import antigravity
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Chris Rebert
<l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> wrote:
> Subtle...
You're a bit behind the times.
If my calculations are right, that comic is over 2 years old.
Cheers,
Chris
Stefan Behnel
> Subtle...
Absolutely.
Python 2.4.6 (#2, Jan 21 2010, 23:45:25)
[GCC 4.4.1] on linux2
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import antigravity
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
ImportError: No module named antigravity
Stefan
Chris Rebert
Ulrich Eckhardt
> You're a bit behind the times.
> If my calculations are right, that comic is over 2 years old.
import timetravel
Uli
Alf P. Steinbach
C:\test> python
Python 3.1.1 (r311:74483, Aug 17 2009, 17:02:12) [MSC v.1500 32 bit (Intel)]
on win32
Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>>> import time
>>> time.altzone
-7200
>>> # hm.
...
>>> _
Cheers,
- Alf
Chris Rebert
So that's where Guido's been hiding his infamous time machine! Right
in plain sight!
It's so obvious in retrospect.
Hans Mulder
I think you mean:
from __future__ import timetravel
-- HansM
Martin P. Hellwig
Well according to Marty it is:
from __back_to_the_future import DeLorean
--
mph
Mark Lawrence
Taking 1984 into account surely it should be
from __past__ import __future__ as future
But the question is, have we yet got to 1984, are we currently there or
have we already gone past it? Who actually *IS* running the time
machine? Are there any bugs??
Regards.
Mark Lawrence.
Michael Rudolf
> Who actually *IS* running the time machine? Are there any bugs??
My is. And as I'm a lazy hacker: sure. there are bugs. lets just call
them features and move on. nothing to see here ;)
Stefan Behnel
I'll know it, I'll just know it!
Stefan
Lawrence D'Oliveiro
Rebert wrote:
I see that you published my unobfuscated e-mail address on USENET for all to
see. I obfuscated it for a reason, to keep the spammers away. I'm assuming
this was a momentary lapse of judgement, for which I expect an apology.
Otherwise, it becomes grounds for an abuse complaint to your ISP.
Stefan Behnel
I hope you just had a bad day. Threatening others for figuring out your
e-mail address is even worse than posting with an illegal e-mail address.
Stefan
Alf P. Steinbach
Hi.
Chris Rebert didn't reveal anything not already present in the posting he
replied to, and indeed in the posting I'm replying to here.
The headers in the article I'm replying to (yours) look like this:
<headers source="your article">
Path:
feeder.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.straub-nv.de!news.linkpendium.com!news.linkpendium.com!newsfeeds.ihug.co.nz!lust.ihug.co.nz!ihug.co.nz!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: import antigravity
Followup-To: comp.lang.python
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 20:49:55 +1300
Organization: Geek Central
Lines: 7
Message-ID: <hnslv3$jjk$2...@lust.ihug.co.nz>
References: <hnnclk$eud$1...@lust.ihug.co.nz>
<mailman.820.12687259...@python.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 118-92-14-26.dsl.dyn.ihug.co.nz
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: lust.ihug.co.nz 1268898595 20084 118.92.14.26 (18 Mar 2010 07:49:55 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: ab...@ihug.co.nz
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 07:49:55 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: KNode/4.3.4
Xref: eternal-september.org comp.lang.python:51777
</headers>
One must assume that you were not aware that you're posting your mail address in
plaintext in every article?
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
Stefan Behnel
Uhm - where?
Stefan
Alf P. Steinbach
Well, at least the one that Chris Rebert quoted,
<mailto:l...@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> (in the 'From:' header).
The point is, if he's upset about Chris quoting that, then he's probably unaware
that he's posting it in plaintext himself.
Cheers,
- Alf
Jussi Piitulainen
> The point is, if he's upset about Chris quoting that, then he's
> probably unaware that he's posting it in plaintext himself.
The complaint was not about quoting but about using in public. Chris
sent his piece to three addresses. From his headers, redacted:
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
To: "Lawrence D'Oliveiro" <l...@geek-central.gen.[REDACTED]>
Cc: pytho...@python.org
Can we stop importing red herrings now?
Alf P. Steinbach
Oh, I didn't see that -- it's Bad Practice so I didn't look for it.
Cheers,
- Alf
Steve Holden
Surely the point of such an obvious obfuscation is that humans can
de-obfuscate is easily. The fact that it was then used in an open
newsgroup communication is just part of the shit that happens every day.
Complaining to Chris's ISP is unlikely to be anything other than a waste
of time. Drawing attention to it the way Lawrence did is much more
likely to draw attention to it that simply gracefully letting it pass.
Lawrence, if you are so worried perhaps you should consider not using
e-mail any more. It's clearly too dangerous to suit you.
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
See PyCon Talks from Atlanta 2010 http://pycon.blip.tv/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS: http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
Steven D'Aprano
No, this is hardly the first time that Lawrence has made such a
wankerific threat:
http://www.mail-archive.com/python-list%40python.org/msg245012.html
I sympathise, because many years ago I lost an email address, made
unusable by spam, after using it unobfuscated in Usenet. But I think that
the spammers have mostly moved on these days. The pickings are much
richer for hijacking people's address books in Hotmail, Facebook or
Outlook, and the state of the art of anti-spam is better too. So I think
that Lawrence needs to HTFU and stop making empty threats over something
so trivial.
--
Steven
Chris Rebert
<no-...@extra.super.obfuscation> wrote:
> I see that you published my unobfuscated e-mail address on USENET for all to
> see. I obfuscated it for a reason, to keep the spammers away. I'm assuming
> this was a momentary lapse of judgement, for which I expect an apology.
My apologies to you then. In my own defense, I will say this is the
first complaint I can recall getting about unmungeing the "To:" header
when replying to someone on python-list. To ensure your address's
privacy in the future, either using a disposable address or putting a
/completely/ invalid and unrelated address in the "To:" header are
some possible options.
Regards,
Chris
--
This is one of the pitfalls of mail-news gateways I suppose.
John Bokma
Ha ha ha! Get a life. You're using a non-existant tld. I recommend to
use .invalid instead, e.g.
l...@geek-central.gen.nz.invalid
And Chris can make sure that his unobfuscating code doesn't run if the
tld is invalid.
--
John Bokma j3b
Hacking & Hiking in Mexico - http://johnbokma.com/
http://castleamber.com/ - Perl & Python Development