approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected ( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money (x) It is defenseless against brute force attacks (x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it (x) Users of email will not put up with it ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it (x) The police will not put up with it ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers (x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it (x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email ( ) Open relays in foreign countries (x) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses (x) Asshats ( ) Jurisdictional problems (x) Unpopularity of weird new taxes ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money (x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack (x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email (x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches (x) Extreme profitability of spam (x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft ( ) Technically illiterate politicians (x) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers (x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering (x) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation ( ) Blacklists suck ( ) Whitelists suck (x) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks (x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually ( ) Sending email should be free ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers? ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome ( ) I don't want the government reading my email ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work. ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it. ( ) Nice try, l0ser! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
1. Dogs *are* animals, you insensitive clod! 2. ?! If it works for a hot dog, but leaves a notch, you would not want to test it in yourself, would you? 3. flesh is flesh; I suppose the alterations in capacitancy in a hot dog and in an arm is the same. 4. were you trying to be funny?
Ummm gosh, the only ActiveX applets I ever saw was right after it was released. Heh, I often say Java is dead on the web (though I know it isn't completely) but now ActiveX is entirely dead except for like the applet on Windows Update:-P
You are a Holy Person, sir/madam.
Go find some pr0n and you'll see a lot of activeX thingies trying to install. Lucky me I use Moz.
with a big screen like that, we would not have to stop to stretch...:-) Really, my main problem in my last physical evaluation in the gym was not muscle tonus, but muscle *shortening* due to lack of stretch...
1. we *are* definitively more passive than USofAns, but we had our quota of bloody war, too (we -- and i'm definitively not proud -- eliminated more than half the Paraguayan male population in a war on which our generals dumped the dead bodies in the Paraguayan rivers in order to poison them); not to mention what our army and police corps have done during the late sixties and seventies during the military dictatorship era.
2. about the Papal photos: it's not forbidden. I work in a common office space with 10 other people and it would not offend the (1) Protestand (2) atheist people here that I put up a Papal photo in the wall by my side. More animosidy would ensue if I put an Atletico Mineiro flag, even though there is only one Cruzeiro fan here (my State's two main -- and opposing -- soccer teams -- in the room next door things are inverted, 9 Cruzeirenses and only 1 Atleticano)
2. (continued, trying to get on-topic [?] again) the case of religious symbols is that we (as a culture) think is a disrespect forbidding religious symbols. such nonsense as it has being happening in France (Muslim girls forbidden to use the veil) would never happen here. I can display a large cross, and the guy in the next table a large David star, and the other one an enourmous Shiva statue; no one cares. This is our cultural definition of religious respect.
2nd paragraph: I live in a more-catholic and more-religious in general state than Sao Paulo (Minas Gerais). And I have yet to see a Pope snapshot apart from the one in my wife's granny's living room. And I don't see your point, even if this were true, which it is not.
4th paragraph: It's true, but I could not see its relevance. Portugal did not have the resources (and the armada) England have. When young Pedro said "I will not get back to Lisbon 'cause I like the mulatas down here" (yes, that's the *real* reason), they did not have the armed forces to try it.
3. training of 2000 civil servants. 4. publishing many books and 5. pushing for the end of "linked sales" in licitatory processes (this last one means: sometimes M$ would enter a licitatory process to sell MS-Windows [to which they did not have a concurrent] and would only sell MS-Windows if the govment bought MS-Office)
This is *not* a totally different alternative, is just an *optimized* version of the X Window Protocol (not X WindowS). BTW, to move a window from an X session to another is perfectly possible.
This is exactly what Enterprise had been doing. People bash it a lot, but I kind of like it. Season 3 last was really nice, especially towards the ending, but the cliffhanger was really lame.
If you enable portknocking, your computer does not show up in a IP range portscan as a target. To a portscanner, your computer looks like all ports are closed, no way to reach it. It's turned off for all the port scanner knows. So the 5kr1p7 k1dd1ez will not bother you.
I would be stupid, though, if *after* the port knock open some door, you get to open a telnet port for instance, instead of a more secure ssh port.
What the topic *is* about is that now you can have OTPs and other types of non-fixed port knocks. Additionally to the security of not being "seen" by port scans, the port knock sequence changes and is more difficult to brute force.
That a portscan reveals nothing in the case of port knocking. And it shows a listening port in the case of the deamon, well, listening, conventionally.
Here goes a non-fish translation of the leads only. It's Sunday morning and I'too lazy to do the rest.
FISL: 35 coutries represented and all Brazilian states represented in the Forum.
