On December 30, 2004 at 17:53 asrg(_at_)johnlevine(_dot_)com (John Levine)
wrote:
But counting the port 25 packets is only related in the most vague
sense to actual e-mail costs. I don't know anyone (other than vendors
who want to be the gatekeeper) who thinks there's any merit in
charging for mail that isn't spam, and I don't know very many who
think there's any merit in charging for e-mail in general other than
as an indirect way to stop spam.
I do. I think spam, as we usually use the term (shady crap) is just
the harbinger of an ever-growing wave of email which will be from
people/orgs who will resist any spam label.
This would include charities, political campaigns, the govt, religious
and other nuts of the more popular variety, not to mention
multi-billion dollar corps who can claim some sort of "legitimate
business" relationship with you because you once had a credit card w/
them or a bank they acquired or bought something at one of their
stores, etc etc etc.
I think it's pure pollyanna-ism to believe that all we have to do is
discourage those evil people and everyone else will behave reasonably.
In fact, I'll say that if we ever did manage to stop The Evil Ones
(tm) then all those others will rush in to fill the void, in a new
york minute. We'd have opened the door for them by unburdening the
average user's mailbox with most crap (except theirs.)
To anticipate the obvious question, why hasn't this happened yet?:
Well, I think to some extent it has happened, or is happening.
But two factors are:
a) As unbelievable as it is, I have good reason to believe that most
of those sorts haven't "gotten" the e-mail thing yet, not by a long
shot. In particular mass e-mailing.
b) I think some threshold has to be breached for their marketeers to
say "ok, spam isn't just for breakfast any more, let's go for it!"
That is, something will breach its very negative connotation.
Probably someone like Wal-Mart just saying ``oh the hell with it I'm
sure our 200+M customers would LOVE To hear from us a few times a day
just go for it''. And if someone like that starts, and another, and a
few more, well, it won't be pretty.
And don't kid yourself, when they decide the day has come they'll have
some strategy to make sure they're not treated like spammers like
lawsuits against anti-spam companies or isp's who filter them etc.
If you're going to count the port 25 packets, it seems to me that a
much cheaper and equally effective approach would be to forget about
money and let networks set hourly or daily ingress quotas for their
peers. If someone on network A sends a huge blast of spam to network
B, they'll hit their daily limit at 12:05 AM, and no more mail over
that path until tomorrow. Then network A has to deal with the
complaints from its own users that their mail is falling on the floor.
Ya ever hear the story about King Cnut? He marched to the shore, held
out his hand, and commanded the tide not to come in.
No economics, no go.
The economics right now go the other way, let 'em do what they want so
long as they send in their $20 and let the PR dept sort out any
damage.
That's what has to be changed.
Of course, if one takes a purely populist view, sure, everything
would be free...how hard is that to sell?
Chorus:
Oh the buzzin' of the bees
In the cigarette trees
Near the soda water fountain
At the lemonade springs
Where the bluebird sings
On the big rock candy mountain
There's a lake of gin
We can both jump in
And the handouts grow on bushes
In the new-mown hay
We can sleep all day
And the bars all have free lunches
Where the mail train stops
And there ain't no cops
And the folks are tender-hearted
Where you never change your socks
And you never throw rocks
And your hair is never parted...
etc.
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs(_at_)TheWorld(_dot_)com |
http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: 617-739-0202 | Login: 617-739-WRLD
The World | Public Access Internet | Since 1989 *oo*
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg