You're a bigger man than most to admit your errors. Thanks.
However, I believe that really bad, fill-your-inbox spam won't ever become common with "real" companies--they will have (mostly) real, working opt-out options, because they are big, established companies, not little scurry-around-in-the-dark spammers.
How many thousands of times will you have to opt out before all of the big companies are done with you?
And as far as bandwidth goes, 10,000 zombie Windows boxes are comparable to any number of T3s coming out of WalMart.
And most of them are behind ISPs that have finally gotten a clue and stopped leaving port 25 open.
Yes, there will always be idiots who answer spam
Fine them and, for repeat offenses, jail them.
, and yes, companies will do a lot of sleazy things, but I think, and I think WalMart knows, that 50 messages per day will do more harm than good.
Yes, Walmart knows that. So they won't send more than one per week. Same with Home Depot, Kroger, Target, Sears, Costco, Albertson's, Safeway, JCPenney, Kmart, Walgreen, Lowe's, CVS, Best Buy, Publix, Rite Aid, Federated Dept. Stores, Gap, May Department Stores, Winn-Dixie, TJX, Staples, Office Depot, Toys "R" Us, A&P, 7-Eleven, Circuit City, SuperValu Retail, Kohl's, Limited Brands, Dillard's, Dollar General, Nordstrom, Saks, BJ's Wholesale Club, Blockbuster, AutoZone, Barnes & Noble, CompUSA, OfficeMax, RadioShack, Foot Locker, Longs Drug, QVC, Family Dollar, Pathmark, Amazon.com, Big Lots, Bed Bath & Beyond, Ross Stores, Borders Group, Sherwin Williams, Advance Auto Parts, ShopKo, Wegman's, Neiman Marcus Group, Payless ShoeSource, Michaels, PETsMART, Whole Foods Markets, Stater Bros., Spiegel, Burlington Coat Factory, The Pantry, Value City, Price Chopper, Ames, Williams-Sonoma, Harris Teeter, Dollar Tree, Zale, Linens 'n Things, Pep Boys, Casey's General Stores, Berkshire-Hathaway Retail, Lenscrafters-Sunglasses Hut, Weis Markets, 84 Lumber, Pier 1 Imports, K-B Toys, Tiffany, etc. Yeah, you don't have to worry about fifty messages per day. Sure...
That may be true, but I guarantee you that it'll only happen once.
It's already happened more than once. Big businesses and even politicians have spammed people.
Some major company is going to decide that the time is right to "spam legally," and the firestorm of bad publicity, lost sales, and vandalism of their retail stores that follows will make the corporate world finally realise once and for all that spam - legal or not - is a suicidal way to advertise.
Outside of a handful of anti-spam activists, most people don't give a rat's ass unless the spam shows someone's genitals or implies that the recipient's pecker is too small. If Sears spammed the net today, they would probably gain more business than they lost.
and vandalism of their retail stores
I am an ardent anti-spam activist and I'm not about to end up doing jail time for vandalizing a retail store. Are you serious (or are you just 14)?
No, I know someone who consults for an opt-in bulk mailer. After CAN-SPAM, the bulk mailer started receiving inquiries from large corporations that were interested in advertising that complied with CAN-SPAM.
Thanks for the warning, but I could tell what you wrote without the label.
Corporations can't and won't take the negative publicity they'll get by spamming. Legitimate businesses have a reputation to uphold.
You are simply wrong. 50 years ago, a "decent" woman wouldn't be seen in public with a skirt that left her knees uncovered or a top that exposed her midriff. Perceptions and standards change. If, in ten years, there is no pr0n spam, no viagra spam, no make-money-fast spam, then it won't continue to have the negative connotations that it does now, will it?
I have no problem with legitimate bulk mail from large corporations. At least they're accountable.
Who the f**k cares if they are accountable if they just stole my bandwidth, storage, and CPU cycles? I don't give a rat's ass that you (and maybe millions of others) don't mind their spam. You didn't buy my mail server, pay for my broadband connection, of reimburse me for the time I spend opening, closing, opting out, etc.
That situation is still worlds better than the status quo. CAN-SPAM is clearly a step in the right direction.
