[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bulk postage fine (was Re: non-censorous spam control)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Kent Crispin said:
>On Sun, Aug 03, 1997 at 12:29:37PM +0100, Adam Back wrote:
>> Here's the sequence of events as I see it:
>>
>> 1. spammer spams you with adverisement for phone sex line
>> 2. you try to sue phone sex line company
>> 3. phone sex company denies all knowledge
>> 4. government says all email must be authenticated
>> 5. government issues internet drivers license
>> 6. anonymous remailers work around authentication requirement
>> 7. government outlaws remailers
>>
>> See any flaws in that logical and undesirable sequence of events?
>
>The flaws become apparent if you try to attach a *realistic*
>probability to each step.
Wasn't the UPS trying to promote some system of authentication (where you
pay just as like you purchase postage stamps now) at a trade show of some
description in the US this year or late last year? I recall a post on
this to this list but can't recall the detail. Anyone recall the details
of that post?
I know last year the australian post office suggested such a role for
themselves and they didn't see it as a voluntary proposal. I haven't
heard anything from them lately so maybe it was all just too difficult.
- --
.////. .// Charles Senescall [email protected]
o:::::::::/// PGP mail preferred [email protected]
>::::::::::\\\ Finger me @bear for PGP PUBKEY Brisbane AUSTRALIA
'\\\\\' \\ <A HREF="http://quux.apana.org.au/~apache/">Apache</A>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3i
Charset: noconv
iQEVAwUBM+iwwXawhvoxf0r9AQGnTwf/ZvFB+PlCUqiNvXoPmkhDSw3YlBfOjpW2
4JnOeKA3kLys23FMKvSeNd1BulrKhVwVZGpGHCsOS7/aiyxvshZb3Mjakw20mV6Z
O0gy/Si1yOLVk65e3vXWsn78xPdfXmvTEdwiFEGT3/HvICzuWzfbUIJkhdmDXK3j
D8uXE+p97NYyMscg1+qlZzD3D4uIl5jwht/giu+ztVtjJgGYqmMk4z9WZ3Vk245N
RAYhF3zgeJz/cTxNTTlT8v05kbJOcZJJlRHMLE3BlCSSY338hnXuodttc54JEoEZ
Gb04DO12bphTW2sdIqdxmQY9jjAxlO10w3CHlzuB2G05x/lyakScWg==
=lS/d
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----