In <F336xFRFtReq5Gibomh0000a345(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com> "John Fenley"
<pontifier(_at_)hotmail(_dot_)com> writes:
From: Brad Templeton <brad(_at_)templetons(_dot_)com>
My view is that arms races aren't as bad as you depect. More to the point,
if what we do to stop spam will have some "collateral damage" then in fact
we want to be in the arms race, because we want to use the minimum change
to cause the minimum collateral damage, until such time as that minimum is
no longer working, and then move to the next phase.
I'm sorry. what?
are you arguing that we might as well "be in the arms race" rather
than skip ten years ahead to what must be the final solution?
I dunno about Brad, but my answer is "yes. Definitely yes."
First, predicting things is hard, especially when it involves the
future. Unless you have some sort of absolute proof that we will end
up where you say we will, there is no reason to cause more damage than
we need to now.
Second, the general public probably will not understand or accept
challenge-response systems at this time. Several years ago, SpamCop
used a c-r system for their email system, but gave up because too many
people wouldn't accept it. The rising popularity of things like TMDA
seem to indicate that public opinion and understanding is changing,
but I still have my doubts that C-R systems will be widely accepted.
-wayne
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg