I took a Bug for a test drive and was rather impressed. I'd consider buying one if I was in the market. Luckily being as tall as I am I can drive a 'chick car' without people making to many comments.;)
You should also ask yourself this: which car would a chick rather be in: a "chick car" or a "stud car"? Make your purchase accordingly.;-)
My understanding, from everything I've read, is that patent holders can sue ANYONE making unauthorized use of their patent, from the manufacturer down to the end user.
Hm... that's quite a nasty situation. So, if we're updating our "... profit!" plan, it could look something like this:
1. Alice gets patent for X 2. Bob (secretly a friend of Alice's) sets up company, builds product Y using technology X to other companies and end-users. 3. Alice sues Bob for using patent without a license. Bob's company goes bust, as it was supposed to. 4. Alice then takes Bob's customer list and sues all of the customers who purchased the products. 5. Profit!
Assuming it's never revealed that Alice and Bob are conspiring together (though would this really matter?) you can make a ton of money from suing everybody.
First, if you do it as "X IP addresses per unit time", spammers will calculate your X and your time unit and then do X-1 per unit time across a few thousand boxes to get their result.
Good point. If the number were only 10 IPs per hour, it would essentially eliminate the effectiveness of the current generation of zombie machines but the next generation would adapt and each machine would spam continually to only 10 domains, for example. Then the ISPs would need to change tactics again. Rinse and repeat.
Second, it is, as you say, only "more than likely" to be a zombie. So then you also have to deal with a small minority of your customers who do this - either explaining why they can't do it any more, or administrating a system of exceptions. The exception system and/or educating support people about the subject takes far more resources than the fix.
Well, if customers are running mail servers themselves then they are already the knowledgeable ones. Education isn't a big deal. The average mom and pop whose machined has been pwn3d won't even notice a difference and won't care.
Blocking off access to anything except the ISP's server doesn't solve the problem - they can still mail out through the server so you have to put restrictions on that.
Of course -- I'm assuming that any ISP worth their salt already has some kind of filtering to prevent spammers from signing up for an account and blasting spam through them already. At the very least, it's much more noticeable when it's coming through the ISP's own mail server than when it's just yet more packets.
And even if they can't use port 25, they can send IM spam, or connect through zombies to machines elsewhere, or through web proxies, or web mail systems.
Good. If enough spam aggregates through a web proxy, then that web proxy can easily be blacklisted. The more mail that funnels through a single source, the easier that source is to block.
Having said all that, it's possible to do it, but it falls into "harder than you might think" rather than "quite easy", unless you are running an ISP with just 100 customers who are all in possession of a clue.
Yes, I suppose it's harder than just flipping a switch and magically nuking all the zombies, but the real question is if it would be worthwhile. What if zombie spam could be cut down to 1% of what it is presently? Would that make a difference enough that the hard work to get such a system in place pays off?
Isn't the fix for this quite easy? Identify the machines which are connecting out over port 25 to more than X separate IP addresses per unit time. Maybe it's a power-user running his/her own mail server. More than likely, it's a trojaned PC spewing out spam. So block off port 25 access to anything but the ISP's mail server until the user either cleans up their system or demonstrates that they're running a responsible server, if that's even allowed by the TOS.
Imagine you're going through photos of your latest vacation and you find one of a street corner which you snapped while on a drinking binge. Since, in your drunken stupor, you don't remember where it was, you can just submit it to find out the history of the building and perhaps discover other famous people who have similarly vomited in that vicinity.
Gotta love those Mach 3 commercials... "Less irritation! You take one stroke, it takes three!" Okay, if that's true, why not develop a Mach 100? "Less irritation! You take one stroke, it takes a hundred!"
Having said that, I use the Mach 3 to shave. I think the real innovation is how the head pivots, not in how many blades they stuck in there.
The point as I see it still stands, we should never expect gifts from the government.
Strange logic. If you pay tax dollars for the government to develop a piece of software, and they then allow you to also use that software, it is now a gift? Does that mean that the Freedom of Information Act is used to get gifts from the government since they're providing the results enabled by your tax-funds? Or that the State of the Union address is the president's gift to you?
Speed up the process why don't you! Keep pumping greenhouse gasses locally, and flood the rest of the planet. Then who will you ship to??
So if the rest of the planet gets flooded, then you can ship to any country directly. It's a boon for the shipping industry! And who needs ports with cranes and all that? Just dump the cargo containers overboard once you hit the coordinates -- done right, it'll land on their doorstep.
Slashdot Mirror
I took a Bug for a test drive and was rather impressed. I'd consider buying one if I was in the market. Luckily being as tall as I am I can drive a 'chick car' without people making to many comments. ;)
;-)
You should also ask yourself this: which car would a chick rather be in: a "chick car" or a "stud car"? Make your purchase accordingly.
Along with point 1, slashdot *still* won't render properly in Firefox.
An even better summary:
wynx.org is available
Let's see how long it lasts.
I hijacked your wireless session when I saw you disconnect and finished your post for you. You're welcome.
My understanding, from everything I've read, is that patent holders can sue ANYONE making unauthorized use of their patent, from the manufacturer down to the end user.
Hm... that's quite a nasty situation. So, if we're updating our "... profit!" plan, it could look something like this:
1. Alice gets patent for X
2. Bob (secretly a friend of Alice's) sets up company, builds product Y using technology X to other companies and end-users.
3. Alice sues Bob for using patent without a license. Bob's company goes bust, as it was supposed to.
4. Alice then takes Bob's customer list and sues all of the customers who purchased the products.
5. Profit!
Assuming it's never revealed that Alice and Bob are conspiring together (though would this really matter?) you can make a ton of money from suing everybody.
Well, I was expecting a friend to call me last night, and I didn't get a phone call. Now there was a situation just dripping with irony.
Right...because rain on your wedding day is ironic
That is, it's contrary to what was expected or intended...well unless you planned for it to rain on your wedding day.
Well, I'd consider that a pretty loose definition. Was it ironic that John Kerry didn't win the election given that he intended to?
So they're removing SCO code? ;-)
Coincidence != Irony.
Yeah, like rain on your wedding day.
First, if you do it as "X IP addresses per unit time", spammers will calculate your X and your time unit and then do X-1 per unit time across a few thousand boxes to get their result.
Good point. If the number were only 10 IPs per hour, it would essentially eliminate the effectiveness of the current generation of zombie machines but the next generation would adapt and each machine would spam continually to only 10 domains, for example. Then the ISPs would need to change tactics again. Rinse and repeat.
Second, it is, as you say, only "more than likely" to be a zombie. So then you also have to deal with a small minority of your customers who do this - either explaining why they can't do it any more, or administrating a system of exceptions. The exception system and/or educating support people about the subject takes far more resources than the fix.
Well, if customers are running mail servers themselves then they are already the knowledgeable ones. Education isn't a big deal. The average mom and pop whose machined has been pwn3d won't even notice a difference and won't care.
Blocking off access to anything except the ISP's server doesn't solve the problem - they can still mail out through the server so you have to put restrictions on that.
Of course -- I'm assuming that any ISP worth their salt already has some kind of filtering to prevent spammers from signing up for an account and blasting spam through them already. At the very least, it's much more noticeable when it's coming through the ISP's own mail server than when it's just yet more packets.
And even if they can't use port 25, they can send IM spam, or connect through zombies to machines elsewhere, or through web proxies, or web mail systems.
Good. If enough spam aggregates through a web proxy, then that web proxy can easily be blacklisted. The more mail that funnels through a single source, the easier that source is to block.
Having said all that, it's possible to do it, but it falls into "harder than you might think" rather than "quite easy", unless you are running an ISP with just 100 customers who are all in possession of a clue.
Yes, I suppose it's harder than just flipping a switch and magically nuking all the zombies, but the real question is if it would be worthwhile. What if zombie spam could be cut down to 1% of what it is presently? Would that make a difference enough that the hard work to get such a system in place pays off?
Isn't the fix for this quite easy? Identify the machines which are connecting out over port 25 to more than X separate IP addresses per unit time. Maybe it's a power-user running his/her own mail server. More than likely, it's a trojaned PC spewing out spam. So block off port 25 access to anything but the ISP's mail server until the user either cleans up their system or demonstrates that they're running a responsible server, if that's even allowed by the TOS.
Most slashdotters are still working on upgrading to a 2-way.
RPGs are the most important thing on any console anyway.
Hm... a hockey game where you can use Rocket Propelled Grenades... I think you've got a great idea there!
The certificate was revoked at the same time (when it was discovered), nobody can use it any more.
They can use it to sign things still. Hopefully there's not a lot of people who have *not* updated their certificate revocation lists.
And it's great that it installs on Win32 without modification, but will it support IIS or is Apache required?
me thinks they need to "Make" a subscription service that can handle a decent slashdotting...
Looks like this slashvertisement went awry.
Imagine you're going through photos of your latest vacation and you find one of a street corner which you snapped while on a drinking binge. Since, in your drunken stupor, you don't remember where it was, you can just submit it to find out the history of the building and perhaps discover other famous people who have similarly vomited in that vicinity.
Keep posting in the old story. Only about 100 more comments until the Iraq story gets ousted and this one makes the Hall of Fame.
My favorite is the new service from eTrade that shuffles your stock portfolio. Takes all the effort out of trading!
The real kicker is that, using this method, studies have shown you get better returns than a professional fund manager.
Just me, or has apple been slashdotted?
You think Slashdot manages to serve up more clicks than the horde of millions of loyal Apple fans? You must be really new around here!
"There are several niches that the Mac Mini doesn't quite satisfy..."
Of course, this raises the question: if you satisfy every niche, is it still a niche product?
Clickety-link without the space:
_ jan2005_480.html
http://www.apple.com/hardware/gallery/mac_mini_pc
Gotta love those Mach 3 commercials... "Less irritation! You take one stroke, it takes three!" Okay, if that's true, why not develop a Mach 100? "Less irritation! You take one stroke, it takes a hundred!"
Having said that, I use the Mach 3 to shave. I think the real innovation is how the head pivots, not in how many blades they stuck in there.
The point as I see it still stands, we should never expect gifts from the government.
Strange logic. If you pay tax dollars for the government to develop a piece of software, and they then allow you to also use that software, it is now a gift? Does that mean that the Freedom of Information Act is used to get gifts from the government since they're providing the results enabled by your tax-funds? Or that the State of the Union address is the president's gift to you?
Speed up the process why don't you! Keep pumping greenhouse gasses locally, and flood the rest of the planet. Then who will you ship to??
So if the rest of the planet gets flooded, then you can ship to any country directly. It's a boon for the shipping industry! And who needs ports with cranes and all that? Just dump the cargo containers overboard once you hit the coordinates -- done right, it'll land on their doorstep.