Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

gramicon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 52 posts

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#21

Post by jerf »

igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

If you're in the mood and fast, you can prefix each line with 4 spaces to get the more traditional monospaced layout of that.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#22

Post by dbecker »

igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

Great response.

I would think it took some time to compose that. Out of curiosity, is this procrastinating before finals, or is this free time after finals?

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#23

Post by [deleted] »

igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

[deleted]

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#24

Post by dbecker »

corresation wrote: post #13
mleeds wrote: post #9

A great opportunity for an entrepreneur to take these emails and direct them to the spam folder.

It says that a read message demands a reply, and a replied to message can be rated upon by the receiver. There was a service years back that did something similar via the phone -- you could register as an expert of something and people would call and pay them for time with you. It is a good idea, fundamentally, though voice was a horrendous medium for it.

If you have to reply to get paid, you could hire someone on oDesk to reply to your gramicon mails for $3/hr.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#25

Post by SkyAtWork »

neilk wrote: post #19

You Might Be An Anti-Spam Kook If... you assume that your attention is so important that strangers will pay money to send you mail. http://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/you-might-be.html#e-postag...

Doesn't seem too kooky, there's $163 billion spent every year to do just that: http://www.the-dma.org/cgi/dispannouncements?article=1590

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#26

Post by SoftwareMaven »

igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

I first skimmed this and thought, "how remarkably annoying" ("reading" it was too hard with the collapsed lists). Then I started digging into the lists and realized it is a wonderful satire of HN.

To the author: fix up the lists. Having them concatenated makes it too hard to read, so you home in on the X's, missing the satire completely. If you make them pre-formatted using the spaces at the beginning of the line, recognize there is no auto-wrapping, so long lines need to be wrapped.

Anyway, thanks for the smile.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#27

Post by patmcguire »

dbecker wrote: post #22
igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

Great response. I would think it took some time to compose that. Out of curiosity, is this procrastinating before finals, or is this free time after finals?

It's a template that used to be big over at Slashdot and probably goes back to usenet days.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#28

Post by corresation »

dbecker wrote: post #24
corresation wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says that a read message demands a reply, and a replied to message can be rated upon by the receiver. There was a service years back that did something similar via the phone -- you could register as an expert of something and people would call and pay them for time with you. It is a good idea, fundamentally, though voice was a horrendous medium for it.

If you have to reply to get paid, you could hire someone on oDesk to reply to your gramicon mails for $3/hr.

That would be a cynical view of it, sure. I do consulting work, 90%+ of it out of sight. I could technically hire some offshore help to do it for me, but it turns out that the reason people pay me what they do is the insight and knowledge that I bring to the work. The exact same principal applies here.

I can see something like this (not necessarily this implementation with their ridiculous psuedo-currency) having applicability for core developers of widely used projects (Apache, nginx, Linux, Cyanogen, etc). If they gave useless replies the jig would be up.

Aside from the technical, in the gaming community lots of people like to email Gabe Newell about Half Life 3, for funny comments, etc, usually to cash in for karma on Reddit. It would make it more interesting if he could have something like this with proceeds donated to charity.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#29

Post by rayiner »

patmcguire wrote: post #27
dbecker wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great response. I would think it took some time to compose that. Out of curiosity, is this procrastinating before finals, or is this free time after finals?

It's a template that used to be big over at Slashdot and probably goes back to usenet days.

Yeah, I was about to say, this is old as dirt.

Re: Want to chat with inaccessible people? Pay them, not Facebook

#30

Post by efdee »

SoftwareMaven wrote: post #26
igul222 wrote: post #16

Your post advocates a ( ) technical ( ) legislative (x) market-based ( ) vigilante approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. ( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses ( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected (x) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money ( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks ( ) It will stop spam…

I first skimmed this and thought, "how remarkably annoying" ("reading" it was too hard with the collapsed lists). Then I started digging into the lists and realized it is a wonderful satire of HN. To the author: fix up the lists. Having them concatenated makes it too hard to read, so you home in on the X's, missing the satire completely. If you make them pre-formatted using the spaces at the beginning of the line, re…

This copypasta predates HN by many, many years.
Post reply on HN