Your post seems to be in direct contradiction to the other post currently in this thread (by Bagels) I suggest the two of you fight to the death, gladiator-style.
SPEWS is not merely a list. Nobody decided one day: "Let's make a list of spammers. In fact, let's include their ISPs, and their ISP's ISPs, and block everyone down the line like that. Let's do this for absolutely no reason. I mean, I'm bored."
SPEWS intends to block people. It isnt doing statistical analysis. It isnt just letting people know what they think. SPEWS is trying to get people to block other people. This does not merely include spammers and those who support spammers, this includes people who hate spam. The reason is to try to get people to complain to their ISPs. That is, SPEWS exists in order to degrade the value of ISPs until such time as the ISPs have no other recourse but to risk their business as a whole and seek an alternative method of connection. SPEWS does not draw the line merely at those who support spam. It calls anyone who sends money to an ISP which sends money to an ISP which supports spam a supporter of Spam. The line is drawn that far out in order to directly effect people who hate spam, to get them to complain to their ISP: "I hate spam, and now I'm blocked because I'm being called a spammer. Do something about this!" In order for anything to get done, a critical mass must be reached. Good fucking luck. If this mass is ever reached, what are the options? "Change your ISP" usually means "Move". That is: There are NO OPTIONS.
Your note about "Don't you mean 'Buys from'?" I can see where you could read it like that. It works either way, since I refered to all levels as "a company"
I didnt mean to imply any monetary benifit when I mentioned health insurance. I was just trying to think of "An unrelated service which you pay for", and it seemed to fit better than "Public Parking Lot".
If SPEWS only blocked spammers, there would be no problem. "Should we force people who support spammers out of business"? Should we consider people who do not know about any spam which is being sent by a customer of their ISP's ISP a "Supporter of spam"? You continually say that all parties involved know exactly what they are doing, when in reality only two of the parties- the spammers and the spammer's ISP, has any control over or knowledge of the situation. SPEWS goes too far, and it does it on purpose. Those are not the only two parties which exist.
Switching ISPs is NOT an option.
SPEWS is terrorism. It's a minor form of terrorism, but it does exist in order to control by fear. I think it's a noble goal, I just think they happen to be fuckheads.
Runs Linux. Unless I dont know what I'm talking about* The Zaurus uses ARM, thas all I know. It would be great to have a GBA with Linux on it instead of Linux with a GBA on it. I'd buy that:)
A2: In most cases, spam blocking and filtering systems work after the fact. There is a time lag between the spammer setting up shop, spamming millions, and getting their network ranges block-listed. SPEWS identifies known spammers and spam operations, listing them right as they start, sometimes even before they start, spamming.
A11: Sorry, SPEWS is a list of known spammers, spamming operations and spam supporters
I think I stated my point about automated lists quite clearly: "It's entirely possible for someone to exist who is stupid enough to not see the connection between publishing an IP to a list which is used by many automated servers which you have helped to set up for the purposes of blocking the IPs on the list, and the subsequent blocking of that IP. Those people don't have anything to do with SPEWS, though."
You seem to confuse "Responsibility" with "Soul Responsibility" I'm not telling SPEWS to stop existing, I'm telling people to stop using SPEWS. I am telling them this because SPEWS is responsible for a lot of legitimate mail being blocked. Use a list which does not intentionally block innocents.
If Happy Funland Daycare agency was hiring child molestors, that's no reason to prevent people from collecting health insurance from the company Happy Funland Daycare uses.
I'm assuming that you didnt read beyond the title because you claimed not to have any idea where I could have seen SPEWS as being related. If I had the time, I would have re-read the article thoroughly, and possibly posted "A well known SPEWS mirror", instead of just "SPEWS". My point is that SPEWS is responsible for innocent people having their e-mail bounced. If SPEWS did not exist, these people who are being bounced would not be bounced. If SPEWS decided to stop their terrorism ("Stop paying a company which sells to a company which sells to a company which sends SPAM, or your customers will not be able to send e-mail. That is, Go out of business, or we will force you out of business."), then those people would no longer be blocked.
