Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

You've Got Spam: AOL Blocks 1/2 Trillion Spam

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the bit-bucket dept.

Spam 472

yohaas writes "Yahoo! News is reporting that AOL blocked more than 500 billion spam messages for its users in 2003. That comes to 40 messages a day per user. The company regularly blocks 75-80% of all incoming mail as spam! The article also lists the top 10 spam phrases for the year, including such come-ons as: 'Viagra online', 'Online pharmacy', 'Get out of debt' and 'Get bigger'."

cancel ×

472 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

First Aens Post (-1, Offtopic)

Aens (737179) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865516)

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_* [nero-online.org]
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>_\___|_____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>_|__/_____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>_|_/______t
s______/_/\|___C_____)_______|__(___>_/__\______s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*


The perineum is the area of skin rich in nerve endings that is located below the anus (the opening for bowel movements). For men, the perineum extends to the vaginal opening; for women it extends to the base of the testicles.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

To make stimulation smoother and more comfortable, it is often helpful to lubricate your fingers before stroking the perineum during lovemaking.

As long as the stimulation remains outside the body on the perineum, any type of lubricant (petroleum-base or water-base) will do.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

The anus is rich in nerve endings & participates with your genitals in the contractions of sexual arousal & orgasm. Anal stimulation greatly enhances & intensifies masturbation, oral sex, or intercourse. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with anal play, is relax, use plenty of lube (the anus & rectum do not produce any lubrication of their own), and enjoy.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

The vagina is rich in vulvatic sensor spots & cooperates with your clitoral system in the up and down movements of sexual arousal & orgasm. Vaginal stimulation greatly enhances & multiplies masturbation, perienium stimulation, and orgies. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with vaginal stimulation, is to relax, and use one quart of 10W30 (the vagina produces no lubrication of its own during normal stimulation), and enjoy.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

[ Reply to This [nero-online.org] ]

1 reply [nero-online.org] beneath your current threshold.

Re:First Aens Post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865611)

I know they say to read articles at a lower threshold when you have moderator points, but this really discourages me...

Re:First Aens Post (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865691)

did you ever know that you're my hero?

You're everything I wish I could be.

Their mail server went down again, that's all (5, Funny)

corebreech (469871) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865518)

AOL has been losing email for over a decade now.

(is this another dupe story?)

FIRST POST! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865519)

Huzzah!

Re:FIRST POST! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865556)

::gets up from atop your post:: Ah yes! I just let a steamy load off on your post. Yes, thats me taking a dump on your failed attempt at first post. I POOP ON FAILURES!

Imagine. (5, Interesting)

tehdely (690619) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865520)

It's been suggested in nanae [admin.net-abuse.email] that as a brutal display of the efficacy of spam-fighting and, most importantly, blocklisting, major ISPs all simultaenously turn off their spam defenses for a day to show users just how much UCE spew is clogging the internet every day.

Of course, the idea is repeatedly turned down for its utter lack of pragmatism.

But damn, 500 billion spams, and that's only to AOL.

Just imagine.

The instant clogging of mail-servers around the world and subsequent technological disruption might actually get the general computer-using public to take more of an interest in the fact that around 200 gangs of people are effectively raping and pillaging the Internet right under their eyes.

But then again, what can one do when faced with the Tragedy of the Commons?

Short of going to war with China (0, Troll)

rsilvergun (571051) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865604)

what're you gonna do? Seriously, hasn't anyone noticed that the spam is comming mostly from countries that have a technology infrastruction combined with lots of really poor people (China, India, etc.)? In a lot of those countries life is harsh. It's no wonder people turn to rather unpleasant means to better their standard of living. Sure spamming sucks, but it beats the hell out of 16 hrs/day making Nike shoes in a sweatshop. If you want spam to go away, do something about the general standard of living in the rest of the world. There are just too many desparate people around right now.

Re:Short of going to war with China (4, Insightful)

cmallinson (538852) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865676)

Seriously, hasn't anyone noticed that the spam is comming mostly from countries that have a technology infrastruction combined with lots of really poor people (China, India, etc.)?

Do you think that a bunch of poor people in China are all of a sudden picking up laptops and peddling viagra? It's not the Chinese, it's the same people [slashdot.org] who have always sent spam. They are just buying their hosting/bandwidth from companies overseas, where regulations are non-existant.

Re:Short of going to war with China (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865684)

It's not that regulation is non-existant, it's just that for $20USD you can get the cops to look the other way while you beat an old lady to death. Gvt corruption at it's finest.

(no, i'm not just flinging sterotypes, i lived in china for a year.)

Re:Imagine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865613)

AOL has blasklisted the electronic merchant provider I use for one of my client's online shopping carts. (Yourpay.com)

It's such a hassle.. To get an email through to my client I have to route it through my box, on to AOL. If they blacklist me, I swear to doG I'm going to Virginia with an Uzi.

Re:Imagine. (3, Funny)

Gzip Christ (683175) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865614)

It's been suggested in nanae that as a brutal display of the efficacy of spam-fighting and, most importantly, blocklisting, major ISPs all simultaenously turn off their spam defenses for a day to show users just how much UCE spew is clogging the internet every day.
So let me get this straight... you're asking us to imagine a beowulf cluster of spam?

