, hello spam free inbox.
Well, taking my twenty-odd thousand spams as a sample, a lot of Canadian spams come from compromised machines at shawcable / shaw.caclient*.comcast.net and attbi.com, the abuse departments are too lazy^H^H^H^Hoverwhelmed to do anything about them (even easy solutions, such blocking port 25 and insisting mail is relayed through their own SMTP servers, which would kill this spam stone dead at a stroke).
The vastly underrated "Tempest 2000", an insanely fast, psychedelic (surprise!) update of the ancient Tempest arcade machine, with banging techno soundtrack.
He's developed and contributed to many Open Source/Free Software projects
Bullshit. ESR is a self important twit and, contrary to his own claims, his contribution of code to Open Source software is almost entirely negligible.
We can't predict how much rain there'll be one week from now, but we can predict the temperature to within one degree a century from now?
Imagine I throw a baseball towards you at 90mph? Can you predict how long it will take to reach you, with a reasonable degree of accuracy? Course you can -- some people can even do it accurately and quickly enough to hit the ball with a bat.
Can you predict the exact location of an individual atom in that baseball? Can you predict the motion of an individual Nitrogen molecule thats in the baseball's path as it passes through its turbulent wake?
MORAL : Sometimes, broad general predictions, are more accurate than extremely specific ones.
It doesn't matter what we've learned, because like every other economic bubble, by the the next one has come along everyone will either: i) think they know why this one is going to be different or ii) will have forgotten the lessons of this one anyway
True, but if Knuth has kept control of the name TeX. If you modify it so that it fails to pass a (very stringent) set of regression tests, you can't call it TeX anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
That explains why I haven't been spammed by a Comcast box for ... 36 minutes :(
Did all those Golden Rasberries and that apalling IMDB rating not dissuade them from any further releases?
Bennifer is tougher than we thought!
Gamer vastly over estimates importance of gaming in home / office desktop PC market. Film at 11.
I think that this is it, but you'll need a NYT-style free login.
You're right. It was OpenServer, not UnixWare. Mea Maxima Culpa.
Here is an interesting GrokLaw post from the man at AutoZone who helped them transition from UnixWare to Linux, blowing apart most of these claims.
Bearing in mind that this post is over 2 weeks old, you'd think someone at SCO would have noticed that their claims are basically debunked.
PS : SCO quarterly losses up to $2.25 million for fiscal Q1. Ouch.
But is not an annoyance of a few users (and there are workrounds, as you're aware, which would inevitably become better integrated into products) a price well worth paying to massively reduce the spam problem that annoys *everyone*.
Would you prefer the major inconvenience of spam to the minor inconvenience of SSH tunneling.
Theres nothing wrong with it, except that allowing smart users to do it also allows the idiotic users to be zombified and spam the world.
There is certainly a pro-case, but IMHO the cons outweigh the pros, because the idiots outnumber the cognoscenti.
Close the open relays and de-trojan the zombie machines and the spam problem pretty much goes away.
No. I'll bet they used whois lookups on the originating IP addresses, because they're not amateursm, and because the IP address used in the final inbound connection to your own servers is just about the only thing you can trust in email headers.
Its also the single best thing to filter on, IMHO. Goodbye bbtec.net, goodbye, client-foo.comcast.net, hello spam free inbox.
The vastly underrated "Tempest 2000", an insanely fast, psychedelic (surprise!) update of the ancient Tempest arcade machine, with banging techno soundtrack.
I want a Linux Port!
Can you predict the exact location of an individual atom in that baseball? Can you predict the motion of an individual Nitrogen molecule thats in the baseball's path as it passes through its turbulent wake?
MORAL : Sometimes, broad general predictions, are more accurate than extremely specific ones.
Why not read a thorough debunking of the "1970s Scientists predicted Ice Age" myth.
It doesn't matter what we've learned, because like every other economic bubble, by the the next one has come along everyone will either:
i) think they know why this one is going to be different or
ii) will have forgotten the lessons of this one anyway
I'm listening to "Salt Of The Earth", right now.
True, but if Knuth has kept control of the name TeX. If you modify it so that it fails to pass a (very stringent) set of regression tests, you can't call it TeX anymore.
"Begun the search engine war has!"
(If Yoda great Jedi Master is, why proper sentence construct can he not, eh?)
Well, the major difference is that TeX is as close to bug free as I expect I'll ever see a major piece of software to be.
And Don Knuth is a nice man, where as David Dawes went to the "Theo de Raadt Scholl Of Charm."