Writing Blog

August 8, 2008

Project 119

This is one of a series of articles I posted for Gambling News.
You can view the original version at:
* http://newsgamblingnews.blogspot.com/2008/08/project-119.html

During the XXVII Olympics in Sydney, the Chinese team won only one gold in traditionally Western dominated sports such as athletics, track and field, and water events such as swimming, canoeing and sailing.

The Chinese State General Sports Bureau introduced shortly thereafter “Project 199”, aimed at getting more medals in those sports, which combined account for 119 (updated to 122 in Beijing) of the 302 gold medals available . During the following 2004 Athens Olympics, the Chinese team won four gold medals on sports covered by “Project 119”.

The government has also pumped money into other not-so-popular sports such as archery and shooting, in an effort to overtake the USA (Russia doesn’t seem to have much of a chance these days) as the country that will win the most Gold Medals in the 2008 Olympic Games in Beijing.

On a personal level, large cash bonuses, access to university and generous sponsorship deals await those athletes that make it to the podium.

Everyone is betting nowadays on who will win the win the most Gold Medals in Beijing.
The Wall Street Journal, for example, is predicting that the U.S. will likely continue its Olympic winning streak, both in golds (47 to 38 over second-place China) and total medals (110 to 93, with China second and Russia third on both counts).

PriceWaterhouseCoopers has concluded that China will win 88 medals overall, compared with 87 for the US, a close call that nonetheless would make Chinese very happy due to their belief on number 8 being a lucky number. It’s not a coincidence that these Games have started on the 8th day of the 8th month of the 8th year.

In any case, there’s no doubt that these Olympic Games are going to have an added spirit of competition not seen since the Cold War period, when the Soviet Union topped the medals board on eight occasions.

Darryl Seibel, spokesman for the US Olympic Committee, recently said that:

“We expect this to be one of the most competitive Olympics in recent history. That is down to a combination of China’s investment in its Olympic programme, Russia’s decision to do the same and the policy of some nations like Britain, which are targeting specific medals in sports that are important to them. China has to be considered the favorite. Every host nation receives a huge boost.”

Ant that’s the key to predict who will win the win the most Gold Medals in the 2008 Olympic Games, a variable that many forecasters seem to have failed to include in their formulas.
Remember Australia, Spain or Korea? Those countries received a lot more medals that they are used to when hosting the Games.

My prediction on who will win the win the most Gold Medals in Beijing? China, of course.
And all bookmakers seem to agree.


March 3, 2008

SPAM on Usenet

This is one of a series of articles I posted for magiKomputer.
You can view the original version at:
* http://magikomputer.blogspot.com/2008/03/spam-on-usenet.html

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:

“Spamming is the abuse of electronic messaging systems to indiscriminately send unsolicited bulk messages. While the most widely recognized form of spam is e-mail spam, the term is applied to similar abuses in other media: instant messaging spam, Usenet newsgroup spam, Web search engine spam, spam in blogs, wiki spam, mobile phone messaging spam, Internet forum spam and junk fax transmissions.

Spamming is economically viable because advertisers have no operating costs beyond the management of their mailing lists, and it is difficult to hold senders accountable for their mass mailings. Because the barrier to entry is so low, spammers are numerous, and the volume of unsolicited mail has become very high. The costs, such as lost productivity and fraud, are borne by the public and by Internet service providers, which have been forced to add extra capacity to cope with the deluge. Spamming is widely reviled, and has been the subject of legislation in many jurisdictions.”

Spam affects about everybody that uses the Internet in one form or another. And in spite of what Bill Gates forecasted in 2004, when he said that “spam will soon be a thing of the past”, it is getting worse by the day. While the European Union’s Internal Market Commission estimated in 2001 that “junk e-mail” cost Internet users €10 billion per year worldwide, the California legislature found that spam cost United States organizations alone more than $13 billion in 2007, including lost productivity and the additional equipment, software, and manpower needed to combat the problem.

Where does all that Spam come from? Experts from SophosLabs (a developer and vendor of security software and hardware) have analyzed spam messages caught by companies involved in the Sophos global spam monitoring network and came out with a list of top 12 countries that spread spam around the globe:

  • USA – 28.4%;
  • South Korea – 5.2%;
  • China (including Hong Kong) – 4.9%;
  • Russia – 4.4%;
  • Brazil – 3.7%;
  • France – 3.6%;
  • Germany – 3.4%;
  • Turkey – 3.%;
  • Poland – 2.7%;
  • Great Britain – 2.4%;
  • Romania – 2.3%;
  • Mexico – 1.9%;
  • Other countries – 33.9%

There are many types of electronic spam, including E-mail spam (unsolicited e-mail), Mobile phone spam (unsolicited text messages, Messaging spam (“SPIM”), use of instant messenger services for advertisement or even extortion, Spam in blogs (“BLAM”), posting random comments or promoting commercial services to blogs, wikis, guestbooks, Forum spam (posting advertisements or useless posts on a forum, Spamdexing, manipulating a search engine to create the illusion of popularity for web pages, Newsgroup spam, advertisement and forgery on newsgroups, etc.

For the purpose of this post we shall focus on Newsgroups spam, the type of spam where the targets are Usenet newsgroups.
Usenet convention defines spamming as excessive multiple posting, that is, the repeated posting of a message (or substantially similar messages). During the early 1990s there was substantial controversy among Usenet system administrators (news admins) over the use of cancel messages to control spam. A cancel message is a directive to news servers to delete a posting, causing it to be inaccessible to those who might read it.
Some regarded this as a bad precedent, leaning towards censorship, while others considered it a proper use of the available tools to control the growing spam problem.
A culture of neutrality towards content precluded defining spam on the basis of advertisement or commercial solicitations. The word “spam” was usually taken to mean excessive multiple posting (EMP), and other neologisms were coined for other abuses — such as “velveeta” (from the processed cheese product) for excessive cross-posting.
A subset of spam was deemed cancellable spam, for which it is considered justified to issue third-party cancel messages.

The Breidbart Index (BI), developed by Seth Breidbart, provides a measure of severity of newsgroup spam by calculating the breadth of any multi-posting, cross-posting, or combination of the two. BI is defined as the sum of the square roots of how many newsgroups each article was posted to. If that number approaches 20, then the posts will probably be canceled by somebody.

The use of the BI and spam-detection software has led to Usenet being policed by anti-spam volunteers, who purge newsgroups of spam by sending cancels and filtering it out on the way into servers.

A related form of Newsgroups spam is forum spam. It usually consists of links, with the dual goals of increasing search engine visibility in highly competitive areas such as sexual invigoration, weight loss, pharmaceuticals, gambling, pornography, real estate or loans, and generating more traffic for these commercial websites.
Spam posts may contain anything from a single link, to dozens of links. Text content is minimal, usually innocuous and unrelated to the forum’s topic. Full banner advertisements have also been reported.
Alternatively, the spam links are posted in the user’s signature,where is more likely to be approved by forum administrators and moderators.
Spam can also be described as posts that have no relevance to the threads topic, or have no purpose in general (e.i, a user typing “CABBAGES!” or other such useless posts in an important news thread).

When Google bought the Usenet archives in 2001, it provided a web interface to text groups (thus turning them into some kind of web forums) through Google Groups, from which more than 800 million messages dating back to 1981 can be accessed.
There are some especially memorable articles and threads in these archives, such as Tim Berners-Lee’s announcement of what became the World Wide Web:
or Linus Torvalds’ post about his “pet project”:
You can view a pick of the most relevant posts here:

But Google Groups are responsible for the higher proportion of the spam that floods the Usenet nowadays. Google Groups isn’t the only source, but is the one that makes it easier for spammers to carry out their irritating activities.
It’s so easy to spam Usenet through Google Groups that there are some infamous spammers who have been doing so for years. Perhaps the best known of all is the MI-5 Persecution spammer who gets his way across just about any other newsgroup with rambling postings that often appear as clusters of 20 or more messages all related to Mike Corley’s perceived persecution of himself by MI5, the British intelligence agency. This UK-based spammer readily admits that he suffers from mental illness in several of his postings. He annoys the rest of users in such an exasperating way, that some of them have even offered themselves to the MI-5 to personally finish off the job.

The solution, IMHO, is to implement the Breidbart Index in Google Groups. It would be an easy task for a company that excels at implementing all kinds of algorithms in their search engine, that I just can’t understand what are they waiting for.

More Info:
Newsgroup Spam

%d bloggers like this: