here's a solution, it's in using email intelligently.
It's not that easy (or simple), friend. It's not just about giving your email address away to trusted folks, nor is it about placing your email in places that can be trolled from the web.
About 99.9% of my mail I get is spam. I receive about 2000 emails a day to my personal account and if I'm lucky, 3 of them are legit (I now mostly communicate with my family and friends via IM).
I run my own email server (and have since '93). The problem is that my system is constantly being dictionary-attacked for addresses. No matter where you hide (or don't hide) your account names, having some fucker scan every known name in the universe against your system WILL get it. And once one spammer gets it, they all do. (You do know they trade lists, right?).
As it stands now there is no good way of preventing dictionary scanning. Yes you can make it hard (and I do by catching more than 2 User Unknowns, IP firewalling off the address that started the scan and sending back 1MB of/dev/random data from sendmail as a response message), but when someone wants to scan you, they will; even if they have to do it one address-per-envelope at a time.
My son (who is 11) receives close to 300 spams a day (because he has his first name as his account name [as my entire family does on my system*]), 200 of which would make Solomon blush [hey! click here to see girls get fucked by turtles]. I, of course, filter HIS mail by hand (he pops from an account that I forward mail to).
I *want* legislation; badly. I want it to be illegal to forge headers. Since my state (North Carolina) *HAS* anti-spam laws already, it would be really nice to be able to enact them. But because of the forging, it's next to impossible to do unless I quit my day-job just to parse headers and track down companies so that I can take them to small claims court.
I can't do that. And I don't have the time. And nor should I be required to. So what's the answer: unfortunately, legislation.
SPAM is a plague of locust for the 'net. I equate it to kids who crack/cheat on multiplayer games and make them unplayable by everyone else. SPAM has absolutely ruined the usefulness of email.
* By using full first names as accounts (nicholas@blah.com) it's easy to guess my accounts. I should NOT however, be forced to use anything else because of the abuse of the system by lowlifes who are too lazy to get a real job to make money.
Yeah, I'm vehement about this. Check out other posts by me here to see.
You know, I've heard a lot of anger coming from the Telemarketing industry regarding this. The general consensus is that it will drive them completely out of business.
You know what? It's all their faults anyway. If they hadn't been so aggresive and so intrusive (I used to get around 15 calls from 6pm to 9pm... right smack dab in the middle of dinner), they wouldn't have pissed off an entire nation of people and legislation like this wouldn't be required.
But they were, so it is needed.
Hm. I guess that thought applies to SPAM as well.
My comment to telemarketers: Here's a dime, go call someone who gives a damn (but make sure you check The Registry first!). As my mother used to say: you made the bed, now f**king sleep in it.
Think about it, if you license something under GPL, you can't say who can or can't use it...
Why not come up with a variation of the GPL, the GPLL (Gnu Public License for Liberty) that has a direct stipulation in it that it can't be used by various agencies of world governments.
I mean, hell, if Microsoft can include a EULA that has such ridiculous measures as their right to log into your machine and examine applications and data, certainly saying that TIPS, or the CIA/FBI/Homeland Security can't use the program would quite legal.
In fact, it might be a way to help get EULA's struck down in court: perhaps the US government would fight over the right to use anything GPLL'd and consequently invalidate all stupid EULA's in the process.
So far, only about 700,000 of the most avid television mavens have bought TiVo devices,...
I am one of those 700,000 folks, but I respectfully disagree with the collection ("avid television mavens") I've been dropped into. I bought my TiVO because I'm *NOT* addicted to the TV and don't want to be. I wanted to choose what and when I watched. I wanted to STOP being a slave to the TV clock.
TiVo has 100% changed the way I watch TV (insert beginning of ad-like-comments). I no longer watch programs that I don't care about "to fill up space." I watch ONLY what I want, when I want.
... which are cumbersome to install.
Oh my yes; plugging in two cables is certainly cumbersome:(
I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that they would say such a thing: this is the same company that stated above that by reducing the number of options you have for your PVR (what you can record, when, and what you can skip) they will attrack more customers from the TiVo ranch.
I recently (like 2 months ago) saw a 3D IMAX movie about Dinosaurs... I forget the exact title, but it involved a young girl going back in time (or so she thought).
While it was extremely boring, I have to admit: the 3D effects where absolutely phenominal. I have seen a scattering of 3D movies (starting with that lovely SciFi thriller: Parasite) and I honestly didn't know the technology had progressed so far.
I was impressed.
I was also nauseous. I had to take my glasses off once every 10 minutes or so to let my stomach settle down. But I am perfectly willing to entertain the idea that it was my age causing the sickness, not the technology.
You just don't get it, do you? (Though I might argue whether this is true or not) The reason why file-trading, etc. is accepted here and SPAM is not is because of the intrusiveness of SPAM.
You CANNOT get away from it. You cannot stop it. You cannot ID where it is coming from. It's a deluge of mail that you can't prevent from hitting your box (even if you have good anti-spam software, it has to hit your box first).
File-trading isn't intrusive. That's the difference. If P2P applications FORCED you to receive any file that anyone wanted to send you, then yes, people here would then lump it with SPAM.
It's not a question of legality, it's a question of access control to your system.
Next up bannings for using foul language on Xbox live service??
This might be a good thing. Has anyone played on Battle.Net recently? The strength and vocalness of people's anger and rudeness absolutely astounds me.
The people are what have prevented me from allowing my son to play on it.
Heh, well, I do employ SEVERAL anti-spam filters, including Spampd and SpamAssassin (and some that I wrote myself that block sites that send too many "User Knowns").
The 50 I quoted were the ones that get through;) I myself receive close to 1000 spams a day, only 800 or so get caught.
I'm surprised: an intelligent and implementable system actually came out of Congress.
Of course, I wouldn't want to be NeuStar. That's a hell of a responsibility; to police an entire subdomain for appropriateness. And I wonder what sort of liability issues that creates. If I let my 10-year-old browse at will through.kids.us (he goes through a squid proxy right now that defaults to denied [I have an ACL of acceptable domains]) and he comes across something inappropriate, may I then sue NeuStar for allowing that exposure?
As it stands now, my son's email account receives close to 50 spams a day, 10 of which are sexually revolting. But because of the nature of the beast, I cannot press charges against any of the companies that originate the mail (if I could find them, that is). It would be refreshing to to have a "Kid Safe" label and have it mean something*.
* Unfortunately to get any organization to truly "Certify" that (and be able to TRUST that certification), there must be real and hurtful penalties attached.
This book was mildly interesting in a pure historical context, but the authoring style bordered on being the worst I've ever read.
It was dry, unimaginitive, cluttered and and it just "tried too hard."
I particularly found it annoying that the authors (as with the House * books) found it necessary to explain EVERYTHING. For example, you met a proto-Fremen and blam! He rides the first worm. You see a group of recluse women and BLAM!, they are the proto-Bene Gesserit.
It seemed that the authors went out of their way to CREATE connections, and with that in mind, they felt it necessary to connect to EVERYTHING. I find it hard to believe that in a Galaxy whose history is well over 12,000 years old, that we would see the beginnings of so many familiar settings within a span of a year. I would think they would be stretched out over a greater period of time.
Having had the same email address since '93, I receive close to 1000 spams per day to my personal account (which is also aliased from root/postmaster/webmaster).
I've tried everything under the planet to reduce the amount that I see in my mailbox; SpamAssassin being one of the best so far. But even that lets through quite a bit (around 10%).
So I decided to attack it from a different angle. I wrote a series of perl-scripts that I plunked into my procmail file.
The scripts work by checking the address of the sender each time a message is received. That address is looked up in a database. If it exists in the db, and it's marked as "authorized", it's just passed into my mailbox.
If it's marked as denied,/dev/null.
