Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 194 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#11
Apparently enough people ultimately click the links to make it worth it for the spammers, otherwise it would have stopped.

It's probably something like less than 1 in 10,000 emails getting a click, which is depressing when you consider all the computing resources wasted by receiving email servers and then by all the recipients which need to filter out the noise (for example I still at least scan subject lines of items in my Gmail Spam folder).

So with that considered, spammers clearly completely lack empathy for their fellow human beings, they have zero care on the cost of their practice, as long as it makes them a few bucks. Sure, there are people who do far worse things, but that fact in no way redeems spammers.

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#12
There are a lot of e-mail systems out there with not very good spam filters. And spammers do change up their methods to get around filters. You might not notice them, but people with less effective spam filters do get them. (And some people are dumb enough to read e-mails in their spam folder)

It's always been an economic numbers game. You might send 1 million spams that costs you $100, but you might get $400 in return from whoever paid for the spam campaign. If you're running your own spam operations for your own "products", you get more profit, but the risk and difficulty is higher.

I also have a theory that spies use spam as a form of steganography. If spam naturally contains a lot of variable information, and it comes from random places and is sent literally everywhere, it's not hard for a spy to receive an encoded message dropped into their mailbox without anyone even knowing what their e-mail address is.

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#14
Because email is essentially one of the oldest internet applications and also essentially has never changed.

That means, as has been stated in this thread a bunch of times, that sending spam is essentially "free", especially since they like to use exploited email accounts to do the sending if possible.

I am all for a re-envisioning of email from the ground up, tbh.

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#15

Because email is essentially one of the oldest internet applications and also essentially has never changed. That means, as has been stated in this thread a bunch of times, that sending spam is essentially "free", especially since they like to use exploited email accounts to do the sending if possible. I am all for a re-envisioning of email from the ground up, tbh.

I'm all for reimagining the email system, but considering how wide spread email is right now I think the replacement might need to be at least partially compatible to allow interoperation during transition

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#17

Apparently enough people ultimately click the links to make it worth it for the spammers, otherwise it would have stopped. It's probably something like less than 1 in 10,000 emails getting a click, which is depressing when you consider all the computing resources wasted by receiving email servers and then by all the recipients which need to filter out the noise (for example I still at least scan subject lines of item…

> So with that considered, spammers clearly completely lack empathy for their fellow human beings, they have zero care on the cost of their practice, as long as it makes them a few bucks.

I'll start by saying I in no way excuse like or can stand spammers, I think action should be taken against them as they've destroyed every communication medium in existence.

But I have some friends that come from some third world countries in Africa and similar places. From their perspective the few bucks to us makes them some of the richest and well to do people where they are at, and all they are doing is taking it from fat rich wealthy Americans and Europeans that already have too much money, even if the person is close to destitute by our standers from the perspective of many people in the third world if they have a roof over their head and know where their next meal is coming from, to mention nothing of ac and a car they are living an unimaginable lifestyle.

My point isn't to defend scammers it's just to point out that many of them arent malicious simply trying to survive in a difficult world, I would argue many of us here on Hm would do the same if faced with the choice after all how many people here already go to work on ad or surveillance tech of dubious ethical vlaue because the pay is insane.

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#18

Because email is essentially one of the oldest internet applications and also essentially has never changed. That means, as has been stated in this thread a bunch of times, that sending spam is essentially "free", especially since they like to use exploited email accounts to do the sending if possible. I am all for a re-envisioning of email from the ground up, tbh.

I'm all for reimagining the email system, but considering how wide spread email is right now I think the replacement might need to be at least partially compatible to allow interoperation during transition

The tech industry’s ‘reenvisioning’ of a free/cheap older, but universal, standard is usually to replace it with something expensive, proprietary, and limited in scope.

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#19

Because email is essentially one of the oldest internet applications and also essentially has never changed. That means, as has been stated in this thread a bunch of times, that sending spam is essentially "free", especially since they like to use exploited email accounts to do the sending if possible. I am all for a re-envisioning of email from the ground up, tbh.

Can you elaborate on what you would like to see from a reimagined e-mail?

Re: Ask HN: Why is spam email still a thing?

#20

Why does Gmail even show them in the spam filter? Shouldn't it be so obvious spam that I don't have to deal with it? And then only keep the dubious stuff and show it to me.

If suspected spam e-mails are simply discarded, the users will not find that any false positive rate other than zero is acceptable.

There is a way to reject suspected spam, which is to do it at the SMTP level (refuse to deliver) so that the sender gets a non-delivery notice.

Accepting everything (pretending to deliver it) and then silently dropping some of it is generally a nonstarter.

Post reply on HN