Re: [Asrg] Spam, defined, and permissions

On Dec 27 2004, Barry Shein wrote:
> Well, if one wants to resist the idea one merely builds scenarios out
> anything left unsaid which lead to the conclusion that the idea is
> untenable.
Generally IMHO, if what is unsaid is large enough to drive a truck
through it's worth narrowing down the unsaid parts. 

What bothers me here with your approach is that you're not attacking
the spam problem, you're attacking the user apathy problem and
*hoping* that this will somehow solve the spam problem. But there's no
guidance as to what users will or should do if they wake up from their 
apathy. 

> I suspect if someone got a nuisance overcharge, say a dollar or two,
> for mail being sent by a virus on their machine they'd become
> interested in fixing it both because that's attracted their attention
> and who wants to think their computer is under the control of a virus?
I agree with the sentiment, but am not (yet) convinced the underlying
economics support the conclusion you reach. Here's roughly what I think:

1) The majority of users consider fixing their computers on par with
fixing their cars. Necessary, but expensive and too complex to bother
with. The path of least resistance is allowing decay followed by buying a
brand new replacement.

2) A new computer costs a typical user now on the order of $1000, an
ISP charges on the order of $20 per month. Clearly, the computer is
much more valuable than the ISP service.

3) Fixing a computer by either buying a new one, hiring somebody or
getting one of those magical system cleaning programs costs on the
order of $50 minimum, and is a hassle.

4) The ISP charges $3 as a penalty, per month? 

5) YMMV, but if I was such a user, I'd either laugh off the penalty or
I'd be pissed off at the ISP for finding a gratuitous way to
overcharge me. Gratuitous because my zombified PC runs fine, so I
don't see what needs fixing urgently right this minute. If there are
other available ISPs, I'd switch to another $20/month provider.

> Also, as to switching to another ISP, if they don't fix the infection
> it's not clear this wouldn't just repeat the problem. I assume these
> viruses periodically send their current IP address to the mother ships
> even if just to adapt to DHCP contracts.
If the user switches ISPs, he fixes *his* problem, at least
temporarily. The fact that it only shifts the problem around for the
ISP community is not *his* problem.


-- 
Laird Breyer.

_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg