Tech TV disappoints ... again.

Darth Mandarb · Sat 06/12/2003 05:14:38

A few months back TechTV did their "Music Wars" special about mp3 and music downloading.

It was supposed to be an 'open-mic' town hall type of meeting. I watched it (and even tried to call in) because it's a subject I feel strongly about. I was incredibly disappointed however, because the only folks from the audience they let speak were a bunch of morons and the whole show seemed (to me at least) to be very one sided (on the side of the record labels).

Needless to say, I got over the disappointment.

Then I hear they're having another 'open-mic' town hall meeting about Spam. So I e-mailed the Screen Savers saying, "Don't let this be like the Music Wars special ... PLEASE let the audience actually speak this time around"

I got a response from Joshua Brentano (the segment producer for the Screen Savers) saying this;

"As Music Wars was a bit of a tryout for "townhall" type shows, Spam Attack is much more conducive to audience discussion. There will be quite a bit of it... we have half of the show planned for audience discussion... so be sure to watch! Or even show up! If you would like to attend, please let me know."

So I sit down tonight to watch and low and behold they let 3 people from the audience actually speak and one of them was pro-spam. In my opinion that's not 1/2 the show. They let a self admitted spamming bitch speak non-stop. This lady admitted to sending 1 MILLION spams minimum a day. This is the lady they let speak!!?!?!? This bitch had the nerve to try and justify clogging our inboxes with useless spam and they just let her prattle on and on ...

Once again, TechTV disappoints.

I can only think that their producers told Pat and Leo to keep the editorial turned off because I've heard Pat say (on several occasions) how much he hates spam and spammers and yet he didn't say spit!! I tried to call in 'cause I was going to hammer that spamming pig but of course, all lines were busy.

Did anybody watch it?

What did you all think?

EDIT
In case you all can't tell ... I'm not a big fan of spam. I'm sure there are those of you that get more, but I get like 150-200 a day and I'm just sick of it!

I have the solution (what I think would work) to fixing the Spam problem ... if anybody wishes to hear it I'd be happy to add it to this thread. As it is ... it would add a lot more to this post

TheYak · Sat 06/12/2003 05:37:06

I migrate e-mail addys to avoid spam. I usually don't get any until some well-meaning friend/relative signs me up for some free crap. Among the boxes I still check, I delete about 75 spam messages a day. Another 230-ish are filtered out. Anyway, the amazing part of your post is that nobody in the audience removed their footwear in order to pummel the bitch with it.

I think this is another example of the world vs. technology. It's not pretty. Everyone in this forum is an exception. Most of the rest of the populous jumps on the latest hardware/gadget/software/on-line fad bandwagon and considers themselves hi-tech when they're actually just treading water, knowledge-wise.

Timosity · Sat 06/12/2003 05:56:37

The show sounds like a bit of spam itself.

On spam, I don't get a hell of a lot of it on my main email (I don't give my address to many people.) And I quite often try to unsubscribe from some of them. I probably get about 2 to 4 a day, occasionally more.

It's a bit dodgey unsubscribing cause sometimes you fill out a form with your emai address on it and are probably subscribing to something else, but I've been doing this for a few years with this email address and I don't get a lot of spam.

So I think the odds in unsubscribing do actually work in your favour, If I didn't unsubscribe, I'm sure I'd get a shitload more.

I hate ones you can't unsubscribe from, or the unsubscribe address is a broken link, also spam that is sent and doesn't even have your address in the TO: bit, I can't work out why you even get them. (even if you look at the email properties, your address isn't in any of the paths)

MrColossal · Sat 06/12/2003 06:48:31

but call for help has showcased two ags games as their free files.......

so they're not all bad

Darth Mandarb · Sat 06/12/2003 07:23:18

The hardest part about fixing the problem is defining what Spam is exactly. Spam is, to me, e-mail that I didn't ask to receive.

These [scumbag] spammers have the right to send it out yes; but we, the victims, have the right not to recieve it.

So ...