I disagree. CAN-SPAM legalizes some forms of spam that used to be in a gray area. It overrode tougher state laws: For example, Virginia's anti-spam law, which allowed private lawsuits against spammers has been overridden by CAN-SPAM, which has no private right of action.
I have trouble viewing this in a positive light. Many of those who previously sent out illegal spam continue to do so under CAN-SPAM and the only big difference is that I can't sue them unless I am an ISP. Others decided to "go legit" by abiding by the rules in CAN-SPAM, meaning that I still get their spam and they are now above prosecution. Those who previously did not spam for fear of legal problems now have a clear set of guidelines that enable them to spam with confidence. How that's an improvement escapes me.
So what? Any spammer who complies with the CAN-SPAM act has to put "ADV" in the subject line,
You obviously have not read the act. The CAN-SPAM act only requires that there be a "clear and conspicuous identification that the message is an advertisement or solicitation". That could be in the subject or the body. It could be a line saying "this is an ad." It could be a subject that says "Viagra for sale."
The CAN-SPAM act also has the following:
"The Commission shall transmit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce--
The Commission shall transmit to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce-- {snip} (2) a report, within 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, that sets forth a plan for requiring commercial electronic mail to be identifiable from its subject line, by means of compliance with Internet Engineering Task Force Standards, the use of the characters `ADV' in the subject line, or other comparable identifier, or an explanation of any concerns the Commission has that cause the Commission to recommend against the plan.
It may be ADV. It may be something else. Or it may be a recommendation against any such identifier.
so they will find that my mail server bounces their crap immediately when they attempt to deliver it. So "merely" getting spammers to comply with the act is perfectly fine by me.
Yeah, to hell with everyone who doesn't have an e-mail address on your server. Who cares if your ISP gets hit by thousands of spams per second? They'll just pass the cost on to their customers -- like you, for example. How about if I DDOS your mail server with spams that all start off with ADV in the subject line? You don't care about your connection being saturated? You don't care if your packets are getting dropped because some spammer is using your ISP's bandwidth for messages that are being rejected? You have an interesting outlook on all of this.
Thanks. I have no problem with true opt-in (with confirmation) e-mail. I don't mind a company sending me ads via e-mail if they get my permission first. In fact, I get several such mailings already. They advertise. I'm interested in their products. They get sales. I buy cool stuff. It's all good.
Such a strategy might have worked a decade agim byt it's simply too late for that now. The associations "spam=scam" and "spam=porn" have become indelible.
Don't be so sure. Why do you think that major corporations pushed so hard against outright bans on spam. Who do you think came up with the ideas contained in CAN-SPAM, that it's not spam if there is an opt-out, a physical address, and it contains no forged headers? It sure wasn't penis enlargement pill spammers and it wasn't consumers, who overwhelmingly hate spam. It was big businesses who see a role for "direct e-mail advertising" in the future.
It's also worth mentioning that legitimate businesses provide legitimate "opt-out" policies.
According to the Small Business Administration, there are about 24 million small businesses in the United States. If only one 1% of those businesses sent you just one e-mail advertisement a year, you would get over 650 pieces of spam each day. That number doesn't even count large corporations or international businesses.
Why should I have to "opt-out" of spam that I never opted-in for? Why should my day, my server's hard drive, and my bandwidth be wasted for thousands of unwanted ads? Why should I have to opt-out over and over on each address that I own?
See anything in there from Dell? GE? MS? No. I registered my Pavilion with HP when I bought it and I get, like, 1 message from them every 3 months. Myabe one message every 2 months from my ISP and my cell phone provider. Legitimate businesses are NOT the problem.
Reading comprehension is not your strong point, is it? I wrote:
These charges are just part of clearing out the small-time operators in order to make room for the big boys. Our fine friends in government want to get rid of the sleaziest stuff so the Fords, Walmarts, and Panasonics of the world can spam without being associated with the Internet porn and snake-oil spams. When the penis enlarger and herbal viagra spams end, then you can expect to see your mailbox filled with spam from major corporations -- all of whom can afford Internet pipes that would make the small-time spammers weak in the knees.
Now if you read that carefully, you will note that I said that the major corporations would begin spamming once the sleaziest stuff was basically quashed -- once their spam would not be "associated with the Internet porn and snake-oil spams." I did not say that they were already spamming and even explained why (the negative associations) they would not do so yet.
I litterly get about 200 spams day now. I'd say 99.99% of them are illegal under the CAN-SPAM act. If the only spam I got was legal spam under this law, spam wouldn't be a problem at all, I can handle 2-3 emails a week from businesses I've had recent dealing with.
But you miss the point: Once the sleazy spams have been largely stopped through CAN-SPAM, I am betting that there will be spamming on a massive scale from major corporations, with which many of the recipients will have had no recent dealings. Sears, GM, and Microsoft have no more right to spam you than some guy selling "herbal Viagra."
Actually, this is a very good thing. The post was made from IP address 217.205.149.48. Jem Matzan, the site editor, was kind enough to provide that information and I will be sending a complaint to the ISP. Unlike the owners of Slashdot, Mr. Matzan doesn't seem so eager to just ignore such postings on his site.
Let's get one thing straight right now: These people are not being charged with spamming. They are being charged with spamming in a manner not in compliance with the CAN-SPAM act. Dell, General Electric, and Microsoft (for example) will all be able to comply with the CAN-SPAM act -- it was written for their ilk. Big corporations don't have to worry about some anti-spam vigilante threatening them or their family. They don't have to be concerned that their credit will be destroyed. Then don't have to worry about their phones ringing all night long. The won't be particularly upset if pictures of their headquarters and their contact information appear on Slashdot. They can afford to hire operators to man the phones and deal with angry spam recipients.
These charges are just part of clearing out the small-time operators in order to make room for the big boys. Our fine friends in government want to get rid of the sleaziest stuff so the Fords, Walmarts, and Panasonics of the world can spam without being associated with the Internet porn and snake-oil spams. When the penis enlarger and herbal viagra spams end, then you can expect to see your mailbox filled with spam from major corporations -- all of whom can afford Internet pipes that would make the small-time spammers weak in the knees.
CAN-SPAM is not the last word. Call your Congressional representatives and tell them that you want legislation with teeth that makes all spam (usolicited bulk e-mail) illegal. Make it illegal to send it, illegal to pay someone else to send it, illegal to relay it, and illegal for ISPs to knowingly provide safe havens for spammers. Require that ISPs act within 24 hours of getting notification of spam activity and that they not "warn" spammers. Pressure other countries to pass similar legislation. Don't tell me that it can't be done -- just look at the DMCA-like laws being enacted everywhere and how the draconian laws favored by the RIAA and MPAA are being passed throughout the world due to U.S. pressure.
As often stated, follow pre-Internet laws unless absolutely necessary.
Is an employer required to open all snail mail to screen it for porn? Would that, actually, be illegal?
If an employee was receiving pornographic advertisements in his/her work snail mail, that person might have grounds for a suit. But since that really doesn't happen to many people, there is not a lot of caselaw, precedence, and legislation surrounding it, so it makes a weak analogy and a poor model for handling the problem.
A key point about this is that employers do have the means to drastically reduce the quantity of porn spam that employees receive. There are blacklists, Bayesian filters, and spam filtering services (e.g. Brightmail). They can use web forms rather than mailto links. They can provide employees with separate addresses for trusted senders and untrusted senders (e.g., what the employee fills out on an information request card). If they decide not to employ any of these tools, then they should be held liable for how their decision affects the people working for them.
I'm not suggesting that it's appropriate for someone to sue their employer if they get three porn spams in a year. But if they are getting them every day AND the employer has not taken reasonable steps to alleviate the problem, a lawsuit might be reasonable.
That also means that business will start pressuring legislators to create real anti-spam legislation with actual "Federal pound-me-in-the-*** prison time for offenders. We've all seen that it does little good when individuals complain, but, somehow, big business seems to have the ear of lawmakers...
What the hell is wrong with bunny-hopping, strafe-jumping and circle-jumping?
For one thing, it's annoying to other players. Is it so unreasonable to move in a somewhat humanoid manner?
In a way, it's a kind of finger acrobatics.
How about some mental acrobatics where you use strategy rather than finger speed to win games? Save the "finger acrobatics" for surfing the porn web sites.
It doesn't matter if you were 30 when pong came out, your still new to most recent games because of your newbie mind set.
I was in Best Buy the day the UT2004 was released to get my copy. Same thing for UT2003. CompUSA for Q3 Arena. So I'm up to date on the current FPS games and have years of experience that gives me a perspective.
You play games the way that you like. I play them the way that I like. You have a much more liberal view of what's fair than I do. If you want to call me names because I don't believe in taking (what I view to be) unfair advantage of game design problems, that's your right.
I mentioned Pete Egoscue's book above. He suggests that the reason so many people have RSI's these days is because we are motion deprived; before the past 40-50 years life was harder- more manual. It kept our bodies in shape. Egoscue contends that we require food, clothing, shelter and motion to survive.
Some of the most physically active people I know have gotten RSI problems. These are people who work out almost every day, play sports, bicycle, etc. You have to consider that, 40-50 years ago, there weren't people making a living typing on short-keystroke, hard-impact electronic keyboards and using computer mice all day.
I don't doubt the overall value of exercise and have no doubt that it can improve many aspects of life, but I've see too many active, healthy, young people with RSIs to believe it's the answer to preventing or treating RSIs. YMMV.
As for keyboards, I DON'T recommend the Microsoft Natural keyboards. There's nothing natural about the position that they put your hands in.
As you say later, "everyone is different." They work well for me and for my girlfriend. I'm glad that the Kinesis is working well for you. Interesting observation about the Dvorak layout. It's really not an option for me given how many different systems I have to use in a week.
lol. Let see, most people can't dunk, thus all NBA players are cheaters. Most poeple can't throw curve balls so all Baseball pitchers are haxxors. Most drivers can't apex turn so NASCAR driver are cheap Apex whores.
Obviously people can do those things since NBA players, baseball pitchers, and NASCAR drivers are people. "lol" right back at ya!
The divide is this, if you can do it with the game you bought, then it's fair.
Okay, so it's fair to damage people through walls (a Quake "feature" that was later "removed")? It's fair to make yourself "unlit" in UT2004 with a set command? It's fair to turn off fog so that you can see where people playing the out-of-the-box game cannot? You have a strange idea of fair.
When my girlfriend, a professional writer and editor, got carpal tunnel, her doctor prescribed a wrist brace that she had to wear for x hours per day for y weeks (don't remember the exact numbers). We also made four other changes:
1. Traded in the stick-shift for an automatic. 2. Got her a smaller and lighter purse (less crap in it). 3. Went to a trackball. 4. Went to a split keyboard (Microsoft Natural).
The carpal tunnel has not returned in the intervening years.
I started to get carpal tunnel syndrome myself and went with a split keyboard and a trackball. That did the trick for me.
If you have wide shoulders, I strongly recommend the split keyboard. The wider your shoulders, the worse the angle on the wrists to use a conventional keyboard. As to mice or trackballs, trackballs rock and mice suck -- especially if you do much graphics (e.g., Photoshop) work. Get a good one and don't get one of those idiotic ones that you operate with your thumb. I recommend the ones by Mouse-Trak. Very high quality, ball size and weight is substantial, and price is reasonable at around the $100 mark.
Good luck and don't ignore the problem or it will just get much worse. Treat it early.
It sounds like the real issue here is that you're not very good, and it's easier for you to blame something insignificant like continuous jumping than it is for you to improve as a player.
I'm not very good at it. I don't spend untold hours practicing. I don't have superhuman reflexes. I'm just an average player. But it's not that important. My self-esteem doesn't hinge on how many frags I get in UT or where I stand in the rankings. I play games to have fun -- that's all. Are you perhaps using your self-proclaimed prowess at FPS games to make up for some other area where you feel inadequate?
Does your jump key not work or something? If you feel that it gives others such an advantage (and it really doesn't), then why not use it?
It might give me an advantage in chess to distract my opponent with twitching, loud coughing, wheezing, and a day-glo orange shirt. But I don't do it because it's a despicable way to win the game -- even if it's not specifically against the rules.
Only when the situation necessitates it. In this case, the old "garbage in, garbage out" adage seems to apply.
Please don't blame me for your vulgarity. You came up with that all on your own.
I've seen your other posts on this topic, and you seem to have an interesting take on the word "flaw."... Constantly jumping because characters don't get tired?
Good example. The designers of FPS games like UT2003/4 gave players the ability to run, walk, jump, and crouch. They gave them the ability to stand still as well. Obviously, they did not design the game with the intent that people would run and jump continuously. If I wanted to play a game where the "targets" jumped wildly in all directions at high speed, I would have purchased something like a shooting gallery game rather than a first-person shooter.
Slashdot Mirror
You're right, I missed that.
You're a bigger man than most to admit your errors. Thanks.
However, I believe that really bad, fill-your-inbox spam won't ever become common with "real" companies--they will have (mostly) real, working opt-out options, because they are big, established companies, not little scurry-around-in-the-dark spammers.
How many thousands of times will you have to opt out before all of the big companies are done with you?
And as far as bandwidth goes, 10,000 zombie Windows boxes are comparable to any number of T3s coming out of WalMart.
And most of them are behind ISPs that have finally gotten a clue and stopped leaving port 25 open.
Yes, there will always be idiots who answer spam
Fine them and, for repeat offenses, jail them.
, and yes, companies will do a lot of sleazy things, but I think, and I think WalMart knows, that 50 messages per day will do more harm than good.
Yes, Walmart knows that. So they won't send more than one per week. Same with Home Depot, Kroger, Target, Sears, Costco, Albertson's, Safeway, JCPenney, Kmart, Walgreen, Lowe's, CVS, Best Buy, Publix, Rite Aid, Federated Dept. Stores, Gap, May Department Stores, Winn-Dixie, TJX, Staples, Office Depot, Toys "R" Us, A&P, 7-Eleven, Circuit City, SuperValu Retail, Kohl's, Limited Brands, Dillard's, Dollar General, Nordstrom, Saks, BJ's Wholesale Club, Blockbuster, AutoZone, Barnes & Noble, CompUSA, OfficeMax, RadioShack, Foot Locker, Longs Drug, QVC, Family Dollar, Pathmark, Amazon.com, Big Lots, Bed Bath & Beyond, Ross Stores, Borders Group, Sherwin Williams, Advance Auto Parts, ShopKo, Wegman's, Neiman Marcus Group, Payless ShoeSource, Michaels, PETsMART, Whole Foods Markets, Stater Bros., Spiegel, Burlington Coat Factory, The Pantry, Value City, Price Chopper, Ames, Williams-Sonoma, Harris Teeter, Dollar Tree, Zale, Linens 'n Things, Pep Boys, Casey's General Stores, Berkshire-Hathaway Retail, Lenscrafters-Sunglasses Hut, Weis Markets, 84 Lumber, Pier 1 Imports, K-B Toys, Tiffany, etc. Yeah, you don't have to worry about fifty messages per day. Sure...
That may be true, but I guarantee you that it'll only happen once.
It's already happened more than once. Big businesses and even politicians have spammed people.
Some major company is going to decide that the time is right to "spam legally," and the firestorm of bad publicity, lost sales, and vandalism of their retail stores that follows will make the corporate world finally realise once and for all that spam - legal or not - is a suicidal way to advertise.
Outside of a handful of anti-spam activists, most people don't give a rat's ass unless the spam shows someone's genitals or implies that the recipient's pecker is too small. If Sears spammed the net today, they would probably gain more business than they lost.
and vandalism of their retail stores
I am an ardent anti-spam activist and I'm not about to end up doing jail time for vandalizing a retail store. Are you serious (or are you just 14)?
You're fucking paranoid.
No, I know someone who consults for an opt-in bulk mailer. After CAN-SPAM, the bulk mailer started receiving inquiries from large corporations that were interested in advertising that complied with CAN-SPAM.
Bullshit.
Thanks for the warning, but I could tell what you wrote without the label.
Corporations can't and won't take the negative publicity they'll get by spamming. Legitimate businesses have a reputation to uphold.
You are simply wrong. 50 years ago, a "decent" woman wouldn't be seen in public with a skirt that left her knees uncovered or a top that exposed her midriff. Perceptions and standards change. If, in ten years, there is no pr0n spam, no viagra spam, no make-money-fast spam, then it won't continue to have the negative connotations that it does now, will it?
I have no problem with legitimate bulk mail from large corporations. At least they're accountable.
Who the f**k cares if they are accountable if they just stole my bandwidth, storage, and CPU cycles? I don't give a rat's ass that you (and maybe millions of others) don't mind their spam. You didn't buy my mail server, pay for my broadband connection, of reimburse me for the time I spend opening, closing, opting out, etc.
That situation is still worlds better than the status quo. CAN-SPAM is clearly a step in the right direction.
I disagree. CAN-SPAM legalizes some forms of spam that used to be in a gray area. It overrode tougher state laws: For example, Virginia's anti-spam law, which allowed private lawsuits against spammers has been overridden by CAN-SPAM, which has no private right of action.
I have trouble viewing this in a positive light. Many of those who previously sent out illegal spam continue to do so under CAN-SPAM and the only big difference is that I can't sue them unless I am an ISP. Others decided to "go legit" by abiding by the rules in CAN-SPAM, meaning that I still get their spam and they are now above prosecution. Those who previously did not spam for fear of legal problems now have a clear set of guidelines that enable them to spam with confidence. How that's an improvement escapes me.
You obviously have not read the act. The CAN-SPAM act only requires that there be a "clear and conspicuous identification that the message is an advertisement or solicitation". That could be in the subject or the body. It could be a line saying "this is an ad." It could be a subject that says "Viagra for sale."
The CAN-SPAM act also has the following: It may be ADV. It may be something else. Or it may be a recommendation against any such identifier.
so they will find that my mail server bounces their crap immediately when they attempt to deliver it. So "merely" getting spammers to comply with the act is perfectly fine by me.
Yeah, to hell with everyone who doesn't have an e-mail address on your server. Who cares if your ISP gets hit by thousands of spams per second? They'll just pass the cost on to their customers -- like you, for example. How about if I DDOS your mail server with spams that all start off with ADV in the subject line? You don't care about your connection being saturated? You don't care if your packets are getting dropped because some spammer is using your ISP's bandwidth for messages that are being rejected? You have an interesting outlook on all of this.
Okay, you've got a point.
Thanks. I have no problem with true opt-in (with confirmation) e-mail. I don't mind a company sending me ads via e-mail if they get my permission first. In fact, I get several such mailings already. They advertise. I'm interested in their products. They get sales. I buy cool stuff. It's all good.
Such a strategy might have worked a decade agim byt it's simply too late for that now. The associations "spam=scam" and "spam=porn" have become indelible.
Don't be so sure. Why do you think that major corporations pushed so hard against outright bans on spam. Who do you think came up with the ideas contained in CAN-SPAM, that it's not spam if there is an opt-out, a physical address, and it contains no forged headers? It sure wasn't penis enlargement pill spammers and it wasn't consumers, who overwhelmingly hate spam. It was big businesses who see a role for "direct e-mail advertising" in the future.
It's also worth mentioning that legitimate businesses provide legitimate "opt-out" policies.
According to the Small Business Administration, there are about 24 million small businesses in the United States. If only one 1% of those businesses sent you just one e-mail advertisement a year, you would get over 650 pieces of spam each day. That number doesn't even count large corporations or international businesses.
Why should I have to "opt-out" of spam that I never opted-in for? Why should my day, my server's hard drive, and my bandwidth be wasted for thousands of unwanted ads? Why should I have to opt-out over and over on each address that I own?
Reading comprehension is not your strong point, is it? I wrote:Now if you read that carefully, you will note that I said that the major corporations would begin spamming once the sleaziest stuff was basically quashed -- once their spam would not be "associated with the Internet porn and snake-oil spams." I did not say that they were already spamming and even explained why (the negative associations) they would not do so yet.
I litterly get about 200 spams day now. I'd say 99.99% of them are illegal under the CAN-SPAM act. If the only spam I got was legal spam under this law, spam wouldn't be a problem at all, I can handle 2-3 emails a week from businesses I've had recent dealing with.
But you miss the point: Once the sleazy spams have been largely stopped through CAN-SPAM, I am betting that there will be spamming on a massive scale from major corporations, with which many of the recipients will have had no recent dealings. Sears, GM, and Microsoft have no more right to spam you than some guy selling "herbal Viagra."
Actually, this is a very good thing. The post was made from IP address 217.205.149.48. Jem Matzan, the site editor, was kind enough to provide that information and I will be sending a complaint to the ISP. Unlike the owners of Slashdot, Mr. Matzan doesn't seem so eager to just ignore such postings on his site.
Let's get one thing straight right now: These people are not being charged with spamming. They are being charged with spamming in a manner not in compliance with the CAN-SPAM act. Dell, General Electric, and Microsoft (for example) will all be able to comply with the CAN-SPAM act -- it was written for their ilk. Big corporations don't have to worry about some anti-spam vigilante threatening them or their family. They don't have to be concerned that their credit will be destroyed. Then don't have to worry about their phones ringing all night long. The won't be particularly upset if pictures of their headquarters and their contact information appear on Slashdot. They can afford to hire operators to man the phones and deal with angry spam recipients.
These charges are just part of clearing out the small-time operators in order to make room for the big boys. Our fine friends in government want to get rid of the sleaziest stuff so the Fords, Walmarts, and Panasonics of the world can spam without being associated with the Internet porn and snake-oil spams. When the penis enlarger and herbal viagra spams end, then you can expect to see your mailbox filled with spam from major corporations -- all of whom can afford Internet pipes that would make the small-time spammers weak in the knees.
CAN-SPAM is not the last word. Call your Congressional representatives and tell them that you want legislation with teeth that makes all spam (usolicited bulk e-mail) illegal. Make it illegal to send it, illegal to pay someone else to send it, illegal to relay it, and illegal for ISPs to knowingly provide safe havens for spammers. Require that ISPs act within 24 hours of getting notification of spam activity and that they not "warn" spammers. Pressure other countries to pass similar legislation. Don't tell me that it can't be done -- just look at the DMCA-like laws being enacted everywhere and how the draconian laws favored by the RIAA and MPAA are being passed throughout the world due to U.S. pressure.
As often stated, follow pre-Internet laws unless absolutely necessary.
Is an employer required to open all snail mail to screen it for porn? Would that, actually, be illegal?
If an employee was receiving pornographic advertisements in his/her work snail mail, that person might have grounds for a suit. But since that really doesn't happen to many people, there is not a lot of caselaw, precedence, and legislation surrounding it, so it makes a weak analogy and a poor model for handling the problem.
A key point about this is that employers do have the means to drastically reduce the quantity of porn spam that employees receive. There are blacklists, Bayesian filters, and spam filtering services (e.g. Brightmail). They can use web forms rather than mailto links. They can provide employees with separate addresses for trusted senders and untrusted senders (e.g., what the employee fills out on an information request card). If they decide not to employ any of these tools, then they should be held liable for how their decision affects the people working for them.
I'm not suggesting that it's appropriate for someone to sue their employer if they get three porn spams in a year. But if they are getting them every day AND the employer has not taken reasonable steps to alleviate the problem, a lawsuit might be reasonable.
That also means that business will start pressuring legislators to create real anti-spam legislation with actual "Federal pound-me-in-the-*** prison time for offenders. We've all seen that it does little good when individuals complain, but, somehow, big business seems to have the ear of lawmakers...
What the hell is wrong with bunny-hopping, strafe-jumping and circle-jumping?
For one thing, it's annoying to other players. Is it so unreasonable to move in a somewhat humanoid manner?
In a way, it's a kind of finger acrobatics.
How about some mental acrobatics where you use strategy rather than finger speed to win games? Save the "finger acrobatics" for surfing the porn web sites.
It doesn't matter if you were 30 when pong came out, your still new to most recent games because of your newbie mind set.
I was in Best Buy the day the UT2004 was released to get my copy. Same thing for UT2003. CompUSA for Q3 Arena. So I'm up to date on the current FPS games and have years of experience that gives me a perspective.
You play games the way that you like. I play them the way that I like. You have a much more liberal view of what's fair than I do. If you want to call me names because I don't believe in taking (what I view to be) unfair advantage of game design problems, that's your right.
As for no fog, that fair, no glowing aura thats fine too
No, it's not. You're just another cheater who's rationalizing.
If a camper is hiding behind a crate thats a common hiding spot, why not allow me to shoot him through the crate.
I didn't say crates. I said walls.
You are the very picture of a new player whining.
I was probably playing video games before you were even born, kiddo.
I mentioned Pete Egoscue's book above. He suggests that the reason so many people have RSI's these days is because we are motion deprived; before the past 40-50 years life was harder- more manual. It kept our bodies in shape. Egoscue contends that we require food, clothing, shelter and motion to survive.
