Slashdot Mirror
The Economics of Spam
higgins writes "The Wall Street Journal has the best story I've ever seen on the economics of spam. A self-described "spam queen" (Clean link; should work for non-subscribers) talks about not just the millions of emails she spews, but what it costs per mailing ($250 for 500k emails), what the response rates are (1-2 one-thousandths percent) and what she actually makes. (40% of each sale of one product: anti-spam software)."
With 605.6 millions of internet users, worldwide (according to kadius) 1-2 one-thousandths of a percent that's still 6056 replies to spam. With that many replies and close to zero cost one could make a decent business... sadly
40% of each sale of one product: anti-spam software
Geez. This is like sending out virus attachments to people in hopes of getting them to buy your anti-virus software.
You need to get a firewall on your Windows box. Your ports are hanging wide open. Who knows what else has been done to your machine...
Ms. Betterly says she refuses to send e-mails about adult fare, because it "disgraces society."
/dev/null.
Yeah whatever - spammers claiming moral superiority over pornographers. What's next, the RIAA claiming it supports artists?
Thankfullly, Spamassassin means I don't have to deal with her garbage. Unfortunately it just hides the problem, but at least I get the satisfaction of a "fuck you" when it redirects to
If you've got an unfortunate friend stuck in Outlook, Cloudmark does a decent job of cleaning up the mess, and Mozilla's soon-to-be turned on anti-spam features are looking nice.
Here is her website:
http://www.dataresourceconsulting.com
And her email:
laura@dataresourceconsulting.com
You may fire when ready.
$250 for 500k emails? This morning I was reading about a guy who is selling a million for 20 bucks.
Fun quote:
"I hate spam," he [the spammer, "Steve"] says. "I've gotten death threats. People have threatened to kill my dog. . . . But when you make a thousand bucks in one day, you could care less."
<sarcasm>Hard to argue with that!</sarcasm>
A quick search on Switchboard shows that she is listed, please everybody call her with your beliefs on spam:
Laura Betterly
717 Weathersfield Dr
Dunedin, FL 34698-7437
(727)733-5335
We know:
Her name: Laura Betterly
Her kids names: Chris, 10, and Craig, 11
The city she lives in: DUNEDIN, Fla
What her house is like: 5,000-square-foot home, with a pool
And it even had a picture of her.
A quick Google turns up:
Betterly, Laura
717 Weathersfield Dr.
Dunedin, FL 34698-7437
United States
(1) 727-447-2037
(1) 727-468-2037
-----------
How about someone in Florida drive over there and tell her that the other 99.999% of her email recipients are wishing her bodily harm, and also that they know where she lives.
Hell, why don't we all call her?
`Lex - Find Me Here: Text Appeal
Spam predates the web. It was described as a problem
in rfc 706 On The Junk Mail Problem by Jon Postel
in 1975. A telling quote is:
"The services denied are the processor time consumed
in examining the undesired messages and rejecting
them"
which remains the chief argument against the
legality of spam.
> Blah. It's even a Photoshop filtered black & white picture.
It's a sketch. You don't read the WSJ print version much, do you?
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
http://www.ezlink.com/~perry/CoS/Wise99/42_United_ States2.txt
:)
Betterly, Laura
717 Weathersfield Dr.
Dunedin, FL 34698-7437
United States
(1) 727-447-2037
(1) 727-468-2037
I personally intend to sell her an Anti-Anti-Spam tool to filter out Anti-Spam mail.
Why stick up for big business?
Laura Betterly
717 Weathersfield Dr
Dunedin, FL 34698-7437
(727)733-5335
How nice that the Pinellas County Property Appraiser's Office let's you do on-line searches. The information for her address is available on-line.
Includes:
Enjoy!
Laura Betterly's home address and phone number:
Betterly, Laura
717 Weathersfield Dr
Dunedin, FL 34698
727-733-5335
Fsck you very much, Laura, for the spam.
Sit back and relax as Windows 98 installs on your computer.
Last time I commented on this, I got accused by some idiot of being a troll. Interestingly enough it was still modded to 5 and considered "Insightful".
The biggest problem with spam is ... the response rates. That is users who actually are dumb enough to open up the email and then reply to it.
If everyone in the whole world suddenly got a clue (and it won't happen) then the response rate for junk emails would be nothing, nada, zip, 0 people and 0%.
Exactly how long would a spamming organisation be able to stay in business if they couldn't even guarantee that in a 6 million mailout, they could not get one sale?
With a response rate as low as 0.002%, do they expect that the people that install and run spam filters are the most likely to respond to spam ?
