You quote the original article as if it's gospel. It's not.
It is generally considered one of the earliest examples of commercial “spam” on the internet -- and certainly the most “successful” at the time.
WHO generally considered [past?] this?
HTTP protocol is redundant...
So is SCUBA gear. So is SIM card. So is PIN number. Welcome to English.
Many of your "facts" are distorted.
Like which facts?
To pick one example, UUCP and Usenet were strictly dial-up distribution networks...
Yes, and that's not a distorted fact. The "Internet" as available to the masses in 1993 was also dial-up, and we all got free coffee coaster 3.5" diskettes, then CDs with AOL, Netcom, etc. That is neither distorted nor does it change teh nature of the fact.
It wasn't until the introduction of NNTP that Usenet became available on the internet
Narp. Usenet newsgroups were available long before NNTP. NNTP just made it convenient to use a remote server instead of UUCP to a local store.
Nothing in the article says any of this was invented in the early 90s... reading comprehension... yada yada whine whine.
Sorry we read the same English words but understood them differently. Kind of like how you likely read the Wikipedia NNTP article and didn't get past the first part.
The only point of this post that touches on content moderation is the decisions on the part of Usenet administrators ('admins') on figuring out how to combat what we now know as spam. These occurred in the real world, unlike the timeline in this article.
The end result is bots that removed SPAM based on a "spam score" which varied from bot to bot. These would analyze Usenet postings and when the [mostly] same content was posted to different newsgroups, too many newsgroups, etc. (depending on THAT particular bot's settings) the postings were "removed" by a fraudulent Usenet posting pretending to be from the author retracting the post. [That was the only protocol option at the time]
The commercial Internet was formed in 1993 when SprintLink convinced the Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX) to allow non-Internet companies to connect. Quickly formed thereafter other interconnects such as MAE-West and MAE-East followed. The rest is history.
The rest of the bad dates are below.
Shana Tova.
Ehud
UUCP was standardized in 1988.
Usenet was created in 1989.
Neither of these is "the early 1990s".
The "Internet" was created in 1973.
The NSFnet was created in 1985.
Neither of these is "the early 1990s."
By 1986 the NSF Supercomputer centers were online. The NSFnet was linked to ARPAnet, and the Internet (or "nascent Internet", whatever that is) was there.
Neither of these were in "the early 1990s."
Sir Tim Berners-Lee created the HTTP protocol and the world-wide web in 1989.
This was not in "the early 1990s."
The first "commercial" Usenet spam,[2][4] and the one which is often (mistakenly) claimed to be the first Usenet spam of any sort, was an advertisement for legal services entitled "Green Card Lottery – Final One?".[5] It was posted on 12 April 1994, by Arizona lawyers Laurence Canter and Martha Siegel, and hawked legal representation for United States immigrants seeking green cards.
Cybersell, the company they had setup to do internet advertising, was apparently dissolved in 1998.
Try 1997. Also don't confuse Cybersell Inc (AZ) with Cybersell Inc (FLA).
I guess the question remains unanswered. Does "The DoJ can say X" means "X" or "one day maybe X" or "it it comes to it in the right way X" or what. Having a lawyer offer an opinion may help.
Either way, an injunction is typically provided as a relief because money can't solve the problem. "I may not get paid" can certainly be resolved with money. As a non-lawyer I can see why the TRO was rejected, yet still have questions about DoC and DoJ wording.
I can agree fully the droids working for Trump are as stupid as he is, and cause more harm to the United States than I ever thought possible. I just haven't said it.
I know people's attention spans are stretched "during these times" (it's always times of something) but this is a proposed improvement to the PACER fees to get them to where they should be -- zero.
The myth takes on new dimensions :)
According to this it was a company employee... which COULD have been a lawyer, but undefined... and he "stood in line" not slept.
It was a Bass employee who rang in the New Year by waiting in line outside the registrar’s office to ensure that the company became the first to file a trademark when the office opened on the morning of January 1, 1876.
CPB has updated its comments to walk back "counterfeit" and claim the OnePlus buds violate Apple's trademarks. While CPB does have "enforcement of border trademark violations" on their charter, it doesn't seem to me these illiterate child-caging simians* have the intellect to hold a candle to IP lawyers.
Ehud
No insult to the simian population is intended.
P.S. Mike, sorry to hear about your pooch - my condolences :(
They failed to do anything other than attempt to stifle the competition. Had they improvised, adapted, they would have overcame the change and embraced it. The same is true for GameStop. They have lots of physical retail space and display space for games. If the games are not physical in nature that space can be used for other things.
