mainsleazespam.com: Alternatives for Email Delivery, January

Alternatives Proposed to Replace Current Email Model, Pros and Cons.

Many Proposals, Little Agreement Yet, Especially Over Proposed Micropayments. Do you really want to have to pay Microsoft for every email you sent?

Alternative Email Models News Roundup

Click here for Next Page of Alternative Proposals News.

To understand the folly and motives of Bill Gates and Verisign and others on fee based email, be sure to read
Alternatives to Current Email Technology, Pros and Cons:
March 2004 Commentary by Gordon Peterson on Microsoft Email Proposals
March 2004 Commentary by Rich Kulawiec on Microsoft Email Proposals

    prnewswire.com. April 8, 2004.
    The Internet community must act now to eliminate spam. The seriousness of the spam problem goes far beyond the mere annoyance of flooded email inboxes and offensive messages: spam threatens the viability of email as a communications medium. The degree of pollution is so severe that regular users are finding it difficult to justify using email at all. As a result, the very utility of the Internet is downgraded. When it comes to spam, we are all harmed in terms of productivity.
         Eradicate Spam by Adopting Microsoft's Penny Black Anti-Spam Solution, Urges Email Marketing Industry Pioneer
        [Ed. Note: I totally disagree with the assertions of the person quoted in this press release, but it belongs under this heading nevertheless. The idea that I should have to pay Microsoft or anyone else a penny or whatever micropayment dreamed up to send and receive email on the Internet from servers I bought, own, and control, is actually pretty laughable. This proposal is not the solution. Progressively cutting off ISPs and nodes on the Internet that spam and now allowing them access to the Internet is the answer. Pure and simple. I do not believe I should be punished financially or operationally because of the criminal actions of spammer scum.]

    ComputerWorld, New Zealand, IDGNet. computerworld.co.nz. March 22, 2004.
         I’ve watched with bemusement as Bill Gates has been making the rounds lately — the World Economic Forum, the RSA Conference — to announce that Microsoft is “innovating on many different fronts” to eradicate spam. Really?
    The hashcash scheme, which requires the sender to spend CPU cycles generating an ID number for each message, dates back to about 1992 or so. And “caller ID for email” derives from RMX (Reverse MX), a more recent proposal to bind senders to authorised relays via DNS records.
    The truth is, we’ve had plenty of innovation through the years. What we’ve lacked is follow-through. Consider S/MIME digital signatures. It’s very likely that your email client supports them. But it’s overwhelmingly unlikely that you’ve ever digitally signed an email message.
         Making email identity work

    cbsnews.com. March 5, 2004.
    If the U.S. Postal Service delivered mail for free, our mailboxes would surely runneth over with more credit card offers, sweepstakes entries and supermarket fliers.
    That's why we get so much junk e-mail: It's essentially free to send. So Microsoft Corp. chairman Bill Gates, among others, is now suggesting that we start buying "stamps" for e-mail.
    Many Internet analysts worry, though, that turning e-mail into an economic commodity would undermine its value in democratizing communication.
         Fee-Based E-Mail Way To Can Spam?

    smh.com.au. February 3, 2004.
    The notion of eliminating spam by charging people to send you email is often scoffed at but, as the spam deluge worsens, the idea continues to resurface.
    Microsoft founder Bill Gates is the latest proponent of the pay-per-send email system as part of his pledge to can spam within two years.
         Payback time for spammers