Re:Imagine. (2, Insightful)

wkitchen (581276) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865627)

But damn, 500 billion spams, and that's only to AOL.
Even worse, that's just the one's AOL blocked. There's a lot that gets through despite their filters.

Re:Imagine. (5, Insightful)

Geek of Tech (678002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865695)

This coming from the people that I can't get to stop sending me AOL CDs... oh the irony!

i claim this third post (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865521)

on behalf of the jihad
fuck u taco

by james a. c. joyce
author of ulysses

YOU KNOW THE SCORE, FUCKERS. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865522)

We have reason to believe that this site is distributing child pornography, which is in direct breach of US law 1,823.b. We therefore have no choice but to shut your channel down, and use your IP addresses to track you, in accordance with regulation 2,551a. If you have any questions, please write to your senator. See here [nero-online.org] for the laws and regulations in question. Thank you.

Re:YOU KNOW THE SCORE, FUCKERS. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865542)

I'm sorry. What if I delete the porn? PleasE!

Outbound (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865523)

Now if they'd only block going outbound too!

You've got spam??!? (4, Insightful)

DeathPenguin (449875) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865525)

I know AOL bashing is a treasured hobby of many Slashdotters, but based on those numbers it seems that they're doing a fairly good job at blocking spam. Especially since they're a huge ISP who has to be conservative with their spam blocking techniques.

Re:You've got spam??!? (0, Offtopic)

KrispyKringle (672903) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865633)

I think it was a joke. And if anything, it makes fun of e-mail more than it does AOL.

Re:You've got spam??!? (1)

wkitchen (581276) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865638)

Yes, give credit where credit is due. AOL deserves some credit for their spam fighting efforts.

Re:You've got spam??!? (1)

hikerhat (678157) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865640)

Never havin used AOL I can't be sure, but I bet they give users an insecure email client (automatically follows external links in html email for example) that actually increases the amount of spam sent to AOL users. So for every inch they gain they probably lose one or two.

Re:You've got spam??!? (2, Funny)

Geek of Tech (678002) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865707)

>> So for every inch they gain they probably lose one or two.

You think anyone would buy from spam like that?!

:P

Re:You've got spam??!? (4, Insightful)

dvdeug (5033) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865687)

Especially since they're a huge ISP who has to be conservative with their spam blocking techniques.

What makes you think that? AOL tends to have a lot of false positives when blocking spam.

It would be WAY too easy . . . (4, Funny)

dgrgich (179442) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865526)

. . . to make a crack about the Post Office blocking the shipment of trillions of AOL CDs. I prefer to work for my karma. :)

Re:It would be WAY too easy . . . (2, Interesting)

bjarvis354 (319402) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865561)

Except for the fact that the Post Office probably makes a few hundred million off the postage from AOL...And AOL probably gets a kickback from the Spammers who get through...hmmm.

Re:It would be WAY too easy . . . (1, Interesting)

Afrosheen (42464) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865706)

You know, I was in the local Post Office here in Dallas a week ago, and those damn AOL cd's were in a box there. Waiting for innocent victims. I'm thinking, ok, the Postal Service is supposed to be a government agency right? All that money we spend for stamps and shipping goes to the branch of gov't that deals with mailing right? So why the hell do they get to advertise in a public company for FREE? I grabbed the whole box and marched it to the nearest trash can. People clapped.

Didn't you know? AOL... (1, Funny)

SailfishMac (732653) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865623)

...bought the Post Office.

With those stacks of AOL disks laying around and the Post lady bringing you one every week, I thought it was obvious.

Re:It would be WAY too easy . . . (1)

gid13 (620803) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865679)

It would ALSO be way too easy to make a crack about you actually getting karma for that... Wait a minute... Recursion... Killing brain...

*head explodes a la Scanners*

They should do something. (5, Insightful)

I'm back (737470) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865527)

Instead of sending the mails to the bitbucket AOL should do something about the abuse. They've got the IP addresses of half a trillian zombies and open proxies. Where's the AOL goon squad? They should be kicking down doors, not writing press releases.

Re:They should do something. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865572)

This is for marketing dude. They want to show users that AOL is "good".

From a buisines point of view, they should not waste money on tracking and fighting spam when the Federal Government placed laws which are considered "spam friendly".

Just remember spam and privacy the next time you cast your vote or the next time you talk to your senator. As long as GW is here, spam is here to stay...

Re:They should do something. (2, Insightful)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865636)

They've got the IP addresses of half a trillian zombies and open proxies.

Erm, I think you'll find that the average spammer will send more than one email from a compromised machine. So there's probably slightly less than half a trillion machines involved here...

Re:They should do something. (2, Informative)

Phroggy (441) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865698)

If too much spam starts coming from a particular IP block, AOL sends a nastygram to the ISP that owns the IP block, threatening to blacklist the IP block, or the entire ISP. If that happens, no customers of that ISP can send mail to @aol.com at all, so the ISP pretty much has to do their own policing, or risk causing major problems for all their other customers.

As much as I'd love for AOL to start kicking down spammers' doors, they can't exactly do that legally themselves.

Anybody attorneys want to comment on the feasibility of filing lawsuits on that kind of scale?

Paris Hilton (0, Redundant)

alatesystems (51331) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865533)

I hate Paris Hilton a lot. She is now around 70% of my spam which is currently at about 20 a day. I use spamassassin though and I don't see spam unless I go to my spam folder. I'm at 100% accuracy for positives, negatives. I love bayes and AWL.

