Fascism is coming to Internet
Joan Miller
Fascism is coming fastly to Internet because is the only communication
way that governements (managed by the bank and multinationals) cann't
control
http://www.boingboing.net/2010/02/21/acta-internet-enforc.html
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
Joan Miller <pelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Sorry by this message off topic, but this is too important*
Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
posts to this list?
--
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
+1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
Grant Edwards
> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:54:25 -0800 (PST)
> Joan Miller <pelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> *Sorry by this message off topic, but this is too important*
>
> Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
> increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
> posts to this list?
I did that a long time ago for all of the Usenet groups I read
and all but one of the mailing lists I read.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm wearing PAMPERS!!
at
visi.com
Grant Edwards
> On 2010-02-23, D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:54:25 -0800 (PST)
>> Joan Miller <pelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> *Sorry by this message off topic, but this is too important*
>>
>> Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
>> increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
>> posts to this list?
>
> I did that a long time ago for all of the Usenet groups I read
> and all but one of the mailing lists I read.
Wait, I misread the posting. I block everything from
google.groups, not everything from gmail.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I have accepted
at Provolone into my life!
visi.com
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
Grant Edwards <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
> >> increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
> >> posts to this list?
> >
> > I did that a long time ago for all of the Usenet groups I read
> > and all but one of the mailing lists I read.
>
> Wait, I misread the posting. I block everything from
> google.groups, not everything from gmail.
Yes, I did that a long time ago as well. But now there seems to be
more and more actual spam coming from gmail.com itself. It may just be
a minor blip on the spam graph but I'm keeping my eye on it.
Most mailing lists that I am on are pretty good at filtering spam
before it gets to the list. The only spam I ever see on my NetBSD
lists are the ones that I moderate and I block them before anyone else
sees them. A little more pain for me in return for a lot less pain for
everyone else. I guess that's not possible on a list that is gatewayed
to UseNet like this one is.
Hmm. I wonder if all the spam is coming from the NG side. I'll have
to look at that. One of the reasons that I stopped reading UseNet over
ten years ago was because of the diminishinig S/N ratio. I have always
felt that it was a mistake to gateway this group.
Joan Miller
This is something that affects to all programmers:
"This calls on all parties to ensure that "third party liability" (the
idea that ISPs, web-hosts, application developers, mobile carriers,
universities, apartment buildings, and other "third parties" to
infringement are sometimes liable for their users' copyright
infringements) is on the books in their countries. It doesn't spell
out what that liability should be, beyond "knowingly and materially
aiding" an infringement"
Olof Bjarnason
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>
<politics>
Even if this is "Off Topic" (which I think it really isn't in any open
source / free software-oriented mailing list), I want to agree with
Joan.
ACTA is a *real* problem that we must fend politically. Here is a blog
post I wrote about the problem with making ISPs liable for what their
users communicate:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Folofb.wordpress.com%2F&sl=sv&tl=en
(sorry for the bad quality google translation -- this is an important topic!)
Note the name of the important principle: "Mere conduit".
</politics>
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
Olof Bjarnason <olof.bj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Even if this is "Off Topic" (which I think it really isn't in any open
> source / free software-oriented mailing list), I want to agree with
> Joan.
It isn't about the Python programming language so it is off topic. So
what if some members have an interest? We have interest in a lot of
things. We all have interest in the hardware that our programs run on
but questions about hardware are also off topic.
Perhaps you don't quite grasp the point of topical discussion groups.
They are a way of letting individuals decide for themselves what kind
of discussions they want to be involved in. By spamming the group this
way you take away that freedom of choice. It's ironic when it is done
in the name of freedom.
Daniel Fetchinson
>> >> increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
>> >> posts to this list?
>> >
>> > I did that a long time ago for all of the Usenet groups I read
>> > and all but one of the mailing lists I read.
>>
>> Wait, I misread the posting. I block everything from
>> google.groups, not everything from gmail.
>
> more and more actual spam coming from gmail.com itself. It may just be
> a minor blip on the spam graph but I'm keeping my eye on it.
