Who are YOU to dictate what people should be using, as well?
Also, why is it that such a large proportion of Slashdot comments include comments such as "get a better...". That is hardly constructive.
And, I do have my own domain.
Oh, and can I see your statistics pointing to "a majority" of people wanting server-side blocking? Perhaps this is what you discuss at Friday-night D&D meetings with you and your d00dz, but it's not something I want. If you had read my post, it would have been obvious that I was speaking for myself, not anyone else. Perhaps you would do well to follow said advice.
I'm not too disappointed to hear of these new attacks. Conspiracy theories and the like aside, I'd rather have the responsibility for SPAM-blocking placed on the client side.
Damnit, if I want a larger penis, then I should be able to read SPAM directed towards that. That being said, I'd much prefer if these SPAM services were forced to be opt-in.
Unfortunately, client-side filtering doesn't adequately address the massive amounts of bandwidth consumed by SPAM operations. Nonetheless, the idea that an autonymous corporation/whatever can decide what is valid e-mail for ME is just as offensive, in my opinion, as e-mail advertising product/scam/idea X.
Slashdot Mirror
Who are YOU to dictate what people should be using, as well?
Also, why is it that such a large proportion of Slashdot comments include comments such as "get a better...". That is hardly constructive.
And, I do have my own domain.
Oh, and can I see your statistics pointing to "a majority" of people wanting server-side blocking? Perhaps this is what you discuss at Friday-night D&D meetings with you and your d00dz, but it's not something I want. If you had read my post, it would have been obvious that I was speaking for myself, not anyone else. Perhaps you would do well to follow said advice.
Jarett
Really? That's not what 2 of the ISP's I have used have said. Thanks for making assumptions about my environment, though.
I'm not too disappointed to hear of these new attacks. Conspiracy theories and the like aside, I'd rather have the responsibility for SPAM-blocking placed on the client side.
Damnit, if I want a larger penis, then I should be able to read SPAM directed towards that. That being said, I'd much prefer if these SPAM services were forced to be opt-in.
Unfortunately, client-side filtering doesn't adequately address the massive amounts of bandwidth consumed by SPAM operations. Nonetheless, the idea that an autonymous corporation/whatever can decide what is valid e-mail for ME is just as offensive, in my opinion, as e-mail advertising product/scam/idea X.
Peas,
j