If it's never been seen before, an authentication message is sent to the sender asking them to reply to it to authorize themselves. If that authmessage is bounced back, a db entry is made as "denied".
If it's replied to in a normal fashion, that email is marked as "authorized" and any queued up mail from that person is pushed out.
The concept is that spam will almost never have a valid reply-to; so it will bounce and be marked as denied.
Even if the email doesn't bounce, no spammer alive will reply to it; so after 30 days, that email is marked as "denied".
Since I've set this up (for myself and my 10-year-old son who receives porn in his box (grrr!!!!)), it has worked flawlessly. The "real" email is unharmed, while the spam is stopped.
Oh, and I have a web-based control page so that users can manually add email addresses (for lists and such).
This week, for the first time in YEARS, I don't have spam in my mailbox anymore.
Hurray!
No if I can only stop those damned dictionary-based scanning of my servers, I'll be set. Thank the gods that I don't have metered service.
For some reason I felt compelled to open a dialog with this individual. I thought I would post the results here:
Boy! Let me say, I'm am going to have SO MUCH FUN with comments like this from you:
Shame on YOU for stealing from webmasters. I can't wait till AntiAdBlocker is on every site on the web so scumbags like yourself no longer get a free ride and can't steal from webmasters.
AntiAdBlocker
That was an amazingly lowbrow and aggressive (not to mention stupid) letter you wrote to Jonathan Gardner. I especially like your comments that by not looking at pop-up ads, we are stealing from webmasters You sound just like the TV ad exec who said that we have a contractual obligation to watch TV commercials and if we didn't, we were stealing.
You really just don't understand do you? No one likes pop-up ads, and certainly no one likes companies or individuals who force them on us or who imply that we are STEALING by not passively soaking them up.
You obviously are not an experienced businessman, otherwise you would have never written such an amazing condemning letter to an individual.
I'm afraid to tell you that already someone has published the instructions on how to circumvent your anti-ad-blockers, including fooling your poorly designed system into thinking that the person HAS seen the ads.
Never (directly or indirectly) challenge the geek culture with something like this: you are fated to lose. It because of people like you that the DOTCOM bubble was created and then burst. You seem to think that there is millions of dollars waiting to be made out there. I expect you are starting to see that isn't true; demonstrated by your obvious frustration.
Be kind, be well, and calm down. Try not to insult your customers and inflame people against you. By having that single email-based argument with Mr. Gardner, your story (and insults) will be plastered across the entire 'net in a few days. You've sunk your business in a fit of pique.
I feel for you, son, and I wish you well. Please try to find a vocation that doesn't involve forcing people to do, hear, see, or read things they don't want to. Never has any business succeeded that consciously spoke down to the population in general (in this case, the 'net population).
Be kind and be well and find yourself something else to do. You've completely failed at this, even if the effects have yet to be seen.
to which he responded
Thanks for confirming that our product is pissing off scumbags like yourself. Your messages has encouraged us that it's working and doing exactly as intended. You're such a loser Slasdot fanboy troll, get a life.
AntiAdBlocker.com
to which I responded:
Ah! You have slain me with your rapier-like wit! I humbly submit to your greater wisdom and intellect.
So... your intent is not to produce a product, but instead to piss people off? Interesting business model. But you should probably know that you don't in fact piss me off: I feel nothing but pity for you.
I hope you eventually find what you are looking for in life, for it seems to me you are quite angry and unhappy; a shameful situation for any individual to be in.
Be well and be calm,
-- njl
I now wait with anticipation for his next elegantly written rebuttal.
As much as I would love to contribute to this, I'm afraid that I've already sold my soul for next nine months (or so) for Neverwinter Nights (well ok, rented I guess). My playing sessions will be described in units of DAYS instead of hours.
<jonStewartLike>Thank you ProVigil!</jonStewartLike>.
Maybe next year? Oh wait, but doesn't..... come out then?
As the husband of a librarian, I am very pleased with this decision. It was just last night that my wife and I were talking about the ALA's stance on being a neutral provider of information.