>
> Most mailing lists that I am on are pretty good at filtering spam
> before it gets to the list. The only spam I ever see on my NetBSD
> lists are the ones that I moderate and I block them before anyone else
> sees them. A little more pain for me in return for a lot less pain for
> everyone else. I guess that's not possible on a list that is gatewayed
> to UseNet like this one is.
>
> Hmm. I wonder if all the spam is coming from the NG side. I'll have
> to look at that. One of the reasons that I stopped reading UseNet over
> ten years ago was because of the diminishinig S/N ratio. I have always
> felt that it was a mistake to gateway this group.
And this has to do with python programming in what way?
You, sir, are incredibly funny :)
Just 5 minutes ago you declared in a nearby thread that
> It isn't about the Python programming language so it is off topic. So
> what if some members have an interest? We have interest in a lot of
> things. We all have interest in the hardware that our programs run on
> but questions about hardware are also off topic.
>
> Perhaps you don't quite grasp the point of topical discussion groups.
> They are a way of letting individuals decide for themselves what kind
> of discussions they want to be involved in. By spamming the group this
> way you take away that freedom of choice. It's ironic when it is done
> in the name of freedom.
Touche!
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Psss, psss, put it down! - http://www.cafepress.com/putitdown
D'Arcy J.M. Cain
Daniel Fetchinson <fetch...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> And this has to do with python programming in what way?
Are you new? Meta discussions about lists are generally considered
on-topic for the list.
> You, sir, are incredibly funny :)
Yes, I am. That however is NOT on topic. :-)
And just to bring this back on topic, I did do a test and found that
splitting my mailbox between Python mailing list messages and Python
newsgroup messages did not indicate that that was a good barometer of
spaminess. There are also quite a few decent posts from gmail.com so
blocking by that domain isn't going to be the problem solver either.
Ned Deily
> splitting my mailbox between Python mailing list messages and Python
> newsgroup messages did not indicate that that was a good barometer of
> spaminess. There are also quite a few decent posts from gmail.com so
> blocking by that domain isn't going to be the problem solver either.
Try following the list using gmane (either via NNTP, RSS, or the web).
gmane does a pretty good job of filtering the spam.
http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.python.general
--
Ned Deily,
n...@acm.org
Aahz
D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:54:25 -0800 (PST)
>Joan Miller <pelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> *Sorry by this message off topic, but this is too important*
>
>Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
>increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
>posts to this list?
Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
--
Aahz (aa...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/
"Many customs in this life persist because they ease friction and promote
productivity as a result of universal agreement, and whether they are
precisely the optimal choices is much less important." --Henry Spencer
Ben Finney
> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
content (off-topic and unsolicited).
The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
stop the message being spam when posted here.
--
\ “Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not |
`\ entitled to their own facts.” —US Senator Pat Moynihan |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Lie Ryan
> In article <mailman.103.1266924...@python.org>,
> D'Arcy J.M. Cain <da...@druid.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, 23 Feb 2010 02:54:25 -0800 (PST)
>> Joan Miller <pelo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> *Sorry by this message off topic, but this is too important*
>>
>> Is it just me or has the spew from gmail on this list radically
>> increased in the last week? Anyone else considering blocking all gmail
>> posts to this list?
>
> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
Does being a regular poster exempts you from having your post considered
as spam? That's an
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Inverse_ad_hominem.
Steven D'Aprano
>> Hmm. I wonder if all the spam is coming from the NG side. I'll have
>> to look at that. One of the reasons that I stopped reading UseNet over
>> ten years ago was because of the diminishinig S/N ratio. I have always
>> felt that it was a mistake to gateway this group.
>
> And this has to do with python programming in what way?
I think the question of whether or not comp.lang.python is being spammed,
and if so, what we can do about it, is a good question to raise on
comp.lang.python.
Where else do you think it should be discussed?
--
Steven
Lie Ryan
comp.lang.python.spam_prevention_discussion
Robert Kern
Which doesn't exist and never will. Sorry, but meta-discussions about the group
are typically on-topic for all groups with some few exceptions (e.g.
non-discussion, binary-only groups with associated .d groups, for instance).
--
Robert Kern
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma
that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had
an underlying truth."
