UK To Hold Public Enquiry On Spam

feepcreature writes "Is something going to be done about email spam at last? In the UK, the All Party Parliamentary Internet Group is to hold a public enquiry into spam. These politicians seem to understand the scale of the spam problem, and they are considering a new global level organization to deal with the Internet, as well as new laws, inter-government action and technical solutions. But will more international bodies help? Would laws work?"

Comments

I was going to get ADSL, but...

[maeka]

From the article:

In order to increase user confidence in the Internet and increase take-up levels for broadband it is essential that all stakeholders work together to combat the growing of spam.

If you ask me, spam is a good reason to get broadband. I'm tired of trying to download 25+ bloated, HMTL laden, emails every day over my sub-56K connection.

Re:I was going to get ADSL, but...

[koko775]

For those who don't know what bayesian filtering is, look here: http://www.paulgraham.com/spam.html

Spam still takes out a lot of the internet's bandwidth -- and not EVERYBODY will use Outlook or Entourage. As long as they can send spam to the 5% (Non-Windows) who don't use those programs, they'll do it. Linux, BSD, Microsoft, and Apple will all have to do this, but there will still be people who get it nevertheless. They also might research into what kind of stuff goes through and send that. Eventually they'll die off, but that still won't solve the problem that those damn spammers take up a lot of bandwidth.

I pray to god that Fast TCP doesn't catch on among spammers, or they'll send it faster than ever before.

Can politicians really retool email?

[bkedelen]

If spam is really a problem with the fundamental flexability of the smtp system, I do not see that politicians will have much success controlling it. It seems to me that the only really successful campaigns against offensive internet use are grass-roots based, starting with end users becoming genuinely fed up and accepting new (possibly painfully new) techniques, instead of just being annoyed, but unwilling to take the next step. Perhaps ./ should have an article examining the current alternatives to smtp and easy ways ./ readers can make it a part of their companies, and homes.

laws and sausages

[timothy]

Well, OK, spam isn't a "sausage" but if sterile canning systems had been around in abundance equal to that of instestines when people were first thinking up sausage, do you think anyone would quite recognize the difference? Go with sausage, just for a minute.

Despite being of a basically liberal bent, I have at times so despaired of spam that even *new laws* sounded attractive. Various anti-spam measures (I like the *potential*-payment plan of pennyblack, mentioned on Slashdot at least once before), including of late vastly improved spam-filtering methods, I think are a better solution. (Yes, Declan McCullagh has made this argument better than I am ready to right now ;))

Even though it sounds nice to say that we should "ban spam," unless all email is routed through a big Spam Whittler, any such ban is no better than just enforcing property rights laws re: trespass etc. In Italy, CDs are all stamped with a little pink stamp of government approval / taxation (at least 10 years ago there were ... still true?); I don't want little pink stamps of inspection / taxation on all my emails.

A visit today to a franchise location of the U.S. Postal "Service" (remember, "dot-com, not dot-gov" since [hold the guffaws in the rear] they're not a government agency, according to so high an authority as ... the U.S. Postal Service) reminded me of what sort of people, if not which people per se, will increasingly hold power to approve email as any such laws click into bureaucratic place.

timothy

Compulsory Spam Filtering

[mrkurt]

I think about the only thing that governments can do is mandate that ISPs provide adequate spam filtering, as the Internet is global and government control of internet traffic stops at national borders. The solution that my ISP has worked out seems to be effective; the spam is filtered, and a lot less seems to hit my inbox folder. I can report messages that are spam for me, and it gets added to my spam filter.

Yes! if...

[axxackall]

There will be a law enforcing ISP to:

1. to accept email only with correct (recognized and traceable) e-signature;
2. to give (for free!) e-signing software (for example GPG) to all POP customers;
3. to give (for free!) e-signing forms for all web-mail customers;

Then:

1. all email will be traceable;
   • therefore many temporary spam agents will afraid to spam as they know they are easier to be found and punished;
2. it will be much easier to implement more robust black and white lists;
   • therefore, many spam sources will cease their spam operations (and perhaps look for alternative ways to make money) as the spam will be very ineffective na d most likely unprofitable;

Conclusion: e-signature and PKI - that's the only way to clean Internet from spammers!