The levy is placed on all recordable media, not just music CD-R's. The difference between a data and a music CD-R is that a music CD-R has timecode embedded into it; it is intended for music production, not duplication. The extra cost for music CD-R's has more to do with market factors, like actual demand, than anything else. Music CD-R's aren't going anywhere as long as set-top recorders exist.
The amount of people paying for their bandwidth on a per-kB basis is negligible, and comparable to the amount of people who pay for PO Boxes. Both are receiving something they do not want, and at a cost to themselves. I nevertheless do not excuse liability from the spammer who sends to those individuals.
The 'Do Not Call' services available are almost universally worthless, and with phreak-spamming and SMS-spamming gaining popularity, they become even worse than not signing up. A 'Do Not Email' list is inherently worthless, as any spammer worth his salt has a network of individuals who will certainly gain access to the entire list somehow.
As I said earlier, the only way spam will stop being a viable business model is when there is no actual business generated.
So someone used bandwidth he was paying for, without using a botnet, to send emails for companies that sponsored him. While I understand the logic in complaining about a nuisance, I am unable to relate to thos individuals who wish the assign some sort of punitive action to this spammer.
Is it really that hard to just hit delete? Is it a reasonable assumption that spam will be less profitable (and, sooner or later, unprofitable), if people stop opening spam email and purchasing the products advertised?
These individuals are obviously providing a service that many people utilize, and, botnet-mailed-spam notwithstanding, no actual harm is being perpetrated. The mere fact that some people are annoyed is not enough to warrant legislation or legal action.
actually, the only reason to not believe that we are alone is to put your confidence in an evolutionary worldview, a thoroughly discredited and unreliable concept with no facts to support it. the real arrogance lies with those who want to believe, contrary to all evidence, that the universe is billions of years old, and that we are not alone in the cosmos.
keep in mind, also, that non-terran life is only probable if it is at least possible, which is, at the least, highly unlikely, and at the best, perpetually uncertain.
Slashdot Mirror
The levy is placed on all recordable media, not just music CD-R's. The difference between a data and a music CD-R is that a music CD-R has timecode embedded into it; it is intended for music production, not duplication. The extra cost for music CD-R's has more to do with market factors, like actual demand, than anything else. Music CD-R's aren't going anywhere as long as set-top recorders exist.
The amount of people paying for their bandwidth on a per-kB basis is negligible, and comparable to the amount of people who pay for PO Boxes. Both are receiving something they do not want, and at a cost to themselves. I nevertheless do not excuse liability from the spammer who sends to those individuals.
The 'Do Not Call' services available are almost universally worthless, and with phreak-spamming and SMS-spamming gaining popularity, they become even worse than not signing up. A 'Do Not Email' list is inherently worthless, as any spammer worth his salt has a network of individuals who will certainly gain access to the entire list somehow.
As I said earlier, the only way spam will stop being a viable business model is when there is no actual business generated.
So someone used bandwidth he was paying for, without using a botnet, to send emails for companies that sponsored him. While I understand the logic in complaining about a nuisance, I am unable to relate to thos individuals who wish the assign some sort of punitive action to this spammer.
Is it really that hard to just hit delete? Is it a reasonable assumption that spam will be less profitable (and, sooner or later, unprofitable), if people stop opening spam email and purchasing the products advertised?
These individuals are obviously providing a service that many people utilize, and, botnet-mailed-spam notwithstanding, no actual harm is being perpetrated. The mere fact that some people are annoyed is not enough to warrant legislation or legal action.
everyone knows chicks can't use computers
lol internet
actually, the only reason to not believe that we are alone is to put your confidence in an evolutionary worldview, a thoroughly discredited and unreliable concept with no facts to support it. the real arrogance lies with those who want to believe, contrary to all evidence, that the universe is billions of years old, and that we are not alone in the cosmos. keep in mind, also, that non-terran life is only probable if it is at least possible, which is, at the least, highly unlikely, and at the best, perpetually uncertain.