-- Umberto Eco
Grant Edwards
>> comp.lang.python.spam_prevention_discussion
>
> Which doesn't exist and never will. Sorry, but
> meta-discussions about the group are typically on-topic for
> all groups with some few exceptions (e.g. non-discussion,
> binary-only groups with associated .d groups, for instance).
Since now we are discussing meta-discussions, is this now a
meta-meta-discussion?
--
Grant
Joan Miller
> > Even if this is "Off Topic" (which I think it really isn't in any open
> > source / free software-oriented mailing list), I want to agree with
> > Joan.
>
> It isn't about the Python programming language so it is off topic. So
> what if some members have an interest? We have interest in a lot of
> things. We all have interest in the hardware that our programs run on
> but questions about hardware are also off topic.
>
> Perhaps you don't quite grasp the point of topical discussion groups.
> They are a way of letting individuals decide for themselves what kind
> of discussions they want to be involved in. By spamming the group this
> way you take away that freedom of choice. It's ironic when it is done
> in the name of freedom.
>
> --
To avoid the spam, I reccomend a mailing list site as librelist:
http://librelist.com/index.html
problem -> reaction -> solution
Robert Kern
If you like, but I tend to interpret "meta-" as idempotent. It's easier on my
aspirin budget.
Aahz
Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>>
>> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
>
>Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
>distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
>content (off-topic and unsolicited).
>
>The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
>stop the message being spam when posted here.
That seems to miss the point to some extent. If I post my recipe for
spinach lasagne here, is that spam? I don't think many people would call
it spam, just an off-topic post. From my POV, spam is defined a bit more
narrowly.
Steve Holden
> In article <87sk8r5...@benfinney.id.au>,
> Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>> aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>>> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
>> Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
>> distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
>> content (off-topic and unsolicited).
>>
>> The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
>> stop the message being spam when posted here.
>
> That seems to miss the point to some extent. If I post my recipe for
> spinach lasagne here, is that spam? I don't think many people would call
> it spam, just an off-topic post. From my POV, spam is defined a bit more
> narrowly.
Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
e-mail. So anything that isn't commercial (like those "send these to ten
of your friends" emails) isn't spam (but it might just as well be).
regards
Steve
--
Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119
PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010 http://us.pycon.org/
Holden Web LLC http://www.holdenweb.com/
UPCOMING EVENTS: http://holdenweb.eventbrite.com/
Arnaud Delobelle
> In article <87sk8r5...@benfinney.id.au>,
> Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>>>
>>> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
>>
>>Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
>>distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
>>content (off-topic and unsolicited).
>>
>>The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
>>stop the message being spam when posted here.
>
> That seems to miss the point to some extent. If I post my recipe for
> spinach lasagne here, is that spam?
Are they really good? Sounds good, spinach lasagne, I don't know a
recipe for them. Maybe you could post it as Python code, with a lot of
nested if-then-else clauses, of course :)
--
Arnaud
Aahz
Steve Holden <st...@holdenweb.com> wrote:
>Aahz wrote:
>> In article <87sk8r5...@benfinney.id.au>,
>> Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>> aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>>>>
>>>> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
>>>
>>> Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
>>> distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
>>> content (off-topic and unsolicited).
>>>
>>> The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
>>> stop the message being spam when posted here.
>>
>> That seems to miss the point to some extent. If I post my recipe for
>> spinach lasagne here, is that spam? I don't think many people would call
>> it spam, just an off-topic post. From my POV, spam is defined a bit more
>> narrowly.
>
>Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
>e-mail. So anything that isn't commercial (like those "send these to ten
>of your friends" emails) isn't spam (but it might just as well be).
That's roughly correct, but I also think that if someone posts the same
message to five mailing lists, it's not unreasonable to call that
spamming.
Aahz
>>
>> Joan Miller is a regular poster; this is off-topic, but it's not spam.
>
>Non sequitur. Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its
>distribution (to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its
>content (off-topic and unsolicited).
>
>The message is important, its poster is a regular here; that doesn't
>stop the message being spam when posted here.
Moreover, by your definition, your post above counts as spam.
Neil Hodgson
> Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
> e-mail.
