Results 1 to 28 of 28
  1. #1

    Paying for E-Mails [Good Idea?]

    Hello,
    I just read this on Yahoo! on thought it was interesting.
    NEW YORK - 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 (news - web sites), among others, is now suggesting that we start buying "stamps" for e-mail.


    Many Internet analysts worry, though, that turning e-mail into an economic commodity would undermine its value in democratizing communication.


    But let's start with the math: At perhaps a penny or less per item, e-mail postage wouldn't significantly dent the pocketbooks of people who send only a few messages a day. Not so for spammers who mail millions at a time.


    Though postage proposals have been in limited discussion for years a team at Microsoft Research has been at it since 2001 Gates gave the idea a lift in January at the World Economic Forum (news - web sites) in Davos, Switzerland.


    Details came last week as part of Microsoft's anti-spam strategy. Instead of paying a penny, the sender would "buy" postage by devoting maybe 10 seconds of computing time to solving a math puzzle. The exercise would merely serve as proof of the sender's good faith.


    Time is money, and spammers would presumably have to buy many more machines to solve enough puzzles.


    The open-source software Hashcash, available since about 1997, takes a similar approach and has been incorporated into other spam-fighting tools including Camram and Spam Assassin.


    Meanwhile, Goodmail Systems Inc. has been in touch with Yahoo! Inc (NasdaqNM:YHOO - news). and other e-mail providers about using cash. Goodmail envisions charging bulk mailers a penny a message to bypass spam filters and avoid being incorrectly tossed as junk.


    That all sounds good for curbing spam, but what if it kills the e-mail you want as well?


    Consider how simple and inexpensive it is today to e-mail a friend, relative or even a city-hall bureaucrat. It's nice not to have to calculate whether greeting grandma is worth a cent.


    And what of the communities now tied together through e-mail hundreds of cancer survivors sharing tips on coping; dozens of parents coordinating soccer schedules? Those pennies add up.


    "It detracts from your ability to speak and to state your opinions to large groups of people," said David Farber, a veteran technologist who runs a mailing list with more than 20,000 subscribers. "It changes the whole complexion of the Net."


    Goodmail chief executive Richard Gingras said individuals might get to send a limited number for free, while mailing lists and nonprofit organizations might get price breaks.


    But at what threshold would e-mail cease to be free? At what point might a mailing list be big or commercial enough to pay full rates? Goodmail has no price list yet, so Gingras couldn't say.


    Vint Cerf, one of the Internet's founding fathers, said spammers are bound to exploit any free allotments.


    "The spammers will probably just keep changing their mailbox names," Cerf said. "I continue to be impressed by the agility of spammers."


    And who gets the payments? How do you build and pay for a system to track all this? How do you keep such a system from becoming a target for hacking and scams?





    The proposals are also largely U.S.-centric, and even with seamless currency conversion, paying even a token amount would be burdensome for the developing world, said John Patrick, former vice president of Internet technology at IBM Corp.

    "We have to think of not only, let's say, the relatively well-off half billion people using e-mail today, but the 5 or 6 billion who aren't using it yet but who soon will be," Patrick said.

    Some proposals even allow recipients to set their own rates. A college student might accept e-mail with a one-cent stamp; a busy chief executive might demand a dollar.

    "In the regular marketplace, when you have something so fast and efficient that everyone wants it, the price goes up," said Sonia Arrison of the Pacific Research Institute, a think tank that favors market-based approaches.

    To think the Internet can shatter class distinctions that exist offline is "living in Fantasyland," Arrison said.

    Nonetheless, it'll be tough to persuade people to pay in cash or computing time that delays mail for something they are used to getting for free.

    Critics of postage see more promise in other approaches, including technology to better verify e-mail senders and lawsuits to drive the big spammers out of business.

    "Back in the early '90s, there were e-mail systems that charged you 10 cents a message," said John Levine, an anti-spam advocate. "And they are all dead."
    Article Link

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Let's see.....
    Posts
    4,446
    It wouldn't fly. There's another thread on here about paying for email...

    Link: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showth...hreadid=232921
    73's, Kim
    Everything happens for a reason I make up.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,033
    Well I would not like that at all. I send about 100 emails a day some times 200 (all to friends and family members). This is nothing compared to a small company that probabley sends out 1000 emails a day if not MORE. The people would just over rule anyone that trys to make the people charge.

    Also say it acually went in people would start creating free email and they would get around the issue.

  4. #4
    Yah, I would most likely just start using some type of "Underground Network" or perhaps just PM the hell out of forums.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    275
    I high doubt it will go. But I would like to get rid of the spam issue. Maybe start charging 1 dollar for 100 e-mails?
    - 7de5igns

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    812
    I would not like this idea. Rather pay somebody to travel and kick some SPAMMER's rear end.
    Web Hosting Resource Kit - Web Hosting Reviews & Hosting Tutorials

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    I would like to see email stamping, to be perfectly honest.

    An authoritative stamp, costing around $50-$100 per year, that can be revoked at any time.

    I'm not sure how this could be put into effect, but I guess it would start with major ISP's.

    Most ISP's were quick to start blocking port 25, so if this passes, and goes ahead, don't be surprised if you see it mass-implemented, within weeks.

    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    5,283
    Could be a good idea, but should only apply to bulk senders, for example, 200 and more e-mails. That way you stay in the clear and spammers pay up.
    Hosting Discussion - web hosting community.

    Is your company represented?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    9,576
    I wonder if this then means (if port 25 blocking became the standard to enforce the 'postage'), that we could then start to charge for 'recieving' mail as well - at the senders expense of course.

    After all, if the ISP's are getting a penny an e-mail once it's sent how about the poor web hosts who have to store all that e-mail till it's read and deleted? That might turn out even better than the hosting fees on accounts themselves.

    Former Webhost... now, just a guy.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    470
    Originally posted on Yahoo!
    Gates gave the idea a lift in January at the World Economic Forum
    that's already 2 reasons to oppose it

    Email sending and receiving should remain free (you pay for the data transfer already anyway).

    Sending off unsolicited commercial email should be illegal.

    Originally posted on Yahoo!

    Many Internet analysts worry, though, that turning e-mail into an economic commodity would undermine its value in democratizing communication.
    no ****, that's exactly the reason why they want to do it. spam used as an excuse ofcourse

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    FT Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,098
    Its form of legal extortion and I will not tolerate. I do not use credit cards and do not plan to use them period online. I should not have to pay for mail to be sent out because I can't afford to pay it. This will also cut off my customers. If they really want to stop spam why not just raid spammer homes? I have a solution to stop spam we are making a control panel. I can not give out its name or vital information, but 1 suggestion I had was allowing a user email to block certain incoming and outgoing ip & email addresses to curb spamming. What could happen is if a spammer is on this "list" it would bounce as a return to sender. It just may confuse the spammer. Also if they do charge I could be a spammer. If it costs 1 cent per email I could send out a few hundred thousand email for just a few thousand and still spam. It may cost me in the end, but spammers with money will not stop them from spamming. If you've read some spammers have millions of dollars.
    Kerry Jones

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,733
    www.thawte.com offers free digital id (non assured) however for max $50 you can get you identity assured and you name in your digital cert.
    I have been using one for over 4 years now...
    If everyone had one of these then we could know for sure who the email came from....
    Brad Baker www.rochen.com
    Rochen - True Premium Shared & Reseller Hosting since 2000
    Better Support: Expert support 24/7 from Red Hat and Cisco Certified Engineers
    Joomla! Core Team Member Joomla Tutorials

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    Originally posted by Kerry Jones
    Its form of legal extortion and I will not tolerate.
    It is far from being extortion.

    It is a viable, proposed solution. An option for a company to accept resosnbility for X amount of users/people would also be something I wouldn't mind seeing.

    Whilst you seem to have a low opinion of solutions, be they in place, or proposed, to solve the spamming issue, I am sure that it comes from never being hit, majorly by spammers.

    Blacklists don't work, that's a given. Too many people are on there that shouldn't be, and vice versa. I for one like the initial idea of stamps, and I think that with a little more ground work thrown down for it, it could deffinitely work.

    The reason I mention a company being able to accept responsibility for X amount of people, is this could pave the way for an ongoing blacklist of people who are able to connect. If one spammer violates an ISP's trust in them, they would then be forced by the authorities, to shut his account down, and he would in turn, be added to an ISP blacklist,that each ISP could refer to when signing up a new client.

    It can work.

    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Yorkshire - UK
    Posts
    344
    I wouldn't pay - Id rather cut my own eyes out with a rusty fish knife.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    Originally posted by visio
    I wouldn't pay - Id rather cut my own eyes out with a rusty fish knife.
    But you would, of course, agree that your ISP could sign for you (if included in your ISP's current payment scheme), and should you violate it, you'd agree to being placed on a mass-blacklist, no?

    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    FT Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,098
    Originally posted by IHSL
    It is far from being extortion.

    It is a viable, proposed solution. An option for a company to accept resosnbility for X amount of users/people would also be something I wouldn't mind seeing.

    Whilst you seem to have a low opinion of solutions, be they in place, or proposed, to solve the spamming issue, I am sure that it comes from never being hit, majorly by spammers.

    Blacklists don't work, that's a given. Too many people are on there that shouldn't be, and vice versa. I for one like the initial idea of stamps, and I think that with a little more ground work thrown down for it, it could deffinitely work.

    The reason I mention a company being able to accept responsibility for X amount of people, is this could pave the way for an ongoing blacklist of people who are able to connect. If one spammer violates an ISP's trust in them, they would then be forced by the authorities, to shut his account down, and he would in turn, be added to an ISP blacklist,that each ISP could refer to when signing up a new client.

    It can work.

    Simon
    IHSL: If and when you hit the 10,000 customer mark and need to send out 10,000 emails a month don't feel bad its only after all $12,000 down the drain on email.
    Kerry Jones

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    Originally posted by Kerry Jones
    IHSL: If and when you hit the 10,000 customer mark and need to send out 10,000 emails a month don't feel bad its only after all $12,000 down the drain on email.
    Why would we need to send out 10k emails a month, costing 12k? please explain.

    To add an extra point to that, it wouldn't be money down the drain, it would be simply a cost of business, as all costs are.

    Note: keep in mind, there are ways to do support, signup, billing etc, without many emails sent.

    Simon
    Last edited by IHSL; 03-06-2004 at 05:43 PM.
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    3,100
    only good way to stop spam is to introduce fines to people who support it (who click the links in the spam).

    <edit>
    Same goes for viruses, people who spread them should have thir computers taken away.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    FT Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,098
    IHSL in order to send out 10,000 emails a month to your customers it would cost $1,000 / month or $12,000 a year. Let me ask you this have you thought of the impact it will have on forums or email forms for that matter? Everything is connected to email one way to another even your helpdesk are connected. The most heavily affected will be communities like WHT. For each registered member WHT sends 1 email to comfirm they're address. It would of costs WHT $5,000 for the 55,000 registered members or so for the emails being sent and on top of that the people who change they're email addresses. Another email would be sent and charged to them. Everything is tied to email and if we have to pay for it the internet will die.
    Kerry Jones

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Nova Scotia, Canada
    Posts
    4,126
    Originally posted by Kerry Jones
    IHSL in order to send out 10,000 emails a month to your customers it would cost $1,000 / month or $12,000 a year. Let me ask you this have you thought of the impact it will have on forums or email forms for that matter? Everything is connected to email one way to another even your helpdesk are connected. The most heavily affected will be communities like WHT. For each registered member WHT sends 1 email to comfirm they're address. It would of costs WHT $5,000 for the 55,000 registered members or so for the emails being sent and on top of that the people who change they're email addresses. Another email would be sent and charged to them. Everything is tied to email and if we have to pay for it the internet will die.
    Sorry, when exactly did I say i'd approve of "1 cent per email'?

    I said "stamps", not 1cent per email.

    An authoritative stamp, costing around $50-$100 per year, that can be revoked at any time.
    Simon
    EIRCA Ltd, home of The Genius Network.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, Ontario
    Posts
    1,761
    Im all for paid emails..... but only if it will stop spam, which is unlikely.


    oh well.... nice try M$.
    Repeat after me... ProSupport is the best... Prosupport is...
    ProSupport Host Support System - OUT NOW! Grab a copy yourself and see what the hype is about!
    VertiHost Inc. - We run a quality business. Do you?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    FT Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,098
    I still do not support the use of stamps. It is a said if theres a will theres a way and its only a matter of time before a spammer figures out how to beat the system. Spam will never stop unless they are convicted and sent to prison.
    Kerry Jones

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    3,479
    If you're sending an e-mail from the US to, say, England or Australia, which government collects the money?

    If this is ever implemented, there will be so much revolt that it will later have to be stopped pretty quickly.

    In theory it's a good idea, but in practice people will find ways around it, and spammers will rely more on mail relays on home users' PCs. Someone will still pay for the spam, not the spammers.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    2,508
    I like IHSL's idea, whilst receiving let's say a "stamped" email, it would goto "Inbox", and uncertified email would goto let's say "Uncertified". With the ability to terminate Stamps for spamming, I think this would be a viable option.
    Linux junkie | steward.io

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    FT Worth, TX
    Posts
    5,098
    What about message boards and support systems? It would have a huge impact on forum registration as to I won't have an email address if they start charging.
    Kerry Jones

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    13,277
    Its stupid,its just another way to extract $$$ from people..........

    It wont stop spam @ all,so..........They have ways of getting around things as we all know..........

    The Dude

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    495
    Actually I have seen first hand where they are taking this. For example, we host a large NFL team that sends out a newsletter. Of course everyone subscribes etc. but people inevitably report it as spam. The IP of the server was initally banned by a large ISP and when we contacted them they asked that we start to use bondedsender.com. Basically we would be responsible to pay $50 for everytime someone reports spam. We found some technical ways around this to get mail rerouting back to the ISP, but its def. in the works.
    James R. Clark II

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,718
    It would takes years and years and ofcourse a lot of money to implement something like this.

    I would say just harsher anti-spam laws. And as far as off-shore spam, proxy and open-relays, start cracking down on them and work with foreign governments.
    Sid Shroff
    Senior Enterprise Web Administrator
    IIS, .NET, MS SQL
    SidShroff.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •