🚀 go-pugleaf

> In article <35189EF8.289B9C85@hotmail.com>, Buzz  <purphaze@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hard drives do not cost very much anymore. You can buy a tower of
> >9-18Gb drives for a few grand, to an ISP with a few hundred or a few
> >thousand users, this is not a lot of money to spend. How much space, in
> >your opinion, would be absorbed by spam on an average ISP's server?
> >Just wondering.
>
> That's rather like saying that after a thief breaks into your house,
> bypassing the reasonable controls you've put in place to prevent it,
> that instead of jailing the thief for theft, you should buy more stuff
> to keep him happy and coming back for more.  Do you have any concept
> of what "property rights" mean?  Or trespass?

The words trespass and private do not always apply on the internet.Am I wrong on
this? Are you expecting these things over the internet?
Your house is made of glass when it's on line. It is a public domain.
Your home is not a public domain, If you can't stop someone from
physically stuffing things into your mailbox, how do you expect to
do that with your email?  If a thief breaks into my house, he will get
hurt or go to jail, period. That is the law.
Since you can sue a spammer as others have pointed out,
then that is the action to be taken in those cases.
When you ask if I have any concept of what property rights
are, Remember, I didn't invent spam, so why are you asking me
as if I set the rules? I didn't spam you, go ask the ones who did.
I only asked for an approximate number of Mb's absorbed by spam.

>
>
> We _don't_ want the spam coming in.  We tell the spammers exactly
> that (in the few cases where we can figure out where they are), and
> instead of complying, they come up with new and inventive ways of
> getting around our filters, stealing our resource to spam others,
> etc.  They are trespassing at the very least.

Then sue them

>
>
> Various ISPs estimate between 10 and 30% of all traffic coming into
> their systems is spam.  When you're talking a few thousand customers
> (or, say, AOL's 10 million +), you're not talking about a few pieces
> of hardware that cost a few grand.  You're talking about infrastructure,
> support, physical plant, space, wiring costs, financing costs, manpower,
> increased bandwidth, backups etc.  That costs orders of magnitude more
> than the Computer City cost for a few 9Gb disk drives.
>
> Ask AOL sometime how much it costs to provide email services to their
> customers.  The answer is up in the 10s of millions.  Then, take 30%
> of that.  Big number, right?
> --

Yes, that is a large number, much more than I imagined.
It's an outrage to know that it has reached that level without
any firm body or committee to be assigned to stop it.
Chris, if the spam has been constantly coming in for a
while now, and in huge numbers, doesn't that indicate
that someone (or many someone's) are responding positively
to it? Like someone has to be buying what their selling, or
wouldn't even the most hardened advertise give up at that point?
They risk being prohibited by ISP's, they risk being sued and
risk the wrath of many knowledgeable computer users. Why do
they continue to do this if no one is buying?
And secondly, if people are reading and buying, then this
would be considered a service not a dis-service. So
does that mean you would be cutting off a "service" for some.
Just wondering.

BTW  thank you for not resorting to repeated personal
attacks, one or two is no problem.

Buzz
Ottawa