-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Saturday 2006-11-04 at 18:08 -0900, John Andersen wrote:
On Saturday 04 November 2006 17:52, Carlos E. R. wrote:
It is my job to filter spam, or to pay them to do it for me.
Now there's a scam I would like to see outlawed. It costs an ISP more to handle spam than to deal filter it, so why charge anybody?
As long as there is someone making money off of spam there will always be spam. How serious will any ISP be about anti-spam measures if they are making money off of it?
Because if they did filter by default their basic charges would be higher. I prefer to pay less and to do it my self, where I have full control. There are other extra services, like virus protection, parental control whatever and other things. It is a business, they charge for things. Of course, there are mail providers out there that provide such things for free, or so it seems: I know they are charging me for that in hidden ways. By the way, I'm not sure it cost them more money to handle spam than filter it. Passing on the spam received is just some resources. Filtering them is, I think, extra resources and man power. Using filters like spamassassin are very cpu intensive; and any way, that spam mail has entered their servers, so they store it in our folders that have limited space, anyway. - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Made with pgp4pine 1.76 iD8DBQFFTVnEtTMYHG2NR9URAqc5AJ9tKs/NAQaVXmxWFx1VvcA1druYbACfbQZc HEOjkBjltr3J2VWU32u0gGo= =dAid -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----