bulk postage fine (was Re: non-censorous spam control)

Adam Back aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk
Sun Aug 3 06:56:28 PDT 1997

sar <sar at cynicism.com> writes:
> At 06:32 AM 8/3/97 +1000, ? the Platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote:
> >
> >On Sat, 2 Aug 1997, Adam Back wrote:
> >
> >> Next we choose a threshold say 1000 posts per day.  Seems hard to
> >> imagine anyone generating manually over 1000 emails per day.  That's
> >> more than 1 per minute for a 10 hour day.
> Take bugtraq which has over 12,000 subscribers. Each post to bugtraq would
> send out 12,000 emails so it would cost aleph one 1200$ per post to his
> list. I dont think anyone would want to run a mailing list under these
> sorts of conditions.

The way such pay for email systems as I see them would interface with
your existing email system is that you would have a list of addresses
which you would be happy to receive email from for free.

Clearly a the list address for a list you subscribed to is an address
you would put in your "receive email without postage" list.

Mail from email addresses not on this list would be expected to
include a valid 0c postage stamp.  If they don't include the postage
the mail gets bounced together with a nag about installing the system,
and possibly a manual way for them to send you the email in spite of
the system

(Note most spammers use non-replyable email addresses, because they
don't want you to know their ISPs address, because their ISP will yank
their account as soon as they figure out what they're up to.)

Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/

print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<>

More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list