Re: Inexpensive anti-spamware/anti-verminware tactic
Charles Cazabon <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.im2000 |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jon Ribbens <[email protected]> wrote: [...] > Secondly, "cost to recipient". UBE is only a *problem* because the > cost to recipient is high. If the cost to recipient was low (i.e. your > computer could somehow correctly detect and filter out UBE) then it > wouldn't matter if people sent UBE or not, because it would not bother > the recipients. I think storage space is a complete red herring here. > Disk space is very cheap. In the abstract ("Wow, a 120GB drive is only $100"), it is. In the specifics of operating a high-volume server, it is definitely not. Ask your local ISP with fifty thousand users how much it costs to operate their email infrastructure (all SMTP and POP/IMAP servers) including associated hardware maintenance contracts, on-call time, administration expenses, telephone support, etc. You will be shocked, positively shocked, at how expensive it works out for them to offer you a measly 5MB or 10MB inbox. IM2000's cost structure is an enormous benefit to everyone involved -- but it appears that only mail system administrators can appreciate that fact on the face of it. Current users don't see the intrinsic costs of operating an SMTP mail infrastrucue becase all of the costs are just lumped in with their ISP or hosting fees. Charles -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Charles Cazabon <[email protected]> GPL'ed software available at: http://www.qcc.ca/~charlesc/software/ -----------------------------------------------------------------------