I reject such bounce-backs at SMTP time. Any email server / software that accepts virus / spam laden mail and then later bounces it is the cause of all collateral damage. Incompetent sites that operate such servers should be blacklisted.
reading the other replies it looks like this is really going to put a dent in my problem.
Not really. Very few site implement SPF in a way that would reject forged mail. Look, if they are not smart enough to reject outright and instead scan later and bounce (which is the cause of the collateral damage to begin with), what makes you think that YOU implementing SPF is going to help? It won't. Not one bit.
The easiest way to deal with backscatter bounce spam is to reject it. Scan for the common bounce messages, such as the brilliant "You have sent a message with a virus" type generated by poorly designed "security" software (such as the shit from "Declude", which is obviously means "we have no clue") and reject such bounces with a message that points them to a web page that explains the problem. This creates a double bounce, which puts the problem right back on the incompetent email admin that accepted the forged spam or virus laden mail to begin with!
On the contrary, forwarding is Very Very useful. I have somewhere around a dozen different accounts on email servers that I don't control that forward to a couple accounts that I DO control. With so many accounts, fetchmail isn't viable (especially with "expiring" passwords to deal with) and some forwarding accounts don't even allow logins fr various reasons.
The SPF "solution" is SRS (Sender Rewriting Scheme).
Unfortunately, SRS ALSO sucks. Instead of a huge long post here, I'll just refer to this post, but the gist of it is that SRS creates a fundamental gaping hole in the utility of SPF.
SRS isn't even supported on most of the servers that I have forwarding accounts on anyway, so it's a non-"solution" from the start.
A log is a recording of events. It's what men call it when they keep a diary, so it doesn't sound so gay.... Weblogs are logs on the web. Thank you Mr Obvious... Anyone else hear that whooshing sound near this AC?
I not only hate the word, I hate the root: "web log". What the fuck is that? An Apache access_log file? In the old days, we used to call them "web sites." A journal "On the Internet!" (tm) didn't need a special unique descriptive name.
How about another annoying word: meatspace? Or anything starting with "Cyber".
"On the Internet" is a trademark of Patent Trolls Inc. We patent any old technology applied to the internet, because applying something to the internet is obviously a new and innovative thing to do worthy of paying us huge piles of cash... And if you do't think so, we just sue you anyway.
the difference is that I'm not strutting around stating that spending 1k on a laser printer is the only sane thing to do, and anything else is stupid.
You are claiming that I am "strutting around"? Nice.
I also claimed and said no such thing about being the only sane thing to do, and that anything else is stupid. Go back and read my posts! The REAL history is all out in the public.
Maybe you feeling as though you lost the argument and now have to attack me personally and spread false statements about what I said, which would be quite unprofessional if true. I think it's true.
I know few/.ers read the FA, but at LEAST read the FA SUMMARY, which states:
Apple, which plans to start selling the phone in all of its 162 retail stores on June 29, did not disclose any plans around training or staffing for the launch.
If you want color, they are going to be big. No choice. The better ones are also quite heavy - 100lbs is not uncommon. B&W lasers / AIO's can be a lot smaller and lighter.
And if you go for a slightly better printer, you get a $200 maint. kit (with drum) that lasts 100K pages AND has cheap toner bottles resulting in printing costs that are 1/2 the brother or HP units. HP's workgroup and above printers are tanks, but can be a little expensive to operate. I personally avoid SOHO printers from any manufacture as they are slow, expensive to operate, and don't last. If you are willing to deal with messy refill kits, you can get 3x the pages from the all-in-one toner / drum style printers. Even the cheapest laser will be less expensive to operate than any inkjet, without the clogging / print quality problems.
BTW, it's disingenuous to call everybody who doesn't think as you a "laser printer salesman". Are you an inkjet printer salesman because you keep insisting that the cost per page of inkjet printing is low even though refill kits are not available for many inkjet printers? Or are you somehow involved in the ink cartel?
Is it so damn hard to believe that maybe, just maybe, that others have had very different experiences with inkjet technology than you?
I obviously don't believe you are an inkjet salesman. I believe that you have had a good experience with your 5 year old printer. That's wonderful.
