Until recently (after getting a Gmail account), I lost all hope in email; my usage of email decreased significantly as I had to cancel (abandon) several webmail accounts due to spam (~40 per day).
Before the "do not call registry" started, I was planing to let go of my phone too.
There is one more way to fight this. "Demand" from you phone company to block telemarketers even if that meant putting a cap on outgoing phone calls just like we ask ISP's to do with email spammers. This would be easier than we do with spam since land lines are easier to trace.
Many companies use unlicensed software and the software companies know of them but ignore it so that they keep competetors out and keep that share of the market. I do not see any major news in that.
(To quote Homer Simpson!):
WHAT'S YOUR POINT?
It would be much better if they can include at least a couple of the top rated/popular extensions as an option in the custom installation of Firefox's new RC/release?
As a start, I would like to suggest: - "All-in-One Gestures" (very similar to the Opera interface) - "Adblock" - Target Alert (mentioned above).
The included extensions should customizable during setup.
Later, it would be nice if the installer could offer a (dynamically retrieved) list of available extensions.
Please also post your comments in the Mozillazine forum: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.ph p?f=8
A palm has address book, calendar and secure applications for passwords, etc...
I would think ten times before having my palm accessing or "accessible" via WiFi.
Yes, I am at the paranoid side, but in this age, you have to be so.
Wifi is not an option for me unless there is solid security such as runing two different systems on a Palm similar to a PC. Until that is an option, my Palm is offline.
I wonder if the gov will be placing any backdores in the encryption modules of Longhorn.
No I am not paranoid, but with the rising emphasis on national security this is not far fetched. This would be considered by many much less intrusive than the Patriot Act, fingerprinting all visitors, mandatory interviews etc...
The fact that they blocked an entire domain for an unjustified reason is wrong. The fact that UN.ORG sysadmin did not remove them from their black list does not mean that they can block the un.org domain. It is not the political affiliation which is significant. It is the fact that a webmail has blocked a major international organization for unjustified reasons. It is the fault of outblaze that their servers were blocked and not UN.ORG
In this case, Outblaze is deliberately prventing legitimate email from arriving to my email box. I paid for their services. I expect them to do a decent job and not to block emails coming to my inbox. The fact that they chose to do that with the servers of an organization as the UN makes this worse.
Other companies as Outblaze have similar practices. Recently, all emails from the un.org servers were BLOCKED. Outblaze claim that the sysadmin @ un.org blocked their servers for spam or other stuff (viruses, etc) and did not respond to their emails. What Outblaze did is the most stupid thing ever. I will not be renewing my subscription with them (www.operamail.com). I may nderstand if they decided to block an ISP server, but blocking servers of the United Nations is just MORONIC; I doubt this happens outside the US.
The support people said "We only support outlook." and after explaining that I do not want my PC to be infected like the other ones and that I have been using the webinterface all the time said "I will only give you the name of the exchange server"!!
There is no "offline" mode since the desktop is always connected to the network and from what I can tell, the email stays on the server. Thru the web interface, I can access many "public folders".
"are others also worried about poor security of online banking in the U.S.?"
No, in the US, the legistlators are only worried how to preserve the "Can-Spam Act", "Patriot Act" etc...
Companies are fine with that as long as the legistlator do not push for it. I do not expect to see any improvement in security as long as privacy is low on every body's list.
is to make sure that privacy comes first in their products.
Why these the default settings in Mozilla/FireFox: - enable cookies 'for cuurent session only' - a setting to clear cache on exit - built in list of anonymous proxy - advocate the usage of Freenet with icons on webpages and products (icons similar to the Mozilla, Netscape, or PGP icons on web pages and to the throbber in Mozilla/Netscape)
Although product as Freenet, Frost, GnuPG, PGP, (etc...) are known to most/. readers, most people do not have the time or knowledge to even look for these stuff. Why not advocate Freenet instead of seti@home?
If you report spam (via spamcop) and the ISP "refuses" to take action against the spammer (outside the USA), is there a way to go further so as to hold the ISP where the spam originated or the ISP hosting the advertised site accountable?
The spammers spread the new viruses by email. People who use outlook are the ones at risk.
I think that software companies that produce such defective software (MS in this case) share the blame and should be included in ay legal action against these spammers!
Slashdot Mirror
Until recently (after getting a Gmail account), I lost all hope in email; my usage of email decreased significantly as I had to cancel (abandon) several webmail accounts due to spam (~40 per day).
Before the "do not call registry" started, I was planing to let go of my phone too.
There is one more way to fight this. "Demand" from you phone company to block telemarketers even if that meant putting a cap on outgoing phone calls just like we ask ISP's to do with email spammers. This would be easier than we do with spam since land lines are easier to trace.
would be the best people to know especially that they are mysteriously able to pin-point the time when a fetus is "alive" and has his/her own "soul".
The next thing you know is that they are passing a legistlation to prevent "lamb abortions"!