Spam is more commonly defined as UBE (Unsolicited Bulk Email) of
which UCE is a large subset. Its just as much spam if its pushing a
political party or charity even though there may be no commercial
advantage to the poster.
Neil
Steve Holden
>From my point of view that's a far better definition. Thanks.
Robert Kern
> In article<mailman.194.1267045...@python.org>,
> Steve Holden<st...@holdenweb.com> wrote:
>> Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
>> e-mail. So anything that isn't commercial (like those "send these to ten
>> of your friends" emails) isn't spam (but it might just as well be).
>
> That's roughly correct, but I also think that if someone posts the same
> message to five mailing lists, it's not unreasonable to call that
> spamming.
This accords with my understanding of the term and, it appears, that of Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroup_spam
Ben Finney
> Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
> e-mail. So anything that isn't commercial (like those "send these to
> ten of your friends" emails) isn't spam (but it might just as well
> be).
That excludes things like the religious screeds, or any other one-way
"get this message in front of as many eyeballs as possible" message.
Spam is better defined as unsolicited bulk messaging. Whether it's
commercial in nature is irrelevant. The content is relevant only in that
it's unsolicited by the vast majority of its many recipients.
--
\ “I went to court for a parking ticket; I pleaded insanity. I |
`\ said ‘Your Honour, who in their right mind parks in the passing |
_o__) lane?’” —Steven Wright |
Ben Finney
Ben Finney
> In article <87sk8r5...@benfinney.id.au>,
> Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
> >Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its distribution
> >(to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its content
> >(off-topic and unsolicited).
[…]
> Moreover, by your definition, your post above counts as spam.
No. Again, as several others have pointed out, discussions about how the
forum should operate (meta-discussions, if you like) are on-topic in the
forum.
That's not to say they should dominate the forum, of course.
--
\ “I must say that I find television very educational. The minute |
`\ somebody turns it on, I go to the library and read a book.” |
_o__) —Groucho Marx |
Ben Finney
Aahz
Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>> In article <87sk8r5...@benfinney.id.au>,
>> Ben Finney <ben+p...@benfinney.id.au> wrote:
>>>
>>>Spam is spam, not by who authors or posts it, but by its distribution
>>>(to many people, e.g. via a forum like this one) and its content
>>>(off-topic and unsolicited).
>>
>> Moreover, by your definition, your post above counts as spam.
>
>No. Again, as several others have pointed out, discussions about how the
>forum should operate (meta-discussions, if you like) are on-topic in the
>forum.
We already agreed that the original post was not appropriate for c.l.py;
further discussion about the precise term for describing that post is
off-topic. Therefore, by your definition, your post is spam. My point
is that c.l.py is somewhat tolerant of off-topic posts, and generally
people who contribute to the newsgroup are more likely to get a pass on
off-topic posts.
Robert Kern
> Steve Holden<st...@holdenweb.com> writes:
>
>> Spam is, at least from my point of view, UCE: unsolicited commercial
>> e-mail. So anything that isn't commercial (like those "send these to
>> ten of your friends" emails) isn't spam (but it might just as well
>> be).
>
> That excludes things like the religious screeds, or any other one-way
> "get this message in front of as many eyeballs as possible" message.
>
> Spam is better defined as unsolicited bulk messaging. Whether it's
> commercial in nature is irrelevant. The content is relevant only in that
> it's unsolicited by the vast majority of its many recipients.
That said, in the context of USENET or mailing lists, a single off-topic post to
a single group/list from a regular contributor is not usually considered "bulk
messaging" or "spam". There is already a perfectly fine word for that:
"off-topic". Only when it gets cross-posted excessively or repeated verbatim
indiscriminately does it usually get designated spam.
I think there is an important distinction to be made between isolated off-topic
messages and spam. It's not just about finding commonly agreed meanings of terms
in aid of clear communication. There is a substantive difference. The repetitive
nature of spam dictates what you can do about it. With spam, you can killfile
people, or filter out certain hosts, or use statistical filters, or require
registration or first-post moderation, etc. With the occasional off-topic post
from a regular, you ask them not to do it again and subject them to unending
threads about what spam is or isn't.
