I don't know dude. Theo Epstein has demi-god status around here, and I doubt he would have a problem scoring digits in any Boston bar. You'd be surprised how many female sports fans there are around here.
Huh? The policy linked to speaks of copyright violation. Was the code stolen? If not, I fail to see the reasoning.
Sourceforge is not in the business of judging the code it hosts. If a third party has a problem and the developers don't want to take responsibility and fight them, I don't see any problem with SF yanking the project.
I don't have a strong objection against gambling per se, but I have always been dissapointed by the fact that it takes money from people that need it the most. I would bet that gambling expenses (mainly from lottery) is inversely proportional to income.
Technology for the most part increases the knowledge and information available to you. If more of that causes stress to you, I think you need to give some deep thought as to why.
Was it supposed to work? It was obvious to anyone with a semblance of a clue that it wasn't going to have an immediate impact. Its just supposed to try and firm up the ground for something more effective I think.
The analogy is what's stupid. A server at a restaurant with no public transporation who serves someone 10 scotches and who came alone is like a hardware store selling a piece of pipe, a handful of nails and a stick of dynamite to someone.
Who says you need to know what you are doing to break the law?
Also, I buy alot of spanish/icelandic music and I don't speak it either, not to mention various artists from Africa who sing in languages I don't even know the names of.
And that's just Linux. There have been gobs of them for the various popular software packages out there (Apache, Samba, PHP, etc). I try to stress to other developers that OSS isn't necessarily more secure, its more prone to security, a fine line that can be very significant. I am hugely in favor of OSS, but the idea that opening crappy source means other people will fix your bugs is as false as the idea that opening unfinished source means other people will finish it.
I don't understand the whole "I don't have a phone" or the more common "I don't have a cell phone" because "I don't want to be reached". There is a better solution, it's called "turning them off" or "not answering them". The thing that really aggravates me is that people always say it with a sense of pride, just like people who don't have TVs (a decision that does have merit). I'm sorry, but there is no pride to be taken in telling everyone you care about that you don't consider talking to them important. If you think it's a "leash" then you need to work on your self-esteem and be willing to tell people that you didn't feel like talking to them at that moment. I do it all the time and you'd be surprised how understanding people are.
It's the 21st century, and IMO having a cell phone is no longer an option for someone that interacts daily with friends and family. They are cheap to get and cheap to use, and I think you are going to find alot less people cutting you slack for your misguided principles.
"the financial incentive that makes a spammer spam"
Not really, its the promise of financial incentive that makes a spammer spam. I would doubt that most spammers make money, but since there is such a small investment, they just figure they haven't gotten lucky yet. For previous examples of this behavior see snail-mail pyramid schemes.
"(1) Arwen -- very minor and peripheral character in the book with, as the article mentions, only one line in the entire saga (not that I mind seeing Liv Tyler, but I found that whole subplot extremely contrived)."
Ask a female friend who hasn't read the book if they would have enjoyed the movie more or less without Arwen and the love story element. If a few minutes of watching Liv Tyler is what it takes to add enough appeal to women to get a movie made, I'm game.
Re:How does this reduce spam in any shape or form?
on
SPF Design Frozen
·
· Score: 1
It's going to affect alot of people. Since spammers use the same mechanisms that normal people use anything that affects spammers is in some way going to affect normal users. The more similar a normal behavior is to a spam behavior, the more it will be affected, like the header "forging" you mention. While putting a legitimate address you own from a different domain is a legitimate thing to do, its indistinguable at the technical level from a spammer forging an address.
This is an important thing however, because alot of ISPs block port 25 to anything but their own mail servers, and nobody wants to use a transient ISP address. The reply-to header is designed to alleviate this, but I'm not sure if that's a good enough solution. I think the ISPs will have to work together to figure this out, but then again, the ISPs are the ones that feel the worst effects of spam.
Re:How does this reduce spam in any shape or form?
on
SPF Design Frozen
·
· Score: 1
This is intended to plug a hole, that's all. It's not designed to solve the whole problem. Its a simply solution that makes existing technology better with little investment. Also I think you are underestimating the indirect effect it has. Look at your spam box, where do probably half of them say they come from? Hotmail and Yahoo right? You can't block Hotmail and Yahoo though because they have millions of legitimate users. With this type of system you are forcing them to use smaller and smaller domains which are easier to block. Also, once this reaches critical mass (which is not 100%), you can start scoring against messages from systems that don't implement it.
I support this system because it is a pretty painless partial solution. It certainly isn't a silver bullet but it's a great step.
Slashdot Mirror
At least you can make fun of them for paying $0.99 for a 50 Cent ringtone.
If it was a Nielsen study it would have said that "most people" feel a certain way, where "most people" is a pseudonym for "Jakob Nielsen".
I don't know dude. Theo Epstein has demi-god status around here, and I doubt he would have a problem scoring digits in any Boston bar. You'd be surprised how many female sports fans there are around here.
Huh? The policy linked to speaks of copyright violation. Was the code stolen? If not, I fail to see the reasoning.
