I sounds to me like it is past time for a new email system that keeps this from happening.
|
Does Verizon's Voyager stack up to the iPhone? |
|
|
5 IT skills that won't boost your salary 
[1,407]
Women 4 times more likely than men to cough up personal info [589]
Japan's 10 funniest tech-related commercials [Videos] [407]
Throwing away a promo CD is "unauthorized distribution"? [1,265]
Adults too quick to dismiss educational video games [682]
Attack of the iPhone clones [Slideshow] [578]
10 things IT needs to know about AJAX [1,258]
This Year's 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries [Slideshow] [409]
|
|
spaming
I just deleted over 2600 spam emails on gmail. there was really no need for the first one to be there
and also some emails(yahoo has been guilty of this) will at times for no reason put email from adresses you've received for years into spam.
Yahoo has just abouit killed their chat room service by doing away with personal chatrooms and inviting porn bots into all of their chatrooms.
It seems that yahoo doesn't understand that they could show millions of ads per hour with their chat room service if they would keep bots out.
Email is an import of our lives and should not be allowed to be ivated by spammers and bots
I first reported on the
I first reported on the closing of the Yahoo! user created chat rooms back in 2005. Yahoo! closed their rooms in response to negative publicity from a series aired on KPRC TV in Houston, Tx.
http://www.chatmag.com/news/061805_yahoo_closes_user_chat.html
In the series, KPRC demonstrated that although there were a number of good chat rooms, there were also pedophile related chat rooms, and Yahoo! had opportunity to either close those particular rooms, or install moderators, similar to IRCops in the IRC networks.
Yes, Yahoo! loses a lot of eyeballs by not having more chat rooms, but it is a trade off. It is less of a loss to close the rooms than to have moderators.
Yahoo! Chat is dead, thanks to spam bots, and until Yahoo! decides to get proactive in policing their chat from both spam bots and predators, it will not change.
A new email system is right
It has been fairly well documented (and this experiment adds toi taht documentation) that the existing email system is so broken it cannot be fixed, only replaced. For years the US has suffered from sub-par television because the NTSC standards required that everything be compatible with the very first black and white round tube sets. We are finally replacing that. the biggest hurdle for replacing email seems to be the same mindset, that whatever we put in must somehow function with ELM on a telnet based shell account. Enough of that, it's time to move on and fix this by replacing it.
A new E-Mail system is not right
As opposed to what, REQUIRING a E-Mail program that does HTML, loads images, maybe some Javascript., letting the spammer know you've received his junk? (Via images loading off his server, scripting, or the like?) Of course elm should be able to handle a new mail system, it just gets mail from a spool and sends it out via sendmail.
My account gets about 500-750 spams a day. My ISP quit supplying any blacklist or anything-based spam filterings unless I paid $5 a month. Do I care? NO. Install a bayesian spam filter, and you no longer have any problems. I burn a few CPU cycles while my system retrieves my E-Mail; I get like 2-3 spams that get through; and, since they are working so hard to get past a spamfilter, they are unintelliglbe (i.e. no matter how gullible I am, they would not result in a sale.) If EVERYONE installed spamfilters, spamming would simply become unprofitable and would stop.
Replace email? Perhaps when people stop being greedy.
A fixed email system could work with ELM on a telnet session. After all, email is just text. What needs fixing is the delivery and authentication.
The problem is more one of greed, as ever. Email is so important that it is seen as a tool for such nasties as vendor lock-in or patent revenues. Another approach, encryption and signing, is hampered by the question "how do we get revenues", a little paranoia, and user apathy.
The original email, like the original web, is ubiquitous because it was given away for anyone to use at no cost. Because of this a wealth of tools have surfaced around it. It has knocked any proprietary competition into the dust.
Any new system must have the same property. Until that is realised, a the corporate providers who compete with each other realise they need to work together on this, it will not be solved.
Anyone in these businesses ever heard of a "Win-Win" situation? Anyone thought "We could actually get more benefit by joining in and playing fair than we get by trying to ???? all our competitors"?
Blame CAN-SPAM.
The federal CAN-SPAM law took away the "private right of action" allowed by some states such as Oregon. If it weren't for CAN-SPAM, spam bounty hunters in private right of action states could be going after spammers for $500/message.
Blame CAN-SPAM.
The federal CAN-SPAM law took away the "private right of action" allowed by some states such as Oregon. If it weren't for CAN-SPAM, spam bounty hunters in private right of action states could be going after spammers for $500/message.
As a former Webmaster
At one time - back in my very early days on a small college campus - my personal email address was coded into a standard include on each of 2500 pages. As a result - I received an average of 400 SPAM message EVERY DAY including weekends. I got very good at writing mail filters. :)
A new email system that
A new email system that eliminates this will be one that requires all to show proof of their identity and register their email address with a central trusted authority. And if you can control it, you can tax it.
Everybody ready to sign up for this great idea? Didn't think so.
Yeah, really
And precisely who do you trust to be this "central trusted authority". One thing is for sure it cannot be an american authority.
The reason the Internet works is that no one owns it. If you want to have some authority pwn it I can't agree.
Post new comment