Date: Thu, 23 Oct 1997 13:05:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Annelise Anderson <andrsn@andrsn.stanford.edu> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Niall Smart <njs3@doc.ic.ac.uk>, Andrew Atrens <atrens@nortel.ca>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: pulling email addresses from freebsd lists Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971023124810.8827B-100000@andrsn.stanford.edu> In-Reply-To: <199710210903.SAA00631@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Mike Smith wrote: > > (This topic is Not Appropriate for -hackers.) > > > I disagree, I believe that (mail) protocols which require authentication > > and tracability of the sender would cut spam dramatically, > > This is absurdly naive. > > > If, when you received spam, you > > could determine the senders email, name, and phone number the amount of > > complaints to spammers and their ISP's would rise massively. It would > > also provide the technological infrastructure that governments need to > > enforce anti-spam legislation. > > Alright! Big Brother, here we come. > > You DO NOT want what you are proposing, believe me. I think governments--or perhaps I should speak only of the one I know rather well, the United States Government--would be very pleased to have the technological infrastructure needed to enforce anti-spam legislation. Perhaps one e-mail account per person (a RAND study has already proposed this in a narrower context) or at least all e-mail accounts "legal" and identifiably so. A great benefit of such an arrangement would be the ease with which the government could determine who might be using encryption in violation of any key recovery/key escrow requirements that might exist. This would go a long way toward reducing the anxiety of governments about the Internet. With the USG in the lead, other governments will soon follow; no problem there. So the strategy is just to let that spam roll; and eventually the public will get sufficiently annoyed, upset, and frustrated with all the free offers, chain letters, porn etc. that they will demand government action. And the government will be able to say (about regulation): Hey, you asked for it! > > > If the spammers knew their identity was available, and knew they would > > get caught and prosecuted, then they wouldn't do it. > > They would move offshore. So what? You've sacrificed your ability to > participate in legitimate anonymous communications, and done nothing > about the spam issue. > > mike > > Right on! Annelise
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971023124810.8827B-100000>