[thelist] Serious antispam measures

Wesley Mason wes at pmason.karoo.co.uk
Tue Apr 20 06:28:15 CDT 2004


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I think the whole matter is being overcomplicated, but you did make a  
good point about this being a real world issue, however bringing real  
world issues online is actually difficult as changing infrastructures  
for such a big beast, away from systems that have worked for people for  
years and still work for many, to a complicated system, some of which  
involve real world leg work that people would find difficult to make,  
some of which involve economics which some aren't prepared to enter  
into it.

I've always thought, rather than attacking with new systems, attack  
with the system we have, attack spammers legally in the real world, and  
if that doesn't work use online leverage to throttle usage. Why attempt  
to get rid of it online, when implementing actual laws, rather than the  
weak watered down laws and legislature in place today (and some times  
not in place at all), would do a much better job of cutting down on all  
the crap that comes down the pipe.

Don Park recently blogged a very interesting idea, I'm not saying its  
perfect or would work, but very interesting:

<quote>
Given that more spams originate from certain countries than others, I  
wonder what would happen if total bandwidth capacity of each country is  
choked by percentage of spam in outgoing e-mail.  For example, if  
Korea's bandwidth capacity is X and 70% of e-mail originating from  
Korea is spam, then Korea's bandwidth is limited to 30% of X.
</quote>

http://www.docuverse.com/blog/donpark/EntryViewPage.aspx?guid=53769d2a 
- -7012-4f5d-84c3-9dd1e31e8aa0

- --
Wesley Aaron Mason
(1st Vamp)
Weblog from nowhere: http://1stvamp.org/
Webcomic from somewhere: http://gfbowl.com/
Public PGP/GPG Key: http://1stvamp.org/stuff/pgp


On Apr 20, 2004, at 8:14 am, Kasimir K wrote:

> Good morning,
>
>> the online identity needs to be tied to a physical or legal entity
> ...
>> an invasion of privacy/destruction of the anonymity of the 'net.
>
> I'm all for privacy and all. But I too think that this tying would be  
> a good thing. Often people crying for privacy on the net think of the  
> net as something that is not part of the rest of our world, when it  
> really is just another forum or medium, just a bit more effective and  
> far reaching...
>
> In the 'old forums' we don't like to see people anonymously shouting  
> or doing things that affect others, why should this 'new forum' be  
> different? The same people who wouldn't even dream of stealing a cd  
> from a record store are happily stealing online - so it seems that we  
> have a lot of attitudes to adjust.
>
> I would love to see internet, where doing some things (including  
> emailing) would require an identity to a physical or legal entity,  
> while some others wouldn't - posting to a message board aimed at  
> victims of pedophilia should always remain anonymous.

</snip>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFAhQlTeOBnpCO+fW8RAkLYAKC1WhjaN683cWRn0xsdAGYa56HuhQCePdo+
mUJYxSJ8cZ34++Pd/azdYgs=
=mgzm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the thelist mailing list