Every e-mail that solicites a product and/or a company (as all spam e-mails do) MUST contain specific information (down at the very bottom would be fine) stating when you signed up (date and time), where you signed up (what website, store, shop, etc) and how (phone, email, mailer, etc). (No e-mail harvesting, or dictionary bombing would be allowed this way)

If this information can't be provided then the e-mail must be marked as Spam by the sender/company doing the mail list. You know how you can mark e-mail messages urgent? Like that, they must flag it as Spam/Unsolicited. (Then you just tell your e-mail client to not recieve any e-mail with flagged as Spam.)

All 'Spam' e-mails must come from the same address you send the 'Unsubscribe' notice back to. So, to unsubscribe, you simply click 'Reply'. No more of this, 'Click HERE to unsubscribe' shit.

All e-mail marked as Spam would cost money to send. Like a 'virtual postage stamp' if you will. ALL e-mail must, at some point, go through an ISP to be sent. The ISP logs ALL e-mail flagged as Spam and then the spammers get charged for each and every spam they send. I think 37 cents (same as a postage stamp in the US) would be more than enough.

In conclusion ...

There should be heavy fines for violators (even prison time). Once these scum-of-the-earth Spammers have to start paying for each and every spam (and see a few other spammers tossed in the clink) you'd see a HUGE drop off of spam I should think.

I'm sure there're points I'm leaving out (or haven't considered) but it's about 2:20am here and I'm pretty tired

Oh and MrColossal: I like The ScreenSavers and Call for Help ... I like TechTV. They just have pissed me off again. That's all

TheYak · Sat 06/12/2003 07:39:06

Actually, my dad had an interesting suggestion. He suggested that our ISPs charge us 1 cent for every e-mail sent. It would only work if we used the ISP mail-account, of course. Hotmail and other webmail hosts could do something similar. It would suck to have to pay anything for what's supposed to be free but it would have a couple benefits.
1) No spammer would want to spend as much $$ as it would cost to send 20,000 (or many more) e-mails a month.
2) When applied to web-based e-mail, it would make hotmail/yahoo/etc. compete to provide decent e-mail service. After all, how many sign-ups would hotmail get if it were a pay-service (even if a small amount)

Major drawbacks? If you e-mail like a mofo it would cost you a little bit extra each month. Also, those without credit-card access would have difficulty gaining access to web-mail. In my opinion, the gains would far outweigh the drawbacks. The largest difficulty with this is getting everyone to comply. I mean, what good would it do if everyone had to pay except spammers using Juno?

On another note, at least e-mail spam is mainly just irritating. In my area (I don't know about the rest of the US or overseas) cellphone spam is becoming increasingly common. Wait a minute? They're going to call me, use up my minutes, to leave a message or pitch some product at me when I never asked for them to in the first place? And they're allowed to? Jeez..

shbaz · Sat 06/12/2003 08:10:57

I can't believe that making it illegal to not flag it spam would work. Immediately spammers would set up servers in third world countries (like kazaa did) and just do it from there with no legal consequences.

The penny idea.. I wouldn't mind, but I know most 13 year olds would.

Darth Mandarb · Sat 06/12/2003 08:12:31

Yak - It could be limited. Like, you get 1000 e-mails a month for the normal price. If you exceed that you pay the extra fee(s).

Shabaz - If it became illegal to hide who you are (when sending spam) setting up servers in third world countries wouldn't/couldn't work 'cause you'd still know the company it was coming from and who was sending it. Where the server is located wouldn't matter.

Just IMO

])]v[

juncmodule · Sat 06/12/2003 16:10:26

OH MY GOD! Are you people completely nutz!? Pay for email!!!??? I already pay for my ISP, my email usage is INCLUDED in that! What are you people, a bunch damned capitalists or something!?

Seriously, this is a really dumb idea. Not because the intentions of your recommending it are dumb, but because you are not thinking clearly.

If email-postage ever becomes a reality it will be a penny at first, the inflation kicks it, before you know it you have to pay 37 cents and the mail system is bogged down in infrastructure and companies compete to provide you with service and it's all equally shitty.

You put too much faith in capitalists.