Chris

AOL Users Will Love This (0, Troll)

SlashdotCEO (737177) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865534)

I can almost gurantee that about 95% of all AOL users will be thrilled. I'm a supervisor for a broadband services department and we often get customer's who switch from AOL only to find that spam/pop-ups/porn/etc on the unfiltered internet is so anonying that they want to go back to AOL immediately. Those people love to have their hand held through everything and want AOL to protect them from the internet. Almost anyone that actually uses net send probably isn't on AOL, they have a true ISP.

Re:AOL Users Will Love This (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865582)

Have you considered pharmaceutical help?

Sir, I must respectfully disagree. (-1, Troll)

James A. C. Joyce (733782) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865642)

I'm the call centre supervisor for a medium sized ISP in Britain (whose name I won't mention to avoid getting canned) who carry out a yearly online survey of our customers. In the last three years, the number of people who have ranked their concerns regarding spam as "high" or "significant" has actually steadily dropped, while our mail traffic has increased by about 40% year-on-year. We offer server-side filtering of spam and popups for a small fee and many are willing to pay for it. The other ISPs do the same thing, like Demon Internet, so there's little competition for this kind of thing.

Re:AOL Users Will Love This (0)

Caeda (669118) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865711)

That's pretty dang odd. I've been on my cable service for.. over 2 years now. I have 4 email addresses registered for various needs. I've yet to recieve even 1 spam message about anything at all. I've never, ever recieved any emails I wasnt expecting.

What good is it... (4, Insightful)

DarkBlackFox (643814) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865535)

if they block 500 billion spam messages if a couple trillion spams are sent around in a year? Despite how large that number sounds, I still see client AOL inboxes stuffed with all sorts of junk, and see this more as a publicity stunt on AOL's part. I read the article, and no where in it does it say how much spam total there was in 2003. 500 billion may sound impressive by itself, but if it's 500 billion blocked out of 50 trillion, it's not such a big deal.

Yep, the number doesn't surprise me either (5, Interesting)

millisa (151093) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865558)

I just took a gander at my logs on my postfix-amavisd-spamassassin front ends for one of my smaller ISP's and after doing the math, it's blocking ~36 spam/user/day on average (with spamassassin only blocking at score 9+). It doesn't surprise me that AOL is getting somewhere around ~40spam/user/day as it is more widely visible and the userbase as a whole is generally a lot more likely to do things that would encourage spammers . . .

They also block real mail (5, Funny)

wol (10606) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865545)

They may block a lot of garbage, but they also refuse to admit that my email to my mother is not spam.

Maybe there is something she's not telling me.

Mom!

Re:They also block real mail (5, Funny)

NoData (9132) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865574)

Maybe if you stopped sending your mother,
"Mom! The all new penis patch will get you bigger and harder than ever!" your email would go through.

Re:They also block real mail (5, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865646)

Although funny, it is also true. AOL has been randomly blocking entire ISPs - my hosting service's outgoing SMTP server was arbitrarily blocked by AOL for a total of about a month back around October. My hosting service had absolutely no violations of any kind, and after 2-3 weeks of bitcing and voice-mail-hell, AOL did finally respond, agree that they were not big-bad-purveyors-of-donkey-dick and unblocked them... Only to reblock them again in about 10 days, at which point my hosting service had to start all over again with them. It seems like the second time was the charm since I just sent email to an AOL user today and it didn't bounce (maybe AOL is now silently eating email instead of bouncing, that sure wouldn't make my life easier).

Anyway, from what I read on the net my hosting provider's experience with AOL's blocking of incoming SMTP connections is not out of the ordinary, many, maybe hundreds, of "little guys" have had the same experience. Makes me want to know the false positive rate for their spam blocking -- I'm willing to bet that AOL themselves don't even know the answer to that one.

AOL's mail policies suck (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865549)

They bounce back ALL mail to addresses that don't exist, and if some spammer users YOUR domain or YOUR email address, you get all the bounces. They also don't respond when you try to get them to stop. It's incredibly frustrating.

stop spam now - top 10 phrases (4, Funny)

stonebeat.org (562495) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865554)

I think the phrase "stop spam now" should be added to the list of top 10 spam phrases.
seriously, I get 5-10 spam email / day telling me how to stop receiving spam emails.

I don't know why I believed them (2, Funny)

Sarojin (446404) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865559)

that was nowhere near 581%.

including a gajillion non-spam (2, Insightful)

emptybody (12341) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865563)

When they started blocking "unknown relays" they dropped a pile of legitimate email

Re:including a gajillion non-spam (3, Interesting)

Alan Hicks (660661) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865630)

When they started blocking "unknown relays" they dropped a pile of legitimate email

Legitimate e-mail shouldn't be coming through an unknown relay. Really, your e-mail server should be setup with a proper reverse lookup. There is absolutely nothing wrong with denying mail from unknown e-mail servers (e-mail servers that don't reverse look-up to the correct name). many people and ISPs do this specifically to get rid of SPAM, as anyone running a real mail server should be spending the time to setup his e-mail server correctly.

