>>" You need to show them that most fraud actually comes from the US, even much of the 'Nigerian' stuff.
Then perhaps they will block themselves from us instead.">
You don't understand the problem.
The US may have a higher *NUMBER* of cases of fraud, simply because there are more people. But the overall percentage sales that are fraudulent is small.
Nigeria and Macedonia may only account for a tiny percentage of Internet sales, but out of those few sales, a very large percentage are fraudulent -- a much higher percentage than the US or western Europe.
If you are running a business, you quickly learn who to avoid.
Then there's the whole problem dealing with things on an international level. It's much easier to deal with fraud that comes from within your own country than when it comes from a "foreign" country, especially one where law enforcement is more lax -- and that's exactly what the fraudsters are counting on.
But we could go a long way towards eliminating Spam if the right people would grow some backbone and do the right thing.
1. Cut off Spam from the Zombies. Cable and DSL companies should block all port 25 traffic coming from their customers. If you want to send e-mail, you should have to use use their SMTP servers. Running your own mail-server is against their TOS in many cases, anyway.
In all fairness, however, this could be handled on a case by case basis. If you are such a macho techno-geek that you really really really really just absolutely HAVE TO run your own mail server, you should have to ask them for persmission first and enter into some sort of agreement that you will not be part of the Spam problem.
2. Cut off the Zombies. Any cable/DSL customers spewing out large volumes of e-mail (without permission to run a mail server) get a nasty letter, telling them that their service has been terminated until they secure their computer.
3. Follow the money. Follow the money. Spammers have to make money, somebody has to get paid. They aren't doing this for the fun of it. Trace the money trail back to the people who get paid for the herbal viagra and penis enlargement pills. It isn't easy, but it can be done. If you follow the money, and apply EXISTING laws, such as:
* Child Pornography Statute 18 U.S.C. 2252
* Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 U.S.C. 2701-2711
* Economic Espionage and Protection of Trade Secrets Law Pub. L. No. 104-294
* Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. 1030
* Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 50 U.S.C. 1801-1811
* Transportation of Obscene Matter for Sale or Distribution 18 U.S.C. 1465
* Federal Wire Fraud Act 18 U.S.C. 1343
With IE security holes and exploits being announced almost daily, it might make you wonder why people would continue to use a piece of crap like IE. I wondered the same thing until recently when I had the following conversation with a friend, who is not exactly "computer savvy".
Friend: [asks me a bunch of questions about IE and Outlook Express] Me: "I really don't know. I never use those programs" Friend: "Oh. [looking very surprised] I thought you *HAD* to use them."
In one debate I heard on this issue, the following example was used: Company X reported $4 Billion in profits last year. If they would have been forced to expense stock options, they would have only reported profits of $2 Billion.
OK. So what.
What *REALLY* happened in that example is that Company X really only had $2 Billion in profits, but, because of current accounting rules, they were able to *LIE* to their shareholders, and claim that they actually had profits of $4 Billion.
It should also be noted that when companies do their taxes, they are able to deduct stock options as a business expense. What's really happening here is that companies want to have it both ways -- when doing their taxes they want to claim options are a business expense in order to reduce their profits (and the amount of tax they pay), but, when reporting earnings to sharelholders, they want to claim that options *ARE NOT* a business expense so that they can report the highest possible profits.
Companies do not want options to be expensed for one reason and one reason only: they are afraid of shareholder revolt once they see just how much money is taken away from the bottom line by the stock options given to the CEO and other top executives (who typically get far more options that the lower level employees).
The claim that the expensing of options will force companies to stop giving options to employees is totally and absolutely false. It is a lie. When companies make this claim, what they are really saying is "we're not going to give options to employees unless we can hide the true cost from shareholders."
Infinium Labs went after tech site Sudhian yesterday. Sudhian has an editorial posted that does not paint the Phantom console in a very good light and it seems as though Infinium Labs took issue with that by asking that their trademark logos be removed. Sudhian followed Infinium's wishes, replacing the images with a bit of poetry.
Roses are Red Violets are Blue Refusing to allow anyone to publish pictures of your product Implies that it sucks.
