From: Barry Shein <bzs(_at_)world(_dot_)std(_dot_)com>
...
> > What if such an account as you describe, honestly, would cost $100/mo
> > or more, w/o connectivity fees?
>
> The email will end. Fortunately, we both know that such a number is
> silly nonsense.
Let's see. I've been president & CEO of an ISP since 1989.
Are you sure you want to dismiss my comments about the costs of the
email business as nonsense off-hand?
Yes, because I've been using email for 35 years since 1968. I've
been continuously running sendmail servers that deal with my own
mail since 1986, and have run SMTP servers for years that handled
200K msgs/day for 10K users. I know that it does not take
$100/user/month to provide email with or without spam filtering.
I suspect others know as much.
...
Maybe you don't understand to what exent email is being subsidized by
other revenue streams and how that subsidy is becoming unbearable
mostly due to the personnel strain being created by spam.
I'd be very happy to hear an accounting of those costs, but not
insulting hyperbole of $100/month/user.
...
Well, it's a little more complicated than that but you'd have to pay
me the big bucks to explain it fully.
But unless you work the spreadsheets for a living don't be too sure
that you can extrapolate from what it takes to set-up sendmail and pop
on a linux pc for a few people to what it takes to run a professional
organization with service and customer support staff etc for many
thousands of people. Remember Brooks' constant carping about the N!
nature of organizational endeavors.
So you're saying that ISP services costs AOL and Earthlink
$100/month/user for SMTP plus whatever petty change is needed for
HTTP and they're making up the difference between $100/month and
$10-30/month in volume? .
You're also saying that providing mail for the current ~500,000,000
users is costing the world economy $600B/year?
sheesh...No one disputes that spam is expsensive, but statements like
$100/month/user are noise that hides your message.
> Because it is impractical to charge the mailers that cause problems.
Why? Because you can't think of a way to do it off the top of your
head?
Because it has insurmountable transition and operational problems.
But you can't think of a way to stop spam by any other means off the
top of your head either. Neither can anyone else, apparently.
Which is the justification for a research group. To try to tackle
problems which don't have obvious answers.
Research includes being open to not finding a nice answer.
I wouldn't necessarily start with a sender-pays business plan as a
problem to solve here, maybe later, but I've seen some which are quite
plausible and nothing like what usually gets suggested by people who
aren't in the business of creating new business models.
But I bring it up because I think it's a reality we're going to have
to face, like it or not.
If you'd stop the hyperbole, you might find that I agree a version of
sender pays will occur. I predict (not because I like the idea) that
governments will impose a $0.001 to $0.10/target tax or fee on commercial
bulk email. They'll make the failure to pay that fee a major criminal
offense like failing to pay other taxes. They'll follow the money and
jail both the spam service bureaus and their customers, but mostly the
customers because they're easier to find. Much of the proceeds will go
where government fees always go, but some will to ISPs in the name of
closing the digital divide, providing universal service, improving
education, and stopping child pornography, terrorism, and drugs. Non-bulk
mail and non-commercial bulk mail, including stuff such as the FTC mailings
and messages from politicians will not be taxed.
The Direct Marketing Association will be pleased because the cost of
spam will high enough that reasonable percentage margins will let
Topica, Roving Software, et al survive, and because the viagra work
at home dirty picture spammers will be out of business. ISPs will be
glad to get a cut of the fees. Bill Gates will be especially pleased.
Users will not be pleased because they'll still be getting 10-20
spam/day, albeit of higher quality.
There will be endless court cases over whether particular spews are
commercial. Many completely legitimate bulk mail senders will shut
down rather than risk running afoul of the tax man. Some will switch
to NNTP or HTTP to deliver their current content.
Vernon Schryver vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg