Me too. Three years without spam. For me it's "What spam problem?".
Using TMDA was/is the best thing I've ever invested a little learning curve in.
Combined with qmail, qmailque_patch, spamassassin, and clamav it becomes a very sweet email system. I sometimes use time expiring and or keyword emails for specific sites (I love TMDA).
About 100 - 300 incoming emails per day, about 25 - 30 challenges sent per day, all else is dropped before it reaches TMDA.
And in three years I've never missed an important email. Although I sometimes have to do a quick check of the pending file to get an email address of a company I've bought something from, to release and add to my whitelist.
So my only problem, and it is slight, is with people/business that do NOT publish their email address. If I send someone email they are auto whielisted, just like your setup.
I also use a cgi script for http based requests to be added to my whitelist.
I also use TMDA cgi, and provide free, and spam free, pop3 email services for family and a few friends (they each have their own web whitelist request form). They average about the same percentage of challenges to incoming email as I do.
I'm just an average sort of geek, so if I can do this thing on my home DSL line, with an old computer I'm using for a server, any ISP should be able to provide it as a service.
I find the question "Why don't they do this for their customers?" to be the interesting question.
Could it be that there is way to much vested interest (money) on both sides of spam as we now know it? naaa, surely not...
There is an easy way to envision the transcendental nature of Pi.
If you accept this definition of a circle:
"A circle is a polygon where the number of sides approaches infinite, therefore the closer the polygon approaches a true circular curve, the closer the number of sides comes to being infinite."
Then you might look at the digital representation of 22/7 as a number that is continually getting closer to infinity. If it repeated it would no longer continue to get closer to the infinite value.
That it falls between two integers means nothing - there exists the same infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1 as between 3 and 4, or 0 and any number.
I agree the death penalty has zero deterrent value to the community, but then I think all punishment has zero deterrent value to the community at large.
Crime is motivated by a belief by the criminal that there will be positive gain for the criminal.
The belief in positive gain has already ruled out the possibility of being caught, therefore no possible punishment will be a deterrent.
Of course the "belief in positive gain" would not apply to instant crimes of passion, and/or acts of clearly psychotic individuals. But in those cases gain or loss is not an issue, so fear of punishment would not be a deterrent in those cases either.
But there are, I believe, some crimes that the death penalty is appropriate for. But I also agree that there should be zero possibility of innocence (notice I do not look at it as a question of doubt of guilt) before anyone is put to death.
I hope you can see there is a major difference in "beyond a shadow of doubt" (there might not be a shadow, just a sliver) and zero possibility of innocence. Zero possibility of any possible way one could construe innocence, no matter how remote.
So, for me the death penalty is OK, for some crimes. I just believe that a different standard for how to chose death, instead of life in prison, needs to be established first. But in those cases, life in prison needs to mean absolute life in prison (unless innocence is later shown, of course).
Appropriate Sig: Give me Zero possibility of innocence, or give me life in prison. (With apologies to Nathan Hale).
And I will agree that killing an innocent person did nothing much to lower the crime rate - given that if they were innocent they probably would not have committed a crime even if allowed to go free, i.e., they were not a criminal to start with. In that sense the death penalty is a waste of time, resources, and a real bummer for those involved.
But then, so was convicting an innocent person to start with...
Perhaps the problem lies not so much in the sentence as in the process of determining guilt.
Appropriate Sig: State authorized killing of an innocent person is only a deterrent to innocence.
But by not preventing the first crime the death penalty is a failure.
But by not preventing the first crime all deterrents are failures.
I agree many Innocent people have went to death via the death penalty.
Many guilty people have gone free via one reason or another.
Life is not fair and "justice" is not only blind but also deaf, and usually favors the rich.
All I said was a very accurate statement: The death penalty prevents one person from ever committing another crime - because he's dead.
It's an accurate statement, but stop reading something into it that is not there - like "the death penalty is fair", or "prevents all crime", or any thing other then exactly what I said.
One last time: "It absolutely deters one person from ever committing a crime again. In that sense the death penalty is 100% effective as a crime deterrent."
Operative phrase: "in that sense". Meaning limited to the context of the sentence in which it was used.
