Prove it. Send some content in an email that you believe would be "censored" by yahoo to someone @yahoo.com. If it doesn't get delivered because it's something that "Yahoo doesn't want its readers to read" then I'll believe you.
Petri Laihonen wrote: > "If you think there is censorship or collusion going on, you're wildly > mistaken, and > perhaps excessively paranoid." > > This statement is just plain wrong!! > > There is no mistake and nothing paranoid about it since censorship in this > country is just a sad fact. It happens everywhere over here. It is naturally > more clear to people who have not grown in US, but in a really free country. > (Where you have no need to abuse the real freedom.) For instance, even in the > case of internet, accessibility, limitations (or lack thereof) etc, it is > very difficult to find countries more free than all the Scandinavian > countries. > > US is extremely limited in comparison, and also tries to force that on other > countries as well. There are countries more limited than US, but I have no > interest to live in those.... Currently I live here just because I just > happen to drift here and due to the convenient location to run my > business.... > > When my baby gets to the age when he needs to go to school, there is very > high probability that my family is going to move out from here... or at least > to another region in this country. We'll see.... > > So where is the freedom when megacorporations like M$, oil- and car-industry > are dictating even the government about what to do? Welcome to the puppet > show.... > > > Petri > > > > > Tim Fournet wrote: >> Wait a minute. At one point you say that blocking outbound SMTP >> connections from home PCs does nothing to block SPAM, and then you say >> that the majority of SPAM comes from home PCs on broadband connections >> that are part of botnets (which use SMTP to send spam). Which is it? >> >> As for the rest of your spiel, it really doesn't make sense. The >> internet isn't free, it costs money to run all those lines, keep those >> servers running and cool, etc. Anyone who provides a service of hosting >> email accounts for someone is doing it with the expectation of providing >> some value to its users in return for some value to themselves. In the >> case of Yahoo, MSN, etc, it's mostly about offering a free, reliable, >> reasonably-spam-free, email account in return for brand loyalty and >> maybe some advertising revenue. If users don't like it, there is nothing >> at all stopping them from going to a domain registrar, registering their >> own domain, and then going to an ISP and buying an account that allows >> inbound SMTP; or going to a hosting provider and provisioning their own >> mail server, or paying someone else to do above for them. If you think >> there is censorship or collusion going on, you're wildly mistaken, and >> perhaps excessively paranoid. >> >> willhill wrote: >> >>> If those filters and port blocks did anything to block spam, I'd believe >>> you. >>> I can tell you that AOL and Hotmails spam filters are largely ineffective >>> because my wife uses one and my mom used to use the other until it became >>> unbearable. You and I both know that the vast majority of spam now comes >>> from botnets of home PCs on broadband connections and we also know that >>> spam >>> outnumbers legitmate email even after filters. >>> >>> The real answer to the botnet problem is OS diversification. At least one >>> in >>> four computers is part of a botnet. If ISPs really cared, they would not >>> still be promoting the monoculture. >>> >>> Net neutrality is ultimately an issue of political control. The ability to >>> filter the internet is the ability to filter opinion and it will be used >>> that >>> way. That's not the way the internet is supposed to work and technically >>> the filters are bottlenecks that throttle performance. The example >>> blocking >>> is more than Hotmail and AOL. It's all of the domains controlled by >>> Microsoft, AOL and Yahoo and it reeks of government induced collusion. If >>> you want to know what a corporate controlled, government censored internet >>> will look like, turn on your TV. A free internet is cutting into that >>> censorship and control and that's the reason the FCC came out against >>> network >>> neutrality. >>> >>> TruthOut recommends dumping "free" email, but that won't get solve their >>> problem. If AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo all decide to filter TruthOut, they >>> will do it at all levels and it will work here just as well as it does in >>> China. >>> >>> On Thursday 20 September 2007 8:14 am, Tim Fournet wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Also, SMTP servers blocking incoming mail from misconfigured servers, >>>> and ISPs blocking incoming TCP/25 connections to home IP ranges have >>>> nothing to do with each other, except for being two separate measures of >>>> blocking SPAM. >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> General mailing list >>> General at brlug.net >>> http://mail.brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> General mailing list >> General at brlug.net >> http://mail.brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > General at brlug.net > http://mail.brlug.net/mailman/listinfo/general_brlug.net >
