Let's put it this way Kev, you know I run botlending, and if there would be
any feature that would make it possible to be able to use the same bot for
more then current (e.g. perhaps in the way I proposed earlier many times) I
would do it, in fact I'm already working on it, just need to implement
ohh yeah great then what unet can do after this is charge say $5 per
client/account for bot usages!
SPECIAL OFFER : (+B going for $5 USD) Apply within
j/k , but you never know =)
wensu
- Original Message -
From: "Alexander Maassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:
>
> It's an interesting idea--but it requires that the bot identify itself.
> I highly doubt we could convince botnet owners to make their bots
> identify themselves as bots. It's unfortunate--it would be such a
> useful thing :(
>
>
>
> I don't see why we couldn't convince them... If you ha
If one has nothing to hide, what does one get from using this feature?
Every email so far has identified ways that bots could be restricted,
with only the stick ("Use this or your bot is a kill target") as
incentive to use it. Where is the carrot that makes bot owners *want*
to use it?
While it
"XL NXXoS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't see why we couldn't convince them... If you have nothing to hide
> and are not abusing, you shouldn't fear this feature right? If you don't
> use it, you are a potential kill target, and servers might be able to
> refuse bot connections from unknow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday 19 Aug 2002 4:51 am, Neil Spierling wrote:
> How would you tell if they are bots tho? I suppose ctcp checks could be
> done but they can be easily faked
The same way we tell now, intuition and experience. Imperfect, but when
they
