RE: More on spam
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arnt Karlsen [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Thursday, 23 October 2003 1:51 AM
> To: email@example.com
> Subject: Re: More on spam
> On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 19:58:16 -0400,
> Bill Marcum <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
> <[🔎] 20031021235816.GA7724@iglou.com>:
> > On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 06:56:59AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > >
> > > ..Swen is no different than 9/11. So, next time someone points a
> > > gun your way, you do not want the police doing _anything_
> about it?
> > >
> > How many people have been killed by swen? Should the US
> shut down all
> > internet traffic like they closed all the airports after 9/11?
> ..your analogy suggests all traffic was closed after the WTC fell.
> Not true, travellers were diverted to ground bound transportation.
> ..a better analogy would be "ban all use of wintendo on
> internet". ;-)
> ..I dunno how many has been killed by swen. The stats on
> downtime and costs on wintendos in the US, suggests we have 4
> 9/11 a year worldwide, comparing with the insurance stats of
> the one in 2001, but I would think the loss of human life is
> less, except possibly from the indirect ramifications.
> Evaluating this would require a lot of analysis work, which I
> don't quite see Microsoft sponsoring. ;-)
I think some of you are missing the point.
Spam is just marketing.
If it were coast effective to send several hundred letters to people's homes
every day, it would be done.
If it were permitted to drop paper flyers over cities from planes, it would
If it were allowed, some tv stations would use picture-in-picture to always
have ads running while you watch tv.
Marketing is about making people buy stuff.
Terrorism is about scaring people.
imo we need to move towards a 'deny all else' information world and away
from the largely 'permit all, except' world.