Any true Conservative should have no problem with this decision.
Any true skeptic should recognize the No True Scotsman fallacy when he sees it. Despite what you think conservatives believe and advocate, a large number of people in and out of government, who are considered by themselves and by everyone else to be "conservatives," are advocating and implement bigger government and a curtailment of civil liberties.
Complaining that they are "not true conservatives" does nothing to illuminate the debate, and only serves the purpose of "shooting the messenger."
SPF has to be one of the easiest measures we can take to reduce spam.
Yeah, except that it was never intended for that purpose, and doesn't have any features to do anything to prevent spam. But other than those two minor points, it's perfect.
The *AA organizations should instruct their men and women in Congress to pass a low forcing Microsoft to provide DRM at no charge. I'm sure there's a Homeland Security argument that can be pasted onto such a bill to make it fly.
After all, in America we have the best government money can buy.
First, Kerry's and Bush's ideals *do* differ. Both Republican and Democrat parties are fairly right-wing when it comes to global comparisons, but claiming that they are identical is ridiculous.
I can't help but notice that not once in your entire post, did you provide an example of where Kerry and Bush differ.
Meaning it is to be used for document structuring which is why it does not have presentation elements.
That's what they said about HTML in 1992. Look what happened to it when it got popular: bastardized so badly with presentation elements that it lost almost all of its structuring features. Remember <fig>? It was obsoleted before it even made it out of draft status because commercial browser vendors (*cough* Netscape *cough*) pushed <img align> on everyone instead, because it was quick and easy. That's just one example. Who's to say this new XHTML won't be spoiled the same way? We could say "Use HTML if precise control over layout is needed" but back in the HTML days, we were saying "use PDF if precise control is needed" and we were ignored, and HTML was destroyed so badly that XHTML is now needed to fill the role HTML had to abandon.
... you also have a loud, vocal "I want I want I want" community who... ... were a carefully developed demographic that the music vendors intentionally created and provoked to mass market hysteria with non-stop ads and hype. Gee, maybe they should have priced their product so it would be within the means of the consumer they targetted? Nah. That'd make too much sense. Much better to put a Lexus dealer in South Central, which is exactly what the music industry does by marketing to teens. No wonder their HID lamps get boosted all the time.
It's quite astonishing to see all the Slashdot posters applauding cvensorship and getting modded up. I wonder if the RNC has been having a Slashdot posting seminar.
Instead of pushing our leaders to pass more unenforcable laws that will expand government regulatory power, let's go after ISPs (and entire national networks, if need be) that tolerate spammers.
Go after ISP's using what? New laws? No laws? Vigilante teams? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Just what do you mean by "go after" if it does not involve passing new laws to prosecute violating ISPs with? You do realize that no law prohibits an ISP having a spammer as a customer, don't you?
So how shall we "go after" ISP's with no new laws?
While most readers will [probably correctly] take this to be a rather poor government whitewash, it could equally be a sign that the government's IT strategy has been fragmented and piecemeal for ages.
It's both. The goverment is giving us rather poor whitewash, and their IT strategy has been terribly fragmented and piecemeal for ages.
First of all, the New York Times is a FOR PROFIT company.
How is that a magical excuse for anything? Besides, they still don't get any money from you if you supply them correct or incorrect registration info. So what difference does it make? None that I can see. Having to register for a free service is gratuitous information collecting.
They offer their service for free. All they ask in return is that you provide some information so that they can target ads.
How do you know what they use it for?
Is that so much to ask for?
Yeah.
Would you rather just lay out cash?
Yeah, but that isn't an option for the online version.
Release candidates are unstable. They are released to find issues that were overlooked by the developers. If you tried it without backing up your old profile folder, the fault is with your own inadequate computer security and safety policy.
So when did Firefox point out to me that I had a trashable profile in the first place? If I install a EA release of IE, it keeps all my bookmarks and settings that have carried over to the new version. That Firefox failed to do this, or even warn of the problem, was a huge oversight. Blaming the end user for something he didn't even know about is not the way to encourage adoption.
How about instead they recognize that all the cats that are out of the bag, are not going back in, ever. This would lead them to try and introduce a new format that gives them the control they want. Of course, this new format would have to compete against the existing formats, just like CDs competed with and eventually replaced vinyl and tapes. But that was because CDs gave the buyer something he/she liked to have, that tapes and records did not offer (better portability, sound quality, durability, etc.). If course there are tradeoffs, too. many people think CDs sound "clinical" and lack warmth. But if the new format offers something people would like to have, say multichannel surround sound, or video, then the DRM may be acceptable and may out-compete existing CDs, and eventually replace them.
But if the new format does no deliver, CDs will remain, and people will just keep re-copying them as long as they can.
I report all that to Spamcop, even though they have rules in effect that try and catch virus messages and prevent you from reporting them. It's my mailbox, and if a message contains an unsolicited commercial message, it's spam and I'll report it. I don't care if it's technically a NDR, if Exchange started adding a advertising blurb (This bounce has been brought to you by the innovators at Microsoft) I'd report that as spam, too.
McSpammy is the worst offender in this regard. Fuck 'em.
There are no "registered users" to which BondedSenders mail send mail.
wait a minute, I misunderstood you. I see now you meant "registered users" to mean "users who signed up for material from the email marketer". That makes a lot more sense, of course, but it still doesn't describe BondedSender accurately. It describes BondedSenderPlus, which is a higher standards whitelist that costs more money to get on. The regular BondedSender program merely requires the email marketer to show a previous business relaitonship with the user. There is no requirement for explicit opt-in to qualify as a BondedSender.
That isn't how it works at all. You pay IronPort to get listed on their BondedSender DNS whitelist. Anyone, anywhere can configure their mail server to consult the IronPort DNS whitelist, in the same manner as one would use SPEWS or Spamcop BL, and use that lookup to decide whether or not to subject the message to spam filtering, or to let it pass without any filtering. It is conceivable that a ISP or mailhost could use the BondedSender DNS whitelist as a blacklist, and exclude all BondedSenders from their mail domain.
IronPort cannot guarantee anything about mail delivery to the people who post bonds in order to be listed in the DNS whitelist. They can only assure the people using the DNS whitelist, that all the entries on that whitelist represent email marketers that adhere to BondedSender requirements. They cannot make end users of the whitelist agree that those requirements merit allowing emails through the spam filter. They cannot make end users of the whitelist agree to anything, since it's free and open in the DNS for everyone to use as they see fit. There are no "registered users" to which BondedSenders mail send mail.
If users complain, the amount of bond posted by the email marketer is deducted by $20 for each complaint (past the threshhold, which is currently 1 complaint per million emails).
Slashdot Mirror
Any true Conservative should have no problem with this decision.
Any true skeptic should recognize the No True Scotsman fallacy when he sees it. Despite what you think conservatives believe and advocate, a large number of people in and out of government, who are considered by themselves and by everyone else to be "conservatives," are advocating and implement bigger government and a curtailment of civil liberties.
Complaining that they are "not true conservatives" does nothing to illuminate the debate, and only serves the purpose of "shooting the messenger."
SPF has to be one of the easiest measures we can take to reduce spam.
Yeah, except that it was never intended for that purpose, and doesn't have any features to do anything to prevent spam. But other than those two minor points, it's perfect.
The *AA organizations should instruct their men and women in Congress to pass a low forcing Microsoft to provide DRM at no charge. I'm sure there's a Homeland Security argument that can be pasted onto such a bill to make it fly.
After all, in America we have the best government money can buy.
Now I won't have to fix up all the unportable gcc/linux code you freaks like to think is cross-platform. Hah!
Tivos don't kill people, guns do. Big difference.
This will lead to a ban on all electronic devices in any US retail outlet. Hey, get with the times, this is how we do things now.
First, Kerry's and Bush's ideals *do* differ. Both Republican and Democrat parties are fairly right-wing when it comes to global comparisons, but claiming that they are identical is ridiculous.
I can't help but notice that not once in your entire post, did you provide an example of where Kerry and Bush differ.
Meaning it is to be used for document structuring which is why it does not have presentation elements.
That's what they said about HTML in 1992. Look what happened to it when it got popular: bastardized so badly with presentation elements that it lost almost all of its structuring features. Remember <fig>? It was obsoleted before it even made it out of draft status because commercial browser vendors (*cough* Netscape *cough*) pushed <img align> on everyone instead, because it was quick and easy. That's just one example. Who's to say this new XHTML won't be spoiled the same way? We could say "Use HTML if precise control over layout is needed" but back in the HTML days, we were saying "use PDF if precise control is needed" and we were ignored, and HTML was destroyed so badly that XHTML is now needed to fill the role HTML had to abandon.
What's to prevent lather/rinse/repeat?
... you also have a loud, vocal "I want I want I want" community who ... ... were a carefully developed demographic that the music vendors intentionally created and provoked to mass market hysteria with non-stop ads and hype. Gee, maybe they should have priced their product so it would be within the means of the consumer they targetted? Nah. That'd make too much sense. Much better to put a Lexus dealer in South Central, which is exactly what the music industry does by marketing to teens. No wonder their HID lamps get boosted all the time.
After Congress is lobbied by various industries, the Three Laws will be mutated into something like this:
1. A robot may not help copy a protected work or, through inaction, allow a protected work to be copied.
2. Rule 2 is rescinded.
3. Rule 3 is rescinded.
That's why we run a private Jabber server accessible across our private WAN.
It's quite astonishing to see all the Slashdot posters applauding cvensorship and getting modded up. I wonder if the RNC has been having a Slashdot posting seminar.
Wiki Links Are Not Obligatory. Good Night!
Instead of pushing our leaders to pass more unenforcable laws that will expand government regulatory power, let's go after ISPs (and entire national networks, if need be) that tolerate spammers.
