Slashdot Mirror


Impoverish a Spammer Today

esj at harvee writes "Recently the Camram project released its latest version of a hybrid sender-pays anti-spam system. The project has proven that sender-pays works and has demonstrated how to make it work with existing e-mail systems. Camram has developed hybrid sender-pays techniques that scale down to the desktop and up to the enterprise. It's a completely decentralized system that can put spam-fighting power in the hands of individuals. It gives you control of not only the current generation of spam, but also any future commercial spam -- why replace Viagra ads from a scam artist with Viagra ads from Pfizer?"

6 of 343 comments (clear)

  1. Re:When do I get a shock-the-spammer protcol? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    no it won't. You know why? Because too many people are going to say what I just did, "who the fuck wants to pay to send mail?"

    I hate sending USPS mail because of that why should I pay just to stop getting the four spams I do a year?

    Get a clue, don't give our your real email address to websites as a login, don't post it on websites (including your own), and don't let your idiot co-workers send you joke forwards and include your email in the open.

    Just be smart and you won't get spam. Paying to send email is ridiculous. WHITE LISTS DO NOT WORK.

  2. a Joke! by ch-chuck · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    How do you know when a blonde has been using your computer to send email?

    All the stamps pasted to the monitor.

    --
    try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
  3. Re:When do I get a shock-the-spammer protcol? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I call bullshit on you, sir. While I agree that these things are not the ultimate solution, crying that it is unfair is rediculous in itself.

    If you don't want to perticipate, then don't. As time goes on, you evolve or die. You don't hear anyone bitching that the average webserver nowadays has to be like 500mhz AT LEAST, with multitude of ram, etc, when at some point inhistory, a 486DX was plenty sufficient for serving webpages. But the climate changed.

    You get no tissues from me.

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  4. Boo hoo by Jim+McCoy · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    My heart bleeds for you. Oh woe! You want to send your users with messages that you think are legitimate (something they may disagree with) but do not want to be bothered with the inconvenience of putting up with your users asking you to participate in a spam rate-limiting mechanism or ask them to add you to their whitelist.

    If the "individual enthusiast and small business person" is too lazy or ignorant to deal with this then maybe this is how we will revoke your license to drive on the information superhighway...

  5. Re:The problem is... by edrugtrader · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    he meant that the online retain outlet was on the receiving end. idiot.

    SLASHDOT: NONE OF YOU HAVE ANY FUCKING COMMON SENSE.

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
  6. Re:When do I get a shock-the-spammer protcol? by jazmataz23 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    As much as I'd like to berate you as many of my siblings do, maybe I'll just remind you that the real information IS NOT ON SLASHDOT. SLASHDOT IS A BLOG. The article goes over several objections, specifically yours: "I run a 'legitimate' email list, my server's going to crumble under the load!" It is one click away from slashdot, called "Frequently Raised Objections"

    I propose a compute-intensive stamp for posting to slashdot, instead of the retarded delays we currently have. Why not one of those obfuscated words, like when you sign up for a free email account? That way illiterate asshats like yourself won't clutter up the conversation!

    jaz

    --
    Death to Argument by Slogan!! (This post twice-encrypted with ROT-13. Replies not using same will be ignored)