I could have sworn I read or saw something that talked about how the concept of hyperlinking was actually dreamed up back in the '40's. Did anyone else hear about that?
Myself and many other anti-spammers have found joker.com to be completely unresponsive to spam complaints regarding domains they register. It would be irresponsible to support spamming services. It would be irresponsible to see someone drop their wallet and not tell that person. It would be irresponsible to witness a crime and not report it. It's not irresponsible to choose to not do business with a registrar that may not directly suppport a spamming service but doesn't do jack to stop it after it's been reported. It's a choice. You're the type of person to be against SPEWS that lists pro-spam ISPs in a DNS blacklist. You're probably the type of person to not support *any* blacklist. You're probably like a few of my users that want 80 extra pieces of spam in their inbox every week and ask me for unfiltered email. All I can say is happy pressing the D button.
They are also the exclusive registrar of Alan Ralsky, a notorious spammer. An excellent method of blocking Ralsky spam to to declare that all joker.com domains are spamming domains. I've seen it done. If you use it and than it's highly likely that soon you'll come across someone that rejects your mail as spam. Then you'll become a casuality of war, an anti-spam war.
I recently shipped overseas. The $100 insurance was there. For every $100 over that, it was like $5 or something like that. Practically nothing for anything that you want to see again.
I bought an Apple 9600/200MP (nice tower) off of eBay and had it shipped to me via UPS. I told the guy to make sure it was packaged good (this was the first CPU I'd ever purchased on auction that wasn't networking HW). The box was a little flattened when it got to me. I had a witness with me when I opened it up. The fault in this case wasn't with UPS (although they should have been more careful and lived up to their rule of repackaging packages that look like they need it). The CPU was upright in a large box. Around the box was some long styrofoam bricks. Not really big, 4" x 4" L-shape x 16" long or so. Some cardboard supports were scattered around the box too. Around that was packing peanuts and not a whole lot of them. Basically it was a jumble of packing materials. Had it been in a moving truck with nothing heavy stacked on top of it and taken across the state it would have been just fine. Unfortunatly the box had no structure to it. When weight was put on the top of it, the box and packing materials gave way and the weight was supported soley by the CPU. The CPU has a side door that opens and can be removed for easy access to the guts. The metal lining was bent out of shape. Plastic tabs and small pieces were sheered off. The back of the CPU bowed out under the weight. The PCI cards that were screwed into the back of the case were popped out of their slots. It was a mess. Fortunately nothing mechanical was damaged. That's my horror story.
I shipped a large networking chassis to a guy in Germany (from me in Kansas). The chassis was a Cabletron 6C105 and was filled with blades. The total weight was around 80lbs. It was about 3' tall by 2' wide and 1.5' deep, roughly. I managed to acquire one of the boxes that Cabletron ships those units in. It was heavy packing corners to slip over the unit's edges for support and to completely fill the space from end to end, side to side. I wrapped the chassis in small bubblewrap and stuck on the corners. Then I put it in the box on it's back, access to the cards on top. The corners gave it 3" or so of space all the way around it except for the corners where it was nice and tight. In those gaps I crammed packing peanuts. Literally. I would shove handfuls of peanuts in the bottom void, crushing some until I could force any more in there. Then I filled the sides and packed them down as tight as I could. You couldn't have put another peanut down those sides. It was tight. the box was actually bulging a bit. On the top I placed some large foam pads that were about 2" thick. I then closed the lids, packing peanuts in as tight as I could under it. I then taped it shut. I used an excessive amount of tape of course and didn't just use small pieces to cover the edges. I wrapped the thing in tape almost. It was one tightly packed box. Hell they might have been able to air drop the thing to deliver it!:-) The guy was satisfied with the shipment and I got my $$. The moral of the story is you can't pack something too tight. If you'd had a strong structure under the cardboard surface to support the weight, less damage would have occured. I imagine you packed the box the same way my 9600 was packaged. Better luck next time.
