Slashdot Mirror
Federal Bounty on Spammers
Portigui writes "CNN is reporting that the FTC is considering imposing a bounty on spammers. They are guessing it would take between $100,000 to $250,000 to get people to rat out their friends, coworkers, etc... Interstingly enough is that it is 'higher than rewards in most high-profile criminal and terrorism cases. For example, the FBI pays $50,000 for tips leading to the arrests of most of its top 10 fugitives.'"
a bounty on /. dups...
Do you have ESP?
this
But the question I have to ask - are they really worth persuing to this degree? I'm not trolling (seriously) but I'd rather see my tax dollars paying for takedowns in more serious crime..
I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
I think I saw this yesterday O_o Could this be considered spam?
http://ipod.fresh27.net/
1. Go here
2. Find high moderated comments, and repost them.
3. Karmic Profit!!!
do not read this line twice.
Would be the perfect person to rat out, not only does there datacenter disregard spammers who host there, he also spams quite a bit himself.
Why would I do it ?
1) They screawed me out of a $2000 check.
2) They screawed me on my taxes.
3) They still have some equipment of mine.
4) Even for $10,000 it would be worth it to me.
until (succeed) try { again(); }
Next time 34564gnshe@yahoo.com or DSggh5r4555@hotmail.com sends me some spa, I am reporting their ass to the feds. Now I just need to figure out what to do with all of that money...
They are guessing it would take between $100,000 to $250,000 to get people to rat out their friends, coworkers, etc...
Holy shit, spammers have loyal friends. I'd rat 'em out for a happy meal.
...to buy a dictionary and learn how to spell 'screwed' properly. :)
"People" using "unnecessary" quotes should be "shot".
Perhaps you should send out an email to all potentially interested parties. "Send $20 and watch spam disappear from your computer!"
G
Here.
;)
Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL
Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL
Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL
Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL
And right about here is where I got too lazy to continue. Go make up your own lyrics for the rest. Not that anyone remembers the original beyond the bass line anyway.
(Shameless ripoff of Duke of Earl)
In Korea, long hair is for old people!
Do you need a new mortgage?
Do you want to earn your d1pl0ma?
Do you want a Nigerian penis?
Send $1 to:
Happy Dude
355 S 520 W, Ste. 100
Lindon, UT 84042
Sincerely,
Darl McBride
via Gzip Christ
You know what?
Does this mean I can rat out my coworkers who insist on forwarding jokes with their whole addressbook in the TO: field AND GET PAID FOR IT?!
#include <sig.h>
No, it implies (to me) that spammers are harder to track down than regular criminals without community help.
I mean you have no crime scene to investigate, no fingerprints or DNA or other physical evidence to link the suspect to the crime.
About the only real way to bag a spammer as I can see is with eye witness testimony. Any "evidence" you collect online is easily thrown out by an attorney with the "anyone could have forged that" or "my clients box was hacked because of an insecure OS".
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
and I would buy rocks and a fake beard from vendors at any public stonings of a spammer.
Slashdot has editors?
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
From many comics: Wanted Dead or Alive, preferably Dead
For example, the FBI pays $50,000 for tips leading to the arrests of most of its top 10 fugitives.""
Yow! $50,000! Alright, I know just how to get that money, right after the 21st!
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Is there any evidence that spammers have co-workers or friends (who are not themselves also spammers)?
The laws are pitiful and full of loopholes built in by the direct marketing lobbyists, and even Eliot Spitzer has mostly given the spammers he's prosecuted mere slaps on the wrist.
If I were a spammer, I'd have a friend turn me in for the reward, take the minimal risk that anyone could actually prosecute me on it, then split the reward with the friend. Sounds like instant profit to me...
... and probably an easier way to "make money fast" ;-) than actually spamming...
For that matter, such a scheme could work well enough to bring new people into the spamming field just to turn themselves in...
You Forgot:
As I wade through dup'd Articles
Will noone stop the Duped Url's
And-a you, where did you go editors?
And no one can stop you now
Yes-a, I, oh a we.....we're gonna get you, oh Taco
Not gonna subscribe no more
'Cause you ignore, the duped Url's
So hey yea yea yeah
And when we warn you,
You'll ignore our emails, Emails about Duped URL's
So we're left to pay to read our duped Slashdot
While the profits you just don't share
Yes-a, we, oh we're gonna get you, oh Taco
Nothing will make us renew now
'Cause we're still seeing Duped Url's
So hey yeah yeah yeah
Well, we, oh we're gonna get you, oh Taco
Try searching before you post it now
'Avoid the duped URL's
So hey yeah yeah yeah
Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
Shouldn't that be:
Dupe, Dupe, Dupe, Dupe of URL....