Hallmark is a niche product but yet they have physical retail stores and they turn handsome profits on selling $2 cards with simplistic sayings. (With all due respect to Mr. Deeds...) GameStop needs to improvise, adapt, and overcome.
About the only thing you got right is you "don't care if games on pc[sic] are free". Good for you. The rest of your run on half-sentences (I didn't even think that could be done) are making your English teacher turn over in her/his grave.
You should apply at the White House. Donald is looking for morons to write his whines for him.
Too many people want to pretend that things aren't changing... that they'll "go back" to "the way things were."
Gamestop is done. They're not the first. Think of Tower Records, Blockbuster, every movie theater, Dave & Busters, etc. People seem to not want to die, and if that means ditching high-density party zones, well then, that's what it means.
So yes, you can debate whether you'd rather spend $20 at Gamestop and get a real CD or whether the new console can play it vs $5.99 on Steam, but really you're just debating which chord the band should play next as the Titanic sinks into the icy ocean.
Don't take my word for it. Take corporate's numbers... take store numbers, and finally, look at where console mfgs are going. They're done with the CD stuff.
Gamestop - It's dead. It just hasn't stopped thrashing yet.
Begged Question: Does the college have the right --in the first place-- to limit a student's access, movement, and education based entirely on a REQUIREMENT that this tuition-paying contract-signed student:
Owns a smartphone
Always carries said phone on campus
Leaves it on, charged, and communicating with networks
These are an absurd set of assumptions to gloss over and assume.
Followup Question: If the college has exactly zero jurisdiction off campus [and in the US with the exception of "greek" houses and "activity houses" this is true] then there is ZERO tracking of people meeting off campus.
If Alice and Bob go out for a beer at Trudi's Beerpub, it's off campus, outside college jurisdiction, and --given the nature of college students-- will lead to less social-distancing than on campus.
Further, with current tests being around 50-65% accurate, Alice and Bob can get tested many times, and eventually get a negative (or maybe even the first time around) and whether false or not, report that in the app... so that when they ACTUALLY ARE on campus the app [that they're forced to install on a smartphone they're forced to carry and maintain and keep charged, on, and networked] marks them as safe.
Now to that add the part about the app leaking personal identifying information, infection status, and locations, and the whole thing becomes a complete cluster.
When all you know is how to use a hammer, and you have a 'Certificate' on your wall to prove it, then construction should only be done with nails. Because you're the objective decision-maker.
You'll also need to ensure all new hires are 'vetted' by you so you can remove any pesky non hammer-certificated people so you don't have to have this conversation ever again. Fortunately your boss sees how good you are with a hammer, and that it definitely needs nail construction to work, so you MUST be great and your opinion is exactly what the company needs...
Dumb wasn't the opposite of intelligent, it was unable to speak. Over time and people assuming those unable to speak were stupid, dumb came to mean that. Now its colloquial use is in the language.
Oxford gives an informal definition:
1.
informal
simplify or reduce the intellectual content of something so as to make it accessible to a larger number of people.
"critics have accused publishers of dumbing down books"
On the post: The TikTok 'Deal' Was A Grift From The Start: Accomplishes None Of The Stated Goals; Just Helps Trump & Friends
Techdirt
Sometimes a writer at TD gets it so right all you have to do is lean back, enjoy the cough pillow, take a deep breath, let it out slowly, and say...
Thank you, Mike, and everyone at TD and F64.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Usenet Has To Figure Out How To Deal With Spam (April 1994)
Re: UDP
Very much so. There is no cabal.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Usenet Has To Figure Out How To Deal With Spam (April 1994)
Re: Re: History ...
You quote the original article as if it's gospel. It's not.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Usenet Has To Figure Out How To Deal With Spam (April 1994)
Ad hominems are the last refuge of the needy
Sorry we read the same English words but understood them differently. Kind of like how you likely read the Wikipedia NNTP article and didn't get past the first part.
Gotta go -- my modem is tying up the line.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Usenet Has To Figure Out How To Deal With Spam (April 1994)
History ...
The only point of this post that touches on content moderation is the decisions on the part of Usenet administrators ('admins') on figuring out how to combat what we now know as spam. These occurred in the real world, unlike the timeline in this article.
The end result is bots that removed SPAM based on a "spam score" which varied from bot to bot. These would analyze Usenet postings and when the [mostly] same content was posted to different newsgroups, too many newsgroups, etc. (depending on THAT particular bot's settings) the postings were "removed" by a fraudulent Usenet posting pretending to be from the author retracting the post. [That was the only protocol option at the time]
The commercial Internet was formed in 1993 when SprintLink convinced the Commercial Internet Exchange (CIX) to allow non-Internet companies to connect. Quickly formed thereafter other interconnects such as MAE-West and MAE-East followed. The rest is history.
The rest of the bad dates are below.
Shana Tova.
Ehud
UUCP was standardized in 1988.
Usenet was created in 1989.
Neither of these is "the early 1990s".
The "Internet" was created in 1973.
The NSFnet was created in 1985.
Neither of these is "the early 1990s."
By 1986 the NSF Supercomputer centers were online. The NSFnet was linked to ARPAnet, and the Internet (or "nascent Internet", whatever that is) was there.
Neither of these were in "the early 1990s."
Sir Tim Berners-Lee created the HTTP protocol and the world-wide web in 1989.
This was not in "the early 1990s."
While Canter & Siegel did their "green card lawyers spamming the globe thing later" the first Internet spam was in 1978.
This was not in 1993.
https://www.edn.com/1st-spam-email-is-sent-may-3-1978/
The first Usenet spam was not C&S in April 1994. It was someone else in January 1994.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroup_spam
On the post: Court Refuses To Block Trump Exec Order On TikTok As Requested By TikTok Employee After DOJ Says He Can Still Get Paid
Re: Re: I call bullshit too...
I guess the question remains unanswered. Does "The DoJ can say X" means "X" or "one day maybe X" or "it it comes to it in the right way X" or what. Having a lawyer offer an opinion may help.
Either way, an injunction is typically provided as a relief because money can't solve the problem. "I may not get paid" can certainly be resolved with money. As a non-lawyer I can see why the TRO was rejected, yet still have questions about DoC and DoJ wording.
I can agree fully the droids working for Trump are as stupid as he is, and cause more harm to the United States than I ever thought possible. I just haven't said it.
E
On the post: Appeals Court Upholds Ruling Saying PACER Overcharged Users
Congress poised to act to fix PACER fees
I know people's attention spans are stretched "during these times" (it's always times of something) but this is a proposed improvement to the PACER fees to get them to where they should be -- zero.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/09/bill-to-tear-down-federal-courts-paywall-gains-mom entum-in-congress/
Now that I've posted an ars link on techdirt, quick someone put it on slashdot!
Ehud
On the post: Court Refuses To Block Trump Exec Order On TikTok As Requested By TikTok Employee After DOJ Says He Can Still Get Paid
Legal language
I am uncertain whether "The Department of Justice can state X" means either:
or
For example, here's my take:
I can state that The DoJ is run by a corrupt AG.
Did I just SAY the DoJ is run by a corrupt AG or did I say only that I CAN so state... yet haven't yet actually stated it?
In the latter case there is still good cause shown for a TRO.
E
On the post: Craft Brewing Trade Mag Argues Beer Is The Most IP Product Ever, Ignores History Of The Industry
Re: Well it's kind of correct
The myth takes on new dimensions :)
According to this it was a company employee... which COULD have been a lawyer, but undefined... and he "stood in line" not slept.
E
https://www.logoworks.com/blog/bass-pale-ale-brand-and-logo/
On the post: Craft Brewing Trade Mag Argues Beer Is The Most IP Product Ever, Ignores History Of The Industry
Open source movement
There is definitely a problem, and the solution is to encourage those who don't cause it, and punish those who do.
E
On the post: CBP So Confused It Seizes Clearly Labeled OnePlus Earbuds, And Falsely Claims They're Counterfeit Apple Airpods
Now it's a trademark thing....
CPB has updated its comments to walk back "counterfeit" and claim the OnePlus buds violate Apple's trademarks. While CPB does have "enforcement of border trademark violations" on their charter, it doesn't seem to me these illiterate child-caging simians* have the intellect to hold a candle to IP lawyers.
Ehud
P.S. Mike, sorry to hear about your pooch - my condolences :(
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Digital
Bonus points for bringing up Ken Olson!!
E
On the post: The Next Generation Of Video Game Consoles Could Be The Beginning Of GameStop's Death
Improvise, Adapt, and Overcome
They failed to do anything other than attempt to stifle the competition. Had they improvised, adapted, they would have overcame the change and embraced it. The same is true for GameStop. They have lots of physical retail space and display space for games. If the games are not physical in nature that space can be used for other things.
