Use @example.com email address for sites that require email

You know those annoying websites that are designed to briefly show you the page, but then block you from actually using it until you enter your email address? That annoys the crap out of me! There’s an easy way around it, though, if you don’t want to use your real email address: make an @example.com one!

There’s an explanation of example.com below, but basically it is a domain that seems like a real domain and accepts email from other mail servers, but immediately dumps the email. This allows people to test out programs they write that need to send email, but it also provides an interesting back door to websites requiring an email address.

All you need to do is come up with anything – anything at all, whether it’s names, words, just a bunch of random letters – and put it before the @example.com. As long as it’s a valid email format, example.com will accept it. So go ahead and use IROCK@example.com, or xxsddfswe@example.com or youcanthavemyemailaddress@example.com.

One caveat: this isn’t a secret, and there are quite a few coders out there that won’t allow any @example.com email addresses. This trick will work at most websites, but don’t be surprised if you get a “not a valid domain” message from time to time.

Happy surfing!

select a domain name without creating naming conflicts if end-users try to use the sample configurations or examples verbatim.

Source: example.com – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

House approves flag burning amendment

I’m late writing about the proposed flag-burning amendment. This is mostly because I cannot believe that an amendment was re-introduced. I thought that we had already dealt with this issue last decade! Burning the flag is a despicable act, but it is also constitutionally-protected free speech. Banning this act would be restricting our First Amendment rights. This amendment would destroy one of the ideals that the flag stands for in an effort to protect the flag. Which just doesn’t make sense.

Reason to vote for Bill Ritter for Colorado Governor

Well, it didn’t take long to to find a good reason to vote for Bill Ritter for Governor of Colorado in ’06: He has an extremely balanced and educated view of reproductive rights:

However, voters do have a right to know where I stand on this issue. I am pro-life as a matter of personal faith. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, and the decision of whether or not to legalize abortions reverts to the states, and if the Colorado Legislature passes a bill banning abortion, I will sign the bill only if it provides protections for women who are victims of rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother. However, should the Colorado Legislature pass a complete ban without these protections, I would veto that bill. That said, Roe V. Wade is the law of the land and abortions are legal. As Governor I will act in the same way I did as DA. I will respect the law as it stands, and I will not act to undermine the right of a woman to choose to have an abortion. For example, as Denver DA, I prosecuted those who caused damage and created disruption at family services clinics.

I do believe that there is much to be done in our society, and in our state, to make abortions rare. In the area of teen pregnancy prevention, greater efforts can be made in educating our youth. We can examine the adoption policies of this state and look for ways to support girls and women who find themselves confronting an unplanned pregnancy.

Actually, Mr. Ritter provides a few answers in this interview with ColoradoPols that make me think that he’d be a good choice for governor. Definitely give this interview a read.