Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Spam

Spam, Milord 342

Your daily dose of spam... rjwoodhead writes "Hansard, the official journal of the UK parliament, reports on a recent discussion of spam in the House of Lords which not only mentions Monty Python, but reads like one of their skits." A New York spammer has been arrested. One account isn't scientifically representative, but it's a grim picture when you're showing a spam-doubling every 42 days. And an article in New Scientist suggests solving a puzzle, which is essentially the same idea as hash cash.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Spam, Milord

Comments Filter:
  • by da3dAlus ( 20553 ) <dustin.grauNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @01:48PM (#5956352) Homepage Journal
    "Baked beans are off, all we have is SPAM!"
  • by (54)T-Dub ( 642521 ) * <[tpaine] [at] [gmail.com]> on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @01:49PM (#5956364) Journal

    Lord Mackie of Benshie: My Lords, can the Minister think of a name for the enormous amount of unsolicited ordinary mail we receive?

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, when I have a moment I shall bend my mind to that question.

  • by 91degrees ( 207121 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @01:54PM (#5956406) Journal
    It's good to see that they can throw in Pythin references to a debate. It's what makes us British goddammit! If you can't say "Spam Spam Spam Spam" with a straight face, in a serious debate, you have no business calling yourself a citizen, and especially not a member of the house of Lords!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @01:56PM (#5956420)

    One account isn't scientifically representative, but it's a grim picture when you're showing a spam-doubling every 42 days

    Dear Spammers,

    Please slow down your spamming to doubling only every 18 months. This will give Moore's Law a chance to keep pace.

    Thank you.
  • by Mister Transistor ( 259842 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:01PM (#5956459) Journal
    That is just too amazing a coincidence that that figure is also the answer to Life, The Universe, And Everything.

    If you look into anything closely enough, you can find a relationship to that number. ;

  • by Nept ( 21497 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:05PM (#5956500) Journal
    I though the funniest line was

    Lady Saltoun of Abernethy: My Lords, do the Government have any plans to restrict unsolicited faxes? My fax paper is always being wasted by people who send me faxes I do not want. I do not know whether they could be called "corned beef" or something, but I have had enough of them.

    I expected them at any point to start murmuring rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb. (custard!) .... that for goon show fans :)

  • by Jim Ethanol ( 613572 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:06PM (#5956506) Homepage
    So that's it! The question and answer to life, the universe and everything...

    Q: "How many days does it take for spam output to double?"

    A: "42!"

    Douglas Adams would be so proud...

    -JE

    -JE
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:06PM (#5956508)
    It's worth noting that Lord Sainsbury of Turville is the Parlimantary Undersecretary for Technology and Innovation (something like that). Lord of the Geeks?
  • ahh (Score:4, Funny)

    by Joe the Lesser ( 533425 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:06PM (#5956510) Homepage Journal
    It somehow makes me happy that Lord Faulkner of Worcester knows the spam song...
  • by Thud457 ( 234763 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:09PM (#5956537) Homepage Journal
    You know, I just figured this out:
    If I charged $1 to listen to a 30-second ad, I'd be making $120 / hour!!!
    Then I could finally afford to get those penis and brest enlargement operations I always wanted!!
  • by Johnny Mnemonic ( 176043 ) <mdinsmore@NoSPaM.gmail.com> on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:13PM (#5956566) Homepage Journal

    Imagine if Slashdot read like this transcript.

    Lord Johnny Mnemonic: My Lords, do you agree that the original post in this thread shall be labled a "First Post" and condemned as such?

    Minister Cowboy Neal: Aye, and who will join me in moderating up all Natalie Portman posts?

    The content would be the same, but it sure would be lot more polite...
  • by b1t r0t ( 216468 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:15PM (#5956593)

    The first bit, right before they talk about Intenet-delivered luncheon meat, said:

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I totally agree. These statistics on accidents are extremely fascinating; they prove that the British public can use practically anything in this world to hurt themselves with. It is understandable that there are an estimated 55 accidents a year from putty, while toothpaste accounts for 73. However, it is rather bizarre that 823 accidents are estimated to be the result of letters and envelopes. It is difficult to understand how they can be the cause of such serious plight. I agree with the noble Baroness that it would be helpful if people paid careful attention.

    Wow, over 125 accidents a year in the UK, just from putty and toothpaste alone!

  • by iCoach ( 658588 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:16PM (#5956594) Journal
    I figured that, but I just associate the funny wigs with the British. Don't they all wear them?
  • by hndrcks ( 39873 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:17PM (#5956609) Homepage
    I think the comment right before the spam discussion gives everyone a good idea of the weighty matters taken up by the House of Lords:

    Baroness Strange: My Lords, does the Minister agree that sardine tins and anchovy tins are also very difficult to open with their tin-openers?

    At least they didn't flee to Oklahoma to avoid quorum!

  • by blamanj ( 253811 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:21PM (#5956636)
    Lady Saltoun of Abernethy....Clueless humor, I suppose, but humor.

    But she has enormous...tracts of land.
  • by meringuoid ( 568297 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:30PM (#5956728)
    Lady Saltoun of Abernethy: My Lords, do the Government have any plans to restrict unsolicited faxes? My fax paper is always being wasted by people who send me faxes I do not want. I do not know whether they could be called "corned beef" or something, but I have had enough of them.

    Clueless humor, I suppose, but humor.

    No, actually quite sharp humour. If you go back to the menu of what the Lords were discussing that day, they'd just had an interesting discussion about corned beef, in particular when tinned, and how it can injure people. Link [the-statio...fice.co.uk].

    Lady Saltoun of Abernethy: My Lords, is the Minister aware that if, having taken off one end of the corned beef can with the twisty thing provided-assuming that you have not lost it-you then take a common, ordinary, household tin-opener and take off the other end, it is very easy to push the corned beef out of the tin without any danger to yourself?

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville: Yes, my Lords, I was aware of that, and I am very glad that that essential piece of information is passed round for the benefit of this House.

  • A great looking bunch of people. Homocidal maniac looking people on the right (That dude on the far right would be the right one to send knocking on someone's door), technical looking people on the left (the guy on the far left looks like every FBI wirehead in every movie I've ever seen), and smack in the middle, Beth, who I now want to have my baby. (She should block her email for the next couple hours as geeks across /. try to dig up her address.)

    What is it aboutt these departments that they all have an OB PIB (Person In Black) in them? Is there a new Affirmative Action law for goths and freaks (I say this, as the OB PIB in my department.)

    Congrads to all of you.

  • Perhaps.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by Realistic_Dragon ( 655151 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:31PM (#5956738) Homepage
    Instead of forcing a computer to solve a puzzle before it can send email, the user should be forced to solve a puzzle.

    Depending on how well he did, the e-mail could then be moderated - so that you could set a threshold based on the IQ of the sender.

    Unrated email (IQ 0) would still get through, but would be very simple to discard - and after all, who really needs email from simpletons?

    On a side note, would all non-English Slashdotters note that the proper English accent extends only to about 50 miles north of the Capital, and excludes the interior areas of most cities. This may help avoid confusion when visiting as saying 'methinks today is a radiant example of the beauty of the English countryside' to a resident of Hull would likley result in extrodinary ammounts of pain in the region of your genitals.
  • by codefool ( 189025 ) * <ghesterNO@SPAMcodefool.org> on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:37PM (#5956780) Homepage Journal
    I wonder how much of /. bandwidth is being consumed by talking about spam?
  • by toxcspdrmn ( 471013 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:38PM (#5956792) Homepage
    The funniest part is that the previous debate was all about the dangers of corned beef tins [the-statio...fice.co.uk] (you'll need to scroll down the page to "Food Containers: Safety".

    Quotes include Baroness Sharples: My Lords, can the noble Lord say whether ring-pull cans are safer than ordinary cans which are opened with a tin-opener? Which is safest?

  • by forkspoon ( 116573 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:42PM (#5956824) Journal
    I recommend that the puzzle they have to solve is a factoring problem. Computer engineers trying to make their email clients faster would research ways to quickly solve the factoring problem, and then they would unintentially be contributing to number theory research. Hopefully eventually this will help break RSA.
  • by MmmmAqua ( 613624 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @02:55PM (#5956935)
    Lord Mitchell asked Her Majesty's Government:
    What are their plans to reduce the growth in spam (unsolicited e-mails).

    Translated: I am receiving seven hundred penis enlargement and shemale porn spams per day. This is becoming difficult to explain to Lady Mitchell.

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville:
    My Lords, I hope noble Lords will appreciate how I move seamlessly from corned beef to spam.

    We aim to implement by the end of October this year the privacy and electronic communications directive. This includes requirements that unsolicited e-mails may be sent to individuals only for the purpose of direct marketing with their prior consent, except where there is existing customer relationship between the sender and the addressee. Consultation on the draft regulations started on 27th March and closes on 19th June.


    Translated: look, I'm making a clever Spam joke! Aren't I a hoopy frood?

    Just like the United States, we're planning on passing laws, but only rarely doing anything to enforce them.

    Lord Mitchell:
    My Lords, I thank my noble friend the Minister for that Answer. Unsolicited e-mails, known as "spam", now account for half of all e-mails in this country. In the United States, they account for 70 per cent. Spam, whether it is nuisance advertising or hardcore pornography is literally choking the Internet. Will the Minister expand on his Answer? Do the Government intend to follow the example of the United States Senate in introducing legislation specifically prohibiting unsolicited e-mails?

    Translated: No, seriously, the long-schlong pills and he-she emails are a pain. What are you going to do about it?

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville:
    My Lords, we believe this to be a serious issue. The fact that a European regime has now been agreed implements the door to bilateral agreements between the EU and other countries, which is clearly very helpful. The European Commission is keen to pursue that.

    There is now a big movement to stop spam in the United States. Twenty-six states have legislated and, although I do not believe that any action has been taken at the federal level, there has been a recent forum from the Federal Trade Commission on the subject.

    We take the matter seriously. If measures are to be effective, it is vitally important that the international dimension is taken account of.


    Translated: Well, nothing, really. I mean, if the EU does something, maybe, but come on, I mean, France is in the EU, right? How seriously are we going to take anything France is involved in?

    Lord Renton:
    My Lords, will the Minister explain how it is that an inedible tinned food that lasted for ever and was supplied to those on active service can become an unsolicited e-mail, bearing in mind that some of us wish to be protected from having an e-mail?

    Translated: Me and Ned Ludd want to know what these "e-male" and "interweb" thingies are, and what they have to do with lunchmeat?

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville:
    My Lords, I am afraid that I have not been able to find out why the term "spam" is used, but that is the meaning it now has. It is a matter that should be taken very seriously because it not only clutters up computers but involves a great deal of very unpleasant advertising to do with easy credit, pornography and miracle diets. That is offensive to people, and we should try to reduce it.

    Translated: Hell if I know. You really expect a bunch of pasty guys with thick glasses and technology fetishes to come up with a normal name? All I know is they say it's bad, so we should do something about it.

    Lord Faulkner of Worcester:
    My Lords, I can help the Minister with the origin of the word. It comes from aficionados of Monty Python, and the famous song, "Spam, spam, spam, spam". It has been picked up by the Internet community and is used as a descrip
  • by viking099 ( 70446 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @03:13PM (#5957100)
    I feel sorry for the poor chap who screws up the cover sheet on his TPS reports!
  • by uk_greg ( 187765 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @03:24PM (#5957203)
    And later in the transcript a "Lord Newby" weighed in - but on a different topic. Maybe he's not 1337 enough to talk about spam.
  • by Limited Vision ( 234684 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @03:27PM (#5957225)
    I used to work in the British Columbia Legislature where I was privy to many a hilarious debate.

    It fascinating to watch the 'Honourable Members' skirt the line between debate and personal insult. In the parliamentary system, if the Speaker/Chair thinks they've gone too far, they can call them on it and request they withdraw the offending statement. Dysfunctional as the B.C. Leg is, there were never any duels called on matters of honour. But this exchange [gov.bc.ca] between Moe Sihota and Fred Gingell back in 1993 was my all time favourite. Even in apologizing, insults can be made...

    Hon. M. Sihota: The opposition seem to be irritated that I made some comments about trustees. They never seem to have any difficulty in taking some shots themselves at trade unions. Be that as it may, it is true that I made some comments about the trustees during the course of this dispute. It is my responsibility to comment on what is happening in a particular dispute, and indeed I did.

    (Interjection.)

    Hon. M. Sihota: Look, if the yappy cocker spaniel over there will settle down, we could....

    F. Gingell: Listen to who's talking. Go back and read the way you used to speak in this House when you were in opposition.

    The Chair: Order, please. Hon. members, the Chair doesn't wish to intervene, but if members are going to take liberties with respect to personal comments on individuals, it will be incumbent on the Chair to ask them to withdraw. I would ask the minister to withdraw the term "cocker spaniel."

    Hon. M. Sihota: I withdraw my comment that the hon. member is a yappy cocker spaniel.

    The Chair: Thank you, hon. minister. Please proceed.

    Hon. M. Sihota: I'll wait for the member to settle down before I speak again...
  • by dipipanone ( 570849 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @03:38PM (#5957314)
    Say what you want about the britsh parliment, but they got style.

    Don't talk to me about parliamentary style.

    Couple of weeks ago, I was invited to lunch at the House of Lords. Not something that happens to me often. In fact, not something that's ever happened to me before.

    I actually thought about wearing a suit, and had intended to, but at the very last minute, there was a local train strike and so I decided that I couldn't be bothered as I knew I'd be travelling for ages.

    It wasn't until I get through the peers entrance that it immediately strikes me that I've screwed up. This is the oldest gentleman's club in the world, and I'm wearing a polo shirt and chinos!

    Anyway, the peer that I'm dining with shows up, and -- as is normal with British etiquette, she does her best to make light of it, telling people do this all the time, etc. and she hands me over to the usher to have him sort me out with the spare jacket and tie that they keep for these occasions.

    Anyway, as soon as I'm out of her site, the usher starts to explain his philosophy on the world. This is a guy who dresses all day in a tailcoat and bow-tie. He tells me that when it comes to ties, he's something of a rebel. He believes that gentlemen should wear a tie at all times, and when he comes across sleazy little shits like me who don't bother with good grooming, he makes them pay.

    So, when I'm finally escorted into the peers dining room, I'm wearing a dark blue shirt, a yellow paisley tie that should have been destroyed circa 1970, and an military-style blazer.

    I've never really understood how it must feel to be a homeless person, but it all became clear to me that day.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @03:46PM (#5957390)
    Even funnier when you read it in context, as it immediately followed this statement:

    Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My Lords, I totally agree. These statistics on accidents are extremely fascinating; they prove that the British public can use practically anything in this world to hurt themselves with. It is understandable that there are an estimated 55 accidents a year from putty, while toothpaste accounts for 73.
  • by agrippa_cash ( 590103 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @04:35PM (#5957892) Homepage
    ...on of the Lords coming kicking and screaming into the 21st Century. Long may it continue! For the next 150 years, I suspect.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @05:02PM (#5958164)
    She should block her email for the next couple hours as geeks across /. try to dig up her address.

    I'm gonna take a wild guess and say it's "abuse@earthlink.com"? :o)
  • by huistr ( 518531 ) on Wednesday May 14, 2003 @05:13PM (#5958314)
    "Homocidal ..." - man, that's harsh.

1 + 1 = 3, for large values of 1.

Working...