No, I am saying that Habeas has done nothing at my site but allow spam to bypass the SpamAssassin filters. It has not, at least as far back as my logs go, allowed any legit mails to come through that might have otherwise been stopped. As far back as my logs go, the only HABEAS_SWE rule hits were from the spammer. Therefore: good-bye HABEAS_SWE rule.
If you start filtering on that mark you *WILL* falsely filter out a lot of legitimate mail.
Incorrect. This spam was the first to reach my site bearing any Habeas mark. The Habeas mark, to my knowledge, has not kept any spam out of my co-worker's inboxes, nor has it made sure that any wanted mails made it through the filters. Our sole experience with the Habeas mark has been this infringing spammers using it to bypass our filter. We bounce 400 spams/minute with scores over 10, just to give you an idea of how much mail we get, and therefore how rare a properly used Habeas mark really is at our site.
The Habeas rule stays off. I will not trust 3rd parties to tell me who is playing nice. I will not use negative-scored public-knowledge rules anymore, either.
Is it time to start filtering for haikus or will Habeas succeed in thwarting the spam attack?"
It is time to start ignoring the Habeas mark. Good for them that they are trying to track down the infringer, who used a network of compromised zombies to spread the spam. Meanwhile, the HABEAS_SWE rule in SpamAssassin is letting the spam through. Until SA is upgraded to recognize when a lawsuit is pending, the HABEAS_SWE rule gets a score of zero.
I will no longer trust 3rd parties to tell me who is being good.
Mike Rowe could have registered MikeRowe.com, or MikeRowe.ca, or MikeRowe.ch, or Mike.Rowe.name or any of the other variants that could be registered.
Adding the otherwise superfluous "soft" suffix can be reasonably construed as an attempt to sponge off of Microsoft's famous mark. Without the goodwill built by Microsoft into their famous trademark, MikeRoweSoft.com is just another clumsy-sounding name, like IniTech or Flooz.
At least KSH doesn't do bone-headed crap like set read-only environment variables that are identical to the ones your Bourne or Korn shell script uses. What a bone-headed bash-ism that is. In fact, there's no way to get a posix-ish bash, so it's a free for all and whenever the Bash developers feel like taking over some variables you were using, well, tough luck - you should have been prescient and should have known they'd steal something obvious like $UID and $GID.
No, it doesn't. The SpamAssassin rules are independent of the Bayesian analysis. Those rules match on the other text, the stuff that actually tries to sell you something, or get you to click on something.
The effect it would have on the Bayesian filters is to give those words closer to a neutral score, to the extent that they also appear in ordinary emails that the Bayesian system has learned. But the remaining words that only spammers use would end up being scored higher. How many regular emails do you get that use the words "diptheria" or "biharmonic."? Do any of your friends use the word "niggardly" or "milieu" on a regular basis? Dictionary attacks on the Bayesian system only seem to make it more able to recognize dictionary attacks.:)
The mail servers I run for my employer reject 400 spams every minute. Those are the ones with SpamAssassin scores greater than 10. 1000 spams in a week is a very small amount. They should be grateful.;)
I have been an amateur astronomer for years. My curent planetary scope is a 9" Maksutov-Cassegrain. Jupiter is blandly colored. Saturn is ebven more bland. Mars is bland, too. What details can be seen are very low contrast. Newcomers have to be taught to see details in the planets, just as they have to be taught to see faint details in galaxies and nebulae.
(and yes, my Mak is properly collimated and baffled)
Enough dust in the atmosphere could interfere with that sufficiently to create a red hue, but this should not be the norm in calm weather conditions.
It is the norm for Mars. It's atmospheric dust load totally overwhelms Rayleigh scattering. Remember Mars atmosphere is much less dense than Earth's, therefore there is much less Rayleigh scattering.
It was a couple of weeks before they had produced re-sampled mosaics from the first Pathfinder images. The first release of those images were also hastily stitched together, and showed obvious seams. Give them a little time, they'll release corrected panoramas very soon, I think.
No device "sees" colors the way humans see color. Heck, no two humans see color the same way. All images, especially science images, whether they are photographic prints or digital images, are colorized and manipulated and stretched and bent and filtered and modified to enphasize the details the investigator is interested in.
You think Jupiter is a really garish ball of swirling colorful gasses? Think again. All the Galileo and Voyager images have saturation boosted a great deal, and the contrast is stretched mightily. Furthermore, the luminance layer is deconvolved to bring subtle spatial details into sharper relief. To the human eye, Jupiter is a rather bland beige-ish ball with some hint of subtle color here and there, and not much obvious detail. The same goes for Io, which is usually depicted as a bright yellow/orange malestrom. It's "real" colors - what a human in orbit would see - are also rather bland.
However, in order to get things off the ground without having to wait for DNS servers and tools to support a new record type...
Which of course, is a BIND design flaw... DNS servers should not need to be recoded to support a new record type. Tinydns doesn't. If you know the new record type's integer value, and the format of the data, just plug that into a tinydns record and you're set.
Dig supports querying for any record type. Just use "dig -t " if your version of dig does not understand the record type's name (SPF or SRV, for example).
Oh, I suppose I ought to post the point I was trying to make. First point is that tiny notebooks don't have to give up important features like network connectivity and touchpads. The second point is that because my Sharp is so lightweight, I use it and carry it with me much more often than the full-size notebooks I have owned previously.
I got one of these. It weighs slightly more than the Sony, but has a Transmeta 933Mhz CPU, integrated 100baseT and 802.11b, 2 USB 2.0 ports, 10.1" TFT, and a touchpad. It runs Linux with no problem, except that the ALi sound chip doesn't support SPDIF, yet the sound driver expects this chip to support SPDIF and tries to initialize those ports with colorful results.:) A few minutes' hacking on the driver source, and that problem was solved.
With the bigger battery, its weight goes up to a whole 2.9 lbs, but it runs for 9 hours.
Wouldn't they have more fun looking at pictures of naked women? Is this what happens when the armed forces can only recruit hayseeds from poor areas in the south?
That I never upgraded my pirated Photoshop 5.5. Whew! Glad I didn't have to waste all that time downloading CS. Does Adobe think my time is valueless? These guys need to get a clue.
The output sound is tight, crisp and full-bodied. The level is clean and hot, just the way I like it.
I'm sorry, Mr. Audio Engineer, but I don't understand all those technical audio terms. Could you tell me what is the meaning of "tight, crisp and full-bodied" and also "clean and hot" in terms of S/N ratio, frequency response, and dB?
Slashdot Mirror
Oops, make that 30-pin, 9-chip DRAM DIMMs. So sue me.
It runs RedHat 5.2... No, really! I still have the CD. I also have a CD for SunOS 4.1.4, which I might load on it again one day.
It ran Solaris2 like a pig, btw...
Two 50 Mb Quantum HDD, 64 Mb of 9-pin DRAM DIMMs in four banks of four... Ah, those were the days. (NOT!)
It seems like every sci-fi show, good or bad, popular amongst us geeks or not, gets cancelled.
Instead, we have these mind-numbing 'reality' tv shows, vapid sit-coms, and corny teenage melodramas.
Those get cancelled, too. Thought that was important to point out. All TV shows eventually get cancelled.
No, I am saying that Habeas has done nothing at my site but allow spam to bypass the SpamAssassin filters. It has not, at least as far back as my logs go, allowed any legit mails to come through that might have otherwise been stopped. As far back as my logs go, the only HABEAS_SWE rule hits were from the spammer. Therefore: good-bye HABEAS_SWE rule.
If you start filtering on that mark you *WILL* falsely filter out a lot of legitimate mail.
Incorrect. This spam was the first to reach my site bearing any Habeas mark. The Habeas mark, to my knowledge, has not kept any spam out of my co-worker's inboxes, nor has it made sure that any wanted mails made it through the filters. Our sole experience with the Habeas mark has been this infringing spammers using it to bypass our filter. We bounce 400 spams/minute with scores over 10, just to give you an idea of how much mail we get, and therefore how rare a properly used Habeas mark really is at our site.
The Habeas rule stays off. I will not trust 3rd parties to tell me who is playing nice. I will not use negative-scored public-knowledge rules anymore, either.
Is it time to start filtering for haikus or will Habeas succeed in thwarting the spam attack?"
It is time to start ignoring the Habeas mark. Good for them that they are trying to track down the infringer, who used a network of compromised zombies to spread the spam. Meanwhile, the HABEAS_SWE rule in SpamAssassin is letting the spam through. Until SA is upgraded to recognize when a lawsuit is pending, the HABEAS_SWE rule gets a score of zero.
I will no longer trust 3rd parties to tell me who is being good.
Mike Rowe could have registered MikeRowe.com, or MikeRowe.ca, or MikeRowe.ch, or Mike.Rowe.name or any of the other variants that could be registered.
Adding the otherwise superfluous "soft" suffix can be reasonably construed as an attempt to sponge off of Microsoft's famous mark. Without the goodwill built by Microsoft into their famous trademark, MikeRoweSoft.com is just another clumsy-sounding name, like IniTech or Flooz.
Or it could be the BSD daemon wearing fishnet stockings. Who says the daemon is a dude daemon?
At least KSH doesn't do bone-headed crap like set read-only environment variables that are identical to the ones your Bourne or Korn shell script uses. What a bone-headed bash-ism that is. In fact, there's no way to get a posix-ish bash, so it's a free for all and whenever the Bash developers feel like taking over some variables you were using, well, tough luck - you should have been prescient and should have known they'd steal something obvious like $UID and $GID.
Sheesh!
Get a clock embedded in my credit card?
;)
Get a calendar printed on paper currency?
Get a sundial added to Sacagawea dollars?
I can go on....
With RBLs and hard-coded spamming in effect, instead of 200 spams a day, I might get 3-5.
Let me know when your spam volume grows to 400 per minute, and whether your system scales to that size. That's how much spam my mail servers receive.
This is pretty clear evidence that Congress doesn't really do a great job in protecting the interests of the voting public.
Letting Bush & Co. run roughshod over the Constitution wasn't sufficiently convincing, but failing to contain spam was? Oh brother...
Will this confuse filters like spamassassin?
:)
No, it doesn't. The SpamAssassin rules are independent of the Bayesian analysis. Those rules match on the other text, the stuff that actually tries to sell you something, or get you to click on something.
The effect it would have on the Bayesian filters is to give those words closer to a neutral score, to the extent that they also appear in ordinary emails that the Bayesian system has learned. But the remaining words that only spammers use would end up being scored higher. How many regular emails do you get that use the words "diptheria" or "biharmonic."? Do any of your friends use the word "niggardly" or "milieu" on a regular basis? Dictionary attacks on the Bayesian system only seem to make it more able to recognize dictionary attacks.
The mail servers I run for my employer reject 400 spams every minute. Those are the ones with SpamAssassin scores greater than 10. 1000 spams in a week is a very small amount. They should be grateful. ;)
I have been an amateur astronomer for years. My curent planetary scope is a 9" Maksutov-Cassegrain. Jupiter is blandly colored. Saturn is ebven more bland. Mars is bland, too. What details can be seen are very low contrast. Newcomers have to be taught to see details in the planets, just as they have to be taught to see faint details in galaxies and nebulae.
(and yes, my Mak is properly collimated and baffled)
Enough dust in the atmosphere could interfere with that sufficiently to create a red hue, but this should not be the norm in calm weather conditions.
It is the norm for Mars. It's atmospheric dust load totally overwhelms Rayleigh scattering. Remember Mars atmosphere is much less dense than Earth's, therefore there is much less Rayleigh scattering.
It was a couple of weeks before they had produced re-sampled mosaics from the first Pathfinder images. The first release of those images were also hastily stitched together, and showed obvious seams. Give them a little time, they'll release corrected panoramas very soon, I think.
No device "sees" colors the way humans see color. Heck, no two humans see color the same way. All images, especially science images, whether they are photographic prints or digital images, are colorized and manipulated and stretched and bent and filtered and modified to enphasize the details the investigator is interested in.
You think Jupiter is a really garish ball of swirling colorful gasses? Think again. All the Galileo and Voyager images have saturation boosted a great deal, and the contrast is stretched mightily. Furthermore, the luminance layer is deconvolved to bring subtle spatial details into sharper relief. To the human eye, Jupiter is a rather bland beige-ish ball with some hint of subtle color here and there, and not much obvious detail. The same goes for Io, which is usually depicted as a bright yellow/orange malestrom. It's "real" colors - what a human in orbit would see - are also rather bland.
However, in order to get things off the ground without having to wait for DNS servers and tools to support a new record type...
Which of course, is a BIND design flaw... DNS servers should not need to be recoded to support a new record type. Tinydns doesn't. If you know the new record type's integer value, and the format of the data, just plug that into a tinydns record and you're set.
Dig supports querying for any record type. Just use "dig -t " if your version of dig does not understand the record type's name (SPF or SRV, for example).
Oh, I suppose I ought to post the point I was trying to make. First point is that tiny notebooks don't have to give up important features like network connectivity and touchpads. The second point is that because my Sharp is so lightweight, I use it and carry it with me much more often than the full-size notebooks I have owned previously.
I got one of these. It weighs slightly more than the Sony, but has a Transmeta 933Mhz CPU, integrated 100baseT and 802.11b, 2 USB 2.0 ports, 10.1" TFT, and a touchpad. It runs Linux with no problem, except that the ALi sound chip doesn't support SPDIF, yet the sound driver expects this chip to support SPDIF and tries to initialize those ports with colorful results. :) A few minutes' hacking on the driver source, and that problem was solved.
With the bigger battery, its weight goes up to a whole 2.9 lbs, but it runs for 9 hours.
Wouldn't they have more fun looking at pictures of naked women? Is this what happens when the armed forces can only recruit hayseeds from poor areas in the south?
That I never upgraded my pirated Photoshop 5.5. Whew! Glad I didn't have to waste all that time downloading CS. Does Adobe think my time is valueless? These guys need to get a clue.
Nice rant. I give it an 8.5.
The output sound is tight, crisp and full-bodied. The level is clean and hot, just the way I like it.
I'm sorry, Mr. Audio Engineer, but I don't understand all those technical audio terms. Could you tell me what is the meaning of "tight, crisp and full-bodied" and also "clean and hot" in terms of S/N ratio, frequency response, and dB?
Thanks.