All posts by rbowen

Ebay is of the Devil

There. I said it. EBay is of the Devil. It’s an evil, wicked, unholy addiction. The entire site is geared to get people to buy stuff that they don’t need or want, at completely unjustified prices.

Oh, wait, that’s how our entire economy works. I forgot.

I’ve been looking for a decent compass that didn’t cost a fortune, and I found a “Military style compass”, which I bought for $0.01. Which makes me wonder, what’s going to be wrong with it when it shows up? Will it be the size of a pencil eraser? Will it point SSE? Will it even arrive?

Next, why do they assume that if I just bought one X that I’m sure to want 48 more Xs? I suppose they must have good results with this approach, or they would not do it. Perhaps a lot of collectors shop on ebay. Dunno. I just know that the few times I have gone shopping on ebay, I’ve ended up with stuff that I didn’t really want, and paid way too much for it.

ISSN’s

Ken wants to know who’d be interested in donating time to get ISSNs approved.

Well, I had thought briefly about getting an ISSN, since I knew at least that it could be done, but after seeing Ken’s various mentions of it, I had concluded that it probably wasn’t worth the time.

Yeah, I’d be interested in spending a few of my blog-reading hours providing feecback to the LOC in order to get ISSNs approved. Might even read some interesting stuff in the process.

For those of you who read this, but don’t usually read Ken’s stuff, first of all, you should, but go read his idea about ISSNs.

Confusing spam

I continue to find spam confusing.

Why would someone send out hundreds of spam messages, for example, with no body text? For a while, I just assumed that there was some attachment that I wasn’t seeing because I wasn’t using Outbreak, or that there was some hidden HTML. But, no, there’s nothing at all. I looked at the mbox, and it’s just a blank message.

The business of sending a misleading subject line I sort of understand – to get people to read a message that they would not otherwise read. But when the subject line is “load insect ambrosial”, who’s going to read that?

Oh, and here’s a fun one. I’ve gotten several messages lately where it was apparent that the spammer didn’t quite know how to use their software. For example, the subject line might be %RND_CHARS(8-20) which, presumably, was supposed to generate a string of 8 to 20 random characters.

Another thing recently has been a series of messages with the following subject line:

is could be your Ticket…|Don’t let this slip through your fingers….|The Stars are the Limit…|It222s your time to Come Aboard…|Don’t miss the Train…To your Dreams…|Awesome Opportunity!|Secrets of the Rich Finally Revealed!|See What the “Heavy Hitters” do not want you to know!|Generate Massive Wealth!|Show Me!|Accumulate Massive Wealth!|At Last, Secrets of the Rich and Powerful Finally Revealed!|See What We’ve Never Been Shown Before!|The Last One You Will Ever Need!|WOW! Please Check This One Out, You Won’t Be Sorry!|Staying’ Home and Loving’ It!|Opportunity Express!|Secrets of Internet Millionaires!|Change Your Future Forever!|Finally, an Answer to Your Prayers!|The World’s Greatest Opportunity!|The Most Realistic Program Ever!|Top of the Line Opportunity!|Once In A Lifetime Opportunity!|An Opportunity You Can’t Keep to Yourself!|This One is Really Easy!|You%}

So, I can only presume here that the spammer is a complete moron (I mean, even more than regular spammers) and could not figure out how to get the software to pick just one of the titles. The good news is that you can take that entire list and feed it directly into your spam filtering, and catch that entire category of spam in one easy step. Very helpful of them, don’tcha think?

My daughter is a hacker

Disclaimer: For those of you who are not already familiar with this fact, you should know that the media consistently misuses the term “hacker.” A hacker is someone who enjoys tinkering (usually with technology), experimenting, and playing. What the media refers to as “hackers” are more accurately referred to as “crackers”, which are folks that maliciously try to break in where they are not wanted. This has been a public service message.

So, this morning, while I was in the shower, my daughter discovered how to change all of my desktop settings on Enlightenment. She was very pleased with herself for this discovery. I tried very hard not to dampen her spirits.

So, now, she has her own login. And although she does not (yet) know the password, this is a frightening new step in her path of hackerness. She has set her own desktop background. She has customized the menus.

At least she’s not destroying my desktop settings any more. And I don’t *think* she can do any major damage.

On the other hand, perhaps I should put her account in some kind of chroot jail, or get her her own computer …

Rush Limbaugh

lI may have mentioned, I’ve been listening to Rush Limbaugh, in an attempt to understand what people see in him, why people listen to him, and whether he actually has anything to say.

Well, I listened again today. I tried not to, but, you know, it’s kinda like a train wreck. It’s so hard to look away.

In today’s demonstration of intellectual prowess, he “proved” that “the liberals” were wrong about the war by comparing how long things took. For example, it took less time to take Iraq than for Hillary Clinton to find missing legal documents. This, clearly, proves the the war was goodness and light, and that Hillary Clinton is evil. Clearly. I mean, how can you miss it?

Then, he went on to talk about how wrong “the liberals” were about the economy, by reading a New York Times op-ed piece by some well-know liberal I’d never heard of, and agreeing with every point that was made in the article, calling most of them patently obvious. I wasn’t clear how this proved that the guy was wrong. Perhaps it means that “they” are only right when it’s obvious? I dunno.

So, again, I find myself wondering, and coming down to two possibilities. Either Mr Limbaugh thinks that his audience is monumentally stupid, or he himself is monumentally stupid. When he says that Liberal Q said something which, clearly, only someone suffering from massive head trauma would actually say, I must conclude that either the “quotation” is taken grossly out of context, or that he made it up entirely. Yet, he’s still got a high-rated radio show, 13 years on. I suppose there’s a lot of evidence for the theory that his listeners are idiots. After all, they _voluntarily_ call themselves “ditto-heads”, indicating that they never had an original thought of their own, but only spout what they hear him saying. They do *know* what “ditto” means, right? (Maybe not.)

And yet, so many of my very intelligent friends listen to him, and support the things that he says, that, surely, I must be missing something. Or he’s a very effective con artist. Or, after listening to him for long enough, you stop hearing the logical falacies that are behind most of his claims.

Or maybe I’m just a liberal. 😉

I guess what I need to do is, some time, sit down with one of these friends and listen to a recording of the show, so that we can pause it and discuss it. This sounds like a very interesting conversation.

Meanwhile, I think that I might just make a New Years resolution not to listen to him any more, since he just annoys me.

Helpful hint to spammers

Dear spammers,

Here’s a helpful tip.

If you have to misspell your product’s name in order to get it into my inbox, this should be a clue that I DON’T WANT IT!

I do not want your V@|1um or your X(a)n@x.

I do not want to 3nl@rge my |ips or my p3n1s, and I do not want to c|3@n my c0|0n.

Is that clear?