From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
"patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
CLiki
http://www.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
ALU CLiki
http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
McCLIM CLiki
http://mcclim.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
seem to remember that such links used to be available.
If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the
sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least
raise the cost of producing it.
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Paolo Amoroso wrote:
> From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
> the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
The obvious solution that reduces spam consists of measures that are
implemented on various online systems:
Before creating content, users are ``authenticated'' to an e-mail
address by creating a password-protected account that is activated by
responding to an e-mail and responding to an image-understanding
challenge.
Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an
activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding
challenge.
On 2004-12-18 02:08:42, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an
> activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding
> challenge.
That wouldn't be a wiki anymore.
Stefan Scholl <······@no-spoon.de> writes:
> On 2004-12-18 02:08:42, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>
> > Whenever submitting new public content, users must be logged in to an
> > activated account, and additionally respond to an image-understanding
> > challenge.
>
> That wouldn't be a wiki anymore.
The image-understanding challenge by itself may be enough to eliminate
automated spam. Although I don't think that is friendly to blind
people or people who have images turned off.
How about if you just ask, "Are you a human?" If the answer is "yes",
they can update the page. If the answer is "no", they can't.
--
An ideal world is left as an excercise to the reader.
--- Paul Graham, On Lisp 8.1
David Steuber wrote:
> Stefan Scholl <······@no-spoon.de> writes:
> > On 2004-12-18 02:08:42, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > > Whenever submitting new public content, users must be
> > > logged in to an activated account, and additionally
> > > respond to an image-understanding challenge.
> >
> > That wouldn't be a wiki anymore.
>
> The image-understanding challenge by itself may be enough to
> eliminate automated spam. Although I don't think that is
> friendly to blind people or people who have images turned off.
>
> How about if you just ask, "Are you a human?" If the answer is
> "yes", they can update the page. If the answer is "no", they can't.
Just so you guys don't waste your time on this in vain, the ALU wiki
problem has nothing (nada, zero) to do with technical issues. Paolo
probably knows this, and suggested the only obvious solution.
I personally do not think Lisp users should feel at all responsible to
contribute labor to this wiki unless they are honestly told the
specifics of why this spam is an issue. I'm not dissing Paolo, I think
he's just being polite when faced with a totally bullshit situation.
MfG,
Tayssir
Tayssir John Gabbour wrote:
> Just so you guys don't waste your time on this in vain, the ALU wiki
> problem has nothing (nada, zero) to do with technical issues. Paolo
> probably knows this, and suggested the only obvious solution.
> I personally do not think Lisp users should feel at all responsible to
> contribute labor to this wiki unless they are honestly told the
> specifics of why this spam is an issue. I'm not dissing Paolo, I think
> he's just being polite when faced with a totally bullshit situation.
Has the ALU Wiki made an enemy of a particular spammer, or has it just
made a spammer compiled list of wikis?
If I was looking to be a wikid spammer, I'd type 'wiki' into Google.
Conversely, I might be tempted to remove all uses of the word 'Wiki' if
I was maintaining a community bulletin board.
I think that solutions which require human attention to deal with what
are likely automated attacks are doomed to failure, simply because the
humans will get demoralized, and the spamming programs won't.
The captcha solution suffers from the problem that it asks legitimate
users to jump through hoops, and making it even fractionally more
difficult to add content to a wiki is just going to reduce participation.
Is it too unrealistic or difficult for the wiki to generate a diff
between the old page and the newly modified one, and run that diff
through a Bayesian wiki spam classifier? Or even a program which,
finding hyperlinks added to the page, loads the first one and looks for
either the word 'Lisp' or for sexprs?
I find it a bit sad that, in the newsgroup dedicated to the seminal AI
language, brainy people are asking other brainy people to spend their
time doing such a soul-deadening classification/maintenance task.
Cameron MacKinnon wrote:
> I find it a bit sad that, in the newsgroup dedicated to the seminal
> AI language, brainy people are asking other brainy people to spend
> their time doing such a soul-deadening classification/maintenance
> task.
Sad? I think it's just one of the many entertainments offered by
venerable computing communities. Delving a little into the history of
computing, and particularly Lisp, there's just a lot out there to
bewilder and amuse.
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.lisp/browse_frm/thread/b32bbd5999dacfda#a765a8a5411190b1
MfG,
Tayssir
"Tayssir John Gabbour" <···········@yahoo.com> writes:
> Just so you guys don't waste your time on this in vain, the ALU wiki
> problem has nothing (nada, zero) to do with technical issues. Paolo
> probably knows this, and suggested the only obvious solution.
More precisely, I suggested the solution that places the
less--coding--burden on the site maintainer, Dan Barlow.
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface
From: Karl A. Krueger
Subject: Re: Given enough eyeballs, CLiki spam is shallow
Date:
Message-ID: <cpv57v$9p8$1@baldur.whoi.edu>
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> wrote:
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>
> If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the
> sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least
> raise the cost of producing it.
Lisp folks with WikiClues are also, of course, invited to contribute
to the growing Wikipedia articles on the subject, including:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_programming_language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp
(Or, of course, the non-English Wikipedias' articles on the same
subject....)
--
Karl A. Krueger <········@example.edu> { s/example/whoi/ }
Every program has at least one bug and can be shortened by at least one line.
By induction, every program can be reduced to one line which does not work.
Karl A. Krueger wrote:
> Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> wrote:
> > Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
> > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions.
> > I seem to remember that such links used to be available.
> >
> > If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the
> > sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at
> > least raise the cost of producing it.
>
> Lisp folks with WikiClues are also, of course, invited to contribute
> to the growing Wikipedia articles on the subject, including:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_programming_language
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp
I've always been unhappy with descriptions of sexps; they seem to get
lost in technical descriptions of cons cells, and obscure the point. So
I wrote much of this:
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EssExpressions
Perhaps I can tidy something like it up for Wikipedia.
MfG,
Tayssir
From: Peter Seibel
Subject: Re: Given enough eyeballs, CLiki spam is shallow
Date:
Message-ID: <m3y8fvpgf7.fsf@javamonkey.com>
"Tayssir John Gabbour" <···········@yahoo.com> writes:
> Karl A. Krueger wrote:
>> Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> wrote:
>> > Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
>> > which does not currently provide links to previous page versions.
>> > I seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>> >
>> > If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the
>> > sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at
>> > least raise the cost of producing it.
>>
>> Lisp folks with WikiClues are also, of course, invited to contribute
>> to the growing Wikipedia articles on the subject, including:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_programming_language
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp
>
> I've always been unhappy with descriptions of sexps; they seem to get
> lost in technical descriptions of cons cells, and obscure the point. So
> I wrote much of this:
> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EssExpressions
> Perhaps I can tidy something like it up for Wikipedia.
Do you have a reference for wherever Rivest proposed replacing cons
cells with what sounds like tuples?
-Peter
--
Peter Seibel ·····@javamonkey.com
Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser, comp.lang.lisp
Peter Seibel wrote:
> "Tayssir John Gabbour" <···········@yahoo.com> writes:
>> I've always been unhappy with descriptions of sexps; they seem to
>> get lost in technical descriptions of cons cells, and obscure the
>> point. So I wrote much of this:
>> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EssExpressions
>> Perhaps I can tidy something like it up for Wikipedia.
>
> Do you have a reference for wherever Rivest proposed replacing cons
> cells with what sounds like tuples?
I didn't write that part, and haven't the foggiest. Maybe someone can
ask about it there.
Incidentally, I recall the guy who wrote that was one of the heavy
flamers, so I suspect he was trying to paint lisp as some sort of
priesthood with sacrileges. But it's a helluva lot better than what
went on before...
MfG,
Tayssir
Peter Seibel <·····@javamonkey.com> writes:
> Do you have a reference for wherever Rivest proposed replacing cons
> cells with what sounds like tuples?
You might try checking "The Evolution of Lisp" by Gabriel and Steele.
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface
On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> said:
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the
version, to the url.
Engelke
Engelke Eschner <·······@tekai.org> writes:
> On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> said:
>
>> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
>> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
>> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>
> They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the
Where?
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface
On 2004-12-17 22:35:31 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> said:
> Engelke Eschner <·······@tekai.org> writes:
>
>> On 2004-12-17 17:18:24 +0100, Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> said:
>>
>>> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
>>> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
>>> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>>
>> They are not available but you can append ?v=x , where x the the
>
> Where?
>
Oh, sorry. It should have been "where x is the version number" eg.
http://alu.cliki.net/Sandbox?v=106
and to revert to the old version
http://alu.cliki.net/edit/Sandbox?v=106
Engelke
In article <··············@plato.moon.paoloamoroso.it>,
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> wrote:
> From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
> the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
>
> http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
> "patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
I think this is hopeless. Some kind of 'protection' is necessary.
>
> CLiki
> http://www.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> ALU CLiki
> http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> McCLIM CLiki
> http://mcclim.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
> seem to remember that such links used to be available.
>
> If enough Lispers from all over the world and time zones check the
> sites, we may be able to reduce the effectiveness of spam, or at least
> raise the cost of producing it.
>
>
> Paolo
Rainer Joswig <······@lisp.de> writes:
> In article <··············@plato.moon.paoloamoroso.it>,
[...]
>> I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
>> "patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
>
> I think this is hopeless. Some kind of 'protection' is necessary.
RubyGarden seems to be coping rather well with a mostly-automatic
system
<http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/2efc4013892474a4>.
I've no idea whether that's a spammer-detection procedure that's
likely to work usefully in the future, but it doesn't seem unlikely.
(If it works for a few months, then probably it's worthwhile.)
[...]
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> writes:
> From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
> the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
>
> http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
> "patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
[...]
> Restoring the original content is a bit tricky with the ALU CLiki,
> which does not currently provide links to previous page versions. I
Here is how to do it. Suppose the spammed page is:
http://alu.cliki.net/my-page
Then do this:
1) Use binary search to find an unspammed version of the page:
http://alu.cliki.net/my-page?v=XX
where XX is the version number. Start around 20-30 (is there a way of
knowing the number of the latest version?)
2) Edit the unspammed version of the page with the URL:
http://alu.cliki.net/edit/my-page?v=XX
3) Confirm the edit.
This is painful. I hope that Dan Barlow restores the direct version
links.
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> writes:
> From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
> the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
>
> http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
> "patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
If I understand correctly, Wikis get flooded with URLs pointing to
spam sites in order to make search engines increase their rating. So,
just out of curiosity: what is the average amount of time for a
spammed page to be effective for spammers, i.e. for search engines to
actually index its content?
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface
Paolo Amoroso wrote:
> If I understand correctly, Wikis get flooded with URLs pointing to
> spam sites in order to make search engines increase their rating. So,
> just out of curiosity: what is the average amount of time for a
> spammed page to be effective for spammers, i.e. for search engines to
> actually index its content?
I suspect that there is no meaningful average - the frequency one's site
is visited by search engine crawlers is likely linked to the frequency
of site updates, as evidenced by HTTP Last-Modified headers. I don't
have hard data for this, just a suspicion.
In article <······················@golden.net>, Cameron MacKinnon wrote:
> Paolo Amoroso wrote:
>> If I understand correctly, Wikis get flooded with URLs pointing to
>> spam sites in order to make search engines increase their rating.
>> So, just out of curiosity: what is the average amount of time for a
>> spammed page to be effective for spammers, i.e. for search engines
>> to actually index its content?
>
> I suspect that there is no meaningful average - the frequency one's
> site is visited by search engine crawlers is likely linked to the
> frequency of site updates, as evidenced by HTTP Last-Modified
> headers. I don't have hard data for this, just a suspicion.
Data point: I rarely (2-3x/year) update my site. Googlebot crawls it
frequently (2-3x/week).
Paolo Amoroso <·······@mclink.it> writes:
> From time to time, CLiki site are flooded by spam. This is currently
> the case for the ALU CLiki, as you can see from the change log:
>
> http://alu.cliki.net/Recent%20Changes
>
> I encourage Lispers to protect these valuable resources and frequently
> "patrol" CLiki sites to remove spam:
It looks like this may no longer be enough: spammers have figured how
to add content to the recent changes page, which can not be edited
later. I suggested Dan Barlow to disable editing at ALU CLiki, at
least for a few weeks, and he has done that.
Paolo
--
Why Lisp? http://alu.cliki.net/RtL%20Highlight%20Film
Recommended Common Lisp libraries/tools (see also http://clrfi.alu.org):
- ASDF/ASDF-INSTALL: system building/installation
- CL-PPCRE: regular expressions
- UFFI: Foreign Function Interface