well, probably because the spammers already found a way to get by that.
Spam nowadays come in different packages. Different subject lines everytime, different email addresses everytime (some are illegal like penis@enlarge.it, I have even seen some from another user who had no idea a spam was sent through their account.
Two things also to consider: the amount of CPU power needed to do content filters, and service objective. Like you said, filtering through email address. What about those that use illegal + dynamic addresses? Content, the content is roughly the same. But account for the number of people using hotmail, and account for # of emails per user, and account for the power needed to read through all messages doing an greedy search for matching keywords and phrases. As for service objective, Hotmail is a email provider, and they can't really afford to be wrong in their filtering. Some people use hotmail for professional reasons, and hotmail can't afford to miss
you are probably right. Seriously, how much information can they mine? They can probably afford better statistics gathering method. Like maybe hiring backstreet boys to call everyone who didn't buy their album and ask why you chose westlife instead.
But most of us are no big fans of recording industry, especially after Napzter got canned.
Wait wait! It's ok for them to do that because they are big corporations. Hence they can make you work for them and turn your computer into a market reporting slave. And if the mass decide against it they will just blame you for allege pirating of mp3s and make it all ok.
Next step, requirement of CDkeys to activate your CD. Then, charge per CD per song per play through your creditcard or bank account
Who is sending those messages out? Or rather, who is behind the support of spammers? Not quite an individual. Small companies maybe. And what's the message? They got a way to enlarge your thing and your gf/wife's front. Wonderful. While they are at it, they can tell you what you can do to relax yourself, by going to their porn site.
in another note, you post something to a board of newsgroup, and you will get spam sooner or later. That common person is then cut off from the ability to reach mass audience too. Just one of those mouse and electricution. Eventually the mouse will stop trying to reach for that cheese.
Let's put it this way. If you use the ISP as a base, each end user that subscribe to that ISP will be affected. Not only in terms of bandwidth (considering broadband), but the nuisance level. Customers should receive the highest priority in business. As a customer myself, I choose an ISP that will filter better than another that filters little.
The cost is necessary, and it is not a fixed number. It is continuous, to a point where spam get smarter too. No specific reply address, illegal email addresses, ip spoofed spam, OFFENSIVE spam (can't do jack, they are sending from a country that doesn't regulate).
Spam to one end user may not be of upmost importance, but to companies that offer services to these end users, it should be.
A friend and I were having a debate, and I wanted to bring it out into the open.
Our debate (might have been done numerous times already, but still) comes to spam in snail mail.
Anyone have any good insights?
Electronic Spam vs Snail Spam. Why outlaw one and not the other?
I know most people hate spam of anykind, so some should be devil advocates:)
Some companies do have amazing filters that will filter anything that is close to spam. But imagine this: a helpdesk/tech support email address. I work for a department like that and spam makes up 90% of my total email. Also, some countries might not have laws about spam and even scams! Though we might not care about what trouble other countries are in, but consider them as part of the commerce sector, and consider spam servers are mostly located in other countries.
I agree
Though I must say that is only easing the pain rather than curing it. It all depends on how people will look at it. I guess I can think of it as a bike. You can still ride it without the seat and have the point sharp metal up your rear, but it still works.
Some people will stand up and ride in order to continue their journey, some will get a new seat. And some simply get a new bike.
Instead of tracking him down, we can track his email addresses (this guy's gotta have at least one?). Set a few free email accounts, post it in the most notorious and popular forums and newsgroups, set the emails to forward to this Spam Schmuck's email.
One thing this can be consider as is a DoS attack. But isn't that what he is doing? Denying us from using our email?
Privacy is important on the Internet. We put sensative data on our computers, our trends and habits can be easily tracked, we need money to afford our bandwidth, space, and resources. An email is a private thing. Without our consent, what gives him the right to use us as garbage disposals? If so, we should get a % of his dirty profits
[Newbie eyes: "Click here to remove yourself from further email notifations"
Seasoned eyes: "Click here to add yourself to 10 additional spam lists. By clicking, you agreed to let us spam you even more and we do not need your consent to continuously spam you until you have a full email account and then we can fill your email queue with more spam."]
Slashdot Mirror
well, probably because the spammers already found a way to get by that. Spam nowadays come in different packages. Different subject lines everytime, different email addresses everytime (some are illegal like penis@enlarge.it, I have even seen some from another user who had no idea a spam was sent through their account. Two things also to consider: the amount of CPU power needed to do content filters, and service objective. Like you said, filtering through email address. What about those that use illegal + dynamic addresses? Content, the content is roughly the same. But account for the number of people using hotmail, and account for # of emails per user, and account for the power needed to read through all messages doing an greedy search for matching keywords and phrases. As for service objective, Hotmail is a email provider, and they can't really afford to be wrong in their filtering. Some people use hotmail for professional reasons, and hotmail can't afford to miss
Remember Napster? I am sure people know about RIAA
you are probably right. Seriously, how much information can they mine? They can probably afford better statistics gathering method. Like maybe hiring backstreet boys to call everyone who didn't buy their album and ask why you chose westlife instead.
But most of us are no big fans of recording industry, especially after Napzter got canned.
Admit it though, Napzter was against the rules.
Wait wait!
It's ok for them to do that because they are big corporations. Hence they can make you work for them and turn your computer into a market reporting slave. And if the mass decide against it they will just blame you for allege pirating of mp3s and make it all ok.
Next step, requirement of CDkeys to activate your CD. Then, charge per CD per song per play through your creditcard or bank account
Who is sending those messages out? Or rather, who is behind the support of spammers? Not quite an individual. Small companies maybe. And what's the message? They got a way to enlarge your thing and your gf/wife's front. Wonderful. While they are at it, they can tell you what you can do to relax yourself, by going to their porn site.
in another note, you post something to a board of newsgroup, and you will get spam sooner or later. That common person is then cut off from the ability to reach mass audience too. Just one of those mouse and electricution. Eventually the mouse will stop trying to reach for that cheese.
The cost is necessary, and it is not a fixed number. It is continuous, to a point where spam get smarter too. No specific reply address, illegal email addresses, ip spoofed spam, OFFENSIVE spam (can't do jack, they are sending from a country that doesn't regulate).
Spam to one end user may not be of upmost importance, but to companies that offer services to these end users, it should be.
A friend and I were having a debate, and I wanted to bring it out into the open. Our debate (might have been done numerous times already, but still) comes to spam in snail mail. Anyone have any good insights? Electronic Spam vs Snail Spam. Why outlaw one and not the other? I know most people hate spam of anykind, so some should be devil advocates :)
Some companies do have amazing filters that will filter anything that is close to spam. But imagine this: a helpdesk/tech support email address. I work for a department like that and spam makes up 90% of my total email. Also, some countries might not have laws about spam and even scams!
Though we might not care about what trouble other countries are in, but consider them as part of the commerce sector, and consider spam servers are mostly located in other countries.
I agree
Though I must say that is only easing the pain rather than curing it. It all depends on how people will look at it. I guess I can think of it as a bike. You can still ride it without the seat and have the point sharp metal up your rear, but it still works.
Some people will stand up and ride in order to continue their journey, some will get a new seat. And some simply get a new bike.
One thing this can be consider as is a DoS attack. But isn't that what he is doing? Denying us from using our email?
Privacy is important on the Internet. We put sensative data on our computers, our trends and habits can be easily tracked, we need money to afford our bandwidth, space, and resources. An email is a private thing. Without our consent, what gives him the right to use us as garbage disposals? If so, we should get a % of his dirty profits
[Newbie eyes: "Click here to remove yourself from further email notifations"
Seasoned eyes: "Click here to add yourself to 10 additional spam lists. By clicking, you agreed to let us spam you even more and we do not need your consent to continuously spam you until you have a full email account and then we can fill your email queue with more spam."]