ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: spam

2003-05-28 07:17:57
    > From: Dean Anderson <dean(_at_)av8(_dot_)com>

    > If the corporation (like hotmail) brings in less than $1 per month from
    > each user, pays all .. from this revenue, then quite clearly, there are
    > no hidden costs, as you assert.
    > Clearly, spam can not cost more than they bring in, in revenue, else
    > they would go out of business.
    > There are sites that offer email services (unsubsidized), for $1 - $2
    > per month. They also have no hidden costs, and no subsidies.

You appear to be deliberately obtuse.

The costs of spam, to the users, include not just the cost of the emailbox,
but also the costs to process the mail. This includes, principally, their time
- a component on which others (including you) are not capable of placing a
value.

If the only cost associated with spam was the cost of storing/forwarding the
email, I'll wager most people wouldn't care.


Anyway, this whole discussion is moot. I'm sure there is rough consensus in
the IETF that getting rid of spam is a good idea. (Maybe a question worthy of
a plenary hum to confirm this.)

The only question left is if there are any *technical* components to doing so
(which would be the IETF's preserve), and, if so, what they are.

        Noel





<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>