>Good for you. However, modem users would still be paying for the extra >connection time. Mailserver operators and Internet providers would still >be paying for the bandwidth, temp storage that spam generates, even if >everyone owned a copy of spamsieve. Guess who's paying for all of that in >the end? >What about mobile mail? Is there a spamsieve or similar for your phone or >Palm?
I know there are costs like this, but if everybody was getting as little spam as I am, even if the spammers were still churning it out, they will eventually stop because it will become an ineffective means of advertising. Spam is very cheap to send, yes, but not free. My main point, however, is that costs aside, spam is far from making the Internet and/or e-mail "unusable" as some media critics are fond of suggesting. If more and more ISPs start using filters like this on their servers, preventing people (modem users) from having to download it in the first-place, it will help even more. I just have to cringe when I check my Hotmail account; perhaps the world's highest concentration of spam. The mighty Microsoft claims to have some kind of spam filter there, and yes, a lot of it goes straight to the junk folder, but I still routinely get mail there which has undisguised words for human genitals boldly included in the mail subject. Great filter, Mr. Gates. Why don't you hire Mike Tsai. --- Scott T. Hards President HobbyLink Japan (www.hlj.com)
