To spammers, hitting the unsubscribe button is no different than saying "I'm here! Look at me, I have an E-mail address that I use! Send more!"
Yes, but what the post you replied to was talking about was not spam, but lists that people have willingly subscribed to. The problem being that there are some people who, when they decide they no longer want to be on such a list, click AOL's "report this as spam" button rather than unsubscribing from the list, which they themselves subscribed to.
Odd. When I search for temple meads (or when I click your link) it doesn't find the station, it lists:
The Old Duke
The Cornubia
The Crown & Cushion
Zee Bar & Grill
Ye Shakespeare
The Stag & Hounds
Printers Devil
Portwall Tavern
British Empire & Commonwealth Museum
The Colosseum
While the Old Duke is a rather fine pub & jazz venue, it's not much use if you're trying to find the station. (The Empire & Commonwealth Museum is next door to Temple Meads, but if you know that, you probably already know how to get to the station...)
It's nice, but it's missing quite a lot of places - try searching for the Millennium Stadium (in Cardiff), the National Exhibition Centre (Birmingham), Bristol Temple Meads station, Birmingham New Street station, Edinburgh Waverly station or Cardiff Central station (I tried stations because it gave Paddington as an example and they have unique names, so it should be easy for it to find them if it knows about them.)
Your post reminded me of a song about Kilroy-Silk, Hey, Mr Tangerine Man, and made me smile:-) (They've also done a theme song for Veritas, although be warned, that one contains gratuitous use of kazoos...)
There are two obvious problems with having.adult (or whatever) as a madatory TLD for adult content: definitions, and enforcement.
The definition: what is "adult content" (or whatever term you decide to use)? Is an educational site that includes images of genitalia (e.g. sex education) included? A discussion site where people discuss sexual matters? (And does it make a difference whether such discussions are regular or occasional?) What about Wikipedia's articles on human sexuality? Does your ISP's usenet server carry alt.sex groups? And, given the international nature of the Internet, how are you going to come up with a universal definition of "adult content"? One acceptable in the Netherlands is not going to be accepted in Iran, or by the "argh! we saw a nipple on teh television!" crowd in the USA.
Which nicely leads on two the second problem, enforcement. Even if you could get a universally accepted definition, you would also need universal enforcement.
Basically, if you actually think a madatory adult content TLD is workable, I have a bridge for sale. Once you've sent payment, my airbore porcine couriers will arrange delivery...
And is utterly irrelevent to the poster you replied to, since they need to be able to use it from anywhere in the world. Freeshell.org's dialup is available "in most area codes of the US and Canada", which, you will notice, does not quite meet BabyDave's requirement of "anywhere in the world".
There is a 1GHz fanless mini-itx board, VIA's EPIA MS 10000E. Add in a silent power supply, and then all you've got left to make silent is the hard drive (and you could make that silent too, by have a solid state drive in the silent box, and pulling everything that won't fit on that off a network drive.)
If you're using Mozilla (rather than FireFox) you don't need to use about:config like the two posts above say, it's in the preferences, in the Advanced->Cache section.
It would look like a typo to Americans - in American English, it is one word, "percent", but in British & Commonwealth English, it is two, "per cent". See Wikipedia: American and British English differences.
[Any] apparatus installed or used for the purpose of receiving (whether by means of wireless telegraphy or otherwise) any television programme service, whether or not it is installed or used for any other purpose.
While FinestLittleSpace was wrong in saying that a licence is only needed if you're using a TV, if you have TV connected only to a DVD player, which is not "installed for the purpose of receiving any television programme service", you do not need a licence.
The TV licencing goons' inability to accept this is, of course, another matter. But then, they can't seem to get it into their brains that some people can manage to live without a TV at all, so subtlities like whether a TV is installed are clearly beyond them.
I'd say they do provide some security benefits, simply by putting the ATMs inside, which means it will be well lit, have better CCTV coverage, and you're likly to be more aware of anyone trying to look over your shoulder for your PIN. And, of course, if the weather outside is nasty, bank customers will appreciate a bit of shelter while they're using the ATMs.
emacs is an esoteric and poorly designed vi wannabe
How dare you?!?! Emacs is an excellent and fully featured operating system, which includes a shell, a mail client, a calendar, and a text editor.
You can even run it on a eMac if you wish...
(N.B.: IANAL)
The UK has a "loser sometimes pays" system, where the courts can make the loser in a civil case pay part or all or the winner's legal costs, but doesn't always make a costs award.
For an extreme example, consider Bruce Grobbelaar's libel action against The Sun newspaper - he was awarded damages of £1, and his legal costs were estimated at £1 million. (Grobbelaar was a football [soccer] goalkeeper who was accused by The Sun of taking bribes to fix matches by letting in goals. Because he didn't actually let in any goals, The Sun had libeled him, but because (in the words of one of the judges) "he had acted in a way in which no decent or honest footballer would act, and in a way which could, if not exposed and stamped on, undermine the integrity of a game which earns the loyalty and support of millions", he got only nominal damages.)
With "loser may pay, but it's not automatic", you get the benefits of loser pays (discouraging frivilous/intimidatory claims) which at the same time not preventing genuine disputes from beign brought to court.
I suspect that the victim did not have his cameras registered and signposted according to the data protection act and the rules for applying it. Now, it was the guy private residence so there is a question if the rules apply, but IANAL so I would rather not get there.
According to the Information Commissioner's Office, "Individuals who are processing personal data for personal, family or household affairs are exempt from notification and most of the other provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998." I would take that to mean that having a webcam set up in your own home is not covered by the DPA, just like keeping a personal address list isn't. (Like you, IANAL, but statements like that seem pretty clear to me.)
I really think DNS needs to be revised to enforce a unique constraint on a filter of the address. for instance if some-place.com, s0me-place.com, someplace.com and smeplace.com all took you to the same place because they are in fact the same..
How far would you go? Is someplaice.com (for all your flat fish needs) allowed?
What about sameplace.com, which is no less similar to smeplace.com than someplace.com is. (And therefore, by your argument, is the same as someplace.com)
What about someplace.net (and all the variations of someplace in.net, too)? The "same" names in.co.uk?.us?.de? The rest of the 258 TLDs?
And with RSA & friends no longer usable, how do you propose to distribute your AES etc. keys? It doesn't matter how strong your symetric cipher is, if you can't securly distribute the keys, you're fucked.
You buy a candy bar for 85 cents. You give the cashier a dollar, and you'll typically get back a ______ and a nickel.
If I may make a comment more often found in response to polls...
I'm not an American, you insensitive clod!
Of course, that might not be a problem if you never want to communicate with any pesky furriners, but for the rest of us, your system won't work very well.
That is a challenge-response system, and CR systems are harmful and abusive. The ability of a CR system to prevent spam is based on the fact that spammers do not see the challenges. The reason thaty spammers do not see the challenges is that they almost universally use forged sender addresses - when a spammer sends email with the sender set to innocentvictim@example.com, who gets hit by all the challenges, the spammer, or innocentvictim@example.com? Some people who have their email addresses regularly forged by spammers routinely respond to all challenges they receive, both to illustrate the abusive nature of CR to its users, and because, in general, any challenge may be a response to a mail they sent to a mailing list (this particular problem does not exist with all CR systems, only those which do not adequatly identify the message that caused the challenge to be sent.)
Next problem: Many users will simply ignore the challenge, or throw it away with the spam, so the the user of the CR system is liable to find non-spam mail being blocked. Additionally, if the system sends challenges inapropriatly, eg in response to mailing list messages, the CR user may well find themselves removed from the list. I know many lists where any auto-response to list mail will result in whoever sent the auto-response being kicked off the list.
Another one: CR stops all machine-generated email, spam or not. How do sign-up confirmations for mailing lists get through? Order confirmations from online shops? The email you may well be sent during the sign-up process for many websites which want to check you have given them a valid email address?
Oh, lookie, the problems keep coming: Suppose alice@example.com wants to email bob@example.net, they both use CR systems, and neither has the other whitelisted. alice sends an email to Bob, and his system sends Alice a challenge. Since Alice does not have Bob whitelisted, her system responds to Bob's challenge with a challenge of its own. But, Bob doesn't have Alice whitelisted, and so his system sends Alice a chal... And so on, until *bang*
Of course, this problem does not occur if the CR system automatically whitelists the addresses of recipients of its user's email, that is, Alice's system would auto-whitelist Bob, but many systems do not do this and in many cases it is not an easy thing to set up (where outgoing and incoming email are handled by seperate systems, for example.)
That should be enough to get started on why CR is bad, stick "challenge response" into Google and you'll find various pages about it.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, s'pose so. Pedant. ;-)
Dam you peple who can spel.
It's nice, but it's missing quite a lot of places - try searching for the Millennium Stadium (in Cardiff), the National Exhibition Centre (Birmingham), Bristol Temple Meads station, Birmingham New Street station, Edinburgh Waverly station or Cardiff Central station (I tried stations because it gave Paddington as an example and they have unique names, so it should be easy for it to find them if it knows about them.)
Your post reminded me of a song about Kilroy-Silk, Hey, Mr Tangerine Man, and made me smile :-) (They've also done a theme song for Veritas, although be warned, that one contains gratuitous use of kazoos...)
Why link to April Fools jokes, when the real thing is so rediculous? They're mad, I tells ya, mad!
There are two obvious problems with having .adult (or whatever) as a madatory TLD for adult content: definitions, and enforcement.
The definition: what is "adult content" (or whatever term you decide to use)? Is an educational site that includes images of genitalia (e.g. sex education) included? A discussion site where people discuss sexual matters? (And does it make a difference whether such discussions are regular or occasional?) What about Wikipedia's articles on human sexuality? Does your ISP's usenet server carry alt.sex groups? And, given the international nature of the Internet, how are you going to come up with a universal definition of "adult content"? One acceptable in the Netherlands is not going to be accepted in Iran, or by the "argh! we saw a nipple on teh television!" crowd in the USA.
Which nicely leads on two the second problem, enforcement. Even if you could get a universally accepted definition, you would also need universal enforcement.
Basically, if you actually think a madatory adult content TLD is workable, I have a bridge for sale. Once you've sent payment, my airbore porcine couriers will arrange delivery...
And is utterly irrelevent to the poster you replied to, since they need to be able to use it from anywhere in the world. Freeshell.org's dialup is available "in most area codes of the US and Canada", which, you will notice, does not quite meet BabyDave's requirement of "anywhere in the world".
There is a 1GHz fanless mini-itx board, VIA's EPIA MS 10000E. Add in a silent power supply, and then all you've got left to make silent is the hard drive (and you could make that silent too, by have a solid state drive in the silent box, and pulling everything that won't fit on that off a network drive.)
You've gone too far-radically too far - with the appaling punnage. They are so bad, it hertz...
If you're using Mozilla (rather than FireFox) you don't need to use about:config like the two posts above say, it's in the preferences, in the Advanced->Cache section.
It look like this. A little box with an RJ-45 socket on each end.
It would look like a typo to Americans - in American English, it is one word, "percent", but in British & Commonwealth English, it is two, "per cent". See Wikipedia: American and British English differences.
The TV licencing goons' inability to accept this is, of course, another matter. But then, they can't seem to get it into their brains that some people can manage to live without a TV at all, so subtlities like whether a TV is installed are clearly beyond them.
Fair point. The only times I've seen banks with the ATMs inside, they've had a (probably useless) card reader on the door.
I'd say they do provide some security benefits, simply by putting the ATMs inside, which means it will be well lit, have better CCTV coverage, and you're likly to be more aware of anyone trying to look over your shoulder for your PIN. And, of course, if the weather outside is nasty, bank customers will appreciate a bit of shelter while they're using the ATMs.
You can even run it on a eMac if you wish...
(N.B.: IANAL)
The UK has a "loser sometimes pays" system, where the courts can make the loser in a civil case pay part or all or the winner's legal costs, but doesn't always make a costs award.
For an extreme example, consider Bruce Grobbelaar's libel action against The Sun newspaper - he was awarded damages of £1, and his legal costs were estimated at £1 million. (Grobbelaar was a football [soccer] goalkeeper who was accused by The Sun of taking bribes to fix matches by letting in goals. Because he didn't actually let in any goals, The Sun had libeled him, but because (in the words of one of the judges) "he had acted in a way in which no decent or honest footballer would act, and in a way which could, if not exposed and stamped on, undermine the integrity of a game which earns the loyalty and support of millions", he got only nominal damages.)
With "loser may pay, but it's not automatic", you get the benefits of loser pays (discouraging frivilous/intimidatory claims) which at the same time not preventing genuine disputes from beign brought to court.
What about sameplace.com, which is no less similar to smeplace.com than someplace.com is. (And therefore, by your argument, is the same as someplace.com)
What about someplace.net (and all the variations of someplace in
You're saying IP lawyers are part human? Shirley some mistake... ;-)
And with RSA & friends no longer usable, how do you propose to distribute your AES etc. keys? It doesn't matter how strong your symetric cipher is, if you can't securly distribute the keys, you're fucked.
I'm not an American, you insensitive clod!
Of course, that might not be a problem if you never want to communicate with any pesky furriners, but for the rest of us, your system won't work very well.
That is a challenge-response system, and CR systems are harmful and abusive. The ability of a CR system to prevent spam is based on the fact that spammers do not see the challenges. The reason thaty spammers do not see the challenges is that they almost universally use forged sender addresses - when a spammer sends email with the sender set to innocentvictim@example.com, who gets hit by all the challenges, the spammer, or innocentvictim@example.com? Some people who have their email addresses regularly forged by spammers routinely respond to all challenges they receive, both to illustrate the abusive nature of CR to its users, and because, in general, any challenge may be a response to a mail they sent to a mailing list (this particular problem does not exist with all CR systems, only those which do not adequatly identify the message that caused the challenge to be sent.)
Next problem: Many users will simply ignore the challenge, or throw it away with the spam, so the the user of the CR system is liable to find non-spam mail being blocked. Additionally, if the system sends challenges inapropriatly, eg in response to mailing list messages, the CR user may well find themselves removed from the list. I know many lists where any auto-response to list mail will result in whoever sent the auto-response being kicked off the list.
Another one: CR stops all machine-generated email, spam or not. How do sign-up confirmations for mailing lists get through? Order confirmations from online shops? The email you may well be sent during the sign-up process for many websites which want to check you have given them a valid email address?
Oh, lookie, the problems keep coming: Suppose alice@example.com wants to email bob@example.net, they both use CR systems, and neither has the other whitelisted. alice sends an email to Bob, and his system sends Alice a challenge. Since Alice does not have Bob whitelisted, her system responds to Bob's challenge with a challenge of its own. But, Bob doesn't have Alice whitelisted, and so his system sends Alice a chal... And so on, until *bang*
Of course, this problem does not occur if the CR system automatically whitelists the addresses of recipients of its user's email, that is, Alice's system would auto-whitelist Bob, but many systems do not do this and in many cases it is not an easy thing to set up (where outgoing and incoming email are handled by seperate systems, for example.)
That should be enough to get started on why CR is bad, stick "challenge response" into Google and you'll find various pages about it.
You forgot to mention that Irn Bru is made from girders. Yes, it's true.*
* Note: may not be an actual, literally true fact, in the most pedantic and technical sense of the word.