Re: IM2000 Won't Be Worth It
[email protected] Mon, 8 Mar 2004 15:38:24 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.im2000 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Mon, Mar 08, 2004 at 06:32:27PM +0000, Jon Ribbens wrote: > Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Why do I care if either of those things have been done? > > > > Because you, as recipient, directly or indirectly, pay the costs of doing so > > in an SMTP world. > > Supposing I pay £25 ($45) a month for my Internet access, would you > care to hazard a guess how much of that goes to pay for spam-related > bandwidth and storage? > > Personally, I reckon it'd be about 1% or less. We are not just talking about spam related storage. If presently your ISP uses 100G storage, it will need 50G for IM2000 since it does not have to store incoming messages. Mate -- --- Mate Wierdl | Dept. of Math. Sciences | University of Memphis Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html