"-it has a recoil of 90/lbs: to get an idea for comparison, i searched google for m16 recoil statisticts (very tough to find)"
I'm not certain of the exact recoil of an M16 (very light) but my 7mm Remington magnum is 19 pounds. Most people consider the 7mm Rem. mag to have a fairly stiff recoil (I got it cheap because the last guy couldn't stand the recoil). I can stand about 12-14 shots at the range before I begin to flinch. I don't think most of us would fire a weapon with a 90 pound recoil more than once. Here's a link to reference recoil of common calibers:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm
Notice that the.460 Weatherby mag is close to 90 pounds.
Here's a link to video of a.460 Weatherby in action:
http://www.accuratereloading.com/videos.html (l ook for John and the 460 Weatherby)
Sustaining fire in combat with a weapon dispensing this much recoil would be all but impossible for most of us. A muzzle brake would reduce the recoil energy considerably but still....
"I don't think a simple law in some single country will ever fix the problem."
You are correct but if something like this (spam marking) were implemented in the US (hopefully other countries too) it should alleviate some of the problem. This, in addition to your idea would put a huge dent in the spam business.
Very good points and possibly a good solution but I believe the spammers will just target all of the smaller mail domains with little extra effort. Spam will never go away. Most people don't want it. Wouldn't it be nice if all UCE's were required to be marked in a very plain and simple manner AND this marking must not be obscured, altered or omitted. Mail could be filtered at the ISP level at the customers request. If this were to come about people who omitted or altered this mark or circumvented filtering in any way could be prosecuted (or at least the originating domains blacklisted). I'm willing to bet that "spam free" mail servers would spring up everywhere. Mail servers everywhere would begin to refuse to deliver any marked as spam mail. Do you disagree with the court's ruling? Or are you just defending other bulk emailers right to do business?
"Who opens this shit anyways? What's the point? What are they gaining?"
I understand that the spammers send so many of these emails that even with an incredibly low response rate, they make money. I could open a business and make money too if I could use everyone else resources.
"And people have chosen to pay this money for the service."
What service are you referring to? I pay my ISP for mail service for my personal use not for people to send me garbage that I don't want. My ISP pays somebody for bandwidth to be used by their customers. Very few people want this type of email or commercial phone messages. It wastes resources (money). The only people who defend these practices are profiting from it. I suppose that if I was making my living by wasting others money, I would also view this from a different perspective.
No but many of us are charged for the minutes of airtime used by telemarketers.
"If I was paying someone to provide a service of throwing messages wrapped round bricks through my car window, I wouldn't complain if they did this. I would have cause to complain if they didn't."
What the hell does this mean?
The post you are replying to is pointing out that SPAMMERS and telemarketers are costing people money.
"You may not like it, but he has a right to advertise."
Spammers have the right to conduct their business if they follow local laws. He did not, I dare say most do not.
"If you don't want to receive his advertisements, then stop being so tight fisted and get some blocking software."
Every person who uses email should spend money to stop UNWANTED UCE's? That seems a bit ridiculous. What blocking software would you recommend to the ISP that got stuck with all the undeliverable mail?
I would like to see (it will never happen), legislation requiring all UCE's to contain a single unique identifier that may not be obscured in any way shape or form that would allow this garbage to be filtered at the ISP by customer request.
"All this company had to do was publically list all valid email addresses."
I don't want my email address listed in any such list and I should not have to "opt-out" of any such list. Are you in the SPAM business?
Amen! If you build or repair (no matter how minor) a computer for family or friends, their computer becomes your "child" that YOU are responsible for all repairs/upkeep for the next eighteen years.
I have two 486 DX4's running 2.2.20. They work fine like they are. Updating from 2.2.x to 2.4.x would be a pain the butt. I'll leave them as is until they die of old age.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, they cut off the phalanx.....
20 billion so far.
_ 94 1.html
http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030416
But 2 million is a drop in the bucket.
I wish.
Yes, that's my favorite. I like to "give it a shot" once and probably only once.
"-it has a recoil of 90/lbs: to get an idea for comparison, i searched google for m16 recoil statisticts (very tough to find)"
.460 Weatherby mag is close to 90 pounds.
.460 Weatherby in action:
l ook for John and the 460 Weatherby)
I'm not certain of the exact recoil of an M16 (very light) but my 7mm Remington magnum is 19 pounds. Most people consider the 7mm Rem. mag to have a fairly stiff recoil (I got it cheap because the last guy couldn't stand the recoil). I can stand about 12-14 shots at the range before I begin to flinch. I don't think most of us would fire a weapon with a 90 pound recoil more than once. Here's a link to reference recoil of common calibers:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/recoil_table.htm
Notice that the
Here's a link to video of a
http://www.accuratereloading.com/videos.html
(
Sustaining fire in combat with a weapon dispensing this much recoil would be all but impossible for most of us. A muzzle brake would reduce the recoil energy considerably but still....
"Cure disease? Explore space? Feed the hungry?"
Noble causes indeed but this is being developed by the military who's job IS to kill people.
"That is a damn shame for sure. But I wouldn't go out driving around in vehicles in the middle of a war zone in the dead of night..."
Don't confuse the issue with logic.
First, great idea.
"I don't think a simple law in some single country will ever fix the problem."
You are correct but if something like this (spam marking) were implemented in the US (hopefully other countries too) it should alleviate some of the problem. This, in addition to your idea would put a huge dent in the spam business.
Very good points and possibly a good solution but I believe the spammers will just target all of the smaller mail domains with little extra effort.
Spam will never go away. Most people don't want it. Wouldn't it be nice if all UCE's were required to be marked in a very plain and simple manner AND this marking must not be obscured, altered or omitted. Mail could be filtered at the ISP level at the customers request. If this were to come about people who omitted or altered this mark or circumvented filtering in any way could be prosecuted (or at least the originating domains blacklisted). I'm willing to bet that "spam free" mail servers would spring up everywhere. Mail servers everywhere would begin to refuse to deliver any marked as spam mail. Do you disagree with the court's ruling? Or are you just defending other bulk emailers right to do business?
"You chose to have a phone. You knew the risks when you signed up. It's your choice whether to pay for these messages, not mine."
I can only hope that one day you smoke a turd in hell.
"Who opens this shit anyways? What's the point? What are they gaining?"
I understand that the spammers send so many of these emails that even with an incredibly low response rate, they make money. I could open a business and make money too if I could use everyone else resources.
"And people have chosen to pay this money for the service."
What service are you referring to? I pay my ISP for mail service for my personal use not for people to send me garbage that I don't want. My ISP pays somebody for bandwidth to be used by their customers. Very few people want this type of email or commercial phone messages. It wastes resources (money). The only people who defend these practices are profiting from it. I suppose that if I was making my living by wasting others money, I would also view this from a different perspective.
"!? Mobile phone spam breaks the phone?"
No but many of us are charged for the minutes of airtime used by telemarketers.
"If I was paying someone to provide a service of throwing messages wrapped round bricks through my car window, I wouldn't complain if they did this. I would have cause to complain if they didn't."
What the hell does this mean?
The post you are replying to is pointing out that SPAMMERS and telemarketers are costing people money.
"You may not like it, but he has a right to advertise."
Spammers have the right to conduct their business if they follow local laws. He did not, I dare say most do not.
"If you don't want to receive his advertisements, then stop being so tight fisted and get some blocking software."
Every person who uses email should spend money to stop UNWANTED UCE's? That seems a bit ridiculous. What blocking software would you recommend to the ISP that got stuck with all the undeliverable mail?
I would like to see (it will never happen), legislation requiring all UCE's to contain a single unique identifier that may not be obscured in any way shape or form that would allow this garbage to be filtered at the ISP by customer request.
"All this company had to do was publically list all valid email addresses."
I don't want my email address listed in any such list and I should not have to "opt-out" of any such list. Are you in the SPAM business?
"yes. i want to be able to play freecell if i'm stranded on a desert island." And if your consumer grade laptop fails, you will die of boredom.
Great job as usual. Thank you.
Amen! If you build or repair (no matter how minor) a computer for family or friends, their computer becomes your "child" that YOU are responsible for all repairs/upkeep for the next eighteen years.
ssh.. They're our allies.
I have two 486 DX4's running 2.2.20. They work fine like they are. Updating from 2.2.x to 2.4.x would be a pain the butt. I'll leave them as is until they die of old age.
"I'm beginning to think that irony is truly dead. At least on /."
/.'ers will descend on you like a pitbull on a baby.
You have to point out the irony in advance. Otherwise your fellow
"The original poster was rather obviously going for a +5, Funny."
He seems to have fallen a bit short.......
Because it's the default smtp for many distro's and it works out of the box.
Knock it off Pointdexter.
Can you imagine the hue and cry when we refuse to destroy them?
I bet that'd go great with a nice rare ribeye!