Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Yes, Please (Score 2) 247

by arth1 (#47663739) Attached to: The IPv4 Internet Hiccups

This means that their DNS resolver will know to only return IPv4 routes since IPv6 routes aren't usable. Thus no problem.

That depends. The "filter AAAA on ipv4" option is quite new in bind 9, and probably not available on the majority of DNS installations out there.
My guess is that a majority of ISPs will gladly send IPv4 clients the AAAA records. Which, in my opinion, is a good thing. Just because the query goes through IPv4 doesn't necessarily mean a client doesn't have IPv6.

Comment: Re:This guy might be overvaluing his files (Score 0) 100

by arth1 (#47663647) Attached to: Password Gropers Hit Peak Stupid, Take the Spamtrap Bait

Why is this "insightful"? By the time the spam is processed by the trap and is blacklisted, the million e-mails have already been delivered.
The next time the spammer sends e-mail, it will be a different e-mail, so the existing rule won't trigger.

The only real effect this has is adding fat to the spam checkers, making mail delivery slower for everyone. Except the spammer.

Comment: Re:This guy might be overvaluing his files (Score -1, Offtopic) 100

by arth1 (#47662935) Attached to: Password Gropers Hit Peak Stupid, Take the Spamtrap Bait

Right, it is irrelevant for the spammer. He's not using his own resources. Whether he sends e-mail to a million real and a million fake addresses, or to a million real and two million fake ones does not matter.

What's "peak stupid" here is the submitter not understanding how spamming works before posting on it.

Comment: Re:Yes, Please (Score 3) 247

by arth1 (#47662885) Attached to: The IPv4 Internet Hiccups

And most people don't need router technology in their home that's newer than 10 years old.

Once their OS is told that www.google.com has internet address 2607:f8b0:4009:805::1010, they sure do.
Or once their ISP switches to IPv6.

What's sad is that slashdot.org does not have an AAAA address.
News for whom?
Stuff that what?

Comment: Re:Automated notice not necessary here (Score 1) 364

by arth1 (#47657705) Attached to: Comcast Drops Spurious Fees When Customer Reveals Recording

If they notify you that the call is being recorded then that's all they have to do. If you don't consent then hang up, that's the purpose of the notification.

That's a Hobson's choice as far as the call goes.
Given that for many of their services, you cannot do them though the web site or e-mail, that's a showstopper. They've pretty much responded with "you have to call us for that" whenever I needed something done and tried to do it online.
If you're disabled or without transportation to get you to an office, that pretty much leaves you with no options at all.

Comment: Re:Alternatively... (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47623133) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

It's basically looking for a needle in a haystack, but for a router, the haystack is a lot smaller than on a full OS.
Any code affecting normal operation speeds would also be easier to spot - additional packet inspection can incur a noticable hit on a device that prides itself on passing packets as quickly as possible and allowing as many simultaneous connections as possible.

Comment: Re:we offered a similar service, it costs to opera (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47622629) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

A Billion dollar security firm won't sign up for a $120 per year service to see the data behind the breach?

A billion dollar security firm won't sign up for a $120 per year service per site to not see the data behind the breach, but to be given an unsubstantiated statement of whether they allegedly are affected or not.

Why would they? That would just be opening up for all kinds of protection rackets.

Comment: Re:Objection! (Score 1) 102

by arth1 (#47622583) Attached to: Massive Russian Hack Has Researchers Scratching Their Heads

Could be worse:

- Here, my $120, what's going on with this?
- You're affected. Change your password, goodbye.
- But, hey, my web site doesn't have any passwords, how can it be affected?
- Yes, you're affected, goodbye.

Until they pony up some evidence, this sounds like scam much like the cold callers who tell you you have a virus.

Comment: Re:Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47613091) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

That's just what Jesus said, sir.

It reminds me of a televangelist who was a teetotaler. When confronted with Jesus having made wine out of water, his response was "Yes, we know about this, but we do not like it".

Religion can justify or condemn pretty much anything, so the only rational thing to do is to take religion out of the equation. It certainly should not influence our laws.

Comment: Re:Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47612999) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

"Make people not do bad things" is a golden goose. Nobody has yet come up with a way to make that actually happen.

Nobody.

I don't know whether you speak out of ignorance, stupidity, contrariness or misplaced belief, but the above is a big fucking lie.
There are lots of programmes that makes people not do bad things. They're called preventative measures, and includes programmes like free methadon for heroin addicts, poverty reduction, incentives to hire ex-cons, psychological and psychiatric assistance programmes, and much more. And they do work - crime rates and recidivism goes down.

If you look at things in black and white and think that if it doesn't stop 100% of the crime it's ineffective, you refuse to see the big picture. It doesn't have to. If leads to a measurable improvement, it does reduce the number of crimes committed and suffering victims.
If that isn't your goal, you're part of the problem, not the solution.

While you're sitting dreaming of ways to stop people from doing bad things would you rather there were no penalty for crime, or have I myself now misrepresented your views?

Can you even help yourself from doing that?

Prison sentences serve multiple purposes:

- Deterrence.
Studies show that the length and severity of the sentence is only effective up to a certain point. No one will abstain from doing a crime because they risk 40 years in jail instead of 12. In some cases, too harsh mandatory or customary sentencing has a detrimental effect. A good example is child molestation, where the super-long sentencing causes children to not report their parents, because they don't want to see people they love go to jail for the rest of their lives. They endure instead, and become more traumatized. Another example is capital punishment. When that is in place, it is in the interest of a criminal to kill witnesses and police, because it won't make the sentencing any harder, but will make it more likely they get away with it.
Yes, deterrence works. Up to a point. Based on that factor, the sentencing here in the US is far too long for the maximal effect.

- Prevention
While in prison, the opportunity to commit the same crime as arrested for is low. This has an effect when the recidivism risk is high. But the way it is used in the US is not based on statistics, but on fucking feelings. The crimes with the highest recidivism rates get shorter sentencing than the ones with lower recidivism rates. So it's obviously not a main concern. Many other countries split the sentencing between the actual punishment and an additional detainment, which is meant to be for preventative reasons. A few even factor in the risk of recidivism.

- Rehabilitation.
It is in society's best interest that a convicted criminal returns to society as a productive member; the sooner, the better. Most Western countries try to use the time criminals spend incarcerated in preparing them for returning to a normal life, not to "reward" the criminal, but because it greatly reduces recidivism and costs to everyone. In the US, there's pretty much no rehabilitation, and the number of ex-convicts who return to crime is astonishingly high compared to the rest of the world.

- Revenge.
It doesn't undo the crime, and drags those exacting revenge down to the same level as the criminal. It certainly doesn't make the criminal any more inclined to become a happy member of society. Few countries now support this, and almost all that do, do it for religious reasons.

Yes, sentencing is necessary when someone is caught for a crime. But the sentencing needs to be rational, and not based on feelings. And better yet is to reduce the number of people sentenced by reducing the risk of crime before it happens. I know, alien concept, and you won't get your righteous rocks off as much by reading about caught perps.

Comment: Re:Post office/border security (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47607951) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

how, exactly, does one fingerprint a tax-evader or speeder's email?

Sales receipts for out-of-state purchases can be fingerprinted, and compared to use tax declarations. And this has indeed come up too, in a slightly more limited way. At least one state have asked some online retailers to be Bcced on all sales receipts.

Key words like "evaded" and "90mph" may be set up to trigger manual inspection. Bayesian filtering can be used for more than catching spam.

Comment: Re:Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47606685) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

Why a criminal should receive hundred of thousand of dollars in "help" while other people who, in my mind are much more worthy, don't have access to a basic quality life? Why reward criminals?

Because you're helping society, not just the individual. By helping the individuals, the amount of crime goes down. Or do you mean that the cost of rehabilitation and prevention means more to you than the children getting molested? Cause that's what you appear to be saying.

You choose to believe pedophiles suffers from a mental illness. Why? What is your real reason for that. You don't have any kind of scientific basis to proclaim that. So why believe that? Do you know your head enough to know the answer?

One of the large factors in child molestation is paedophilia, which is classified as a clinical perversion, much like necrophilia, zoophilia and others. That's certainly a mental health condition. No-one wakes up one day and says to him/herself "I think I will start lusting after prepubescent children". If that factor can be reduced by offering medical assistance to those who need and want it, without the current stigma, it would lead to a reduction in child molestations. That's the goal.
Other factors can probably be reduced too, including poverty (there is a correlation), repressed sexuality (legalize prostitution), ignorance and superstition (public education), and other treatable medical problems. Any given thing does not have to work on all cases - it's the sum, and how it works on society as a whole that's important.

Did you know that one of the biggest risk factors for becoming a child molester is having been abused as a child? By reducing the number of atrocities happening now, you help break a vicious cycle, and reduce it even more for the next generation.

Comment: Re:Well at least they saved the children! (Score 1) 790

by arth1 (#47604743) Attached to: Google Spots Explicit Images of a Child In Man's Email, Tips Off Police

The hard truth is that there is no realistic solution to the root cause of these problems. Do you really think that if there were, we wouldn't be already doing that?

I see a distinct unwillingness to even consider it, and much less invest money and resources on it. People appear to want to string up molesters and not reduce the risk of people becoming or staying molesters. Just look around in this thread, and you see plenty of examples.

The bogosity meter just pegged.

Working...