My experiences with probably a dozen inkjet printers at home over the years and hundreds over my career at work are quite different. I have been burned over and over and over again by mid-level consumer and high-priced "professional" inkjet printers that turned out to be awful and very expensive to operate over the life of the printer (which is never very long - they just haven't stood up the the usage patterns.) Have I just been horribly unlucky? Or maybe my experience with those printers is more the norm than the exception... Could it just possibly be that YOUR wonderful experience with your 5 year old printer is the exception??
On the other hand, I have had MUCH better experiences with laser printers, and nearly perfect performance with workgroup-level and above printers. That's why, having been in the IT field for over 20 years, I recommend them, and do not recommend inkjets except in cases where there isn't a good alternative. I also temper my recommendations with use. If you are doing mostly photos, a laser is not right for you. Maybe an inkjet isn't either however, especially with so many companies that do better prints that last longer at a lower cost than you can possibly do at home.
I've had 2 brothers, one an old 1270N and a more modern 5250dn.
The 1270N at least had the option of a straight paper path, but wore out after about 5K pages (it wouldn't feed anymore.)
The 5250dn (which I still have but don't use much) is MUCH faster, but is all plastic. I think I paid $175 for it. It weighs about half what the 1270N did. No straight paper path and it jams frequently on any non-standard paper (useless for heavier than 20lb stock.) I don't expect to get a whole lot more prints out of it than the old 1270N did. My current $1K color laser can handle 100lb cardstock, duplex, with zero problems.
The contact isn't between the consumers and the DVD group, it's between the DVD group and DVD licensees. You will still have the right to do backups and other fair use activities, just no hardware will be available to help you do it.
if the public was going to revolt over IP issues they would have done so a long, long time ago.
The full impact of DRM and other technologies has yet to impact consumers in any major way. About the most "in your face" DRM mechanism at this point is HDCP, which when implemented poorly causes major problems (you can't watch legit content.)
So I don't agree. Since there hasn't been a significant issue, there is no major backlash. The largest backlash from general consumers is CD copy-protection that installed back doors (Sony,) or caused CD's not to work in computers at all.
Once the DRM systems become ubiquitous and start to become real problems for consumers, we will see a REAL backlash. Maybe it will be when your Sat. or Cable co. provided DVR will refuse to record certain content, or not allow fast-forwarding, skipping at all, or refuse to save recorded content longer than 2 days. Maybe it will be when new DVD players refuse to play old DVDs at all. I don't know when the point will be, but I do see us getting to that point some time in the next several years.
I have seen HP 4 printers that have printed several MILLION pages with very little service. They are tanks. On the other hand, the low-end "soho" HP's and all Brothers are total crap.
Higher-end color lasers with separate toner carts don't have this problem. Some even have spiral grooves and spin the bottle to keep the toner from caking and to move it down to the end.
Many many brands of printers use separate head / cart now. Epsons and Canon for example. You can't manually clean most epsons without disassembling the entire printer - the entire printer is designed to be disposable.
It's not unusual for an OEM set of ink carts to cost $100, that only get you about 200 pages (if you are lucky.) Payback on the laser is under 1K pages. Yes, for some printers you can get refills that can drop that cost to 20%. That is still under 5K pages - the norm for starter toners.
Refills (if you can get them) can also be messy. Print quality problems (clogged heads), speed, shit print drivers (winprinters), and special paper requirements are also huge issues.
I can EASILY print over 5k pages on an inkjet with separated and refillable cartridges, WAY more than that actually.
Well, that's great. I haven't gotten an inkjet to last that long. Epsons for example have a non-removable print head. You can't clean it without completely disassembling the printer. Rather than go through that hassle, I just toss it in the garbage. I can also easily print 100K on my laser before I have to buy a $200 maint kit. My high-yield toners, which cost $450 for a full color set can print 17K pages. Black toner is even cheaper (which is most of my printing) and those refills are only $80 for 17K pages. Good luck getting inkjet refills that cheap. OEM inkjet carts? Well, you may need a second mortgage.
It's not like I've never used inkjets. I started with an HP Thinkjet back in '84, and have probably used every brand out there over the years. At some point you decide that the hassles of inkjets just aren't worth it. I have better things to do than sit there and go through 15 cleaning cycles trying to get rid of banding, or refilling my carts every 200 pages or so. If you time has zero value, and/or you print less than 200 pages over a year, go for the inkjet (although infrequent printing with an inkjet is also a problem.) Skip that, go with a cheap laser if you don't print often. You can get an OK color unit for $300.
Well, yeah. You get what you pay for. If you are replacing a $200 inkjet with a $500 color laser, don't expect a whole lot better experience. Buy a $1K color laser however and you get a decent workgroup class printer with good paper handling (I have no problem printing cardstock or envelopes.) That $1K seems like a lot, but the printer with the included starter toner that can print 5K pages will cost less than an inkjet with enough replacement carts to print 5K pages.
I buy printers with a simple translucent toner cartridge (or several for color units) that does not have any "chip" built in. True, this "workgroup" printer costs more than a SOHO printer, but it is worth it. I really don't like the "toner / drum" combo units. Look at any large office copier - do they have toner / drum combo units? No. It's ALWAYS separate. Those drums are designed to handle 5-10X the amount of usage that the amount of toner included can print. Why replace it?
It's because they want market share. Mom / grandma going into a store will more often buy price and not have a clue that the consumables will end up costing here 5 times more than the other brand of printer that is only $30 more.
Laser is significantly better at the moment. Cost per page is about 10% that of inkjet, and it's a lot faster. Photo's aren't so hot, but are about the same as an inkjet in photo draft mode - big reason is that the DPI is lower (1200 on my color laser) and it only has 4 colors instead of 6 or 8. This is why I use my little Kodak 4x6" photo printer for photos (which is thermal transfer) and an internet print shop for larger quantities / enlargements of photos.
I'll never ever buy an inkjet ever again. With my laser, I never have banding, never have "cleaning cycles," etc. It just works.
Doh! Should have hit preview./. ate a good chunk of my post... Real second paragraph:
Some devices you are just screwed with such as scanners / webcams. Yeah, I may be able to ebay a 5 year old scanner, or find a $1000+ scanner that works, but I think you would be hard pressed to find a current model <$600 scanner that works with SANE / Linux. I've been looking on and off for several years. My current solution is a vmware session with the USB scanner passing through to the Windows driver. This sucks since I use Linux 74% of the time, and Mac 24%, with only 2% in Windows, where scanner use is most of that 2%.
Slashdot Mirror
I reject such bounce-backs at SMTP time. Any email server / software that accepts virus / spam laden mail and then later bounces it is the cause of all collateral damage. Incompetent sites that operate such servers should be blacklisted.
reading the other replies it looks like this is really going to put a dent in my problem.
Not really. Very few site implement SPF in a way that would reject forged mail. Look, if they are not smart enough to reject outright and instead scan later and bounce (which is the cause of the collateral damage to begin with), what makes you think that YOU implementing SPF is going to help? It won't. Not one bit.
The easiest way to deal with backscatter bounce spam is to reject it. Scan for the common bounce messages, such as the brilliant "You have sent a message with a virus" type generated by poorly designed "security" software (such as the shit from "Declude", which is obviously means "we have no clue") and reject such bounces with a message that points them to a web page that explains the problem. This creates a double bounce, which puts the problem right back on the incompetent email admin that accepted the forged spam or virus laden mail to begin with!
1) forwarding sucks. Why? I don't know.
On the contrary, forwarding is Very Very useful. I have somewhere around a dozen different accounts on email servers that I don't control that forward to a couple accounts that I DO control. With so many accounts, fetchmail isn't viable (especially with "expiring" passwords to deal with) and some forwarding accounts don't even allow logins fr various reasons.
The SPF "solution" is SRS (Sender Rewriting Scheme).
Unfortunately, SRS ALSO sucks. Instead of a huge long post here, I'll just refer to this post, but the gist of it is that SRS creates a fundamental gaping hole in the utility of SPF.
SRS isn't even supported on most of the servers that I have forwarding accounts on anyway, so it's a non-"solution" from the start.
A log is a recording of events. It's what men call it when they keep a diary, so it doesn't sound so gay. ...
Weblogs are logs on the web. Thank you Mr Obvious... Anyone else hear that whooshing sound near this AC?
I not only hate the word, I hate the root: "web log". What the fuck is that? An Apache access_log file? In the old days, we used to call them "web sites." A journal "On the Internet!" (tm) didn't need a special unique descriptive name.
How about another annoying word: meatspace? Or anything starting with "Cyber".
"On the Internet" is a trademark of Patent Trolls Inc. We patent any old technology applied to the internet, because applying something to the internet is obviously a new and innovative thing to do worthy of paying us huge piles of cash... And if you do't think so, we just sue you anyway.
the difference is that I'm not strutting around stating that spending 1k on a laser printer is the only sane thing to do, and anything else is stupid.
You are claiming that I am "strutting around"? Nice.
I also claimed and said no such thing about being the only sane thing to do, and that anything else is stupid. Go back and read my posts! The REAL history is all out in the public.
Maybe you feeling as though you lost the argument and now have to attack me personally and spread false statements about what I said, which would be quite unprofessional if true. I think it's true.
Yeah, but half the cost of ink is still 5x-20x the cost of laser, and you still have the clogging problems.
If you want color, they are going to be big. No choice. The better ones are also quite heavy - 100lbs is not uncommon.
B&W lasers / AIO's can be a lot smaller and lighter.
And if you go for a slightly better printer, you get a $200 maint. kit (with drum) that lasts 100K pages AND has cheap toner bottles resulting in printing costs that are 1/2 the brother or HP units. HP's workgroup and above printers are tanks, but can be a little expensive to operate. I personally avoid SOHO printers from any manufacture as they are slow, expensive to operate, and don't last. If you are willing to deal with messy refill kits, you can get 3x the pages from the all-in-one toner / drum style printers. Even the cheapest laser will be less expensive to operate than any inkjet, without the clogging / print quality problems.
BTW, it's disingenuous to call everybody who doesn't think as you a "laser printer salesman". Are you an inkjet printer salesman because you keep insisting that the cost per page of inkjet printing is low even though refill kits are not available for many inkjet printers? Or are you somehow involved in the ink cartel?
Is it so damn hard to believe that maybe, just maybe, that others have had very different experiences with inkjet technology than you?
I obviously don't believe you are an inkjet salesman. I believe that you have had a good experience with your 5 year old printer. That's wonderful.
My experiences with probably a dozen inkjet printers at home over the years and hundreds over my career at work are quite different. I have been burned over and over and over again by mid-level consumer and high-priced "professional" inkjet printers that turned out to be awful and very expensive to operate over the life of the printer (which is never very long - they just haven't stood up the the usage patterns.) Have I just been horribly unlucky? Or maybe my experience with those printers is more the norm than the exception... Could it just possibly be that YOUR wonderful experience with your 5 year old printer is the exception??
On the other hand, I have had MUCH better experiences with laser printers, and nearly perfect performance with workgroup-level and above printers. That's why, having been in the IT field for over 20 years, I recommend them, and do not recommend inkjets except in cases where there isn't a good alternative. I also temper my recommendations with use. If you are doing mostly photos, a laser is not right for you. Maybe an inkjet isn't either however, especially with so many companies that do better prints that last longer at a lower cost than you can possibly do at home.
I've had 2 brothers, one an old 1270N and a more modern 5250dn.
The 1270N at least had the option of a straight paper path, but wore out after about 5K pages (it wouldn't feed anymore.)
The 5250dn (which I still have but don't use much) is MUCH faster, but is all plastic. I think I paid $175 for it. It weighs about half what the 1270N did. No straight paper path and it jams frequently on any non-standard paper (useless for heavier than 20lb stock.) I don't expect to get a whole lot more prints out of it than the old 1270N did. My current $1K color laser can handle 100lb cardstock, duplex, with zero problems.
The contact isn't between the consumers and the DVD group, it's between the DVD group and DVD licensees. You will still have the right to do backups and other fair use activities, just no hardware will be available to help you do it.
if the public was going to revolt over IP issues they would have done so a long, long time ago.
The full impact of DRM and other technologies has yet to impact consumers in any major way. About the most "in your face" DRM mechanism at this point is HDCP, which when implemented poorly causes major problems (you can't watch legit content.)
So I don't agree. Since there hasn't been a significant issue, there is no major backlash. The largest backlash from general consumers is CD copy-protection that installed back doors (Sony,) or caused CD's not to work in computers at all.
Once the DRM systems become ubiquitous and start to become real problems for consumers, we will see a REAL backlash. Maybe it will be when your Sat. or Cable co. provided DVR will refuse to record certain content, or not allow fast-forwarding, skipping at all, or refuse to save recorded content longer than 2 days. Maybe it will be when new DVD players refuse to play old DVDs at all. I don't know when the point will be, but I do see us getting to that point some time in the next several years.
I have seen HP 4 printers that have printed several MILLION pages with very little service. They are tanks. On the other hand, the low-end "soho" HP's and all Brothers are total crap.
Higher-end color lasers with separate toner carts don't have this problem. Some even have spiral grooves and spin the bottle to keep the toner from caking and to move it down to the end.
Make sure you use distilled water and not tap water. Rubbing alcohol also helps.
Many many brands of printers use separate head / cart now. Epsons and Canon for example. You can't manually clean most epsons without disassembling the entire printer - the entire printer is designed to be disposable.
That is a LOT of ink refills on an inkjet.
It's not unusual for an OEM set of ink carts to cost $100, that only get you about 200 pages (if you are lucky.) Payback on the laser is under 1K pages. Yes, for some printers you can get refills that can drop that cost to 20%. That is still under 5K pages - the norm for starter toners.
Refills (if you can get them) can also be messy. Print quality problems (clogged heads), speed, shit print drivers (winprinters), and special paper requirements are also huge issues.
I can EASILY print over 5k pages on an inkjet with separated and refillable cartridges, WAY more than that actually.
Well, that's great. I haven't gotten an inkjet to last that long. Epsons for example have a non-removable print head. You can't clean it without completely disassembling the printer. Rather than go through that hassle, I just toss it in the garbage. I can also easily print 100K on my laser before I have to buy a $200 maint kit. My high-yield toners, which cost $450 for a full color set can print 17K pages. Black toner is even cheaper (which is most of my printing) and those refills are only $80 for 17K pages. Good luck getting inkjet refills that cheap. OEM inkjet carts? Well, you may need a second mortgage.
It's not like I've never used inkjets. I started with an HP Thinkjet back in '84, and have probably used every brand out there over the years. At some point you decide that the hassles of inkjets just aren't worth it. I have better things to do than sit there and go through 15 cleaning cycles trying to get rid of banding, or refilling my carts every 200 pages or so. If you time has zero value, and/or you print less than 200 pages over a year, go for the inkjet (although infrequent printing with an inkjet is also a problem.) Skip that, go with a cheap laser if you don't print often. You can get an OK color unit for $300.
Well, yeah. You get what you pay for. If you are replacing a $200 inkjet with a $500 color laser, don't expect a whole lot better experience. Buy a $1K color laser however and you get a decent workgroup class printer with good paper handling (I have no problem printing cardstock or envelopes.) That $1K seems like a lot, but the printer with the included starter toner that can print 5K pages will cost less than an inkjet with enough replacement carts to print 5K pages.
I buy printers with a simple translucent toner cartridge (or several for color units) that does not have any "chip" built in. True, this "workgroup" printer costs more than a SOHO printer, but it is worth it. I really don't like the "toner / drum" combo units. Look at any large office copier - do they have toner / drum combo units? No. It's ALWAYS separate. Those drums are designed to handle 5-10X the amount of usage that the amount of toner included can print. Why replace it?
It's because they want market share. Mom / grandma going into a store will more often buy price and not have a clue that the consumables will end up costing here 5 times more than the other brand of printer that is only $30 more.
I wouldn't doubt if they sell the printers BELOW cost with the insane profit margins the have on ink.
Laser is significantly better at the moment. Cost per page is about 10% that of inkjet, and it's a lot faster. Photo's aren't so hot, but are about the same as an inkjet in photo draft mode - big reason is that the DPI is lower (1200 on my color laser) and it only has 4 colors instead of 6 or 8. This is why I use my little Kodak 4x6" photo printer for photos (which is thermal transfer) and an internet print shop for larger quantities / enlargements of photos.
I'll never ever buy an inkjet ever again. With my laser, I never have banding, never have "cleaning cycles," etc. It just works.
Doh! Should have hit preview. /. ate a good chunk of my post... Real second paragraph:
Some devices you are just screwed with such as scanners / webcams. Yeah, I may be able to ebay a 5 year old scanner, or find a $1000+ scanner that works, but I think you would be hard pressed to find a current model <$600 scanner that works with SANE / Linux. I've been looking on and off for several years. My current solution is a vmware session with the USB scanner passing through to the Windows driver. This sucks since I use Linux 74% of the time, and Mac 24%, with only 2% in Windows, where scanner use is most of that 2%.