What kind of fucked-up human being could say something like that.
If someone says that, that's a pretty good indication that they're not human. They're a monster wearing a suit of human meat, just like the meat shell wears its fancy suit.
I was wondering this as well.
Technically speaking, I think it would have to be based on the physical location of the person when they press the button. I suppose the person's state of citizenship might matter too.
Assume that I, a citizen of New York, am vacationing in Cape Cod (in Mass., a two-party-consent state). I'm lounging on the beach, delicious craft brew in hand, when my mobile phone rings. I don't know why I brought the damn thing with me. I cuss once, put my beer down, and answer the phone.
Q: Can I press the "Record" button?
My craft brew and I are physically in Massachusetts, but the phone has a New York number, is registered to an account in New York, and is operating via the VZW network, which is run by a company headquartered in--you guessed it--New York.
I just looked at the source for the page. It's static HTML with the ASCII art defacement poster enclosed in [pre] tags. There isn't any code there with which one could conceivably conduct an attack.
Your post advocates a
( ) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based (x) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
( ) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
(x) The police will not put up with it
( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
(x) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
(x) Laws expressly prohibiting it
( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
(x) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
( ) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
(x) Extreme profitability of spam
( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
(x) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
(x) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your
house down!
"Take the piss" is a British slang term that means roughly the same thing as when we say "give someone shit".
Your pithy, quotable wisdom notwithstanding, that's why you have a locking drawer in the desk
Your State may be different, but New York's Freedom of Information Law (or FOIL, we like to be different) works like this:
The agency has to respond within five business days, but that response can read something like:
Dear Sexybomber:
We have received your request for public records pursuant to FOIL. Due to the complexity of the records you have requested, it may not be possible to produce them within the standard 20-day statutory period. We anticipate that we will be able to produce the records you have requested within 40 days. If you have questions or concerns, please direct them in writing to the address above.
If they run into a snag, they have to inform you of this and produce the records within a "reasonable period".
So it's not like NYC was under a five-day time crunch here. They could easily have responded and said it would take 40 or 60 days, being as there were several million records requested. That's definitely long enough to bring in a consultant (or even one of the more technically-literate staff members) to properly secure the data.
Sandra Day O'Connor hasn't been on the Supreme Court for eight years now. That glorified shitstain Sam Alito replaced her. While it would certainly be interesting to hear her opinion of the case, such opinion would carry no weight whatsoever.
I just took a nuclear shit. It was the bomb.
(Am I doing it right?)
No one should even consider to be concerned about what other people do.
You seem pretty concerned about OP's alleged hate speech.
What the fuck did I just read?
I'll bite. Please present evidence supporting your claim that "that research has since been disproven".
I hate to break it to you, but you're sorely mistaken. Every State has gotten rid of the marital rape exemption. Some of them maintain differences in exactly how it's prosecuted, but it's still rape.
Who's writing Linux these days? One can only hope it's not the same people who are responsible for the abomination that is Slashdot Beta.
People will buy anything that's one to a customer.
