[hashcash] Re: anti-spam collateral damage
- From: Jonathan Morton <chromi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: hashcash@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 07:59:39 +0000
The stand that mail servers are private property is what I call a
libertarian illusion. If you take the stance that contact points
(telephone, house door, mailbox, mail server) are private property and
nobody can contact you without your permission, then you will lose the
advantage of anonymous contact. And if you don't think there's any
advantage, think about cards, letters, phone calls, visits from people
that know someone that you know or you have forgotten about.
Actually, I think the analogy between an e-mail inbox and my front door
is a good one. Bear in mind, for the purposes of this discussion, that
Europeans usually have their mailbox as part of the front door, or very
close to it, rather than at the end of the drive as Americans do.
My front door and my mailbox are my property. It says so on the deeds.
I am quite within my rights to complain to the police if someone
pushes a bomb, lit firework, or bag full of dog doodoo through my
letterbox, or smashes the door down to burgle my house. (None of the
above have actually happened to me.) It would be a pretty poor society
if that were not the case. But the equivalents of these actions happen
regularly on the Internet - we are advised to install automatic bomb
and firework defusing equipment, and/or live in a bomb and fire proof
house. In the real world, this would justifiably be called anarchy or
terrorism.
I am also quite within my rights to ignore the doorbell (or disconnect
it) when salesmen or evangelists come to call, and complain to the
police if they persist beyond reason. It's annoying when kids ring the
bell and immediately run off, but if it happened more often I would
have a reasonable chance of identifying their parents and having a
word. My front door opens directly onto the pavement, so it would be
hard to claim trespass. Occasionally people call at my door by
mistake, usually wanting the bike-breaker who lives next door, but I
just politely redirect them to the correct address.
The situation with junk mail is slightly less clear. But the senders
of (real world) junk mail have paid, even if at a discounted rate, to
get it to me. It is the Royal Mail postman who actually pushes it
through my letterbox, except in the case of local small businesses who
occasionally hand-deliver leaflets (these are occasionally useful - a
good example of *targeted* advertising).
The costs involved to the sender keep the volume and content
reasonable, in practice. The UK's Advertising Standards Agency and
Trading Standards Office probably also help, but less directly. This
means it is actually feasible to hand-sort my mail, throw away the junk
I don't want, and investigate letters from distant relatives who I may
not recognise immediately. There are people who need to employ someone
to sort their mail, but these are typically celebrities who get a lot
of fan mail.
Can you explain how an e-mail inbox is any different, except for the
fact that spammers typically have essentially zero costs per mail at
present?
--------------------------------------------------------------
from: Jonathan "Chromatix" Morton
mail: chromi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.chromatix.uklinux.net/
tagline: The key to knowledge is not to rely on people to teach you it.
Other related posts:
