Forum Moderators: phranque
TechNewsWorld [technewsworld.com]
Washington Times [washingtontimes.com]
Aparently, the FTC is pondering a $100,000 to $250,000 "whistleblower" bounty to catch spam kings.
Two sides to this:
Side One: YAY!
Side Two: Hmmm, how worried should those of us who use mass mailers (legitimately) be, when the profit motive enters into tracking down and turning in spammers? (probably not at all, but lets look at the "law of unintended consequences" aspect of this.)
The old saying:
First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out, because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out,because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak out for me.Pastor Martin Niemöller
Having been a victim of AOL's (miserably faulty) spamblocker programme, I feel this could quickly get seriously out of hand if not really well thought out and tested (with an ear to the ground) for a good long while before being implemented.
I have a question. I am trying to verify my SQL
admin password but I can not seam to figure out
where to go..... can anyone point me in the correct direction -I thank you in advance so much.
I am trying to update this software as it bombed last week due to the SA password. The designers of the software changed it on me.
I would like to check it that I have the correct one just can't seam to find it. I am running SQL 5.0 on Server 2000.
Thanks you so much!
Do you expect the FTC to pay rewards independently of the quality of the information provided by the whistleblower? Note that they're talking about "insiders with high-value information", and not just any arbitrary snitch.
Do you expect the FTC to pay rewards independently of the quality of the information provided by the whistleblower? Note that they're talking about "insiders with high-value information", and not just any arbitrary snitch.
True enough, but again, I was thinking in terms of the "snowball" effect. If the initial program fares well againstthe "big time" spammers, then I can easily see them modifying the program to go after the "smaller" offenders. Bounty programs in the past have often worked this way. Big bounties, at first, for the big crooks, then smaller and smaller bounties offered for smaller offenders.
Also, how do you define and "insider"? Large corporations use mass mailers all the time. So, if you work for such a large corporation, and decide to get "even" with the company for some imagined slight, what's to stop you from turning them in for a quick cash payout?
Large sites like Amazon and others could easily suffer. Ever tried to get off Amazon's mailing list? It's possible, but not as intuitive as it really should be (at least it wasn't a litte over a year ago), and wht if they end up violating the can-spam act through some administrative oversite or programming error?
Don't get me wrong, spam-kings are bottom feeders barely above virs writers in mybooks (and there have been some supiscious activities with viruses lately that would seem to indicate that, in some cases, the two groups are in cahoots).
I'm just not a real big fan of bounties. Bounties have a way of getting abused.