Just as doctors, lawyers and priests have an implied confidentiality between them, so the ALA believes the same should exist between librarians and their customers.
Plus it's kinda neat to think of an absolutely neutral 3rd party for information; it excites the scifi/fantasy fan in me (imagine a monestary where the monks provide information to anyone, Evil Warlords and Scholars equally) and makes me less nervous about the direction our country (USA) is heading.
Considering that people sue the cigarette industry for their self-inflicted problems caused by voluntarily smoking, I think it is only a matter of time before we see this BS as well.
I think you misunderstand: people are suing Tobacco companies because they MISREPRESENTED the cancerous and addictive qualities of their products. For years the population was told that cigarettes weren't addictive and weren't harmful. THAT is the basis for the suits.
This past May, Senator Hollings cast a most unusual vote, as the only Democrat to support the Financial Modernization Act (FMA) of 1999, S. 900. Hollings' vote regarding this bill is difficult to explain, given his pro-consumer voting record. But when considered in the context of the over $250,000 the Senator received from industries that would most benefit from the legislation, additional light is shed on his decision.
The Golden Leash Award is a modern incarnation of former Senator William Proxmire's legendary Golden Fleece, which highlighted government waste and abuse.
"Senator Hollings' vote is an ideal example of how campaign contributions appear to influence strongly the way a Senator votes. What else would explain his puzzling anti-consumer position on this important bill from a senator who has a long history of pro-consumer stands?" said Ellen Miller, executive director of Public Campaign.
As the chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, one of the most important committee chairs on Capitol Hill, Hollings has attracted quite a stable of high-profile donors over the years. According to Federal Election Commission data presented by campaign contribution watchdog Open Secrets, there are five major media and entertainment companies in the top 20 list of Hollings' most generous campaign donors. They include AOL Time Warner ($33,500), the Murdoch-owned News Corporation ($28,224), Viacom's CBS ($16,632), the National Association of Broadcasters ($22,000), and Walt Disney Co. ($18,500).
The individual donors from those companies include a flock of high-ranking executives from various News Corp/Fox subsidiaries, Viacom CEO Sumner Redstone, and Ted Turner from AOL Time Warner. Since 1995, employees from companies producing television, movies, music, and other media content have sent Hollings $287,534, making the entertainment industry his second most generous supporters. Those individual donations look like small potatoes, especially when you find out that they cover the past five to six years of campaign contributions.
There are more; just do a google search on "Fritz Hollings campaign contributions" and see what you get.
I guess I have to throw in my $0.02 here. Instead of relying on a single services or technique for stopping SPAM, try something heuristic that combines the best of multiple worlds: SpamAssassin, for example.
It uses a weighted score that derives it's values from a variety of sources including Razor and various Black Hole Lists.
The type of heuristics are along the lines of:
SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------
SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
SPAM:
SPAM: Content analysis details: (12.24 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) From: contains numbers mixed in with letters
SPAM: Hit! (1.2 points) From: does not include a real name
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) 'Message-Id' was added by a relay (2)
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) Subject contains lots of white space
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) BODY: List removal information
SPAM: Hit! (1.56 points) Contains phrases frequently found in spam
SPAM: [score: 26, hits: accept credit, credit cards,]
SPAM: [fill out, for your, more information, our]
SPAM: [company, phone number, receive further, remove]
SPAM: [the, reply this, subject line, thank you, the]
SPAM: [subject, this email, wish receive, word remove,]
SPAM: [you for, you like, you wish, your]
SPAM: [email]
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) spam-phrase score is over 20
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) Received via a relay in inputs.orbz.org
SPAM: [RBL check: found 14.54.162.63.inputs.orbz.org.]
SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in relays.osirusoft.com
SPAM: [RBL check: found 6.223.155.212.relays.osirusoft.com., type: 127.0.0.9]
SPAM: Hit! (1.48 points) Subject contains a unique ID number
SPAM:
SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------
Slashdot Mirror
It's not that easy (or simple), friend. It's not just about giving your email address away to trusted folks, nor is it about placing your email in places that can be trolled from the web.
About 99.9% of my mail I get is spam. I receive about 2000 emails a day to my personal account and if I'm lucky, 3 of them are legit (I now mostly communicate with my family and friends via IM).
I run my own email server (and have since '93). The problem is that my system is constantly being dictionary-attacked for addresses. No matter where you hide (or don't hide) your account names, having some fucker scan every known name in the universe against your system WILL get it. And once one spammer gets it, they all do. (You do know they trade lists, right?).
As it stands now there is no good way of preventing dictionary scanning. Yes you can make it hard (and I do by catching more than 2 User Unknowns, IP firewalling off the address that started the scan and sending back 1MB of /dev/random data from sendmail as a response message), but when someone wants to scan you, they will; even if they have to do it one address-per-envelope at a time.
My son (who is 11) receives close to 300 spams a day (because he has his first name as his account name [as my entire family does on my system*]), 200 of which would make Solomon blush [hey! click here to see girls get fucked by turtles]. I, of course, filter HIS mail by hand (he pops from an account that I forward mail to).
I *want* legislation; badly. I want it to be illegal to forge headers. Since my state (North Carolina) *HAS* anti-spam laws already, it would be really nice to be able to enact them. But because of the forging, it's next to impossible to do unless I quit my day-job just to parse headers and track down companies so that I can take them to small claims court.
I can't do that. And I don't have the time. And nor should I be required to. So what's the answer: unfortunately, legislation.
SPAM is a plague of locust for the 'net. I equate it to kids who crack/cheat on multiplayer games and make them unplayable by everyone else. SPAM has absolutely ruined the usefulness of email.
* By using full first names as accounts (nicholas@blah.com) it's easy to guess my accounts. I should NOT however, be forced to use anything else because of the abuse of the system by lowlifes who are too lazy to get a real job to make money.
Yeah, I'm vehement about this. Check out other posts by me here to see.
You know what? It's all their faults anyway. If they hadn't been so aggresive and so intrusive (I used to get around 15 calls from 6pm to 9pm ... right smack dab in the middle of dinner), they wouldn't have pissed off an entire nation of people and legislation like this wouldn't be required.
But they were, so it is needed.
Hm. I guess that thought applies to SPAM as well.
My comment to telemarketers: Here's a dime, go call someone who gives a damn (but make sure you check The Registry first!). As my mother used to say: you made the bed, now f**king sleep in it.
Why not come up with a variation of the GPL, the GPLL (Gnu Public License for Liberty) that has a direct stipulation in it that it can't be used by various agencies of world governments.
I mean, hell, if Microsoft can include a EULA that has such ridiculous measures as their right to log into your machine and examine applications and data, certainly saying that TIPS, or the CIA/FBI/Homeland Security can't use the program would quite legal.
In fact, it might be a way to help get EULA's struck down in court: perhaps the US government would fight over the right to use anything GPLL'd and consequently invalidate all stupid EULA's in the process.
So far, only about 700,000 of the most avid television mavens have bought TiVo devices, ...
I am one of those 700,000 folks, but I respectfully disagree with the collection ("avid television mavens") I've been dropped into. I bought my TiVO because I'm *NOT* addicted to the TV and don't want to be. I wanted to choose what and when I watched. I wanted to STOP being a slave to the TV clock.
TiVo has 100% changed the way I watch TV (insert beginning of ad-like-comments). I no longer watch programs that I don't care about "to fill up space." I watch ONLY what I want, when I want.
Oh my yes; plugging in two cables is certainly cumbersome :(
I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that they would say such a thing: this is the same company that stated above that by reducing the number of options you have for your PVR (what you can record, when, and what you can skip) they will attrack more customers from the TiVo ranch.
It appears all the UPSTO email addresses are FirstName.LastName@uspto.gov.
