On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:41:03PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > >
> > > > nokia 9210
> > >
> > > Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
> >
> > I know someone who
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 08:59:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> >
> > > nokia 9210
> >
> > Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
>
> I know someone who knows someone who has a test model - I'll prod on
> programmability.
Greg has (
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 07:12:02PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
>
> well if I was intending to base my filtering on withheld/unavailable I
> would make sure my phone *did* make the distinction .. most do. Also BT
> are intending to introduce a service called 'choose to refuse'
They already offer
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:43:52PM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> > nokia 9210
>
> Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
I know someone who knows someone who has a test model - I'll prod on
programmability.
Martin
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:00:28PM +0100, Robert Shiels wrote:
> I have worked as a telemarketer, so feel a bit sorry for them as it's a shit
> job, so I just say "No thanks" and hang up.
You can buy these little devices that emit a canned request to be
removed from the lists which these people a
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:09:47PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> > yeah .. thats fine .. it doesn't work from creaky old strowger exchanges
> > either (are there any of those left ? ) but there is a subtle difference
> > between 'number withheld' and 'num
* Steve Mynott ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > * Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> > > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > > > Heh, don't forg
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:08:31PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 01:38:26PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> > Ok, so you should have said "Caller detect doesn't work for some
> > international calls either".
>
> But, you see, if a call ID is withheld, you can't tell whether
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 01:15:57PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> > That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or bugger off").
> > I suppose i
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:38:16PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> > Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
>
> nokia 9210
Which is still, AFAIK, unobtainium.
--
David Cantrell | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.cantrell.org.uk/david/
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
>
> > And if it's withheld, answer with a terse message and disconnect.
>
> No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
And me refusing to
From: Robert Shiels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 5:23 PM
> I was just wondering, have the secret T-shirt designs been sent off to the
> printers yet ? The reason I ask is that I'd really like one of them to be
> Hitch-Hiker related; or maybe we could have a special run of ZZ9 P
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 05:22:44PM +0100, Robert Shiels wrote:
> I was just wondering, have the secret T-shirt designs been sent off to the
> printers yet ? The reason I ask is that I'd really like one of them to be
> Hitch-Hiker related; or maybe we could have a special run of ZZ9 Plural Z
> Alph
I was just wondering, have the secret T-shirt designs been sent off to the
printers yet ? The reason I ask is that I'd really like one of them to be
Hitch-Hiker related; or maybe we could have a special run of ZZ9 Plural Z
Alpha.PM shirts done.
--
Robert
Probably all you people who program for a living think this is
[crap/obvious/can be done in 3 bytes] but I liked it:
$|++; print qw(\ | / -)[$i%4]."\r"; $|--;
Put a spinning progress thing in your loops...
--
Jonathan Peterson
Technical Manager, Unified Ltd, 020 7383 6092
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> * Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> > That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or bugger off").
> > I suppose it could go to answer
From: "Robin Szemeti" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> well .. I believe you have extended the analogy just a little bit too far
> :) . .the main reason _I_ decline to answer 'withheld number' calls is
> because almost every single one is a halfwit trying to sell me
> insurance/glazing/burglar alarms/toil
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Jonathan Peterson wrote:
> At 12:48 15/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
>
> >extension number. I simply don't want people phoning me up who refuse to
> >own up to who they are before they invade my privacy.
>
> personal>
>
>
> Yeah, me neither. Damn strangers, I don't talk to the
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> > yeah .. thats fine .. it doesn't work from creaky old strowger exchanges
> > either (are there any of those left ?)
>
> http://www.light-straw.co.uk/ate/strowger.html
ah yes .. I don't even need to click the link as I've seen it b4 ..
excellent s
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, Martin Ling wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > >
> > > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
> >
> > Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
> >
> > > And if
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:08:31PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> But, you see, if a call ID is withheld, you can't tell whether they're
> international calls with non-working caller detect or domestic calls from
> ex-directory/paranoid numbers. So filtering on withheldness is BAD BAD BAD.
No -
At 12:48 15/05/01 +0100, you wrote:
>extension number. I simply don't want people phoning me up who refuse to
>own up to who they are before they invade my privacy.
Yeah, me neither. Damn strangers, I don't talk to them and neither do my
kids.
