Options

Buying stamps for email?

Unknown
edited March 2004 in Science & Tech
What would you prefer - no spam or free email?

[blockquote]If the U.S. Postal Service delivered mail for free, our mailboxes would surely runneth over with more credit-card offers, sweepstakes entries, and supermarket fliers. That's why we get so much junk e-mail: It's essentially free to send. So Microsoft Corp. chairman Bill Gates, among others, is now suggesting that we start buying "stamps" for e-mail.
[/blockquote]
[link=http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/internet/03/05/spam.charge.ap/index.html]The full report[/link] - Submitted by csimon

Comments

  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited March 2004
    I will deal with more spam before I send Bill more money, something he doesnt need at all.
  • gtghmgtghm New
    edited March 2004
    For those of us that use pop3 accounts that are included with the cost of our IP, I feel like that we are paying for email already, so to charge us a stamp fee above the cost of the pop account would be double charging us. Truly I tihnk that the IP's should help to offset the spam that is delivered to email addresses.
    I'm sure that there is a way that it could be done.

    "g"
  • ThraxThrax 🐌 Austin, TX Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    Lame.
  • BlackHawkBlackHawk Bible music connoisseur There's no place like 127.0.0.1 Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    :rant:
  • LincLinc Owner Detroit Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    How could you possibly enforce that? Even if the US makes a law, wouldn't it just drive e-mail accounts to servers abroad?
  • qparadoxqparadox Vancouver, BC
    edited March 2004
    While I like to bash MS as much as anyone did you even read the article? The payment they're proposing is not monetary but instead in computing time (send an email and have to fold for 10 seconds type deal). Its sorta interesting although it would suck for people like me who legitimately send out mass emails to various mailing lists and its got tons of problems.

    The solution to spam is not in new schemes like this, but merely requiring proper authentication of senders. Once sender authentication methods are implemented spammers won't be able to hide behind spoofed addresses and open-relays. The e-mail system needs to be rebuilt, but simply adding a "cost" to the current system isn't going to cut it.
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited March 2004
    So its like sending PMs here? We have to wait so many seconds before we can send another PM.
  • primesuspectprimesuspect Beepin n' Boopin Detroit, MI Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    exactly.. Anybody who reads what Bill actually proposed before saying "Bill gates doesn't need teh more moolah omgz!" will see that he did not mention currency or actual payment. The stupid media blew this whole thing out of proportion (surprise surprise).. he said one of the ways that we might deal with spam is to essentially introduce a 5-10 second delay for each mail sent out. That is actually a pretty elegant solution to the spam thing. For legitimate mass mailers such as qparadox and myself (if I have to mail all my customers or whatever) it can be a slight concern, but I would gladly have my computer take two hours to send out the emails if it means no more pen1s en1argement spams.
  • mmonninmmonnin Centreville, VA
    edited March 2004
    Just means they will have several computers to send all the spam out too ppl. If it does go into effect I hope it does something and not just piss people off.

    So if I forward something to several people, say 5, it would send one, wait 10 seconds and send another one after another. Or would I have to send each individually only wait 10 seconds in between. Like is there a queue and every 10 seconds another is sent. That would be my guess.
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited March 2004
    primesuspect wrote:
    exactly.. Anybody who reads what Bill actually proposed before saying "Bill gates doesn't need teh more moolah omgz!" will see that he did not mention currency or actual payment. The stupid media blew this whole thing out of proportion (surprise surprise).. he said one of the ways that we might deal with spam is to essentially introduce a 5-10 second delay for each mail sent out. That is actually a pretty elegant solution to the spam thing. For legitimate mass mailers such as qparadox and myself (if I have to mail all my customers or whatever) it can be a slight concern, but I would gladly have my computer take two hours to send out the emails if it means no more pen1s en1argement spams.

    Me also, though I Blind Carbon Copy things to legit customers who want certain info regularly. One send, multiple recipients (I am talking about 4-5 or less people). Don't send them what they do not want, no yells.

    John D.
  • robbyrobby Olympia, WA New
    edited March 2004
    Allthough Bill didn't mention currency, it is mentioned that other companies have started planning ways to profit off of this. Honestly don't think either will ever happen, though.
  • -Ben-Ben
    edited March 2004
    I think this is quite a nifty idea :)

    They should have some sort of trusted mailer type of deal. Where by the recipent checks if it's spam or not and the next time they get sent an email from that source the sending machine does not incur a penalty.

    But this would have to be buried in the hardware or something because how would they get the other PC to do the calculation? And what about old PC's?
Sign In or Register to comment.