Once again, proving the quickest way to spread something is to try to squash it with corporate jackboots, I just found about this cool agent clone and grabbed the RPM. Thanks, man, you're the greatest:>.
I know how the service I'm using, SpamCop, makes money.
There's a service (of which I'm a satisfied customer) called SpamCop, that parses spam headers (including addresses hidden in JavaScript, decimal IP's, etc.) for you and makes it painless to report spam. Sites hosted by legitimate ISP's referred to in a spam to me have a life expectancy measurable in minutes from the time I receive the spam. There are both metered subscriptions and a free (with a 4 second JavaScript countdown nag) one available.
<humor>BTW, spamrecycle.com has an anti-spam petition . I hope it doesn't involve forwarding the petition to ten friends, who will forward it to ten more, and . . . </humor>
The zeroknowledge.com thing would be pretty cool, but they don't anonymize connections to arbitrary ports (e.g. 6699, 6346). For that matter, they don't anonymize ftp connections. Only http, IRC (no DCC), telnet, ssh, nntp (post only, no anonymous reading), pop, and smtp. I imagine the reason for this is to avoid being used for high bandwidth applications like moving copyright infringed software and music anonymously.
Not to say that some clever people couldn't make a gnutella-like protocol that tunnels over http, with the added benefit that networks find it distasteful to filter all http packets at the routers:>.
Yep, the same thing induced me to buy one a couple of months ago that without instant gratification I would not have. And now that people know it can be done, I'm sure we're not the only ones that would prefer not to drag ourselves to a meatspace music store to buy a CD.
And I, for one, won't be buying into any bullshit locked music formats.
In the tradition later followed by the one-click patent and other disingenous lawsuits, SEA misused the courts to stop Phil Katz from using.ARC as a file extension. Never mind that "ARC" had been used as an abbreviation for archive for over a decade prior in mainframe systems (and was a trademark of an unrelated company, Datapoint, since the 1970's).
The BBS community turned up its collective nose at SEA, forcing them out of business and into obscurity, where they and the scum like them (e.g. Amazon, eToys) belong. This caused the crowning.ZIP the king of compressed file formats in the BBS world.
Damn, and I thought I was cynical:>! Really, I can't imagine it being a publicity stunt--someone would swing if it turned out to be. Wonder if the theft can still be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act:>?
Cool--this means that Microsoft is very unlikely to put a clause in their EULA making it illegal to run their products in a VM. (A measure, which, unfortunately, would end up enforceable under the UCITA)
That sure does sound like a mitigating fact for the administration's action, and if I were the one who ordered this, I'd make sure that it was known far and wide these students had already been given a chance.
While it doesn't fix the problem that led the students to do this in the first place, the fact that they'd been warned pretty much kills my reason for ranting on the subject. Screwing up, getting caught once and repenting is one thing--screwing up once, getting caught once, thumbing one's nose at authority, then doing it again is stupidity.
OK State's administration will pay for this later when they try to recruit students. I would love to be a fly on the wall watching their admissions people try to explain to high school seniors and parents why their administration chose to turn these students over to the sherrif for what was essentially a harmless prank.
I wouldn't recommend that any intelligent student go to or any parent send his/her children to an institution that demonstrated such an unwillingness to handle this kind of matter internally--without involving police, judges, criminal records, and destroying these students' futures.
This isn't a direct analogy, but imagine if CMU gave up their students to the RIAA and didn't <wink, wink> discipline <nudge, nudge> them for the RIAA to sue and/or prosecute as they liked.
Re:A slashdot-like moderation system for USENET
on
Is Usenet Dying?
·
· Score: 2
This sounds a great deal like the Grouplens collaborative Usenet filtering project from 1996. It was pretty cool--you had a patched newsreader and rated posts. You could set a threshold, just like on/.
This sort of thing will fly for a short while, until most students become cynical enough to realize that academe is competing for students in a market.
Students can help fix these kinds of problems by speaking out, and letting the coveted first-time freshmen find schools that don't perform Gestapo monitoring on their campus networks.
Clemson censors? Write to the administators at South Carolina State and see what they do before you apply for admission at either one. If bright students avoid schools that censor, they'll either stop or see their average ACT score and other measurable metrics go down the tubes.
I think they didn't want to provide a server that could send files using the Punter protocol, or decide whether to use.SEQ or.PRG.
Or it could have something to do with the difference in character sets--like Atari ASCII (ATASCII), CBM-ASCII diverges from the true ASCII character set. (There is no Atari 400/800 client either--but that might be because the XE series induced some minor quirks.)
These character set anomalies could be problematic in things like Base64 encoding, which is sensitive to differences in case, as well as facilitating cheating by rogue 8-bit hackers (Also precluding open source clients).
Except for the regrettable fact that telemarketers have a talent for placing calls from outbound call centers in areas that show up as "out of area." (This avoids the stigma of having blocked caller ID.)
I regret that I can't find a citation, but I've heard of at least one instance of RBOCs marketing caller-ID proof outbound lines to telemarketers. Anecdotally, this certainly seems true here.
There are countermeasures against telemarketers, just as there are for banner ad tracking: Telemarketing Scum Page technical data. That link contains references to patents on call progress detection and tips on foiling predictive dialers.
Re:One step closer to a Linux port?
on
MP3.com's Beam-It
·
· Score: 1
It wasn't a reference to DeCSS; it was a reference to the idea producers of software may hold that those who use Linux might be more predisposed to reverse engineering the protocols than their Win32 counterparts.
You just described what MCI Mail did around 1983. For $2 (IIRC), you could compose a message electronically and have it delivered via the good old USPS to any U.S. address. I actually held an account on this service long enough to try it out--they laser printed the letter (a big deal back then)!
Re:One step closer to a Linux port?
on
MP3.com's Beam-It
·
· Score: 1
They won't release a Linux port because we Linux users are all 31337 n3t hax0rs who will break the protocol used to check to see if you own the CD:>.
What you speak of has already been envisioned. It's called SET, for Secure Electronic Transactions. It uses cryptography (both public key and symmetric) and X.509 certificates to allow a merchant to accept a credit card and get paid without ever knowing the credit card number. The bank can also pay the charge without ever knowing what the customer ordered (say, a Beowulf cluster of VIC-20's running FreeBSD, a Natalie Portman statuette, and a dozen packets of instant grits), but retains a one way hash of that order information in case of a customer dispute.
An overview and links to more detail are available at SETCo's site. (SETCo is an organization promoting the standard.)
This standards effort started in 1996 at the behest of MasterCard and Visa, apparently sometime shortly after someone there first made the observation that anyone handling a credit card has access to the number.
Thank you--I was just going to hunt for the AARD article. How anyone could read and understand this and come away thinking MS didn't deliberately disable competing DOS versions, I do not know.
Lower rates for using this device == surcharge for not using it. It won't be "voluntary" forever, unless competition works to favor the companies that don't require it (insurance being a heavily government-regulated oligopoly, I don't see that as too likely). Eventually, only "the rich" will be able to afford the state required mandatory liability insurance without it.
Slashdot Mirror
Once again, proving the quickest way to spread something is to try to squash it with corporate jackboots, I just found about this cool agent clone and grabbed the RPM. Thanks, man, you're the greatest :>.
I know how the service I'm using, SpamCop, makes money.
There's a service (of which I'm a satisfied customer) called SpamCop, that parses spam headers (including addresses hidden in JavaScript, decimal IP's, etc.) for you and makes it painless to report spam. Sites hosted by legitimate ISP's referred to in a spam to me have a life expectancy measurable in minutes from the time I receive the spam. There are both metered subscriptions and a free (with a 4 second JavaScript countdown nag) one available.
<humor>BTW, spamrecycle.com has an anti-spam petition . I hope it doesn't involve forwarding the petition to ten friends, who will forward it to ten more, and . . . </humor>
You said "The best way to get shot is to pull out a gun." Nice bromide. Prove it with numbers.
The zeroknowledge.com thing would be pretty cool, but they don't anonymize connections to arbitrary ports (e.g. 6699, 6346). For that matter, they don't anonymize ftp connections. Only http, IRC (no DCC), telnet, ssh, nntp (post only, no anonymous reading), pop, and smtp. I imagine the reason for this is to avoid being used for high bandwidth applications like moving copyright infringed software and music anonymously.
:>.
Not to say that some clever people couldn't make a gnutella-like protocol that tunnels over http, with the added benefit that networks find it distasteful to filter all http packets at the routers
Or they'll think "These are collectible now!" then take it, and hawk it on eBay with an ad that says "!!! ULTRA R@RE TRS-80, NR, Visa/MC" :>.
Uh, dude--Napster isn't non-profit. At least not intentionally.
Yep, the same thing induced me to buy one a couple of months ago that without instant gratification I would not have. And now that people know it can be done, I'm sure we're not the only ones that would prefer not to drag ourselves to a meatspace music store to buy a CD.
And I, for one, won't be buying into any bullshit locked music formats.
Thanks--I was starting to question my sanity, not being able to find a mention in the episode archive, and all!
Anyone remember the JURYVAC robot jury on the Jetsons in the episode in which George was on trial? So when are those food replicators coming?!
