Please change the subject line. On Thu, September 4, 2008 11:34 am, SJS wrote: > begin quoting Andrew Lentvorski as of Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 02:27:53AM > -0700: > [snip]> >> The primary issue is that there is no such thing as positive sender >> identification with respect to email. I can't verify that a stranger is >> who he says he is. I can't even verify that my whitelist is who they >> say they are as they can be compromised fairly readily and then their >> machines start spewing spam. > > There's always that fundamental disconnect between the human being and > the online presence. I'm not sure it's worth worrying about that. > >>From your account on your machine *is* you, so far as I'm concerned. If > your account/machine gets compromised, your online avatar has been > effectively possessed, and I can't get /too/ upset at you about that (so > long as you are cured in a timely manner). No head-spinning, however, as > that makes me dizzy. > >> The only thing that differentiates spam from non-spam is *content*. Any >> method which uses something other than content is doomed to failure. > > What's amusing is how often email from the office/managers at work is > "recognized as spam" by my spam filters. > > -- > We need to invent a real AI. > Stewart Stremler > > > -- > KPLUG-List@kernel-panic.org > http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list >
-- Lan Barnes SCM Analyst Linux Guy Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer -- KPLUG-List@kernel-panic.org http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
