OFF TOPIC: email postage should be of interest to those who use OSS newslists 2004-02-02 - By David Wall
Back
Sorry for this off topic posting, but it should be of interest to those in the
OSS communities since it threatens us.
The following story appeared in the New York Times as well as various local
papers (like the one here in Seattle).
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/02/technology/02spam.html
The gist is that Microsoft, Yahoo and others are trying to create a scam in
which they charge postage for email. Note that this would be used against all
open source projects that rely heavily on free emails going out to developers
and users. Note that spam filters in the big ISPs will only be made more
restrictive in order to increase utilization of the postage scam. After all,
nearly every email sent arrives at its destination today, so nobody will pay.
But as they tighten the rules, more legit email will get blocked as spam, thus
forcing us into paying for postage that provides no added services, and of
course would cripple OSS projects that rely on email.
Below is my letter to the editor of the NYT and a few quotes from the article
for those who aren't registered on the NYT site.
Thanks,
David
++++
Re: "Gates Backs E-Mail Stamp in War on Spam," http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02
/02/technology/02spam.html
Dear Mr. Hansell:
Postage for sending email? That sounds like a greedy attempt to charge
twice without providing any added services.
Our tax dollars paid to create the Internet and the communications protocols
freely used by Microsoft and Yahoo. But now there's a new land grab to try
to privatize our public, worldwide network that promotes freedom.
Our monthly ISP and telephone fees already pay for our usage of the Internet.
Now we're told that for our own good, we should pay for each email sent,
even though we've already paid for that privilege. Open source projects
rely heavily on email for developer communications and for user support. Is
it surprising that Microsoft likes such a scheme? Will we next have to pay
for each instant message or each web page we visit?
A typical email, like this one, is about 2 KB in size. Today's MSN homepage
is 100 KB, with lots of unsolicited ads. Unsolicited popup ads often run in
the 13-20KB range. Should Microsoft have to pay me to view these ads?
Their web page consumes 50 times more bandwidth than this email.
Lastly, there are commercials services today like Yozons.com that charge for
sending secure messages that have no spam or viruses, but at least they
offer lots of features beyond email (working return receipts, encrypted delivery
to ensure privacy, electronic signatures, status tracking of messages sent, etc
.)
so many find it worth the extra money spent.
We'll pay for services we want, but paying twice for no added service is bad
all around.
Sincerely,
David Wall
+++++
Some quotes from the NYT story, since I realize I cannot post the entire story
here for copyright reasons:
"Ten days ago, Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman, told the World Economic Forum
in Davos, Switzerland, that spam would not be a problem in two years, in part
because of systems that would require people to pay money to send e-mail. Yahoo
, meanwhile, is quietly evaluating an e-mail postage plan being developed by
Goodmail, a Silicon Valley start-up company."
""Damn if I will pay postage for my nice list," said David Farber, a professor
at Carnegie Mellon University, who runs a mailing list on technology and policy
with 30,000 recipients. He said electronic postage systems are likely to be too
complex and would charge noncommercial users who should be able to send e-mail
free."
"But for the big Internet access providers, or I.S.P.'s, the prospect of e-mail
postage creating a new revenue stream that could help offset the cost of their
e-mail systems is undeniably attractive"
|
|
