SpamPal is good, too. It uses a plugin architecture that currently supports a regex-based body text scanner and Bayesian categorization. It also natively supports filtering of mail using DSNBLs for those of us who want to also use something other than content scanning.
I don't like to use the term spyware, I prefer the term "Crapware"
In my opinion, it's more accurately termed "crappy spyware with intrusive popups", but I can see why they'd want to call it "adware" instead.
RoboForm is much better and isn't adware, spyware, or anything similar. It even imports Gator's stored information, though I'm not sure why you'd need much of an incentive to move away from Gator.
(I'm not affiliated with Siber Systems, the maker of RoboForm, I'm just a *VERY* happy user.)
Okay, I understand and agree with most of your post. But how is getting rid of the IP header checksums a good thing?
Error detection and/or correction is generally already being done at the link layer.
If each physical network hop has reliable transfer, a header checksum is really only useful if something along the way corrupts the packet during forwarding. (One could probably argue that receiving and processing such corrupted packets should expose the corruption problem more quickly than rejecting them.)
There may well be other great reasons to move to IPv6 - but the so-called IP shortage is not one of them.
The grand vision of the hideously-massive IPv6 address space would seem to be the ability to address nearly everything, including a large percentage of mobile devices, on a ubiquitous, ambient IP network. IPv4 space just isn't cut out for that.
IPv4 address shortage isn't critical at the moment, but it isn't sufficient for projected future needs. The sooner we make the change, the less painful it will be.
The doom & gloom of an exhausted IPv4 address space has been touted every three months for as long as I can remember. Yet all these years later we don't really seem to be any closer to that happening
NAT and CIDR helped control the problem. We'd currently be in a major mess if we had to have world-routable addresses everywhere and were restricted to the old Class A/B/C distribution of IP address blocks.
You missed the point of course. I'm talking about commercial distribution.
Of course you were talking about commercial distribution. That's why you said:
but don't assume everyone likes their bandwidth eaten away just to watch the latest Lord of the Rings trailer...
Downloading the LOTR trailer is clearly a commercial enterprise, something which you should be entitled to without fear of having to contribute to others' downloads.
Of course, you are not alone, tens of slashbots like to rush and answer instead of thinking and READING before flaming.
You are also not alone. In decades of online forums, from BBSes to Usenet, there are countless examples of posters who say provocative things, then backpedal furiously, claiming that respondants couldn't read properly.
Absolutely, some will. It's a lot like a "remove" link on spam, which sometimes is used to confirm addresses. Once the number is exposed on a list, some will use a list for something other than its intended purpose.
I listed my home phone number, since it was already getting bombarded with phonespam. In eight years of owning a cellphone (not the same one for all eight years, thankfully), I've never (knocking on wood) gotten a telemarketing call on my cellphone. I'm not about to list my cellphone number in the national DNC registry if it's going to be handed out to whoever pays for the list.
Re:A very (ludicrous, retarded, draconian) precede (Score:4, Insightful) by EdgeShadow (665410) on Wednesday October 08, @02:56PM (#7165798) The penalties aren't for the spam he sent, but rather for spoofing the sender's address. Many (hundreds of thousands) of the spam emails he sent out were to bad/non-existent addresses, and were bounced back to the real addresses he faked as his own. The people who received the "returned" emails are suing him, not those that got spammed.
Doesn't always work, kids can also use this to run the show.. ie you're going someplace and the kid doesn't want to.. he starts causing trouble, and you'll miss your appointment because he's punished and you'll have to wait for him.
We've had this problem, too. Obviously there aren't any hard-and-fast rules that will work in all situations for all children. Being adaptable is required when you have kids, and not only for this particular situation.
For a while, we had the Chevy Venture Warner Brothers Edition minivan. We'd still go, but they'd lose their video privileges. (There's the added benefit of angering your sibling who also lost out due to your actions. It works on troops in basic training, it also seems to work on kids.)
The post that I replied to was insinuating that since sex is normal and natural, it doesn't make sense to shield children from it, and since violence isn't a necessity of life it should be hidden from children.
Any such insinuation was added by yourself. I only stated, "The sad thing is that (in the USA at least) graphic violence is apparently more acceptable than graphic sexuality." I said nothing about children, nor did the parent post to mine.
If only I could read that much extra into my bank account statement, I'd be rich.
Come on, people! I can understand trying to be helpful and all - but don't jump to conclusions about something you know nothing about.
I know what you mean.
On a slightly different angle, my wife was going through the Mall of America doing some shopping. I don't recall what my eldest son did wrong at the time, but my wife placed him in time-out and stood nearby waiting for him to finish wailing before actually starting the clock.
A woman stranger approached and tried to comfort him, which just caused him to shriek louder. My wife told her he was in time-out and asked her to leave him alone. For some reason, the woman started berating my wife for mistreating him and tried to get him to come with her.
My wife--who was trained in high school and college to sing opera, and has a LARGE voice when she chooses--yelled at her to "let go of my son!" Needless to say, that woman experienced immediate attention from everyone in the area, as well as mall security, who arrived in short order.
This is clealy a better experience than yours, since the person who barged into the parenting of another got a demonstration in why that's not a good notion.
Umm, I was a child. I know what time-outs are and I didn't mind them. OH NO, NOT 10 MINS OF SILENT TIME!!! Give me a break. The sound of my father's belt whipping off his jeans was enough to make me piss my pants.
Did you consider that maybe time-outs didn't mean much to you *because* your parent(s) used violence as punishment?
Speaking from LOTS of experience in this, it is NOT a time-out for the parent. If you're doing it right, it's a big fscking pain in the neck, since you have to stop what you're doing and wait for the child to finish their time-out, with restarts if they don't continue to sit where they're placed in silence.
People don't have to take responsibility for their actions anymore. Parents don't punish children they give them time-outs (hey folks, it doesn't work).
Regularly using time-outs and actually enforcing them *is* a punishment, and liberally taking away privileges as punishment works.
Some of the problems I've seen with implementing this are:
* Warning a child of an impending time-out by counting upwards. A countdown implies going from something down to zero, not the other direction. Children understand it when they're running out of numbers, where counting up gives them unlimited room for expansion.
* Threatening punishments but not delivering. I've seen parents threaten their child, but when the child yanks away from them, screams, whatever, the parent impotently lets the child get away with it. Apparently the child is either running the show, or the parent is afraid of appearing mean in public or something.
* Shortening time-outs because you're in a hurry, or giving back lost privileges due to expediency. If you're serious about punishing your kids, you sacrifice. When you give in and give back things you took away, the punishments have no meaning and the child won't care about being "punished".
Amazingly, my kids usually quickly stop most small-to-medium infractions when they hear the word "five". They know "four", "three", "two", "one", "zero", and "time-out" are coming. They remember all the other times they've been sat facing a corner for periods that seem endless to children, bored out of their little skulls. They know that Mom and Dad will stop what they're doing, just for the purpose of waiting for them to finish a time-out. They also know that a privilege taken away is not coming back, so they try to avoid losing the privileges in the first place.
Parents don't need to beat their children instead of using time-outs, they need to actually spend more than the minimum effort needed to raise their children.
> First let me say that if I thought we could make a game that would > honestly motivate people to do things in real life, then I would > make a game about fucking, cause this world needs more sex than > killing that's for shit sure.
I have no motivation problems in this area.
The sad thing is that (in the USA at least) graphic violence is apparently more acceptable than graphic sexuality. This appears to be exactly backwards.
Not exactly. I didn't say that it was a stampede ; I said that it was more like a lemming stampede than like a mass suicide. I must admit that it didn't occur to me that anybody would be so literal as to take seriously the notion of lemmings stampeding.
Animals sometimes stampede off a cliff, because the ones in front are crowded off by the ones behind them. It doesn't have to be a literal stampede; this kind of thing can happen any time you get a mass of animals--or even people--moving together, especially if they are in a hurry.
So...when you say that they "stampede" off a cliff, facing towards the ones going off in front of them, you were actually referring to lemmings milling around and getting crowded off. Not a "literal stampede", just a metaphorical one that doesn't involve actually running blindly in any direction.
Got it. As clear as SCO's claims of System V UNIX copyright infringement and licensing.
Not personally. Actually, my comments are based on the very references that you cite:
These deaths are not deliberate "suicide" attempts, however, but accidental deaths resulting from the lemmings' venturing into unfamiliar territories and being crowded and pushed over dangerous ledges.
A few lemmings being pushed off a precipice due to crowding as a migration occurs next to a cliff is far different from a "stampede" off the edge, which is what you said:
I gather it's more like a lemming stampede than a mass suicide. The ones at the edge get shoved off by the guys behind--who can't see the edge because there are lemmings in front of them.
Uh, the 2-year old survived for 3 weeks by eating dry pasta, mustard and ketchup until her father demanded entry into the apartment. Yes, it was extremely upsetting to me too, as I have a 2-year old. And I do hope my 2-year is as well-equipped to survive.
I'm positive mine could do that. My middle child would, when he was about 2 years old, get up in the middle of the night to forage for food in the kitchen. He was surprisingly good at it and could get into most everything.
The thought of a toddler spending three weeks completely alone makes me want to go home and hug my kids for a while. Anyone who has kids and actually loves them will agree that this definitely beats a pump-and-dump scam on the Bad Crime meter.
I gather it's more like a lemming stampede than a mass suicide. The ones at the edge get shoved off by the guys behind--who can't see the edge because there are lemmings in front of them.
