Oh man, the only thing worse than SPAM is government involvement. Larry Price ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote*: > >http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/09/magazine/09SPAM.html > >He examines the problem and some of the history, he talks about >SpamAssassin, but at the very end of the article he comes around to the >fact that legislative change will have to be a part of any effective >solution. > >UCE is a big problem and won't be solved all at once, some of the pieces >are going to be technical and some legislative, but the equilibrium is >definitely leaning too far towards the spammers at this point in time. > >I think we will begin seeing some form of server authentication and >systemwide prefiltering agreements between major (nationwide and regional) >ISPs before this year is out, and possibly legal enforcement action from >the FBI. Expect places that are havens of spam to drop off the network >through firewalling and refusal of transport. Expect at least one >prominent mention of Spam being used to sell some form of multilateral >trade agreement that creates an international treaty agency to "clean up >the internet". > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug >
_______________________________________________ Eug-LUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.efn.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/eug-lug