At least the few that I was able to find fit that pattern.
Has anyone checked out this link?
Ummm... because it sucked?
Seriously though, it's not that hard to figure out why this movie didn't do well
Granted most of those points exist for ANY Star Trek production you can name, but we expect more in movies. Or should.
How much spam do you have waiting for you?
I recently (like 2 months ago) saw a 3D IMAX movie about Dinosaurs ... I forget the exact title, but it involved a young girl going back in time (or so she thought).
While it was extremely boring, I have to admit: the 3D effects where absolutely phenominal. I have seen a scattering of 3D movies (starting with that lovely SciFi thriller: Parasite) and I honestly didn't know the technology had progressed so far.
I was impressed.
I was also nauseous. I had to take my glasses off once every 10 minutes or so to let my stomach settle down. But I am perfectly willing to entertain the idea that it was my age causing the sickness, not the technology.
File-trading isn't intrusive. That's the difference. If P2P applications FORCED you to receive any file that anyone wanted to send you, then yes, people here would then lump it with SPAM.
It's not a question of legality, it's a question of access control to your system.
This might be a good thing. Has anyone played on Battle.Net recently? The strength and vocalness of people's anger and rudeness absolutely astounds me.
The people are what have prevented me from allowing my son to play on it.
Heh, well, I do employ SEVERAL anti-spam filters, including Spampd and SpamAssassin (and some that I wrote myself that block sites that send too many "User Knowns").
;) I myself receive close to 1000 spams a day, only 800 or so get caught.
The 50 I quoted were the ones that get through
I'm surprised: an intelligent and implementable system actually came out of Congress.
.kids.us (he goes through a squid proxy right now that defaults to denied [I have an ACL of acceptable domains]) and he comes across something inappropriate, may I then sue NeuStar for allowing that exposure?
Of course, I wouldn't want to be NeuStar. That's a hell of a responsibility; to police an entire subdomain for appropriateness. And I wonder what sort of liability issues that creates. If I let my 10-year-old browse at will through
As it stands now, my son's email account receives close to 50 spams a day, 10 of which are sexually revolting. But because of the nature of the beast, I cannot press charges against any of the companies that originate the mail (if I could find them, that is). It would be refreshing to to have a "Kid Safe" label and have it mean something*.
* Unfortunately to get any organization to truly "Certify" that (and be able to TRUST that certification), there must be real and hurtful penalties attached.
This book was mildly interesting in a pure historical context, but the authoring style bordered on being the worst I've ever read.
It was dry, unimaginitive, cluttered and and it just "tried too hard."
I particularly found it annoying that the authors (as with the House * books) found it necessary to explain EVERYTHING. For example, you met a proto-Fremen and blam! He rides the first worm. You see a group of recluse women and BLAM!, they are the proto-Bene Gesserit.
It seemed that the authors went out of their way to CREATE connections, and with that in mind, they felt it necessary to connect to EVERYTHING. I find it hard to believe that in a Galaxy whose history is well over 12,000 years old, that we would see the beginnings of so many familiar settings within a span of a year. I would think they would be stretched out over a greater period of time.
How many years ago did 1TB of personal, home-based storage seem impossible?
Now the big question is: how do I back this up?
Having had the same email address since '93, I receive close to 1000 spams per day to my personal account (which is also aliased from root/postmaster/webmaster).
/dev/null.
I've tried everything under the planet to reduce the amount that I see in my mailbox; SpamAssassin being one of the best so far. But even that lets through quite a bit (around 10%).
So I decided to attack it from a different angle. I wrote a series of perl-scripts that I plunked into my procmail file.
The scripts work by checking the address of the sender each time a message is received. That address is looked up in a database. If it exists in the db, and it's marked as "authorized", it's just passed into my mailbox.
If it's marked as denied,
If it's never been seen before, an authentication message is sent to the sender asking them to reply to it to authorize themselves. If that authmessage is bounced back, a db entry is made as "denied".
If it's replied to in a normal fashion, that email is marked as "authorized" and any queued up mail from that person is pushed out.
The concept is that spam will almost never have a valid reply-to; so it will bounce and be marked as denied.
Even if the email doesn't bounce, no spammer alive will reply to it; so after 30 days, that email is marked as "denied".
Since I've set this up (for myself and my 10-year-old son who receives porn in his box (grrr!!!!)), it has worked flawlessly. The "real" email is unharmed, while the spam is stopped.
Oh, and I have a web-based control page so that users can manually add email addresses (for lists and such).
This week, for the first time in YEARS, I don't have spam in my mailbox anymore.
Hurray!
No if I can only stop those damned dictionary-based scanning of my servers, I'll be set. Thank the gods that I don't have metered service.
to which he responded
to which I responded:
I now wait with anticipation for his next elegantly written rebuttal.
I just did a search on my name (also) and was quite suprised that in the opening 10 hits, only one of them actually contained my name :-/
With all the posting I used to do on linux-kernel and related groups, I usually get around 2000 or so valid hits from Google.
As far as this canned test went, Alltheweb lost.
As much as I would love to contribute to this, I'm afraid that I've already sold my soul for next nine months (or so) for Neverwinter Nights (well ok, rented I guess). My playing sessions will be described in units of DAYS instead of hours.
..... come out then?
<jonStewartLike>Thank you ProVigil!</jonStewartLike>.
Maybe next year? Oh wait, but doesn't
Just as doctors, lawyers and priests have an implied confidentiality between them, so the ALA believes the same should exist between librarians and their customers.
Plus it's kinda neat to think of an absolutely neutral 3rd party for information; it excites the scifi/fantasy fan in me (imagine a monestary where the monks provide information to anyone, Evil Warlords and Scholars equally) and makes me less nervous about the direction our country (USA) is heading.
I think you misunderstand: people are suing Tobacco companies because they MISREPRESENTED the cancerous and addictive qualities of their products. For years the population was told that cigarettes weren't addictive and weren't harmful. THAT is the basis for the suits.
I see a MS vs. Samba and AOL vs. Trillian game already starting.
Crap. I forgot this very useful URL: Open Secrets.
http://www.publicampaign.org/press_releases/pr6_29 _99.html
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/21830 .html
There are more; just do a google search on "Fritz Hollings campaign contributions" and see what you get.
It uses a weighted score that derives it's values from a variety of sources including Razor and various Black Hole Lists.
The type of heuristics are along the lines of:
SPAM: -------------------- Start SpamAssassin results ----------------------
SPAM: This mail is probably spam. The original message has been altered
SPAM: so you can recognise or block similar unwanted mail in future.
SPAM: See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
SPAM:
SPAM: Content analysis details: (12.24 hits, 5 required)
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) From: contains numbers mixed in with letters
SPAM: Hit! (1.2 points) From: does not include a real name
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) 'Message-Id' was added by a relay (2)
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) Subject contains lots of white space
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) BODY: List removal information
SPAM: Hit! (1.56 points) Contains phrases frequently found in spam
SPAM: [score: 26, hits: accept credit, credit cards,]
SPAM: [fill out, for your, more information, our]
SPAM: [company, phone number, receive further, remove]
SPAM: [the, reply this, subject line, thank you, the]
SPAM: [subject, this email, wish receive, word remove,]
SPAM: [you for, you like, you wish, your]
SPAM: [email]
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) spam-phrase score is over 20
SPAM: Hit! (1 point) Received via a relay in inputs.orbz.org
SPAM: [RBL check: found 14.54.162.63.inputs.orbz.org.]
SPAM: Hit! (2 points) Received via a relay in relays.osirusoft.com
SPAM: [RBL check: found 6.223.155.212.relays.osirusoft.com., type: 127.0.0.9]
SPAM: Hit! (1.48 points) Subject contains a unique ID number
SPAM:
SPAM: -------------------- End of SpamAssassin results ---------------------