Hallmark is a niche product but yet they have physical retail stores and they turn handsome profits on selling $2 cards with simplistic sayings. (With all due respect to Mr. Deeds...) GameStop needs to improvise, adapt, and overcome.
E
On the post: The Next Generation Of Video Game Consoles Could Be The Beginning Of GameStop's Death
Re: Most illiterate rant ever
About the only thing you got right is you "don't care if games on pc[sic] are free". Good for you. The rest of your run on half-sentences (I didn't even think that could be done) are making your English teacher turn over in her/his grave.
You should apply at the White House. Donald is looking for morons to write his whines for him.
On the post: The Next Generation Of Video Game Consoles Could Be The Beginning Of GameStop's Death
Gamestop is done.
Too many people want to pretend that things aren't changing... that they'll "go back" to "the way things were."
Gamestop is done. They're not the first. Think of Tower Records, Blockbuster, every movie theater, Dave & Busters, etc. People seem to not want to die, and if that means ditching high-density party zones, well then, that's what it means.
So yes, you can debate whether you'd rather spend $20 at Gamestop and get a real CD or whether the new console can play it vs $5.99 on Steam, but really you're just debating which chord the band should play next as the Titanic sinks into the icy ocean.
Don't take my word for it. Take corporate's numbers... take store numbers, and finally, look at where console mfgs are going. They're done with the CD stuff.
Gamestop - It's dead. It just hasn't stopped thrashing yet.
E
On the post: Astronomers Say Space X Astronomy Pollution Can't Be Fixed
Regulation
Regulation hasn't been the answer to anything. The free market-driven economy demands that.
You don't get to call out those ISPs you don't like and demand they be regulated. That's not how it works.
Best of luck to SpaceX, and astronomers everywhere.
SpaceX is not obsolete. People who pontificate about required regulations are.
E
On the post: ACLU Sues Federal Officers Over Excessive Force Deployed Against Portland Protesters
Valor
In the military, valor is earned through behavior.
In Donald Trump's police state you just participate in the Diligent Valor Dance and you get a merit badge/medal/date with Sadie Hawkins.
E
On the post: If A College Is Going To Make COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps Mandatory, They Should At Least Be Secure
Some questions begged, others ignored
Begged Question: Does the college have the right --in the first place-- to limit a student's access, movement, and education based entirely on a REQUIREMENT that this tuition-paying contract-signed student:
These are an absurd set of assumptions to gloss over and assume.
Followup Question: If the college has exactly zero jurisdiction off campus [and in the US with the exception of "greek" houses and "activity houses" this is true] then there is ZERO tracking of people meeting off campus.
If Alice and Bob go out for a beer at Trudi's Beerpub, it's off campus, outside college jurisdiction, and --given the nature of college students-- will lead to less social-distancing than on campus.
Further, with current tests being around 50-65% accurate, Alice and Bob can get tested many times, and eventually get a negative (or maybe even the first time around) and whether false or not, report that in the app... so that when they ACTUALLY ARE on campus the app [that they're forced to install on a smartphone they're forced to carry and maintain and keep charged, on, and networked] marks them as safe.
Now to that add the part about the app leaking personal identifying information, infection status, and locations, and the whole thing becomes a complete cluster.
Ehud
On the post: If Oracle Buys TikTok, Would It Suddenly Change Its Tune On Section 230?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
When all you know is how to use a hammer, and you have a 'Certificate' on your wall to prove it, then construction should only be done with nails. Because you're the objective decision-maker.
You'll also need to ensure all new hires are 'vetted' by you so you can remove any pesky non hammer-certificated people so you don't have to have this conversation ever again. Fortunately your boss sees how good you are with a hammer, and that it definitely needs nail construction to work, so you MUST be great and your opinion is exactly what the company needs...
E
On the post: Consumer Reports Study Shows Many 'Smart' Doorbells Are Dumb, Lack Basic Security
Re: "Dumb" is a technical term
Dumb wasn't the opposite of intelligent, it was unable to speak. Over time and people assuming those unable to speak were stupid, dumb came to mean that. Now its colloquial use is in the language.
Oxford gives an informal definition:
1.
informal
simplify or reduce the intellectual content of something so as to make it accessible to a larger number of people.
"critics have accused publishers of dumbing down books"
E
Next >>