I am so sick of spam (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865564)

It has nothing to offer me since I work from home using my degree (obtained online) in pharmaceuticals. I have a huge cock, am quite rich, get my insurance for free and own my home outright. I do have to use viagra occasionally because it is sometimes hard to get it up for some good Oprah XXX action but I can get it through the pharmacy which I run online.

How to stop SPAM at the source (-1, Insightful)

Aens (737179) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865568)

In order to deal with spammers, we have to analyze their vulnerabilites. Understanding their weaknesses is easy once you answer this question: What do spammers fear the most?

That's easy. Look at spam messages. You'll see forged return addresses, redirections through open relays, spoofed Received lines, etc.

What does this mean? Spammers are most afraid of being tracked and identified.

And they have a good reason to be afraid. When spammers are identified, they get their ISP accounts terminated, and may get stuck paying hundreds of dollars of cleanup fees. They're harrassed, sued, threatened, they quickly earn a terrible reputation. They'll go to extremes to remain anonymous.

The key is to make it difficult or impossible for spammers to forge headers and obfuscate their emails' points of origin. How do we do this? Require cryptographic authentication of all mail going through any MTA. No exceptions, ever. Every time a mail goes through an MTA, it must be signed by that MTA. Any message without a signature or with an invalid signature gets dropped. By requiring crypto signatures, responsible MTAs can be easily tracked, and spamming MTAs can be blocked.

Key creation, distribution and endorsement can be through a central authority, though I prefer a PGP-style web of trust because central authorities can abuse their power. Naturally, any MTA caught distributing spam should immediately get their keys revoked, and the revocation should be distributed to MTAs as widely as possible, causing all emails from that MTA to be blocked in a matter of minutes. If an MTA wants its emails to reach its destinations, it will crack down hard on spammers.

The difficult part is convincing ISPs to require authentication and drop unsigned messages. However, if a large ISP such as AOL or Comcast can be convinced to do this, MTAs will have a strong incentive to start signing messages, and authentication will start to catch on.

Re:How to stop SPAM at the source (5, Interesting)

KrispyKringle (672903) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865666)

There arenumerous problems in this system that others have pointed out (and face it, this wasn't your idea). For one, even if there's no central authority, how would I get my mailserver approved? I run my own, for my own domain, which handles e-mail for just me. A number of people do the same thing. So now I have to apply and hope AOL deems me worthy of attention (even though ignoring me wouldn't likely affect anything at all, since I know probably nobody who uses AOL, and even if I did, I'm just one guy)?

Whitelisting makes sense--trusting certain mailservers more and not bothering with intense heuristics on mail coming from them. But blacklisting anyone you don't know makes none. The Internet is too vast to really implement something like this without huge costs and huge losses; I think solutions like this likely do far more to Balkanize the Internet than to protect it.

The solution mentioned in a previous Slashdot article a few days ago of making SMTP servers run a small computation per e-mail makes much more sense. This allows you to impose restrictions on non-whitelisted servers without completly ignoring them, either.

But when you talk about the anonymity preferred by the spammers, you ignore the fact that they are, in fact, selling a product. Forget the spammers. Track down their clients, the ones paying for the ads. Problem solved.

Re:How to stop SPAM at the source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865681)

Nice advice on spammers.

Have any regarding trolls? [slashdot.org]

Mod parent down!

Re:How to stop SPAM at the source (0)

XiChimos (652495) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865713)

This is how it would work:

You have an agreement between major ISPs in which ISPs have some cryptographic method of making sure that the person (most likely) isn't a spammer. This can be done through hash puzzles or signatures. Then, the person's emails automatically get a low spam score (as in SpamAssassin) if it verifies that they are a real person. The ISPs would have certificates or some key system. This hybrid network would last for a while, and as more and more people learn that they get blacklisted if they don't use this system, more and more people will join in. Eventually, you could make an easy transition and just have people denying service to older users.

Forget trackable, what do foreigners care about U.S. lawyers?

Collateral Damage (5, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865570)

AOL blocks a lot of legitimate email as well, however. If you prefer to run your own email server (for example, about half of all the Linux broadband users on Slashdot) then you cannot send to an AOL user... same goes for SWBell users too I think. Sure they block a lot of email and I can kinda understand their purpose in blocking "dynamic" or "residential" IPs... but that is collateral damage.

Re:Collateral Damage (1)

Sarojin (446404) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865586)

AT&T Worldnet (dialup) started doing that around a year ago -- probably ATTBI before the Comcast merger too.

Re:Collateral Damage (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865606)

What's wrong with using your ISPs mailserver to send your outgoing email from your mail server?

Re:Collateral Damage (0, Flamebait)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865658)

Yes but how many Slashdot users, or indeed anyone with enough technical knowledge to admin their own smart host wants to talk to an a member of the (A)rmy (O)f (L)osers? And if you're about to say your relatives are using it, then you should be damned ashamed for allowing them to do such a thing!

No problems here.. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865704)

I send mail from my mailserver to a couple friends on AOL at least once a week.

Static IP DSL from Speakeasy via Covad. I had them configure rDNS when I heard AOL started their aggressive blocking, but never had a problem before or since having that done.

Re:Collateral Damage (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865721)

If you prefer to run your own email server (for example, about half of all the Linux broadband users on Slashdot) then you cannot send to an AOL user... same goes for SWBell users too I think.
Well these folks did make the list [pc9.org] (sites that don't accept mail from dynamic/dialup/consumer broadband IPs).