Appropriate Sig: Successful use of "sentence" as a pun in a sentence about the death penalty.
Site one criminal that was put to death, and then committed another crime.
So while nothing prevents the first crime, the death penalty is 100% effective in preventing that individual from committing a second, third, fourth, etc., crime.
In fact there is no threat of punishment that will deter the first crime - no one commits a crime with the expectation of being caught, therefor fear of punishment does not enter into the equation.
The one exception being when the punishment is vastly less then the gain from the crime. In that event the criminal may commit the crime and not care about being caught, or the possible punishment.
As I said: there is no deterrent except death, and that only prevents all future crime from that one individual.
Appropriate Sig: Death sentence for speeding and that person will never speed again.
The job of an ISP is to deliver bits - what the content of those bits are is not relevant.
So no ISP should be in the "filter" or "block" anything business.
Spammers are not important, people and companies that pay spammers to spam are.
The only final answer to "spam" is to go after the source of the money that pays for it. And I mean the direct source - the place spam tries to get you to go and spend money at. Not the idiots that buy from them, for they also are not important. Go after those that hire spammers.
In the interim use: "fetchmail -> qmail(with pop3 & smtpd)+qmailqueue + qmail-scanner(st/hcc) -> clamav -> spamassassin w/(razor, pyzor,dcc) -> tmda, and kmail with tmda-ofmipd, on Mandrake 9.2", or the equivalent.
TMDA is great, but you need to drop about 66% of the spam prior to the C/R system in order not to create more spam then you started with - in other words be a good net citizen.
I've been using this set up for over a year with no false positives and no (and I mean NO) spam.
I set up a default form on my website for anyone that could not reach me by email (in case of a problem with the filter/block/drop/TMDA method). It has never been used by anyone, so at this point if they can't reach me, they have nothing to say that I want to hear anyway.
Get ISPs out of the role of Big Brother. The only thing that can come of that is disaster.
"I think everyone should spend a weekend wrongly imprisoned in jail... just for the perspective. I did it (not by choice) and many of my opinions about the justice system changed drastically."
Here's the usual change:
A Conservative is a Liberal that's just been mugged.
A Liberal is a Conservative that's just been arrested.
This is a very Conservative Liberal Sig... Or Vice Versa.
First, on an old computer I had that was just sitting around growing dust, I set up my own "in house" email server using qmail , on GNU/Linux/Mandrake. It was dead easy to do.
I pluged it into my router and opened ports 25 & 110 for it.
And then the neatest thing since sliced bread; TMDA.
4 months now - zero spam, zero lost valid emails.
I didn't have to give up any existing (POP3) accounts, and gained as many as I want to create, because I now have my own email server.
This is easy and cures spam, period.
I'm on DSL, with dynamicly assigned IP, so I use a free DNS service no-ip.com.
This really is simple to do, all were RPM's and I mostly just took whatever default was offered.
I really am New To Nix, so if I could do this, then anyone can.
And it was free.
I am so happy - 40 - 50 spam emails a day, went to ZERO spam. And I still have and use my same email address! Plus some special occasion ones I create as needed (timed experation for usenet, etc.).
And the disclaimer - I have nothing to do with any program mentioned in this post, other then being a happy user of same.
And other places that do not want to be tied into the US controll/monopoly.
You can see the way it is going now, open source adopted by other (I'm USA) governments (this is good, IMO).
The same will be true of the BIOS chips & even MB chip sets - they (forgin governments) are sharp enough to know it's a bad idea to have your system locked down (or into) something some one else has controll over.
So we buy all our stuff from overseas now, for price reasons. Soon we will be buying from them for freedom reasons (this may NOT bode well for the price we may have to pay in the future).
The day may be coming when we have to smuggle BIOS chips and/or Main Boards into the US, just to try to keep some freedom.
This may not be quite as "tinfoil hat" as it sounds now. Remember no one is looking out for your freedom - that task is up to you.
NewToNix - I lent my sig to a really nice government man, but he never returned it.
It is becoming the real world making it into scifi.
"Trinity does it properly in The Matrix Reloaded. She whips out Nmap version 2.54BETA25, uses it to find a vulnerable SSH server, and then proceeds to exploit it using the SSH1 CRC32 exploit from 2001. " ( http://www.insecure.org/ ).
If so where are they in this thread?
Any nerd I know would be in hysterical gales of laughter any time he/she sees the two words "internet" and "privacy" combined.
I live in the USA, that means for me privacy is a commodity like everything else. You can have all of it you can afford.
Hmmm...new business model: eBay privacy auction. It would have to be a dutch auction....
"Well, on one hand, it's the Fed's money, so they can pretty much do what they want with it. It's pretty lame to make that money conditional based on these filters, but when someone is giving you free money, you're pretty much in their house."
It's neither free nor theirs.
Having to building libraries next to police stations would seem a strange method for enforcing library rules.
There is supposed to be a right to free speech. There is no "right" to computers in libraries, nor to the use of library computers.
The court has just decided we have the "duty" to pay for "filters" for computers in libraries that we also have to pay for.
A better solution might well be to put a few computers in individual private cubicles in our libraries and CHARGE lots of money for a "private" computer session.
The result would be a profit center for the library, and no problems with "public" porn, etc.
who will controll the use made of the things I have purchased, i.e., do I own the data, and/or the hardware being used to collect the data, or does TIVO?
I believe a person owns that which he controlls (what you can destroy you own). TIVO's opt out is not you in controll - it is you asking for a favor over something they claim to own - the collected data and the right to use the hardware to collect that data.
So take controll, you bought the hardware and your data should belong to you (even in aggregate it is your data, to the extent that data derived from you is part of the aggregate).
As to agreements made wherein TIVO retains the "right" to do the data collecting as part of purchasing the hardware: It should be no diffrent then purchasing a car or a microwave, if you want the warranty you do what they say, if you want total ownership you may remodel the thing to suit yourself, but lose any warranty.
Slashdot Mirror
Using TMDA was/is the best thing I've ever invested a little learning curve in.
Combined with qmail, qmailque_patch, spamassassin, and clamav it becomes a very sweet email system. I sometimes use time expiring and or keyword emails for specific sites (I love TMDA).
About 100 - 300 incoming emails per day, about 25 - 30 challenges sent per day, all else is dropped before it reaches TMDA.
And in three years I've never missed an important email. Although I sometimes have to do a quick check of the pending file to get an email address of a company I've bought something from, to release and add to my whitelist.
So my only problem, and it is slight, is with people/business that do NOT publish their email address. If I send someone email they are auto whielisted, just like your setup.
I also use a cgi script for http based requests to be added to my whitelist.
I also use TMDA cgi, and provide free, and spam free, pop3 email services for family and a few friends (they each have their own web whitelist request form). They average about the same percentage of challenges to incoming email as I do.
I'm just an average sort of geek, so if I can do this thing on my home DSL line, with an old computer I'm using for a server, any ISP should be able to provide it as a service.
I find the question "Why don't they do this for their customers?" to be the interesting question.
Could it be that there is way to much vested interest (money) on both sides of spam as we now know it? naaa, surely not...
NewToNix (well I was once, anyway).
From the "I can see you, but you can't see me" dept.
If you accept this definition of a circle:
Then you might look at the digital representation of 22/7 as a number that is continually getting closer to infinity. If it repeated it would no longer continue to get closer to the infinite value.
That it falls between two integers means nothing - there exists the same infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1 as between 3 and 4, or 0 and any number.
Send it earlier... twice.
I'm posting this for tomorrow... so if you mod it Funny today everybody can laugh in advance...
You do not bribe senators. You rent them on a cost per day based on the chances of future rentals.
At the end of the rental period they are often rented to some one with an opposing viewpoint.
This is what gives rise to the interesting phenomena of "I voted for it, before I voted against it."
It has nothing to do with "It depends on what the definition of is, is".
That behavior is caused by other forces.
Appropriate Sig: Get a job in the oil industry, then you'll feel OK with a vote for Bush.
method.
But it will not fit in this tiny /. reply box...
Appropriate Sig: This really is my last theorem.
