I can't see the article since it's registered users only, but if I recall correctly didn't Asimov's idea involve mathematics applied to the behavior of LARGE numbers of people? How does this apply?
It applies because the guys that post stories at Slashdot don't give a flying fuck whether they get any part of it right.
I like to believe that all non-ACs are fairly professional about technical issues so, in the future, just lower the temperature
A reasonable request. By way of explantion, (not justification) there is so much gratuitous stupidity inflicted upon the web-browsing public, I just get aggravated.
By the way, regarding your original code to generate lists of gibberish addresses, have you ever tried including a real one, for an account used for nothing else, to test uptake?
You absolutely have the right to be silly. I have the right to call you silly if I think you are.
I intentionally set all my windows to full screen all the time (almost). Then I alt-tab between them as needed. Your silly javascript makes the window change size. It makes the browser wndow become smaller - what does that accomplish, other than annoying me?
<script language="JavaScript"><!-- if (window.screen) { window.resizeTo(screen.availWidth*.75,screen.avail Height) window.moveTo(screen.availWidth*.1,0); }
if ((screen.width <= 800)) { window.resizeTo(screen.availWidth,screen.availHeig ht) window.moveTo(0,0);; } //--></script>
Where do YOU get off deciding what size MY browser window should be? Use relative numnbers for table widths and fonts and you won't be tempted into silly fucking kludges like this.
MS will continually introduce gratuitous and non-documented changes to the APIs to keep it from being fully functional
Even if it worked perfectly, it just lets you continue to give money for applications to MS and to keep your data in closed formats dictated by Microsoft.
For these reasons, WINE is ultimately losing proposition IMHO. It's not the way to go Open Source. The criticial apps (browser, office suite) now exist in mature forms in open source.
..don't like something, but have the pesky problem that the majority is for it? Thtat's OK, just put in place someone who will undermine it in the postion that's supposed to enforce it. How else does Michael Powell end up chair at FCC? Put someone in charge of EPA that doesn't believe in the environment. Put Harvey Pitt at the SEC so big companies can rob the workd blind. They couldn't get the laws repealed EVER, so they intentionally undermine their enforcement instead.
... as if I (or anyone else) actually gives a fuck about anything SCO/Caldera does, ever again.
Syntactically Significant Whitespace - YUCK!!!
on
Python in a Nutshell
·
· Score: 1
I have never gotten around this. I probably never will get around this.
With braces, as in perl or C, I can bounce on the % key and find the ends of a block unequivocally. I can cut and paste from one editor to another, and it still works. I can change tabstops and everything still works.
David Boies...has lost every major case...Like being the DOJ vs Microsoft prosecutor
No, DOJ did not lose the initial case. They found an appeals court to overrule the punishment phase on totaly bogus grounds, and the Bush DOJ, unlike the Clinton DOJ, netotiated the most bogus settlement imaginable, and then, in effect, became Microsoft's law firm when it was challenged.
John Kerry is right - we need a regime change in Washington.
good will towards their company is not as important
Especially since there wasn't much of that to start with. I had the misfortune to admin SCO systems in the mid 90's. Their formal for-money tech support sucked. Their product was mediocre, though, properly patched, it was fairly reliable.
Then there's Caldera, who's main Linux innovation (besides an installer that left critical functions like atd non-functional) was per-seat licensing. One main reason to go to Linux is to get away from crap like that.
but there's a maximum of 32767 processes in most Unixces, and I get that many messages in just one day.
But will the typical spamming slime initiate an individual connection for each? If someone is spamming by the millions, one optimization is to group spam to a specific domain into one session. One session should be one process, right?
Of course, teergrube or other tarpits may encourage the spammers to set up many parallel connections. That is also fightable though - periodically scan your sockets and if more than some number are to port 25 from the same IP, block that IP. A perl script run from cron could do this one fairly easily, I think.
I used 6.0 (actally still do for my main webservers) and there was some flakiness there that was improved significantly in 6.2 - not stability issues, I think it was application stuff or window manager - can't even remember the details now, but it was enough to make me generally willing to wait for point releases. The fact that there won't be one for 8 is therefore disappointing.
Your experience is interesting though - maybe I'm being too conservative.
From the article: expert spammers can also switch IP addresses as quickly as the blocks are applied.
