http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/26/lycos_europe_spam_blitz/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4051553.stm Tempting as it may be to fight abuse with abuse... it doesn't seem right. -- Juha
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Juha Saarinen wrote:
Tempting as it may be to fight abuse with abuse... it doesn't seem right.
At least the Europeans don't usually have to worry about byte-charging. Could turn into mighty expensive revenge otherwise. I prefer the idea of LART squads tracking down spammers in meat-space and dealing out a bit of clue-by-four justice. -- Matthew Poole "Don't use force. Get a bigger hammer."
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004, Juha Saarinen wrote: : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/26/lycos_europe_spam_blitz/ : : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4051553.stm : : Tempting as it may be to fight abuse with abuse... it doesn't seem right. The servers targeted by the screensaver have been manually selected from various sources, including Spamcop, and verified to be spam advertising sites, Lycos claims. How will they "manually" choose which spammers they'll go after? Personal eVendetta? It'll just cause the spammers to use the zombie networks more and more. It seems to me to just be an advertising gimmick, not a solution. scott
participants (3)
-
Juha Saarinen -
Matthew Poole -
Scott Weeks