Don't underestimate the power of The Source
CowboyNeal had a first post on this story!
I'd rat out just about anyone for spamming for like $1000. let alone 100x that.
Although oddly I don't have a problem with well focused spam. I dont' mind getting spam from my regional compeditors and suppliers. But knock off Pfizer products is a little annoying.
Just remember, behind every dupe article is a submitter who didn't see it posted the first time.
Sometimes stories are marked "pending" for days, so it's not always the submitters fault.
riding round the world on an old motorcycle
But you know that already!
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
HELLO!! the internet isnt all american. a bounty will work in the US. But will it with in the czech republic. What about spammers in thailand, china and anywhere else. These bounties wont work as a solution long term.
This is correct. Another way of looking at this is that spammers take let's say 1 minute per day of time to deal with. They take it from 100,000,000 people. In one year, they have taken 36e9 minutes from others. A human lifetime is approximately 40,000,000 minutes long. So they have wasted 1000 lifetimes per year. They ARE mass murderers! (Or worse, the imprison people their entire lives!)
while (sig==sig) sig=!sig;
Now, is that just for the pelt, or do I have to bring in the whole spammer?
This is not my sandwich.
The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and pay to see yesterday's stories again!
Leben Sie jetzt die Fragen.
... who write laws that effectively stop spammers? Writing legislation on commission, what a novel concept! Oh, woops, I almost forgot, that's what big-money lobbyists offer all the time.
Mathematics is not a crime.
Spam, as a criminal activity, affects way more people directly than most other serious offenses. When you look at murder, for example, say one person kills another. That is obviously one victim. Add to that everyone that that person knows, and on average that crime affected ~ 100 people (making the math easy)? If that killer makes the 10 most wanted, there may be a $50,000 bounty out. That would be about $500 / person affected.
Look at spam then. One message goes out to 10 million addresses. Then multiply that one message by a conservative 10 messages per day.
Say both these criminals are out on the street for 100 days before each is ratted out. The killer has affected 100 people in this time, with one occurrence - about 100 effects. The spammer has spammed 10 million people with 10 messages for 100 days. That is 10,000,000,000 occurrences of the "crime".
Dollars per occurrence - Murderer - $50,000 / 100 = $500 / effect. Spammer - $250,000 / 10,000,000,000 = $0.000025 per effect
So the FTC is spending way less than the FBI for each of us affected by the crimes.
Perhaps they need a bigger budget? =)
Look at the scale of the thing. A rapist targets a single victim, whereas a spammer targets a million victims. If you could take one million junk mail messages and divert them to a single recipient who is forced to either read or delete them all manually in no longer than a minute, it would more or less kill that person, cartoon-style (we are talking 10,000 key presses per second here).
Another calculation: If it takes one second for the recipient to detect and delete each junk mail message (no automatic filtering involved), and some 20 billion junk mail messages are distributed on the Internet every day, that means spammers consume 20 billion seconds of unpaid human labour, or about ten human lifetimes, per day. That makes a total of 3,000 human lives destroyed per year. How many people are killed by terrorism each year?
Sometimes, translating human life into economic terms actually makes it look more valuable, not less.
While I doubt it would happen, I would like to see spammers punished in other ways as well as the big bounty.
Divide the spammer's current net-worth - minus the minimum amount to live for one year - then liquidate and distribute it to everyone that received the spam. Or as many as can be reached after much effort. Make doing this a requirement for the spammer to keep out of federal prison. Make them show progress like an unemployed person has to show progress.
After one year if the person has not found a replacement job of any type or has gone back to spamming then induct them into a government menial job or military service in a non-combat role.
Not an ideal solution but it would at least re-distribute the wealth stolen by these spammers. You'll never get the time back though...
"Bah!" - Dogbert
Alan M. Ralsky
6747 Minnow Pond Dr.
West Bloomfield, MI 48322-2663
248-926-0688
amr777@comcast.net
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Garry AKA -Phoenix- Rising Above the Flames
Si hoc legere scis nimium eruditionis habes
Funny : Although no pysical person seems to be allowed to prosecute a spammer for his/her losses to them, they are "required" (read : forced, by way of an extra tax) to pay for any bounty offered for capture of those miscreants.
....
I've got a good idea : let the very companies, who are allowed to recuperate their, losses by sueing a spammer, pay the bounty.
Why should I, as a mere end-user of the system, be required to take my losses (due to the time busy with both removing spam, as well as the cost of anti-spam software) without a right to recuperate them from the person(s) causing it, and than have to pay for the costs of finding those culprits too.
I can be wrong, but it looks like a lose-lose situation for me