Some of the most physically active people I know have gotten RSI problems. These are people who work out almost every day, play sports, bicycle, etc. You have to consider that, 40-50 years ago, there weren't people making a living typing on short-keystroke, hard-impact electronic keyboards and using computer mice all day.
I don't doubt the overall value of exercise and have no doubt that it can improve many aspects of life, but I've see too many active, healthy, young people with RSIs to believe it's the answer to preventing or treating RSIs. YMMV.
As for keyboards, I DON'T recommend the Microsoft Natural keyboards. There's nothing natural about the position that they put your hands in.
As you say later, "everyone is different." They work well for me and for my girlfriend. I'm glad that the Kinesis is working well for you. Interesting observation about the Dvorak layout. It's really not an option for me given how many different systems I have to use in a week.
lol. Let see, most people can't dunk, thus all NBA players are cheaters. Most poeple can't throw curve balls so all Baseball pitchers are haxxors. Most drivers can't apex turn so NASCAR driver are cheap Apex whores.
Obviously people can do those things since NBA players, baseball pitchers, and NASCAR drivers are people. "lol" right back at ya!
The divide is this, if you can do it with the game you bought, then it's fair.
Okay, so it's fair to damage people through walls (a Quake "feature" that was later "removed")? It's fair to make yourself "unlit" in UT2004 with a set command? It's fair to turn off fog so that you can see where people playing the out-of-the-box game cannot? You have a strange idea of fair.
When my girlfriend, a professional writer and editor, got carpal tunnel, her doctor prescribed a wrist brace that she had to wear for x hours per day for y weeks (don't remember the exact numbers). We also made four other changes:
1. Traded in the stick-shift for an automatic.
2. Got her a smaller and lighter purse (less crap in it).
3. Went to a trackball.
4. Went to a split keyboard (Microsoft Natural).
The carpal tunnel has not returned in the intervening years.
I started to get carpal tunnel syndrome myself and went with a split keyboard and a trackball. That did the trick for me.
If you have wide shoulders, I strongly recommend the split keyboard. The wider your shoulders, the worse the angle on the wrists to use a conventional keyboard. As to mice or trackballs, trackballs rock and mice suck -- especially if you do much graphics (e.g., Photoshop) work. Get a good one and don't get one of those idiotic ones that you operate with your thumb. I recommend the ones by Mouse-Trak. Very high quality, ball size and weight is substantial, and price is reasonable at around the $100 mark.
Good luck and don't ignore the problem or it will just get much worse. Treat it early.
It sounds like the real issue here is that you're not very good, and it's easier for you to blame something insignificant like continuous jumping than it is for you to improve as a player.
I'm not very good at it. I don't spend untold hours practicing. I don't have superhuman reflexes. I'm just an average player. But it's not that important. My self-esteem doesn't hinge on how many frags I get in UT or where I stand in the rankings. I play games to have fun -- that's all. Are you perhaps using your self-proclaimed prowess at FPS games to make up for some other area where you feel inadequate?
Does your jump key not work or something? If you feel that it gives others such an advantage (and it really doesn't), then why not use it?
It might give me an advantage in chess to distract my opponent with twitching, loud coughing, wheezing, and a day-glo orange shirt. But I don't do it because it's a despicable way to win the game -- even if it's not specifically against the rules.
Only when the situation necessitates it. In this case, the old "garbage in, garbage out" adage seems to apply.
Please don't blame me for your vulgarity. You came up with that all on your own.
Thats silly, Fair play is shakign hands afterwards and sayign good game.
Let's just say that we have a different idea of what fair play is.
I've seen your other posts on this topic, and you seem to have an interesting take on the word "flaw."... Constantly jumping because characters don't get tired?
Good example. The designers of FPS games like UT2003/4 gave players the ability to run, walk, jump, and crouch. They gave them the ability to stand still as well. Obviously, they did not design the game with the intent that people would run and jump continuously. If I wanted to play a game where the "targets" jumped wildly in all directions at high speed, I would have purchased something like a shooting gallery game rather than a first-person shooter.
Give me a fuckin break.
You are quite the eloquent writer, aren't you?
So whats stopping you from cheesing?
A sense of fair play.