"If SPEWS didnt say to block them, they wouldnt be blocked" "If SPEWS decided not to block them anymore, they wouldnt be blocked"
How is that not "Responsible"? Again, they are not Soully responsible. No one is saying that. You can't claim, however, that SPEWS doesnt block anyone. The two parts work together, and neither is without responsibility.
Responsibility requires only that your actions directly effect the actions of others, and that you are aware of it. This isnt even a mere loose relationship whereby the word of one person trickles down to another person who may eventually take action- this is a List which is refrenced by Automated Scripts which SPEWS tells people how to set up.
It is easy to determine that SPEWS is responsible through a simple question: If the SPEWS list were updated tomorrow, removing all innocents from its list, would many of those innocents suddenly find themselves un-blocked?
Gee, I guess I missed that whole thing about SPEWS not being a list of Spammers, given that their faq explicitely states that they are a list of Spammers and Spammer Operations. Walking into a crouded room and shooting each person one-by-one in the head when you know quite well who your actual target is, you dont get to call the others "Collateral Damage" Being in the same building as someone else does not make you guilty. SPEWS claims that they blocklist people who know what they're doing, neglecting to mention that such is in no way true- as they intentionally block people who are innocent. (Someone using an ISP which allows spam is not automatically "Well aware of what they are doing wrong") As for being the only one who has ever heard SPEWS say anything, I guess I'm the only one who knows what.org stands for. Or maybe you're just entirely wrong, it can probably work either way.
I have no idea what your point is with the "Duh". Yes, SPEWS admits that it purposely blocks the innocent in order to ruin legitimate businesses which are indirectly associated with Spammers. But since it states that directly, I guess saying "Duh" should make it okay to overlook the point. "You stole that guy's pants!" "I didnt claim not to. Duh." It's a statement which doesnt work by itself- if you're admitting to wrongdoing, you need to also explain why you consider it justified.
As for your claims for success, wouldnt a successful blacklist (for what SPEWS is trying to do) perhaps be staying at about the same size at some point, rather than be growing constantly?
You dont need to like spam to hate spews. There are plenty of lists which go out of their way to prevent listing the innocent. Lists more effective than SPEWS, I hear.
Read the SPEWS Faq. SPEWS is a list of Spammer IP addresses.
As for SPEWS not personally having set up your e-mail server, that is irrelevant and you're shitting yourself if you don't think you know it. It's not like some people just spontaneously decided in unison to add a particular IP address to their blacklist for no reason. SPEWS is published for the purpose of having the IPs blacklisted. A Newspaper can't start calling random people Child Molestors, give out the home addresses of those people, and suggest that everyone go out with torches- then claim to be innocent. "This neighborhood is known to harbor child molestors, so even though only Joe Shmitt is actually a child molestor, we'll call everyone in this neighborhood a child molestor. And just to be sure, everyone in the surrounding area is a potential child molestor, and should be watched closely"
Okay, so technically you dont have to block people with them. I guess I could buy a kit to build an RC car, then ignore the instructions and use the parts to make a necklace.
I can only assume you didnt read beyond the title, perhaps into the associated story and discussion. Truthfully I was just trying to make a point about automated scripts and the responsibilities associated with them, remembered something related, and saw that SPEWS was associated with it. I didnt bother to re-read the article, I really did need to head off.
If you modify a list which automated scripts link to, and you are aware of what they do, then you are controlling those automated scripts.
If you hadnt decided to stop reading, you would have seen that you are wrong. Or at the least, you would have seen why I consider your argument invalid, and perhaps been able to respond to that.
There is a HUGE difference between "False Positive" and "Intentional False Positive". SPEWS defends their actions by saying that they cannot eliminate all False Positives, and so shouldnt try. However, that is a lie. SPEWS intentionally blocks legitimate e-mail for the purpose of causing people to complain to their ISPs to the point that their ISPs complain to their provider, to the point that a legitimate customer who is not violating any terms of service is asked to change their practices or move to another region of the country. Is this effective? Of course not. Certainly, someone who uses the list will not recieve as much spam, as well as blocking much legitimate mail at the same time. But SPEWS is not about blocking Spam, it is about trying to get high-level service providers to violate their contracts. Any list you use is going to have False-Positives. The difference is that SPEWS does it on purpose.
SPEWS claims that they are innocent, because they don't block anyone. This is a lie. They publish lists which are in turn downloaded by automated scripts and are applied to e-mail servers as filters. They are aware of this. Their lists have no other purpose. Remember when SPEWS blocked everybody, and many automated scripts did the same?
When you publish a list which has no other purpose, then tell people how to configure their servers to automatically download and use the list, you Are blocking people. It's entirely possible for someone to exist who is stupid enough to not see the connection between publishing an IP to a list which is used by many automated servers which you have helped to set up for the purposes of blocking the IPs on the list, and the subsequent blocking of that IP. Those people don't have anything to do with SPEWS, though.
There is more, but I need to head off. I may post again later.
I mean it sucks because it's never broad enough. Yeah, we complain about the DMCA, it's too broad. But hey, wait a second, why specifically DIGITAL? Why do we have seperate laws for phone calls, e-mails, faxes, and door-to-door sales? It doesnt make sense! Legislation sucks.
Legislation sucks. Can't we just make it illegal to advertise to people who have taken steps to prevent that particular method of advertising from reaching them?
I did not in any way mean to imply that the person who said "Except that parsec is a measure of distance" wasnt a complete fucktard. I just dont like the stupid black hole thing. It changes the line. HS used "Parsec" to denote speed, not ajility. The explanation using black holes is stupid.
See, that explanation makes sense. It's not some entirely seperate unrelated plot element added as an explanation. I would accept that, but Canon has its own stupidness about black holes. Fucking Maw.
How dare they spell a word which was written in JAPANESE originally differently from the way I've seen it written using latin characters before!!
Fans of the series will hate the live-action movie no matter what happens, so why even bother? It might be a good movie to people who dont already dream of fucking Ayanami, and with the best of luck it will bring the Giant Robot Genre into mainstream Hollywood. If you already know what Eva is, this isnt worth keeping track of- just see it when it comes out, hate it, and then complain about how they changed things and took out all the subtle religious symbols that you need to be intelligent to pick up on.[/sarcasm]
I liked Eva, but shouldnt the moderators kill any post that's "Hopelessly Fanboy"? It's CONCEPT ART, moron. It's a LIVE ACTION MOVIE. Would you prefer Jake Lloyd and Emma Watson? It's not going to be the same. Deal.
Ah crap, I forgot that one. The most important one of all! I still have the No Tea.. actually, I think I mis-handled it or something, 'cause now it's all over everything:/
I still have my Hitchhiker's Guide box, complete with destruction orders for my home/Earth, Sub-Atomic Space Fleet, and of course, Pocket Lint. Sadly, the peril-sensitive sunglasses are long gone. Being the best of all items packed- including the game -they were often shown off, and eventually tore. I think there was also a "Don't Panic" button that my mom ignorantly tossed away (curses!)
I remember it was pure crap and I don't talk to the person who DCC'd it to me anymore.
I remember that I thought MP3s were stupid, and that.mod and.xm were superior. Even MIDI. Why would you waste 3 whole megabytes on something that you could get for a couple a KB? I hated those wasteful assholes.
Now that hard drives and download speeds are actually fast enough/big enough for the size of MP3s, I complain instead about people who encode fansubs at 300MB for 20 minutes- when 75MB will do just fine! I hate you wasteful assholes!
I'm sure that in time, I'll be complaining about people who encode 3-terabyte realities, when a 500-gigabyte Half-Life 4 map will do.
Slashdot Mirror
I love you. Why won't you tell me your name? :(
Your post seems to be in direct contradiction to the other post currently in this thread (by Bagels)
I suggest the two of you fight to the death, gladiator-style.
SPEWS is not merely a list. Nobody decided one day: "Let's make a list of spammers. In fact, let's include their ISPs, and their ISP's ISPs, and block everyone down the line like that. Let's do this for absolutely no reason. I mean, I'm bored."