Software Livre [FISL]), that ended today, June 5th, in Porto Alegre, had 4,854 attendants from 35 countries, comparing to the 20 countries of last year. All 27 Brazilian states were represented, as were 380 municipalities in the country. Of the total number of attendants, 1,014 people were representing firms or public instituions, a record number according to the event's organization.
5th FISL: Gilberto Gil (Culture Minister) preaches "land reform" in the field of cultural propriety.
Free culture was the prevalent idea in the launching of the Creative Commons project in Brazil, with the presence of the Minister of Culture Gilberto Gil [1] in a debate int the PUC-RS Event Hall, in Porto Alegre. The encounter, in the end of the friday the 4th's afternoon, was one of the most attended of the Forum.
5th FISL: Lecturers criticize press coverage about Free Software
In the conference "Free Software in the Press", that took place in the last day of the 5th FISL, the debaters reached the conclusion that there are many flaws in the spreading of the theme by the comunication media.
The coordinator of special projects of the e-government of the Municipality of Sao Paulo, Joao Cassino, said that the coverage about Free Software in the press has a lot to do with journalism ethics. "It's very easy to distort technical themes, but we cannot deny journalism is a politics weapon," he said.
basically, that you have a current point, a current pen, a current brush, a current path, state elements you use to draw and compose whatever you want to compose in your screen (like PDF/PS composing in a paper)
Passing slow left traffic in the middle or right traffic lane, in not against any law. Here in Brasil, yes it is. Down here you can only pass another car by the left side (the driver's seat side, just like EU and USofA).
Here's what: I, personally, don't pass the left-lane-snails by the right side, b ut I do honk and flicker the lights and yell 'till the asshole gets tired. And I'm persistent, I guarantee you.
All the time he was speeding, and he did a lot (more than a dozen) wrong (right-side) passings, mainly trucks. If I was from the DMV, his license would be history by now. (Right-side passing, where I live is a 5 point infraction... and you can only get 20 in one year before losing your license.
"Many of them should IMHO not be operators;" I humbly disagree. Perl (and Perl6, by extension) use the concept of Huffman-encoding source (if something is done many times, it should be trivial to write and read, with the least keystrokes possible);
Slashdot Mirror
the book was published?
Jabber is the holy grail of the IM.
soft links.
that while Bush father and Bubba were in the office, they held up the debt. That seems to be the point of the GPP.
They were manufactured in Taiwan or someplace... ?! can anyone clarify this to me?
This article advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
(x) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
(x) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
(x) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
(x) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
(x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
(x) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
(x) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
(x) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
(x) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, l0ser! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
1. Dogs *are* animals, you insensitive clod!
2. ?! If it works for a hot dog, but leaves a notch, you would not want to test it in yourself, would you?
3. flesh is flesh; I suppose the alterations in capacitancy in a hot dog and in an arm is the same.
4. were you trying to be funny?
I think he got you. Either it's a joke, or he is from outside Federation space.
Ummm gosh, the only ActiveX applets I ever saw was right after it was released. Heh, I often say Java is dead on the web (though I know it isn't completely) but now ActiveX is entirely dead except for like the applet on Windows Update :-P
You are a Holy Person, sir/madam.
Go find some pr0n and you'll see a lot of activeX thingies trying to install. Lucky me I use Moz.
with a big screen like that, we would not have to stop to stretch... :-) Really, my main problem in my last physical evaluation in the gym was not muscle tonus, but muscle *shortening* due to lack of stretch...
1. we *are* definitively more passive than USofAns, but we had our quota of bloody war, too (we -- and i'm definitively not proud -- eliminated more than half the Paraguayan male population in a war on which our generals dumped the dead bodies in the Paraguayan rivers in order to poison them); not to mention what our army and police corps have done during the late sixties and seventies during the military dictatorship era.
2. about the Papal photos: it's not forbidden. I work in a common office space with 10 other people and it would not offend the (1) Protestand (2) atheist people here that I put up a Papal photo in the wall by my side. More animosidy would ensue if I put an Atletico Mineiro flag, even though there is only one Cruzeiro fan here (my State's two main -- and opposing -- soccer teams -- in the room next door things are inverted, 9 Cruzeirenses and only 1 Atleticano)
2. (continued, trying to get on-topic [?] again) the case of religious symbols is that we (as a culture) think is a disrespect forbidding religious symbols. such nonsense as it has being happening in France (Muslim girls forbidden to use the veil) would never happen here. I can display a large cross, and the guy in the next table a large David star, and the other one an enourmous Shiva statue; no one cares. This is our cultural definition of religious respect.
