What happens when the defect is with the product itself rather than an individual instance of that product? A responsible store would accept the returns and send the entire shipment back as defective.
Here's the problem: Spammers don't care about rules.
Some of them will put ADV in the subject header. Others will ignore it and claim that they don't have to, citing 'free speach' (and even if it doesn't apply, that does not stop them from whining to anyone who will listen about it). Others will move overseas. None of this will solve the problem wherein the ISP is already footing the bill by allowing the advertisement into their system, thus letting it eat up bandwidth.
Spammers are, without exception, lying criminal scum and most of them are also exceptionally stupid. There is no reason to write pussy laws that effectively legitimize spam if it is done in some 'approved' fashion. The answer lies in making the act itself illegal. The big problem is less about your inbox and more about their actions driving up the cost of doing business for ISPs who would be quite happy never to see that crap cross into their netspace again.
I think that blacklisting anyone running an open relay or knowingly hosting spammers is a great idea. Unfortunately, there are people who don't quite understand why spam is a bad thing and they will bitch and whine when their e-mails come through. They will file lawsuits and clueless judges who should be pulled from the bench and shot will rule in their favour.
Personally, I'm in favour of having spammers publically tortured to death. I think that such a penalty (a legally enforced one, not a vigilante act) would really reduce the spam problem.
Well, legislation protecting spammers (preventing ISPs from kicking them offline) and/or creating legal penalties for reporting spam could make it worse.
Cumbersome? I had more trouble getting my CD-RW drive set up than I did a samba share. Under my user account I type 'mount mp3', I enter the password and I suddenly have access to a network share. It was not even remotely difficult to set up (well, getting the share activated on the other end was a bit of a challenge since I'd never set up a samba share before).
Isn't the current debian openssl still at 0.9.6c? That's what I get when I apt-get it. Of coruse, I assume that the debian team backported the bugfixes...
I already started compiling 0.9.6g when I saw your post. Of course, I remembered hearing about an OpenSSL bug which had prompted me to go to e, so I suspected that I was safe. I don't even run an SSL-enabled apache server (though I do run sshd on port 443).
He specifically invited the test. He was blacklisted, he claimed that his server was not open and he invited the testers to come and attempt to relay mail through his server. When they succeeded, he claimed that they committed fraud and trespass by forging the domain name.
This was discussed in news.admin.net-abuse.email a month or so ago.
More accurately, he's threatening to sue them after inviting them to test his server. He's threatening legal action over an event that he explicitly invited.
It's like me inviting you into my home and then instantly suing you for trespassing for coming into my home.
A number of games in Japan (and even a few in the US) included 'modchip detection' code that would prevent the game from working on Playstation consoles with modchips installed. Of course, the "protection" could be easily bypassed with either a Gameshark (or similar device) or with a crack applied to a CD image of the game. The result was that gamers who used modchips solely to play legally purchased imports were out of luck while the pirates could continue on without problems. Might have even pushed a few to the 'dark side'.
I suspect that any modchip detection code in the XBox will have a similar effect.
In this case, however, it's because a spammer (Clark Mankin, a crook who runs speedstar.net) has been list-mail bombing me by signing up my e-mail address to hundreds of FFA links pages (and he didn't even try to hide his identity, as he used his own webpages in the signups and his IP address shows up everywhere) He has also claimed to be stalking me online.
Quite frankly, I'd like laws that would put people like him in jail.
Why should a user have to *pay* to avoid receiving unwanted messages? Why should a user have to do anything to avoid receiving unwanted e-mail that takes up resources to send and store?
The better solution is to kill the spammers. No more spam.
Spammers, like 'em or not, are just exercising their rights to free speech and to free capitalistic enterprise.
You are either an idiot or a spammer yourself. Spammers usurp the resources of third parties without permission in order to distribute and store unwanted advertising. Spammers are typically sociopaths who care nothing that they are bothering others and stealing the resources of third-party ISPs.
I just suffered a mailbomb attack because the owner of www.praise-jesus.tv and documented fraud artist Clark Mankin didn't like that I complained about his spam run to QWest.net. Spammers are evil, and death is too good for them.
Spam is not 'free speech'. It is theft of service and trespass to chattel. It is no more a right than is spray-painting graffitti on privately owned businesses.
I've used WineX to run WinRAR and Forté Agent, though I've since just used vanilla wine for such nongames. Still, WineX is designed with games in mind, and it's not surprising that it might not work with non game applications.
Sometimes they are slow to update the 'working' status when a game is made to run. I can run Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment under WineX, yet both have a 'working rating' of Zero.