I believe that spam is a huge problem that must be dealt with. I just don't believe that is the way to do it.

The problem is, no solutions are actually being implemented. Our governments will wait until the problem is absolutely unbearable and then tell us that we have to pay some kind of massive fee to fix it. Then they will pass bills authorizing millions of dollars to go into some anti SPAM department that will just sit around and buy 50,000 dollar toilet seats.

It will happen and my cries will be lost. In America we throw away freedom in the name of fighting terrorism every day. Most Americans barely blink an eye. It is a sad world we live in today. If we Americans are so free then why do I feel like a prisoner to my freedom?

Support socialism.

Viva La Revolution!!

later,
-junc

scotch · Sat 06/12/2003 16:52:55

I don't think making people pay for email or have a limited number would work, it's entirely possible to set up a mail server on your own machine isn't it? You don't need to go through an ISP, as long as you have the bandwidth (and small text spams aren't going to take a lot) it would be very cheap to send out a million spams a day.
Putting legal controls on it is the only way I can think of of reducing it, and even if it moved offshore it shouldn't be too hard to persuade smaller countries to cooperate, it's not like spam would ever provide them with jobs or a lot of money, it's only a small group of people worldwide who do it.

Pumaman · Sat 06/12/2003 17:58:55

Although it would be nice to have a pay-per-email scheme (with the first 1000 free or something as Darth suggests), as scotch says it's not technically feasible due to the way e-mail works.

The sad thing is that the US has now passed a law effectively legalising spam:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/31506.html
because it just requires the "if you don't want any further mails click here" link that most spam already has. Sigh.

And even so, because spam is an international problem, if it were outlawed in the West, new businesses would start up in places like China and Taiwan from which all the spam would be sent.

The way things are going, spam is putting a lot of people off using e-mail, which is a shame - but there doesn't really seem to be anything we can do about it.

TheYak · Sun 07/12/2003 03:45:05

I actually have zero problem with spam at most of my e-mail addresses.. I just have to be careful who I give 'em to.

That Opt-out law was/is supposed to force Spammers & telemarketers to call or e-mail you only if you did business with them in the past or signed up for a certain service. The law's only been written half-assed by people who know nothing about the problem. The law was meant to help the average person avoid the vast majority of spam but commercialism has allowed too many businesses to have input into the bill.

However, if the spam problem gets worse to the point that I can't start an e-mail account without having 20-30 messages in the first week from spammers, I'll just set up a simple filter. "If Message [Does Not] Contain(s) "myjackass" then send to [trash] and [permanently delete]." Give my friends/family that phrase to put in the subject and problem solved!

Darth Mandarb · Sun 07/12/2003 08:47:42

junc - I wasn't saying everybody should pay for e-mails.

Just the spam e-mail!!

But truthfully, if having to pay a penny per e-mail (after a certain ammount of sent e-mails) is the evil required to keep the Spam out of my inbox I'm tempted to say I'd pay it.

40 years from now ...

An old Darth sits around in his hover rockin' chair telling stories to the grand kids... "Back in the day," [said in an old man's voice] "I used to send as many letters as I wanted for FREE!! Only we called 'em e-mails back then"

Yak - that secret phrase is a pretty good idea .. unfortunately most of my friends can't remember their own names so they'd never remember to change the subject line!

What I've done is I created my own message board system for my friends and family to use. I no longer (with a few exceptions) get e-mail from friends or family. We just all post on my forums (which are a masterpiece I don't mind saying [I created them in ColdFusion])

I'm getting a new business e-mail address. My solution (that I've come up with because of your 'secret phrase' thing) is that I'm going to tell clients that in order to e-mail me they go to my website to do it. Then the website appends your 'secret code' idea to the subject and I'll just filter out the rest! So bravo!! An excellent idea.

I think most clients would be okay with this if I explain to them it's to prevent SPAM to myself AND them!!

I'm going to try it out ... see how they take it.

])]v[

remixor · Sun 07/12/2003 10:51:50

I almost never get spam. My school email gets literally none due to a nice filter programmed by the CS department, and my Hotmail filter lets maybe one get through per day.