1996-05-22 - Re: The Crisis with Remailers

Header Data

From: “Vladimir Z. Nuri” <vznuri@netcom.com>
To: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
Message Hash: cbd690455e018ffc8c9268d1d94bc577e8ea0934e51f91e89a0e50efe340dd18
Message ID: <199605211948.MAA11490@netcom19.netcom.com>
Reply To: <m2g28uhgh3.fsf@deanna.miranova.com>
UTC Datetime: 1996-05-22 05:38:06 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 13:38:06 +0800

Raw message

From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 13:38:06 +0800
To: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
Subject: Re: The Crisis with Remailers
In-Reply-To: <m2g28uhgh3.fsf@deanna.miranova.com>
Message-ID: <199605211948.MAA11490@netcom19.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

>It isn't spam if they're paying for the traffic.  Commercial
>advertisement through electronic mail is only evil because it is
>forced on someone against their wishes and on their dime.  The current
>situation is much like a telemarketer calling long distance collect
>with billing done automatically, and you can't hang up until they're
>done with their spiel.
>If it were standard practice for email recipients to charge the sender
>an ecash fee (waived if they thought the mail worth their time), it
>would make things much more interesting.

a very interesting proposal (I believe Bill Gates may have even
suggested this in his book), but keep in mind you seem to be mixing
different ideas here.

there is a cost involved in delivering a message associated with
pure communications costs. then there may be a cost imposed on someone
to obtain the attention. the latter is arbitrary. the former is
pretty well established based on internet infrastructure.

what you might keep in mind is the following: in a public forum,
where "spam" was originally invented, who decides how much it
costs to post? now lets say we could quantify the communications
costs. ok fine, this comes out to $.05/msg (a large example number).
that is still economically viable for someone to "spam". to
a mail marketer this would be a really great deal. hence a system
that only charges communications fees is unlikely to prevent
spam, imho. furthermore, in a public forum, you aren't very
easily going to be able to implement "arbitrary" charges like
I wrote about.

so charging for email to one's mailbox is one possible way to
deal with spam, but it's hard to see how one could apply this
to public forums. and in many ways, the spam problem is most
difficult to solve there.

but I like the thinking on methods of trying to solve the spam
problem. I do believe it is solvable. it's just that its such
an insanely difficult problem to solve. it's a good example
of a problem that gets worse when the span of the software
grows larger.