I think there's a fundamental difference between the problems IPV6 is trying to solve and what any "SMTP2" solution is trying to solve.
IPV6 will solve the underlying problem of running out of IP space.
"SMTP2" would NOT solve the spam problem, because it's not a technical problem, IMHO. Spammers would move over to "SMTP2" eventually. They'd just have to find that one little flaw or feature and they'd be back exploiting it like they're exploiting weaknesses in SMTP now.
If widespread adoption of "SMTP2" takes anywhere near the amount IPV6 adoption is taken, it's not going to work. Spammers would have 5 years to study the new technology and develop solutions to get their crap across the new protocol.
By the time "SMTP2" is in place and used by everybody, the spam problem would no longer be what it is now and we'd be back in the cat-and-mouse game with spammers and their spamware techniques.
All the "SMTP2" solutions I've seen would make normal Email communication between non-spammers much more difficult. I think that's something that should be avoided, even at the cost of not solving the spam problem using technology solutions.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
SMTP is here to stay and it won't change within any reasonable time period. It's unfortunate that it's so unsecure, but that's just the way it is.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first so that they won't be able to run away while you slowly torture them to death.
"The member list doesn't look too anti-spam to me."
That's damn right. It's the Who's Who of spam-for-hire operations. Every single one of them spams. It's just that they claim their spam is not spam.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot the knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
EmarketsAmerica.org is run by an incompetent baffoon as a front to some of the sleaziest spammers in existance.
They've been harrassing the people named in the lawsuit for months, if not years now, and this is just their latest method of doing so.
What's disturbing about this harrassment in particular, is that they're using tax payers' money by abusing the US courts as a means to go after their arch-enemies, the anti-spammers.
The actual filing papers can be found from a mirror (PDF file).
Read it, and have a wonderful belly laugh over it. It's so insanely inaccurate, rambling and straightout kooky that no judge is going to take it seriously.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot the knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
As long as they are not blocking Google or otherwise limiting its usefulness within China, I simply do not see what the problem is.
You, me or anyone else have no information about what the Chinese Government intends to do with the search engine and whether that will include widescale censorship or other totalitarian tactics.
Until I see evidence pointing otherwise, I am going to assume that the search engine is what it says it is, just a search engine.
I don't understand why they would need to inject filtering or other censorship tools within the search engine when they reportedly already have wide capabilities to do so in the net infrastructure level.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill double standards
If the Chinese want to use Google, they will. If they want to use the new Government organized search engine, they will.
The one that acquires most users wins. Open competition at its best. You should cheer competition in the marketplace.
Unless, of course, the Chinese governments artificially changes the odds by blocking Google or Google's Chinese partner. That may or may not happen. To my knowledge they are not blocking Google at the moment.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill double standards
I've been working with a lot of vendors on projects, IBM, BEA, ATG, TIBCO, etc.
You always find bugs in the products you use. Most of the time you have to develop a fix yourself, because the vendor's release schedule will not enable you to wait for the official fix. It's just good vendor relations to send the fix to the vendor.
I did that exactly for the same reason Merrill Lynch does that, to get better software.
The best way to get the sociopaths to understand the concequences of their actions is to strip them of their anonymity and watch in awe as the Internet community acts to punish the thieves.
I'm all for vigilante actions, if the laws can't protect us.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
It's mostly legal, but highly unethical, since it involves cost-shifting and most of times hijacking open relays and other unsecured resources to send out that crap. And it annoys 99% of all recipients.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death
If all you get from China is spam, why not block the entire country?
Most of the businesses outside of China have no need to get Email from China at all. There is no bias here, just a practical anti-spamming technique that works MUCH better than any boneheaded challenge-response system.
The problem with challenge-response systems is that it is yet another anti-spam measure that causes the innocents to spend more time fighting spam.
Spamming is not a technical problem, but a sociological problem. All technical solutions I've seen impose a burden on the victims, some more so than others. Spamming will cease to be a problem when ISPs start taking the problem seriously, when victims can sue spammers directly and when sanctions against spammers become strong enough to deter the sociopaths. It will take jail sentences or VERY stiff monetary penalties to do so. The new anti-spam bill in California is a step into the right direction (the only problem with that is that it still would allow "labeled" spam).
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember, knees first so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death
Slashdot Mirror
...are just as bad as most analogies.
What is the difference between asking ISPs to cut spammers and sking ISPs to cut users, who set up porn websites?
Well, the latter is not against the TOS of the ISP. The first one is.
The latter is not threatening to destroy Email. The first one is.
The latter is not stealing. The first one is.
But I guess this one's just another personal opinion of an EFF Director, and not representitive of EFF's opinion on these issues...
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
I think there's a fundamental difference between the problems IPV6 is trying to solve and what any "SMTP2" solution is trying to solve.
IPV6 will solve the underlying problem of running out of IP space.
"SMTP2" would NOT solve the spam problem, because it's not a technical problem, IMHO. Spammers would move over to "SMTP2" eventually. They'd just have to find that one little flaw or feature and they'd be back exploiting it like they're exploiting weaknesses in SMTP now.
If widespread adoption of "SMTP2" takes anywhere near the amount IPV6 adoption is taken, it's not going to work. Spammers would have 5 years to study the new technology and develop solutions to get their crap across the new protocol.
By the time "SMTP2" is in place and used by everybody, the spam problem would no longer be what it is now and we'd be back in the cat-and-mouse game with spammers and their spamware techniques.
All the "SMTP2" solutions I've seen would make normal Email communication between non-spammers much more difficult. I think that's something that should be avoided, even at the cost of not solving the spam problem using technology solutions.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
SMTP is here to stay and it won't change within any reasonable time period. It's unfortunate that it's so unsecure, but that's just the way it is.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first so that they won't be able to run away while you slowly torture them to death.
The only solution is to make ISPs hosting spammers accountable for the spammers' abuse.
If there are spammers, there will be spam.
They *will* find a way around this Earthlink system.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first so that they can not run away while you slowly torture them to death
"The member list doesn't look too anti-spam to me."
That's damn right. It's the Who's Who of spam-for-hire operations. Every single one of them spams. It's just that they claim their spam is not spam.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot the knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
EmarketsAmerica.org is run by an incompetent baffoon as a front to some of the sleaziest spammers in existance.
They've been harrassing the people named in the lawsuit for months, if not years now, and this is just their latest method of doing so.
What's disturbing about this harrassment in particular, is that they're using tax payers' money by abusing the US courts as a means to go after their arch-enemies, the anti-spammers.
The actual filing papers can be found from a mirror (PDF file).
Read it, and have a wonderful belly laugh over it. It's so insanely inaccurate, rambling and straightout kooky that no judge is going to take it seriously.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot the knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
Simply amazing.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill corruption
http://www.riaa.org/About-Members-1.cfm
Looks like 50:1 on Indies vs. Big 5 in there...
Though I'm not sure how many of the members are subsidiaries of the major labels.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill RIAA
1. provide access to the source to vendors
2. have them fix bugs
3. profit
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill Microsoft
Yes, I know they blocked Google last year.
As long as they are not blocking Google or otherwise limiting its usefulness within China, I simply do not see what the problem is.
You, me or anyone else have no information about what the Chinese Government intends to do with the search engine and whether that will include widescale censorship or other totalitarian tactics.
Until I see evidence pointing otherwise, I am going to assume that the search engine is what it says it is, just a search engine.
I don't understand why they would need to inject filtering or other censorship tools within the search engine when they reportedly already have wide capabilities to do so in the net infrastructure level.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill double standards
I don't understand what the big deal is.
If the Chinese want to use Google, they will. If they want to use the new Government organized search engine, they will.
The one that acquires most users wins. Open competition at its best. You should cheer competition in the marketplace.
Unless, of course, the Chinese governments artificially changes the odds by blocking Google or Google's Chinese partner. That may or may not happen. To my knowledge they are not blocking Google at the moment.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill double standards
I've been working with a lot of vendors on projects, IBM, BEA, ATG, TIBCO, etc.
You always find bugs in the products you use. Most of the time you have to develop a fix yourself, because the vendor's release schedule will not enable you to wait for the official fix. It's just good vendor relations to send the fix to the vendor.
I did that exactly for the same reason Merrill Lynch does that, to get better software.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill bugs
Hahhaha, pot-kettle-black coward.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammer apologists
Well, if you haven't seen the website yet, why are you commenting on what's on it or not?
It has nothing that could even remotely be interpreted as inciting harrassing the spammer scum.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers
Hahhaha, why don't you report me to my employer.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammer apologists
Look at what crawled from under the rock.
So, which spammer scum are you anyway?
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill anonymous coward spammer scum
What wrongs?
Yu didn't do anything but post his contact information on the web. His website didn't incite harrassing him nor did he personally ever spam him.
You might recall that even the abortion clinic doctor hitlist was considered legal...
What the good Doctor Fatburn (that's his nickname) is doing here is nothing but a SLAPP suit. A very typical spammer tactic.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers
The best way to get the sociopaths to understand the concequences of their actions is to strip them of their anonymity and watch in awe as the Internet community acts to punish the thieves.
I'm all for vigilante actions, if the laws can't protect us.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death.
Spam is such an easy ethical problem.
It's mostly legal, but highly unethical, since it involves cost-shifting and most of times hijacking open relays and other unsecured resources to send out that crap. And it annoys 99% of all recipients.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember to shoot knees first, so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death
We can soon start cancelling these as spam.
wasn't that just a fun April's fool. Had to post it three times.
If all you get from China is spam, why not block the entire country?
Most of the businesses outside of China have no need to get Email from China at all. There is no bias here, just a practical anti-spamming technique that works MUCH better than any boneheaded challenge-response system.
The problem with challenge-response systems is that it is yet another anti-spam measure that causes the innocents to spend more time fighting spam.
Spamming is not a technical problem, but a sociological problem. All technical solutions I've seen impose a burden on the victims, some more so than others. Spamming will cease to be a problem when ISPs start taking the problem seriously, when victims can sue spammers directly and when sanctions against spammers become strong enough to deter the sociopaths. It will take jail sentences or VERY stiff monetary penalties to do so. The new anti-spam bill in California is a step into the right direction (the only problem with that is that it still would allow "labeled" spam).
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers. Remember, knees first so that they can't run away while you slowly torture them to death
I'm gonna give a big FU for the vailed attempt to paint anti-spammers as terrorists. Nice going Selanit.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill spammers
Sex? Duh, there're people on this planet who don't have sex. Think bigger!
:)
Me...I'm going to patent using an organic mechanism for exhaling and inhaling gases.
I'm then going to have Bill Gates pay me for breathing. Or, alternatively, some anti-MS pays me to not license the patent technology to Bill Gates
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill the US Patent Office
What's wrong with that article? Repeats some of the paragraphs two or three times.
Proletariat of the world, unite to kill bad proofreaders