Your Emails, And Your Internet Service Provider, Will Give You Up Fast

Recently, my ISP, Bellsouth, gave me a call about complaints made by
an individual regarding my postings to RTC. After several minutes of
conversation, and quite a few hearty chuckles, he signed off with a
"Best Wishes", no warning, no violation of the TOS (Terms Of Service)
Agreement. He swears he will become a consistent lurker; doesn't want
to miss the "action", so to speak.

LOL

Sorry, maybe next time. Probably not.

It did bring to my mind the ever increasing ability, for those who
attempt to invade our privacies, and control our public
(Internet/Usenet) resources, that certain "anti terrorism" laws have
given our government, and its populace, to monitor, censure and invade
our lives.

The NSA "reads" 10% (or more) emails that are circulated worldwide and
our FBI the same for US citizens. As data mining software is
improved, thanks to felons like John Poindexter...

http://www.americanpolitics.com/20030730Koop.html

http://www.warblogging.com/tia/poindexter.php

Which brings us to this article which, if this doesn't scare the
BeJesus out of you, then you have no BeJesus in you.

http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article...,113440,00.asp


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6

You can cross me off of a couple of your lists, Michelle.

First and foremost, get rid of any thoughts that I lust or ever lusted for
any part of you. I have gone back through all of your identities for the
year 2003, and I can't find anything that suggests what you are suggesting.

But because you have proven yourself to be so ludicrous and pathetic, I want
you to stay here and continue to post notes like the ones that state that
"the Jews killed Christ." so that all of us can truly understand what kind
of trash we are dealing with.

Happy New Year, Michelle
--
DG in Cherry Hill, NJ



"Cruising Chrissy" wrote in message
...
Recently, my ISP, Bellsouth, gave me a call about complaints made by
an individual regarding my postings to RTC. After several minutes of
conversation, and quite a few hearty chuckles, he signed off with a
"Best Wishes", no warning, no violation of the TOS (Terms Of Service)
Agreement. He swears he will become a consistent lurker; doesn't want
to miss the "action", so to speak.

LOL

Sorry, maybe next time. Probably not.

It did bring to my mind the ever increasing ability, for those who
attempt to invade our privacies, and control our public
(Internet/Usenet) resources, that certain "anti terrorism" laws have
given our government, and its populace, to monitor, censure and invade
our lives.

The NSA "reads" 10% (or more) emails that are circulated worldwide and
our FBI the same for US citizens. As data mining software is
improved, thanks to felons like John Poindexter...

http://www.americanpolitics.com/20030730Koop.html

http://www.warblogging.com/tia/poindexter.php

Which brings us to this article which, if this doesn't scare the
BeJesus out of you, then you have no BeJesus in you.

http://www.pcworld.com/howto/article...,113440,00.asp


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6

"Cruising Chrissy" wrote in message
...
Recently, my ISP, Bellsouth, gave me a call about complaints made by
an individual regarding my postings to RTC. After several minutes of
conversation, and quite a few hearty chuckles, he signed off with a
"Best Wishes", no warning, no violation of the TOS (Terms Of Service)
Agreement. He swears he will become a consistent lurker; doesn't want
to miss the "action", so to speak.

LOL

Sorry, maybe next time. Probably not.


Way to go girl!

LB

Cruising Chrissy wrote:

Recently, my ISP, Bellsouth, gave me a call about complaints made by
an individual regarding my postings to RTC. After several minutes of
conversation, and quite a few hearty chuckles, he signed off with a
"Best Wishes", no warning, no violation of the TOS (Terms Of Service)
Agreement. He swears he will become a consistent lurker; doesn't want
to miss the "action", so to speak.

LOL

Sorry, maybe next time. Probably not.

It did bring to my mind the ever increasing ability, for those who
attempt to invade our privacies, and control our public
(Internet/Usenet) resources, that certain "anti terrorism" laws have
given our government, and its populace, to monitor, censure and invade
our lives.

