Greg Broiles wrote:
[...]
Osirusoft seems to be a spam blocker, but blocking legitimate mail is going
too far. I'd rather have the spam. And I object strongly to third (or
fourth) parties deciding what to do with my mail.
It's the recipient, or someone acting on their behalf, who's
--
On 14 Aug 2002 at 4:36, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
For instance, limiting the number of recipients of an email
(the cryptogeek system I'm working on [m-o-o-t] just allows
one), or limiting the number of emails one IP can send per
day (adjusted for number of users).
There was an EU
Lately on both of these lists there has been quite some discussion about
TCPA and Palladium, the good, the bad, the ugly, and the anonymous. :)
However there is something that is very much worth noting, at least about
TCPA.
There is nothing stopping a virtualized version being created.
There is
From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Solution is obvious and has been known for a long time
Integrate payment with email. If anyone not on your approved
list wants to send you mail, they have to pay you x, where x is
a trivial sum, say a cent or two.
Spammers wind up sending huge
None of those things work. Most spammers don't give a shit if you don't
receive email. I can attest to this by the slew of spam going to
hostmaster, webmaster, and the like on many networks. What they're really
selling is ten million addresses and spam software. Even if 9 million
of those are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At 10:58 PM 8/13/2002 -0700, Joseph Ashwood wrote:
Lately on both of these lists there has been quite some discussion
about TCPA and Palladium, the good, the bad, the ugly, and the
anonymous. :) However there is something that is very much worth
It seems from this article that perhaps MS already had worked out how
to do copy protection with Palladium, or at least thinks it possible
contrary to what was said at USENIX security:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/26651.html
[Palladium related job advert...] Our technology allows
Khoder bin Hakkin[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
In the most recent _Science_ some biologists gripe that the scientists
who synthesized infectious
poliovirus from its description were not doing anything novel, just a
prank. Any biologist
would have known that, since you could concatenate
Joseph Ashwood wrote:
Lately on both of these lists there has been quite some discussion about
TCPA and Palladium, the good, the bad, the ugly, and the anonymous. :)
However there is something that is very much worth noting, at least about
TCPA.
There is nothing stopping a virtualized
The remote attesation is the feature which is in the interests of
third parties.
I think if this feature were removed the worst of the issues the
complaints are around would go away because the remaining features
would be under the control of the user, and there would be no way for
third parties
Adam Back wrote:
The remote attesation is the feature which is in the interests of
third parties.
I think if this feature were removed the worst of the issues the
complaints are around would go away because the remaining features
would be under the control of the user, and there would be
11 matches
Mail list logo
