Comments on: Anti-spam Theater

By: Larry Sheldon

Larry Sheldon — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 03:28:00 +0000

You might want to look at the Sierra v. Ritz case in Fargo for comfort.

By: Larry Sheldon

Larry Sheldon — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 03:28:00 +0000

You might want to look at the Sierra v. Ritz case in Fargo for comfort.

By: Bill P. Godfrey

Bill P. Godfrey — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 01:00:11 +0000

Are the demands of anti-spammers unreasonable? I dunno, but unless there's some law I don't know about, you are free to just ignore them.

Of course, others are equally as free to choose not to accept mail originating from open relays, all customers of ISPs that allow spammers, IP addresses that end in .42, etc.

Ain't freedom wonderful.

By: Bill P. Godfrey

Bill P. Godfrey — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 01:00:11 +0000

Are the demands of anti-spammers unreasonable? I dunno, but unless there's some law I don't know about, you are free to just ignore them.

Of course, others are equally as free to choose not to accept mail originating from open relays, all customers of ISPs that allow spammers, IP addresses that end in .42, etc.

Ain't freedom wonderful.

By: Don Marti

Don Marti — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:49:16 +0000

"Almost as much as they hate terrorists?" "In effect, spammers kill ten people each day."

If you put SPF on the domain from which you send mail, you can decide for yourself whether you want recipients to accept mail from you through an open relay, or through anywhere.

By: Don Marti

Don Marti — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 03:49:16 +0000

"Almost as much as they hate terrorists?" "In effect, spammers kill ten people each day."

If you put SPF on the domain from which you send mail, you can decide for yourself whether you want recipients to accept mail from you through an open relay, or through anywhere.

By: Seth Finkelstein

Seth Finkelstein — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:14:50 +0000

A key factor underlying the problem is that a Libertarian has an extremely hard time believing something works in practice if it cannot be analytically demonstrated to his or her satisfaction from abstract principles. It’s an order of magnitude worse if the empirical fact is contrary to what he or she wants to be the case.

The way I explain it simply is that if you try to tell a Libertarian that refrigerators exist, they answer back that it’s a scientific principle that entropy must increase, so refrigerators won’t work.

By: Seth Finkelstein

Seth Finkelstein — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:14:50 +0000

Yes, it’s called “logical fallacy”. It’s very popular with Libertarians, though of course by no means exclusive to them (though they are one of the populations particularly vulnerable to that form, since the ideology severely damages their ability to think 1/2 )

A key factor underlying the problem is that a Libertarian has an extremely hard time believing something works in practice if it cannot be analytically demonstrated to his or her satisfaction from abstract principles. It’s an order of magnitude worse if the empirical fact is contrary to what he or she wants to be the case.

The way I explain it simply is that if you try to tell a Libertarian that refrigerators exist, they answer back that it’s a scientific principle that entropy must increase, so refrigerators won’t work.