But you only break out the comfy chair for the very worst of the offenders.
Steven D'Aprano
> Spam is better defined as unsolicited bulk messaging. Whether it's
> commercial in nature is irrelevant. The content is relevant only in that
> it's unsolicited by the vast majority of its many recipients.
Not quite.
I've read tens of thousands of messages to comp.lang.python, and
solicited perhaps some hundreds. Are all the rest spam? I should say not!
I haven't solicited them: at no point did I say, explicitly or
implicitly, "Hey strangers all over the world, send me messages asking
questions about Python" but I do welcome them.
(In fact, I'd be annoyed if everyone started sending the questions to me
personally instead of to the list.)
I think it is foolish to try to create a water-tight definition of
"spam". It is clearly a fuzzy concept, which means sometimes right-
thinking people can have legitimate disagreements as to whether or not
something is "spam".
For example, I happen to think that the OP's message about Fascism is off-
topic but not spam. I think Joan is guilty of a breach of etiquette for
failing to label it [OT] in the subject line, and she should have
directed replies to a more appropriate forum (a mailing list, another
newsgroup, a web forum, anywhere but here). But in my opinion, it didn't
cross the line into spam. I wouldn't be the slightest bit tempted to
killfile her, or flag the message as spam, in my mail/news client.
If other people feel differently, well, that's your personal choice. But
please don't try to tell me that *my* line between spam and ham is wrong,
and that *yours* is the only correct one.
(That last response is aimed at a generic You, not Ben specifically.
Stupid English language, why can't we have a word for generic you?)
--
Steven
Ben Finney
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2010 11:39:08 +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
>
> > Spam is better defined as unsolicited bulk messaging. Whether it's
> > commercial in nature is irrelevant. The content is relevant only in
> > that it's unsolicited by the vast majority of its many recipients.
>
> Not quite.
>
> I've read tens of thousands of messages to comp.lang.python, and
> solicited perhaps some hundreds. Are all the rest spam? I should say
> not! I haven't solicited them: at no point did I say, explicitly or
> implicitly, "Hey strangers all over the world, send me messages asking
> questions about Python"
By subscribing to the forum, I maintain that you do exactly that.
> but I do welcome them.
Whether they're welcome or not, they're solicited in the sense of being
delivered to the recipient who explicitly asked to receive messages on a
particular range of topics.
When a message that is well outside the nominal range of topics for a
forum is broadcast to recipients by means of that forum, the message is
unsolicited.
--
\ “All my life I've had one dream: to achieve my many goals.” |
`\ —Homer, _The Simpsons_ |
_o__) |
Ben Finney
Steve Holden
Arnaud Delobelle
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> (That last response is aimed at a generic You, not Ben specifically.
> Stupid English language, why can't we have a word for generic you?)
I thought the word was "one".
--
Arnaud
BJ Swope
> If you like, but I tend to interpret "meta-" as idempotent. It's easier on
> my aspirin budget.
>
> --
> Robert Kern
And here I thought it was little blue pills for idempotentcy...
----
Life is a sexually transmitted disease with a 100% fatality rate. -- brazzy
Auburn fans are like slinkys... not really good for anything but they
still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of
stairs.
To argue that honorable conduct is only required against an honorable
enemy degrades the Americans who must carry out the orders. -- Charles
Krulak, Former Commandant of the Marine Corps
We are all slave to our own paradigm. -- Joshua Williams
If the letters PhD appear after a person's name, that person will
remain outdoors even after it's started raining. -- Jeff Kay
Emile van Sebille
> aa...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) writes:
>> That seems to miss the point to some extent. If I post my recipe for
>> spinach lasagne here, is that spam?
>
> Are they really good? Sounds good, spinach lasagne, I don't know a
> recipe for them. Maybe you could post it as Python code, with a lot of
> nested if-then-else clauses, of course :)
>
+1 for Aahz posting his Spinach Lasagne recipe.
Emile
Aahz
Sorry, I lied. ;-) I don't actually have a spinach lasagne recipe.
I've got lots of others on my personal website at http://rule6.info/
(including one for Catalan Spinach).