Death is a problem ... so being alive is part of the problem?
... thank gawd!
Despite all attempts to the contrary, the final solution to the SPAM problem
will be a TECHNOLOGICAL solution, NOT a legislative solution.
I said it ... you read it here.
You may be right but they haven't worked so far. Just like the filters
you're using now. Something more needs to be done, whether its a combination
of law and technology or whatever - so long as it works better than what we
have. And to those that say this overrides the state laws, I have to ask,
just how effective were they in reality?
And to address you're analogy...you're not dead yet, so it's not the
Actually, it will take a combination of laws and technological advances ...
after all, you gotta give the spammers "due process" before you can publicly
I've never had much faith in filters, but this guy does wonders with them:
Couple these ideas in AI, with advances in tcp/ip technology (ipvX), and we
will eventually make it tough to continue the practice by taking the profit
out of it.
BTW, the older I get, the more staying alive _is_ a problem. ;>)
I can agree to that but its been far to many years since I've written any
"killer assembly code", so maybe aggravating the local / national
legislators will be my only contribution (other than bitching here of
Interesting site - worth a read.
I guess I don't understand everybody's fuss over spam, Bob.
I don't see any spam email...just like I don't see any spam in this
Its all in the filters.
Wishing you and yours a happy Thanksgiving season...
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:58:42 -0800, Larry Blanchard
There's a LOT of problems in the world, Larry. I can't solve them
all...nor am I concerned with them all.
And, obviously...disk space and bandwidth is not a major problem for
And...DEFINE spam! That's one of the big problems. Spam
SELLS!...that's why its still out there. Its been out there for
YEARS. Do you think it'd still be out there if it wasn't profitable?
I've purchased several things...that I was made aware of because of
Do you want to stop unsolicited snail mail, too?
Deal with the problem...on your end. Let the ISP's take care of their
Wishing you and yours a happy Thanksgiving season...
There _were_ laws on the books in about 30 states. I happen to live in a
state which had one, albeit a moderately weak one. That law will be 'invalid'
as of the first of the year. along with the one in WA that let a recipient
sue for $500 for -each- unsolicited email. And the one that was just enacted
in Calif, that let a provider sue for something like $100 for each unsolicited
message received on their server, to something like $250,000/day/sender.
I'd have had -no- objections to the Fed. legislation *IF* it had left the
state-level laws _alone_. But it didn't.
And, we're going to be "stuck" with this POS legislation for _years_. After
all, the Congresscritters _have_ "addressed" the problem. It's "solved".
It won't be "deserving" of Congressional attention "again", for _years_.
(It usually takes Congress 7-10 years to 'revisit' something. The 'fastest'
instance I know of -- excluding 'funding' legislation, that is -- where
Congress reversed itself on legislation was 4 years.)
Watch and see.
The proverbial "It depends" applies.
If the Feds can find an excuse to invoke the Commerce Clause of the
Constitution -- and they _have_ stretched it to include covering strictly
'in-state' transactions that "might affect" interstate commerce, "because
there are similar inter-state transactions" -- the primacy of Federal
law can be asserted.
Whether or not that is a 'justified' exercise of Federal jurisdiction *is*
hotly debated in some circles. In the 'real world', it doesn't matter how
that debate comes out, because the courts _have_,*repeatedly*, upheld
that rationale for Federal 'meddling'.
*ALL* states have legal codes that -can- be used. Threre are civil torts for
things like 'theft of services', and "trespass to chattel". These _have_ been
*successfully* used to sue spammers.
"Maybe it's 'better for some'. It is *definitely* _worse_ for many others.
Which was _un-necessary_. Pass the federal legislation *without* pre-empting
state laws, and you have the 'best of both worlds'.
Care to guess *why* Congress _didn't_ do that? Hint: the -main- motivation
was to disembowel the aggressive state-level laws being enacted.
The real key to ending spam is PROFIT. Put a federal tax on all
email, even stuff that originates outside the US. Exempt a reasonable
amout of messages per month, say 50 or even 1000. Make the sender pay
it. For overseas stuff block all email from countries that refuse to
pay up. SPAM is almost free to send, but it puts a large strain on
resources, so make the spammers pay.
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:31:31 +0000, email@example.com
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:
How long do you think it would take spammers to beat the limits? 30 seconds?
"Say what you will about the ten commandments, you must always come back to the
pleasant fact that there are only ten of them." H. L. Mencken
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.