No, because if you've installed it yourself you're too tech savvy and very very unlikely to buy anything from them. They're gunning for the uneducated masses. Those that do reply.
A 0.002% response rate for 3 million emails is 6 thousand responses. Despite the low percentage, that bold figure is enough for many unscrupulus companies to go "hell yeah!".
Email spamming is quick, cheap and it's easy. So quick, so cheap and so easy that it's seen as worthwhile even if you only get 50 responses. Until that number drops to 1 or 2 then we'll all have to look at other ways of stopping the menace.
Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
Quicken and many other programs let you print checks. You can order black check stock from them and many other companies.
Though I agree in principle, the various SMB ports are near useless on so-called "high-speed" connections. There is just way too much broadcasting and redundant back-and-forth traffic that it's too slow to actually use.
It's also an inherently insecure protocol. I suppse one could port-forward via SSH (I have no idea, just musing out loud). Authentication will often fall-back to cleartext if the weak challenge-and-response fails.
I actually prefer that my provider block such ports on the wire. They did this mostly because new customers would fire up their boxes and immediately be able to browse (or be browsed) on the "Network Neighbourhood". The whole world is your "WORKGROUP"!
I have the feeling most people didn't know or care that they have such a thing available to them. At work, they may use "the network" but apparently they need no such thing at home and certainly don't want to know how to set one up (with any amount of security, anyway).
My guess is that only a few of us run an internal network that routes to a shared connection.
The problem, of course, is that blocking ports can be seen as the "thin edge of the wedge" in terms of providers slowly removing connectivity until we are all paying for a single port-80 connection to their proxy (complete with Carnivore) and maybe POP or IMAP. If you are lucky, and really ask nice.
-- clvrmnky
sunbiz.org file for her company. As someone mentioned she's doing biz at home, there seems no problem with this, check here. At least she tries to work legal, however...
6. It bounces.
Actually, what you are suggesting is fraud.
Well, this will be the most unpopular message in the thread, but this woman is not a spammer. People have signed up to receive email, she sends them email. They request to be taken off the list, she takes them off. She doesn't forge headers, use open relays, or advertise for fake products. Where exactly is she wrong here? If you sign up to receive email, you should expect to receive email. These people requested to be put on the list (if they aren't smart enough to uncheck the "send me additional email" box it's their own fault), and they can get taken off her list by faollowing the instructions in the email. Sorry, nothing she is doing is wrong.
"Information wants to be expensive" - Stewart Brand, the same guy who said "Information wants to be free"
um...er....0.002% of 3 million is 60, not 6 thousand (0.002% x 3million = 0.00002 x 3million).
How can we afford to ever sleep
So sound again
--ebtg
I got the exact same thing yesterday in my school lab. It is not ironic since the act is intentional. It is called targeted advertising.
e s/ popupspam/index.htm
The message is being listed as being sent from 'WEBPOPUP' since that is the name someone used for their system. Most of these diploma traces so far go to ev1.net, though after a lot of complaints they refuse to do anything. Check out a little information concerning this issue here:
http://www.mynetwatchman.com/kb/security/articl
The program being used is called "Direct Advertiser". If you have NetBIOS bound to your interface, someone using net send will, by default, pipe the message over SMB to TCP 139. But if NetBIOS is not bound to the interface, net send will use UDP 135 instead. It takes the "net" command a bit longer to figure this out, but it does work.
The Direct Advertiser product just skips the preliminaries, knowing that smart system administrators close TCP 139, and goes right for the undocumented back door.
The 'Direct Advertiser' web site even tells you how to not receive these kind of things any more.
How to set up your system not to receive netbios messages
To deliver the message our program uses a NetBios call built into the Windows API.
Click Start->Setings -> Control Panel->Administrative Tools->Services
Scroll down and highlight "Messenger"
Right-click the highlighted line and choose Properties.
Click the STOP button.
Select Disable or Manual in the Startup Type scroll bar
Click OK
Windows XP
Click Start->Control Panel
Click Performance and Maintenance
Click Administrative Tools
Double click Services
Scroll down and highlight "Messenger"
Right-click the highlighted line and choose Properties.
Click the STOP button.
Select Disable or Manual in the Startup Type scroll bar
Click OK
Windows 98/ME
Remove or disable the file and printer sharing from your network configuration.
Cave, wreck, and deep diver.
help yourself:
BETTERLY, LAURA A
717 WEATHERSFIELD DRIVE
DUNEDIN FL 34698
See:
sunbiz.com
Maybe somebody should sign her up for all sorts of neat stuf...
hmm..
