TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
 ·Verizon Online DSL
edit:
March 17th, @12:52PM
| FUSSP
While I believe that jailing spammers (Thieves and vandals) is a good thing, it certainly is not a solution.
A fairly airtight solution would be simple, and "Capitalistic". What if, at the end of the month, you were able to add up all the bytes of spam in your spam folder, and then get a rebate from your ISP for every byte of spam you receive? Let's say a $.01/KB rebate on your monthly access charge? OR! spam from ISP to ISP MTA gateway traffic is billed as a nuisance fee to the sending MTA. OR a combination of the two.
Dangle another revenue source to ISPs and they will probably jump at it. If spam costs providers money, the problem would cease. Spammers would lose access, get prosecuted, get blocked.... all at the ISP level.
Until some sort of real re-chargeable cost is associated with spam, it will never stop; you have to assign and collect a monetary cost to the problem.
In the OP article's example of 20,000 spams for 15 days, we have 300,000 spam mails. Let's say an average of 1KB/Spam we have 3,000,000 bytes, at $.01/byte we have a gain/loss of revenue possibility of $3000.00. And that's just one run from one spammer. The potential to make spam too expensive is great.
There must be a creative way to simply make spamming too expensive to be profitable. One very simple way is to charge for email. If everyone were allowed 10,000 emails/Month free, then $.01/email spammers could not function., and legitimate email users would not feel a thing.
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. |
|
Kylemaul
Lovin' My Firefox 1.5.x
Premium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL
clubs: | Great logic until you consider bot-nets.  |
|
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by Kylemaul  : ... consider bot-nets. Actually, they would disappear! My email box gets a spam, Verizon pays me, Verizon then bills Cox (the sender) for the nuisance fee. Cox, shuts down their portion of the botnet..... In time, as the costs rise, ISPs will find a way to eliminate botnets.
If somehow one can assign a real cost to spam, it can simply be made unprofitable.
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. |
|
Kylemaul
Lovin' My Firefox 1.5.x
Premium
join:2001-03-30
North Port, FL
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
edit:
March 17th, @04:08PM
| I'm not so sure the billing between ISPs would fly. It would be too easy to plant (fake) customers and generate revenue straight from your competition. And I think it will be a very long time before botnets get eliminated: (isn't it just astounding that anti-virus software is still necessary?!) 
Another thought to consider: charging for e-mail is surely likely to drive more folks to the forums... |
|
Twisted_D
@iowatelecom.net | reply to Kylemaul
Yeah, great logic until you also start multiplying by 20 million (as stated in original article) instead of the 20,000 spams for 15 days. Bit of a difference 20,000 or 20,000,000. |
|
nopliiz
@rim.net |  reply to TamaraB
This "over 10,000 emails you pay" schema could actually work, and it's a very elegant solution to this problem.
I HATE SPAMMERS, I hope he gets all 26 years and then some more. |
|
kpatz
MY HEAD A SPLODE
Premium
join:2003-06-13
Manchester, NH
| said by nopliiz :
I HATE SPAMMERS, I hope he gets all 26 years and then some more. Yes, maybe he'll get to share a cell with ol'Buddy here who bought and used all the Viagra and enlargement products from the spamvertised companies... 
--
Windows Vista has detected that your mouse was moved. In order to enhance your user experience, Vista needs to contact Microsoft to re-activate the software. Please make sure you are connected to the Internet, have your credit card handy, then click OK. |
|