Have you witnessed this?
As the parent post stated, this is an urban legend [site lists reference citations]
Slashdot Mirror
SpamPal is good, too. It uses a plugin architecture that currently supports a regex-based body text scanner and Bayesian categorization. It also natively supports filtering of mail using DSNBLs for those of us who want to also use something other than content scanning.
I don't like to use the term spyware, I prefer the term "Crapware"
In my opinion, it's more accurately termed "crappy spyware with intrusive popups", but I can see why they'd want to call it "adware" instead.
RoboForm is much better and isn't adware, spyware, or anything similar. It even imports Gator's stored information, though I'm not sure why you'd need much of an incentive to move away from Gator.
(I'm not affiliated with Siber Systems, the maker of RoboForm, I'm just a *VERY* happy user.)
Okay, I understand and agree with most of your post. But how is getting rid of the IP header checksums a good thing?
Error detection and/or correction is generally already being done at the link layer.
If each physical network hop has reliable transfer, a header checksum is really only useful if something along the way corrupts the packet during forwarding. (One could probably argue that receiving and processing such corrupted packets should expose the corruption problem more quickly than rejecting them.)
There may well be other great reasons to move to IPv6 - but the so-called IP shortage is not one of them.
The grand vision of the hideously-massive IPv6 address space would seem to be the ability to address nearly everything, including a large percentage of mobile devices, on a ubiquitous, ambient IP network. IPv4 space just isn't cut out for that.
IPv4 address shortage isn't critical at the moment, but it isn't sufficient for projected future needs. The sooner we make the change, the less painful it will be.
The doom & gloom of an exhausted IPv4 address space has been touted every three months for as long as I can remember. Yet all these years later we don't really seem to be any closer to that happening
NAT and CIDR helped control the problem. We'd currently be in a major mess if we had to have world-routable addresses everywhere and were restricted to the old Class A/B/C distribution of IP address blocks.
Of course you were talking about commercial distribution. That's why you said:
Downloading the LOTR trailer is clearly a commercial enterprise, something which you should be entitled to without fear of having to contribute to others' downloads.
Of course, you are not alone, tens of slashbots like to rush and answer instead of thinking and READING before flaming.
You are also not alone. In decades of online forums, from BBSes to Usenet, there are countless examples of posters who say provocative things, then backpedal furiously, claiming that respondants couldn't read properly.
I want 110kb/sec, and I don't want to share
And you probably feel you should be able to speed down the freeway in your luxury SUV without having to wait for anyone to get out of your way.
Where did we get this crop of people who feel they are entitled to everything they want, when they want it?
But if a piece of spam comes that you can't copy, print or forward, that avenue is pretty much dead and gone.
I had this very same thought, and you can bet that spammers are thinking it.
Bill "Laquotos" Gates
Do you mean "Locutus"?
Probably they will get the number from there
Absolutely, some will. It's a lot like a "remove" link on spam, which sometimes is used to confirm addresses. Once the number is exposed on a list, some will use a list for something other than its intended purpose.
I listed my home phone number, since it was already getting bombarded with phonespam. In eight years of owning a cellphone (not the same one for all eight years, thankfully), I've never (knocking on wood) gotten a telemarketing call on my cellphone. I'm not about to list my cellphone number in the national DNC registry if it's going to be handed out to whoever pays for the list.
s/hackers/crackers
Unfortunately, that particular horse has already left the barn, jumped the fence, and is roaming the countryside.
Re:A very (ludicrous, retarded, draconian) precede (Score:4, Insightful)
by EdgeShadow (665410) on Wednesday October 08, @02:56PM (#7165798)
The penalties aren't for the spam he sent, but rather for spoofing the sender's address. Many (hundreds of thousands) of the spam emails he sent out were to bad/non-existent addresses, and were bounced back to the real addresses he faked as his own. The people who received the "returned" emails are suing him, not those that got spammed.
No, you don't get jail time for a lawsuit.
These appear to be criminal charges.
Doesn't always work, kids can also use this to run the show.. ie you're going someplace and the kid doesn't want to.. he starts causing trouble, and you'll miss your appointment because he's punished and you'll have to wait for him.
We've had this problem, too. Obviously there aren't any hard-and-fast rules that will work in all situations for all children. Being adaptable is required when you have kids, and not only for this particular situation.
For a while, we had the Chevy Venture Warner Brothers Edition minivan. We'd still go, but they'd lose their video privileges. (There's the added benefit of angering your sibling who also lost out due to your actions. It works on troops in basic training, it also seems to work on kids.)
The post that I replied to was insinuating that since sex is normal and natural, it doesn't make sense to shield children from it, and since violence isn't a necessity of life it should be hidden from children.
Any such insinuation was added by yourself. I only stated, "The sad thing is that (in the USA at least) graphic violence is apparently more acceptable than graphic sexuality." I said nothing about children, nor did the parent post to mine.