2nd paragraph: I live in a more-catholic and more-religious in general state than Sao Paulo (Minas Gerais). And I have yet to see a Pope snapshot apart from the one in my wife's granny's living room. And I don't see your point, even if this were true, which it is not.
4th paragraph: It's true, but I could not see its relevance. Portugal did not have the resources (and the armada) England have. When young Pedro said "I will not get back to Lisbon 'cause I like the mulatas down here" (yes, that's the *real* reason), they did not have the armed forces to try it.
3. training of 2000 civil servants.
;-)
4. publishing many books
and
5. pushing for the end of "linked sales" in licitatory processes
(this last one means: sometimes M$ would enter a licitatory process to sell MS-Windows [to which they did not have a concurrent] and would only sell MS-Windows if the govment bought MS-Office)
Good attempt, but the natives can do better
This is *not* a totally different alternative, is just an *optimized* version of the X Window Protocol (not X WindowS). BTW, to move a window from an X session to another is perfectly possible.
This is exactly what Enterprise had been doing. People bash it a lot, but I kind of like it. Season 3 last was really nice, especially towards the ending, but the cliffhanger was really lame.
And the difference will be... what?
If you enable portknocking, your computer does not show up in a IP range portscan as a target. To a portscanner, your computer looks like all ports are closed, no way to reach it. It's turned off for all the port scanner knows. So the 5kr1p7 k1dd1ez will not bother you.
I would be stupid, though, if *after* the port knock open some door, you get to open a telnet port for instance, instead of a more secure ssh port.
What the topic *is* about is that now you can have OTPs and other types of non-fixed port knocks. Additionally to the security of not being "seen" by port scans, the port knock sequence changes and is more difficult to brute force.
That a portscan reveals nothing in the case of port knocking.
And it shows a listening port in the case of the deamon, well, listening, conventionally.
Anaconda only works in x86 (and sparc?), and debian has to install in 11 archs. Understand now?
Here goes a non-fish translation of the leads only. It's Sunday morning and I'too lazy to do the rest.
FISL: 35 coutries represented and all Brazilian states represented in the Forum.
Software Livre [FISL]), that ended today, June 5th, in Porto Alegre, had 4,854 attendants from 35 countries, comparing to the 20 countries of last year. All 27 Brazilian states were represented, as were 380 municipalities in the country. Of the total number of attendants, 1,014 people were representing firms or public instituions, a record number according to the event's organization.
5th FISL: Gilberto Gil (Culture Minister) preaches "land reform" in the field of cultural propriety.
Free culture was the prevalent idea in the launching of the Creative Commons project in Brazil, with the presence of the Minister of Culture Gilberto Gil [1] in a debate int the PUC-RS Event Hall, in Porto Alegre. The encounter, in the end of the friday the 4th's afternoon, was one of the most attended of the Forum.
5th FISL: Lecturers criticize press coverage about Free Software
In the conference "Free Software in the Press", that took place in the last day of the 5th FISL, the debaters reached the conclusion that there are many flaws in the spreading of the theme by the comunication media.
The coordinator of special projects of the e-government of the Municipality of Sao Paulo, Joao Cassino, said that the coverage about Free Software in the press has a lot to do with journalism ethics. "It's very easy to distort technical themes, but we cannot deny journalism is a politics weapon," he said.
basically, that you have a current point, a current pen, a current brush, a current path, state elements you use to draw and compose whatever you want to compose in your screen (like PDF/PS composing in a paper)
Passing slow left traffic in the middle or right traffic lane, in not against any law.
Here in Brasil, yes it is. Down here you can only pass another car by the left side (the driver's seat side, just like EU and USofA).
Here's what: I, personally, don't pass the left-lane-snails by the right side, b ut I do honk and flicker the lights and yell 'till the asshole gets tired. And I'm persistent, I guarantee you.
All the time he was speeding, and he did a lot (more than a dozen) wrong (right-side) passings, mainly trucks. If I was from the DMV, his license would be history by now. (Right-side passing, where I live is a 5 point infraction... and you can only get 20 in one year before losing your license.
"Many of them should IMHO not be operators;"
I humbly disagree. Perl (and Perl6, by extension) use the concept of Huffman-encoding source (if something is done many times, it should be trivial to write and read, with the least keystrokes possible);
I prefer:
do_something if -r 'file.txt'
To:
if( readable_file("file.txt") ) {
do_something();
}
and having to implement readable_file as some other stuff.