New Paper technology in our world :

In article ,
David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 1/27/2008 6:32 PM ____ spake thus:

In article uyanj.5139$z_6.1141@trnddc06,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:

And spam in e-mails is getting worse. In the mid 1990s the spam level of
e-mail was probably less than 50%, but now it seems to be between 90% and
95%. Soon the Internet will become useless. It is a pity.

I get relatively no spam in email I can not trace to someone I've given
my address. I never respond to garbage. I also have a www. site and have
limited direct email to me in several ways. One: I made all the email
boxes for my site have an address to I use two addresses, all incoming
email from the site gets filtered and has to come from a detailed
response form. I am relatively happy

Well, like they say, it all depends.

Here at home, I get ZERO spam. None. Never. (Well, once in a great
while, like say every couple months, I get one spam message.)

At work, not only do we get tons of spam on our main account (info@...),
but the got-damn mother****ing spammers are now using OUR account as a
source address for their spam! In other words, not only do we get spam,
but we get spam that originates (seemingly) from OUR OWN EMAIL ADDRESS,
as well as "bounce" messages from spam that didn't hit its target.
Meaning that folks out there are getting ****ed off at *us*, since it
appears that we are spammers, when in fact we are their victim.

I agree with Jean-David: email will soon become useless as a
communication medium. And you know what? I look forward to that day!
Bring it on!

Are these PC systems by chance. Where I work PT on PCees we get some
spam/ they decided to filter the incoming mail through and online
spam trap it work well to take the most ignorant stuff away. I think as
filters get better eventually you'll at least see less. I seriously
doubt email will go by the wayside because a few idiots.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:


There's only one logical explanation I can think of: spammers are
getting their addresses directly from ISPs (or indirectly). It must be
an inside job;

BINGO!!

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

____ wrote:
In article uyanj.5139$z_6.1141@trnddc06,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:
And spam in e-mails is getting worse. In the mid 1990s the spam level of
e-mail was probably less than 50%, but now it seems to be between 90% and
95%. Soon the Internet will become useless. It is a pity.

I get relatively no spam in email I can not trace to someone I've given
my address. I never respond to garbage. I also have a www. site and have
limited direct email to me in several ways. One: I made all the email
boxes for my site have an address to I use two addresses, all incoming
email from the site gets filtered and has to come from a detailed
response form. I am relatively happy

A lot of mine seems to be from trojans that invade mailboxes of friends and
capture their address books. They then send me e-mail allegedly from my
friends, but they never sent them.

The next batch is where the spammer has a million monkeys typing e-mail
addresses for their clients who then want me to send my eBay account
information (there is none, since I avoid eBay), my Bank of America account,
and such. My ISP's spam filter weeds out most of the Viagra and Vicodin
type adds. I still get the Nigerian hoaxes.

I am going back to the telephone and snail mail for important communications.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 20:40:01 up 4 days, 10:26, 2 users, load average: 4.22, 4.17, 4.19

David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 1/27/2008 6:32 PM ____ spake thus:

In article uyanj.5139$z_6.1141@trnddc06,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:

And spam in e-mails is getting worse. In the mid 1990s the spam level of
e-mail was probably less than 50%, but now it seems to be between 90%
and
95%. Soon the Internet will become useless. It is a pity.

I get relatively no spam in email I can not trace to someone I've
given my address. I never respond to garbage. I also have a www. site
and have limited direct email to me in several ways. One: I made all
the email boxes for my site have an address to I use two addresses,
all incoming email from the site gets filtered and has to come from a
detailed response form. I am relatively happy

Well, like they say, it all depends.

Here at home, I get ZERO spam. None. Never. (Well, once in a great
while, like say every couple months, I get one spam message.)

At work, not only do we get tons of spam on our main account (info@...),
but the got-damn mother****ing spammers are now using OUR account as a
source address for their spam! In other words, not only do we get spam,
but we get spam that originates (seemingly) from OUR OWN EMAIL ADDRESS,
as well as "bounce" messages from spam that didn't hit its target.
Meaning that folks out there are getting ****ed off at *us*, since it
appears that we are spammers, when in fact we are their victim.

I agree with Jean-David: email will soon become useless as a
communication medium. And you know what? I look forward to that day!
Bring it on!

I used to say that day was about 5 years off. But in the three years or so
that have passed, I think it is now about 2 years off.

--
.~. Jean-David Beyer Registered Linux User 85642.
/V\ PGP-Key: 9A2FC99A Registered Machine 241939.
/( )\ Shrewsbury, New Jersey http://counter.li.org
^^-^^ 20:45:02 up 4 days, 10:31, 2 users, load average: 4.06, 4.13, 4.16

On 1/28/2008 3:25 PM ____ spake thus:

In article ,
David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 1/27/2008 6:32 PM ____ spake thus:

In article uyanj.5139$z_6.1141@trnddc06,
Jean-David Beyer wrote:

And spam in e-mails is getting worse. In the mid 1990s the spam level of
e-mail was probably less than 50%, but now it seems to be between 90% and
95%. Soon the Internet will become useless. It is a pity.

I get relatively no spam in email I can not trace to someone I've given
my address. I never respond to garbage. I also have a www. site and have
limited direct email to me in several ways. One: I made all the email
boxes for my site have an address to I use two addresses, all incoming
email from the site gets filtered and has to come from a detailed
response form. I am relatively happy

Well, like they say, it all depends.

Here at home, I get ZERO spam. None. Never. (Well, once in a great
while, like say every couple months, I get one spam message.)

