Yes, I've seen some classics too.

For a while I actually deliberately allowed stuff from the "Lads from Nigeria" through and put in its own inbox for everyone at the firm to laugh over. I created a second specially trained SA Bayesian classifier in front of the main filter to siphon this stuff off.

It was trained on a hand crafted corpus gleaned from a mailbox of stuff behind a sacrificial Exim daemon on its own connection that strangely runs really slow but not too slow to put off the spammers.

SA can be made to work in very strange ways. Perhaps I ought to get out more ...

Cheers
Jon

Have you ever tried it (I can't speak for 2010)? The Intelligent Message Filter is dreadful.

You pretty much only get two knobs to turn: 0-10 for either block or quarantine. On the switches front you get to use someone else's service ie DNSBLs or you can (naively) fill in blocked address lists.

That's why have been doing a roaring trade (10 odd years) in tiny Gentoo (VMs nowadays) machines with Exim 'n' Spam Assassin + Clam AV doing the stuff that Exchange just can't.

So yes his Uni probably did cock up the config of Exch but if they turn the knobs up too far he wont see any mail out side of his Junk folder. Catch 22 matey

Cheers
Jon

Well I played rugby (prop - loose and tight head) for 15 years and I've never thought I was missing something when I watch coverage on TV. I can see exactly what is happening. Also there is plenty of analysis with overhead and "reverse angles" etc.

Nowadays, I can compile my own distro ...

Cheers
Jon

So what the hell was the (80)287 that I bought for my 286 to run AutoCAD then?

I know it had "Maths Coprocessor" written on the box and it cost ~£120 - bargain!

Also I seem to remember that the SX/DX thing actually came in with the 486 and was back ported.

Cheers
Jon

This looks like a story - there's even a headline.

Then we find no substance in the reporting, simply a quick quote with no link to the original source and no original analysis.

Just a link to some other web site's report.

CRAP - CRAP - CRAP

Cheers
Jon

For goodness sake, you have a seven digit ID here - stop being so insightful.

You should be writing up bollocks under the subject line of "Welcome to 1984" or something.

At the moment this is the MoTD in the /. footer :

"Mix a little foolishness with your serious plans; it's lovely to be silly at the right moment. -- Horace"

Cheers
Jon

You have succinctly summed up a large part of /. in a beautifully constructed comment.

It gets my vote for comment of $QUITE_A_LONG_TIME

Shame you can't stamp a comment: _classic_ - >10,000 votes gets it into a hall of fame or similar.

Cheers
Jon

PS It was let down only marginally by the line noise at the end.

I doubt very much that your evidence really made a huge amount of difference.

You called the officer's evidence into question in a valid way (as you describe it) - that's what would have swung it in your favour. For his evidence to be valid he should have ensured that he followed the procedures for using a speed checking device and he clearly didn't.

Still, your phone app angle makes a nice spin on an otherwise routine court appearance.

It is possible that you have helped add to the possibility that such things would be considered potential evidence but then you would also have to prove that you followed similar procedures that the traffic policeman should have for his evidence.

Can you prove that your data was valid and not tampered with in any way? At best your evidence can be described as anecdotal or loosely corroborative. It is better than saying "no I didn't" but not much. To make a difference you would need some sort of expert witness that would be recognized by the court as such to pronounce your evidence as valid.

Cheers
Jon

Well, you have really done it now.

In the traditional car analogy - the Govt can make all roads vanish from maps and also many ports (air, rail n sea) if nasty people start using them. Obviously, only after they've been really naughty.

Well that's really useful.

When will a Govt understand that this is a pointless waste of money. They now have a switch which if used will, at present - harm, and in the near future - destroy their own economy.

I've no doubt that in the UKoGB (home) someone is smugly sat fondling a similar but unreported kill switch.

It really is this simple - none of us really fully understand the sociological, economic and the $DEITY know's what else changes that are occurring world wide due to the internet.

We see huge changes daily and yet don't really notice them for what they are because we are in the midst of them.

A few years back if you predicted that > 500 MILLION people worldwide would choose to use a fancy bulletin board, run by one corporation, as their means of talking to people all across the globe, you would probably have looked a bit weird.

A few years back would you have predicted how much of your personal and business communication goes on over the internet?

We are in a period of change that rivals the Industrial Revolution. In the UK (I know my countries' history - I'm sure your own was just as exciting), when _that_ happened, it meant a period of ..... readjustment.

So, come on Government: Do you really want to have a "kill switch"? Do you really understand what you will actually kill with it?

Cheers
Jon

Actually that is now EU law. Buy your fags from Poland and never have to worry!

Unless I get my Polish employee to translate - bugger 8)

I'm sure the US or wherever you are from will soon have similar "dis-incentives" that don't do much but placate the lobby.

Cheers
Jon

It is also ironic that you address an entity calling themselves Anonymous as though they should have a consistent approach to politics.

Surely the meme we know as "AC" hasn't escaped your notice?

I come from a land where irony means more than "has less carbon in it than steel" - you?

Cheers
Jon