For the record before anyone replies to my message, I do understand the frustrations of chrisp. Dealing with stupid questions can quickly get on your nerves. Doing something with little to no credit also makes you question the worth of what you're doing. However if you do something good and you don't get public credit for it, you shouldn't doubt what you've done. You've already done it. If you doubt yourself after the fact when something doesn't go your way then it wasn't worth doing in the first place.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I took some time to read all of the links provided; the resignation letter and the links that came with it, the email correspondence with the packager of openosx, all of that. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I came away with a feeling that all the involved parties have serious maturity problems. One person takes another person's comments too seriously and blows up at them. One person takes a user's simple oversight and turns it into a haneous crime. chrisp and finyard in the bug tracker were just plain rude at times. Users ask dumb questions. We've all been on mailing lists and in the newsgroups. In fact we were all there at one point or another asking those same stupid questions. If people had flamed us with snide remarks, we would have probably said 'fsck this' and moved on to something else. There's no reason for chrisp to have been rude in the bug tracker, no matter how dumb of a question was asked. That's a responsibility that comes with being in a position such as that. All I can say to the parties involved is either grow up and be adults about this or meet out by the swing set at recess and settle it like the children you're acting like.
They know it went down. They know it was headed to JFK. They don't know anything else at the moment. They say they don't have any reason to say it's a terrorist attack at this point. At the moment they're calling it an accident. FYI
So to balance that ivory tower that we live in, you think it's acceptable to squash the very liberties on which this country was founded on? History does have a tendency to repeat itself. The only place to go now is outer-space.
I'm not a buff on the specifics of the HTTP protocol(s) but I believe there is something similar to the information you send about the name (identity) of your browser and the version number that shows plugins and versions. I believe that's what they are looking at. If their server detects that the connecting client meets the requirements, it serves the file. If it doesn't, it serves an alternate file. I think... I really don't know though. That's my $.02.
Perhaps it's not a lightsaber at all but a Moodsaber®. It's green when he's around big, handsome and studly Obi-Wan, blue around the other guy that doesn't swing that way, and purple around the princess....
Here's the direct link to the larger movie. NOTE: They appear to have done something funky with the web server to first check to see if you have QuickTime 5.0 before they let you download anything. If you do not have 5.0, you will not get to download the movie. It's amazing what you can accomplish with a packet sniffer though.:-) The large movie is 12.1MB. Looks more like a slideshow to me though.
I say Michael Crichton because if nothing else, a number of his movies were made into Hollywood block busters. Jurassic Park, #2, #3, Congo (although it wasn't nearly as good as the book), and more I think. Good author. Good books. Good read IMHO.
"The existence of such a technology, the amendment states, ''may seriously intrude on the privacy of these users..."
Then again binoculars and small video cameras 'may seriously intrude on the privacy...' of European people too. Are they going after things of that nature as well?
Or intentionally sped up. Perhaps the optimizations look for a program running called Quake3.exe and throw in a few optimizations to make it better. If that simple string match fails then the optimizations aren't thrown in. Makes sense to me.
I owe you something if I'm an ISP? Now just where the hell did you come up with that? I'm assuming (since you didn't say) that the "poor bastard" with their shorts down had an open relay that was used to spam me. I don't list open relays. I use the RSS for that. I report it and let MAPS test/notify. I blacklist spamming domains and very well-known pro-spam providers like Broadwing. I don't list some poor bastard because they made a config error. When I report the open relay I typically do research to find out who's machine it is (or at least the upstream) and CC them on the report. I blacklist hosts when they do nothing but spam us, Rumplestiltskin attacks, floods, etc... I also go out of my way to get their provider to do something about the, (typically it's a DSL/cable customer). It is however my hardware and my resources. I made no garuntees to my users that they would receive full, complete, and unfiltered email. I filter viruses too. They don't seem to mind that at all. I would love to find a way to let my users opt-out of our checks but there isn't such a way yet. Sendmail either accepts the message if it doesn't match, or rejects it if it does match. It doesn't give a damn who the message is going to. If there was a way to set an X-Spam tag for users that ask for non-filtered mail, I'd implement it. The only way of doing it now is with a LDA like procmail. By the time a message gets to procmail, you've already wasted your resources by fully accepting the message. All you can do then is send it back to MAILER-DAEMON@that-domain.tld. Your MTA can't reject it the way SMTP was meant to work. If someone came up with the program to do it, I'd love to do it for my users. Unfortunately it's not there yet. I would still filter all mail unless they explicitly asked for the other option (which would entail me still identifying the mail I'd reject as spam with a header tag and let the user's MUA filter it).