The NSA "reads" 10% (or more) emails that are circulated worldwide and
our FBI the same for US citizens. As data mining software is
improved, thanks to felons like John Poindexter...


In my experience, any assertion that any organization reads even 10% of
the worldwide traffic is completely and absolutely ridiculous.

Yes, I saw the quotes. Even a keyword search of same would be beyond any
government's capability. You have no CLUE how much email, postings,
spam, and other traffic flow though the Internet/Usenet each hour of
each day.

I've been paid to program computers for about 25 years; hacked on them
since '70. I know how to do these things and know how little I could
sample without unbelievable resources. RELAX guys and gals. The Internet
isn't as unsafe as some would want us to believe. The sheer volume of
traffic is an insulation for individuals.

And from long experience: attacking the character of someone is usually
an indication that the attacker has no real argument.

--
Jere Lull
Xan-a-Deux ('73 Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD)
Xan's Pages: http://members.dca.net/jerelull/X-Main.html
Our BVI FAQs (290+ pics) http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 08:22:41 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:

The NSA "reads" 10% (or more) emails that are circulated worldwide and
our FBI the same for US citizens. As data mining software is
improved, thanks to felons like John Poindexter...


In my experience, any assertion that any organization reads even 10% of
the worldwide traffic is completely and absolutely ridiculous.

Really?

Yes, I saw the quotes. Even a keyword search of same would be beyond any
government's capability. You have no CLUE how much email, postings,
spam, and other traffic flow though the Internet/Usenet each hour of
each day.

Hm, only what Hubby can tell me through DARPA.

I've been paid to program computers for about 25 years; hacked on them
since '70. I know how to do these things and know how little I could
sample without unbelievable resources. RELAX guys and gals. The Internet
isn't as unsafe as some would want us to believe. The sheer volume of
traffic is an insulation for individuals.

It is only unsafe for those who use it unwisely.

And from long experience: attacking the character of someone is usually
an indication that the attacker has no real argument.

I see character assassination and strong argument hand-in-hand every
day.


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6

Cruising Chrissy wrote:
Jere Lull wrote:
The NSA "reads" 10% (or more) emails that are circulated worldwide and
our FBI the same for US citizens. As data mining software is
improved, thanks to felons like John Poindexter...

In my experience, any assertion that any organization reads even 10% of
the worldwide traffic is completely and absolutely ridiculous.

Really?

I don't know what he means by "in my experience" (maybe he tried really hard
and only managed to read 9% of the world's email before getting tired) but
yes, it's true that 10% of the world's email traffic would be (A) an
unmanageably huge volume, and (B) increasingly difficult to get at as email
becomes more common between places whose comm links don't cross the USA.

Maybe they could scan it for certain magic words but even that would result
in too much mail to be read by any team of people small enough to reasonably
be kept a secret. Just think about how much trouble the best minds have on
accurately filtering spam.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 22:49:16 GMT, (Miguel Cruz) wrote:

I don't know what he means by "in my experience" (maybe he tried really hard
and only managed to read 9% of the world's email before getting tired) but
yes, it's true that 10% of the world's email traffic would be (A) an
unmanageably huge volume, and (B) increasingly difficult to get at as email
becomes more common between places whose comm links don't cross the USA.

Data mining software has become extremely sophisticated. They can
read bit combinations from selected datagrams. It's not like they
have to read anything except the ones mined, filtered and selected.
Certain IP addresses are mined, certain traffic originations are
marked.

Maybe they could scan it for certain magic words but even that would result
in too much mail to be read by any team of people small enough to reasonably
be kept a secret.

they would only have those to read that met certain, qualifying
criteria. Emails are scored and only those that score the most
appropriately are then collected for visual inspection.

Among those, many are only followed for path tracing.

Just think about how much trouble the best minds have on
accurately filtering spam.

There is no spam on Milnet.


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6

Malicious Michelle,

You picked on Sunny, but you didn't have the stones to answer me.

So that everyone here knows what you think and believe, please explain why
you posted the "The Jews killed Christ" message. I'll be happy to re-post
it if you try to deny it

Everyone has disavowed themselves of this one except you, Malicious
Michelle, you bigoted, racist, homophobic anti-Semite

Defend your position, sweetie.
--
DG in Cherry Hill, NJ



"Cruising Chrissy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 22:49:16 GMT, (Miguel Cruz) wrote:

I don't know what he means by "in my experience" (maybe he tried really
hard
and only managed to read 9% of the world's email before getting tired)
but
yes, it's true that 10% of the world's email traffic would be (A) an
unmanageably huge volume, and (B) increasingly difficult to get at as
email
becomes more common between places whose comm links don't cross the USA.

Data mining software has become extremely sophisticated. They can
read bit combinations from selected datagrams. It's not like they
have to read anything except the ones mined, filtered and selected.
Certain IP addresses are mined, certain traffic originations are
marked.

Maybe they could scan it for certain magic words but even that would
result
in too much mail to be read by any team of people small enough to
reasonably
be kept a secret.

they would only have those to read that met certain, qualifying
criteria. Emails are scored and only those that score the most
appropriately are then collected for visual inspection.

Among those, many are only followed for path tracing.

Just think about how much trouble the best minds have on
accurately filtering spam.

There is no spam on Milnet.


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6

Cruising Chrissy wrote:
(Miguel Cruz) wrote:
I don't know what he means by "in my experience" (maybe he tried really
hard and only managed to read 9% of the world's email before getting
tired) but yes, it's true that 10% of the world's email traffic would be
(A) an unmanageably huge volume, and (B) increasingly difficult to get at
as email becomes more common between places whose comm links don't cross
the USA.

Data mining software has become extremely sophisticated. They can read
bit combinations from selected datagrams.

What is sophisticated about that?

It's not like they have to read anything except the ones mined, filtered
and selected. Certain IP addresses are mined, certain traffic originations
are marked.

Maybe they could scan it for certain magic words but even that would
result in too much mail to be read by any team of people small enough to
reasonably be kept a secret.

they would only have those to read that met certain, qualifying
criteria. Emails are scored and only those that score the most
appropriately are then collected for visual inspection.

That one sentence is where the problem lies. Either the criteria are too
specific to match any constructive proportion of the target material, or
they are too vague to keep the cull at a workable level.

Just think about how much trouble the best minds have on accurately
filtering spam.

There is no spam on Milnet.

No spam in a lot of places. That's not because of some genius filtering
technology, but because they're closed systems with known participants.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

Pretty simple to avoid that crap. Save a message as a graphics file and send
it. Kinda hard to pick words out of a .jpg or other image unless you
actually open and read it manually.

"Cruising Chrissy" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 22:49:16 GMT, (Miguel Cruz) wrote:

I don't know what he means by "in my experience" (maybe he tried really
hard
and only managed to read 9% of the world's email before getting tired)
but
yes, it's true that 10% of the world's email traffic would be (A) an
unmanageably huge volume, and (B) increasingly difficult to get at as
email
becomes more common between places whose comm links don't cross the USA.

Data mining software has become extremely sophisticated. They can
read bit combinations from selected datagrams. It's not like they
have to read anything except the ones mined, filtered and selected.
Certain IP addresses are mined, certain traffic originations are
marked.

Maybe they could scan it for certain magic words but even that would
result
in too much mail to be read by any team of people small enough to
reasonably
be kept a secret.

they would only have those to read that met certain, qualifying
criteria. Emails are scored and only those that score the most
appropriately are then collected for visual inspection.

Among those, many are only followed for path tracing.

Just think about how much trouble the best minds have on
accurately filtering spam.

There is no spam on Milnet.


The Not So Fine Art Of Google
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29A321E6