If you run your own mail server and deliver your mail directly, and it's not against your ISP's Terms of Service, then you're well within your right (both legal and technical) to deliver mail directly. That's what SMTP is designed for, dammit. SMTP is designed to be peer-to-peer, and global communications works best when able hosts delivery mail directly and don't pass it off to another (less reliable) host.

Efficiency Rate? (3, Insightful)

itsnotme (20905) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865573)

If they're blocking that much spam, makes me wonder how much of the mail that was NOT spam is being blocked. Maybe AOL users are not getting all the email they should be getting.

On the other hand, I get spam from AOL and they dont seem to be doing anything about it, maybe they should be concetrating on blocking their outgoing spam too.

My own score (4, Interesting)

PD (9577) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865576)

In 2003 Spamprobe blocked just over 12000 on my personal domain, which is low compared to many others.

Stupid 'ass' moderators, this is for you! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865578)

*_s_l_a_s_d_o_t_s_u_c_k_s_*_s_l_a_s_h_d_o_t_s_u_x_
s_/_____\____REPORT___\___DUPES____/____\_______s_ _
l|___I___|_____________\__________|______|______l_ _
a|__LOVE_`.__Call_1-800-SUCKTACO__|_______:_____a_ _
s`___M____|_____________|________\|_______|_____s_ _
h_\__I____|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____h_ _
d__\__C___\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____d_ _
o___\__H___\_-~____________________~-_\____|____o_ _
t____\__A____\_________.--------.______\|__|____t_ _
s______\__E__\______//_________(_(__C__\___|____s_ _
u_______\__L.__C____)_________(_(___C___|__/____u_ _
c_______/\_|___C_____)/__/.__\_(____C___|_/_____c_ _
k______/_/\|___C_____)|_MODS_|__(___C___/__\____k_ _
s_____|___(____C_____)\_HERE_/__//__C_/_____\___s_ _
*_____|____\__C_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__*_ _
s____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__s_ _
l____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_l_ _
a___|______R_______/____|_____|__\____________|_a_ _
s___|___F__E______|____/___/.__\__\____F__S___|_s_ _
d___|___U__A___/_/____|__SERVER_|__\____U_P____|d_ _
o___|__C___L__/_/______\__/\___/____|___C__E___|o_ _
t__|___K__N__/_/________|____|_______|__k__E___|t_ _
s__|______E___|_________|____|_______|_____C___|s_ _
u__|______W__|__________|____|_______|_____H___|u_ _
x__|______S__|__________|____|_______|_________|x_ _
*_s_l_a_s_d_o_t_s_u_c_k_s_*_s_l_a_s_h_d_o_t_s_u_x_

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page)Problems regarding accounts or comment posting should be sent to CowboyNeal.

Spam has dropped since January 1st for me (5, Informative)

Crazieeman (610662) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865581)

I'm not sure if it has to do with the new United States anti-spam law or not, but I have received the same amount of spam in 48 hours as I would have in 12 hours in 2003. About 45 emails.

Re:Spam has dropped since January 1st for me (2, Insightful)

Texas Rose on Lava L (712928) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865592)

The spammers are probably just taking some time off around the holidays like everyone else. It'll go back up next week.

Re:Spam has dropped since January 1st for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865641)

Spam has increased infinately for me in 2004. Before January 1st, I had never (ever) recieved one spam message to my personal email address. On January 1st I recieved a single spam message; same thing (exact same message) happened today (2nd). Interestingly, both emails were addressed to people with names similar to mine: all began with the same letter and ended with the same ISP. This pisses me off to no degree; I have taken extreme care to keep my address safe; time for an email to my ISP.

Hmmm (2, Interesting)

Christoff84 (707146) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865584)

Of that half trillion emails, I wonder how many of them originated inside aol itself.

All those 1000 hour free CDs being put to use in the wrong hands...

That's 9k petebytes (5, Insightful)

Maskirovka (255712) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865585)

(5E11*20kb)/(1024E3) [1024E4 kilabytes/terrabyte]
=9,765.6 petabytes [I guessed at the average size of a spam email]

I wonder how much that costs AOL?

The article (1)

Nilisco (730538) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865587)

failed to mention that 250 billion of the spam messages came from aol...

Some stats (2, Informative)

titaniam (635291) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865588)

Hey. I get a fair amount of spam, but I am not afraid. It is all filtered. You can see some recent ones at drpa.us/spam.html [drpa.us] . Try to send me an email, and check if it gets through! You can also see a plot of my daily spam frequency for the last 400 days or so at drpa.us/spam0.jpg [drpa.us] . Advice to all: start saving all your spam and good mail in separate folders. The more you save, the easier it is for a smart filter to automatically identify them. And many thanks to Paul Graham [paulgraham.com] for teaching us all the Bayesian solution (we just need to listen).

Re:Some stats (1)

leviramsey (248057) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865689)

Alternatively, just map a key in your MUA to "train as ham" and another to "train as spam".

Re:Some stats (2, Insightful)

titzandkunt (623280) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865720)


"...I get a fair amount of spam, but I am not afraid. It is all filtered..."

Good for you.

But the key point about all this spam that you're hiving off into a seperate folder at +9 on the SpamAssassin scale, or that your ISP is bouncing on the basis of blacklists is: You've already paid for it!

Your ISP is paying for the bandwidth, the storage and the processing power to cope with this junk, and as they wish to stay in business and make a profit, they pass the charge right along the food chain to you the paying customer.

It doesn't matter that you and people like you never get to see the spam bar the subject heading - I suspect that you would never buy anything from a spam-supported business even if you had a pistol to your head.

But filtering email is like a Usenet kill-file: Although you might not be seeing the posts, they're still there for others to see. The spammers will continue to get through to those who are naive, gullible, or just plain stupid. People who have no idea how to enable blacklist based blocking at their ISP, or how to use a filter...

And enough of those people will reply to spam to make up the fractional percentage response that makes spam profitable.

T&K.

Only Spam? (5, Interesting)

Spacejock (727523) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865601)

iiNet is one of the largest ISPs in Australia (third or fourth now, I think). I got an advisory yesterday saying AOL and RR had both blocked all inbound mail from iinet as 'spam' They can crow about 500 billion mails all they like, but if a lot of it involves turning off mail from whole slabs of legitimate users, then it's not much of a service. The other thing is, if spammers are using trojans to create spam relays, then it's a bit hard to blame a particular ISP if a bunch of their users have been infected with this stuff. iiNet has a policy of advising users when they appear to be infected, they're cluey people too, they run everything on Debian as far as I can tell, and they have local mirrors for many Linux distros etc. I guess what I'm saying is that if you're going to block an ISP's mail you'd start with clueless behemoths who don't give a damn. Anyway, they appear to have a work-around in place, but RR is still blocking. Simon

Unwarranted assumptions (3, Insightful)

oskillator (670034) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865603)

A less deceptive way of phrasing it is that AOL has blocked 500 billion emails from reaching the intended recipients. I doubt very much that this figure takes into account the ridiculous rate of false positives that AOL's rather loose definition of "spam" [slashdot.org] results in.

RoadRunner sucks too, (1)

pair-a-noyd (594371) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865607)

They block email from all sorts of people (read FRIENDS) that are mailing from some ISP that RR has a woody for. I think RR is doing it just to strongarm the little ISP's into folding. As those users get blocked, they get pissed and drop that ISP. The BIG ISP's are forcing the little ISP's out of business by exclusion.

I'm pissed at RR over it and emailed them but they say "too bad, your friends need to contact their ISP and have their ISP stop violating OUR policies. Either that or they can switch ISP's"

What bullshit...

I don't need a baby sitter. Stop blocking email to my account and quit virus scanning my email.
Hell, I would be thrilled to get some viruses sent to me so I could LAUGH MY LINUX USING ASS OFF!

Damn I hate this nanny mentality and these pathic people that wring their hands "Oh woe is me, what shall I do about all this spam?" and beg someone for a solution because they are too damn stupid to deal with it themselves.

MOST people in the world have no business using computers. That AOL exists is proof of that.

Re:RoadRunner sucks too, (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865649)

I'm pissed at RR over it and emailed them but they say "too bad, your friends need to contact their ISP and have their ISP stop violating OUR policies. Either that or they can switch ISP's"

Meanwhile their idiot users have PCs that are getting owned and being used as spam relays. Do they do anything drastic to stop that? Nope!

Road Runner, why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

Not counting... (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865609)

The proxypot operators who are also capturing spam that would have been deliverable to AOL addresses but didn't. I ran a proxypot for a couple of months, back about July-August 2003. I trapped *gigabytes* of spam that would have gotten to AOl users, almost exclusively in some instances, most of it from Internet Video Networks hosted on C&W's sewer network. I took it down after posting too many messages to nanae and had it identified by spammers and no longer used. It's comin' nigh up on getting it back up and on the network. I'm gonna *cash in*, PRAISE "BOB"!

How do you people get so much spam? (2, Interesting)

GhostGuy (708750) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865625)

"That comes to 40 messages a day per user" Wow, anyone who gets 40 spam emails a day must not be very smart. Or their friends must not be very smart and put peoples names on those "Tell your freinds" things (You know, you see a short clip or something and it has like 10 slots underneath for friends e-mail address') If anybody gets a lot of spam, it is usually their fault. I get on average 2 spam emails per day (The most i have gotten in a long time is about 5), and i dont even use any sort of spam blocker/filter. For those of you who get mass spam, here is a hint. For things where you have to enter your e-mail address (Aside from shopping from legit sites or other highly legitimate things), but you dont have any use for mail from them, enter the address of a secondary account you set up for that purpose. That way, if there is confirmation required, you can sign on your secondary account, do any verification required, and never have to read any other spam you may get from that company and/or any companies that may buy your address from the original company.

Re:How do you people get so much spam? (2, Informative)

samdaone (736750) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865639)

I must ask this as well. I have had one of my email addresses stuck on newsgroups, forums, and websites for over 3 years now, so out there for all the little spam harversters. I average about 3-5 SPAMs a day. It is still annoying but I do not know how others get hundreds of SPAM a day.

Is there something others are doing with their email, or is the fact that the people who do get hundreds of SPAM or whatever amount it takes to be unproductive, just popular or is there something else they are doing?

Re:How do you people get so much spam? (1)

GhostGuy (708750) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865685)

"I have had one of my email addresses stuck on newsgroups, forums, and websites for over 3 years now, so out there for all the little spam harversters" Same here. Who knows, maybe we're just lucky ^__^ Oh, and where is my +1? ^_^

Re:How do you people get so much spam? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865694)

Those people who get spammed a lot on aol probably go in chat rooms and since your aol screen name is your email address well I guess a spammer could make a program to collect the names in those chat rooms. Then later on spam you...

And what about prosecuting those instances??? (1)

$ASANY (705279) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865626)

Until CAN_SPAM goes into effect, Virginia (where AOL is based) has one of the more agressive anti-spam laws in the country and AOL should have referred all this to the VA Attorney General for prosecution. When CAN-SPAM happens, though, I suppose this option will go away. So of this multitude, how many of these instances are going to be prosecuted while there's still time, if there is still time?

Perhaps it just demonstrates how ineffective laws are around this issue. One, the feds decide to nullify a rather decent law with their CAN-SPAM abortion, and two, the laws in VA that could have been used aren't employed. Wasn't it worth it to drop criminal complaints on the 100 or so worst offenders?

I'd have been happier if there was a PS. on that story that AOL had referred the lot for criminal prosecution. But I suppose it's a little hard to bring Chinese and Brazilian spammers to justice in Virginia or in the US. Maybe we could get DOD to serve warrants and do the extraditions...

One little bit of design... (1)

andy@petdance.com (114827) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865628)

Until we replace SMTP, I don't know why we should expect any different...

Hotmail (1)

easyfrag (210329) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865629)

While were talking spam, has anyone else noticed a considerable improvement in Hotmail's handling of it? Is Hotmail's "Report Junk Email" option similar to community based spam fighting technologies like Spamnet?

Re:Hotmail (1)

titaniam (635291) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865714)

My father (and posts above) mentioned a drastic recent improvement in the spam situation as an MSN user, but I have seen no decrease in my considerable (300/day) spam numbers as a multi-domain owner. He claims he specifically requested no filtering to be done on his emails. I therefore conclude that either major spammers are avoiding Microsoft accounts, or that Microsoft is filtering user's emails without permission.

I could delete 7.5 million spams... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865643)

...if I worked at Slashdot:
DELETE FROM comments;

My spammeter (1)

gtrubetskoy (734033) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865645)

Here is the obligatory reference to my spammeter [ispol.com] . It is definitely growing, although, interestingly enough there appears to be a drop from a peak in mid-december. Don't know if this can be attributed to recent anti-spam efforts by the governments, more likely it's just the spammers taking christmas vacations....

I've said it b4 and I'll say it again (1)

Botchka (589180) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865648)

The fact that AOL blocks 500 million spam messages is kind of ironic considering that some of the most intrusive junk mail I get at home is those damn AOL cd's!

Re:I've said it b4 and I'll say it again (1)

Botchka (589180) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865660)

oops 500 billion that is...

How they did it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865650)

And how did they manage to block so many? Simple, they don't give a damn about generating false positives. I know several people who've tried emailing friends who use AOL, only to have the message bounced based solely on the senders domain. And these aren't spamhausen they're sending from, they all use major, reputable ISPs. As an added bonus, blocking all that legitimate email just increases the amount of 'spam' they supposedly blocked, thus giving them better numbers for their ad campaigns. Typical AOL... Shittiest service and best advertising in the business. The perfect way to stay afloat by milking the uneducated.

The only way to end spam (1)

Dark Bard (627623) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865654)

Spam is like phone solicitation and junk mail. If it didn't work they wouldn't do it. The only real way to perminately stop it is to encourage everyone to not respond. If no one responded it would dry up overnight. Unfortunately there is a percentage that are gullible so we all pay the price. I've encouraged people for years to hang up on phone solicitors. The same must be done with spammers. There really needs to be a grass roots movement to educate people to avoid junk mail of all forms. Personally I boycote products that send junk mail and spam. I also try to avoid sites that use multiple pop-ups. If it starts costing them business they'll stop. If they loose ten customers for everyone they gain the junk mail/e-mail will vanish.

test (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865661)

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_* [nero-online.org]
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>_\___|_____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>_|__/_____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/______\_(_____>_|_/______t
s______/_/\|___C_____)_______|__(___>_/__\______s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*


The perineum is the area of skin rich in nerve endings that is located below the anus (the opening for bowel movements). For men, the perineum extends to the vaginal opening; for women it extends to the base of the testicles.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

To make stimulation smoother and more comfortable, it is often helpful to lubricate your fingers before stroking the perineum during lovemaking.

As long as the stimulation remains outside the body on the perineum, any type of lubricant (petroleum-base or water-base) will do.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

[ Reply to This [nero-online.org] ]

1 reply [nero-online.org] beneath your current threshold.

The anus is rich in nerve endings & participates with your genitals in the contractions of sexual arousal & orgasm. Anal stimulation greatly enhances & intensifies masturbation, oral sex, or intercourse. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with anal play, is relax, use plenty of lube (the anus & rectum do not produce any lubrication of their own), and enjoy.The anus is rich in nerve endings & participates with your genitals in the contractions of sexual arousal & orgasm. Anal stimulation greatly enhances & intensifies masturbation, oral sex, or intercourse. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with anal play, is relax, use plenty of lube (the anus & rectum do not produce any lubrication of their own), and enjoy.

Because the perineum is so rich in nerve endings it often feels pleasing to have it touched or stroked. If one is comfortable with being touched on the perineum, its stimulation can be incorporated into a couple's lovemaking to further enhance sexual arousal.

The vagina is rich in vulvatic sensor spots & cooperates with your clitoral system in the up and down movements of sexual arousal & orgasm. Vaginal stimulation greatly enhances & multiplies masturbation, perienium stimulation, and orgies. A good rule of thumb, when experimenting with vaginal stimulation, is to relax, and use one quart of 10W30 (the vagina produces no lubrication of its own during normal stimulation), and enjoy.

However, because this kind of stimulation is often associated with insertion of the finger into the vagina or anus, or both, a water-base lubricant is recommended and preferred.

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865662)

Spammers increased their spam by 500 billion

Stopping spam. (4, Interesting)

DarkHelmet (120004) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865663)

Note: I did some thinking earlier on spam, and I figured I would post this the next time slashdot does a story on spam... You can find a link to this at:

http://sillygoth.com/journal/21669 [sillygoth.com]

This is my writing... I just want some feedback on it from the slashdot crowd.

Okay...

One of the things that I've been tired of recently is dealing with lots and lots of spam in my inbox. I've become even more tired of hearing about how there's a lack of solutions for dealing with it. It's one of the things that slashdot has been endlessly parading about.

To me, the primarily problem with spam is that emails are too easily spoofable. Solve this, and spam will become *much* more managable.

So, what technology is there right now that deals with certifying legitimacy?

Digital Certificates!

When you go to a site that's protected with https, the owners of the site usually have to get a certificate from a trusted source (Verisign, Thawte, etc) signifying that the site is legitimate (so that you don't end up giving credit card information to someone fronting for that company).

You actually *can* get a digital certificate for your email, but it costs money. Plus, to make something like that mandatory, each user would have to set up a certificate individually. Evil.

Why not move authentication to the domain itself? When accounts are setup on a user's machine, create an RSA public / private key per account. Simple enough.

When a user sends an email, force this user to relay the email through the mail server rather than directly from his/her computer. Force the user to authenticate their email / password to send the message. Some servers already force this, I believe.

When the user authenticates him/herself, encode a confirmation id using some elements of the email (first xx characters of message, subject, date, etc) using the RSA private key and attach it to the message.

Here's what should change with the receiving server... When a mail server receives the message, the mail server should initiate a separate connection that looks up the domain's MX server, and communicates with it.

This MX server should then provide the RSA public key for the account listed. The public key will then be used to decrypt the stamp that the MX server included with the message. If the stamp is legitimate, deliver the message to the inbox.

If a stamp is not legitimate, or there's no stamp, simply don't deliver the message. Simple enough.

This method has its series of strengths:

There would be absolutely no point in spammers taking over people's machines with viruses in order to send email if email must be sent through a qualified mail server. It's possible that worms could be written to auto-send messages through these relays, but at least then the mail server could detect it and shut the person out.

If mail sent is authenticated from a domain, people would then have the option to blacklist domains that aren't responsible for keeping tabs on its users.

Mail *will* come from where it says it's coming from. If not from the exact user on the domain, it'll come from that particular machine.

Of course, there are possible weaknesses to this strategy too.

If the mail server is hacked, hackers would be able to still send mail from it using the private key. Fortunately, they would only be able to send from email addresses listed under domains they own.

Spam software like SpamCop / Spamassassin / etc would be able to keep tabs on servers that exhibit hacked behavior, and temporarily blacklist these servers until resolved.

This doesn't necessarily stop users with legitimate email addresses from sending spam. Someone with a legitimate email address can still be spammed.

But at least when you block their email address or domain, it'll be a real email address, and a real domain name.

This method is not 100% in eliminating spam. But it's a damn good start.

Re:Stopping spam. (2, Insightful)

thogard (43403) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865703)

2 major problems

If I can buy a cert, a spamer can buy a cert too.
See x.400 for why this won't work.

Second is that if you can't trust the ISP to do the MX right, then this breaks. How many IPS break their reverse dns lookups? There are too many for me to count.

Remember spamers are good at breaking all the little rules.

they should release the spam (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865664)

They should make this spam readily available for everyone to use that wants it

That'd make for one hell of a bayesian filter. :)

http://www.ftgimp.com/ (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865673)

http://www.ftgimp.com/

And this is the reason... (5, Funny)

FearUncertaintyDoubt (578295) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865688)

...why AOL users have such small penises and breasts.

JOIN GNAA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#7865712)

GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [tux.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] (Click Here [idge.net] to download the ~280MB MPEG off of BitTorrent)

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.easynews.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here [nero-online.org] .

If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

This post brought to you by Penisbird [nero-online.org] , a proud member of the GNAA

I am protesting Slashdot's chronic abuse of its readers and subscribers. Please visit www.anti-slash.org [anti-slash.org] and help us!
________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_ GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_|
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'

AOL proud?! (1)

czion3 (612261) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865690)

Why the hell is AOL going around whoring the fact that there customers get the most spam. You might have blocked a 1/2 trillion but another trillion has gotten through.

Just run through a spell check (2, Interesting)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#7865705)

It seems like the latest attack on Bayes-based filters is to throw misspellings and random characters into the message. I'm surprised the major Bayes tools haven't linked to a standard spell-checker and consider really bad spelling a sign of spam...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>