Many companies use unlicensed software and the software companies know of them but ignore it so that they keep competetors out and keep that share of the market. I do not see any major news in that. (To quote Homer Simpson!): WHAT'S YOUR POINT?
I have seen and listened to GW talk. He is no Caesar!
Extensions which introduce popular stuff in other browsers as "All in one guestures" (similar to Opera) and top rated/downloaded plugins as "Adblock".
It would be much better if they can include at least a couple of the top rated/popular extensions as an option in the custom installation of Firefox's new RC/release?
h p?f=8
As a start, I would like to suggest:
- "All-in-One Gestures" (very similar to the Opera interface)
- "Adblock"
- Target Alert (mentioned above).
The included extensions should customizable during setup.
Later, it would be nice if the installer could offer a (dynamically retrieved) list of available extensions.
Please also post your comments in the Mozillazine forum:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewforum.p
It actually passed the slashdot effect which is impressive.
The Onion also mentioned something related to that in the Oval Office
A palm has address book, calendar and secure applications for passwords, etc...
I would think ten times before having my palm accessing or "accessible" via WiFi.
Yes, I am at the paranoid side, but in this age, you have to be so.
Wifi is not an option for me unless there is solid security such as runing two different systems on a Palm similar to a PC. Until that is an option, my Palm is offline.
I wonder if the gov will be placing any backdores in the encryption modules of Longhorn.
No I am not paranoid, but with the rising emphasis on national security this is not far fetched. This would be considered by many much less intrusive than the Patriot Act, fingerprinting all visitors, mandatory interviews etc...
Think of it this way. It is much better to wear clothes than to wander around naked.
The fact that they blocked an entire domain for an unjustified reason is wrong. The fact that UN.ORG sysadmin did not remove them from their black list does not mean that they can block the un.org domain. It is not the political affiliation which is significant. It is the fact that a webmail has blocked a major international organization for unjustified reasons. It is the fault of outblaze that their servers were blocked and not UN.ORG In this case, Outblaze is deliberately prventing legitimate email from arriving to my email box. I paid for their services. I expect them to do a decent job and not to block emails coming to my inbox. The fact that they chose to do that with the servers of an organization as the UN makes this worse.
Other companies as Outblaze have similar practices. Recently, all emails from the un.org servers were BLOCKED. Outblaze claim that the sysadmin @ un.org blocked their servers for spam or other stuff (viruses, etc) and did not respond to their emails. What Outblaze did is the most stupid thing ever. I will not be renewing my subscription with them (www.operamail.com).
I may nderstand if they decided to block an ISP server, but blocking servers of the United Nations is just MORONIC; I doubt this happens outside the US.
Has anyone encountered similar stupid acts?
The support people said "We only support outlook." and after explaining that I do not want my PC to be infected like the other ones and that I have been using the webinterface all the time said "I will only give you the name of the exchange server"!! There is no "offline" mode since the desktop is always connected to the network and from what I can tell, the email stays on the server. Thru the web interface, I can access many "public folders".
Can I use it instead of outlook to connect to the Exchange server at work?
"are others also worried about poor security of online banking in the U.S.?" No, in the US, the legistlators are only worried how to preserve the "Can-Spam Act", "Patriot Act" etc... Companies are fine with that as long as the legistlator do not push for it. I do not expect to see any improvement in security as long as privacy is low on every body's list.
is to make sure that privacy comes first in their products.
/. readers, most people do not have the time or knowledge to even look for these stuff. Why not advocate Freenet instead of seti@home?
Why these the default settings in Mozilla/FireFox:
- enable cookies 'for cuurent session only'
- a setting to clear cache on exit
- built in list of anonymous proxy
- advocate the usage of Freenet with icons on webpages and products (icons similar to the Mozilla, Netscape, or PGP icons on web pages and to the throbber in Mozilla/Netscape)
Although product as Freenet, Frost, GnuPG, PGP, (etc...) are known to most
Isn't this similar to WASTE? http://sourceforge.net/projects/waste/
They should have invested some money or codeveloped an open source project. Oh wait, Ass Kroft (!) still has his finger in all this.
With the availability of other companies who are willing to provide open source drivers, why should anyone by ATI products?
I would rather buy products of other companies who sympathize with the open source community.
I do not like the new name. May I suggest the name "FireChick" in reference to a "smaller" bird?
P2P now stands for Pegeon to Pr0n!
If you report spam (via spamcop) and the ISP "refuses" to take action against the spammer (outside the USA), is there a way to go further so as to hold the ISP where the spam originated or the ISP hosting the advertised site accountable?
Thanks
I agree,
I had so much trouble in installing Debian on my two year old PC due to the ATI card.
I decided never to buy any of the ATI cards again.
"The device kind of looks like a spaceship"?
Spaceships are a common commodity these days!
The spammers spread the new viruses by email. People who use outlook are the ones at risk.
I think that software companies that produce such defective software (MS in this case) share the blame and should be included in ay legal action against these spammers!