Crime is motivated by a belief by the criminal that there will be positive gain for the criminal.
The belief in positive gain has already ruled out the possibility of being caught, therefore no possible punishment will be a deterrent.
Of course the "belief in positive gain" would not apply to instant crimes of passion, and/or acts of clearly psychotic individuals. But in those cases gain or loss is not an issue, so fear of punishment would not be a deterrent in those cases either.
But there are, I believe, some crimes that the death penalty is appropriate for. But I also agree that there should be zero possibility of innocence (notice I do not look at it as a question of doubt of guilt) before anyone is put to death.
I hope you can see there is a major difference in "beyond a shadow of doubt" (there might not be a shadow, just a sliver) and zero possibility of innocence. Zero possibility of any possible way one could construe innocence, no matter how remote.
So, for me the death penalty is OK, for some crimes. I just believe that a different standard for how to chose death, instead of life in prison, needs to be established first. But in those cases, life in prison needs to mean absolute life in prison (unless innocence is later shown, of course).
Appropriate Sig: Give me Zero possibility of innocence, or give me life in prison. (With apologies to Nathan Hale).
The verified accounts go to bank accounts that have only Paypal sums in them.
They can freeze what they want, it all sorts it's self out and I just use another account for the duration.
There is no rule against this.
Some things are easy if you just think ahead...
Appropriate Sig: I use my Paypal credit card to fund my Paypal account...
But then, so was convicting an innocent person to start with...
Perhaps the problem lies not so much in the sentence as in the process of determining guilt.
Appropriate Sig: State authorized killing of an innocent person is only a deterrent to innocence.
But by not preventing the first crime all deterrents are failures.
I agree many Innocent people have went to death via the death penalty.
Many guilty people have gone free via one reason or another.
Life is not fair and "justice" is not only blind but also deaf, and usually favors the rich.
All I said was a very accurate statement: The death penalty prevents one person from ever committing another crime - because he's dead.
It's an accurate statement, but stop reading something into it that is not there - like "the death penalty is fair", or "prevents all crime", or any thing other then exactly what I said.
One last time: "It absolutely deters one person from ever committing a crime again. In that sense the death penalty is 100% effective as a crime deterrent."
Operative phrase: "in that sense". Meaning limited to the context of the sentence in which it was used.
Appropriate Sig: Successful use of "sentence" as a pun in a sentence about the death penalty.
Site one criminal that was put to death, and then committed another crime.
So while nothing prevents the first crime, the death penalty is 100% effective in preventing that individual from committing a second, third, fourth, etc., crime.
In fact there is no threat of punishment that will deter the first crime - no one commits a crime with the expectation of being caught, therefor fear of punishment does not enter into the equation.
The one exception being when the punishment is vastly less then the gain from the crime. In that event the criminal may commit the crime and not care about being caught, or the possible punishment.
As I said: there is no deterrent except death, and that only prevents all future crime from that one individual.
Appropriate Sig: Death sentence for speeding and that person will never speed again.
It absolutely deters one person from ever committing a crime again. In that sense the death penalty is 100% effective as a crime deterrent.
Appropriate Sig: Stopping crime the old fashion way, one criminal at a time.
So no ISP should be in the "filter" or "block" anything business.
Spammers are not important, people and companies that pay spammers to spam are.
The only final answer to "spam" is to go after the source of the money that pays for it. And I mean the direct source - the place spam tries to get you to go and spend money at. Not the idiots that buy from them, for they also are not important. Go after those that hire spammers.
In the interim use: "fetchmail -> qmail(with pop3 & smtpd)+qmailqueue + qmail-scanner(st/hcc) -> clamav -> spamassassin w/(razor, pyzor,dcc) -> tmda, and kmail with tmda-ofmipd, on Mandrake 9.2", or the equivalent.
TMDA is great, but you need to drop about 66% of the spam prior to the C/R system in order not to create more spam then you started with - in other words be a good net citizen.
I've been using this set up for over a year with no false positives and no (and I mean NO) spam.
I set up a default form on my website for anyone that could not reach me by email (in case of a problem with the filter/block/drop/TMDA method). It has never been used by anyone, so at this point if they can't reach me, they have nothing to say that I want to hear anyway.
