Slashdot Mirror


Selling Your Attention to Spammers

Dotnaught writes "Can the free market stop spam where technology has failed? As described in InformationWeek, Professor Marshall Van Alstyne of Boston University School of Management has co-authored a soon-to-be-published paper that proposes an "attention bond" -- money put up by email senders that recipients collect only if they consider the message a waste of time. Supposedly, this market-based filter performs better than a perfect technology-based solution, with no false positives or negatives. A company called Vanquish already has a working model. Is selling one's attention the answer to spam?"

17 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Automated Spam Response by EggMan2000 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Your post advocates a

    (*) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante

    approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)

    ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
    (*) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
    (*) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
    ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
    ( ) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
    (*) Users of email will not put up with it
    ( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
    ( ) The police will not put up with it
    ( ) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
    ( ) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
    ( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
    ( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
    ( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business

    Specifically, your plan fails to account for

    ( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
    ( ) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
    ( ) Open relays in foreign countries
    ( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
    ( ) Asshats
    ( ) Jurisdictional problems
    ( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
    ( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
    ( ) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
    ( ) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
    ( ) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
    (*) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
    ( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
    ( ) Extreme profitability of spam
    ( ) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
    ( ) Technically illiterate politicians
    ( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
    ( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
    ( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
    ( ) Outlook

    and the following philosophical objections may also apply:

    (*) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
    ( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
    ( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
    ( ) Blacklists suck
    ( ) Whitelists suck
    ( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
    ( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
    ( ) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
    ( ) Sending email should be free
    ( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
    ( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
    ( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
    ( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
    ( ) I don't want the government reading my email
    ( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough

    Furthermore, this is what I think about you:

    (*) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
    ( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
    ( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!

    --
    what? what I thought we were in the trust tree in the nest, were we not?
    1. Re:Automated Spam Response by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
      I never see people complain about dupe comments...
      In Soviet Russia, people pay attention.
    2. Re:Automated Spam Response by nacturation · · Score: 4, Funny

      Supposedly, this market-based filter performs better than a perfect technology-based solution.

      So it performs better than perfect? How does that work?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:Automated Spam Response by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny
      You did it wrong. That reply must read:
      Your posting shows that before replying you
      [x] did not read the article
      [x] did not read the summary
      [ ] did not read the posting you replied to
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    4. Re:Automated Spam Response by MrLint · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ya know frankly i only read the comments on new spam filtering techniques to read the automated spam response form. Im not really concerned with the pie in the sky solution in the actual article.

    5. Re:Automated Spam Response by hamfactorial · · Score: 1, Funny

      I, for one, welcome our new misguided comment duping overlords.

      --
      Did you know subscribers can see articles in the future? Holy shit!
  2. Old news... by grub · · Score: 3, Funny


    money put up by email senders that recipients collect only if they consider the message a waste of time

    I get that already, it's called "my salary".

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  3. They can afford me! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    My time is free! I'll give them all the time they want and then some! They just need to come over to this dark alley... say, have I shown you my baseball bat? Look at these fine details... now just hold still.

  4. typical of economics by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 2, Funny

    the only field where you can get a nobel for being wrong

  5. Let's try it out on Slashdot by pcraven · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'd like to try this on Slashdot. I can collect money for articles that I think are a complete waste of my time. Then this money can be used to post messages like this, which are a complete waste of other people's time.

    1. Re:Let's try it out on Slashdot by Shadow+Wrought · · Score: 4, Funny

      You owe me $1.00.

      --
      If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
  6. Re:Possible way to cash in... by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 3, Funny


    Great...three people managed to post this bright idea before me.

    Last time I answer the phone at work!

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

  7. Re:A rhetorical question by TripMaster+Monkey · · Score: 3, Funny


    I bill four digits an hour while reading Slashdot.

    Unfortunately, there's a decimal point involved....

    ^_^

    --
    ____

    ~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

  8. Re:Let the system break down by SithLordOfLanc · · Score: 2, Funny

    4) Profit!

  9. Sorry.. by ebilhoax · · Score: 2, Funny

    Sorry.. but I have Adult ADD and won't be able..
    oh look, a kitty!

  10. I am an open proxy, ban me!!! by NivenHuH · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hehe.. Just kidding.. ;)

    (I hope I didn't just sign a death-wish for my karma...)

    --
    Just when you make it idiotproof, some idiot builds a better idiot.
  11. I'm game by StikyPad · · Score: 2, Funny

    I have absolutely no problem with this. I'd love a second income, and I'd be more than happy to sell my att.. oooh, shiny!