And if there's an unexpected knock at the door
Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> > > That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or
On Thursday, May 10, 2001, at 12:24 PM, Robin Houston wrote:
> On Thu, May 10, 2001 at 09:16:25AM +0100, Cross David - dcross wrote:
>> #!/usr/bin/perl -w # how to (ab)use substr
>> use strict;
>> my $pi='3.14159210535152623346475240375062163750446240333543375062';
>
>
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 02:09:47PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
> yeah .. thats fine .. it doesn't work from creaky old strowger exchanges
> either (are there any of those left ? ) but there is a subtle difference
> between 'number withheld' and 'number unavailable'
There is, but not all phones ma
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> > That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or bugger off").
> > I suppose it could go to answerp
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 01:38:26PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> Ok, so you should have said "Caller detect doesn't work for some
> international calls either".
But, you see, if a call ID is withheld, you can't tell whether they're
international calls with non-working caller detect or domestic
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:48:26PM +0100, Robin Szemeti wrote:
>
> > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
>
> ??? ... its simple. If they choose to withhold their number I choose to
> reject their call.
Okay, whatever, I don't, it's an *option*.
Martin
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 01:25:23PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> > Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > Caller detect doesn't work for international calls either.
> >
> > Untrue. When I get calls from friends in Sweden I can see who they
> >
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 01:25:23PM +0100, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Caller detect doesn't work for international calls either.
>
> Untrue. When I get calls from friends in Sweden I can see who they
> are.
And when I get calls from Japan, which happens
Simon Cozens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> > That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or bugger off").
> > I suppose it could go to answer
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:43:59PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > No; many people withhold automatically, it a legitimate privacy concern.
> That's what the terse message is for ("reveal yourself, or bugger off").
> I suppose it could go to answerphone.
Caller detect doesn't work for internation
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> >
> > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
>
> Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
>
> > And if it's withheld, answer with a terse message and disconne
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> >
> > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
>
> Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
>
> > And if it's withheld, answer with a terse
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:38:16PM +0100, Greg McCarroll wrote:
>
> > Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
>
> nokia 9210
Bleh, wearable and a GSM card.
Martin
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:30:59PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> Ho hum. If I wasn't trying to get some work done, I'd grab sphinx and
> write some code.
One of the things I plan to do on my way around America after TPC is sit
down with Kevin and DHD and start writing some funky robots. sphinx +
in
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:30:59PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
>
> The particularly (interesting|annoying) bit is that recent phones have
> hardware capabilities sufficent for a procphone - same code as does the
> voice dialling.
Ho hmm... Nokia appealing to Linux coders to help with their new
* Simon Cozens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
> > Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
>
> N
I thought there might be some people out there
interested in this.
Please contact Ed directly, but feel free to ask me
questions (off list or on IRC) if you want, I've been here 3 weeks.
Cheers
Leo
CLOUDBAND.COM LIMITED
=
Cloudband was set up in 1998 to provide online se
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:22:35PM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> > Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
>
> Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
The particularly (interesting|annoying) bit is that recent phones have
hardware capabilities sufficent for a procphone - same code
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:15:32PM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
> > Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
> Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
Now *this* is why I want programmable mobile phones.
-
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 12:04:24PM +0100, James Powell wrote:
>
> Heh, don't forget to have a RBL-like list of source telephone numbers.
Definitely. A whitelist too, of course.
> And if it's withheld, answer with a terse message and disconnect.
No; many people withhold automatically, it a legi
* at 15/05 12:04 +0100 James Powell said:
>
> My girlfriend got her first SMS spam the other week... all it said
> was "call this number 2320340 324 CompName EX7 TL7" (or similar).
the one i got the other day promised cheaper phone calls and all i
needed to do was phone this number at £1 a minut
Robin Szemeti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tue, 15 May 2001, you wrote:
>
> > (look, a perl question)
>
> what is this 'Perl' of which you speak? .. is it a custom of your
> people?
Your people are wrong! And Evil! We are the only true people!
--
Piers Cawley
www.iterative-software.com
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:49:18AM +0100, Martin Ling wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:33:07AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > > we are considering funding the development of a procmail-a-like for
> > > snail-mail.
> >
> >
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 11:33:07AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> > we are considering funding the development of a procmail-a-like for
> > snail-mail.
>
> I want a procphone.
Now that's reasonably feasible. Tap the incoming audi
On Tue, 15 May 2001, you wrote:
> (look, a perl question)
what is this 'Perl' of which you speak? .. is it a custom of your people?
