one thing to think about is while CRAP systems are crap, could they not help develop a new underlying protocol that actually works better, because of there increased spam rate? maybe if we all start using them we can actually kill SMTP and drown it in a world of captcha-like annoyances.
in any case, my point is that while crap isn't great, what do we have that's better? are better spam filters the way forward? or technology? or what? i think crap's are a nice niche and people can use them if they want. obviously not ideal, but it's hard to make an ideal system on the base we have. On 3/15/07, Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, Mar 14, 2007 at 09:53:08PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Oh, ok. > As I said earlier, TMDA isn't for everybody. The point is that TMDA is like a sharp katana. You don't want these things lying around in a kindergarten. > It looks like it isn't for you. It looks like TMDA is for 0.1% of all Internet users. Probably less. I don't think I would be able to handle it accurately, all the time. And I wouldn't even know I'm spamming others, because there is no feedback. > I described it in the hopes that it might be useful to others; > whether TMDA is popular or unpopular with the internet on the > whole does not matter to me in any way at all. I derive no > income or glory from being a happy user; the only benefits > are intrinsic. When used in combination with Spamassassin, TMDA > cut my spam burden down to about 1 per month. I get about 5 spams/day, for several hundred of ham, and I'm not using anything beyond an unmodified Spamassassin/procmail. > Incidentally, if you ever do want to run your own MTA for only > $30/month you can get a physical box (not just a virtual machine) What is wrong with a virtual machine? I run many of those, on a few of physical iron. Works just great. > from serverpronto.com. They are very bare-bones in terms of > services, but then that's one of the reasons they can be so cheap. > Their connectivity is quite good (direct fiber to Tier 1 backbones). > If you want, they can pre-load it with Debian, FreeBSD, or whatever > else you'd like. Too expensive for a normal user. > Perhaps your filters are misconfigured. > It seems that way to me, based on what you're saying. It seems that you're unwilling to accept the fact that TMDA is not the solution, but the precipitate. > I don't find your hypothesis offensive, just the groundless > accusation that I have personally offloaded work on to others > and created problems. I've done nothing of the sort. Are you sure? How would you know? Judging from what you've said so far I'm not inclined to believe you understand what the problem is. > If the challenges you're seeing take on a wild variety > of forms, they they are probably actual spams posing > as challenges (hence c/r can't be faulted); if they are > highly patterned, then they are easily eliminated and > should not be visible to you in the first place. > > As pointed out earlier, the extra bandwidth consumed is > quite negligible, even if *everybody* were doing this. DUDE, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BANDWIDTH. IT'S ABOUT PEOPLE. > Therefore, the "third party" argument does not convince me. > Perhaps we've reached a point of irreducible disagreement. > I'm guessing this is the case now. I'm guessing I'd rather not have sharp katanas distributed in a kindergarten. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org";>leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFF+RBIdbAkQ4sp9r4RAgSqAKC+kZCg5ieIT+3p4dVfN5CNOPRIEwCfYT2+ YAFRakmns4lecCpFBR9loME= =+hGv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- mike 00110001 <3 00110111
