The problem with most encoders is their use of JavaScript, which still isn't universally implemented across all browsers or used by all Web surfers.
The problem with the non-JS-based encoders is that, well, they're based on a simplistic encoding method. Anything you can use your computer to easily encode can be just as easily decoded by a similar program. (We're talking encoding, not encryption.) So in theory, a well-written scraperbot can simply de-ASCII-fy any numerical entities it runs into (the common method of encoding without resorting to JavaScript) and then scrape the address in clear text.
The problem with e-mail forms is that they're a pain in the arse, and people like me who keep archives of all incoming and outgoing e-mail are rather disinclined to use them.
Right now I use solution #2, because spammers don't seem to be writing smart enough scraperbots (yet) to justify moving to either #1 or #3. Instead of moving to either of those, I'll probably end up using a CGI-based solution that does some mucking about with HTTP headers. It combines the absolute unscrapeability and universal compatibility of a form with the ease of use of an encoded address.
The Nemesis Theory sounds awfully similar to a lot of the Planet X stuff that Phil Plait has already debunked. Suggest you read that and have a laugh whilst you're at it.
This bill isn't the answer. The state sales tax situation is a complete and utter mess, and local sales taxes make things even worse.
How does this propose to handle county or city sales taxes? It doesn't.
F'rinstance: in Blount County, TN, purchasers at local stores are subjected to a 6% state sales tax and a 2-3/4% local (county, IIRC) sales tax. Purchases made on the Internet, or via mail order, from outside of the state are not subject to sales tax, either county or state. This bill would subject said purchases to state sales tax, but the county still gets shafted (or the buyer gets lucky, whichever way you want to look at it).
Michigan's state 1040 has a "use tax" line where you can (if you kept receipts) enter 6% (the state tax rate) of the total amount of out-of-state purchases made in that tax year and pay your state sales tax that way, or if you (intelligently) didn't keep receipts, you can "estimate" it using a formula they give (which will usually save you a bundle if you do much out-of-state purchasing) based on your AGI.
What if I'm on vacation in Oregon and buy a backpack, or some other non-consumable item, for use in Illinois? Oregon gets the sales tax money, but clearly, the purchase is intended for use in Illinois, so Illinois is getting screwed here. People who live in states adjoining those where there is no state sales tax whatsoever have the benefit of being able to cross the state line and purchase whatever they want tax-free. Obviously, the bordering states don't like this.
Sales taxes need to be abolished, and the federal government should implement a national sales tax (hereafter abbreviated "NST"), akin to the UK's VAT or Canada's GST. When a remote purchase is made, the state to which the purchase is billed gets that portion of the NST. The state can then let the local governments do their own fighting over whatever scraps are left. I can't say as I particularly like local taxes anyway, and VAT and GST work extremely well in the UK, Canada, Australia, etc., so perhaps these folks are trying to solve a problem by reinventing the wheel...
people need to realize that advertising is not a right.
Yeah. You tell 'em. And can you possibly call the U.S. District Court in Denver and tell Judge Edward Nottingham that advertising to my telephone isn't a right either?
Look people, enough grumbling about Microsoft and their psychology department... as a corporation who's main product is a human-machine interface, it is in their best interest to understand and maximize everything that eases these tasks.
Last I checked, Microsoft's Human Interface R&D department was headquartered at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino.
Windows XP has a Speech module in the control panel that's getting pretty good at speaking random text.
Which other operating systems have had the ability to do since the early 1990s, and even earlier if you're willing to accept a bit of a quality hit.
At least if you put any faith in the way the season premiere of Threat Matrix (on ABC) depicted them.
For those of you who missed it (and I rather liked the show, because it was refreshing to see a realistic look at the technology behind this on TV), the line of reasoning goes something like this:
Terrorists are financing their operations by smuggling diet pills into Utah from Canada (which then gets cooked into meth). Meth cook deals with terrorists through "secret" spam-like e-mail, in this case one with the number 4 in the subject line. Terrorists are safe because they're bouncing the e-mail through five bazillion open relays, most of which, to paraphrase the show, "are running on personal computers whose owners have no idea they're installed," presumably because some virus or worm installed these SMTP relays.
So no, I really don't think spam and terrorism are necessarily that unrelated.
...in combination with magnetic induction chargers...
Right, because I want a big magnetic field half an inch away from magnetic storage media.
Bluetooth would be useful. I'm afraid someone's going to have to make RF-based power transmission more efficient before you can cordlessly charge an iPod, though. My toothbrush doesn't have any hard disks inside it.
CPUs, no matter the heat limitations, require a certain wattage to operate properly and at the right speed. AMD and Intel CPUs both require between 300 and 450 watts of power to operate.
"Milonic are pleased to announce that there are no longer any licensing issues with reference to [Orrin Hatch's hypocrisy]."
Yeah, probably because he sent them a nice fat $900 check to bring himself into compliance so that he can get his spin doctors to play this down in tomorrow's paper...
Hay un hombre de espana que esta de vacaciones en la republica dominicana, y necesita tomar un autobus.
Le pregunte al nativo, >, y el nativo responde >
Apologies for the horrendous grammar and spelling of the above, but I'm on a PC and can't create the nice accented characters as easily, and I'm way too lazy to look them up.
So now does anyone converting the above to normal text break the DMCA by circumventing the ROT-13 "encryption?"
Can fobbman sue them?
Or is fobbman guilty of violating the DMCA himself?
What if someone violates the DMCA to prove fobbman violated the DMCA, since no one can prove fobbman really did violate the DMCA without ROT-13ing his post?
If the proof violates the DMCA, is it valid in a DMCA-violation case?
If I were to ROT-13 this post, talking about posts covered by the DMCA that talk about DMCA violations, would someone be violating the DMCA to read it?...
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with most encoders is their use of JavaScript, which still isn't universally implemented across all browsers or used by all Web surfers.
The problem with the non-JS-based encoders is that, well, they're based on a simplistic encoding method. Anything you can use your computer to easily encode can be just as easily decoded by a similar program. (We're talking encoding, not encryption.) So in theory, a well-written scraperbot can simply de-ASCII-fy any numerical entities it runs into (the common method of encoding without resorting to JavaScript) and then scrape the address in clear text.
The problem with e-mail forms is that they're a pain in the arse, and people like me who keep archives of all incoming and outgoing e-mail are rather disinclined to use them.
Right now I use solution #2, because spammers don't seem to be writing smart enough scraperbots (yet) to justify moving to either #1 or #3. Instead of moving to either of those, I'll probably end up using a CGI-based solution that does some mucking about with HTTP headers. It combines the absolute unscrapeability and universal compatibility of a form with the ease of use of an encoded address.
p
Capitalism holds the answer - provide a better alternative
There already is one...
that takes away their market share
Dammit, you had to stick that qualifier in there, didn't you?
Hrm. Well, at least in the portable market, Apple's market share isn't quite as much of a joke as it used to be...
p
The Nemesis Theory sounds awfully similar to a lot of the Planet X stuff that Phil Plait has already debunked. Suggest you read that and have a laugh whilst you're at it.
p
This bill isn't the answer. The state sales tax situation is a complete and utter mess, and local sales taxes make things even worse.
How does this propose to handle county or city sales taxes? It doesn't.
F'rinstance: in Blount County, TN, purchasers at local stores are subjected to a 6% state sales tax and a 2-3/4% local (county, IIRC) sales tax. Purchases made on the Internet, or via mail order, from outside of the state are not subject to sales tax, either county or state. This bill would subject said purchases to state sales tax, but the county still gets shafted (or the buyer gets lucky, whichever way you want to look at it).
Michigan's state 1040 has a "use tax" line where you can (if you kept receipts) enter 6% (the state tax rate) of the total amount of out-of-state purchases made in that tax year and pay your state sales tax that way, or if you (intelligently) didn't keep receipts, you can "estimate" it using a formula they give (which will usually save you a bundle if you do much out-of-state purchasing) based on your AGI.
What if I'm on vacation in Oregon and buy a backpack, or some other non-consumable item, for use in Illinois? Oregon gets the sales tax money, but clearly, the purchase is intended for use in Illinois, so Illinois is getting screwed here. People who live in states adjoining those where there is no state sales tax whatsoever have the benefit of being able to cross the state line and purchase whatever they want tax-free. Obviously, the bordering states don't like this.
Sales taxes need to be abolished, and the federal government should implement a national sales tax (hereafter abbreviated "NST"), akin to the UK's VAT or Canada's GST. When a remote purchase is made, the state to which the purchase is billed gets that portion of the NST. The state can then let the local governments do their own fighting over whatever scraps are left. I can't say as I particularly like local taxes anyway, and VAT and GST work extremely well in the UK, Canada, Australia, etc., so perhaps these folks are trying to solve a problem by reinventing the wheel...
p
...but I already did this 371 times inside of a year, back before spam took over the Internet and it was still a solvable problem.
Yawn...
p
people need to realize that advertising is not a right.
Yeah. You tell 'em. And can you possibly call the U.S. District Court in Denver and tell Judge Edward Nottingham that advertising to my telephone isn't a right either?
Thanks.
p
Look people, enough grumbling about Microsoft and their psychology department... as a corporation who's main product is a human-machine interface, it is in their best interest to understand and maximize everything that eases these tasks.
Last I checked, Microsoft's Human Interface R&D department was headquartered at 1 Infinite Loop in Cupertino.
Windows XP has a Speech module in the control panel that's getting pretty good at speaking random text.
Which other operating systems have had the ability to do since the early 1990s, and even earlier if you're willing to accept a bit of a quality hit.
Hey, don't shoot me; I'm just the messenger.
p
The spammers *are* terrorists.
At least if you put any faith in the way the season premiere of Threat Matrix (on ABC) depicted them.
For those of you who missed it (and I rather liked the show, because it was refreshing to see a realistic look at the technology behind this on TV), the line of reasoning goes something like this:
Terrorists are financing their operations by smuggling diet pills into Utah from Canada (which then gets cooked into meth). Meth cook deals with terrorists through "secret" spam-like e-mail, in this case one with the number 4 in the subject line. Terrorists are safe because they're bouncing the e-mail through five bazillion open relays, most of which, to paraphrase the show, "are running on personal computers whose owners have no idea they're installed," presumably because some virus or worm installed these SMTP relays.
So no, I really don't think spam and terrorism are necessarily that unrelated.
p
...in combination with magnetic induction chargers...
Right, because I want a big magnetic field half an inch away from magnetic storage media.
Bluetooth would be useful. I'm afraid someone's going to have to make RF-based power transmission more efficient before you can cordlessly charge an iPod, though. My toothbrush doesn't have any hard disks inside it.
p
Not if the bacteria don't need oxygen. Ethanol is a byproduct of the aerobic oxidation of sugars. Without oxygen, you can't make ethanol.
p
CPUs, no matter the heat limitations, require a certain wattage to operate properly and at the right speed. AMD and Intel CPUs both require between 300 and 450 watts of power to operate.
Hrmmm....
Or AMD and Intel could concentrate on building more efficient CPUs.
Which was sort of his point in the first place.
p
"Milonic are pleased to announce that there are no longer any licensing issues with reference to [Orrin Hatch's hypocrisy]."
Yeah, probably because he sent them a nice fat $900 check to bring himself into compliance so that he can get his spin doctors to play this down in tomorrow's paper...
p
Mufflers, eh?
Hay un hombre de espana que esta de vacaciones en la republica dominicana, y necesita tomar un autobus.
Le pregunte al nativo, >, y el nativo responde >
Apologies for the horrendous grammar and spelling of the above, but I'm on a PC and can't create the nice accented characters as easily, and I'm way too lazy to look them up.
p
Re: #5:
http://www.earthplaza.com/aoldisks/
p
So now does anyone converting the above to normal text break the DMCA by circumventing the ROT-13 "encryption?"
Can fobbman sue them?
Or is fobbman guilty of violating the DMCA himself?
What if someone violates the DMCA to prove fobbman violated the DMCA, since no one can prove fobbman really did violate the DMCA without ROT-13ing his post?
If the proof violates the DMCA, is it valid in a DMCA-violation case?
If I were to ROT-13 this post, talking about posts covered by the DMCA that talk about DMCA violations, would someone be violating the DMCA to read it?...