By that time, it's already too late. The spam has already uses your resources in bandwidth coming in, processing time to parse it and write it to disk, drive space to store it, more processing to to extract that spam and form it up in packets for delivery to the client when he/she asks for it, bandwidth exiting your system, bandwidth for them to download it. Whereas thanks to the SMTP protocol we could have rejected in right away by IP or domain name before we gave our code 200 to accept the message. Much fewer resources wasted.
Why should I tell you I'm blacklisting you? I list 10-30 spamming domains per day in my Sendmail access lists. Many are known spamming outfits like Alan Ralsky. Others are ISPs that I've reported mail abuse to and nothing was done about it or I got a reply saying "it's not our fault" or "we don't believe you". I get both of those often or nothing at all and the spam continues to flow. I see nothing wrong with not telling you that I'm not going to accept mail from you.
I had two funny thoughts. What if you wreck your car? What will it do then? Go AWOL and it and the nearby cars will revolt and take actions against their owners because they see us as the problem? My favorite idea is what if the computer observes a couple in the back seat steaming up the windows?:-) Or road head...
Slashdot Mirror
I could have sworn I read or saw something that talked about how the concept of hyperlinking was actually dreamed up back in the '40's. Did anyone else hear about that?
Myself and many other anti-spammers have found joker.com to be completely unresponsive to spam complaints regarding domains they register. It would be irresponsible to support spamming services. It would be irresponsible to see someone drop their wallet and not tell that person. It would be irresponsible to witness a crime and not report it. It's not irresponsible to choose to not do business with a registrar that may not directly suppport a spamming service but doesn't do jack to stop it after it's been reported. It's a choice. You're the type of person to be against SPEWS that lists pro-spam ISPs in a DNS blacklist. You're probably the type of person to not support *any* blacklist. You're probably like a few of my users that want 80 extra pieces of spam in their inbox every week and ask me for unfiltered email. All I can say is happy pressing the D button.
They are also the exclusive registrar of Alan Ralsky, a notorious spammer. An excellent method of blocking Ralsky spam to to declare that all joker.com domains are spamming domains. I've seen it done. If you use it and than it's highly likely that soon you'll come across someone that rejects your mail as spam. Then you'll become a casuality of war, an anti-spam war.
I think M$ should donate 100mil to eduation per year anyways. They can afford it and it would be well used.
Some moderator had his or her head up their asses again. How the hell can the first post to an article be redundant. Dumbass.
I recently shipped overseas. The $100 insurance was there. For every $100 over that, it was like $5 or something like that. Practically nothing for anything that you want to see again.
I shipped a large networking chassis to a guy in Germany (from me in Kansas). The chassis was a Cabletron 6C105 and was filled with blades. The total weight was around 80lbs. It was about 3' tall by 2' wide and 1.5' deep, roughly. I managed to acquire one of the boxes that Cabletron ships those units in. It was heavy packing corners to slip over the unit's edges for support and to completely fill the space from end to end, side to side. I wrapped the chassis in small bubblewrap and stuck on the corners. Then I put it in the box on it's back, access to the cards on top. The corners gave it 3" or so of space all the way around it except for the corners where it was nice and tight. In those gaps I crammed packing peanuts. Literally. I would shove handfuls of peanuts in the bottom void, crushing some until I could force any more in there. Then I filled the sides and packed them down as tight as I could. You couldn't have put another peanut down those sides. It was tight. the box was actually bulging a bit. On the top I placed some large foam pads that were about 2" thick. I then closed the lids, packing peanuts in as tight as I could under it. I then taped it shut. I used an excessive amount of tape of course and didn't just use small pieces to cover the edges. I wrapped the thing in tape almost. It was one tightly packed box. Hell they might have been able to air drop the thing to deliver it! :-) The guy was satisfied with the shipment and I got my $$. The moral of the story is you can't pack something too tight. If you'd had a strong structure under the cardboard surface to support the weight, less damage would have occured. I imagine you packed the box the same way my 9600 was packaged. Better luck next time.
For the record before anyone replies to my message, I do understand the frustrations of chrisp. Dealing with stupid questions can quickly get on your nerves. Doing something with little to no credit also makes you question the worth of what you're doing. However if you do something good and you don't get public credit for it, you shouldn't doubt what you've done. You've already done it. If you doubt yourself after the fact when something doesn't go your way then it wasn't worth doing in the first place.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I took some time to read all of the links provided; the resignation letter and the links that came with it, the email correspondence with the packager of openosx, all of that. I'll probably get flamed for this, but I came away with a feeling that all the involved parties have serious maturity problems. One person takes another person's comments too seriously and blows up at them. One person takes a user's simple oversight and turns it into a haneous crime. chrisp and finyard in the bug tracker were just plain rude at times. Users ask dumb questions. We've all been on mailing lists and in the newsgroups. In fact we were all there at one point or another asking those same stupid questions. If people had flamed us with snide remarks, we would have probably said 'fsck this' and moved on to something else. There's no reason for chrisp to have been rude in the bug tracker, no matter how dumb of a question was asked. That's a responsibility that comes with being in a position such as that. All I can say to the parties involved is either grow up and be adults about this or meet out by the swing set at recess and settle it like the children you're acting like.
What kind of support for non-x86 architectures do you envision (PPC, Sparc, Alpha, etc..)?
And how did I get an offtopic out of this? Offtopic? WTF is offtopic about what I wrote? I stated what I knew.
Insightful, not really but it was a positive vote. Thanks.
Overrated? Well, I suppose so. That's an opinion and you're entitled to it. Offtopic and redundant is just wrong.
They know it went down. They know it was headed to JFK. They don't know anything else at the moment. They say they don't have any reason to say it's a terrorist attack at this point. At the moment they're calling it an accident. FYI
So to balance that ivory tower that we live in, you think it's acceptable to squash the very liberties on which this country was founded on? History does have a tendency to repeat itself. The only place to go now is outer-space.
Flamebait? I hate it when newbie on crack get mod points.
I'm not a buff on the specifics of the HTTP protocol(s) but I believe there is something similar to the information you send about the name (identity) of your browser and the version number that shows plugins and versions. I believe that's what they are looking at. If their server detects that the connecting client meets the requirements, it serves the file. If it doesn't, it serves an alternate file. I think... I really don't know though. That's my $.02.
Perhaps it's not a lightsaber at all but a Moodsaber®. It's green when he's around big, handsome and studly Obi-Wan, blue around the other guy that doesn't swing that way, and purple around the princess....
Here's the direct link to the larger movie. NOTE: They appear to have done something funky with the web server to first check to see if you have QuickTime 5.0 before they let you download anything. If you do not have 5.0, you will not get to download the movie. It's amazing what you can accomplish with a packet sniffer though. :-) The large movie is 12.1MB. Looks more like a slideshow to me though.
I say Michael Crichton because if nothing else, a number of his movies were made into Hollywood block busters. Jurassic Park, #2, #3, Congo (although it wasn't nearly as good as the book), and more I think. Good author. Good books. Good read IMHO.
Then again binoculars and small video cameras 'may seriously intrude on the privacy...' of European people too. Are they going after things of that nature as well?
Or intentionally sped up. Perhaps the optimizations look for a program running called Quake3.exe and throw in a few optimizations to make it better. If that simple string match fails then the optimizations aren't thrown in. Makes sense to me.
J
By that time, it's already too late. The spam has already uses your resources in bandwidth coming in, processing time to parse it and write it to disk, drive space to store it, more processing to to extract that spam and form it up in packets for delivery to the client when he/she asks for it, bandwidth exiting your system, bandwidth for them to download it. Whereas thanks to the SMTP protocol we could have rejected in right away by IP or domain name before we gave our code 200 to accept the message. Much fewer resources wasted.
If you don't like it as a customer, take your business elsewhere. Simple as that.
Why should I tell you I'm blacklisting you? I list 10-30 spamming domains per day in my Sendmail access lists. Many are known spamming outfits like Alan Ralsky. Others are ISPs that I've reported mail abuse to and nothing was done about it or I got a reply saying "it's not our fault" or "we don't believe you". I get both of those often or nothing at all and the spam continues to flow. I see nothing wrong with not telling you that I'm not going to accept mail from you.
I had two funny thoughts. What if you wreck your car? What will it do then? Go AWOL and it and the nearby cars will revolt and take actions against their owners because they see us as the problem? My favorite idea is what if the computer observes a couple in the back seat steaming up the windows? :-) Or road head...