She doesn't like pr0n, huh..
hmm..
heh..
t_t_b
I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
You might not see the problem, but that's becuase spammers have a bad reputation. This is why I do not like this article - when spammers do have a good reputation and anyone thinks nothing about sending email, what will you will have, is useless ineffective computers.
Bottom line is this: sending email costs the sender a fixed flat, neglible cost. Receiving email is a sunken cost of wiring up computers, paying for system admins or software to set it up. The rewards of this system lies in maximizing the gain associated with having good quality, desired email. If you let the noise in, you only stand to lose.
There - I've just phrased the argument succinctly in the businessspeak of cost-benefit-analysis for all managers and businessmen out there.
Not convinced? Must we actually wait until there is a real problem of one having to sift through junkmail, missing out on your time and business opportunity, before you can act?
So although, spam may never be wpied out totally, but efforts towards that are GOOD. Taking "the spam can be good" is the WRONG attitude.
I do the same thing.
By default, all emails to my domains go into my mailbox, so anything I makeup comes to me. This works great for filling out forms where they email a password to you. If I sign up with microsoft@mydomain.org, I can tell when they Spam me or when they sell my address to a spammer and I can add a line with that address to a sendmail config file that returns an error message instead of accepting mail. Permanent blacklist of all spammer who bought that address. I've actually had to do that very few times, but then I don't get out much (in the internet consumer sense).
This seems very simple and straightforward to me, but when I try to explain how it works to non-techie coworkers, they get that "deer in the headlights" look. I'd arrange to teach a class about how to use email effectively, except the thought of getting that look from a whole bunch of people at once scares me.
Here's my mirror.
To the poster who located this, that's just beautiful! I particularly love the crosshair right over her home. You can almost see the smartbomb falling down her chimney in the next instant...
Note to John Ashcroft and freinds: I'm just kidding with the part about the bomb. Really. I'm a pacifist. It's a JOKE.
Have you tried spamgourmet.com? Excellent free service that replaced... mailexpire. Spamgourmet's premise is simple: go to their website and create your user name, password and real e-mail address. Never go there again.
/dev/null (min 1, max 20) and 'username' tells spamgourmet where to forward e-mails received by this address.
/. Go there are and read about yourself.
Whenever some e-mail harvesting website asks for my e-mail address, I give them word.n.username@spamgourmet.com, where the 'word'helps me remember who I gave the e-mail to, where 'n' is how many messages this address will forward before sending subsequent e-mails to
In practice, when I ordered my shinny, new Lindows box from walmart, they asked for my e-mail address. Without going back to spamgourmet, on the fly I made up walmart.5.@spamgourmet.com and sure enough, they can send me exaclty five e-mails to the only address they have for me, and that's it. No mas. Of course, spamgourmet has "power user" features that allow you to keep addresses open based on criteria, but this is
Did I mention that spamgourmet.com is free as in beer?
This information is compiled from online directories, the article itself, and from public records:
/ /www.dataresourceconsulting.com/0 37
. ht m
0 3713867 9220447148,00.html
_ list.ht m
Laura Betterly
laura@dataresourceconsulting.com
http:
717 Weathersfield Dr
Dunedin, FL 34698-7437
727-733-5335
727-447-2037
727-468-2
The others involved in the company are:
Joel Betterly (evidently her ex-husband) and
Chris Connell
chris@eshop1.com
8224 SOLANO BAY LOOP APT 717
TAMPA, FL 33635-9567 US
Phone: 813-814-4085
Phone: 813-854-2833
Fax: 813-854-3283
The Dunedin city zoning people can be found here:
http://www.ci.dunedin.fl.us:/dunedin/phone_list
Deb King in zoning at 727-298-3194 suggested that I call licensing at 727-298-3201 to complain. That is the extension of Mary Gouge. I called to complain. The article appeared on the front page of the WSJ today, and I may mail a copy to Mary. The fax number for the licensing section is 727-298-3206. The house is located in a residential zone.
The article is here:
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/0,,SB1
It contains a description of her faxing from her home, the names of her kids, her company, her tech (Chris Connell, who lives in Tampa, FL).
Dunedin govt. contact list is here:
http://www.ci.dunedin.fl.us:/dunedin/phone
A quick google search turns up a link to this article http://www.djzone.net/pg/archives/0899/visio.shtml which not only mentions Chris, but also Ms. Betterly, linking him to http://www.visiosonic.com/ whois will give you his email address