Score one against spammers!

[Red Cat Jenny]

A company with ties to Eastern Europe has been forced offline, which has helped spam levels decrease

The global amount of spam e-mail sent over the past two weeks has reduced drastically after two ISPs in the United States stopped offering service to a web hosting company involved in spam. San Jose, CA- based McColo Corp. also was involved in several criminal activities aside from spam, including child pornography, IronPort said.

One of the company's ISPs, Hurricane Electric, was shown evidence by a Washington Post reporter that McColo was involved in criminal activity, which led Hurricane Electric to pull the plug. Global Crossing also pulled the plug on McColo yesterday morning.

Spam monitoring groups said spam mail has decreased 70 percent after the company was booted off of the internet on November 11. Several of the largest botnets in operation were supported by McColo, and criminal organizations involved in child pornography used the McColo servers.

The company's web site, before it was taken down, promoted the company as a legitimate business operating out of Delaware, with servers located in San Jose.

McColo's main web site remains shut down.

Even though this seems like a victory, spam experts warn there will be a dozen other spammers ready to take McColo's place, and numbers will again increase. As Thanksgiving and Christmas approach, spam levels, which typically increase during the holidays, are expected to rebound and increase over the next month and a half.

Governments are working closely with ISPs to try and identify and prosecute people who are believed to be spammers. More spammers in the United States are being punished by heavy fines and jail sentences, but if the spammers are located overseas, it becomes much more difficult to identify and prosecute them.

Several high-profile spammers over the past year have been shut down and given prison sentence, in a telling sign the U.S. government is ready to continue prosecuting spammers.

[Patrick Hand]

OK... shutting down child porn is good....

But I wonder about our free speech.....

Yeah... I don't like Spam.... but what is to stop a.... or any government from stopping what I want to say....?

Some of my drawings that I have posted in the past would violate what the Muslims think is proper... Do I have to go by what they say or think?....

I don't like Spam... but I hate censorship more......

(well stopping child Pornography is a good thing... but that is a totally different argument.)

[Red Cat Jenny]

well I am viciously for freedom of speech..

but spam is akin to someone walking in your house everyday uninvited, ignoring your desire for your own freedom to be left alone or simply to be free from harranguing. These are not freedom fighters for speech..they're just 2 bit porn and drug peddlers.

It would be interesting to get intelligent spam..that might actually be kinda neet once in a while. On that I can agree with you

[Red-Handed Jill]

I have to side with Red Cat on this one. One person's right of free speech ends where another's right to not be importuned begins.

[Mission]

I guess it depends on what they had on that server of theirs. Was it all just spam and porn? (Somehow I doubt that.) I tend to lean towards Patrick's argument...spam is annoying, but unless you're terminally ill-informed, you know better than to respond to it. (Child porn and alleged "criminal activity" on their server is another matter though - in that respect, I'd say they did themselves in. )

When I started reading this, my thought was that someone else was out there that would just pick up the slack. Then I got to the part where they said as much in the article. That's the trouble with the internet - it's so (relatively) inexpensive and easy to become part of that when it comes to fighting such things it's a hydra. (Of course, the freedom and ease of involvement is also the benefit of it - the flip side of your greatest weakness is your greatest strength.)

[Patrick Hand]

Like I typed, I don't like Spam (1). But I never open the stuff anyway, so it’s only a minor inconvenience. It goes away as soon as I hit the delete button.

they're just 2 bit porn and drug peddlers.

Yeah… "everyone" agrees that the Government should take those out first, But what’s next?

It bothers me when the Government decides that it knows the best way to protect its citizens, (for their own good)... I'm not discussing the Military, or safety codes or that kind of thing here.... I'm discussing the potential for uncontrolled Governmental censorship and invasion of privacy.

After stopping pornography, and saving us from Terrorists what is to stop the Government from monitoring and controlling anything else it doesn’t like?

In 1933 Hitler tried to do the same thing with un-German books… that lead to only Pro-Nazi books being allowed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_book_burnings

Of course, our Government would never do that…..

Right now, Spam is an inconvenience.... But I’d rather just delete it than have the Government reading my e-mails and monitoring what web sites I visit, so it can “protect” me.