--
Robin Szemeti
The box said "requires windows 95 or better"
So I installed Linux!
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
> we are considering funding the development of a procmail-a-like for
> snail-mail.
I want a procphone.
--
VMS must die!
Has anyone used Log::Agent, or for that matter any of the other logging
modules?
I'm just looking for a consistent way to do logging. I've got a wheel
that I reinvented, but it's a very simple one (no tyre or inner tube yet)
and before I make any improvements I was just wondering if it was time
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:04:45AM +0100, Cross David - dcross wrote:
> From: Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > However what i'd really hate is any restrictions placed
> > on the topics of London.pm , politics should be just as
> > welcome as BtVS.
>
> Or, even, Perl :)
Oh, please, we
Philip Newton wrote:
>
> I read in a book about a place where this premise was taken to its logical
> conclusion and all residents of a particular state were given college
> degrees so that people would be equal.
>
> (It might have been Heinlein's _Friday_.)
>
It wasn't just college degrees.
A
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 10:10:23AM +0100, David Cantrell wrote:
>
> a delightfully Heath-Robinson mechanical whatsit which will clip on to
> the inside of your letter box, and will reject spam with GREAT VENGEANCE
> and FURY.
But you're missing a critical feature. If the thoughtful Spam M[oi]nge
Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I enjoy aspects of the thread about politics, but get bored when it
> all goes down old roads. However what i'd really hate is any
> restrictions placed on the topics of London.pm , politics should
> be just as welcome as BtVS.
It is with me.
--
D
David Cantrell wrote:
> a delightfully Heath-Robinson mechanical whatsit which will clip on to
> the inside of your letter box, and will reject spam with
> GREAT VENGEANCE and FURY.
For GREAT JUSTICE.
Cheers,
Phi "how do smurfs make little smurfs?" lip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All
- Original Message -
From: David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 4:10 AM
Subject: Re: Enough!
> Mail::Audit is for *weaklings*. My first act as Benevolent Dictator will
> be to ban it, and mandate procmail. I have been discussing this wi
On Tue, May 15, 2001 at 09:57:03AM +0100, Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> and before simon gets there:
>
> use Mail::Audit;
Mail::Audit is for *weaklings*. My first act as Benevolent Dictator will
be to ban it, and mandate procmail. I have been discussing this with my
soon-to-be-announced Post
From: Greg McCarroll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> However what i'd really hate is any restrictions placed
> on the topics of London.pm , politics should be just as
> welcome as BtVS.
Or, even, Perl :)
Dave...
--
The information contained in this communication is
confidential, is intended only fo
Matthew Byng-Maddick wrote:
> and before simon gets there:
>
> use Mail::Audit;
To which Johan Vromans would probably reply:
use Mail::Procmail;
Chacun à son goût.
Cheers,
Philip
--
Philip Newton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
If you're not part of the so
* Steve Mynott ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
>
> Personally I find discussion of politics more interesting than
> American TV shows about vampires.
>
I enjoy aspects of the thread about politics, but get bored when it
all goes down old roads. However what i'd really hate is any
restrictions place
On Tue, 15 May 2001, Dominic Mitchell wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:43PM +0100, Natalie Ford wrote:
> > At 15:09 14/05/01, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> > >Please, would you take the politics elsewhere? Some of us really don't
> > >give a shit either way.
> > Hear hear! I am getting tired of
On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 11:04:43PM +0100, Natalie Ford wrote:
> At 15:09 14/05/01, Dave Hodgkinson wrote:
> >Please, would you take the politics elsewhere? Some of us really don't
> >give a shit either way.
>
> Hear hear! I am getting tired of hitting delete... :)
procmail++
If anybody wants a
From: David Cantrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 10:49 PM
> On Mon, May 14, 2001 at 10:35:44PM +0100, Natalie Ford wrote:
> > At 09:58 14/05/01, James Powell wrote:
> > >The Perl Journal arrived this morning...
> >
> > Mine too! You read Dave's article and the credits at the
On Mon, 14 May 2001, Greg McCarroll wrote:
> * Alex Gough ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > >
> > > I appoint Greg as my Culture Adviser and as head of the church. Any
> > > volunteers for my other minions? Even if you don't want a cabinet
> > > post, please feel free to volunteer as a Henchman.
64 matches
Mail list logo
