Re: Hashcash for IM2000

zcat writes:
 > 
 > Hashcash is a broken concept, as is any other solution that imposes a
 > 'cost' on all mail.
 > 
 > As I see it, there's two answers that might work, and one is a lot easier
 > than the other;
 > 
 > 
 > 1) Change mail so that the message sits on the spammer's machine until the
 > recipient requests it. This forces spammers to be more identifiable,
 > and transfers the 'cost' of mail back to the sender rather that imposing
 > an artificial cost. But it requires an overhaul of the entire mail system,
 > which is quite simply NOT going to happen. Ever. Forget it.

Then why are you on this mailing list?  If IM2000 isn't going to ever
be implemented by anybody, why are you wasting your time here?

 > 2) Change Terms Of Service, one ISP at a time, so that spammers incur a
 > cost for spam. "If you're caught using this ISP for spam then you will be
 > terminated, you will be billed an appropriate cleanup fee, and full
 > details of the 'incident' will be made available to other ISP's." - Most
 > users have no intention of spamming, so this doesn't affect them.

Instead, the ISP signs a "pink contract" (a little spammy), where the
customer pays an appropriate cleanup fee FOREVER, and the ISP deals
with the higher complaint load.

-- 
--My blog is at angry-economist.russnelson.com  | Free markets express in the
Crynwr sells support for free software  | PGPok | practical world our belief
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | that there is that of God
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  | +1 315 268 9201 FAX   | in all people. -Chris V.