There was also at least one game (a free DDR clone) that worked in an older version of WineX (apparently) but does not work in the current version (or at least I couldn't make it work).
You should send complaints to the ISP hosting his website. Do so in an 'unofficial' manner.
Your university's council is ill-advised. Steve Biener hasn't a legal leg to stand on even if you do block his IP at the router, because 'free speech' does not entail the right to force yourself to be heard. Tell him that, complain to his ISP and get his website shut down.
I'm currently waging a battle against http://www.praise-jesus.tv/. They seem to think that the First Amendment prevents their ISP (a non-government agency) from terminating them for theft of service and trespass to chattel (citing a court case that made no such decision). I am going to send a deluge of complaints to qwest.net until that website is a smoking crater.
As an individual, you might not notice the impact of spam. ISPs, who deal with hundreds or thousands of customers, do deal with a very real and very costly impact of spam. Spam is theft, regardless of the nature of the content, and all deliberate spammers should be KILLED.
If I got something like that in my inbox, and the election were in my district then Mike Jones would be getting my vote even if all the statements about him were true...unless Jones also spammed. In that case I would organize a write-in campaign and publically denounce both candidates as known criminals who used theft to "advertise" their campaigns.
No. It will not be a "drop in the bucket" should every politician jump on the bandwagon.
Bill Jones, who should be shot for using such a dishonest and unethical "marketing" technique, claimed that his mailing list was only of registered California voters. People in the UK got his crap. He was either lying (rule #1 with spammers), stupid (rule #3 with spammers), or both. When you start getting junk e-mail from every politicial candidate on the planet because someone claimed that your address 'was in their district', you'll be singing a different tune.
Spam must be outlawed, regardless of the content. All deliberate spammers, regardless of who they are, deserve nothing less than a horrible, brutal death.
I don't consider web ads evil. I consider e-mail advertisements pure trash regardless of the content, and I believe that senders of such trash (those who do so deliberately) deserve to be killed. People think I'm exaggerating, but I'm dead serious. Deliberate spammers should be put to death.
Slashdot Mirror
What happens when the defect is with the product itself rather than an individual instance of that product? A responsible store would accept the returns and send the entire shipment back as defective.
Does that mean that I can come over and spraypaint advertisements on your car? It's only chrome (or plastic, if you drive a Saturn).
Here's the problem:
Spammers don't care about rules.
Some of them will put ADV in the subject header. Others will ignore it and claim that they don't have to, citing 'free speach' (and even if it doesn't apply, that does not stop them from whining to anyone who will listen about it). Others will move overseas. None of this will solve the problem wherein the ISP is already footing the bill by allowing the advertisement into their system, thus letting it eat up bandwidth.
Spammers are, without exception, lying criminal scum and most of them are also exceptionally stupid. There is no reason to write pussy laws that effectively legitimize spam if it is done in some 'approved' fashion. The answer lies in making the act itself illegal. The big problem is less about your inbox and more about their actions driving up the cost of doing business for ISPs who would be quite happy never to see that crap cross into their netspace again.
Simple. You're preventing their communication. Their claim has no merit in law, but that won't stop some idiot judges from ruling in their favor.
I think that blacklisting anyone running an open relay or knowingly hosting spammers is a great idea. Unfortunately, there are people who don't quite understand why spam is a bad thing and they will bitch and whine when their e-mails come through. They will file lawsuits and clueless judges who should be pulled from the bench and shot will rule in their favour.
Personally, I'm in favour of having spammers publically tortured to death. I think that such a penalty (a legally enforced one, not a vigilante act) would really reduce the spam problem.
Well, legislation protecting spammers (preventing ISPs from kicking them offline) and/or creating legal penalties for reporting spam could make it worse.
Cumbersome? I had more trouble getting my CD-RW drive set up than I did a samba share. Under my user account I type 'mount mp3', I enter the password and I suddenly have access to a network share. It was not even remotely difficult to set up (well, getting the share activated on the other end was a bit of a challenge since I'd never set up a samba share before).
You feel dated? I remember the Atari 2600 and the NES!
Isn't the current debian openssl still at 0.9.6c? That's what I get when I apt-get it. Of coruse, I assume that the debian team backported the bugfixes...
I already started compiling 0.9.6g when I saw your post. Of course, I remembered hearing about an OpenSSL bug which had prompted me to go to e, so I suspected that I was safe. I don't even run an SSL-enabled apache server (though I do run sshd on port 443).
He specifically invited the test. He was blacklisted, he claimed that his server was not open and he invited the testers to come and attempt to relay mail through his server. When they succeeded, he claimed that they committed fraud and trespass by forging the domain name.
