Okay, It seems to me that there is a simple solution to all of these spam related problems.
Instead of relying on a technological solution that will be circumvented sooner or later, why not follow the money?
Going after the spammers themselves seems to be a losing proposition because they have become adept at being elusive. The people in this equation that cannot afford to be elusive are the ones that are actually collecting money from the targets of spam. The people that are paying the spammers for their services are the ones that need to be penalized. When the spammers are no longer useful they will die out.
Making money from spam should be made illegal. I think it would be a lot more effective at reducing spam than the methods that are being used now.
If my logic is in any way flawed, please let me know.
All your base is a fad? I still use it in daily conversation. It's one of the greatest running jokes ever. The guy who wrote this article obviously doesn't know what he's talking about. Kinda like those people that say MP3s were a fad.
These lobbying groups have a way of creating the problems that they try to fight.
For example: way back in 97 people were using IRC and Hotline and FTP to trade music, and it was under the radar to the mainstream. Then Napster comes along and the RIAA takes notice, and a staggering number of news stories announces to the public that it's possible to trade music online. The RIAA was the reason for the popularity of napster. And inderectly they are also responsible for the rise in popularity of trading movies on the net because of the migration to morpheus after napster's demise.
Lobbying groups like the RIAA and the MPAA are doing a great service to the cause of piracy.
There seems to be a simple solution to this problem. Why not just go after the people that will be making money off of the spam? It really doesn't matter at the end of the day who sent it. What matters is who will be recieving the money from the spam doing its job.
Spam email has to have a way of the recipient replying the spammers (and the spammers cutomers) so that it makes economic sense.
If there is a law that prevents spam from being profitable, chances are it won't exist much longer.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, So the first step was to crush napster, the second step was to sue people that share files and now the third step sell unusable CDs.
Smart.
How about this:
I will not buy Music under the RIAA's control period. I will wait for them to go out of business before I ever spend a dollar again.
yeah.. sounds like a plan.
Okay, It seems to me that there is a simple solution to all of these spam related problems.
Instead of relying on a technological solution that will be circumvented sooner or later, why not follow the money?
Going after the spammers themselves seems to be a losing proposition because they have become adept at being elusive. The people in this equation that cannot afford to be elusive are the ones that are actually collecting money from the targets of spam. The people that are paying the spammers for their services are the ones that need to be penalized. When the spammers are no longer useful they will die out.
Making money from spam should be made illegal. I think it would be a lot more effective at reducing spam than the methods that are being used now.
If my logic is in any way flawed, please let me know.
All your base is a fad? I still use it in daily conversation. It's one of the greatest running jokes ever. The guy who wrote this article obviously doesn't know what he's talking about. Kinda like those people that say MP3s were a fad.
ugh.
These lobbying groups have a way of creating the problems that they try to fight.
For example: way back in 97 people were using IRC and Hotline and FTP to trade music, and it was under the radar to the mainstream. Then Napster comes along and the RIAA takes notice, and a staggering number of news stories announces to the public that it's possible to trade music online. The RIAA was the reason for the popularity of napster. And inderectly they are also responsible for the rise in popularity of trading movies on the net because of the migration to morpheus after napster's demise.
Lobbying groups like the RIAA and the MPAA are doing a great service to the cause of piracy.
I wonder why they don't see that.
There seems to be a simple solution to this problem. Why not just go after the people that will be making money off of the spam? It really doesn't matter at the end of the day who sent it. What matters is who will be recieving the money from the spam doing its job.
Spam email has to have a way of the recipient replying the spammers (and the spammers cutomers)
so that it makes economic sense.
If there is a law that prevents spam from being profitable, chances are it won't exist much longer.