SPEWS intends to block people. It isnt doing statistical analysis. It isnt just letting people know what they think. SPEWS is trying to get people to block other people. This does not merely include spammers and those who support spammers, this includes people who hate spam. The reason is to try to get people to complain to their ISPs. That is, SPEWS exists in order to degrade the value of ISPs until such time as the ISPs have no other recourse but to risk their business as a whole and seek an alternative method of connection.
SPEWS does not draw the line merely at those who support spam. It calls anyone who sends money to an ISP which sends money to an ISP which supports spam a supporter of Spam. The line is drawn that far out in order to directly effect people who hate spam, to get them to complain to their ISP: "I hate spam, and now I'm blocked because I'm being called a spammer. Do something about this!"
In order for anything to get done, a critical mass must be reached. Good fucking luck.
If this mass is ever reached, what are the options? "Change your ISP" usually means "Move". That is: There are NO OPTIONS.
Your note about "Don't you mean 'Buys from'?" I can see where you could read it like that. It works either way, since I refered to all levels as "a company"
I didnt mean to imply any monetary benifit when I mentioned health insurance. I was just trying to think of "An unrelated service which you pay for", and it seemed to fit better than "Public Parking Lot".
If SPEWS only blocked spammers, there would be no problem. "Should we force people who support spammers out of business"? Should we consider people who do not know about any spam which is being sent by a customer of their ISP's ISP a "Supporter of spam"? You continually say that all parties involved know exactly what they are doing, when in reality only two of the parties- the spammers and the spammer's ISP, has any control over or knowledge of the situation. SPEWS goes too far, and it does it on purpose. Those are not the only two parties which exist.
Switching ISPs is NOT an option.
SPEWS is terrorism. It's a minor form of terrorism, but it does exist in order to control by fear. I think it's a noble goal, I just think they happen to be fuckheads.
And James Brown is GOD.
Runs Linux. Unless I dont know what I'm talking about* :)
The Zaurus uses ARM, thas all I know. It would be great to have a GBA with Linux on it instead of Linux with a GBA on it. I'd buy that
*this is true.
A2: In most cases, spam blocking and filtering systems work after the fact. There is a time lag between the spammer setting up shop, spamming millions, and getting their network ranges block-listed. SPEWS identifies known spammers and spam operations, listing them right as they start, sometimes even before they start, spamming.
A11: Sorry, SPEWS is a list of known spammers, spamming operations and spam supporters
I think I stated my point about automated lists quite clearly:
"It's entirely possible for someone to exist who is stupid enough to not see the connection between publishing an IP to a list which is used by many automated servers which you have helped to set up for the purposes of blocking the IPs on the list, and the subsequent blocking of that IP. Those people don't have anything to do with SPEWS, though."
You seem to confuse "Responsibility" with "Soul Responsibility"
I'm not telling SPEWS to stop existing, I'm telling people to stop using SPEWS. I am telling them this because SPEWS is responsible for a lot of legitimate mail being blocked.
Use a list which does not intentionally block innocents.
If Happy Funland Daycare agency was hiring child molestors, that's no reason to prevent people from collecting health insurance from the company Happy Funland Daycare uses.
I'm assuming that you didnt read beyond the title because you claimed not to have any idea where I could have seen SPEWS as being related. If I had the time, I would have re-read the article thoroughly, and possibly posted "A well known SPEWS mirror", instead of just "SPEWS".
My point is that SPEWS is responsible for innocent people having their e-mail bounced. If SPEWS did not exist, these people who are being bounced would not be bounced. If SPEWS decided to stop their terrorism ("Stop paying a company which sells to a company which sells to a company which sends SPAM, or your customers will not be able to send e-mail. That is, Go out of business, or we will force you out of business."), then those people would no longer be blocked.
"If SPEWS didnt say to block them, they wouldnt be blocked"
"If SPEWS decided not to block them anymore, they wouldnt be blocked"
How is that not "Responsible"? Again, they are not Soully responsible. No one is saying that. You can't claim, however, that SPEWS doesnt block anyone. The two parts work together, and neither is without responsibility.
Responsibility requires only that your actions directly effect the actions of others, and that you are aware of it. This isnt even a mere loose relationship whereby the word of one person trickles down to another person who may eventually take action- this is a List which is refrenced by Automated Scripts which SPEWS tells people how to set up.
It is easy to determine that SPEWS is responsible through a simple question:
If the SPEWS list were updated tomorrow, removing all innocents from its list, would many of those innocents suddenly find themselves un-blocked?
Gee, I guess I missed that whole thing about SPEWS not being a list of Spammers, given that their faq explicitely states that they are a list of Spammers and Spammer Operations. Walking into a crouded room and shooting each person one-by-one in the head when you know quite well who your actual target is, you dont get to call the others "Collateral Damage" Being in the same building as someone else does not make you guilty. .org stands for. Or maybe you're just entirely wrong, it can probably work either way.
SPEWS claims that they blocklist people who know what they're doing, neglecting to mention that such is in no way true- as they intentionally block people who are innocent. (Someone using an ISP which allows spam is not automatically "Well aware of what they are doing wrong")
As for being the only one who has ever heard SPEWS say anything, I guess I'm the only one who knows what
I have no idea what your point is with the "Duh". Yes, SPEWS admits that it purposely blocks the innocent in order to ruin legitimate businesses which are indirectly associated with Spammers. But since it states that directly, I guess saying "Duh" should make it okay to overlook the point.
"You stole that guy's pants!" "I didnt claim not to. Duh."
It's a statement which doesnt work by itself- if you're admitting to wrongdoing, you need to also explain why you consider it justified.
As for your claims for success, wouldnt a successful blacklist (for what SPEWS is trying to do) perhaps be staying at about the same size at some point, rather than be growing constantly?
You dont need to like spam to hate spews. There are plenty of lists which go out of their way to prevent listing the innocent. Lists more effective than SPEWS, I hear.
Read the SPEWS Faq. SPEWS is a list of Spammer IP addresses.
As for SPEWS not personally having set up your e-mail server, that is irrelevant and you're shitting yourself if you don't think you know it. It's not like some people just spontaneously decided in unison to add a particular IP address to their blacklist for no reason. SPEWS is published for the purpose of having the IPs blacklisted. A Newspaper can't start calling random people Child Molestors, give out the home addresses of those people, and suggest that everyone go out with torches- then claim to be innocent.
"This neighborhood is known to harbor child molestors, so even though only Joe Shmitt is actually a child molestor, we'll call everyone in this neighborhood a child molestor. And just to be sure, everyone in the surrounding area is a potential child molestor, and should be watched closely"
Okay, so technically you dont have to block people with them. I guess I could buy a kit to build an RC car, then ignore the instructions and use the parts to make a necklace.
I can only assume you didnt read beyond the title, perhaps into the associated story and discussion. Truthfully I was just trying to make a point about automated scripts and the responsibilities associated with them, remembered something related, and saw that SPEWS was associated with it. I didnt bother to re-read the article, I really did need to head off.
If you modify a list which automated scripts link to, and you are aware of what they do, then you are controlling those automated scripts.
As for your last line: what the fuck?
If you hadnt decided to stop reading, you would have seen that you are wrong. Or at the least, you would have seen why I consider your argument invalid, and perhaps been able to respond to that.
It is completely irrelevant whether any admin was forced to use SPEWS. I really thought I'd made that clear in my message.
There is a HUGE difference between "False Positive" and "Intentional False Positive".
SPEWS defends their actions by saying that they cannot eliminate all False Positives, and so shouldnt try.
However, that is a lie. SPEWS intentionally blocks legitimate e-mail for the purpose of causing people to complain to their ISPs to the point that their ISPs complain to their provider, to the point that a legitimate customer who is not violating any terms of service is asked to change their practices or move to another region of the country.
Is this effective? Of course not. Certainly, someone who uses the list will not recieve as much spam, as well as blocking much legitimate mail at the same time. But SPEWS is not about blocking Spam, it is about trying to get high-level service providers to violate their contracts.
Any list you use is going to have False-Positives. The difference is that SPEWS does it on purpose.
SPEWS claims that they are innocent, because they don't block anyone. This is a lie. They publish lists which are in turn downloaded by automated scripts and are applied to e-mail servers as filters. They are aware of this. Their lists have no other purpose. Remember when SPEWS blocked everybody, and many automated scripts did the same?
When you publish a list which has no other purpose, then tell people how to configure their servers to automatically download and use the list, you Are blocking people. It's entirely possible for someone to exist who is stupid enough to not see the connection between publishing an IP to a list which is used by many automated servers which you have helped to set up for the purposes of blocking the IPs on the list, and the subsequent blocking of that IP. Those people don't have anything to do with SPEWS, though.
There is more, but I need to head off. I may post again later.
I mean it sucks because it's never broad enough.
Yeah, we complain about the DMCA, it's too broad. But hey, wait a second, why specifically DIGITAL? Why do we have seperate laws for phone calls, e-mails, faxes, and door-to-door sales? It doesnt make sense! Legislation sucks.
Nice dream, but that's not what this is.
Legislation sucks. Can't we just make it illegal to advertise to people who have taken steps to prevent that particular method of advertising from reaching them?
You try to defend against being called an elitist asshole by saying "Actually, I run Gentoo"?
Talk about a huge target ~:!P
I did not in any way mean to imply that the person who said "Except that parsec is a measure of distance" wasnt a complete fucktard. I just dont like the stupid black hole thing. It changes the line. HS used "Parsec" to denote speed, not ajility. The explanation using black holes is stupid.
See, that explanation makes sense. It's not some entirely seperate unrelated plot element added as an explanation. I would accept that, but Canon has its own stupidness about black holes. Fucking Maw.
How dare they spell a word which was written in JAPANESE originally differently from the way I've seen it written using latin characters before!!
Fans of the series will hate the live-action movie no matter what happens, so why even bother? It might be a good movie to people who dont already dream of fucking Ayanami, and with the best of luck it will bring the Giant Robot Genre into mainstream Hollywood.
If you already know what Eva is, this isnt worth keeping track of- just see it when it comes out, hate it, and then complain about how they changed things and took out all the subtle religious symbols that you need to be intelligent to pick up on.[/sarcasm]
I liked Eva, but shouldnt the moderators kill any post that's "Hopelessly Fanboy"? It's CONCEPT ART, moron. It's a LIVE ACTION MOVIE.
Would you prefer Jake Lloyd and Emma Watson?
It's not going to be the same. Deal.
That's a bullshit explanation come up with years later and you know it.
SHUT UP.
I am utterly ashamed to have forgotten about it :(
Ah crap, I forgot that one. The most important one of all! :/
I still have the No Tea.. actually, I think I mis-handled it or something, 'cause now it's all over everything
I still have my Hitchhiker's Guide box, complete with destruction orders for my home/Earth, Sub-Atomic Space Fleet, and of course, Pocket Lint.
Sadly, the peril-sensitive sunglasses are long gone. Being the best of all items packed- including the game -they were often shown off, and eventually tore.
I think there was also a "Don't Panic" button that my mom ignorantly tossed away (curses!)
I remember it was pure crap and I don't talk to the person who DCC'd it to me anymore.
.mod and .xm were superior. Even MIDI.
I remember that I thought MP3s were stupid, and that
Why would you waste 3 whole megabytes on something that you could get for a couple a KB? I hated those wasteful assholes.
Now that hard drives and download speeds are actually fast enough/big enough for the size of MP3s, I complain instead about people who encode fansubs at 300MB for 20 minutes- when 75MB will do just fine! I hate you wasteful assholes!
I'm sure that in time, I'll be complaining about people who encode 3-terabyte realities, when a 500-gigabyte Half-Life 4 map will do.
redirect? Bah!
You should use well-defined web standards such as CSS!
You are cool :)
Everyone knows that velcro was invented by the Vulcans. Geez, somebody was asleep in history class.