Sourceforge is not in the business of judging the code it hosts. If a third party has a problem and the developers don't want to take responsibility and fight them, I don't see any problem with SF yanking the project.
Software developer
I don't have a strong objection against gambling per se, but I have always been dissapointed by the fact that it takes money from people that need it the most. I would bet that gambling expenses (mainly from lottery) is inversely proportional to income.
Rodders have a saying, "there's no replacement for displacement" so maybe there is a similar saying for megahertz?
Is there some clause that says MLB can terminate it if Real's software/format/spyware sucks? If there is I'd say MLB will win this one easily.
"Isn't the central idea of solitaire that it is played by oneself?"
How 20th century of you. Don't you know all the Mom's are now hooked on MMOS (Massively Multiplayer Online Solitaire)?
Just think how many jobs are being kept stateside because they are being done for free!
Technology for the most part increases the knowledge and information available to you. If more of that causes stress to you, I think you need to give some deep thought as to why.
Isn't this what privacy concerned people have been saying for ages?
"If you are going to profit of my information at least share some of the fruits with me"
Was it supposed to work? It was obvious to anyone with a semblance of a clue that it wasn't going to have an immediate impact. Its just supposed to try and firm up the ground for something more effective I think.
The analogy is what's stupid. A server at a restaurant with no public transporation who serves someone 10 scotches and who came alone is like a hardware store selling a piece of pipe, a handful of nails and a stick of dynamite to someone.
Who says you need to know what you are doing to break the law?
Also, I buy alot of spanish/icelandic music and I don't speak it either, not to mention various artists from Africa who sing in languages I don't even know the names of.
"If MS went and changed some things in Sun's Java and then started to bundle their version of Java with Windows, who knows what will happen."
Hmm, I wonder if they would call it something dumb like C#...
If we assume for a moment that the state's budget is fixed, wouldn't this mean lower taxes for those of us that already pay the correct amount?
And that's just Linux. There have been gobs of them for the various popular software packages out there (Apache, Samba, PHP, etc). I try to stress to other developers that OSS isn't necessarily more secure, its more prone to security, a fine line that can be very significant. I am hugely in favor of OSS, but the idea that opening crappy source means other people will fix your bugs is as false as the idea that opening unfinished source means other people will finish it.
I don't understand the whole "I don't have a phone" or the more common "I don't have a cell phone" because "I don't want to be reached". There is a better solution, it's called "turning them off" or "not answering them". The thing that really aggravates me is that people always say it with a sense of pride, just like people who don't have TVs (a decision that does have merit). I'm sorry, but there is no pride to be taken in telling everyone you care about that you don't consider talking to them important. If you think it's a "leash" then you need to work on your self-esteem and be willing to tell people that you didn't feel like talking to them at that moment. I do it all the time and you'd be surprised how understanding people are.
It's the 21st century, and IMO having a cell phone is no longer an option for someone that interacts daily with friends and family. They are cheap to get and cheap to use, and I think you are going to find alot less people cutting you slack for your misguided principles.
It's funny because it's true. 8 hours is the time a kid has on a school night.
"the financial incentive that makes a spammer spam"
Not really, its the promise of financial incentive that makes a spammer spam. I would doubt that most spammers make money, but since there is such a small investment, they just figure they haven't gotten lucky yet. For previous examples of this behavior see snail-mail pyramid schemes.
"(1) Arwen -- very minor and peripheral character in the book with, as the article mentions, only one line in the entire saga (not that I mind seeing Liv Tyler, but I found that whole subplot extremely contrived)."
Ask a female friend who hasn't read the book if they would have enjoyed the movie more or less without Arwen and the love story element. If a few minutes of watching Liv Tyler is what it takes to add enough appeal to women to get a movie made, I'm game.
It's going to affect alot of people. Since spammers use the same mechanisms that normal people use anything that affects spammers is in some way going to affect normal users. The more similar a normal behavior is to a spam behavior, the more it will be affected, like the header "forging" you mention. While putting a legitimate address you own from a different domain is a legitimate thing to do, its indistinguable at the technical level from a spammer forging an address.
This is an important thing however, because alot of ISPs block port 25 to anything but their own mail servers, and nobody wants to use a transient ISP address. The reply-to header is designed to alleviate this, but I'm not sure if that's a good enough solution. I think the ISPs will have to work together to figure this out, but then again, the ISPs are the ones that feel the worst effects of spam.
This is intended to plug a hole, that's all. It's not designed to solve the whole problem. Its a simply solution that makes existing technology better with little investment. Also I think you are underestimating the indirect effect it has. Look at your spam box, where do probably half of them say they come from? Hotmail and Yahoo right? You can't block Hotmail and Yahoo though because they have millions of legitimate users. With this type of system you are forcing them to use smaller and smaller domains which are easier to block. Also, once this reaches critical mass (which is not 100%), you can start scoring against messages from systems that don't implement it.
I support this system because it is a pretty painless partial solution. It certainly isn't a silver bullet but it's a great step.
It's just plain sad that despite never sending or receiving one, I instantly knew what C&D meant. They are so common these days.