From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Dec 30 15:32:45 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E24937B401 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org [64.239.180.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CD043EC2 for ; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:32:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dave@jetcafe.org) Received: from hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id gBUNVW176452; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:31:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dave@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org) Message-Id: <200212302331.gBUNVW176452@hokkshideh2.jetcafe.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Terry Lambert Cc: Brad Knowles , Harry Tabak , dever@getaclue.net, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Bystander shot by a spam filter. Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:31:27 -0800 From: Dave Hayes Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Terry Lambert writes: > Dave Hayes wrote: >> Terry Lambert writes: >> > Yes, if you could stand the company you'd be keeping... >> >> Oh, Hi Terry! Listen, you know we are just going to go back and forth >> until I start arguing the benefits of irrationality...so can we save >> time and just start there? >> >> ;) > Why don't we start with your response to my other message, > about systems engineering and emergent a complex behaviours > that result from simple rule sets? Because the assumptions you call "systems engineering" and "emergent behaviors" may not apply when dealing with a large space of humanity. We are still stuck there, at the very least you and I disagree about the amount of applicability these have. > Personally, I'd like to argue about raising the cost of the > sending of repeat SPAM, while leaving the cost of sending > non-SPAM and/or initial SPAM, fixed. I'd actually agree with you there. In fact, this is programmed into my mail filters. If you send the exact same message (same meaning "MD5 checksum") to my mail filters, it only lets the first one through. Of course this is trivial to defeat. > Are you arguing by omission that it's impossible to design > such a system? If so, how do you address my example of the > inability of people to deny the existance of gravity and > inertia? Your analogy is arbitrary. People -do- deny the existence of both those forces. Whether they are "right" or not depends on the circle of people they are addressing. I certainly wouldn't address a PhD in physics with this denial, but I might address a group of new age "spiritual" people that way. ------ Dave Hayes - Consultant - Altadena CA, USA - dave@jetcafe.org >>> The opinions expressed above are entirely my own <<< The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message