Re^2: Just Another Discussion of Spam

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Just Another Discussion of Spam by chromatic (Archbishop) on Mar 17, 2005 at 19:52 UTC
I don't know how many people subscribe to the Perl.com newsletter I send out every other week. I don't want to think about micropayments for that. Don't fall into the mental trap of optimizing the next generation of SMTP based only on your experiences.	[reply]
Re^3: Just Another Discussion of Spam by brian_d_foy (Abbot) on Mar 17, 2005 at 23:59 UTC
I already pay for unlimited SMS messages in my recurring phone bill, just like I pay to send internet traffic in my digital cable bill and hosting bill. I pay for my gmail account by agreeing to let Google show me ads. I'm already paying to send email. Micropayments won't rule out spammers. I still get lots of bulk mail in my physical mailbox, and it costs money to send that stuff: more money then a couple cents and it often has a lower response rate than spam. Payments just make the margins smaller, and they'll make up for it by selling better targeted lists. -- brian d foy <bdfoy@cpan.org>	[reply]
Re^4: Just Another Discussion of Spam by robharper (Pilgrim) on Mar 18, 2005 at 13:50 UTC
Micropayments won't rule out spammers. No, the worst of the spammers will do what they have always done and hijack someone else's account and get them to pay.	[reply]
Re^3: Just Another Discussion of Spam by hardburn (Abbot) on Mar 17, 2005 at 19:58 UTC
How do you implement that? Where does the money go? If you have it go to an authority, you're relying on a central authority to handle e-mail. It'll be abused faster than you can say "ICANN". If you have it go to the receiver, then you need a way of getting the payment to them. That requires a central authority (same problem as above), or having everyone accept credit card payments (impractical with the current credit card processing framework), or a cryptographic cash mechanism. But once you bring cryptography into play, you can solve the spam problem via cryptographic signatures, which makes the whole payment system moot. "There is no shame in being self-taught, only in not trying to learn in the first place." -- Atrus, Myst: The Book of D'ni.	[reply]
Re^3: Just Another Discussion of Spam by Anonymous Monk on Mar 18, 2005 at 13:49 UTC
I can't second this. If there would be a worldwide micropayment system then I would happily pay a cent or two for a email to save me from spam. (Hey you pay that ten times for sending a SMS.) Yes, but for having it work for you, the people sending you email have to be willing to pay for email. Considering the the huge success of "sharing" cracked games, DVDs and CDs to avoid paying for them, or for VoIP to avoid costs, I don't think having to pay for one of the killer-applications of the internet, a service that has been free for over three decades, is going to be a success. Specially since it would be trivial to have a legal, cost-free, alternative (everyone has it already).	[reply]
Re^3: Just Another Discussion of Spam by gloryhack (Deacon) on Mar 28, 2005 at 06:20 UTC
If you don't want spam in your inbox, use your choice of SMTP blacklists (AKA "RBLs" and "RHSBLs") and a good filter -- I use DSPAM for those who get past my long list of 17 SMTP blacklists. I see one or two spam messages per month in my inbox, and my total cost was my time in configuration. If I didn't run my own server, I'd still use those blacklists, but via a homegrown bit of perl, then pipe the remaining messages into DSPAM. I recently set my dear old mom up like this, and it seems to work just fine. Nuthin' to it but to do it, and the price is right.	[reply]