During discussions with management about blocking China, Korea, Brazil, and other countries whose PTT's are spam havens, management can indicate what to whitelist in the unliikely event there would be any legitimate traffic blocked.
I wonder how long an admin would keep his job when his managers are subject to the full tide of Chinese spam.
This is probably because, despite's SpamCop's best efforts, there was something in each email (maybe that "random text" included to get past filters) that identified your address. Once it was a known good address, they spammed away. The spammers come mostly from Brazil and China, and/or use open proxies or hacked machines to send their sporge. Reporting them has no effect, other than maybe helping $CABLE_ISP tell a user to scan his box.
I agree that blanket bans suck, but (especially in oppresive China) the administrators of those IP blocks are capable of getting their act together. Their elimination of access to the mailboxes around the world is a natural consequence of their inaction wrt the spam problem.
Cyveillance ignores robots.txt and uses deceptive user agents to crawl websites that might have material that doesn't jibe with the PR stance of their corporate clients. They are actively involved in suppressing free speech on the Internet by selling "monitoring" services to its corporate masters. The discussion about Spamcop in bed with them
Most of the spam comes from and/or points to IP addresses in China and Brazil. Their reaction to your reports, if they even receive them, is "We'll get right on it."
It would be far more effective to simply drop any SMTP connections from networks in Brazil or China. Even better would be to actively scan emails for links pointing to that IP space, and dump any messages received. This would eliminate most spam from user mailboxes.
Spamcop is a nice parser, though, for those rare occasions in which reporting would do any good. Unfortunately, they're in bed with Cyveillance--don't forget to uncheck that box to avoid helping them.
Only large companies could get away with that kind of "self help." A small developer who did this might find himself in prison--and if not, certainly without much success in the marketplace. Why would his legitimate users trust him after a stunt like that?
Maybe there wouldn't be so many "little scams" if the people perpatrating them couldn't be as sure as they can now that they won't be caught and prosecuted. Food for thought.
And worse--why did they use black for the negative stuff. That shows subconscious rascism. When was the last time you saw the government white out negative portions of reports? I rest my case:).
In the U.S. at least, tax brackets are incremental. Someone in the 40% bracket doesn't pay 40% on all his income; only that over the threshold of the 40% bracket. Thus, reducing one's income into the next lower tax bracket doesn't result in a whole bunch of income suddenly being taxed at a lower rate--it already was being taxed at the lower rate.
Or he might perhaps check the birth date and let you in. Of course, I'd never set foot in a bar that required logging of my entry to begin with, so it's a moot point.
Slashdot Mirror
Probably not much call for Viagra, since you'd already be stiff :).
They can cause a war of escalation--if another iTunes client can play the song, then a client can be written to spoof iTunes and grab the song.
It appears that rules 1 and 2 are still in force.
I wonder how long an admin would keep his job when his managers are subject to the full tide of Chinese spam.
If China would like to conduct business via email, they can clean up their spam problem. Or buy a subscription to AOL and call long-distance :).
The T3 mail harvesters don't claim to be legitimate businesses and sell their services to corporate America.
This is probably because, despite's SpamCop's best efforts, there was something in each email (maybe that "random text" included to get past filters) that identified your address. Once it was a known good address, they spammed away. The spammers come mostly from Brazil and China, and/or use open proxies or hacked machines to send their sporge. Reporting them has no effect, other than maybe helping $CABLE_ISP tell a user to scan his box.
Please see my reply to the sibling of your pose wrt Cyveillance.
I agree that blanket bans suck, but (especially in oppresive China) the administrators of those IP blocks are capable of getting their act together. Their elimination of access to the mailboxes around the world is a natural consequence of their inaction wrt the spam problem.
Cyveillance ignores robots.txt and uses deceptive user agents to crawl websites that might have material that doesn't jibe with the PR stance of their corporate clients. They are actively involved in suppressing free speech on the Internet by selling "monitoring" services to its corporate masters. The discussion about Spamcop in bed with them
It would be far more effective to simply drop any SMTP connections from networks in Brazil or China. Even better would be to actively scan emails for links pointing to that IP space, and dump any messages received. This would eliminate most spam from user mailboxes.
Spamcop is a nice parser, though, for those rare occasions in which reporting would do any good. Unfortunately, they're in bed with Cyveillance--don't forget to uncheck that box to avoid helping them.
Only large companies could get away with that kind of "self help." A small developer who did this might find himself in prison--and if not, certainly without much success in the marketplace. Why would his legitimate users trust him after a stunt like that?
Maybe there wouldn't be so many "little scams" if the people perpatrating them couldn't be as sure as they can now that they won't be caught and prosecuted. Food for thought.
And worse--why did they use black for the negative stuff. That shows subconscious rascism. When was the last time you saw the government white out negative portions of reports? I rest my case :).
A good gift giver doesn't buy gifts that support Blizzard.
You could have returned it :). Did you think that I was referring to republicans because I said "jackbooted thugs?" I was talking about Blizzard.
You deserve to have problems for supporting the DMCA-wielding jackbooted thugs at Blizzard.
My money's that some moderator's some kind of pro-product activation shill
In the U.S. at least, tax brackets are incremental. Someone in the 40% bracket doesn't pay 40% on all his income; only that over the threshold of the 40% bracket. Thus, reducing one's income into the next lower tax bracket doesn't result in a whole bunch of income suddenly being taxed at a lower rate--it already was being taxed at the lower rate.
Or he might perhaps check the birth date and let you in. Of course, I'd never set foot in a bar that required logging of my entry to begin with, so it's a moot point.
OK--I think we're together on this, in that logic doesn't enter consumer decisions :).
You mean like I "voluntarily" pay taxes?
How do you explain that people are willing to pay for cable? They pay for the delivery mechanism, and still put up with large numbers of ads.
"You have no copyright, get over it."
Would you like some help with that?