I think a better analogy would be truck mechanic=programmer and truck driver=sysadmin. Most truck mechanics can drive trucks, but most truck drivers can't fix them.
The calibre of programmers you get in any decent shrinkwrap shop are perfectly capable of doing most sysadmin work.
Fusion power won't be free. The capital cost of a fusion power station will be probably more per GW than a current fission reactor, at least for the first few decades of development. There will still be radioactive waste, (just less of it) and the plant will have a finite life and then have to be decommissioned. My guess is 25% of the (full economic) cost of fission power, but I'm prepared to be corrected?
In dance music, a bootleg is usually a record (vinyl 12" rather than CD) that has been remixed without clearing copyright. Normally these records are white labelled.
Outside the US, creating and trading in such records is fully tolerated by most artists and record companies.
I was using the term "sender id" generically - hence the lower case..
The big argument against this kind of thing is that spammers will just register a domain, send a million emails on it and sacrifice it when it gets blacklisted.
One scenario for the future is that more TLDs will require positive ID to accept a registration. That will allow an anti-spam system to: a) give mail from such TLDs a lower spam probability b) blacklist people and companies rather than domains and IPs
Also, it will allow anti-spam laws to be actually enforced. Theoretically, a registrar could require that domain owners provided a continuing credit card authority that would get charged in the event of abuse (rather like when you rent a car in many countries and get a traffic ticket).
This all remains voluntary - if you don't want to be identified, choose a TLD that doesn't require id - your mail will still get through unless it looks spammy in other ways. (e.g. it discusses well known prescription drugs with a white font colour and a subject line consisting of random words).
It's fairly simple - this is just another piece of information for a filter. Good practice for an MTA is: - Check if the (purported) sender implements some form of sender identification. - If so, check that the sending IP is as expected -- If it mismatches, drop the mail as (possibly fraudulent) spam -- If it matches, give the message negative spam points (in a point based system) and pass it on (e.g. it's a bit less likely to be spam) - If the sender doesn't implement id, pass it on, possibly with a small positive spam rating (it's fractionally more likely to be spam)
I recently worked at an email security vendor, and my sense is that most commercial tools will support incoming sender id (using any protocols they legally can) within the next year or so.
The open source world will just have to: 1: live without Sender_ID 2: create an anonymously authored and distributed, unofficial, illegal plugin for sendmail and whatever..
What's wrong with Ponsonby or Remuera - much classier. Or Manukau, Otahuhu, Papatoetoe - much more authentic.
They could offer a porn-optimised version of Firefox codenamed "K-Road".
And someone or something required it..
Same with Linux, VMS, RT-11. Same with PalmOS, eventually your PP will run out of power and need restarting.
Watch my karma go down to -2!!!!
I don't know why you think speculators are filth - they provide liquidity. At some point you'll want to adjust or cash out of your investment, and you'll get a much better price if there is a liquid market.
If you think Google stock is a good buy for some reason, you can buy it on the market once it starts trading. That way, you know the price and can "invest" exactly the amount you want. In theory, the expected premium on the float price compensates for this - in practice, you might not luck out.
Remember, if the price dumps 50% on day 1, then it'll take a lot of steady growth before your "investment" shows a win.
3.--(1) A person is guilty of an offence if--
(a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and
(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing--
...
(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.
*Any* email will "modify the contents of the computers" it is delivered to or passed through.
If the email has been crafted (e.g with nonsense keywords, hidden text, misleading subjects, forged headers) to avoid a spam filter then it could be held to "impair the operation of a program" - i.e. the spam filter.
This to me looks like a section 3 offence, which carries a five year sentence.
I'm not sure how you'd go about making a complaint though..
The 99% of users who know little and care less about computer technology don't care which browser to use. As long as the websites they want to look at render ok, then why should they?
If a website doesn't work in IE, then to an average user (who doesn't even know it's IE - they just call it the Internet) then that site's broken. Simple as..
The reason why standards (often) don't catch on is that they don't deliver functions to users. Functionality gets invented by bright, creative people, either working alone or for companies, who build a product that people want to use/buy. Standards committees spend months discussing arcane issues of syntax, then come over all upset when their standard gets treated as an irrelevance (everyone having got along just fine without it for the 3 years it took them to settle).
You misunderstand the reason for Galileo. Europe is (mostly) inhabited by grownups, who do not need to prove their military superiority / penis size by arming against imaginary Belarussian invaders.
Galileo has a number of justifications: - the GPS system is not warranted to keep working or be correct. No-one accepts responsibility if it fails (in civilian use). Mostly this doesn't matter, but for safety critical apps like aviation it matters a lot. Galileo will offer a paid-for service with a stability guarantee.
- hopefully, Galileo will offer increased performance, e.g. metre level accuracy, reduced power consumption, better urban receivability. This may be on a paid-for service - I'd pay a few dollars to get a GPS that runs for a month on a battery rather than a few hours.
- there is also scope for added value applications, e.g. traffic warnings
There are 3bln+ 6 character domains (assuming 38 legal chars). Why not have an auction system to allocate all the unassigned ones to the highest bidder.
We could then have a system to pay out the money as a cashback to everyone who pays for net access. After all, ICANN only "owns" the TLDs because we point our DNS at a server that replicates "their" tree.
So one could have an email of me@briansmith or whatever. Just like vanity plates on cars!
Slashdot Mirror
I think a better analogy would be truck mechanic=programmer and truck driver=sysadmin. Most truck mechanics can drive trucks, but most truck drivers can't fix them. The calibre of programmers you get in any decent shrinkwrap shop are perfectly capable of doing most sysadmin work.
Fusion power won't be free. The capital cost of a fusion power station will be probably more per GW than a current fission reactor, at least for the first few decades of development. There will still be radioactive waste, (just less of it) and the plant will have a finite life and then have to be decommissioned. My guess is 25% of the (full economic) cost of fission power, but I'm prepared to be corrected?
In dance music, a bootleg is usually a record (vinyl 12" rather than CD) that has been remixed without clearing copyright. Normally these records are white labelled.
Outside the US, creating and trading in such records is fully tolerated by most artists and record companies.
I was using the term "sender id" generically - hence the lower case..
The big argument against this kind of thing is that spammers will just register a domain, send a million emails on it and sacrifice it when it gets blacklisted.
One scenario for the future is that more TLDs will require positive ID to accept a registration. That will allow an anti-spam system to:
a) give mail from such TLDs a lower spam probability
b) blacklist people and companies rather than domains and IPs
Also, it will allow anti-spam laws to be actually enforced. Theoretically, a registrar could require that domain owners provided a continuing credit card authority that would get charged in the event of abuse (rather like when you rent a car in many countries and get a traffic ticket).
This all remains voluntary - if you don't want to be identified, choose a TLD that doesn't require id - your mail will still get through unless it looks spammy in other ways. (e.g. it discusses well known prescription drugs with a white font colour and a subject line consisting of random words).
It's fairly simple - this is just another piece of information for a filter. Good practice for an MTA is:
- Check if the (purported) sender implements some form of sender identification.
- If so, check that the sending IP is as expected
-- If it mismatches, drop the mail as (possibly fraudulent) spam
-- If it matches, give the message negative spam points (in a point based system) and pass it on (e.g. it's a bit less likely to be spam)
- If the sender doesn't implement id, pass it on, possibly with a small positive spam rating (it's fractionally more likely to be spam)
I recently worked at an email security vendor, and my sense is that most commercial tools will support incoming sender id (using any protocols they legally can) within the next year or so.
The open source world will just have to:
1: live without Sender_ID
2: create an anonymously authored and distributed, unofficial, illegal plugin for sendmail and whatever..
What's wrong with Ponsonby or Remuera - much classier. Or Manukau, Otahuhu, Papatoetoe - much more authentic. They could offer a porn-optimised version of Firefox codenamed "K-Road".
And someone or something required it.. Same with Linux, VMS, RT-11. Same with PalmOS, eventually your PP will run out of power and need restarting. Watch my karma go down to -2!!!!
I don't know why you think speculators are filth - they provide liquidity. At some point you'll want to adjust or cash out of your investment, and you'll get a much better price if there is a liquid market.
If you think Google stock is a good buy for some reason, you can buy it on the market once it starts trading. That way, you know the price and can "invest" exactly the amount you want. In theory, the expected premium on the float price compensates for this - in practice, you might not luck out.
Remember, if the price dumps 50% on day 1, then it'll take a lot of steady growth before your "investment" shows a win.
Arguably, a spammer is breaching the Computer Misuse Act 1990
This provides:
3.--(1) A person is guilty of an offence if-- (a) he does any act which causes an unauthorised modification of the contents of any computer; and(b) at the time when he does the act he has the requisite intent and the requisite knowledge.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above the requisite intent is an intent to cause a modification of the contents of any computer and by so doing--
(c) to impair the operation of any such program or the reliability of any such data.
*Any* email will "modify the contents of the computers" it is delivered to or passed through.
If the email has been crafted (e.g with nonsense keywords, hidden text, misleading subjects, forged headers) to avoid a spam filter then it could be held to "impair the operation of a program" - i.e. the spam filter.
This to me looks like a section 3 offence, which carries a five year sentence.
I'm not sure how you'd go about making a complaint though..
So fix the technology.
It's there to serve us, not us to serve it.
The 99% of users who know little and care less about computer technology don't care which browser to use. As long as the websites they want to look at render ok, then why should they?
If a website doesn't work in IE, then to an average user (who doesn't even know it's IE - they just call it the Internet) then that site's broken. Simple as..
The reason why standards (often) don't catch on is that they don't deliver functions to users. Functionality gets invented by bright, creative people, either working alone or for companies, who build a product that people want to use/buy.
Standards committees spend months discussing arcane issues of syntax, then come over all upset when their standard gets treated as an irrelevance (everyone having got along just fine without it for the 3 years it took them to settle).
Mostly..
You misunderstand the reason for Galileo. Europe is (mostly) inhabited by grownups, who do not need to prove their military superiority / penis size by arming against imaginary Belarussian invaders.
Galileo has a number of justifications:
- the GPS system is not warranted to keep working or be correct. No-one accepts responsibility if it fails (in civilian use). Mostly this doesn't matter, but for safety critical apps like aviation it matters a lot. Galileo will offer a paid-for service with a stability guarantee.
- hopefully, Galileo will offer increased performance, e.g. metre level accuracy, reduced power consumption, better urban receivability. This may be on a paid-for service - I'd pay a few dollars to get a GPS that runs for a month on a battery rather than a few hours.
- there is also scope for added value applications, e.g. traffic warnings
There are 3bln+ 6 character domains (assuming 38 legal chars). Why not have an auction system to allocate all the unassigned ones to the highest bidder. We could then have a system to pay out the money as a cashback to everyone who pays for net access. After all, ICANN only "owns" the TLDs because we point our DNS at a server that replicates "their" tree. So one could have an email of me@briansmith or whatever. Just like vanity plates on cars!