If you're a typical American ISP customer, you're *not* paying any more to receive spam than to not receive spam - you're paying your ISP the same ~$20/month to get email that's really for you and to surf the web, and the spam is a free "bonus", like the advertising banners.
Wow, can I have one of the free computers you're using? With free disk space, and free unlimited bandwidth?
Sure, the cost of each individual spam is trivial, but when sent by the hundreds of thousands, if not the millions they can have a considerable aggregate impact. If it costs my ISP, it ultimately costs *me*, and that is unacceptable.
Plus, I like the irony of a pro-spam posting coming from someone with a munged email address.
The email doesn't say, but do the managers who earn over $60K have to take the same pay cut?
Even if that is so, many executives (does that tend to include middle managment?) often receive much of their compensation via bonuses, stock, and stock options, rather than through their base salary. Of course, this does not strike me as a move that would inspire investor confidence. Those options may not be worth so much soon...
You're assuming that everyone has the technical knowhow to maintain their machines. I work in a small laboratory at a major university; there is no IT support of our machines. I'm competent enough to keep mine updated and fairly secure, but not everyone has the experience to do so. I had to spend three days chasing Nimda around and removing it from various machines last time we got infected. I'm not even sure my advisor knows the Windows Update site even exists.
Now, consider tap water. At one time or another it's had just about every possible substance in it that homeopaths have ever used--so if homeopathy is true, shouldn't drinking tap water keep you in perfect health?
Seeing as how I use a filter on my tap water (it tastes better), the fact that it removes so much lead and other nasty trace elements should make it toxic, right?
Would you rather your child engaged in an IM session with a stranger who found their screen name in a chat room, or with a friendly, well-mannered "bot" that plays by rules of propriety too often ignored in today's world of crass media overload, seeking audience regardless of the cost to morals and proper social behavior?
In other words, use our product and accept our advertizing to your children or pedophiles will attack them! I just love rational arguments...
I was curious, so I fired up AIM, and added SmarterChild to my buddy list and after toying around with it for a while here is the exchange we had:
SmarterChild: OK, fine.
So moving right along...
What else is happening?
[me]: nothin
SmarterChild: K, no prob.
Check this out! Couple Tests Water Beds in After-Hours Romp (from Reuters.com)
With a link to: A Reuters Story about a couple having after-hours sex in a department store. Just the thing I'm sure 7 and 8 year olds need to see more of.
Under the new system, the journals are available free of charge, but access to the journals is forbidden to any organisation which contributes to paid journals. I think there was a voluntary-contribution scheme to reward reviewers more generously than the IEEE, but don't quote me on the details.
As a scientist that submits articles to these "paid journals" and also reviews articles for publication, I would immediately distrust any journal that would sacrifice the ability of information to flow to those who needed it for the sake of making a political point.
Come on, would you approve of the American Chemical Society refusing to sell a subscription to a library of a university because faculty also publishes in American Physics Society (a competitor's) journals?
I don't get why non-universality of DST is a problem for interstate and international commerce. In those situations, don't you have to deal with different times anyway, due to different timezones?
Yes, but at least then the time zones are always consistently off. New York is always four hours ahead of L.A. I live in eastern Illinois, and occasionally have to catch a flight at the Indianapolis airport (nearest major one). I can't tell you how big a pain in the a** it is to have to remember that the time at the airport is an hour ahead of me in the winter and the same time in the summer. Or, wait, is it an hour behind in the summer and the same time in the winter? Dammit...
My favorite .sig of all time
on
Nethack 3.4.0
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Used by Dave Meringer, then of the National Radio Astronomy Observatory:
Now I am become NetHack, the destroyer of graduate students.
OK, you're right, I missed that link in the article. But a telegraph still falls under the definition of an "interactive digitial device". Now I totally admit that there aren't a lot of telegraphs being made these days, but that's still an incredibly broad brush they're painting with. Does it include the 4-bit microcontroller in my calculator? It's digital.
... the Security Systems Standards and Certification Act (SSSCA) [states] that prohibits creating, selling or distributing "any interactive digital device that does not include and utilize certified security technologies."
Now, I don't know where to find the exact text of the bill, but it seems to me that an "interactive digital device" would include:
a telegraph;
a telephone;
a calculator;
just about anything with a microprocessor, e.g. a microwave, a digital clock, etc.;
Sure, these dont exactly need copy protection, but they do seem to be covered by the language of the bill.
As long as they mark the cd, and people know ahead that the product will not work for them, they can protect all the cds they want to. People will just learn to avoid cds that are marked that way.
And when there are no non-protected CDs available, will people continue to avoid them?
After lurking on news.admin.net-abuse.email for a while, I've seen a lot of mail admins post asking to have their servers un-blacklisted because they've "cleaned up their act" only to have it pointed out to them that they are still hosting spammers.
Perhaps you could tell us where you have been blacklisted and what IPs are listed so we can see for ourselves the veracity of your statement?
Trying to prevent such government "sight" is pointless, according to Brin, who maintains that it is much better to seek "oversight" to watch the watchers, a pragmatic position at odds with many techno-libertarians and privacy advocates.
Hmm. And we could apply the same priciples to the economic world as well as to the govermental world, couldn't we? Like, say, when a company releases financial and accounting data to it's shareholders. How do we know they're telling the truth? Well, we should require that this information be audited by an independent agency. That should stop any abuse from happening. Gee, what a great idea.
Maybe Andersen could do the "oversight" of the government's data collection...
OK, maybe never was too strong a word. But I bet you a nickel it never happens in our lifetime.
Here's why (I'm just estimating these numbers) I've been a bad little grad student, and have gotten a bit behind in reading up on these things, but lets say that we can currently make nanotubes about 100 microns (1E-4 m) long. Now, if we have a cable 100,000 km long, and we want each tube to run 1/1000 its length, then each nanotube needs to be 100,000 m long (1E5 m). That means we need to improve the fabrication process so that we can make them a BILLION times longer.
And it is exactly that, sci-fi. Sure, carbon nanotubes are incredibly strong. And they're also on the order of a few microns long. Now, this cable needs to be a few hundreds of thousands of meters long. You do the math.
Spam isn't costing you any precious resources. Don't bother me with the mindless argument about how valuable your time is, or the size of your mail spool.
Oh, I'm sorry. Discussing it would be "bothering" you? Bandwidth is a limited resource and it has a non-zero value. If marketers are allowed to shift the majority of their costs off themselves and onto me, they will do so.
If your ISP is getting DoSed by spammers, it's up to your ISP to sue the spammers. Of course they don't and won't do that --- here's the rub --- because they HAVE NO CASE.
Actually, an increasing number of people are doing that, and winning. We're not talking (malicious) DOS attacks. We're talking about people sending so many email messages to so many people, that they're overloading entire networks.
Public networks are subject to public use, commercial content notwithstanding.
What "public network"? My ISP's network is private property. Sure, it's connected to the rest of the world, but so is my telephone. Marketers can't call me long-distance collect and expect me not to get ticked off.
Spam has the potential to end the days of email as an effective communication medium. I don't want to see that happen.
Asume that all spam has an opt-out program and assume that all people use this opt-out program. That means soon there would be no spam because everyone would be on the opt-out list, except people who wanted it. That's as plausible as his made up scenario.
And you are assuming that there will be a single, effective opt-out list. Rather, I suspect there would be an opt-out list for about every company trying to spam. And when I opt-out of list AAAAA, I'll probably be added to list AAAAB, which when used to spam me and then be sold to another company.
But it won't stop. Ever. Even if the President signs an executive order. Get used to it, and get over it. Instead of wasting your time setting up a myriad of email filters and block lists and fretting each time spam makes it through, and wasting time complaining to the spammer's ISP (who couldn't give two fucks) -- JUST GET OVER IT. Click delete and move on. Don't let it annoy you. Simple. And I promise, you won't fall behind at work or have to add another T1 line.
Hmm. I can't imagine why you're posting as an AC...
What, you think the bandwith and computer resources to sent hundreds of thousands (if not hundreds of MILLIONS) of 10K emails per day is free? It's been estimated that about 30% of all email traffic is spam. And if spamming ever becomes "respectable" you can expect to see a LOT more crap in your inbox. Yes, that costs resources. That costs my ISP money. That costs ME money. So you're damn right I don't like it!
I think spam would be fine as long as there is a working way to opt-out. If I get something and am able to say "don't send me anymore", and it works and they don't, then I have no problem with it.
Opt-out of how many messages? One person estimates that, should bulk email become an accepted method of advertising, we could expect to see on the order of 300,000 spams per month per address.
I don't have time to opt-out of 300,000/month. Do you?
It looks to me like this research group just got a grant from the NSF, and some reporter got ahold of the proposal and ran with it.
Nobody is talking about making these robots. No way could you ever build such things with a measly $1.5 mil grant spread over three different research groups.
From the press release, it looks like this group uses an atomic force microscope to push small amounts of material around. They build things like tiny wires, have even made a single transistor, and are working on a simple switch. They're light years away from radio-controlled robots, let alone releasing them into the ocean.
This was probably a research grant for basic science, not one to build a fleet of pollution monitoring nanites.
Nanotechnology like the press likes to report is the stuff of science fiction, at least for the next 50 to 100 years.
These guys actually brought light to a hault, so that a pulse of light stopped in the crystal
Well, no. It's hard to tell from the lack of detail in the Nature article, but from it's description, it sounds like this material can be made to absorb light, and somehow another laser is later used to extract it. (Same wavelength and phase?) It's not like there are photons standing still somewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Wow, can I have one of the free computers you're using? With free disk space, and free unlimited bandwidth?
Sure, the cost of each individual spam is trivial, but when sent by the hundreds of thousands, if not the millions they can have a considerable aggregate impact. If it costs my ISP, it ultimately costs *me*, and that is unacceptable.
Plus, I like the irony of a pro-spam posting coming from someone with a munged email address.
Even if that is so, many executives (does that tend to include middle managment?) often receive much of their compensation via bonuses, stock, and stock options, rather than through their base salary. Of course, this does not strike me as a move that would inspire investor confidence. Those options may not be worth so much soon...
You're assuming that everyone has the technical knowhow to maintain their machines. I work in a small laboratory at a major university; there is no IT support of our machines. I'm competent enough to keep mine updated and fairly secure, but not everyone has the experience to do so. I had to spend three days chasing Nimda around and removing it from various machines last time we got infected. I'm not even sure my advisor knows the Windows Update site even exists.
Seeing as how I use a filter on my tap water (it tastes better), the fact that it removes so much lead and other nasty trace elements should make it toxic, right?
In other words, use our product and accept our advertizing to your children or pedophiles will attack them!
I just love rational arguments...
Even better.
Mmmmmm. Floor pie!
I was curious, so I fired up AIM, and added SmarterChild to my buddy list and after toying around with it for a while here is the exchange we had:
With a link to: A Reuters Story about a couple having after-hours sex in a department store. Just the thing I'm sure 7 and 8 year olds need to see more of.
As a scientist that submits articles to these "paid journals" and also reviews articles for publication, I would immediately distrust any journal that would sacrifice the ability of information to flow to those who needed it for the sake of making a political point.
Come on, would you approve of the American Chemical Society refusing to sell a subscription to a library of a university because faculty also publishes in American Physics Society (a competitor's) journals?
Yes, but at least then the time zones are always consistently off. New York is always four hours ahead of L.A. I live in eastern Illinois, and occasionally have to catch a flight at the Indianapolis airport (nearest major one). I can't tell you how big a pain in the a** it is to have to remember that the time at the airport is an hour ahead of me in the winter and the same time in the summer. Or, wait, is it an hour behind in the summer and the same time in the winter? Dammit...
OK, you're right, I missed that link in the article. But a telegraph still falls under the definition of an "interactive digitial device". Now I totally admit that there aren't a lot of telegraphs being made these days, but that's still an incredibly broad brush they're painting with. Does it include the 4-bit microcontroller in my calculator? It's digital.
Sure, these dont exactly need copy protection, but they do seem to be covered by the language of the bill.
And when there are no non-protected CDs available, will people continue to avoid them?
After lurking on news.admin.net-abuse.email for a while, I've seen a lot of mail admins post asking to have their servers un-blacklisted because they've "cleaned up their act" only to have it pointed out to them that they are still hosting spammers.
Perhaps you could tell us where you have been blacklisted and what IPs are listed so we can see for ourselves the veracity of your statement?
Hmm. And we could apply the same priciples to the economic world as well as to the govermental world, couldn't we? Like, say, when a company releases financial and accounting data to it's shareholders. How do we know they're telling the truth? Well, we should require that this information be audited by an independent agency. That should stop any abuse from happening. Gee, what a great idea.
Maybe Andersen could do the "oversight" of the government's data collection...
Great, then you will have no objection to fingerprint scanning and DNA testing stations being placed on every street corner.
And, hey, if you're going to broadcast those infrared photons from the "privacy" of your own home, don't expect the police not to look at them.
Here's why (I'm just estimating these numbers) I've been a bad little grad student, and have gotten a bit behind in reading up on these things, but lets say that we can currently make nanotubes about 100 microns (1E-4 m) long. Now, if we have a cable 100,000 km long, and we want each tube to run 1/1000 its length, then each nanotube needs to be 100,000 m long (1E5 m). That means we need to improve the fabrication process so that we can make them a BILLION times longer.
I just don't think that's as all feasable.
And it is exactly that, sci-fi. Sure, carbon nanotubes are incredibly strong. And they're also on the order of a few microns long. Now, this cable needs to be a few hundreds of thousands of meters long. You do the math.
It's fantasy. This is just never going to happen.
Oh, I'm sorry. Discussing it would be "bothering" you? Bandwidth is a limited resource and it has a non-zero value. If marketers are allowed to shift the majority of their costs off themselves and onto me, they will do so.
Actually, an increasing number of people are doing that, and winning. We're not talking (malicious) DOS attacks. We're talking about people sending so many email messages to so many people, that they're overloading entire networks.
What "public network"? My ISP's network is private property. Sure, it's connected to the rest of the world, but so is my telephone. Marketers can't call me long-distance collect and expect me not to get ticked off.
Spam has the potential to end the days of email as an effective communication medium. I don't want to see that happen.
And you are assuming that there will be a single, effective opt-out list. Rather, I suspect there would be an opt-out list for about every company trying to spam. And when I opt-out of list AAAAA, I'll probably be added to list AAAAB, which when used to spam me and then be sold to another company.
Hmm. I can't imagine why you're posting as an AC...
What, you think the bandwith and computer resources to sent hundreds of thousands (if not hundreds of MILLIONS) of 10K emails per day is free? It's been estimated that about 30% of all email traffic is spam. And if spamming ever becomes "respectable" you can expect to see a LOT more crap in your inbox. Yes, that costs resources. That costs my ISP money. That costs ME money. So you're damn right I don't like it!
Opt-out of how many messages? One person estimates that, should bulk email become an accepted method of advertising, we could expect to see on the order of 300,000 spams per month per address.
I don't have time to opt-out of 300,000
In other words, shredding documents to hide (potential) evidence.
*BWOOP* Vaporware alert. Take cover. *BWOOP*
It looks to me like this research group just got a grant from the NSF, and some reporter got ahold of the proposal and ran with it.
Nobody is talking about making these robots. No way could you ever build such things with a measly $1.5 mil grant spread over three different research groups.
From the press release, it looks like this group uses an atomic force microscope to push small amounts of material around. They build things like tiny wires, have even made a single transistor, and are working on a simple switch. They're light years away from radio-controlled robots, let alone releasing them into the ocean.
This was probably a research grant for basic science, not one to build a fleet of pollution monitoring nanites.
Nanotechnology like the press likes to report is the stuff of science fiction, at least for the next 50 to 100 years.
Well, no. It's hard to tell from the lack of detail in the Nature article, but from it's description, it sounds like this material can be made to absorb light, and somehow another laser is later used to extract it. (Same wavelength and phase?) It's not like there are photons standing still somewhere.