Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • The bug tracker, which is where people expect to be able to submit bugs...

    How do people find the bug tracker? Magic powers?

    (My theory is that they look for suggestions on how to report a bug on the Parrot website.)

    • I have a theory too.

      People who complain about how the Perl developers are rude, and then intentionally post de-obfuscated developer e-mail addresses on a public web site that are certain to get picked up by spammers, have very little basis for their complaint.
      • As if spammers don't know how to deobfuscate that.

        Such obfuscation is ineffective and indeed does make using the email address harder.

        If you want people to report bugs, MAKE IT EASY AND OBVIOUS. If it takes longer than just typing the bug report itself, there will be people who no longer bother.

        It's still unnecessary and rude to deobfu it in a journal, though.
      • Let me tell you something: if you're living today and think that you're protecting your addresses from spam by obfuscating them, then you're really deluded. Spammers can and do:

        1. Use web crawlers that read all addresses off web-sites.
        2. Install malware on millions of exploited computers and periodically keep record of all the addresses in their address books or received or sent email messages.
        3. Subscribe to mailing lists and listen to the traffic.
        4. Etc.

        If you think you can keep an obfuscated addr

        • Let me tell you something

          No, I will not let you do any such thing. This is not your decision to make. They want to obfuscate it. It is their address. Taking it upon yourself to de-obfuscate it is rude and disrespectful, and you have no argument to make on that matter.

          Just for the record, this is the "Disqualifier disqualifies based on his own fault" or Ad-hominem [wikipedia.org] fallacy.

          It's not a fallacy. It is legitimately calling into question whether your subjective judgment about rudeness is a reasonable one.

          And I never complained that Perl developers are rude

          That is, of course, a lie. [perl.org]

      • Obfuscated e-mail addresses are like copy protection systems. They annoy the legitimate user and pose absolutely zero problems to a spammer gang. I mean, how hard is it to write s/ AT /@/g and see what falls out? And how much effort do I have to go through to decode the latest trick to fool the harvesters?

        For all I know, there's a Mozilla filter that deobfuscates addresses on the fly, which means the code is out there to do this. In that light, Shlomi posting a normal e-mail address is neither here nor th

        • Sure, there's code out there to do this. But usually (at least for me) de-obfuscated email adresses work pretty good. Since the net is full with non-obfuscated mail adresses, why should the spammers bother with the small part that is?

          I second the thought that deobfuscating it was rude and childish, and Shlomi owes a big apology.

          --
          Ordinary morality is for ordinary people. -- Aleister Crowley