I'm not sure whether libel would be appropriate. There may be more suitable laws, but you'd need to find a fairly experienced lawyer with decent knowledge of legislation regarding computers.
It does seem likely that you could demonstrate to a court that your prescence on the list is causing financial harm. It's just a matter of determining who to sue and on what specific grounds.
Hmmm, I thought you said they had already booted the spammer, but didn't let MAPS know? And you think MAPS should have spent their resources chasing your ISP?
And they probably have. Do you think they don't want to check thoroughly before claiming that they have got rid of all the spammers? Or does MAPS only care about a cusrosy inspection? Seems the ISP is guilty of being more thorough than MAPS here, and as a result they're being punished.
And you think MAPS should have spent their resources chasing your ISP?
YES!!!! They got into this business. They can just leave if its too much work.
Come back when you've actually tried running an RBL.
I'm not going to. I know how hard it is, and am not willing to run a semi adequate service that causes a new set of problems on top of spam. I'm also going to be highly critical of people who don't realise their limitations and instead blame others for the problems caused.
That's exactly what they do. Produce an accurate list of IPs belonging to ISPs who don't respond immediately to reported spamming.
They don't seem to make it clear that their list does anything other than block known or likely spam sources. It doesn't say it blocks ISPs that - for whatever reason - are slow to get back to MAPS.
So you think MAPS should hire lots of more people that could give you free personal service over the weekend and be flexible when your ISP screws up.
That would be one option. There are probably other options as well. Since this often causes a problem, they need to look into how they can make removal easier.
But your ISP who caused the problem, and made money from it, shouldn't at all be required to respond to complaints in a timely manner.
MAPS caused the problem as well. My ISP was speniding time going through logs and verifying that the alleged spammer was actually sending spam.
Here's a clue: One of the main reasons why MAPS is so bureaucratic is that the probably get 1,000 mails a day from people who thing they should make an exception just for their ISP.
So, in the course fo a year, you find 365 000 organisations who disagree with how MAPS is run? MAPS is missing the point here. This is not what they exist for. Stop trying to lay the blame for MAPS' inadequacy on the ISPs. MAPS has a single job to do. Produce an accurate list. The ISPs have a lot of jobs to do that need resources allocated. If MAPS can't do their job then they should give up and try something they can do.
MAPS isn't punishing you - I am. If it means less spam, I'll happily refuse all mail from you and your ISP.
Are you making the decision for yourself, or for all your users as well? I see spam as a cost of receiving 100% of legitimate email. I trust my mail admin to ensure that happens.
This sort of attitude is why people get so annoyed about these lists. MAPS are inflexible pedantic and unhelpful, and as a result often cause more problems than the spam did in the first place.
Why should they need to get back to MAPS so quickly? Is their lack of response causing a problem for other users? The only reason MAPS demands a response is because MAPS says so and if you don't play by their rules they'll punish you.
They're like traffic wardens. MAPS seem like one of the most annoyingly bureaucratic inflexible organisations around. Could this be why so many people who should be thankful for them absolutely hate them?
Yeah, and have you any idea how much this attitude FUCKING PISSES PEOPLE OFF
If you're going to run a blocklist, have some responsibility. Don't claim it's up to the person who uses it. The person who uses it trusts MAPS. MAPS has a responsibility to them to have an accurate list.
The list exists purely for the purpose of blocking email from IP addresses. Adding an IP address to the list will cause it to be blocked.
Otherwise you might as well say that its the laws of physics to blame. After all, the admin who used the list didn't block the address. The computer did. But the computer has no choice in the matter. It is just switching electrons.
They can't just block small sections of netblocks (because a spam-happy ISP will just allocate new IP's to their paying spammer customer) - the only way they can police the offence is to ban the block.
Is this true? I've heard it suggested by many an over zealous spam blocker, but there seem to be little or no evidence. The attitude seems to be that because one provider may have done this in the past, all of them will. However, most will not. They know it will simply result in the new block also being blocked. This will gradually decrease the value of their network, and drive the non spamming customers away.
The real problem though isn't MAPS and their attitude, it's the spammers. Get rid of the spammers and you get rid of the need for MAPS. These lowlife internet-scum are where any ire ought to be directed, again IMHO.
No. MAPS is a problem. In fact, they're a bigger problem than the spammers. Spam is irritating. MAPS is deliberately obstructive.
If they really cared, they'd be working on better methods to make sure their list was ass accurate as possible.
The aim of most of them is an extreme one - of not only eliminating spam, but punishing anyone who has a vague link to spam. The actual definition of a link to spam is solely at the discretion of the list administrator. This can be arbitrary.
Often, the administrator is a power hungry nerd, and refuses to consider that anyone except a spammer could posibly have a different opinion on the matter from them. They have no intention of helping you. Only of demonstrating their supreme power.
Decent admins will be very choosy about what lists they use, and will consider the ones they do use to be a suggestion. Not a definitive statement. Sadly there are too few decent admins around.
They're not obliged to release the software if they do use it (e.g. for internal projects).
Since they can get it for free, the amount they receive is probably greater than the cost to them.
They have choice in the matter. As much choice as whether or not to use Solaris. And personally, I think a lot of developing nations are going to be alot happier about giving "IP" away to the richest nations in the world than giving money to the richest nations in the world.
I think a big problem is that these warnings are modal and fucus grabbing when they don't need to be.
IMO, modal dialogs should only appear when it is logically impossible to continue without responding. "The page contained no data" is bad use of the message box. "Confirm delete" is reasonable.
But your car doesn't pop up a similar light warning you before you do anything slightly different from normal.
It has a total of about 20 lights, that only come on when its imprtant. None of which interfere with driving.
Considering the inevitable arguments regarding the fact that the owners still have their software, and are in no way deprived of the use of it, there are many people who disagree.
Religion doesn't enter into it.
Morally, morality is a personal thing.
Practically there's a key difference. The PearPC creators still have their code.
If you're arguing that it fits your definition of stealing, fine. I'll argue its jaywalking because it fits my definition of jaywalking. But then we might as well be talking different languages.
The only reason to call it stealing is because the term has negative connotations. How about using a less emotive term?
Good question. But Different types of media are often treated differently. There's a specific US law allowing copying of music (Audio Home Recording Act).
Personally, I think it is perfectly reasonable that different media types are treted differently. I'm a lot more likely to want to produce a mix tape than a mix of DVD scenes. I'll never want to take a few bars from a piece of music, but might quote a section of a novel. Different people have different wants and needs.
BeOS does have a reputation for being quite stable.
Since my machine is in my bedroom, and quite noisy, I like to leave it off when not in use.
If I want to check my email I'd rather not wait for over a minute eofre I can do so.
Why are people so tolerant of insane boot times on PCs? I expect my TV to turn on within about 5 seconds. My Commodore 64 was in a useable state in less than a second. Personally, I think most operating systems do way too much.
Non-standard custom-built hardware is much more flexible -- and much more expensive.
I'm curious... Would it be too difficult to build one of these yourself? A car battery (or several batteries) seems like it would be the main part, so the question is could everything else be made conveniently using discrete components? How does a UPS work?
It's Doctor Who. Typically these things are explained by a single line inserted into the script. E.g. Leela's eyes turned blue because Louise Jameson didn't like the contacts. Later Leela fell in love with a character she had had virtually no contact with when Loise wanted to leave the series.
They always have the same list of names (I think it might change slightly when new actors are discovered and old ones die, but it doesn't change much). It's usually Eddie Izzard, Alan Davies or Joanna Lumley these days.
I read about linguists translating an ancient language from greek. One of the resources was something that was quite clearly some sort of a list. This was useful as a crib since we know the sort of things people are likely to be writing in a list, and with a few more clues the writing can be matched up to such things as placenames and numbers.
My memory of this is a little vague. Simon Singhs's "The Code Book" goes into a quite a bit of detail about translating "Linear B" though.
In addition to this, no doubt we'd be interested in such things as just how much grain they consumed since this would indicate population size and typical diet.
It's sort of ironic that the reason we have so much information about the Mesopotamia is that various attackers destroyed the cities that held the clay cunieform tablets.
It's really time someone put together a Rosetta Stone. Put the same text in all known languages (including dead languages) on a very large hunk of durable material. Certain plastics will be pretty durable against general wear and tear (if not extreme conditions). It's just a matter of where to keep it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure whether libel would be appropriate. There may be more suitable laws, but you'd need to find a fairly experienced lawyer with decent knowledge of legislation regarding computers.
It does seem likely that you could demonstrate to a court that your prescence on the list is causing financial harm. It's just a matter of determining who to sue and on what specific grounds.
"double-opt-in with confirmation."
Or didn't you read that far? Did you hurt your knee when it jerked so violently?
Is it possible... just perhaps.. that some people use the term "double opt-in" to refer to "confirmed opt-in"?
Hmmm, I thought you said they had already booted the spammer, but didn't let MAPS know? And you think MAPS should have spent their resources chasing your ISP?
And they probably have. Do you think they don't want to check thoroughly before claiming that they have got rid of all the spammers? Or does MAPS only care about a cusrosy inspection? Seems the ISP is guilty of being more thorough than MAPS here, and as a result they're being punished.
And you think MAPS should have spent their resources chasing your ISP?
YES!!!! They got into this business. They can just leave if its too much work.
Come back when you've actually tried running an RBL.
I'm not going to. I know how hard it is, and am not willing to run a semi adequate service that causes a new set of problems on top of spam. I'm also going to be highly critical of people who don't realise their limitations and instead blame others for the problems caused.
That's exactly what they do. Produce an accurate list of IPs belonging to ISPs who don't respond immediately to reported spamming.
They don't seem to make it clear that their list does anything other than block known or likely spam sources. It doesn't say it blocks ISPs that - for whatever reason - are slow to get back to MAPS.
So you think MAPS should hire lots of more people that could give you free personal service over the weekend and be flexible when your ISP screws up.
That would be one option. There are probably other options as well. Since this often causes a problem, they need to look into how they can make removal easier.
But your ISP who caused the problem, and made money from it, shouldn't at all be required to respond to complaints in a timely manner.
MAPS caused the problem as well. My ISP was speniding time going through logs and verifying that the alleged spammer was actually sending spam.
Here's a clue: One of the main reasons why MAPS is so bureaucratic is that the probably get 1,000 mails a day from people who thing they should make an exception just for their ISP.
So, in the course fo a year, you find 365 000 organisations who disagree with how MAPS is run? MAPS is missing the point here. This is not what they exist for. Stop trying to lay the blame for MAPS' inadequacy on the ISPs. MAPS has a single job to do. Produce an accurate list. The ISPs have a lot of jobs to do that need resources allocated. If MAPS can't do their job then they should give up and try something they can do.
MAPS isn't punishing you - I am. If it means less spam, I'll happily refuse all mail from you and your ISP.
Are you making the decision for yourself, or for all your users as well? I see spam as a cost of receiving 100% of legitimate email. I trust my mail admin to ensure that happens.
This sort of attitude is why people get so annoyed about these lists. MAPS are inflexible pedantic and unhelpful, and as a result often cause more problems than the spam did in the first place.
Why should they need to get back to MAPS so quickly? Is their lack of response causing a problem for other users? The only reason MAPS demands a response is because MAPS says so and if you don't play by their rules they'll punish you.
They're like traffic wardens. MAPS seem like one of the most annoyingly bureaucratic inflexible organisations around. Could this be why so many people who should be thankful for them absolutely hate them?
But that's a different matter. Many admins use MAPS in a reasonable manner. This is fine. It's a perfectly good resource for that.
It just seems that a lot admins assume that a blocking list is absolutely perfect. It's surprising how many people do this.
Yes, anyone who puts total faith in another persons opinion for their blacklisting policy is a moron. Are you suggesting there are no moron admins;)
So.. MAPS exists to do what? Prevent spam, or to ensure people respond to MAPS quickly enough?
Yeah, and have you any idea how much this attitude FUCKING PISSES PEOPLE OFF
If you're going to run a blocklist, have some responsibility. Don't claim it's up to the person who uses it. The person who uses it trusts MAPS. MAPS has a responsibility to them to have an accurate list.
The list exists purely for the purpose of blocking email from IP addresses. Adding an IP address to the list will cause it to be blocked.
Otherwise you might as well say that its the laws of physics to blame. After all, the admin who used the list didn't block the address. The computer did. But the computer has no choice in the matter. It is just switching electrons.
Have some responsibility and show some backbone.
They can't just block small sections of netblocks (because a spam-happy ISP will just allocate new IP's to their paying spammer customer) - the only way they can police the offence is to ban the block.
Is this true? I've heard it suggested by many an over zealous spam blocker, but there seem to be little or no evidence. The attitude seems to be that because one provider may have done this in the past, all of them will. However, most will not. They know it will simply result in the new block also being blocked. This will gradually decrease the value of their network, and drive the non spamming customers away.
The real problem though isn't MAPS and their attitude, it's the spammers. Get rid of the spammers and you get rid of the need for MAPS. These lowlife internet-scum are where any ire ought to be directed, again IMHO.
No. MAPS is a problem. In fact, they're a bigger problem than the spammers. Spam is irritating. MAPS is deliberately obstructive.
If they really cared, they'd be working on better methods to make sure their list was ass accurate as possible.
Never trust a blocking list at face value.
The aim of most of them is an extreme one - of not only eliminating spam, but punishing anyone who has a vague link to spam. The actual definition of a link to spam is solely at the discretion of the list administrator. This can be arbitrary.
Often, the administrator is a power hungry nerd, and refuses to consider that anyone except a spammer could posibly have a different opinion on the matter from them. They have no intention of helping you. Only of demonstrating their supreme power.
Decent admins will be very choosy about what lists they use, and will consider the ones they do use to be a suggestion. Not a definitive statement. Sadly there are too few decent admins around.
They're not obliged to use GPL code.
They're not obliged to release the software if they do use it (e.g. for internal projects).
Since they can get it for free, the amount they receive is probably greater than the cost to them.
They have choice in the matter. As much choice as whether or not to use Solaris. And personally, I think a lot of developing nations are going to be alot happier about giving "IP" away to the richest nations in the world than giving money to the richest nations in the world.
Many of the dialog box equivalents on consumer devices almost fit that description.
I think a big problem is that these warnings are modal and fucus grabbing when they don't need to be.
IMO, modal dialogs should only appear when it is logically impossible to continue without responding. "The page contained no data" is bad use of the message box. "Confirm delete" is reasonable.
But your car doesn't pop up a similar light warning you before you do anything slightly different from normal. It has a total of about 20 lights, that only come on when its imprtant. None of which interfere with driving.
Because that seems to be a definition most people agree on.
Because it distinguishes it from plaigerism.
Because that's where the harm is.
or whateverelsely
controversially?
Arguably?
Considering the inevitable arguments regarding the fact that the owners still have their software, and are in no way deprived of the use of it, there are many people who disagree.
Religion doesn't enter into it.
Morally, morality is a personal thing.
Practically there's a key difference. The PearPC creators still have their code.
If you're arguing that it fits your definition of stealing, fine. I'll argue its jaywalking because it fits my definition of jaywalking. But then we might as well be talking different languages.
The only reason to call it stealing is because the term has negative connotations. How about using a less emotive term?
Good question. But Different types of media are often treated differently. There's a specific US law allowing copying of music (Audio Home Recording Act).
Personally, I think it is perfectly reasonable that different media types are treted differently. I'm a lot more likely to want to produce a mix tape than a mix of DVD scenes. I'll never want to take a few bars from a piece of music, but might quote a section of a novel. Different people have different wants and needs.
BeOS does have a reputation for being quite stable.
Since my machine is in my bedroom, and quite noisy, I like to leave it off when not in use.
If I want to check my email I'd rather not wait for over a minute eofre I can do so.
Why are people so tolerant of insane boot times on PCs? I expect my TV to turn on within about 5 seconds. My Commodore 64 was in a useable state in less than a second. Personally, I think most operating systems do way too much.
What are you talking about? I use always use my computer on the roof of my laboratory.
Non-standard custom-built hardware is much more flexible -- and much more expensive.
I'm curious... Would it be too difficult to build one of these yourself? A car battery (or several batteries) seems like it would be the main part, so the question is could everything else be made conveniently using discrete components? How does a UPS work?
It's Doctor Who. Typically these things are explained by a single line inserted into the script. E.g. Leela's eyes turned blue because Louise Jameson didn't like the contacts. Later Leela fell in love with a character she had had virtually no contact with when Loise wanted to leave the series.
They always have the same list of names (I think it might change slightly when new actors are discovered and old ones die, but it doesn't change much). It's usually Eddie Izzard, Alan Davies or Joanna Lumley these days.
12 regenerations to give 13 incarnations.
I read about linguists translating an ancient language from greek. One of the resources was something that was quite clearly some sort of a list. This was useful as a crib since we know the sort of things people are likely to be writing in a list, and with a few more clues the writing can be matched up to such things as placenames and numbers.
My memory of this is a little vague. Simon Singhs's "The Code Book" goes into a quite a bit of detail about translating "Linear B" though.
In addition to this, no doubt we'd be interested in such things as just how much grain they consumed since this would indicate population size and typical diet.
Clay - 100 years - (10,000 years if burned!!)
It's sort of ironic that the reason we have so much information about the Mesopotamia is that various attackers destroyed the cities that held the clay cunieform tablets.
It's really time someone put together a Rosetta Stone. Put the same text in all known languages (including dead languages) on a very large hunk of durable material. Certain plastics will be pretty durable against general wear and tear (if not extreme conditions). It's just a matter of where to keep it.