A honeypot for spam - mentioned here previously, I think - would be one answer. It would recognize a spammer and, instead of disconnecting, it would accept all the spam - very sllloooowwwly, then discard it. It's not a trivial programming task, since the spam would have to be recognized, then treated differently from that point on from regular email. But it's feasible, I think and would help fight the large scale attack noted at the beginning of the linked article.
When the "work for 1/3 the pay and do whatever management says, no matter how absurd, or be deported" crew is gone, management will have to start treating us like human beings again.
Do you think that every company/organization that uses Linux is going to have in house programmers ready to fix any coding issue? Ugh.
No, but when an issue requiring a programmer arises, they'll be able to recruit from a much larger pool than for proprietary s/w, where you can only choose the owner of the code.
And usenet? WTF? For a REAL business?
Yes. The support on Usenet, for both open source and proprietary products, frequently exceeds that available from vendors, in promptness, and quality. I've seen total cluelessness from vendor reps. An intelligent person who's already been through the same problem (or similar) that you're facing is frequently much better than vendor support. And certainly cheaper.
Dude, its 2003 not 1998.
Yes, indeed. We no longer have money to burn and must spend it sensibly, that means not giving money away for proprietary solutions if good solutions are available for much less elsewhere.
Slashdot Mirror
Ooops that 4th line should be:
for ($e=1; $e<1000; $e++)
Perl equivalent:
.= chr(97 + int(rand(25))); .= "@";
.com .org .net .edu .us .co.uk .org.uk
.net.uk .edu.uk .com.au .org.au .net.au .de .co .tv
.= chr(97 + int(rand(25)));
.= $rootarray[rand(15)];
}
#!/usr/bin/perl -w
print "Content-Type: text/html\n\n<html><head></head><body>\n";
srand(time ^ $$ );
for ($e=1; $e<10; $e++)
{
$fakename = "";
$nl = 4 + int(rand(10));
for ($n = 1; $n<$nl; $n++)
{
$fakename
}
$fakename
@rootarray = ( qw(
) );
$nl = 4 + int(rand(10));
for ($n = 1; $n<$nl; $n++)
{
$fakename
}
$fakename
print "<a href=\"mailto:$fakename\">$fakename</a><BR>\n";
print "\n</body></html>\n";
From your site: Cyberista uses Java judiciously and avoids Flash, along with all other client-side bells and whistles, like the plague.
Damn - you are truly one of the good guys. When I get a new system, one of the first things I do is delete fucking Flash - hate that shit.
Cool. Is there a perl version, (or am I just being lazy)?
I can't see the article since it's registered users only, but if I recall correctly didn't Asimov's idea involve mathematics applied to the behavior of LARGE numbers of people? How does this apply?
It applies because the guys that post stories at Slashdot don't give a flying fuck whether they get any part of it right.
I like to believe that all non-ACs are fairly professional about technical issues so, in the future, just lower the temperature
A reasonable request. By way of explantion, (not justification) there is so much gratuitous stupidity inflicted upon the web-browsing public, I just get aggravated.
By the way, regarding your original code to generate lists of gibberish addresses, have you ever tried including a real one, for an account used for nothing else, to test uptake?
You absolutely have the right to be silly. I have the right to call you silly if I think you are.
I intentionally set all my windows to full screen all the time (almost). Then I alt-tab between them as needed. Your silly javascript makes the window change size. It makes the browser wndow become smaller - what does that accomplish, other than annoying me?
Your page contains this:
l Height)
g ht) ;
<script language="JavaScript"><!--
if (window.screen) {
window.resizeTo(screen.availWidth*.75,screen.avai
window.moveTo(screen.availWidth*.1,0);
}
if ((screen.width <= 800)) {
window.resizeTo(screen.availWidth,screen.availHei
window.moveTo(0,0);
}
//--></script>
Where do YOU get off deciding what size MY browser window should be? Use relative numnbers for table widths and fonts and you won't be tempted into silly fucking kludges like this.
...if it were the programmers committing the errors that cause these who went to jail.
For crying out lound, why are there any NEW buffer overflows being discovered? This just makes no sense.
- MS will continually introduce gratuitous and non-documented changes to the APIs to keep it from being fully functional
- Even if it worked perfectly, it just lets you continue to give money for applications to MS and to keep your data in closed formats dictated by Microsoft.
For these reasons, WINE is ultimately losing proposition IMHO. It's not the way to go Open Source. The criticial apps (browser, office suite) now exist in mature forms in open source.MD5 is flawed.
Guess I missed this one - what's your source?
..don't like something, but have the pesky problem that the majority is for it? Thtat's OK, just put in place someone who will undermine it in the postion that's supposed to enforce it. How else does Michael Powell end up chair at FCC? Put someone in charge of EPA that doesn't believe in the environment. Put Harvey Pitt at the SEC so big companies can rob the workd blind. They couldn't get the laws repealed EVER, so they intentionally undermine their enforcement instead.
... as if I (or anyone else) actually gives a fuck about anything SCO/Caldera does, ever again.
I have never gotten around this. I probably never will get around this.
With braces, as in perl or C, I can bounce on the % key and find the ends of a block unequivocally. I can cut and paste from one editor to another, and it still works. I can change tabstops and everything still works.
http://www.lenny.com/spam/
David Boies...has lost every major case...Like being the DOJ vs Microsoft prosecutor
No, DOJ did not lose the initial case. They found an appeals court to overrule the punishment phase on totaly bogus grounds, and the Bush DOJ, unlike the Clinton DOJ, netotiated the most bogus settlement imaginable, and then, in effect, became Microsoft's law firm when it was challenged.
John Kerry is right - we need a regime change in Washington.
good will towards their company is not as important
Especially since there wasn't much of that to start with. I had the misfortune to admin SCO systems in the mid 90's. Their formal for-money tech support sucked. Their product was mediocre, though, properly patched, it was fairly reliable.
Then there's Caldera, who's main Linux innovation (besides an installer that left critical functions like atd non-functional) was per-seat licensing. One main reason to go to Linux is to get away from crap like that.
Good riddance.
but there's a maximum of 32767 processes in most Unixces, and I get that many messages in just one day.
But will the typical spamming slime initiate an individual connection for each? If someone is spamming by the millions, one optimization is to group spam to a specific domain into one session. One session should be one process, right?
Of course, teergrube or other tarpits may encourage the spammers to set up many parallel connections. That is also fightable though - periodically scan your sockets and if more than some number are to port 25 from the same IP, block that IP. A perl script run from cron could do this one fairly easily, I think.
I used 6.0 (actally still do for my main webservers) and there was some flakiness there that was improved significantly in 6.2 - not stability issues, I think it was application stuff or window manager - can't even remember the details now, but it was enough to make me generally willing to wait for point releases. The fact that there won't be one for 8 is therefore disappointing.
Your experience is interesting though - maybe I'm being too conservative.
From the article: expert spammers can also switch IP addresses as quickly as the blocks are applied.
A honeypot for spam - mentioned here previously, I think - would be one answer. It would recognize a spammer and, instead of disconnecting, it would accept all the spam - very sllloooowwwly, then discard it. It's not a trivial programming task, since the spam would have to be recognized, then treated differently from that point on from regular email. But it's feasible, I think and would help fight the large scale attack noted at the beginning of the linked article.
don't like it? don't use it. You are free to choose.
.0 releases as unstable ones is just a myth. I'm currently using Red Hat 8.1beta3 and works great.
.0 and the second is about .1beta3.
No shit sherlock. I'm also free to comment on this choice.
However I guess Red Hat
Do those two sentences actually connect? The first is about
This is mis-guided on RedHat's part.
.0 releases. So this means I will entirely skip the 8 series.
I don't use
If this becomes their official long-term policy, I'll be skipping redhat altogether.
When the "work for 1/3 the pay and do whatever management says, no matter how absurd, or be deported" crew is gone, management will have to start treating us like human beings again.
yet another sleazy spammer
Redundant.
Do you think that every company/organization that uses Linux is going to have in house programmers ready to fix any coding issue? Ugh.
No, but when an issue requiring a programmer arises, they'll be able to recruit from a much larger pool than for proprietary s/w, where you can only choose the owner of the code.
And usenet? WTF? For a REAL business?
Yes. The support on Usenet, for both open source and proprietary products, frequently exceeds that available from vendors, in promptness, and quality. I've seen total cluelessness from vendor reps. An intelligent person who's already been through the same problem (or similar) that you're facing is frequently much better than vendor support. And certainly cheaper.
Dude, its 2003 not 1998.
Yes, indeed. We no longer have money to burn and must spend it sensibly, that means not giving money away for proprietary solutions if good solutions are available for much less elsewhere.