Go after ISP's using what? New laws? No laws? Vigilante teams? Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles? Just what do you mean by "go after" if it does not involve passing new laws to prosecute violating ISPs with? You do realize that no law prohibits an ISP having a spammer as a customer, don't you?
So how shall we "go after" ISP's with no new laws?
Therefore, Darl McBride is Ray Charles' bastard love child.
With Martha Stewart.
... a version of the 2nd and 3rd movies that don't suck ass?
I'm sure mine is the 152nd post to say the same thing....
Have we stopped caring about transparancy and republican values at home, whilst at the same time singing the praises of 'democracy' abroad?
We have always cared about transparency and republican values at home.
Are we all content to allow this proud nation to slip slowly but surely into a permanently-militarised social order?
Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia. And as you no doubt already know, War is Peace.
Will _you_ accept the suspension of habeus corpus, or of the entire Constitution, and live happily in a police state?
And Freedom is Slavery.
While most readers will [probably correctly] take this to be a rather poor government whitewash, it could equally be a sign that the government's IT strategy has been fragmented and piecemeal for ages.
It's both. The goverment is giving us rather poor whitewash, and their IT strategy has been terribly fragmented and piecemeal for ages.
First of all, the New York Times is a FOR PROFIT company.
How is that a magical excuse for anything? Besides, they still don't get any money from you if you supply them correct or incorrect registration info. So what difference does it make? None that I can see. Having to register for a free service is gratuitous information collecting.
They offer their service for free. All they ask in return is that you provide some information so that they can target ads.
How do you know what they use it for?
Is that so much to ask for?
Yeah.
Would you rather just lay out cash?
Yeah, but that isn't an option for the online version.
Release candidates are unstable. They are released to find issues that were overlooked by the developers. If you tried it without backing up your old profile folder, the fault is with your own inadequate computer security and safety policy.
So when did Firefox point out to me that I had a trashable profile in the first place? If I install a EA release of IE, it keeps all my bookmarks and settings that have carried over to the new version. That Firefox failed to do this, or even warn of the problem, was a huge oversight. Blaming the end user for something he didn't even know about is not the way to encourage adoption.
How about instead they recognize that all the cats that are out of the bag, are not going back in, ever. This would lead them to try and introduce a new format that gives them the control they want. Of course, this new format would have to compete against the existing formats, just like CDs competed with and eventually replaced vinyl and tapes. But that was because CDs gave the buyer something he/she liked to have, that tapes and records did not offer (better portability, sound quality, durability, etc.). If course there are tradeoffs, too. many people think CDs sound "clinical" and lack warmth. But if the new format offers something people would like to have, say multichannel surround sound, or video, then the DRM may be acceptable and may out-compete existing CDs, and eventually replace them.
But if the new format does no deliver, CDs will remain, and people will just keep re-copying them as long as they can.
But this is how it should be!
I report all that to Spamcop, even though they have rules in effect that try and catch virus messages and prevent you from reporting them. It's my mailbox, and if a message contains an unsolicited commercial message, it's spam and I'll report it. I don't care if it's technically a NDR, if Exchange started adding a advertising blurb (This bounce has been brought to you by the innovators at Microsoft) I'd report that as spam, too.
McSpammy is the worst offender in this regard. Fuck 'em.
I am a gringo!
Y yo soy gringo puta!
There are no "registered users" to which BondedSenders mail send mail.
wait a minute, I misunderstood you. I see now you meant "registered users" to mean "users who signed up for material from the email marketer". That makes a lot more sense, of course, but it still doesn't describe BondedSender accurately. It describes BondedSenderPlus, which is a higher standards whitelist that costs more money to get on. The regular BondedSender program merely requires the email marketer to show a previous business relaitonship with the user. There is no requirement for explicit opt-in to qualify as a BondedSender.
That isn't how it works at all. You pay IronPort to get listed on their BondedSender DNS whitelist. Anyone, anywhere can configure their mail server to consult the IronPort DNS whitelist, in the same manner as one would use SPEWS or Spamcop BL, and use that lookup to decide whether or not to subject the message to spam filtering, or to let it pass without any filtering. It is conceivable that a ISP or mailhost could use the BondedSender DNS whitelist as a blacklist, and exclude all BondedSenders from their mail domain.
IronPort cannot guarantee anything about mail delivery to the people who post bonds in order to be listed in the DNS whitelist. They can only assure the people using the DNS whitelist, that all the entries on that whitelist represent email marketers that adhere to BondedSender requirements. They cannot make end users of the whitelist agree that those requirements merit allowing emails through the spam filter. They cannot make end users of the whitelist agree to anything, since it's free and open in the DNS for everyone to use as they see fit. There are no "registered users" to which BondedSenders mail send mail.
If users complain, the amount of bond posted by the email marketer is deducted by $20 for each complaint (past the threshhold, which is currently 1 complaint per million emails).