[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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




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.

-- 
Kent Crispin				"No reason to get excited",
[email protected]			the thief he kindly spoke...
PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html