This was discussed in news.admin.net-abuse.email a month or so ago.
More accurately, he's threatening to sue them after inviting them to test his server. He's threatening legal action over an event that he explicitly invited.
It's like me inviting you into my home and then instantly suing you for trespassing for coming into my home.
A number of games in Japan (and even a few in the US) included 'modchip detection' code that would prevent the game from working on Playstation consoles with modchips installed. Of course, the "protection" could be easily bypassed with either a Gameshark (or similar device) or with a crack applied to a CD image of the game. The result was that gamers who used modchips solely to play legally purchased imports were out of luck while the pirates could continue on without problems. Might have even pushed a few to the 'dark side'.
I suspect that any modchip detection code in the XBox will have a similar effect.
I've been getting a lot of those lately.
In this case, however, it's because a spammer (Clark Mankin, a crook who runs speedstar.net) has been list-mail bombing me by signing up my e-mail address to hundreds of FFA links pages (and he didn't even try to hide his identity, as he used his own webpages in the signups and his IP address shows up everywhere) He has also claimed to be stalking me online.
Quite frankly, I'd like laws that would put people like him in jail.
Why should a user have to *pay* to avoid receiving unwanted messages? Why should a user have to do anything to avoid receiving unwanted e-mail that takes up resources to send and store?
The better solution is to kill the spammers. No more spam.
Spammers, like 'em or not, are just exercising their rights to free speech and to free capitalistic enterprise.
You are either an idiot or a spammer yourself. Spammers usurp the resources of third parties without permission in order to distribute and store unwanted advertising. Spammers are typically sociopaths who care nothing that they are bothering others and stealing the resources of third-party ISPs.
I just suffered a mailbomb attack because the owner of www.praise-jesus.tv and documented fraud artist Clark Mankin didn't like that I complained about his spam run to QWest.net. Spammers are evil, and death is too good for them.
Spam is not 'free speech'. It is theft of service and trespass to chattel. It is no more a right than is spray-painting graffitti on privately owned businesses.
I've used WineX to run WinRAR and Forté Agent, though I've since just used vanilla wine for such nongames. Still, WineX is designed with games in mind, and it's not surprising that it might not work with non game applications.
A GeForce 3 is "less than a GeForce 4 Ti" and it runs fine for me.
Sometimes they are slow to update the 'working' status when a game is made to run. I can run Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment under WineX, yet both have a 'working rating' of Zero.
There was also at least one game (a free DDR clone) that worked in an older version of WineX (apparently) but does not work in the current version (or at least I couldn't make it work).
Rule #0: Spam is Theft.
Rule #1: Spammers lie.
Rule #2: If in doubt, see rule #1.
Rule #3: Spammers are stoopid.
You should send complaints to the ISP hosting his website. Do so in an 'unofficial' manner.
Your university's council is ill-advised. Steve Biener hasn't a legal leg to stand on even if you do block his IP at the router, because 'free speech' does not entail the right to force yourself to be heard. Tell him that, complain to his ISP and get his website shut down.
I'm currently waging a battle against http://www.praise-jesus.tv/. They seem to think that the First Amendment prevents their ISP (a non-government agency) from terminating them for theft of service and trespass to chattel (citing a court case that made no such decision). I am going to send a deluge of complaints to qwest.net until that website is a smoking crater.
As an individual, you might not notice the impact of spam. ISPs, who deal with hundreds or thousands of customers, do deal with a very real and very costly impact of spam. Spam is theft, regardless of the nature of the content, and all deliberate spammers should be KILLED.
If I got something like that in my inbox, and the election were in my district then Mike Jones would be getting my vote even if all the statements about him were true...unless Jones also spammed. In that case I would organize a write-in campaign and publically denounce both candidates as known criminals who used theft to "advertise" their campaigns.
No. It will not be a "drop in the bucket" should every politician jump on the bandwagon.
Bill Jones, who should be shot for using such a dishonest and unethical "marketing" technique, claimed that his mailing list was only of registered California voters. People in the UK got his crap. He was either lying (rule #1 with spammers), stupid (rule #3 with spammers), or both. When you start getting junk e-mail from every politicial candidate on the planet because someone claimed that your address 'was in their district', you'll be singing a different tune.
Spam must be outlawed, regardless of the content. All deliberate spammers, regardless of who they are, deserve nothing less than a horrible, brutal death.
I don't consider web ads evil. I consider e-mail advertisements pure trash regardless of the content, and I believe that senders of such trash (those who do so deliberately) deserve to be killed. People think I'm exaggerating, but I'm dead serious. Deliberate spammers should be put to death.