At work, not only do we get tons of spam on our main account (info@...),
but the got-damn mother****ing spammers are now using OUR account as a
source address for their spam! In other words, not only do we get spam,
but we get spam that originates (seemingly) from OUR OWN EMAIL ADDRESS,
as well as "bounce" messages from spam that didn't hit its target.
Meaning that folks out there are getting ****ed off at *us*, since it
appears that we are spammers, when in fact we are their victim.

I agree with Jean-David: email will soon become useless as a
communication medium. And you know what? I look forward to that day!
Bring it on!

Are these PC systems by chance. Where I work PT on PCees we get some
spam/ they decided to filter the incoming mail through and online
spam trap it work well to take the most ignorant stuff away. I think as
filters get better eventually you'll at least see less. I seriously
doubt email will go by the wayside because a few idiots.

Really has nothing to do with the whole PC-vs-Mac thing (like those
*stupid* Apple commercials). We have one of each, and they both catch
about the same junk messages ("mail" on the iMac, Thunderbird on the
PC). The accounts are all through Yahoo! small business, by the way, so
there's no real problem with spam causing excess server load, as someone
mentioned upthread.

So our email clients do filter the junk pretty effectively, but it
doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference: because the filters aren't
100% effective, that means you *still* have to look through the junk
folder every day to make sure that something you want didn't end up in
there (and then delete all that crap). And it doesn't have anything at
all to do with the victim-as-spammer scheme I mentioned, whereby other
spam victims get ****ed off at you.

In article m, David
Nebenzahl
kens says...

There's only one logical explanation I can think of: spammers are
getting their addresses directly from ISPs (or indirectly). It must be
an inside job; someone who works at Yahoo!, say, is selling names of
accounts. I'm pretty sure this must be true, as I get spam no matter how
long and unusual the user ID of the account is.

All you have to do is send an email from that account to any compromised
computer and the address will end up on a spammer's list. Home users
are generally clueless about computer security, and many small
businesses aren't any better, while big business systems are attractive
to serious data thieves. But to keep things in perspective, I've never
been paranoid about protecting my email addresses and I'm not
overwhelmed by spam. As for spam in the newsgroups, I hardly see any
because my NSP has good filtering.

In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:

Really has nothing to do with the whole PC-vs-Mac thing (like those
*stupid* Apple commercials). We have one of each, and they both catch
about the same junk messages ("mail" on the iMac, Thunderbird on the
PC). The accounts are all through Yahoo! small business, by the way, so
there's no real problem with spam causing excess server load, as someone
mentioned upthread.

So our email clients do filter the junk pretty effectively, but it
doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference: because the filters aren't
100% effective, that means you *still* have to look through the junk
folder every day to make sure that something you want didn't end up in
there (and then delete all that crap). And it doesn't have anything at
all to do with the victim-as-spammer scheme I mentioned, whereby other
spam victims get ****ed off at you.

Oh I don't know, it seems like our work PC's are a lot more prone to
auto opening exe. files and any other contrived contraptions.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

On 1/29/2008 3:29 PM ____ spake thus:

In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:

Really has nothing to do with the whole PC-vs-Mac thing (like those
*stupid* Apple commercials). We have one of each, and they both catch
about the same junk messages ("mail" on the iMac, Thunderbird on the
PC). The accounts are all through Yahoo! small business, by the way, so
there's no real problem with spam causing excess server load, as someone
mentioned upthread.

So our email clients do filter the junk pretty effectively, but it
doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference: because the filters aren't
100% effective, that means you *still* have to look through the junk
folder every day to make sure that something you want didn't end up in
there (and then delete all that crap). And it doesn't have anything at
all to do with the victim-as-spammer scheme I mentioned, whereby other
spam victims get ****ed off at you.

Oh I don't know, it seems like our work PC's are a lot more prone to
auto opening exe. files and any other contrived contraptions.

Well, there are two well-known causes, both correctable:

1. Using Internet Exploiter and Outhouse Express, both of which are
applications walking around with "infect me" signs on their backs.
(Solution: use Mozilla or other free software instead.)

2. People who click on things they shouldn't. Fixable, but with much
more difficulty.

In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:



Oh I don't know, it seems like our work PC's are a lot more prone to
auto opening exe. files and any other contrived contraptions.

Well, there are two well-known causes, both correctable:

1. Using Internet Exploiter and Outhouse Express, both of which are
applications walking around with "infect me" signs on their backs.
(Solution: use Mozilla or other free software instead.)

2. People who click on things they shouldn't. Fixable, but with much
more difficulty.

I agree, and use Mozilla and Firefox on Mac. Where I work PT they have
both the other two programs- which both suck.

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

In article internetphobic-8157B4.18291329012008
@newsgroups.comcast.net, ____
says...
In article m,
David Nebenzahl wrote:

Really has nothing to do with the whole PC-vs-Mac thing (like those
*stupid* Apple commercials). We have one of each, and they both catch
about the same junk messages ("mail" on the iMac, Thunderbird on the
PC). The accounts are all through Yahoo! small business, by the way, so
there's no real problem with spam causing excess server load, as someone
mentioned upthread.

So our email clients do filter the junk pretty effectively, but it
doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference: because the filters aren't
100% effective, that means you *still* have to look through the junk
folder every day to make sure that something you want didn't end up in
there (and then delete all that crap). And it doesn't have anything at
all to do with the victim-as-spammer scheme I mentioned, whereby other
spam victims get ****ed off at you.

Oh I don't know, it seems like our work PC's are a lot more prone to
auto opening exe. files and any other contrived contraptions.

Your network/system administrator isn't doing his job properly.