Lets get away from that particular comparison and instead ask,
if the letter post becomes unsafe due to bio-terrorism, what
alternative do we have?
If there is a repeat attack (the sender is still at large,
there is a high likelihood of copy-cats) we may have to work
out a strategy that allows important mail, bills etc to be
transferred by letter post.
The only personal letter post I receive these days is
postcards, birthday and Christmas cards. All the rest of
my personal communication moved to telephone and email
years ago.
Devising a mechanism that allows bills to be sent electronically
is worth doing for its own sake. People are likely to pay
more promptly and there is a much reduced hassle factor.
I would like to be able to link outlook to money or quicken
so that every time a bill arrives from an authenticated
and authorized source I get the relevant notification.
If the need arose we could set up alternative mechanisms
for the elderly and those without internet to manage thier
money via ATMs and telephone links.
I can try to get the note I wrote on this as a contingency
plan released if there is interest.
Phill
Please stop making comparisons like that in actual values.
Whatever the
amount of spam I receive its not worth one human life.
On Wed, 26 Mar 2003, Chris Lewis wrote:
Brad Templeton wrote:
I mean spam is a royal pain, but it's about 5 orders of
magnitude less pain
than anthrax and letter-bombs.
We get a lot more than 5 orders of magnitude more spam than we get
anthrax or letter bombs.
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg