SEO

"Spam will be a thing of the past in two years' time, Microsoft boss
Bill Gates has promised." Bill Gates jan 24 2004

- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3426367.stm

This is ironic considering gates actions and utterances in the past. See
hime here trying to get spam legislation watered down on Capitol Hill
and get Microsoft, amoungst others, indemnified from being sued by the
consumers.


<quote>
"There is no silver-bullet solution to the problem," he [ gates ] wrote.
".. certify legitimate e-mail solicitations ..

Legitimate e-mail solicitation companies would receive a "seal"
identifying them as trusted senders.

".. federal legislation should indemnify Internet service providers
from blocking spam and pursuing spammers ..Gates wrote.

"the federal government could set up a "safe harbor" program that would
absolve online marketers that participate in self-regulatory
organizations from complying with more onerous antispam laws, such as
labeling spam e-mail messages with "ADV," Gates suggested.

<unquote> Bill Gates may 21 2003
http://computerworld.com/softwaretop...,81393,00.html


<quote>
“Microsoft is talking out of both sides of its mouth,” said state Sen.
Debra Bowen (D), who points to statements by Microsoft Chairman Bill
Gates about how much the company is fighting to eliminate junk e-mail.

But “their focus has been on getting immunity for themselves and
preserving their ability to strike deals to send spam,” she said.
<unquote>
http://www.msnbc.com/news/935049.asp?0cv=CB10&cp1=1


The technology already exists to totally block spam. Why have the ISPs
and Web Portals not done this up to now ?

I see two main reasons for this. Your goverment(s) don't want you
sending email that is hard to eavesdrop on and the various commercial
entities don't really want to stop spam. What they want to do is make
the spammers pay money to them for sending spam or make you pay to stop it.

No what they want is for the spammers to pay for sending 'legitimate'
spam. It is ironic that gates puts forward Microsoft as the champion of
the people as he himself personally blocked laws designed to put the
spammers in jail.

What we current have is a watered down effort that imdemnifies the
carriers from being sued by the consumers. See above where he writes the
Senate Committee asking them to block such simple proposels as putting
an 'ADV' label in the spam. No that would be to onerous says bill.
-

How to totally block spam:

How about Public Key Infrastructure and Digital Signatures. That way I
get end to end encryption and authentication.

Basically an email doesn't pop up in my inbox without being digitally
signed and encrypted.

To send an email a senders email agent (1) contacts the PKI server and
gets my public key and (2) encrypts and signs the msg using his private
key. Then emails it as normal.

When my email agent gets the msg it (a) contacts the PKI server and gets
the senders Public key verifys the Digital Signature using the senders
Public Key and then (b) decrypts the msg using my Private key.

If an email msg doesn't pass steps (a) or (b) then it is automatically
rejected. Simple isn't it. I had better go out and patent it quick.

Instead of this they offer to let us pay them not to send us spam. Or if
the spammers pay more then it gets through. Talk about a license to
print money.

So in two years we get 'Web Services' dotNET and pay a MICROS~1 stamp
for every email we send. All the while being spammed by 'licensed'
spammers. A consumerist silicon nightmare is all.