[LINK] Ramping Spam Rampant - again

[Adam Todd]

At 01:12 PM 1/01/2007, Howard Lowndes wrote:


>Adam Todd wrote:
>>At 02:04 PM 31/12/2006, Howard Lowndes wrote:
>>>>I think spam has got out of the realm of the pimply faced youth - it's 
>>>>more in the realm of organised crime.
>>>
>>>IMO anti-spam legislation is pretty pointless.  When are governments 
>>>going to take the stick to the other end and start beating those with 
>>>buggered systems, or force their ISPs to take the big stick to them. 
>>>Slapping a few ISPs with a clue stick would make most of them wake up to 
>>>themselves - but then, it might reduce their traffic revenue and not too 
>>>many governments will take that tack.  :(
>>Actually as good as that sounds, that's really stepping into the world of 
>>Orwellianism.  We really don't want the Government making legislation to 
>>punish or prosecute end users for ignorance.
>
>If you drive an unserviceable car, then that's an offence in law as well 
>as the possibility of civil damages if it causes damage; how is operating 
>a borked computer any different?

Yes true.  Assuming you know the care is unserviceable.

But should then, the Mechanic you last used to service your car also become 
liable and subject to a Criminal offence for failing to ensure it's serviced.

So what you are really saying is that Harvy Norman and the Good Guys should 
be guilty of a criminal offence of selling a device that can be used for 
the purpose of committing a criminal offence?

>>And we don't want end users become knowledgeable enough to be stupid and 
>>dangerous.
>
>Similar analogy about driving a car.  Knowledge is required - IMO not 
>enough and not tested frequently enough.

God you don't want people knowing how cars work.  Really.

>As a private pilot I have to have a comprehensive test every two years and 
>I have to maintain a currency standard as well, and as a private pilot I 
>am far less likely to do damage to others than I am as a driver on, say, 
>the Hume Highway.

Flying is considerably more difficult and dangerous than driving a car. You 
can only crash into someone going, generally forwards, in a car.  In a 
plane, you can fall out of the sky, crash taking off, crash landing ...

And to be honest I'd prefer to have an intimate knowledge about a plane and 
how it works and check all the critical things BEFORE I taxi off, than to 
find out when I'm plummeting to earth!

But then I did 26 hours of flight training, so I know the difference 
between a plane and a car and I'll drive a car in my sleep any day!

>>The best governance is for Government to prosecute the people who cause 
>>the SPAM, not the innocent people who happened to be used.
>
>The controls need to be enforced from both ends.

Nope, it's simpler.  Government must be willing to prosecute SPAMMERS who 
affect Joe Citizen, not just those that affect Government Agencies.

I have too many examples of where Police enforce and prosecute relentlessly 
an allegation made by a Government Agency, but when you make the same 
allegation to which the Police have been a witness, they do nothing.

If you want prosecution, become a Government Agency.  If you want to be Joe 
Citizen and prosecuted, well.

>>The problem is Law Enforcement doesn't care about Mums and Dads being 
>>affected by SPAM, they will only prosecute SPAMers who hit Government 
>>Agencies with traffic.
>
>Then why aren't they doing something about it - someone from CSIRO said 
>that they have a 97% reject rate at 30 hits/sec.

Because someone at CSIRO hasn't made a formal complaint and probably 
doesn't have the authority to do so.