a great majority of hosting industry uses enom.com . its probably the biggest registrar out there. the only problem is acquiring a reseller account, because they dont sell like godaddy. but, you can acquire an account either directly through them by depositing a huge chunk of cash, or from their levle 2 resellers.
This is a late post for sure, but maybe you'll notice it sometime.:)
ENOM is big like GoDaddy, and I don't believe they are very nice people, either.
I've been blessed with using a Duron 950Mhz with a gig of RAM, lately. Quite speedy. Heh. But I've used worse, as many can no doubt also say. Oh, and an GeForce4, and of course the X Window System.:-)
I've always used Firefox, and Netscape before that, on my linux desktops. I must say that I tried Opera lately, for the first time, and found its rendering to be very spry. The difference was most noticable for me when loading very large web pages, or very detailed with lots of tables and such. The latter was our nagios service detail page, which the rendering in Opera was quite noticeable in its quickness.
So I get to be torn now, maybe, speed vs lean... I do like speed. Opera's memory use doesn't seem to be so excessively bad as to negate the optimizations they seem to have coded into the rendering.
I have received lots of spam from these Xinnet-registered domains. I do get frustrated until I remember I've been getting spammed going on 12 or 13 years, never having once been able to get a blasted spammer in my sights... it's just one of those things you have to live with, it seems, since protocols aren't going to change and neither is the nature of many of our human cousins. Well, this is pessimistic, sure.
And then there is ENOM, a wholly American outfit, and I'm wondering why these folks (and I admire them their work, sure) aren't clamoring for that outfit to be cut out.
Take for example regupdate.net. I decided to one day get a packet dump of some odd UDP traffic that was coming in. Turns out it was from spoofed addresses claiming to be from Shaw Cable IP addresses and sent to windows messenger ports (1026-1028).
Hah! This crap really gets my ire up. So checking into this, I saw that they use round-robin A records and one goes to some InterNAP network space (Internap doesn't seem to care--I did contact them).
Domain Name: REGUPDATE.NET
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
$ host regupdate.net regupdate.net has address 63.251.92.197
You get redirected to 190.34.148.122, in Panama it seems. I wish I could say what stake ENOM has in this scheme, if any, but after awhile hearing about those creeps I'm willing to bet their hands are elbow-deep in some seriously ill behavior.
So, honestly, while I like that someone is yelling about Xinnet, I wish we could rid ourselves of more of these bad apples at home.
If your Aunt Edna can't send e-mail because a spammer sent spam from her ISP's domain two months ago, MAPS doesn't care.
Excuse me, but you're confused about how MAPS works. I assume you mean her ISP can be listed in the RBL because a spammer was also a customer of her ISP, and that's simply not true. What ISP in the world has not ever had a spammer sign up? Now, if her ISP were to provide dedicated service to a spammer, the IP address(es) he used would be put into the RBL. If he continued to spew spam or they moved around his IP addresses, then perhaps all addresses her ISP uses would be listed (or perhaps just the/24 the spammer is in, if they have more than a/24).
Does that really seem so unreasonable? Keep in mind that the process to eventually block that whole/24 would be after months of MAPS prodding them to clean up their act.
"Maximum collateral damage" is their goal
From where did you get that quote?
The only way I can ever see the spam problem solved is if people stop worrying about a few messages and get on with their lives.
Ummm, the spam problem is not about a "few messages," my friend. When you are adminstrator of a mail server providing service to a large number of subscribers, most of whom do not want spam in their mailbox, then it behooves you to take steps to reduce that spam level. Doing so saves you money, makes your customers happy, and thereby enables you to make those boat payments on time.
Futher proof people from oregon are a tad crazy:-)
hah! Well, I live in Bend, OR where Brian lives, and have had the pleasure of knowing
and downing beers with him for some time. Hey, he's pretty down-to-earth! But anybody that designs toys for a living is bound to be a little quirky.
The man is a living legend around here, I'll tell you, and he drives a sweet Mercedes. I've always joked that he's really only doing this to get girls;-). That reminds me of Star Trek, when we discover that Cochran only did it for the money, but history regards him as one of humanity's brightest stars.
Americans fruitlessly crying about privacy laws they lost years ago.
Your posting history reads like the rantings of a mind hell-bent on degrading everyone American and everything American. Now, why is this, I wonder? Are each of us 300 million citizens supposed to think in one particular way before you decide to stop hating us?
And, have you even been here? You do realize just how diverse this nation is, right?
If there was a stalker around your neighbourhood, I bet you'd want the police to have a quick look through your house/garden for him with that receiver
What does this ruling have to do with the police use of this when they have probable cause to do so? Meaning, if the police are in pursuit of a suspected criminal, they certainly can use low-light and infrared-detecting devices. Now, on the off chance they happen to notice your house is aglow, they can't use that as cause to search it.
Is every single person in public service worthy of the public's trust, hell no! Do you trust every damn officer wherever you are?
Despite that, I feel reasonably safe from police intrusion and I always have, wherever I have lived in this country. I will deduce you're in the UK, since you so proudly stated having wooped the Luftwaffe into submission. But we won't go there right now, all I'll say is you have right to be proud, to an extent. But I wouldn't exactly rate the UK as being progressive with regard to the average citizen's privacy.
No-one in the States, no, because the States has grabbed more than half of the world total.
Did you stop to think about why that might be?:)
You are making a bad assumption if you think it's as easy as it used to be to get address space in the US. You'd be wrong; we had to beg and plead to get a measly/27 from our ISP, after we filled our/24. And forget getting portable space.
I think some networks in Europe use lots of IP addresses as well. Let's take Demon Internet of the UK for example. They assign static addresses to all of their dialups. They are somewhat famous for doing so, but how many addresses could they conserve by assigning dynamically like every other large dialup ISP in the world (I'm assuming, but you get the idea:)? I know they have 193.195.0.0/16, 194.222.0.0/16 and 194.217.0.0/16 at the least. That's a lot of IP addresses.
RIPE just began allocating 80/7 (if memory serves) to European networks, as well.
That being said, it has always bothered me greatly when there are places like MIT, who has legacy space of 18/8, yet hardly needs millions of addresses. They won't give it back! And of course I am aware of the difficulties and expense involved, but their unwillingness to play fair, and ARIN's insistence that we must "conserve, conserve, conserve!" isn't helping us poor fools who can't even multihome effectively. Sigh, this has all been said before:)
Anyone who has ever worked for the fed would realize how much paper work is involved in everything. I have friends who have seen them put a bar code on a mouse and keyboard and then go back to make sure the mouse hadn't been stolen every year.
I was always amused by the amount of paper that many government forms dedicate to telling us about the "Paperwork Reduction Act of 1974." heh...
I could never really figure out what it had to to with reducing paperwork, because there sure was enough of it, but I digress...
The reason for the accountability is because governments use taxpayer money to buy the mouse. They are responsible to the taxpayers to ensure that purchased mice aren't stolen and that it is used for the purpose intended, i.e. official government business. Any other use is a waste of our taxes.
NASA is accountable to us for the spending of our money via our elected representatives. Congress exercises its oversight over NASA. What does NASA risk by not documenting everything? Besides lives, probably their very budget! Should paperwork be reduced? I think so. Will Congress and the taxpayers let them?
I think it's a great idea. Perhaps, if instead of modifying your system for you, it sent an email to postmaster, webmaster or root
How many incompetent system administrators actually read email sent to those addresses? How many have a system in place to forward root@everybox to some place where it gets read? If these guys/gals were reading CERT or Bugtraq, they would know about these vulnerabilities and fix them. If they aren't reading those lists, they probably just stick computers on the Internet without giving a thought about "uhhh, where's postmaster mail gonna go?"
Our IDS is showing more and more port scans all the time--I'm glad to know why I've seen a jump in scans of late, the increase agreeing with the arrival of this new worm (scans to port 10008). How much bandwidth are we going to use if we have thousands of machines all over the 'net port scanning thousands of other networks all over the 'net? We'll have the worms port scanning along with all the anti-worms. That's the only way to find out which machines may be infected, by just random port scanning. Doesn't sound very scalable to me.
No, what we need to do (and what I do) is blackhole networks that don't have decent clue at the helm.:-) *plonk*
Bind needs to be configured to have a different set of name servers for the default root zone.
Grassroots efforts to get networks to use different root servers have been tried before,
like AlterNIC.
It didn't help when the co-founder was arrested, however, there have been other attempts if my memory serves.
Netsol was too entrenched, and getting thousands and thousands of networks to switch.. well the task is difficult to say the least.
Now we have an entrenched and (US) government-supported ICANN and Verisign, not to mention hundreds of new registrars. I think it's only going to get harder to accomplish what you propose.
Only in the USA. The rest of the world is dominated by manual gearboxes...
I've no idea what that guy is talking about. Most people I know (and have known) own cars with manual transmission. Not to say there aren't a lot of automatics, but manual is hardly a "specialist interest," whatever that means. I do prefer manual myself. So I'd have to say, based on 29 years of being American, that comparing linux to stick-shifts in the USA is a flawed analogy.
"Lovers Arrival, The" is indeed one of the most highly-rated trolls I've known as a/. reader. Try not to be too offended, it's just that he/she/it is quite good at socially-engineering moderators to give him/her/it points. Truth be told, the post should have been below my threshold, don't know about yours.
Anyway, just remember the guy/gal/thing next time you have moderator points:-)
You said it's stupid to say that spam has costs for the receiver! That's the whole premise of our arguments against spam, and why it's a problem for many of us.
And to the moderator who thinks my post, the opinion within shared by the huge majority of network admins, is "underrated," go ahead and keep up the good work.
While the statement suggests that an eruption, if it occurs, is still a ways off, I still feel kind of excited by the news.
Excited?? Hah! Spoken like someone who hasn't had to live through a volcano! I live about 30 miles from the Sisters, can see them out my window, and grew up in Spokane, WA. Seeing pitch black at 3pm on May 18, 1980, left me with the sense of not ever wanting to be around for another volcano blast. I think two eruptions in my lifetime would be extraordinary, eh?:)
Anyway, the US Pacific Northwest is blessed with weather that isn't very often destructive, but the mountains, well that's another story. Still, it's better than living on the bank of the Mississippi River, that's for damn sure.
Well, writing this two days after the article was posted makes me believe the odds of anybody reading me are slim;-) Sorry I didn't notice it before.
Does that mean they'll go back to the old-style Klingons?
I remember someone asking this question when it was first rumored the series would be in the past.. err before Kirk or whatever.
I also remember being amused when DS9 went into the past, during the Tribble incident, and Worf was asked a poignant question about why he looked so different than other Klingons. See that one? He dodged the question, basically.
I hope they don't revert to old-style Klingons. I don't think I would balk at the lack of consistency; they looked too much like humans, and I remember some very wimpy-looking Klingons.
They may start out that way, but it will be all holodeck sleuthing and virtua-babes within a year.
That would be my worst nightmare as well. But, consider this: the series takes place before holodeck technology (ahem, remember this series' time is before even Kirk's era). I highly doubt they will incorporate it. Thank the Creator.
I admit it. I worked for a company that spammed people often. They got alot of business from it thus they continued to do it.
And you tacitly condoned it. Amazing.
If you read the numbers its not that many people that really are concerned about SPAM. The ones that are ANTI SPAM are just vocal about it.
Bullshit. As an ISP, I hear concerns about spam all the time, from regular folks who are tired of the crap they get in their mailbox. Especially concerned are parents who's mailbox gets filled with porn ads. Just this morning a customer wrote in to say he's tired of getting 20 spams a day!
Well, sure we have mail filtering available. I, however, have to spend my valuable time keeping those filters up-to-date, our mail server has to spend valuable CPU cycles checking these emails, and filtering is never 100% effective, since spammers love to find ways to get around your filters. They don't give a rat's ass if you don't want it, they'll spend their useless lives trying to figure out how to shove their spam down your throat.
So, how did your company send good amounts of spam and not feel any pain, i.e. RBL'd, blackholed by various networks around the world, etc? Spammers that manage to keep sending spam and never get filtered are usually the ones relaying via insecure Asian mailservers and using throwaway dialup accounts, or else they hire someone who does that. Personally, I'd feel like a sleazball having to resort to such tactics, and to work for such a company? You're a pariah.
I've tried to find the source for windows on sunsite.unc.edu and cdrom.com so I would be able to fix some glaring programming errors...
Pardon me, but why would one waste calories even thinking they could find the source for the Windows operating system, obviously closed-source, on Sunsite? (is this supposed to be funny in an obtuse sort of way?:)
I was born on that day when Pioneer 10 launched.
I recall as a kid being in the library and finding out by accident that I was born the same day it launched, and I remember feeling bit of awe at the thought.
When I happen to remember Pioneer, between beers at my usual party, I do toast it, and hope that I'll live as long as that probe!:-) guess I better cut back on the beers;-)
I'm glad someone took the time and effort to sue someone for spamming. Maybe it'll make other companies think twice before spamming me.
Until then, I have my good friend, the "delete" key. Takes a second, gets rid of my problem. It's not THAT difficult.
So, basically, my Good Reverend, you want to reduce your spam level but not make any effort yourself to do so:-)
I submit that until you start doing some of the work yourself, you will not ever reduce your level of spam.
Until you start helping the rest of us that take the time to actually complain about it, may your mailbox be infested with the excrement of spammers!
Here's a tip: spammers have "flamers lists" that they use to weed out addresses that are known to complain a lot. I'll be damned if I can find a URL right now to such a list, but I know I have various addresses on the list (and, the lists are used by spammers that want to "joe-job" antispammers as well:-)
As far as she knows, she's the first one in the state of California to do this. On principal and to set a precedent, I would venture to say that it was worth her time.
Yes, I do tend to agree.
There are a couple of persistant spammers that I would love to sue. There are some
spammers that aren't your everyday variety. Unfortunately, there is no law in my locale (Oregon) that would permit me any relief.
It's time to start lobbying my state legislators, I guess:-)
I'd be a millionaire if I sued every company that spammed me for $50
Well, how much spam do you get?
You could be a rich, yes, but would have to give up your day job and stop going out at night
for beers! (at least I would, being that I get so damn much of it).
Spammers are getting smarter, too. She was lucky that she knew who was spamming her and could get contact information. For much of the spam I receive, it seems as if I'd need to hire a PI, and probably need court subpeonas, to find out who even sent it.
She won $50, so it's a moral victory of a sort, but was it worth her time?
I decided to post in this discussion today, rather than moderating you as flamebait (which you are:-).
My ISP got on MAPS' shit list, and my brother's ISP blocked all my email to my brother.
Excuse me, then you were paying money to a shitty ISP, and it's good that you left. That is exactly the effect intended when a network refuses to be a responsible member of the Internet community.
You didn't say whether your ISP was in MAPS RSS or RBL.
We know to get in MAPS RSS, a mail server must:
They claim to only block IP addresses, and they claim to not block by domain name, but the easily-verified truth is that they do block by domain name.
I challenge you to prove otherwise. So far, you are just full of hot air.
Note that they're too chickshit to block AOL or MSN -- I guess even MAPS don't have enough lawyers to fight those guys.
OK, now you're talking out of your ass. What, are you a really good troll or something?
MAPS did
put MSN on their blacklist.
I think MAPS is lacking in some areas, but your bad experience with a bad ISP is not going to convince me you have a legitimate gripe.
You should not have had to contact MAPS for any reason; your ISP, being the ones blacklisted, should have done what needed to be done.
You sound like an end-user. Let me tell you, it's very hard to get into the RBL if you are a competent organization with well-clued system administrators.
Here, at Central Oregon Internet, we've been using MAPS since nearly the beginning (meaning, years), and I can count the number of problems with legit mail being dropped on ONE HAND (and guess what? I'm a nice sysadmin that will allow email to come in from blacklisted hosts if a customer needs mail from there--but I will try hard to get the offending network to get themselves off the blacklist, and if I see any spam from them, they don't get any more special treatment. See, your brother's ISP sucks, too). A couple of weeks ago, MAPS checking was turned off for three days, and the amount of spam reported by our users skyrocketed. That is all the proof I need of the effectiveness of MAPS.
Slashdot Mirror
a great majority of hosting industry uses enom.com . its probably the biggest registrar out there. the only problem is acquiring a reseller account, because they dont sell like godaddy. but, you can acquire an account either directly through them by depositing a huge chunk of cash, or from their levle 2 resellers.
This is a late post for sure, but maybe you'll notice it sometime. :)
ENOM is big like GoDaddy, and I don't believe they are very nice people, either.
Check out:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/WIKILEAKS.INFO_censored_by_eNom_and_Demand_Media
and a recent /. post of mine:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=591795&cid=23906511
I've been blessed with using a Duron 950Mhz with a gig of RAM, lately. Quite speedy. Heh. But I've used worse, as many can no doubt also say. Oh, and an GeForce4, and of course the X Window System. :-)
I've always used Firefox, and Netscape before that, on my linux desktops. I must say that I tried Opera lately, for the first time, and found its rendering to be very spry. The difference was most noticable for me when loading very large web pages, or very detailed with lots of tables and such. The latter was our nagios service detail page, which the rendering in Opera was quite noticeable in its quickness.
So I get to be torn now, maybe, speed vs lean...
I do like speed. Opera's memory use doesn't seem to be so excessively bad as to negate the optimizations they seem to have coded into the rendering.
Aaron
I have received lots of spam from these Xinnet-registered domains. I do get frustrated until I remember I've been getting spammed going on 12 or 13 years, never having once been able to get a blasted spammer in my sights... it's just one of those things you have to live with, it seems, since protocols aren't going to change and neither is the nature of many of our human cousins. Well, this is pessimistic, sure.
And then there is ENOM, a wholly American outfit, and I'm wondering why these folks (and I admire them their work, sure) aren't clamoring for that outfit to be cut out.
Take for example regupdate.net. I decided to one day get a packet dump of some odd UDP traffic that was coming in. Turns out it was from spoofed addresses claiming to be from Shaw Cable IP addresses and sent to windows messenger ports (1026-1028).
Please.note.that.once.you.visit.to.to.
RegUpdate.net.and.install.the..cleaner.
program.you.will.not.receive.any.more.
reminders.or.pop-ups.like.this.one...
RegUpdate.net..
Hah! This crap really gets my ire up.
So checking into this, I saw that they use round-robin A records and one goes to some InterNAP network space (Internap doesn't seem to care--I did contact them).
Domain Name: REGUPDATE.NET
Registrar: ENOM, INC.
$ host regupdate.net
regupdate.net has address 63.251.92.197
Internap Network Services NETBLK-PNAP-11-99 (NET-63 -251-0-0-1) 63.251.0.0 - 63.251.255.255
eNom INAP-WDC002-ENOM-1942 (NET-63-251-92-192-1)
63.251.92.192 - 63.251.92.255
You get redirected to 190.34.148.122, in Panama it seems. I wish I could say what stake ENOM has in this scheme, if any, but after awhile hearing about those creeps I'm willing to bet their hands are elbow-deep in some seriously ill behavior.
So, honestly, while I like that someone is yelling about Xinnet, I wish we could rid ourselves of more of these bad apples at home.
-Aaron
Excuse me, but you're confused about how MAPS works. I assume you mean her ISP can be listed in the RBL because a spammer was also a customer of her ISP, and that's simply not true. What ISP in the world has not ever had a spammer sign up? Now, if her ISP were to provide dedicated service to a spammer, the IP address(es) he used would be put into the RBL. If he continued to spew spam or they moved around his IP addresses, then perhaps all addresses her ISP uses would be listed (or perhaps just the /24 the spammer is in, if they have more than a /24).
Does that really seem so unreasonable? Keep in mind that the process to eventually block that whole /24 would be after months of MAPS prodding them to clean up their act.
"Maximum collateral damage" is their goal
From where did you get that quote?
The only way I can ever see the spam problem solved is if people stop worrying about a few messages and get on with their lives.
Ummm, the spam problem is not about a "few messages," my friend. When you are adminstrator of a mail server providing service to a large number of subscribers, most of whom do not want spam in their mailbox, then it behooves you to take steps to reduce that spam level. Doing so saves you money, makes your customers happy, and thereby enables you to make those boat payments on time.
hah! Well, I live in Bend, OR where Brian lives, and have had the pleasure of knowing and downing beers with him for some time. Hey, he's pretty down-to-earth! But anybody that designs toys for a living is bound to be a little quirky.
The man is a living legend around here, I'll tell you, and he drives a sweet Mercedes. I've always joked that he's really only doing this to get girls ;-). That reminds me of Star Trek, when we discover that Cochran only did it for the money, but history regards him as one of humanity's brightest stars.
Your posting history reads like the rantings of a mind hell-bent on degrading everyone American and everything American. Now, why is this, I wonder? Are each of us 300 million citizens supposed to think in one particular way before you decide to stop hating us?
And, have you even been here? You do realize just how diverse this nation is, right?
If there was a stalker around your neighbourhood, I bet you'd want the police to have a quick look through your house/garden for him with that receiver
What does this ruling have to do with the police use of this when they have probable cause to do so? Meaning, if the police are in pursuit of a suspected criminal, they certainly can use low-light and infrared-detecting devices. Now, on the off chance they happen to notice your house is aglow, they can't use that as cause to search it. Is every single person in public service worthy of the public's trust, hell no! Do you trust every damn officer wherever you are? Despite that, I feel reasonably safe from police intrusion and I always have, wherever I have lived in this country. I will deduce you're in the UK, since you so proudly stated having wooped the Luftwaffe into submission. But we won't go there right now, all I'll say is you have right to be proud, to an extent. But I wouldn't exactly rate the UK as being progressive with regard to the average citizen's privacy.
Ok, you're right! We submit! I also move that Canadians in space be known as "Canadauts, eh?"
Did you stop to think about why that might be? :)
You are making a bad assumption if you think it's as easy as it used to be to get address space in the US. You'd be wrong; we had to beg and plead to get a measly /27 from our ISP, after we filled our /24. And forget getting portable space.
I think some networks in Europe use lots of IP addresses as well. Let's take Demon Internet of the UK for example. They assign static addresses to all of their dialups. They are somewhat famous for doing so, but how many addresses could they conserve by assigning dynamically like every other large dialup ISP in the world (I'm assuming, but you get the idea :)? I know they have 193.195.0.0/16, 194.222.0.0/16 and 194.217.0.0/16 at the least. That's a lot of IP addresses.
RIPE just began allocating 80/7 (if memory serves) to European networks, as well.
That being said, it has always bothered me greatly when there are places like MIT, who has legacy space of 18/8, yet hardly needs millions of addresses. They won't give it back! And of course I am aware of the difficulties and expense involved, but their unwillingness to play fair, and ARIN's insistence that we must "conserve, conserve, conserve!" isn't helping us poor fools who can't even multihome effectively. Sigh, this has all been said before :)
I was always amused by the amount of paper that many government forms dedicate to telling us about the "Paperwork Reduction Act of 1974." heh...
I could never really figure out what it had to to with reducing paperwork, because there sure was enough of it, but I digress...
The reason for the accountability is because governments use taxpayer money to buy the mouse. They are responsible to the taxpayers to ensure that purchased mice aren't stolen and that it is used for the purpose intended, i.e. official government business. Any other use is a waste of our taxes.
NASA is accountable to us for the spending of our money via our elected representatives. Congress exercises its oversight over NASA. What does NASA risk by not documenting everything? Besides lives, probably their very budget! Should paperwork be reduced? I think so. Will Congress and the taxpayers let them?
How many incompetent system administrators actually read email sent to those addresses? How many have a system in place to forward root@everybox to some place where it gets read? If these guys/gals were reading CERT or Bugtraq, they would know about these vulnerabilities and fix them. If they aren't reading those lists, they probably just stick computers on the Internet without giving a thought about "uhhh, where's postmaster mail gonna go?"
Our IDS is showing more and more port scans all the time--I'm glad to know why I've seen a jump in scans of late, the increase agreeing with the arrival of this new worm (scans to port 10008). How much bandwidth are we going to use if we have thousands of machines all over the 'net port scanning thousands of other networks all over the 'net? We'll have the worms port scanning along with all the anti-worms. That's the only way to find out which machines may be infected, by just random port scanning. Doesn't sound very scalable to me.
No, what we need to do (and what I do) is blackhole networks that don't have decent clue at the helm. :-) *plonk*
But let me point out that URL should be www.alternic.org, not .net as was erroneously posted.
Grassroots efforts to get networks to use different root servers have been tried before, like AlterNIC. It didn't help when the co-founder was arrested, however, there have been other attempts if my memory serves.
Netsol was too entrenched, and getting thousands and thousands of networks to switch.. well the task is difficult to say the least.
Now we have an entrenched and (US) government-supported ICANN and Verisign, not to mention hundreds of new registrars. I think it's only going to get harder to accomplish what you propose.
I've no idea what that guy is talking about. Most people I know (and have known) own cars with manual transmission. Not to say there aren't a lot of automatics, but manual is hardly a "specialist interest," whatever that means. I do prefer manual myself. So I'd have to say, based on 29 years of being American, that comparing linux to stick-shifts in the USA is a flawed analogy.
Anyway, just remember the guy/gal/thing next time you have moderator points :-)
And to the moderator who thinks my post, the opinion within shared by the huge majority of network admins, is "underrated," go ahead and keep up the good work.
Excited?? Hah! Spoken like someone who hasn't had to live through a volcano! I live about 30 miles from the Sisters, can see them out my window, and grew up in Spokane, WA. Seeing pitch black at 3pm on May 18, 1980, left me with the sense of not ever wanting to be around for another volcano blast. I think two eruptions in my lifetime would be extraordinary, eh? :)
Anyway, the US Pacific Northwest is blessed with weather that isn't very often destructive, but the mountains, well that's another story. Still, it's better than living on the bank of the Mississippi River, that's for damn sure.
Well, writing this two days after the article was posted makes me believe the odds of anybody reading me are slim ;-) Sorry I didn't notice it before.
I remember someone asking this question when it was first rumored the series would be in the past.. err before Kirk or whatever.
I also remember being amused when DS9 went into the past, during the Tribble incident, and Worf was asked a poignant question about why he looked so different than other Klingons. See that one? He dodged the question, basically.
I hope they don't revert to old-style Klingons. I don't think I would balk at the lack of consistency; they looked too much like humans, and I remember some very wimpy-looking Klingons.
That would be my worst nightmare as well. But, consider this: the series takes place before holodeck technology (ahem, remember this series' time is before even Kirk's era). I highly doubt they will incorporate it. Thank the Creator.
And you tacitly condoned it. Amazing.
If you read the numbers its not that many people that really are concerned about SPAM. The ones that are ANTI SPAM are just vocal about it.
Bullshit. As an ISP, I hear concerns about spam all the time, from regular folks who are tired of the crap they get in their mailbox. Especially concerned are parents who's mailbox gets filled with porn ads. Just this morning a customer wrote in to say he's tired of getting 20 spams a day! Well, sure we have mail filtering available. I, however, have to spend my valuable time keeping those filters up-to-date, our mail server has to spend valuable CPU cycles checking these emails, and filtering is never 100% effective, since spammers love to find ways to get around your filters. They don't give a rat's ass if you don't want it, they'll spend their useless lives trying to figure out how to shove their spam down your throat.
So, how did your company send good amounts of spam and not feel any pain, i.e. RBL'd, blackholed by various networks around the world, etc? Spammers that manage to keep sending spam and never get filtered are usually the ones relaying via insecure Asian mailservers and using throwaway dialup accounts, or else they hire someone who does that. Personally, I'd feel like a sleazball having to resort to such tactics, and to work for such a company? You're a pariah.
Pardon me, but why would one waste calories even thinking they could find the source for the Windows operating system, obviously closed-source, on Sunsite? (is this supposed to be funny in an obtuse sort of way? :)
When I happen to remember Pioneer, between beers at my usual party, I do toast it, and hope that I'll live as long as that probe! :-) guess I better cut back on the beers ;-)
Until then, I have my good friend, the "delete" key. Takes a second, gets rid of my problem. It's not THAT difficult.
So, basically, my Good Reverend, you want to reduce your spam level but not make any effort yourself to do so :-)
I submit that until you start doing some of the work yourself, you will not ever reduce your level of spam.
Until you start helping the rest of us that take the time to actually complain about it, may your mailbox be infested with the excrement of spammers!
Here's a tip: spammers have "flamers lists" that they use to weed out addresses that are known to complain a lot. I'll be damned if I can find a URL right now to such a list, but I know I have various addresses on the list (and, the lists are used by spammers that want to "joe-job" antispammers as well :-)
Yes, I do tend to agree.
There are a couple of persistant spammers that I would love to sue. There are some spammers that aren't your everyday variety. Unfortunately, there is no law in my locale (Oregon) that would permit me any relief.
It's time to start lobbying my state legislators, I guess :-)
Well, how much spam do you get?
You could be a rich, yes, but would have to give up your day job and stop going out at night for beers! (at least I would, being that I get so damn much of it).
Spammers are getting smarter, too. She was lucky that she knew who was spamming her and could get contact information. For much of the spam I receive, it seems as if I'd need to hire a PI, and probably need court subpeonas, to find out who even sent it.
She won $50, so it's a moral victory of a sort, but was it worth her time?
My ISP got on MAPS' shit list, and my brother's ISP blocked all my email to my brother.
Excuse me, then you were paying money to a shitty ISP, and it's good that you left. That is exactly the effect intended when a network refuses to be a responsible member of the Internet community.
You didn't say whether your ISP was in MAPS RSS or RBL. We know to get in MAPS RSS, a mail server must:
- Be open to third-party
relay.
- Be proven to have relayed spam mail in the past.
- Be unwilling to correct the problem
They claim to only block IP addresses, and they claim to not block by domain name, but the easily-verified truth is that they do block by domain name.I challenge you to prove otherwise. So far, you are just full of hot air.
Note that they're too chickshit to block AOL or MSN -- I guess even MAPS don't have enough lawyers to fight those guys.
OK, now you're talking out of your ass. What, are you a really good troll or something? MAPS did put MSN on their blacklist.
I think MAPS is lacking in some areas, but your bad experience with a bad ISP is not going to convince me you have a legitimate gripe.
You should not have had to contact MAPS for any reason; your ISP, being the ones blacklisted, should have done what needed to be done.
You sound like an end-user. Let me tell you, it's very hard to get into the RBL if you are a competent organization with well-clued system administrators.
Here, at Central Oregon Internet, we've been using MAPS since nearly the beginning (meaning, years), and I can count the number of problems with legit mail being dropped on ONE HAND (and guess what? I'm a nice sysadmin that will allow email to come in from blacklisted hosts if a customer needs mail from there--but I will try hard to get the offending network to get themselves off the blacklist, and if I see any spam from them, they don't get any more special treatment. See, your brother's ISP sucks, too). A couple of weeks ago, MAPS checking was turned off for three days, and the amount of spam reported by our users skyrocketed. That is all the proof I need of the effectiveness of MAPS.