In the tradition later followed by the one-click patent and other disingenous lawsuits, SEA misused the courts to stop Phil Katz from using .ARC as a file extension. Never mind that "ARC" had been used as an abbreviation for archive for over a decade prior in mainframe systems (and was a trademark of an unrelated company, Datapoint, since the 1970's).
.ZIP the king of compressed file formats in the BBS world.
The BBS community turned up its collective nose at SEA, forcing them out of business and into obscurity, where they and the scum like them (e.g. Amazon, eToys) belong. This caused the crowning
RIP Phil Katz.
Another possibility is the ugly nasty bad PR they'd get from dragging a 19 year old college student into court.
Damn, and I thought I was cynical :>! Really, I can't imagine it being a publicity stunt--someone would swing if it turned out to be. Wonder if the theft can still be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act :>?
Cool--this means that Microsoft is very unlikely to put a clause in their EULA making it illegal to run their products in a VM. (A measure, which, unfortunately, would end up enforceable under the UCITA)
That sure does sound like a mitigating fact for the administration's action, and if I were the one who ordered this, I'd make sure that it was known far and wide these students had already been given a chance.
While it doesn't fix the problem that led the students to do this in the first place, the fact that they'd been warned pretty much kills my reason for ranting on the subject. Screwing up, getting caught once and repenting is one thing--screwing up once, getting caught once, thumbing one's nose at authority, then doing it again is stupidity.
OK State's administration will pay for this later when they try to recruit students. I would love to be a fly on the wall watching their admissions people try to explain to high school seniors and parents why their administration chose to turn these students over to the sherrif for what was essentially a harmless prank.
I wouldn't recommend that any intelligent student go to or any parent send his/her children to an institution that demonstrated such an unwillingness to handle this kind of matter internally--without involving police, judges, criminal records, and destroying these students' futures.
This isn't a direct analogy, but imagine if CMU gave up their students to the RIAA and didn't <wink, wink> discipline <nudge, nudge> them for the RIAA to sue and/or prosecute as they liked.
This sounds a great deal like the Grouplens collaborative Usenet filtering project from 1996. It was pretty cool--you had a patched newsreader and rated posts. You could set a threshold, just like on /.
This sort of thing will fly for a short while, until most students become cynical enough to realize that academe is competing for students in a market.
Students can help fix these kinds of problems by speaking out, and letting the coveted first-time freshmen find schools that don't perform Gestapo monitoring on their campus networks.
Clemson censors? Write to the administators at South Carolina State and see what they do before you apply for admission at either one. If bright students avoid schools that censor, they'll either stop or see their average ACT score and other measurable metrics go down the tubes.
I think they didn't want to provide a server that could send files using the Punter protocol, or decide whether to use .SEQ or .PRG.
Or it could have something to do with the difference in character sets--like Atari ASCII (ATASCII), CBM-ASCII diverges from the true ASCII character set. (There is no Atari 400/800 client either--but that might be because the XE series induced some minor quirks.)
These character set anomalies could be problematic in things like Base64 encoding, which is sensitive to differences in case, as well as facilitating cheating by rogue 8-bit hackers (Also precluding open source clients).
Except for the regrettable fact that telemarketers have a talent for placing calls from outbound call centers in areas that show up as "out of area." (This avoids the stigma of having blocked caller ID.)
I regret that I can't find a citation, but I've heard of at least one instance of RBOCs marketing caller-ID proof outbound lines to telemarketers. Anecdotally, this certainly seems true here.
There are countermeasures against telemarketers, just as there are for banner ad tracking: Telemarketing Scum Page technical data. That link contains references to patents on call progress detection and tips on foiling predictive dialers.
It wasn't a reference to DeCSS; it was a reference to the idea producers of software may hold that those who use Linux might be more predisposed to reverse engineering the protocols than their Win32 counterparts.
You just described what MCI Mail did around 1983. For $2 (IIRC), you could compose a message electronically and have it delivered via the good old USPS to any U.S. address. I actually held an account on this service long enough to try it out--they laser printed the letter (a big deal back then)!
They won't release a Linux port because we Linux users are all 31337 n3t hax0rs who will break the protocol used to check to see if you own the CD :>.
An overview and links to more detail are available at SETCo's site. (SETCo is an organization promoting the standard.)
This standards effort started in 1996 at the behest of MasterCard and Visa, apparently sometime shortly after someone there first made the observation that anyone handling a credit card has access to the number.
Thank you--I was just going to hunt for the AARD article. How anyone could read and understand this and come away thinking MS didn't deliberately disable competing DOS versions, I do not know.
Lower rates for using this device == surcharge for not using it. It won't be "voluntary" forever, unless competition works to favor the companies that don't require it (insurance being a heavily government-regulated oligopoly, I don't see that as too likely). Eventually, only "the rich" will be able to afford the state required mandatory liability insurance without it.