On Tue, 18 Mar 2003, Sam Phillips wrote:
> I have a sneaking suspicion that IPv6 is more of a reality then the
> Internet adapting a djb written standard.
Well, IM2000 itself will never get written. But the core idea, which is
that storing mail is the *sender's* responsibility, might go a long way
towards removing the financial incentive for spam. Even if not, reducing
spam to a few hundred bytes of header (the actual message would be on the
spammer's system) would reduce bandwidth costs and reduce spam-fighting
CPU cycles.
The stuff the IETF is currently kicking around throws the baby out with
the bath water is a different way: totally removing any possibility of
anonymity on the net. While I don't think legitimate commercial
enterprises require or deserve privacy, I think individuals do, and I'd
hate to see individuals lose their privacy because we (as a society) have
decided that sales and marketing trump personal privacy.
I agree that blacklists are a mixed blessing at best, although I do use
them here. I also use whitelist and trusted sender systems. But the only
thing that will really stop spam is removing the financial incentive.
Personally, I don't see the problem with that. Laws were passed to prevent
junk faxes, and to prevent telemarketing to cell phones. Why should email
be especially unpriveleged in this regard?
--
Guvf gntyvar jnf rapbqrq jvgu gur ebg13.fu fpevcg, ninvynoyr ng
uggc://jjj.pbqrtabzr.bet/fpevcgvat/fubjfpevcg.cuc?fpevcg=ebg13.fu be
sebz n furyy-fpevcgvat nepuvir arne lbh!
- ROT-13 Encoded Message
_______________________________________________
RLUG mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
