Slashdot Mirror
Anti Spam Bills Continue
Brian D. writes "Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M.'s has a great bill -- $500 penalty for each piece of spam a company sends. It passed overwhelming in the House last year, but this year businesses are being persuaded to "take off the gloves" to kill it." It makes interesting points, for example differentiating between spam, and spam with bogus headers (for which I think a $500 is to light. Punishment should be sweet and simple: launch spammers into the sun).
Don't worry, if you only worked for the company, we'll only send you to the moon, not all the way to the sun.
If you are paying per e-mail you receive, paying for extra bandwidth from spam etc. Go get yourself a new ISP
And you call us ignorant. Who do you think pays for all the bandwidth that spammers use on the Internet backbone? ISPs. Who do you think pays for those ISPs? Us ISP users.
It doesn't matter whether ISPs bill us directly for the amount of bandwidth used, because we end up paying for it when they have to charge us extra to upgrade their connections just so we can receive all the damn spam that assholes like your ex-employer send out.
Personally I disagree with anti-spam laws, because there are better technical solutions; but people who don't understand how spam costs us money are far more ignorant than those who call for laws to protect them.
--
Poliglut
What I really hate about spam is the fact that they provide this statement at the end going on and on about how this mail conforms to bill such and such, and if you want removed, just send an e-mail to remove@blaablaa.com.
So I send an e-mail, and of course a minute later get it bounced back because it's an unknown address.
How do you fight that besides sorting through headers and writing to abuse@blaa.com or whatever? Even if they pass some $500 fine per piece of spam, how can you enforce it?
--- witty signature
Dear Rob,
This is to inform you that you are inviolation of the DMCA for using the SPAM(tm) product image in association with the term SPAM when refering to UCE, thereby circumventing our techonological means to prevent unauthorized association. Our technological means are as follows: we told you not to.
Federal law clearly states that if you do not cease and disist this association you have no chance to survive make your time.
Love,
Hormel Foods
I suggest something equally gruesome, and much cheaper. Weld the spammers into 55 gallon drums weighted down with cinder blocks and drop them into the sea above the Marianas Trench. For a little more, you could add a little window through which the spammer could watch the sunlight diminish and die and they plummet into the icy depths.
Commentators here could have fun speculating as to whether the pressure or asphixya kill the spammers first.
Stefan
According to Hormel Foods' SPAM Trademark Policy, "We do not object to use of this slang term to describe UCE, although we do object to the use of our product image in association with that term." Hormel just doesn't want SPAM Luncheon Meat to be confused with UCE.
Will I retire or break 10K?
We've been seeing major problems with email protocols for years now. SPAM and forged headers are just some of the many problems that the current infrastructure possesses. It seems to me that a new secure mail protocol could be developed that would solve many of these problems and keep all the medalling Feds out of everyone's business.
I get so-called "Spam" quite frequently. I, frankly, don't really see the problem with it. It's just people wanting some help. For instance, yesterday I was contacted by two 18-year old college freshman that were becoming models. They just wanted me to give them feedback on some pictures they took. I went to their site and not only were there pictures of them, but their friends too. I guess college girls are really into amateur photography these days. So I responded to the girl's email (her name was Justine) and gave her some feedback (for instance, I suggested she not let her friends make pop-ups and things on her site (they must be in an HTML class together, I guess). I also suggested that she urge the photographer to use better lighting.) Unfortunately, my email never reached her, I'm not sure what went wrong; it seemed like a valid email address (free_warm_pr0n_4u@yahoo.co.uk). Oh well, I hope that Justine reads this message so she can get my feedback.
I personally enjoy receiving "Spam", as it allows me to help out other web designers with their sites. In exchange, I get to learn about interesting young woman (with some amazing talents). Even better are the ideas people send for me to earn money. Tell me that the human soul isn't a benevolent one, when every day I get mail from people looking to help me earn free money.
God Bless America.
iluvpr0n.