Re: The destruction of rec.pyrotechnics

Harry, are you pretending to be a stupid *** again?

It's actually quite simple to filter the spam crap, idiot.

Your friend,

Joe


<hhc314@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1190481662.646185.80860@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Jasper, you are of course correct. My suggestion to invade and take
over sci.energy.hydrogen was ill thought and overly impulsive.

Regarding "filtering": it is easier said than done because of the
difficulty in defining the filtration criteria. The 'History Channnel'
program on "spam" near the end explains one type of denial of service
attack, how it operates, why it is difficult to defend against and why
it could become a pernicious threat to the entire Internet.
The program even describes how this spam technique is sometimes being
used as an extortion device by criminals, just as we have seen done
here.

One short term workaround may be simply to track and stick with "known
good threads", the issue here being that you first have to first find
those "known good threads" in a sea of spam. On Google this can be
done by searching out the names of the better know rec.pyrotechnics
posters and linking to the threads on which they have posted. Other
solutions exist.

I'm obviously missing something, since it would seem to me that to
produce and effective filter would first require a filtration scheme
which, once defined, could be easily employed to create a filtration
algorithm that could then be programmed to make a filter by any one of
several newsgroup participants with the expertise and experience to do
so. The programming part is simple -- The filtration criteria (or is
it criterion?) is not so obvious. In the real world, we have the
ability to pull a signal out of a sea of noise by using largely
statistical methods that don't really apply here where most users are
employing commercial softare products designed by others. It would
therefore interest me to learn what sort of "filters" are being used
by others, which to me implies using a commercial software product in
a way that it was not intended to be used (if indeed that is what they
are doing).

Also, just to set the record straight: People have all kinds of
different computer knowledge. Some, like myself and I believe Lloyd
have designed software/firmware that executes directly on a processor
chip (this is typically called embeded firmware) which controls your
VCR, RADAR, or guides a missile. Others have an expert ability to
operate programs designed by others in incredible ways. Consequently,
when I have a problem with Microsoft XP, I call my daughter who does
that for a living. If my daughter needs some custom change to the BIOS
chip on one of her computers or a hack to her operating system, she
would likely call me.

It is only a coincidence that my professional career (call it my day
job) involved computers, while display fireworks has always remained a
labor of love (avocation) for me (in which it didn't really matter if
I made or lost a little money in the business side of fireworks,
because I would subsidize it with income from my day job).

Long term readers of rec.pyrotechnics know very well that I don't take
the newsgroup too serioously in my posts except for the safety issues,
but being one of the original sponsors of the group's creation, I find
it tragic to observe what is currently happening. Many of us older
guys date all the way back to DARPA and the ARPANET, and it might
surprise you to realize why the net was developed. That's an
interesting story in itself. Trust me in telling you that it had
nothing to do with recreational computing, nor did we ever imagine
millions of home computers, and the chaos that they are capable of
producing when placed into the hands of hackers and criminals!

In closing, let me say that during 50 years in display fireworks, I
have come face to face with many people that have a near paranoid fear
or hatred of fireworks for bizarre reasons, who would gladly destroy
rec.pyrotechnics given an opportunity to do so.

Harry C.





.

Quantcast