Slashdot Mirror
Seriously. This is a great idea. Too bad it's a group that sucks and that nobody cares about.
Wake me when somebody good shows up.
The Jerk Store called, they're all out of you.
(ob Seinfeld reference)
But we could go a long way towards eliminating Spam if the right people would grow some backbone and do the right thing.
1. Cut off Spam from the Zombies.
Cable and DSL companies should block all port 25 traffic coming from their customers. If you want to send e-mail, you should have to use use their SMTP servers. Running your own mail-server is against their TOS in many cases, anyway.
In all fairness, however, this could be handled on a case by case basis. If you are such a macho techno-geek that you really really really really just absolutely HAVE TO run your own mail server, you should have to ask them for persmission first and enter into some sort of agreement that you will not be part of the Spam problem.
2. Cut off the Zombies.
Any cable/DSL customers spewing out large volumes of e-mail (without permission to run a mail server) get a nasty letter, telling them that their service has been terminated until they secure their computer.
3. Follow the money. Follow the money.
Spammers have to make money, somebody has to get paid. They aren't doing this for the fun of it. Trace the money trail back to the people who get paid for the herbal viagra and penis enlargement pills. It isn't easy, but it can be done. If you follow the money, and apply EXISTING laws, such as:
* Child Pornography Statute 18 U.S.C. 2252
* Electronic Communications Privacy Act 18 U.S.C. 2701-2711
* Economic Espionage and Protection of Trade Secrets Law Pub. L. No. 104-294
* Computer Fraud and Abuse Act 18 U.S.C. 1030
* Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act 50 U.S.C. 1801-1811
* Transportation of Obscene Matter for Sale or Distribution 18 U.S.C. 1465
* Federal Wire Fraud Act 18 U.S.C. 1343
you can shut down the Spammers.
With IE security holes and exploits being announced almost daily, it might make you wonder why people would continue to use a piece of crap like IE. I wondered the same thing until recently when I had the following conversation with a friend, who is not exactly "computer savvy".
Friend: [asks me a bunch of questions about IE and Outlook Express]
Me: "I really don't know. I never use those programs"
Friend: "Oh. [looking very surprised] I thought you *HAD* to use them."
In one debate I heard on this issue, the following example was used: Company X reported $4 Billion in profits last year. If they would have been forced to expense stock options, they would have only reported profits of $2 Billion.
OK. So what.
What *REALLY* happened in that example is that Company X really only had $2 Billion in profits, but, because of current accounting rules, they were able to *LIE* to their shareholders, and claim that they actually had profits of $4 Billion.
It should also be noted that when companies do their taxes, they are able to deduct stock options as a business expense. What's really happening here is that companies want to have it both ways -- when doing their taxes they want to claim options are a business expense in order to reduce their profits (and the amount of tax they pay), but, when reporting earnings to sharelholders, they want to claim that options *ARE NOT* a business expense so that they can report the highest possible profits.
Companies do not want options to be expensed for one reason and one reason only: they are afraid of shareholder revolt once they see just how much money is taken away from the bottom line by the stock options given to the CEO and other top executives (who typically get far more options that the lower level employees).
The claim that the expensing of options will force companies to stop giving options to employees is totally and absolutely false. It is a lie. When companies make this claim, what they are really saying is "we're not going to give options to employees unless we can hide the true cost from shareholders."
I wrote this little program
g le.ser vers > 0.001 secondsd s
if
time.spent.thinking.about.the.number.of.goo
then
you == pathetic.Loser.with.way.too.much.time.on.your.han
" When you install the Google toolbar in IE"
Google toolbar + IE == Moron
Infinium Labs went after tech site Sudhian yesterday. Sudhian has an editorial posted that does not paint the Phantom console in a very good light and it seems as though Infinium Labs took issue with that by asking that their trademark logos be removed. Sudhian followed Infinium's wishes, replacing the images with a bit of poetry.
Roses are Red
Violets are Blue
Refusing to allow anyone to publish pictures of your product
Implies that it sucks.
is This
SCO keeps promnising to sue Linux uesers but never does. Microsfot keeps promising to improve security of its products, but never does.