kevin lyda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > since spammers seem to mainly be reacting to these people for some > inexplicable reason (let's try to get mail to people that really, > really, really don't want it!)
This could partly be because so many have latched on to Bayesian filters lately, but it's also because this is more worth spammer's time to break. If they somehow found a way to sneak spam past Bayesian filters, they could do so without any detriment to their operations. They wouldn't incur any additional cost, and they wouldn't have to reveal their true origin. The same can't be said about TMDA. > i kind of enjoy watching the escalating war. Some people enjoy fighting the battles instead of just winning the war. Many people receive personal satisfaction at seeing a spam attempt defeated (as if the spammer even knows or cares). > on a more positive note think how far the escalation could advance > natural language parsing and ai. *chuckle* > the second one confuses me. tmda essentially *does* add > authentication. how do people think authentication will work if not > authentication between individuals? Perhaps between servers using a certificate system based on a certificate authority? I'm not sure, but I think this would still have the potential for abuse (though not nearly as much as now). The only true "cure" for SPAM IMO is to make it not worth their while economically. For example, the reason I'm not receiving junk faxes or telemarketing to my cellphone from Thailand to circumvent U.S. laws, is not because they haven't thought of this. It's because it's prohibitively expensive to make long distance calls for something that has such a small chance of payoff. I think somehow this idea must be encapsulated at the SMTP level since it's not likely that e-mail will ever vary in cost based on locality. _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