If only I could read that much extra into my bank account statement, I'd be rich.
Come on, people! I can understand trying to be helpful and all - but don't jump to conclusions about something you know nothing about.
I know what you mean.
On a slightly different angle, my wife was going through the Mall of America doing some shopping. I don't recall what my eldest son did wrong at the time, but my wife placed him in time-out and stood nearby waiting for him to finish wailing before actually starting the clock.
A woman stranger approached and tried to comfort him, which just caused him to shriek louder. My wife told her he was in time-out and asked her to leave him alone. For some reason, the woman started berating my wife for mistreating him and tried to get him to come with her.
My wife--who was trained in high school and college to sing opera, and has a LARGE voice when she chooses--yelled at her to "let go of my son!" Needless to say, that woman experienced immediate attention from everyone in the area, as well as mall security, who arrived in short order.
This is clealy a better experience than yours, since the person who barged into the parenting of another got a demonstration in why that's not a good notion.
[...] we have been releasing music Open-source for at least a couple of years now.
How does "open source" apply to a finished, mixed musical composition? Isn't that more akin to object code than source code?
Or are you referring to releasing the sheet music and lyrics?
Umm, I was a child. I know what time-outs are and I didn't mind them. OH NO, NOT 10 MINS OF SILENT TIME!!! Give me a break. The sound of my father's belt whipping off his jeans was enough to make me piss my pants.
Did you consider that maybe time-outs didn't mean much to you *because* your parent(s) used violence as punishment?
Children learn quickly that a time-out is of no consequence (as well as the discussion).
Do you actually have children?
Kids of all ages absolutely loathe boredom, and time-outs and long talks from the parent(s) aren't exactly entertaining.
A time-out is really a time-out for the parent.
Speaking from LOTS of experience in this, it is NOT a time-out for the parent. If you're doing it right, it's a big fscking pain in the neck, since you have to stop what you're doing and wait for the child to finish their time-out, with restarts if they don't continue to sit where they're placed in silence.
People don't have to take responsibility for their actions anymore. Parents don't punish children they give them time-outs (hey folks, it doesn't work).
Regularly using time-outs and actually enforcing them *is* a punishment, and liberally taking away privileges as punishment works.
Some of the problems I've seen with implementing this are:
* Warning a child of an impending time-out by counting upwards. A countdown implies going from something down to zero, not the other direction. Children understand it when they're running out of numbers, where counting up gives them unlimited room for expansion.
* Threatening punishments but not delivering. I've seen parents threaten their child, but when the child yanks away from them, screams, whatever, the parent impotently lets the child get away with it. Apparently the child is either running the show, or the parent is afraid of appearing mean in public or something.
* Shortening time-outs because you're in a hurry, or giving back lost privileges due to expediency. If you're serious about punishing your kids, you sacrifice. When you give in and give back things you took away, the punishments have no meaning and the child won't care about being "punished".
Amazingly, my kids usually quickly stop most small-to-medium infractions when they hear the word "five". They know "four", "three", "two", "one", "zero", and "time-out" are coming. They remember all the other times they've been sat facing a corner for periods that seem endless to children, bored out of their little skulls. They know that Mom and Dad will stop what they're doing, just for the purpose of waiting for them to finish a time-out. They also know that a privilege taken away is not coming back, so they try to avoid losing the privileges in the first place.
Parents don't need to beat their children instead of using time-outs, they need to actually spend more than the minimum effort needed to raise their children.
> First let me say that if I thought we could make a game that would
> honestly motivate people to do things in real life, then I would
> make a game about fucking, cause this world needs more sex than
> killing that's for shit sure.
I have no motivation problems in this area.
The sad thing is that (in the USA at least) graphic violence is apparently more acceptable than graphic sexuality. This appears to be exactly backwards.
Got it. As clear as SCO's claims of System V UNIX copyright infringement and licensing.
Uh, the 2-year old survived for 3 weeks by eating dry pasta, mustard and ketchup until her father demanded entry into the apartment. Yes, it was extremely upsetting to me too, as I have a 2-year old. And I do hope my 2-year is as well-equipped to survive.
I'm positive mine could do that. My middle child would, when he was about 2 years old, get up in the middle of the night to forage for food in the kitchen. He was surprisingly good at it and could get into most everything.
The thought of a toddler spending three weeks completely alone makes me want to go home and hug my kids for a while. Anyone who has kids and actually loves them will agree that this definitely beats a pump-and-dump scam on the Bad Crime meter.
I gather it's more like a lemming stampede than a mass suicide. The ones at the edge get shoved off by the guys behind--who can't see the edge because there are lemmings in front of them.
Have you witnessed this?
As the parent post stated, this is an urban legend [site lists reference citations]