Get ISPs out of the role of Big Brother. The only thing that can come of that is disaster.
NewToNix
Here's the usual change:
A Conservative is a Liberal that's just been mugged.
A Liberal is a Conservative that's just been arrested.
This is a very Conservative Liberal Sig... Or Vice Versa.
One dumb court case down, SCO to go.
I pluged it into my router and opened ports 25 & 110 for it.
Then I added Fetchmail .
And then the neatest thing since sliced bread; TMDA.
4 months now - zero spam, zero lost valid emails.
I didn't have to give up any existing (POP3) accounts, and gained as many as I want to create, because I now have my own email server.
This is easy and cures spam, period.
I'm on DSL, with dynamicly assigned IP, so I use a free DNS service no-ip.com.
This really is simple to do, all were RPM's and I mostly just took whatever default was offered.
I really am New To Nix, so if I could do this, then anyone can.
And it was free.
I am so happy - 40 - 50 spam emails a day, went to ZERO spam. And I still have and use my same email address! Plus some special occasion ones I create as needed (timed experation for usenet, etc.).
And the disclaimer - I have nothing to do with any program mentioned in this post, other then being a happy user of same.
NewToNix (668737)
You can see the way it is going now, open source adopted by other (I'm USA) governments (this is good, IMO).
The same will be true of the BIOS chips & even MB chip sets - they (forgin governments) are sharp enough to know it's a bad idea to have your system locked down (or into) something some one else has controll over.
So we buy all our stuff from overseas now, for price reasons. Soon we will be buying from them for freedom reasons (this may NOT bode well for the price we may have to pay in the future).
The day may be coming when we have to smuggle BIOS chips and/or Main Boards into the US, just to try to keep some freedom.
This may not be quite as "tinfoil hat" as it sounds now. Remember no one is looking out for your freedom - that task is up to you.
NewToNix - I lent my sig to a really nice government man, but he never returned it.
Those that learn from history are doomed to watch it repeat.
NewToNix
I thought they already had. -> "What's good for M$, is what's good for the country.", The Borg, 1999
NewToNix
"Trinity does it properly in The Matrix Reloaded. She whips out Nmap version 2.54BETA25, uses it to find a vulnerable SSH server, and then proceeds to exploit it using the SSH1 CRC32 exploit from 2001. " ( http://www.insecure.org/ ).
And the article never mentioned "Ralf124C41".
If so where are they in this thread?
Any nerd I know would be in hysterical gales of laughter any time he/she sees the two words "internet" and "privacy" combined.
I live in the USA, that means for me privacy is a commodity like everything else. You can have all of it you can afford.
Hmmm...new business model: eBay privacy auction. It would have to be a dutch auction....
Sound of NewToNix running to patent office.....
It's neither free nor theirs.
Having to building libraries next to police stations would seem a strange method for enforcing library rules.
There is supposed to be a right to free speech. There is no "right" to computers in libraries, nor to the use of library computers.
The court has just decided we have the "duty" to pay for "filters" for computers in libraries that we also have to pay for.
A better solution might well be to put a few computers in individual private cubicles in our libraries and CHARGE lots of money for a "private" computer session.
The result would be a profit center for the library, and no problems with "public" porn, etc.
And the First Amendment would not be compromised.
NewToNix.
Lets hear it for TV - the greatest crime reducer ever invented!
My Sig is on the couch, watching TV, so couldn't be bothered to appear here.
I believe a person owns that which he controlls (what you can destroy you own). TIVO's opt out is not you in controll - it is you asking for a favor over something they claim to own - the collected data and the right to use the hardware to collect that data.
So take controll, you bought the hardware and your data should belong to you (even in aggregate it is your data, to the extent that data derived from you is part of the aggregate).
As to agreements made wherein TIVO retains the "right" to do the data collecting as part of purchasing the hardware: It should be no diffrent then purchasing a car or a microwave, if you want the warranty you do what they say, if you want total ownership you may remodel the thing to suit yourself, but lose any warranty.
My Sig left me for another /. Sig