(1) The electronic stuff, I have been know to open a can of the pork parts, and even eat it........ )

[Patrick Hand]

NOTE: I’m typing about spammers… electronic junk mail and such. Not about child pornography.

We don’t like those nasty icky annoying spammers, so let the Government go get ‘em…

Spammers aren’t the bastions of Free Speech; they use it to peddle their junk. Besides spam (the spam blocker won't post the name of those little blue pills) and imitation Rolex watches aren’t needed to defend free speech.

Just a reminder from the Constitution…

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

I guess the Internet doesn’t count. And spammers shouldn’t be protected by the Constitution because we don’t like them….

So with that in mind; what is wrong with the Government monitoring the Internet, reading your mail or using wiretaps? Why would anyone be opposed to that, unless they had something to hide…..

Luckily it doesn’t work that way (yet)

I know I sound really paranoid about this; I don’t like Spam anymore than anyone else does. But even well intentioned Governmental protection can be the first step towards something none of us wants….

A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson….

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

[Mission]

A few quotes from Thomas Jefferson….

I own that I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive.

I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.

My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.

I'll drink to that. That people support personal restrictions in the name of protection continues to amaze me. To quote another of our fine founding fathers,

"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -Benjamin Franklin

[Red-Handed Jill]

There's another side to this and it's the productivity issue. As a former email sysadmin, I had to spend a great deal of time blocking spam. Occasionally, the spambot would create a situation where our mail scanner became flooded by mail and would be pretty much shut down. Which meant our customers couldn't email us and vice versa. Were we compensated for this loss of productivity? Nope. And pretty much every company has had the same sort of productivity hits, all because someone wanted to advertise their porn and cheap spam. That's billions of dollars in lost productivity.

Anyone else interfering with so many other businesses to that extent would be put away or at the least heavily fined. Why is the spammer any different?

Edited November 18, 2008 by Red-Handed Jill

[Patrick Hand]

So basically, if someone can create a program that protects a company or individual's computer from Spam, they could make a lot of money from it.

Find a need and fill it.

But I don't think the Government is the organization that can successfully do that.

I still can't figure out how Spam works... just because spammers send out a lot of adds selling little blue pills or imitation Rolex watches... someone somewhere must be buying from them and only encouraging even more Spam.... And who would even think of giving out their credit card number and information to such a shoddy merchant in the first place....Yeah... I'd trust a spammer to be a truthful and honest businessperson.

I'm sure there is a better solution, I don't think involving the Government is it.

[silas thatcher]

without spam there is an awful lot i would never know... such as; needing a russian bride... new septic tank cleaner... didn't know i had one :).... some guy i don't even know found the right job for me..... needing a larger p#%#s.... apparently mine is not adequate enough :)... lots of college coeds just dying to meet me..... online and for a fee :)...

AND my pet nail trimmer is not quite up to snuff....

freedom of speech !! freedom to use the delete button !! or to turn the tv off, been known to turn off the radio or switch stations if i don't wanna hear crap...

telemarketers.... i just say no thanx and hang up... same thing as bill boards.. trying to sell you stuff...

aren't tv commercials a form of spam ??? someone trying to sell you stuff... stuff for your house.. until you have so much stuff, you need a bigger house... a bigger house to put all your stuff... ( g.c.)

child porn--- NO

spam--- trying to sell stuff like everything else

[Mission]

needing a larger p#%#s.... apparently mine is not adequate enough :)

Not to get OT (per usual), but I am currently reading Roger Moore's account of the filming of Live and Let Die and he tells a story on this topic I thought was pretty funny.

"He [stuntman Jerry Comeaux] came back with me to my home-on-wheels where I had some Jack Daniels waiting for him and a nurse to examine the base of his spine which was hurting. As somebody helped him off with his wet suit the trousers he was wearing underneath came down exposing his rear end. He let out a scared shout. The tough guy was embarassed about the nurse seeing his winkle. I told him what John Barrymore once said to Anthony Quinn: 'How can I be proud of that in which every chimpanzee is my equal and every jackass my superior?'" (Moore, p. 17)