Has the CAN-SPAM Act had any effect on the spam problem? Let’s see, how can I put this? No.
Appetizer: Well, we’re in the middle of the Network World Strategy & Management for Messaging and Spam tour and this week finds us in Dallas on Tuesday and Denver on Thursday so, as it has been said, come on down (although you should register first).
First course: A question that came up in all these events is, has the CAN-SPAM Act had any effect on the spam problem? Let’s see, how can I put this? No.
The government has allocated such limited resources to enforcement that complaints don’t even get acknowledged let alone any large-scale action being taken against spammers.
Side salad: On the other hand, the government does seem to have enough resources to go through the whole rigmarole of fining CBS $550,000 for Janet Jackson’s Super Bowl “wardrobe malfunction.”
Doesn’t it strike you as bizarre and illogical that CBS should be held responsible for something done by the NFL? Doesn’t it strike you as even more bizarre that the fine is for a nipple? Have we got so delicate that the exposure of a nipple is so outrageous that it needs to be prosecuted? Sure, it wasn’t the smartest or the most refined of exhibitions, but really, is the American public more disturbed by a nipple than pictures of mangled bodies on the evening news? But I digress . . . .
Second course: But back to spam – more companies than ever seem willing to cross the line by sending their pitches uninvited and not stopping when you follow their unsubscribe instructions. They won’t stop even when you telephone them!
Among my current personal bête noirs for this kind of behavior are Diversity Business, Dotster and Wireless Dealer Network. These companies are committed to spamming me, and they will not stop.
I can understand anonymous losers pushing pills and selling trash, but how can verifiable and contactable businesses behave so ignorantly?
Third course: A topic I really want to discuss this week was the recent announcement by the Australian Open Source Industry Association (OSIA) that Windows Emulator (Wine) will solve everything.
Wine, according to the Wine FAQ. “is a program which allows the operation of DOS and MS Windows programs (Windows 3.X and Win32 executables) on Unix.”
Wine has been moderately successful running Windows applications, but not all Win32 programs will execute happily (or at all) under Wine. The OSIA’s pitch was that PC vendors should contribute to the development of Wine in their own self-interest.
The argument is that PC vendors’ margins are extremely thin because of the overhead cost of OEMing Windows. The OSIA pointed out that hardware commoditization has greatly benefited Microsoft at the expense of hardware vendors.
Because the market pressure on hardware prices is relentless, the OSIA suggests that to ensure that PC manufacturers continue to make reasonable or indeed any margins they should join the open source movement to make Wine complete and robust.
It is an interesting idea. Combine WINE with a well-engineered user interface and simplified administration for the underlying *nix and you’ve got the ideal formula. We could see complete PC systems for perhaps $300.
Just think, given such a jumping-off point, PC software vendors would be able to make the jump to the *nix world to gain extra performance.
I would like to think the interest is there, but it would take some major players to get the weight of the industry behind the project.
Dessert: I’d be interested to hear three things: Regarding spam, which companies are dogging you? With Wine, do you think the project as proposed by the OSIA stands a chance? And finally, what did you think of your meal?
Send your tips to backspin@gibbs.com.
