<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Michael Gracie &#187; porn</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelgracie.com/tag/porn/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelgracie.com</link>
	<description>Clever Tagline Unavailable At Publication Time</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Spammers prove they are good marketers</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/07/05/spammers-prove-they-are-good-marketers/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/07/05/spammers-prove-they-are-good-marketers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 13:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[pharmaceuticals]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[rolex]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[spam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/spammers-prove-they-are-good-marketers/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[They study the stats, and sculpt their messages accordingly.  According to an analysis by CipherTrust, clickthough rates on spam vary enormously, with porn leading the charge.
- Porn 5.6%
- Pharmaceuticals 0.02%
- Rolex watches 0.0075%
Of course, that is most of what you see too, proving spammers know their business.  Frankly, I know why Rolexes are [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>They study the stats, and sculpt their messages accordingly.  According <a title="Seems Somebody Is Clicking on That Spam - New York Times" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/03/technology/03drill.html?ex=1309579200&#038;en=121a5d37733ed0ce&#038;ei=5090&#038;partner=rssuserland&#038;emc=rss" target="">to an analysis by CipherTrust</a>, clickthough rates on spam vary enormously, with porn leading the charge.</p>
<p>- Porn 5.6%<br />
- Pharmaceuticals 0.02%<br />
- Rolex watches 0.0075%</p>
<p>Of course, that is most of what you see too, proving spammers know their business.  Frankly, I know why Rolexes are so low - they cost a mint to fix!</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/07/05/spammers-prove-they-are-good-marketers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawrence Livermore lab hacked</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/06/16/lawrence-livermore-lab-hacked/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/06/16/lawrence-livermore-lab-hacked/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jun 2006 15:41:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Lawrence Livermore]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/lawrence-livermore-lab-hacked/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Almost forgot - one of Lawrence Livermore Lab&#8217;s databases was hacked.  At least it was only 250 or so employees that were caught in the mess (although the actual value - security clearances and all - may make each record more interesting to some thief).
I just hope it wasn&#8217;t porn surfing that was to [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>Almost forgot - one of <a title="cbs13.com - Lawrence Livermore Lab Database Hacked" href="http://cbs13.com/local/local_story_165152110.html" target="">Lawrence Livermore Lab&#8217;s databases was hacked</a>.  At least it was only 250 or so employees that were caught in the mess (although the actual value - security clearances and all - may make each record more interesting to some thief).</p>
<p>I just hope it wasn&#8217;t <a title="Victoria Taft: Blogging and Porn Surfing: Just Another Day on the Job for Oregon's Government Workers" href="http://victoriataftkpam.blogspot.com/2006/06/blogging-and-porn-surfing-just-another.html" target="">porn surfing</a> that was to blame.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/06/16/lawrence-livermore-lab-hacked/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Never a good day..</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/03/29/never-a-good-day/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/03/29/never-a-good-day/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2006 15:02:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/never-a-good-day/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[..when you hear news like this.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>..when you hear news <a title="Beware of increase in child-porn spam, Sophos warns" href="http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/2006/03/offspam.html" target="">like this</a>.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2006/03/29/never-a-good-day/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Deserved of infection</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/21/deserved-of-infection/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/21/deserved-of-infection/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2005 19:07:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[Sober]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/deserved-of-infection/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you don&#8217;t protect your computer from potential infection, you are complicit in the result.  That doesn&#8217;t mean you deserve it though.  If you are a child pr0n scoundrel, you deserve anything bad that can be dished at you, even if it is the Sober worm that gets you busted.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>If you don&#8217;t protect your computer from potential infection, you are complicit in the result.  That doesn&#8217;t mean you deserve it though.  If you are a child pr0n scoundrel, you deserve anything bad that can be dished at you, even if <a title="Worm traps alleged child porn offender | CNET News.com" href="http://news.com.com/Worm traps alleged child porn offender/2100-7348_3-6002302.html" target="">it is the Sober worm</a> that gets you busted.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/12/21/deserved-of-infection/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Get-rich-quick may be good for email&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/11/10/get-rich-quick-may-be-good-for-email/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/11/10/get-rich-quick-may-be-good-for-email/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Nov 2005 22:24:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/get-rich-quick-may-be-good-for-email/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[but I can attest to the fact that &#8220;pr0n&#8221;-oriented spam is still alive and well in the blog spam world.
The day before reading this report about get-rich-quick schemes outrunning pr0nography in the email world, I had produced a post at another blog regarding the Kaiser Family Foundation&#8217;s findings on &#8220;inappropriate content&#8221; in TV-land.
Big mistake.

I used [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>but I can attest to the fact that &#8220;pr0n&#8221;-oriented spam is still alive and well in the blog spam world.</p>
<p>The day before reading <a title="Get-rich-quick spam rises as porn flops - vnunet.com" href="http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2145873/rich-quick-spam-rises-porn">this report</a> about get-rich-quick schemes outrunning pr0nography in the email world, I had produced a post at another blog regarding the Kaiser Family Foundation&#8217;s findings on &#8220;inappropriate content&#8221; in TV-land.</p>
<p>Big mistake.<br />
<span id="more-831"></span><br />
I used the word containing an &#8220;s&#8221;, an &#8220;e&#8221;, and an &#8220;x&#8221; in the title, and was subsequently barraged by &#8220;inappropriate&#8221; comments and trackbacks.  It was big in volume, and fast in reaction.  I am going to be &#8220;much&#8221; &#8220;more&#8221; &#8220;careful&#8221; from now on, and am thankful I caught it, deleted the post, and <a title="Thought Market: Let me rephrase that" href="http://www.michaelgracie.com/let-me-rephrase-that/">re-wrote it</a> before the all-seeing Google cache got ahold of it.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/11/10/get-rich-quick-may-be-good-for-email/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Smut tops spyware list</title>
		<link>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/07/05/smut-tops-spyware-list/</link>
		<comments>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/07/05/smut-tops-spyware-list/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2005 13:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Gracie</dc:creator>
		
		<category><![CDATA[Spamroll]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[pop-ups]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[porn]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[smut]]></category>

		<category><![CDATA[spyware]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.michaelgracie.com/smut-tops-spyware-list/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Panda Software is now reporting a top ten list of spyware threats, and pop-up smut tops the charts.  This kind of bums me out.  If I knew the biggest spyware threat was smut, I wouldn&#8217;t have bought my Apple PowerBook to avoid it.
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<!-- sphereit start --><p>Panda Software is now reporting a top ten list of spyware threats, and <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/07/04/spyware_chart/" target="">pop-up smut tops the charts</a>.  This kind of bums me out.  If I knew the biggest spyware threat was smut, I wouldn&#8217;t have bought my <a href="http://click.linksynergy.com/fs-bin/click?id=rWSLPQplAy0&#038;offerid=77305.81&#038;type=2&#038;subid=0" >Apple PowerBook</a> to avoid it.</p>
<!-- sphereit end -->]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://michaelgracie.com/2005/07/05/smut-tops-spyware-list/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
